content
stringlengths 1
15.9M
|
|---|
\section{Introduction}
In the last two decades rapid advancement in the theory and applications of complex networks has taken place
related to the widespread recognition of their importance in social life, natural sciences and technology \cite{Albert02,Barabasi16}.
An important part of this trend was development of research on complex systems in which interactions among their
constituent parts are determined by the underlying structure of complex networks \cite{Dorogovtsev08,Barrat08}.
In this context much effort was devoted to study the effect of the complex structure of interactions on the behavior of generic models
of statistical physics exhibiting collective phenomena such as phase transitions. For example, ferromagnetic (FM) phase transition
in the Ising model on complex, possibly heterogeneous networks was studied by means of various analytic
\cite{Bianconi02,Leone02,Dorogovtsev02,Yoon11} and numerical \cite{Herrero04,Herrero15} methods.
Also spin glass (SG) transition \cite{Mezard87,Nishimori01} in the Ising and related models on complex networks with quenched disorder
of FM and antiferromagnetic (AFM) interactions was investigated using, e.g., variants of the replica method
\cite{Nikoletopoulos04,Wemmenhove05,Kim05,Kim14}, effective field theory \cite{Ostilli08,Ferreira10} and Monte Carlo (MC)
simulations \cite{Bartolozzi06,Herrero09}. In connection with recent interest in even more complex structures ("networks of networks")
much attention has been devoted to multiplex networks (MNs) which consist of a fixed set of nodes connected by various
sets of edges called layers \cite{Boccaletti14,Lee14,Lee15}. MNs naturally emerge in many social systems (e.g., transportation or communications networks),
and interacting systems on such structures exhibit rich variety of collective behaviors and critical phenomena. For example,
percolation transition \cite{Buldyrev10,Baxter12,Min14}, cascading failures \cite{Tan13}, diffusion processes \cite{Gomez13,Sole13},
epidemic spreading \cite{Wu16,Zuzek15}, etc., were studied on MNs. Also the FM transition in the Ising model \cite{Krawiecki17}
as well as diversity of first-order, second order and mixed-order transitions in a related Ashkin-Teller model \cite{Jang15} were investigated
in the above-mentioned models with the structure of MNs.
As a natural extension of the above-mentioned research in this paper the SG transition is studied in the Ising model with the
quenched disorder of the exchange interactions superimposed on the underlying structure of a MN. In Sec.\ 2 the Hamiltonian of the model
is defined, with spins placed on a fixed set of nodes and with separately generated sets of edges (layers), with possibly different
distributions of the degrees of nodes, corresponding to randomly assigned
FM and AFM exchange interactions; the layers can have, e.g., the structure of random
Erd\"os-R\'enyi (ER) graphs \cite{Erdos59} or heterogeneous scale-free (SF) networks \cite{Barabasi99} and are generated from the so-called
static model \cite{Goh01,Lee04}. In Sec.\ 3 the thermodynamic properties of the above-mentioned model are investigated by means of the
replica method \cite{Mezard87,Nishimori01}. The approach used here follows the study of the dilute SG model with infinite-range interactions
\cite{Viana85,Kanter87,Mezard87a,Mottishaw87,Monasson98,Castellani05,Hase12} and is a direct generalization to the case of MNs
of a procedure applied successfully to investigate the FM and SG transitions in the Ising model on random ER graphs \cite{Viana85},
heterogeneous SF networks \cite{Kim05} and the FM transition in the Ising model on MNs \cite{Krawiecki17}.
In Sec.\ 4 the FM and SG transitions from the paramagnetic state are investigated in the above-mentioned model,
the corresponding critical temperatures are evaluated from the replica symmetric (RS) solution and the effect of the distributions of the degrees of nodes within
consecutive layers as well as the influence of the correlations between them on the phase diagram is emphasised. Besides, these analytic results are
partly compared with MC simulations. In Sec.\ 5 the critical exponent for the SG order parameter in the vicinity of the SG transition temperature
is determined semi-analytically for the Ising model on MNs with different distributions of the degrees of nodes within layers.
Sec.\ 6 is devoted to summary and conclusions.
\section{The model}
\subsection{The Hamiltonian}
MNs consist of a fixed set of nodes connected by several sets of edges; the set of nodes with each set of edges forms a
network which is called a layer of a MN \cite{Lee14,Lee15}. In this paper only fully overlapping
MNs are considered, with all $N$ nodes belonging to all layers. In the following, for simplicity, MNs with $N$ nodes and only two
layers denoted as $G^{(A)}$, $G^{(B)}$ are considered. The layers (strictly speaking, the sets of edges of each layer)
are generated separately, and, possibly, independently. As a result, multiple connections between nodes are not
allowed within the same layer, but the same nodes can be connected by multiple edges belonging to different layers.
The nodes $i=1,2,\ldots N$ are characterized by their degrees $k_{i}^{(A)}$,
$k_{i}^{(B)}$ within each layer, i.e., the number of edges attached to them within each layer. The, possibly heterogeneous,
distributions of the degrees of nodes within each layer are denoted as $p_{k^{(A)}}$, $p_{k^{(B)}}$, and the
mean degrees of nodes within each layer as $\langle k^{(A)} \rangle$, $\langle k^{(B)} \rangle$.
In the Ising model on a MN with two layers two-state spins $s_{i}=\pm 1$ are located in the nodes $i=1,2\ldots N$ and edges
within the layers $G^{(A)}$, $G^{(B)}$ connecting pairs of nodes $i$, $j$
correspond to exchange interactions with integrals $J_{ij}^{(A)}$, $J_{ij}^{(B)}$, respectively.
The exchange integrals are quenched random variables.
It should be emphasised that in the model under study there is only one spin $s_{i}$ located in each node which interacts with all its neighbors
within all layers. The Hamiltonian of the model is
\begin{equation}
H= - \sum_{\left( i,j\right) \in G^{(A)}} J_{ij}^{(A)}s_{i}s_{j} - \sum_{\left( i,j\right) \in G^{(B)}} J_{ij}^{(B)} s_{i}s_{j},
\label{ham}
\end{equation}
where the sums are over all edges belonging to the layer $G^{(A)}$ ($G^{(B)}$).
Following the studies of the dilute Ising SG models with
infinite-range interactions on random ER graphs \cite{Viana85} and SF networks \cite{Kim05} in this paper it is assumed that
the exchange integrals within each layer can assume only two values $J^{(A)}$ ($J^{(A)}>0$) and $-J^{(A)}$
as well as $J^{(B)}$ ($J^{(B)}>0$) and $-J^{(B)}$ which are assigned to the edges of the layer $G^{(A)}$ ($G^{(B)}$)
with probability $r^{(A)}$ and $1-r^{(A)}$ ($r^{(B)}$ and $1-r^{(B)}$), respectively, and that these assignments are independent for the
two layers. Thus the distributions of the exchange integrals within each layer $P_{r^{(A)}}\left(\left\{ J_{ij}^{(A)}\right\} \right)$,
$P_{r^{(B)}}\left( \left\{ J_{ij}^{(B)} \right\} \right)$ are independent and have the form
\begin{eqnarray}
P_{r^{(A)}}\left( \left\{ J_{ij}^{(A)}\right\} \right) &=& \prod_{\left( i,j\right) \in G^{(A)}} \left[ r^{(A)} \delta\left( J_{ij}^{(A)} -J^{(A)}\right)
+\left( 1-r^{(A)}\right) \delta \left( J_{ij}^{(A)} +J^{(A)}\right) \right] \nonumber\\
P_{r^{(B)}}\left(\left\{ J_{ij}^{(B)} \right\} \right) &=& \prod_{\left( i,j\right) \in G^{(B)}} \left[ r^{(B)} \delta\left( J_{ij}^{(B)} -J^{(B)}\right)
+\left( 1-r^{(B)}\right) \delta \left( J_{ij}^{(B)} +J^{(B)}\right) \right]. \nonumber\\
&& \label{pApB}
\end{eqnarray}
Taking into account the form of the Hamiltonian, Eq.\ (\ref{ham}), it may be supposed that the SG Ising model on a MN can be reduced to
the SG Ising model on a network with a set of edges being a superposition of the sets of edges of the two layers and a proper four-point
distribution of the exchange integrals $J_{ij}$. However, these two Ising models are not equivalent to each other since in a MN the layers
are generated separately (although not necessariliy completely independently) and thus, e.g., probabilities for the pairs of nodes to be connected by
an edge or statistical averages over different realizations of the sets of edges should be evaluated separately for each layer.
This difference is particularly imporatnt in the case of MNs with heterogeneous layers, where
it was shown in Ref.\ \cite{Krawiecki17} that even in the simplest case of purely FM interactions
with $J^{(A)}=J^{(B)}$ the critical temperatures for the two above-mentioned
Ising models can differ noticeably.
\subsection{The multiplex network model}
In Ref.\ \cite{Kim05} SG transition was investigated in the Ising model on heterogeneous networks generated from the static model \cite{Goh01,Lee04}.
Using this model networks with a fixed number of nodes $N$ and desired distributions of the degrees of nodes can be generated as follows.
First, a weight $v_{i}$ is assigned to each node so that the condition $\sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}=1$ was fulfilled. Then,
nodes are linked with edges in accordance with the prescribed sequence of weights, by selecting
a pair of nodes $i$, $j$ ($i\neq j$) with probablities $v_{i}$, $v_{j}$, respectively, linking them with an edge and repeating this process $NK/2$ times. In this way
a network is obtained with the probability that the nodes $i$, $j$ are linked by an edge $f_{ij}\approx NK v_{i}v_{j}$, with the mean degree of nodes
$\langle k\rangle =K$, and with the distribution of the degrees of nodes depending on the choice of the weights.
In particular, random ER graph is obtained if $v_{i}=1/N$ is assumed for all $i$.
For a sequence $v_{i}=i^{-\mu}/\zeta_{N}( \mu)$ associated with the nodes $i=1,2,\ldots N$, where $0< \mu <1$ and
$\zeta_{N}( \mu ) \approx N^{1-\mu}/(1-\mu)$,
SF network is obtained with the distribution of the degrees of nodes $p_{k}\propto k^{-\gamma}$, $\gamma = 1 +1/\mu$.
In an ensemble of networks generated from the static model the mean degree of a given node $i$ is $\langle k_{i}\rangle =NK v_{i}$.
Similarly, in this paper the Ising model on a MN with layers generated from the static model is studied.
The MN with a fixed set of nodes and two layers $G^{(A)}$, $G^{(B)}$ is generated by associating weights $v_{i}^{(A)}$, $v_{i}^{(B)}$ with the nodes
separately to generate each layer. In this way the layers can have different distributions of the degerees of nodes $p_{k^{(A)}}$, $p_{k^{(B)}}$.
Let us note that
the numbering of nodes $i=1,2,\ldots N$ while generating each layer can be assumed the same or different. In the case of random ER layers this distinction is unimportant, however,
in the case of SF layers it can introduce correlations between the two sequences of weights $v_{i}^{(A)}$, $v_{i}^{(B)}$, $i=1,2,\ldots N$, where now and
henceforth $i$ denotes the index of the node in a MN, common for all layers. In particular, a MN with independent
layers is obtained by randomly and independently associating weights from the two appropriate sets of weights with the nodes and then linking them with
edges according to the prescribed sequence of weights within each layer.
\section{Evaluation of the free energy using the replica method}
\subsection{General considerations}
The starting point to study the thermodynamic properties of the Ising model on MNs is to evaluate the free energy
averaged over a statistical ensemble of
MNs generated according to a given rule and with given quenched disorder of the exchange integrals. Hence, the free energy is
$-\beta F=\left[ \left[ \ln Z\right]_{r}\right]_{av}$,
where $Z$ is the partition function for the Ising model on a particular MN with a particular distribution of $J_{ij}$,
the average $\left[ \cdot \right]_{av}$ is taken over all possible random realizations of a set of edges in a MN of a given kind
(i.e., of the two sets of edges in the separately generated layers),
and the average $\left[ \cdot \right]_{r}$ is taken over all possible realizations of the distributions
$P_{r^{(A)}} \left( \left\{ J_{ij}^{(A)} \right\}\right)$, $P_{r^{(B)}} \left( \left\{ J_{ij}^{(B)} \right\}\right)$, Eq.\ (\ref{pApB}),
for fixed sets of edges within each layer $G^{(A)}$, $G^{(B)}$. In the framework of the replica method the free energy is formally evaluated as
$-\beta F =\lim_{n\rightarrow 0} \left\{ \left[\left[ Z^{n}\right]_{r}\right]_{av} -1\right\}/n$. The
average of the $n$-th power of the partition function is
\begin{equation}
\left[\left[ Z^{n}\right]_{r} \right]_{av} = {\rm Tr}_{\{s^{\alpha}\}}
\left[ \left[ \exp\left( \beta \sum_{\left( i,j\right)\in G^{(A)}} J_{ij}^{(A)} \sum_{\alpha =1}^{n}s_{i}^{\alpha}s_{j}^{\alpha}\right)
\exp\left( \beta \sum_{\left( i,j\right)\in G^{(B)}} J_{ij}^{(B)} \sum_{\alpha =1}^{n}s_{i}^{\alpha}s_{j}^{\alpha}\right) \right]_{r}\right]_{av},
\label{Zn}
\end{equation}
i.e., it is the average of a product of $n$ partition functions for non-interacting replicas (copies) of the system,
the trace ${\rm Tr}_{\left\{ s^{\alpha}\right\}}$ is taken over all replicated spins $s_{i}^{\alpha} =\pm 1$, and $\alpha =1,2\ldots n$ is the replica
index.
As pointed out in Ref.\ \cite{Krawiecki17} generation of a MN takes place in two stages: first, in which the weights
$v_{i}^{(A)}$, $v_{i}^{(B)}$ are separately assigned to the nodes $i=1,2,\ldots N$, and second, in which the nodes are connected
with edges taking into account the prescribed weights within each layer. At the first stage the weights from the two sets of weights can be assigned to the
nodes either independently or certain correlations between the two weights assigned to the same nodes can be present (e.g.,
higher weights from both sets can be assigned to the same nodes). Such correlations can change substantially the thermodynamic
properties of the model, e.g., the critical temperature for the FM transition \cite{Krawiecki17}.
Thus, it is necessary to consider separately classes of MNs characterized
by given pairs of sequences of weights $v_{i}^{(A)}$, $v_{i}^{(B)}$, $i=1,2,\ldots N$. Then the average $\left[ \cdot \right]_{av}$ in
Eq.\ (\ref{Zn}) is evaluated separately for each class, and is taken over all possible realizations of the two layers by connecting the
nodes with edges according to the weights $v_{i}^{(A)}$, $v_{i}^{(B)}$, $i=1,2,\ldots N$ characterizing this class.
If necessary, a sort of further averaging over different classes of MNs (e.g., over all classes with the same
correlation coefficient between the two sequences of weights $v_{i}^{(A)}$, $v_{i}^{(B)}$, $i=1,2,\ldots N$) can be
performed by replacing the sums over $N$ nodes by their expected values in the resulting expressions for the critical
temperature.
For a class of MNs with fixed (correlated or not) assignment of the weights $v_{i}^{(A)}$, $v_{i}^{(B)}$ to the nodes
the sets of edges of each layer are generated independently of each other. Thus
the average over all realizations of the set of edges of a MN in Eq.\ (\ref{Zn})
can be taken independently over all realizations of the sets of edges in the layers $G^{(A)}$ and $G^{(B)}$ in accordance with these weights.
Denoting the respective averages by $\left[ \cdot \right]_{av}^{(A)}$, $\left[ \cdot \right]_{av}^{(B)}$, taking into account that
assignment of the exchange integrals $J_{ij}^{(A)}$, $J_{ij}^{(B)}$ to the edges of the layers $G^{(A)}$, $G^{(B)}$ also takes place
independently for each layer and denoting the averages over all possible realizations of the distributions
$P_{r^{(A)}} \left( \left\{ J_{ij}^{(A)} \right\}\right)$ and $P_{r^{(B)}} \left( \left\{ J_{ij}^{(B)} \right\}\right)$ as
$\left[ \cdot \right]_{r^{(A)}}$ and $\left[ \cdot \right]_{r^{(B)}}$, respectively, Eq.\ (\ref{Zn}) can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
\left[ \left[ Z^{n}\right]_{r} \right]_{av}&=&
{\rm Tr}_{\{s^{\alpha}\}} \left\{
\left[ \left[ \exp\left( \beta \sum_{\left( i,j\right)\in G^{(A)}} J_{ij}^{(A)}\sum_{\alpha =1}^{n}s_{i}^{\alpha}s_{j}^{\alpha}\right) \right]_{r^{(A)}} \right]_{av}^{(A)} \right. \nonumber\\
&\times& \left. \left[ \left[ \exp\left( \beta \sum_{\left( i,j\right)\in G^{(B)}} J_{ij}^{(B)}\sum_{\alpha =1}^{n}s_{i}^{\alpha}s_{j}^{\alpha}\right) \right]_{r^{(B)}} \right]_{av}^{(B)}\right\}.
\label{Zn1}
\end{eqnarray}
The two factors can be evaluated as in Ref.\ \cite{Kim05},
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \left[ \left[
\exp\left( \beta \sum_{\left( i,j\right)\in G^{(A)}} J_{ij}^{(A)} \sum_{\alpha =1}^{n}s_{i}^{\alpha}s_{j}^{\alpha}\right)
\right]_{r^{(A)}} \right]_{av}^{(A)} = \nonumber\\
&& \prod_{i<j} \left\{ \left( 1-f_{ij}^{(A)} \right) + f_{ij}^{(A)}
\left[ \exp\left( \beta J_{ij}^{(A)} \sum_{\alpha =1}^{n}s_{i}^{\alpha}s_{j}^{\alpha}\right) \right]_{r^{(A)}} \right\} = \nonumber\\
&& \exp \left\{ \sum_{i<j} \ln \left[ 1+f_{ij}^{(A)}
\left[ \exp\left( \beta J_{ij}^{(A)} \sum_{\alpha =1}^{n}s_{i}^{\alpha}s_{j}^{\alpha}\right) -1\right]_{r^{(A)}} \right] \right\}
\approx \nonumber\\
&& \exp\left[ \sum_{i<j} NK^{(A)} v_{i}^{(A)}v_{j}^{(A)}\left[ \exp\left( \beta J_{ij}^{(A)} \sum_{\alpha =1}^{n}s_{i}^{\alpha}s_{j}^{\alpha}\right) -1
\right]_{r^{(A)}} \right],
\label{Zn2}
\end{eqnarray}
and similarly for the average $\left[ \left[ \cdot \right]_{r^{(B)}} \right]_{av}^{(B)}$. Then, since $s_{i}^{\alpha}s_{j}^{\alpha} = \pm 1$, the relation
\begin{equation}
\left[ \exp\left( \beta J_{ij}^{(A)} \sum_{\alpha =1}^{n}s_{i}^{\alpha}s_{j}^{\alpha}\right) \right]_{r^{(A)}}
= \left[ \prod_{\alpha} \cosh \beta J^{(A)} \left( 1+ s_{i}^{\alpha}s_{j}^{\alpha} \tanh\beta J^{(A)} \right) \right]_{r^{(A)}}
\end{equation}
can be used in Eq.\ (\ref{Zn2}), which yields
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \left[ \left[
\exp\left( \beta \sum_{\left( i,j\right)\in G^{(A)}} J_{ij}^{(A)}\sum_{\alpha =1}^{n}s_{i}^{\alpha}s_{j}^{\alpha}\right)
\right]_{r^{(A)}} \right]_{av}^{(A)} \propto \nonumber\\
&& \exp\left[ \sum_{i<j} NK^{(A)} v_{i}^{(A)}v_{j}^{(A)} \left( {\bf T}_{1}^{(A)} \sum_{\alpha} s_{i}^{\alpha}s_{j}^{\alpha} +
{\bf T}_{2}^{(A)} \sum_{\alpha < \beta} s_{i}^{\alpha}s_{i}^{\beta} s_{j}^{\alpha}s_{j}^{\beta} +\ldots \right) \right],
\label{Zn4}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bf T}_{1}^{(A)} &=& \left[ \cosh^{n}\beta J_{ij}^{(A)} \tanh\beta J_{ij}^{(A)} \right]_{r^{(A)}}
\stackrel{n\rightarrow 0}{\rightarrow} (2r^{(A)}-1) \tanh \beta J^{(A)}, \nonumber\\
{\bf T}_{2}^{(A)}&=& \left[ \cosh^{n}\beta J_{ij}^{(A)} \tanh^{2}\beta J_{ij}^{(A)}\right]_{r^{(A)}}
\stackrel{n\rightarrow 0}{\rightarrow} \tanh^{2} \beta J^{(A)},
\label{T1T2}
\end{eqnarray}
etc.; similar expansion can be obtained for the average $\left[ \left[\cdot \right]_{r^{(B)}}\right]_{av}^{(B)}$.
Finally, after applying the Hubbard-Stratonovich identity to the expressions of the form (\ref{Zn4}), separately for the two averages
$\left[ \left[\cdot \right]_{r^{(A)}}\right]_{av}^{(A)}$, $\left[ \left[\cdot \right]_{r^{(B)}}\right]_{av}^{(B)}$,
and grouping terms connected with the same nodes $i$ it is obtained that
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \left[ \left[ Z^{n}\right]_{r}\right]_{av} = \nonumber \\
&& \int dq_{\alpha}^{(A)} \int dq_{\alpha \beta}^{(A)}\ldots \int dq_{\alpha}^{(B)} \int dq_{\alpha\beta }^{(B)}\ldots
\exp \left[ -Nn\beta f \left( q_{\alpha}^{(A)}, q_{\alpha\beta}^{(A)},\ldots q_{\alpha}^{(B)}, q_{\alpha\beta }^{(B)} \ldots \right) \right] \nonumber \\
&& \equiv \int \ d{\bf q} \exp \left[ -Nn\beta f({\bf q}) \right],
\label{Zn6}
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
n\beta f({\bf q})& =& \frac{K^{(A)} {\bf T}_{1}^{(A)}}{2} \sum_{\alpha} q_{\alpha}^{(A)2}
+ \frac{K^{(B)} {\bf T}_{1}^{(B)}}{2} \sum_{\alpha} q_{\alpha}^{(B)2}
+\ldots \nonumber\\
&+& \frac{K^{(A)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(A)}}{2} \sum_{\alpha < \beta} q_{\alpha\beta}^{(A)2} +
\frac{K^{(B)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(B)}}{2} \sum_{\alpha< \beta} q_{\alpha\beta}^{(B)2} +\ldots \nonumber \\
&-& \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i} \ln {\rm Tr}_{\left\{ s_{i}^{\alpha}\right\}} \exp\left( X_{i}^{(A)} +X_{i}^{(B)} \right),
\label{Zn5}
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\rm Tr}_{\left\{ s_{i}^{\alpha}\right\}}$ is the trace over the replicated spins at node $i$, and
\begin{equation}
X_{i}^{(A)} = NK^{(A)}{\bf T}_{1}^{(A)} v_{i}^{(A)} \sum_{\alpha}q_{\alpha}^{(A)} s_{i}^{\alpha} +
NK^{(A)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(A)} v_{i}^{(A)} \sum_{\alpha < \beta}q_{\alpha\beta}^{(A)} s_{i}^{\alpha} s_{i}^{\beta} +\ldots,
\end{equation}
and similarily for $X_{i}^{(B)}$.
The elements of a set $\{\bf q\}$, $q_{\alpha}^{(A)}, q_{\alpha\beta}^{(A)}, \ldots, q_{\alpha}^{(B)}, q_{\alpha\beta}^{(B)},
\ldots $ form in a natural way two subsets of the order parameters associated with the two layers of the multiplex network
$G_{A}$, $G_{B}$. The first two order parameters,
\begin{equation}
q_{\alpha}^{(A)} = \sum_{i}v_{i}^{(A)} \overline{s_{i}^{\alpha}}, \; \; q_{\alpha}^{(B)} = \sum_{i}v_{i}^{(B)} \overline{s_{i}^{\alpha}},
\label{ordpar}
\end{equation}
where the averages are evaluated as
\begin{displaymath}
\overline{s_{i}^{\alpha}} = \frac{{\rm Tr}_{\left\{ s_{i}^{\alpha}\right\}} s_{i}^{\alpha} \exp\left( X_{i}^{(A)} +X_{i}^{(B)} \right)}
{{\rm Tr}_{\left\{ s_{i}^{\alpha}\right\}} \exp\left( X_{i}^{(A)} +X_{i}^{(B)} \right)},
\end{displaymath}
are called magnetizations for convenience; the next two order parameters
\begin{equation}
q_{\alpha\beta}^{(A)} = \sum_{i}v_{i}^{(A)} \overline{s_{i}^{\alpha} s_{i}^{\beta}}, \; \;
q_{\alpha\beta}^{(B)} = \sum_{i}v_{i}^{(B)} \overline{s_{i}^{\alpha} s_{i}^{\beta}},
\label{ordpar1}
\end{equation}
are called SG order parameters, etc.
\subsection{The replica symmetric free energy}
The simplest RS solution for the order parameters is obtained under the assumption that spins with different replica index
are indistinguishable. In the case of the Ising model on a MN this solution has a form
$q_{\alpha}^{(A)} =m^{(A)}$, $q_{\alpha \beta}^{(A)}=q^{(A)}$, etc., and
$q_{\alpha}^{(B)} =m^{(B)}$, $q_{\alpha \beta}^{(B)}=q^{(B)}$, etc., for $\alpha, \beta =1,2\ldots n$, etc., where, in general,
$m^{(A)}\neq m^{(B)}$, $q^{(A)}\neq q^{(B)}$, etc.\ \cite{Krawiecki17}.
Assuming the above-mentioned form of the RS solution and truncating the free energy, Eq.\ (\ref{Zn5}), at the order of $q^{2}$ yields
\begin{eqnarray}
&& n\beta f\left( m^{(A)},m^{(B)},q^{(A)},q^{(B)}\right)= \nonumber\\
&&\frac{K^{(A)} {\bf T}_{1}^{(A)}}{2}nm^{(A)2}+\frac{K^{(B)} {\bf T}_{1}^{(B)}}{2}nm^{(B)2} +\nonumber\\
&&\frac{K^{(A)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(A)}}{2} \frac{n(n-1)}{2}q^{(A)2} + \frac{K^{(B)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(B)}}{2} \frac{n(n-1)}{2}q^{(B)2} - \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i} \ln {\cal Z}_{i},
\label{nBf}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal Z}_{i}&=& {\rm Tr}_{\left\{ s_{i}^{\alpha}\right\} }\exp \left[ N \left( K^{(A)}{\bf T}_{1}^{(A)} v_{i}^{(A)} m^{(A)} +
K^{(B)} {\bf T}_{1}^{(B)} v_{i}^{(B)} m^{(B)} \right)
\sum_{\alpha} s_{i}^{\alpha} + \right. \nonumber\\
&& \left. N \left( K^{(A)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(A)} v_{i}^{(A)} q^{(A)} + K^{(B)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(B)} v_{i}^{(B)} q^{(B)} \right)
\frac{\left( \sum_{\alpha} s_{i}^{\alpha} \right)^{2}-n}{2} \right].
\end{eqnarray}
Using once more the Hubbard-Stratonovich identity and evaluating the trace over $s_{i}^{\alpha}=\pm1$ yields
\begin{equation}
{\cal Z}_{i}= \exp\left[ -\frac{nN}{2}\left( K^{(A)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(A)} v_{i}^{(A)} q^{(A)} + K^{(B)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(B)} v_{i}^{(B)} q^{(B)} \right)\right]
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \int dz e^{-z^{2}/2}\left[2 \cosh \eta_{i}(z) \right]^{n},
\label{Zi}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\eta_{i}(z) &=& N \left( K^{(A)}{\bf T}_{1}^{(A)} v_{i}^{(A)} m^{(A)} + K^{(B)} {\bf T}_{1}^{(B)} v_{i}^{(B)} m^{(B)} \right) + \nonumber\\
&& z \sqrt{ N \left( K^{(A)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(A)} v_{i}^{(A)} q^{(A)} + K^{(B)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(B)} v_{i}^{(B)} q^{(B)} \right) }.
\end{eqnarray}
In the limit $n\rightarrow 0$ it is possible to expand $\left[ 2\cosh \eta_{i}(z)\right]^{n} \approx 1+n \ln \left[ 2\cosh \eta_{i}(z)\right]$.
Inserting this expansion in Eq.\ (\ref{Zi}) and again expanding $\ln {\cal Z}_{i}$ in Eq.\ (\ref{nBf}) yields for $n\rightarrow 0$
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \beta f\left( m^{(A)},m^{(B)},q^{(A)},q^{(B)}\right)= \nonumber\\
&& \frac{K^{(A)} {\bf T}_{1}^{(A)}}{2}m^{(A)2}+\frac{K^{(B)} {\bf T}_{1}^{(B)}}{2}m^{(B)2} +
\frac{K^{(A)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(A)}}{2}q^{(A)}+\frac{K^{(B)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(B)}}{2}q^{(B)} - \nonumber\\
&& \frac{K^{(A)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(A)}}{4}q^{(A)2}-\frac{K^{(B)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(B)}}{4}q^{(B)2} -
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \int dz e^{-z^{2}/2}\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i} \ln \left[2 \cosh \eta_{i}(z) \right].\nonumber\\
&&
\label{Bf}
\end{eqnarray}
With $\beta f({\bf q})$ given by Eq.\ (\ref{Bf}) the integral in Eq.\ (\ref{Zn6}) can be evaluated using the saddle point method. For this
purpose, the minimum of the function $f\left( m^{(A)},m^{(B)},q^{(A)},q^{(B)}\right)$ should be found, and the necessary condition for
the existence of extremum leads to the following set of self-consistent equations for the order parameters,
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\partial f}{\partial m^{(A)}} =0 &\Leftrightarrow& m^{(A)}= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \int dz e^{-z^{2}/2} \sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(A)} \tanh \eta_{i}(z),
\nonumber\\
\frac{\partial f}{\partial q^{(A)}} =0 &\Leftrightarrow& q^{(A)}= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \int dz e^{-z^{2}/2} \sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(A)} \tanh^{2}\eta_{i}(z),
\label{system}
\end{eqnarray}
and two similar equations for $m^{(B)}$, $q^{(B)}$.
\section{Critical temperatures for the ferromagnetic and spin glass transitions}
\subsection{General equations for the critical temperature}
For small $m^{(A)}$, $m^{(B)}$, $q^{(A)}$, $q^{(B)}$, after expanding the logarithm and evaluating the moments in Eq.\ (\ref{Bf}) the free
energy can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \beta f\left( m^{(A)},m^{(B)},q^{(A)},q^{(B)}\right)= \nonumber\\
&& \frac{K^{(A)} {\bf T}_{1}^{(A)}}{2}m^{(A)2}+\frac{K^{(B)} {\bf T}_{1}^{(B)}}{2}m^{(B)2} -
\frac{K^{(A)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(A)}}{4}q^{(A)2}-\frac{K^{(B)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(B)}}{4}q^{(B)2} \nonumber\\
&& - \frac{1}{2}N \sum_{i=1}^{N} \left( K^{(A)} {\bf T}_{1}^{(A)2}v_{i}^{(A)} m^{(A)}
+ K^{(B)} {\bf T}_{1}^{(B)2} v_{i}^{(B)} m^{(B)} \right)^{2} \nonumber\\
&& + \frac{1}{4}N \sum_{i=1}^{N} \left( K^{(A)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(A)2} v_{i}^{(A)} q^{(A)}
+ K^{(B)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(B)2} v_{i}^{(B)} q^{(B)} \right)^{2}.
\label{Bflinear}
\end{eqnarray}
Then the system of equations in Eq.\ (\ref{system})
leads to the following system of linear equations for $m^{(A)}$, $m^{(B)}$, $q^{(A)}$, $q^{(B)}$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\left( 1-NK^{(A)} {\bf T}_{1}^{(A)} \sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(A)2} \right) m^{(A)}
-NK^{(B)}{\bf T}_{1}^{(B)}\left( \sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(A)}v_{i}^{(B)}\right) m^{(B)} &=&0 \nonumber\\
-NK^{(A)}{\bf T}_{1}^{(A)}\left( \sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(A)}v_{i}^{(B)}\right) m^{(A)}
+\left( 1-NK^{(B)} {\bf T}_{1}^{(B)} \sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(B)2} \right) m^{(B)} &=& 0.\nonumber\\
\left( 1-NK^{(A)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(A)} \sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(A)2} \right) q^{(A)}
-NK^{(B)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(B)}\left( \sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(A)}v_{i}^{(B)}\right) q^{(B)} &=&0 \nonumber\\
-NK^{(A)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(A)}\left( \sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(A)}v_{i}^{(B)}\right) q^{(A)}
+\left( 1-NK^{(B)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(B)} \sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(B)2} \right) q^{(B)} &=& 0.\nonumber\\
&& \label{mAmB}
\end{eqnarray}
Non-zero solutions of the system of Eq.\ (\ref{mAmB}) exist if the determinant is zero. Due to the block structure of Eq.\ (\ref{mAmB})
this condition is equivalent to the requirement that the determinant of the system of the first two equations of the above system is zero
or the determinant of the last two equations of the above system is zero. From the former condition the critical temperature for the FM
transition can be evaluated: the corresponding equation for the critical temperature is quadratic with respect to $\tanh \beta J^{(A)}$, $\tanh \beta J^{(B)}$, thus it has two
solutions of which that with a higher value corresponds to $T_{c}^{FM}$. From the latter condition the critical temperature for the SG transition
can be evaluated: the corresponding equation for the critical temperature is biquadratic with respect to $\tanh \beta J^{(A)}$, $\tanh \beta J^{(B)}$, thus it has four
solutions of which the real solution with the highest value corresponds to $T_{c}^{SG}$. In Sec.\ 4.2 - 4.5 both critical temperatures are evaluated
for the MN with random ER and SF layers.
From the above-mentioned procedure, for fixed model parameters, it is possible to determine on the phase diagram the boundary between the paramagnetic
andt the FM or SG phase, depending on which of the temperatures $T_{c}^{FM}$, $T_{c}^{SG}$ is higher. The boundary between the FM and SG phases
runs along the Almeida-Thouless line at which the FM phase becomes unstable against the occurrence of the reentrant SG phase
as the temperature is lowered \cite{Almeida78}. Determination of the location of this line on the phase diagram is not straightforward in the case of
the Ising model on MNs for which, in contrast with SG models considered so far, the RS solution is characterized by two sets of order parameters
$m^{(A)}$, $q^{(A)} \ldots$ and $m^{(B)}$, $q^{(B)}\ldots $ connected with the two layers $G^{(A)}$, $G^{(B)}$; moreover, it requires numerical solution of a set
of four nonlinear equations in Eq.\ (\ref{system}). Thus, this problem is left for future research and full phase diagrams for the model under study
are not presented in this paper.
The space of parameters for the Ising model on a MN is large and comprises $J^{(A)}$, $J^{(B)}$ and the parameters of the layers,
e.g., in the case of SF layers, $K^{(A)}$, $K^{(B)}$, $\gamma^{(A)}$, $\gamma^{(B)}$, $r^{(A)}$, $r^{(B)}$ as well as the correlation
between the degrees of nodes within the layers $k_{i}^{(A)}$, $k_{i}^{(B)}$, $i=1,2,\ldots N$. In order to constraint the number of
independent parameters henceforth all formulae are obtained under the assumptions $J^{(A)}=J^{(B)}=J$, $r^{(A)}=1$ (i.e., in the layer $G^{(A)}$
the interactions are purely FM) and $r^{(B)}=0$ (i.e., in the layer $G^{(B)}$ all interactions are purely AFM); moreover, mostly the
case $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}$ is considered. Under such assumptions it is possible to study the, probably most intriguing, problem of the influence of the
difference between the distributions of the degerees of nodes $p_{k^{(A)}}$, $p_{k^{(B)}}$ and of the correlation between degrees of nodes within
different layers on the FM and SG transition in the case of balanced FM and AFM interactions.
\subsection{Random Erd\"os-R\'enyi layers}
For random ER layers there is $v_{i}^{(A)}=v_{i}^{(B)}=1/N$, $i=1,2,\ldots N$. From
the definition of the magnetizations, Eq.\ (\ref{ordpar}), as well as from the first two equations in Eq.\ (\ref{mAmB}) follows that
$m^{(A)}=m^{(B)}$ and the equation for the FM critical temperature is linear rather than quadratic with respect to $\tanh\beta J$. The result is
\begin{equation}
T_{c}^{FM}= J{\rm atanh}^{-1} \left[ K^{(A)} -K^{(B)}\right]^{-1},
\label{TfmER}
\end{equation}
thus $T_{c}^{FM} <0$ for $K^{(A)}< K^{(B)}$ and if the density of edges corresponding to FM interactions is smaller than that of edges
corresponding to AFM interactions the transition to the FM phase cannot occur. From
the definition of the SG order parameters, Eq.\ (\ref{ordpar1}), as well as from the last two equations in Eq.\ (\ref{mAmB})
follows that $q^{(A)}=q^{(B)}$ and the equation for the SG critical temperature is linear with respect to $\tanh^{2}\beta J$. The result is
\begin{equation}
T_{c}^{SG}= J{\rm atanh}^{-1} \left[ K^{(A)} + K^{(B)}\right]^{-1/2},
\label{TsgER}
\end{equation}
which is always finite and positive. Thus for $K^{(A)}< K^{(B)}$ there is only SG transition from the paramagnetic phase, and in the
opposite case the transition can be either to the SG or to the FM phase, depending on which of the critical temperatures, $T_{c}^{SG}$ or
$T_{c}^{FM}$ is higher for given $K^{(A)}$, $K^{(B)}$.
\subsection{Independent scale-free layers}
The MN with two independent SF layers is generated by randomly and independently assigning to the nodes $i=1,2,\ldots N$ the weights from
a set $\left\{ v_{k}: v_{k}=k^{-\mu^{(A)}}/\zeta_{N}( \mu^{(A)}) \right\}$, $k=1,2,\ldots N$ to generate the layer $G^{(A)}$ and from
a set $\left\{ v_{l}: v_{l}=l^{-\mu^{(B)}}/\zeta_{N}( \mu^{(B)}) \right\}$, $l=1,2,\ldots N$ to generate the layer $G^{(B)}$. In this way,
the sequences of weights $v_{i}^{(A)}$, $v_{i}^{(B)}$ are uncorrelated.
As a result, in Eq.\ (\ref{mAmB}) the sum over the products of weights can be approximated by its expected value,
$ N\sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(A)}v_{i}^{(B)} \approx N \langle \sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(A)}v_{i}^{(B)} \rangle = 1$
\cite{Krawiecki17}. This approximation is valid in typical cases of MNs with independently generated layers, and is applied instead of
averaging the partition function in Eq.\ (\ref{Zn}) over a class of MNs with mutually independent sequences of weights
assigned to nodes when generating different layers.
Besides, for $\mu^{(A)}<1/2$ ($\gamma^{(A)}>3$), $\mu^{(B)}<1/2$ ($\gamma^{(B)}>3$) by approximating the
sum with an integral it is obtained that
$ N\sum_{i=1}^{N}v_{i}^{(A)2}= N\sum_{k=1}^{N}v_{k}^{2}\approx \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(A)}}
=\frac{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-2 \right)^{2}}{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-1\right) \left( \gamma^{(A)}-3\right)}$
and similarly for $\sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(B)2}$.
The critical temperature for the FM transition can be evaluated from the condition that the determinant of a system of the first two equations in Eq.\ (\ref{mAmB})
is zero, which leads to
\begin{equation}
T_{c}^{FM}=J {\rm atanh}^{-1} \left\{
\frac{ K^{(A)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(A)}} - K^{(B)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(B)}}-\sqrt{\Delta}}
{2 K^{(A)}K^{(B)} \left[ 1- \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(A)}} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(B)}} \right]}
\right\},
\label{TcFM1}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{displaymath}
\Delta = \left[ K^{(A)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(A)}} + K^{(B)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(B)}} \right]^2
-4 K^{(A)}K^{(B)}.
\end{displaymath}
In particular, for the two layers with identical distributions of the degrees of nodes $p_{k^{(A)}} = p_{k^{(B)}}=p_{k}$, i.e., with
$K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}=K$, $\mu^{(A)}=\mu^{(B)}=\mu$,
\begin{equation}
T_{c}^{FM}=J {\rm atanh}^{-1}\left[ K^{-1}\left( \frac{\left(1-\mu \right)^4}{\left( 1-2\mu\right)^{2}} -1\right)^{-1/2} \right],
\label{TcFM1eq}
\end{equation}
i.e., in this case $T_{c}^{FM}>0$ for $0< \mu <1/2$ ($\gamma >3$) and $T_{c}^{FM}\rightarrow \infty$ for $\mu \rightarrow 1/2$ ($\gamma \rightarrow 3$).
The temperature for the SG transition can be evaluated from the condition that the determinant of a system of the last two equations in Eq.\ (\ref{mAmB})
is zero, which leads to
\begin{equation}
T_{c}^{SG}=J {\rm atanh}^{-1} \left\{
\frac{ K^{(A)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(A)}} + K^{(B)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(B)}}-\sqrt{\Delta}}
{2 K^{(A)}K^{(B)} \left[ \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(A)}} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(B)}} -1 \right]}
\right\}^{1/2},
\label{TcSG1}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{displaymath}
\Delta = \left[ K^{(A)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(A)}} - K^{(B)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(B)}} \right]^2
+4 K^{(A)}K^{(B)}.
\end{displaymath}
In particular, for the two layers with identical distributions of the degrees of nodes
\begin{equation}
T_{c}^{SG}=J {\rm atanh}^{-1}\left[ K^{-1/2}\left( \frac{\left(1-\mu \right)^2}{1-2\mu} +1\right)^{-1/2} \right],
\label{TcSG1eq}
\end{equation}
i.e., in this case again $T_{c}^{SG}>0$ for $0< \mu <1/2$ ($\gamma >3$) and $T_{c}^{SG}\rightarrow \infty$ for $\mu \rightarrow 1/2$
($\gamma \rightarrow 3$).
\begin{figure}[bt]
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{Fig1.eps}}
\caption{The critical temperatures for the SG transition $T_{c}^{SG}$ (black solid lines) and for the FM transition $T_{c}^{FM}$ (gray solid lines)
vs.\ $\gamma^{(A)}$, for $\gamma^{(B)}=4.5$ and for (a,b) the MN with independent SF layers with (a) $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)} =2.5$, (b)
$K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}=25$, results of Eq.\ (\ref{TcSG1}), Eq.\ (\ref{TcFM1}), respectively, and for (c,d) maximally correlated SF layers
with (c) $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)} =2.5$, (d) $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}=25$, results of Eq.\ (\ref{TcSG2}), Eq.\ (\ref{TcFM2}), respectively}
\end{figure}
As an example, in Fig.\ 1(a,b) the critical temperatures $T_{c}^{FM}$, $T_{c}^{SG}$ evaluated from Eq.\ (\ref{TcFM1}) and Eq.\ (\ref{TcSG1}),
respectively, are shown for fixed $\gamma^{(A)}=4.5$. It is assumed that $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}$ which means that the FM and AFM
interactions in the MN are balanced (the number of edges corresponding to $J>0$ in the layer $G^{(A)}$ is equal to that corresponding to $-J<0$
in the layer $G^{(B)}$); Fig.\ 1(a) is for small and Fig.\ 1(b) for high mean degree of nodes within both layers. In the Ising model on SF networks
only SG transition occurs in the case of balanced FM and AFM interactions \cite{Kim05}. Here, in contrast, depending on $\gamma^{(A)}$
and the mean degree of nodes transition to the SG or FM phase can occur from the paramagnetic phase. The critical temperature remains finite
for $\gamma^{(A)}>3$. As $\gamma^{(A)}\rightarrow 3$ (from above),
i.e., as the second moment $\langle k^{(A)}\rangle^{2}$ of the distribution $p_{k^{(A)}}$ diverges, $T_{c}^{FM}\rightarrow \infty$ and
the transition is to the FM phase. This is probably due to presence of a large number of hubs (nodes with high degree) within the layer $G^{(A)}$
interacting via FM interactions with many neighbors and thus enforcing global order. For larger $\gamma^{(A)}$ and small $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}$
the transition is to the SG phase, and a tricritical point occurs on the phase diagram (Fig.\ 1(a)). In contrast, for large $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}$ there is
$T_{c}^{FM}>T_{c}^{SG}$ in the whole range of $\gamma^{(A)}$ and the transition is always to the FM phase. In particular, even if the
distributions of the degrees of nodes within both layers are the same, $p_{k^{(A)}}=p_{k^{(B)}}$ and thus $\gamma^{(A)}=\gamma^{(B)}$,
for small $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}$ the transition is to the SG phase and for high $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}$ to the FM phase, which is in marked contrast with
the above-mentioned case of the Ising model on SF networks. The difference is due to the fact that in these two cases the FM and AFM
interactions are not balanced in the same way. In the Insing model on SF networks, on average, half of edges attached to each node corresponds to
$+J$ and half to $-J$ while in the model on MNs with independent layers there are many nodes with high degree within one layer (hubs) with many
attached edges corresponding, e.g., to FM interactions and with small degree within the other layer with only few attached edges corrseponding to
AFM interactions; i.e., in the latter case the FM and AFM interactions are balanced only globally but not locally.
This result, confirmed via MC simulations in Sec.\ 4.6, emphasises the difference of the critical behavior
between the Ising model on, possibly heterogeneous, networks and on MNs with separately (in particular, independently) generated layers.
\subsection{Maximally correlated scale-free layers}
The MN with two maximally correlated SF layers is generated by randomly assigning to the nodes $i=1,2,\ldots N$ the weights
$v_{i}^{(A)}=i^{-\mu^{(A)}}/\zeta_{N}( \mu^{(A)})$ to generate the layer $G^{(A)}$ and
$v_{i}^{(B)}=i^{-\mu^{(B)}}/\zeta_{N}( \mu^{(B)})$ to generate the layer $G^{(B)}$. In this way, in the statistical ensemble of
MNs generated in this way the mean degrees of the consecutive nodes within each layer $\langle k_{i}^{(A)} \rangle \propto v_{i}^{(A)}$,
$\langle k_{i}^{(B)} \rangle \propto v_{i}^{(B)}$ \cite{Lee04} are maximally correlated;
As a result, the nodes which have high degree within one layer have also, on average, high degree in the other layer and
vice versa. Then, for $\mu^{(A)}<1/2$ ($\gamma^{(A)}>3$), $\mu^{(B)}<1/2$ ($\gamma^{(B)}>3$) approximating the
sum with an integral there is
$ N\sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(A)}v_{i}^{(B)} \approx \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right) \left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)}{1-\left( \mu^{(A)}+ \mu^{(B)} \right)}$
in Eq.\ (\ref{mAmB}). Since all MNs generated in this way are equivalent up to the permutation of the indices of nodes,
no further averaging as in the case of independent SF layers is necessary.
The temperature for the FM transition can be evaluated from the condition that the determinant of a system of the first two equations in Eq.\ (\ref{mAmB})
is zero, which leads to
\begin{equation}
T_{c}^{FM}=J {\rm atanh}^{-1} \left\{
\frac{ K^{(A)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(A)}} - K^{(B)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(B)}}-\sqrt{\Delta}}
{2 K^{(A)}K^{(B)} \left[
\frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2 \left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^2}{\left[ 1-\left( \mu^{(A)} + \mu^{(B)} \right)\right]^{2}}
- \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(A)}} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(B)}} \right]}
\right\},
\label{TcFM2}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{displaymath}
\Delta = \left[ K^{(A)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(A)}} + K^{(B)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(B)}} \right]^2
-4 K^{(A)}K^{(B)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2 \left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^2}{\left[ 1-\left( \mu^{(A)} + \mu^{(B)} \right)\right]^{2}}.
\end{displaymath}
In particular, it can be seen that for the two layers with identical distributions of the degrees of nodes the above-mentioned determinant is
equal to 1 for any $\beta$, thus transition to the FM state cannot occur.
The temperature for the SG transition can be evaluated from the condition that the determinant of a system of the last two equations in Eq.\ (\ref{mAmB})
is zero, which leads to
\begin{equation}
T_{c}^{SG}=J {\rm atanh}^{-1} \left\{
\frac{ K^{(A)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(A)}} + K^{(B)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(B)}}-\sqrt{\Delta}}
{2 K^{(A)}K^{(B)} \left[ \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(A)}} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(B)}}
-\frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2 \left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^2}{\left[ 1-\left( \mu^{(A)} + \mu^{(B)} \right)\right]^{2}} \right]}
\right\}^{1/2},
\label{TcSG2}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{displaymath}
\Delta = \left[ K^{(A)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(A)}} - K^{(B)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^2}{1-2\mu^{(B)}} \right]^2
+4 K^{(A)}K^{(B)} \frac{\left(1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^2 \left(1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^2}{\left[ 1-\left( \mu^{(A)} + \mu^{(B)} \right)\right]^{2}}.
\end{displaymath}
In particular, for the two layers with identical distributions of the degrees of nodes
\begin{equation}
T_{c}^{SG}=J {\rm atanh}^{-1} \left( \sqrt{\frac{1-2\mu}{2K}}\frac{1}{1-\mu} \right),
\label{TcSG2eq}
\end{equation}
i.e., in this case again $T_{c}^{SG}>0$ for $0< \mu <1/2$ ($\gamma >3$) and $T_{c}^{SG}\rightarrow \infty$ for $\mu \rightarrow 1/2$
($\gamma \rightarrow 3$).
As an example, in Fig.\ 1(c,d) the critical temperatures $T_{c}^{FM}$, $T_{c}^{SG}$ evaluated from Eq.\ (\ref{TcFM2}) and Eq.\ (\ref{TcSG2}),
respectively, are presented for fixed $\gamma^{(A)}=4.5$ and small (Fig.\ 1(c)) and high (Fig.\ 1(d)) value of $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}$.
As in the case of MN with independent layers for $\gamma^{(A)}\rightarrow 3$ there is $T_{c}^{FM}\rightarrow \infty$ and the transition is to the FM phase.
However, for larger $\gamma^{(A)}$ the transition is to the SG phase, independently of the mean degrees of nodes within layers; thus, there is
always the tricritical point on the phase diagram. In particular, in the case of MN with identical distributions of the degrees of nodes within both layers
the transition is always to the SG phase, as in the case of the Ising model on SF networks with balanced FM and AFM interactions.
This similarity is due to the fact that in the case of the Ising model on a MN with maximally correlated layers the same nodes have high (or small)
degree within both layers, thus the FM and AFM interactions are balanced both globally and locally.
\subsection{Minimally correlated scale-free layers}
The MN with two minimally correlated SF layers is generated by randomly assigning to the nodes $i=1,2,\ldots N$ the weights
$v_{i}=i^{-\mu^{(A)}}/\zeta_{N}(\mu^{(A)})$, $v_{N-i}^{(B)}=i^{-\mu^{(B)}}/\zeta_{N}(\mu^{(B)})$. As a result,
the nodes which have high degree within one layer have, on average, low degree in the other layer and
$N\sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(A)}v_{i}^{(B)} \stackrel{N\rightarrow \infty}{\rightarrow} 0$ in Eq.\ (\ref{mAmB}).
Hence, the MN is effectively decomposed into two apparently non-interacting networks corresponding to the layers $G^{(A)}$, $G^{(B)}$, with
FM and AFM exchange interactions, respectively. As a result,
the system of equations in Eq.\ (\ref{mAmB}) is decomposed into four independent equations. From the first two equations two
critical temperatures for the FM transition can be obtained as
\begin{eqnarray}
&& T_{c}^{(A)FM}= J {\rm atanh}^{-1}\left[ \frac{1}{K^{(A)}}\frac{1-2\mu^{(A)}}{\left( 1-\mu^{(A)}\right)^{2}} \right], \nonumber\\
&& T_{c}^{(B)FM}= - J {\rm atanh}^{-1}\left[ \frac{1}{K^{(B)}}\frac{1-2\mu^{(B)}}{\left( 1-\mu^{(B)}\right)^{2}} \right],
\end{eqnarray}
of which $T_{c}^{(A)FM}$ is positive and finite for $1/2 < \mu^{(A)} <1$ while
$T_{c}^{(B)FM}<0$. From the last two equations in Eq.\ (\ref{mAmB}) the two critical temperatures
for the SG transition can be obtained as
\begin{eqnarray}
&& T_{c}^{(A)SG}= J {\rm atanh}^{-1}\left[ \sqrt{\frac{1-2\mu^{(A)}}{K^{(A)}}}\frac{1}{1-\mu^{(A)}} \right], \nonumber\\
&& T_{c}^{(B)SG}= J {\rm atanh}^{-1}\left[ \sqrt{\frac{1-2\mu^{(B)}}{K^{(B)}}}\frac{1}{1-\mu^{(B)}} \right],
\end{eqnarray}
which are finite and positive for $1/2 < \mu^{(A)} <1$, $1/2 < \mu^{(B)} <1$. There is always $T_{c}^{(A)SG} < T_{c}^{(A)FM}$,
thus, transition from the paramagnetic to the FM or SG phase
can occur at $T_{c}= \max \left\{ T_{c}^{(A)FM}, T_{c}^{(B)SG}\right\}$ as the temperature is lowered, depending on the parameters
$K^{(A)}$, $K^{(B)}$, $\mu^{(A)}$, $\mu^{(B)}$.
\subsection{Comparison with Monte Carlo simulations}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{Fig2.eps}}
\caption{Results of MC simulations for the MN with independent SF layers with $\gamma^{(A)}=\gamma^{(B)}=4.5$, (a,c,e) $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}=2$,
(b,d,f) $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}=25$: (a,b) the overlap order parameter $q$, Eq.\ (\ref{qoverlap}), vs.\ $T$, (c,d) the magnetization $M$ vs.\ $T$,
(e,f) the Binder cumulant $U_{L}$, Eq.\ (\ref{B}), vs.\ $T$, for ($\circ$) $N=1000$, ($\cdot$) $N=2000$, ($+$) $N=5000$, ($\times$) $N=10000$.}
\end{figure}
In order to verify, at least partly, the theoretical predictions of Sec.\ 4.3 MC simulations of the Ising model on MNs with independent SF layers were performed
using the Metropolis algorithm and the parallel tempering (replica exchange) method \cite{Hukushima96,Katzgraber01,Katzgraber02}
in the form described in Ref.\ \cite{Bartolozzi06}.
As the order parameter for the SG transition the absolute value $\left| q\right|$ of the overlap parameter
\begin{equation}
q=\left[ \langle \frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^{N} s_{i}^{\alpha} s_{i}^{\beta} \rangle_{t} \right]_{av} \equiv \left[ \langle \tilde{q} \rangle_{t} \right]_{av}
\label{qoverlap}
\end{equation}
is used, where $\alpha$, $\beta$ denote two copies (replicas) of the system simulated independently with random initial conditions,
$\langle \cdot \rangle_{t}$ denotes the time average for the system on a given MN and $\left[ \cdot \right]_{av}$, as in Sec.\ 3, denotes average over
different realizations of the MN with independent SF layers. The critical temperature for the SG transition $T_{c}^{SG}$
can be determined from the intersection point of the Binder cumulants $U_{L}$ vs.\ $T$ for different $N$ \cite{Binder97}, where
\begin{equation}
U_{L}=\frac{1}{2}\left[ 3-\frac{\langle \tilde{q}^{4} \rangle_{t}}{\langle \tilde{q}^{2}\rangle_{t}^{2}} \right]_{av}.
\label{B}
\end{equation}
Below the critical
temperature for the transition from the paramagnetic to the SG phase $\left| q\right|$ increases from zero. In contrast, the
absolute value $\left| M\right|$ of the magnetization $M=\left[ \langle N^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{N} s_{i}\rangle_{t}\right]_{av}$,
which is the order parameter for the FM transition, should remain close to zero.
On the other hand, below the critical temperature for the transition from the paramagnetic to the FM phase both $\left| q\right|$ and $\left| M \right|$ should
increase from zero.
An important prediction in Sec.\ 4.3 is that in the case of MN with independent SF layers with identical distributions of the degrees of nodes
$p_{k^{(A)}} =p_{k^{(B)}}$ for a certain range
of $\gamma^{(A)}=\gamma^{(B)}$ the transition from the paramegnetic to the SG phase occurs only for small $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}$ while for
layers with higher mean degree of nodes transition to the FM state is expected.
This scenario is in fact observed in MC simulations; results for $\gamma^{(A)}=\gamma^{(B)}=4.5$ and for two values of
$K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}$ are shown in Fig.\ 2. For $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}=2$ the SG transition occurs: for $T< T_{c}^{SG}$ increase of $\left| q\right|$ can
be seen (Fig.\ 2(a)) while $\left| M\right|$ remains small and even decreases (Fig.\ 2(c)). Also the value of $T_{c}^{SG} =1.85 \pm 0.1$ estimated from the MC
simulations (Fig.\ 2(e)) is close to $T_{c}^{SG}=1.92$ evaluated from Eq.\ (\ref{TcSG1eq}). In contrast, for $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}=25$
the FM transition occurs: both $\left| q\right|$ and $\left|M\right|$ increase for $T< T_{c}^{FM}$ (Fig.\ 2(b,d)) and the value of the FM critical temperature
obtained from the MC simulations can be assessed as $T_{c}^{FM} = 15 \pm 2$ from Fig.\ 2(d), which is again with agreement with
$T_{c}^{FM}=16.13$ evaluated from Eq.\ (\ref{TcFM1eq}). Thus, in this particular case theoretical predictions based on the RS solution are confirmed by MC simulations.
\section{Critical exponents for the spin glass transition}
Below the transition point from the paramagnetic to the SG phase the SG order parameter increases from zero while the magnetization
remains close to zero. Bleow $T_{c}^{SG}$ the SG order parameter is expected to scale as $\varepsilon^{\beta}$,
where $\varepsilon =\left( T_{c}^{SG}-T\right)/T_{c}^{SG}$. In Ref.\ \cite{Kim05} it was shown that in the case of the Ising model on
SF networks the scaling exponent $\beta$ can depend on the parameters of the distribution of the degrees of nodes. In this section
this exponent is determined for the Ising model on MNs with independent layers using a semi-analytic procedure.
Let us start with the Ising model on a MN with two random ER layers.
In the case of the transition from the paramagnetic to the SG phase $m^{(A)}=m^{(B)}=0$ below the critical temperature. Taking into
account that $v_{i}^{(A)}=v_{i}^{(B)}=1/N$, $i=1,2,\ldots N$, ${\bf T}_{2}^{(A)}={\bf T}_{2}^{(B)}= {\bf T}_{2} =\tanh^{2}\beta J$ from Eq.\ (\ref{T1T2})
and $q^{(A)}=q^{(B)}=q$ (see Sec.\ 4.2) the equations
for the SG order parameter, the last two equations in Eq.\ (\ref{system}), are reduced to a single equation
\begin{equation}
q= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \int dz e^{-z^{2}/2} \tanh^{2}\left[ z\sqrt{\left( K^{(A)}+K^{(B)} \right) {\bf T}_{2}q } \right].
\end{equation}
In the vicinity of $T_{c}^{SG}$ it is possible to expand the $\tanh \left( \cdot\right)$ function with respect to $q$. After evaluating the momenta and
retaining only the lowest-order nonlinear term it is obtained that
\begin{equation}
\left( \frac{1}{\left( K^{(A)}+K^{(B)} \right) {\bf T}_{2}} - \frac{1}{\left( K^{(A)}+K^{(B)} \right) {\bf T}_{2,c}^{SG}} \right) Q =-2Q^{2},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{displaymath}
1= \left( K^{(A)}+K^{(B)} \right) {\bf T}_{2,c}^{SG} = \left( K^{(A)}+K^{(B)} \right) \tanh^{2} \frac{J}{T_{c}^{SG}}
\end{displaymath}
(see Eq.\ (\ref{TsgER})) and $Q= \left( K^{(A)}+K^{(B)} \right) {\bf T}_{2}$. Hence, $q\propto \varepsilon$ just below the SG transition temperature,
as in the case of the SG transition in the Ising model on random ER graphs
\cite{Viana85}.
Let us now consider the Ising model on a MN with two independent SF layers.
The SG transition temperature is finite, and thus the scaling behavior of the order parameters below $T_{c}^{SG}$ can be determined,
for $\gamma^{(A)}>3$, $\gamma^{(B)}>3$.
In the case of the transition from the paramagnetic to the SG phase $m^{(A)}=m^{(B)}=0$ below the critical temperature and the equations
for the SG order parameter, the last two equations in Eq.\ (\ref{system}), are
\begin{equation}
q^{(A)}= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \int dz e^{-z^{2}/2} \sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(A)}
\tanh^{2}\left[ z \sqrt{ N \left( K^{(A)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(A)} v_{i}^{(A)} q^{(A)} + K^{(B)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(B)} v_{i}^{(B)} q^{(B)}\right) } \right],
\label{qAsg1}
\end{equation}
and analogous equation for $q^{(B)}$. Unfortunately, in this case it is not possible simply to expand the $\tanh \left( \cdot\right)$ function with respect to $q$
due to the occurrence of the terms like $N^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(A)3}$, etc., under the integral which diverge even if the second moments of
the distribution of the weights associated with each layer are finite. Nevertheless, as shown in Appendix B
the sum over the indices of nodes on the right-hand side of Eq.\ (\ref{qAsg1}) can be represented in a form of a converging series expansion
with respect to $q^{(A)}$, $q^{(B)}$.
First, let us note that in the case of independent SF layers the sum over the indices of nodes in Eq.\ (\ref{qAsg1}) can be
replaced by its expected value, similarily as in Sec.\ 4.3, and then approximated by an integral,
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \sum_{i=1}^{N} v_{i}^{(A)}
\tanh^{2}\left[ z \sqrt{ N \left( K^{(A)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(A)} v_{i}^{(A)} q^{(A)} + K^{(B)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(B)} v_{i}^{(B)} q^{(B)}\right) } \right]
\approx \nonumber\\
&& \sum_{i=1}^{N} N^{-2} \sum_{k=1}^{N}\sum_{l=1}^{N} v_{k}
\tanh^{2}\left[ z \sqrt{ N \left( K^{(A)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(A)} v_{k} q^{(A)} + K^{(B)} {\bf T}_{2}^{(B)} v_{l} q^{(B)}\right) } \right]
\approx \nonumber\\
&& \frac{1-\mu^{(A)}}{N^{2}} \int_{1}^{N}\int_{1}^{N} dy_{k} dy_{l} \left( \frac{N}{y_{k}}\right)^{\mu^{(A)}}
\tanh^{2}\left[ z \sqrt{ \left( \frac{N}{y_{k}}\right)^{\mu^{(A)}} Q^{(A)} + \left( \frac{N}{y_{l}}\right)^{\mu^{(B)}} Q^{(B)} } \right],
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $Q^{(A)}=\left( 1-\mu^{(A)}\right) K^{(A)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(A)} q^{(A)}$, $Q^{(B)}=\left( 1-\mu^{(B)}\right) K^{(B)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(B)} q^{(B)}$.
In the limit $N\rightarrow \infty$ and after replacing the variables $u_{1}=z^{2}Q^{(A)} \left(N/y_{k}\right)^{\mu^{(A)}}$,
$u_{2}=z^{2}Q^{(B)} \left(N/y_{l}\right)^{\mu^{(B)}}$ Eq.\ (\ref{qAsg1}) becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{q^{(A)}}{1-\mu^{(A)}}& =& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \left( \gamma^{(A)}-1\right) \left( \gamma^{(B)}-1\right)
\left( Q^{(A)}\right)^{\gamma^{(A)}-2} \left( Q^{(B)}\right)^{\gamma^{(B)}-1}
\times \nonumber\\
&&\int dz e^{-z^{2}/2} z^{2\left( \gamma^{(A)}+ \gamma^{(B)} -3\right)}
\int_{ z^{2}Q^{(A)}}^{\infty} \int_{z^{2}Q^{(B)}}^{\infty}
\frac{u_{1}\tanh^{2} \sqrt{u_{1}+u_{2}} }{u_{1}^{\gamma^{(A)}} u_{2}^{\gamma^{(B)}}} du_{2} du_{1}.
\nonumber\\
&& \label{qAsg2}
\end{eqnarray}
The two-dimesional integral in Eq.\ (\ref{qAsg2}) can be evaluated using Eq.\ (\ref{s}) in Appendix A with
$F\left( x_{1},x_{2}\right) = x_{1}\tanh^{2} \sqrt{x_{1}+x_{2}}$, and the result is given by Eq.\ (\ref{Sfinal}). Inserting this result in
Eq.\ (\ref{qAsg2}) and evaluating the moments it is obtained that
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{Q^{(A)}}{K^{(A)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(A)}} &=& \frac{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-2\right)^{2}}{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-1\right)}\left( \gamma^{(B)}-1\right)
\times \nonumber\\
&&\left[
\sum_{n_{1}=0}^{\infty} \sum_{n_{2}=0}^{\infty}
\frac{f_{n_{1},n_{2}}\left( 2\left(n_{1}+n_{2}\right)-3\right)!!}
{\left( n_{1}-\gamma^{(A)}+1\right) \left( n_{2}-\gamma^{(B)}+1\right)}\left( Q^{(A)}\right)^{n_{1}-1} \left( Q^{(B)}\right)^{n_{2}}
\right. \nonumber\\
&-& \sum_{n_{1}=0}^{\infty}
\frac{2^{\gamma^{(B)}+n_{1}-2}}{ n_{1}-\gamma^{(A)} +1} \frac{\Gamma\left( \gamma^{(B)}+n_{1}-\frac{3}{2}\right)}{\sqrt{\pi}}
I_{2}\left( \gamma^{(B)},n_{1}\right) \left(Q^{(A)}\right)^{n_{1}-1} \left( Q^{(B)}\right)^{\gamma^{(B)}-1} \nonumber\\
&-& \sum_{n_{2}=0}^{\infty}
\frac{2^{\gamma^{(A)}+n_{2}-2}}{ n_{2}-\gamma^{(B)} +1} \frac{\Gamma\left( \gamma^{(A)}+n_{2}-\frac{3}{2}\right)}{\sqrt{\pi}}
I_{1}\left( \gamma^{(A)},n_{2}\right) \left( Q^{(A)}\right)^{\gamma^{(A)}-2} \left( Q^{(B)}\right)^{n_{2}} \nonumber\\
&+& \left.2^{\gamma^{(A)}+\gamma^{(B)}-3}\frac{\Gamma\left( \gamma^{(A)}+\gamma^{(B)}-\frac{5}{2}\right)}{\sqrt{\pi}}
I\left( \gamma^{(A)},\gamma^{(B)}\right) \left( Q^{(A)}\right)^{ \gamma^{(A)}-2} \left( Q^{(B)}\right)^{\gamma^{(B)}-1}
\right],\nonumber\\
&& \label{qAsg3}
\end{eqnarray}
where $f_{n_{1},n_{2}}$ are given by Eq.\ (\ref{Taylorcoeff}), $I_{1}\left( \gamma^{(A)},n_{2}\right)$ by Eq.\ (\ref{I11}),
$I_{2}\left( \gamma^{(B)},n_{1}\right)$ by Eq.\ (\ref{I2}) and $I\left( \gamma^{(A)}, \gamma^{(B)}\right)$ by Eq.\ (\ref{I}) in Appendix B.
The complementary equation for $Q^{(B)}/K^{(B)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(B)}$ can be obtained from Eq.\ (\ref{qAsg3}) by replacing $(A)$ with $(B)$
and vice versa.
\begin{figure}[bt]
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{Fig3.eps}}
\caption{Symbols: $q^{(A)}$ vs.\ $\varepsilon = \left(T_{c}^{SG}-T\right)/T_{c}^{SG}$
in the neighborhood of the critical temperature for the SG transition
for the MN with independent SF layers with $\gamma^{(A)}=3.5$ and various $\gamma^{(B)}$ (see legend), the results were obtained from
numerical solution of Eq.\ (\ref{qAqBsg1}) for $\gamma^{(B)}<4$ and Eq.\ (\ref{qAqBsg2})
for $\gamma^{(B)}>4$ with $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}=1$ (in all cases $T_{c}^{SG}>T_{c}^{FM}$).
Lines: asymptotic (for $\varepsilon\rightarrow 0$) least-squares fits to the above-mentioned solutions
(see legend) in the form of the power scaling law $q^{(A)} \propto \varepsilon^{\beta}$.}
\end{figure}
Let us first consider the case when the SF layers have identical distributions of the degrees of nodes
$p_{k^{(A)}}=p_{k^{(B)}}$, with $K^{(A)}=K^{(B)}=K$,
$\gamma^{(A)}=\gamma^{(B)}=\gamma$ ($\mu^{(A)}=\mu^{(B)}=\mu$).
Then the system of Eq.\ (\ref{qAsg1}) and thus also Eq.\ (\ref{qAsg3}) have solution with $q^{(A)}=q^{(B)}=q$.
In order to determine the critical behavior of $q$ near $T_{c}^{SG}$ it is necessary to retain only the lowest-order nonlinear term
on the right-hand side of Eq.\ (\ref{qAsg3}), thus the cases $3< \gamma <4$ and $\gamma>4$ should be considered separately.
For $3 <\gamma <4$ the following equation for $q$ is obtained from Eq.\ (\ref{qAsg3}),
\begin{equation}
\left( \frac{1}{K{\bf T}_{2}}-\frac{1}{K {\bf T}_{2,c}^{SG}} \right) Q = \frac{\left( \gamma-2\right)^{2}}{\left( \gamma-1\right)}2^{\gamma-1}
\frac{\Gamma\left( \gamma-\frac{3}{2}\right)}{\sqrt{\pi}} D\left(\gamma\right) Q^{\gamma-2},
\label{qAqBsg1eq}
\end{equation}
where ${\bf T}_{2}=\tanh^{2}\beta J$,
\begin{displaymath}
K{\bf T}_{2,c}^{SG}=\frac{1}{\frac{\left(1-\mu \right)^2}{1-2\mu} +1}=
\frac{1}{\frac{\left(\gamma-2 \right)^2}{\left( \gamma-1\right)\left(\gamma-3\right)} +1} = K \tanh^{2} \frac{J}{T_{c}^{SG}}
\end{displaymath}
(see Eq.\ (\ref{TcSG1eq})), $Q=\left( 1-\mu\right) K{\bf T}_{2}q$ and
$D\left( \lambda\right) =\frac{1}{2} I_{1}\left( \lambda, 0\right)$ $= \int_{0}^{\infty} x^{3-2\lambda} \left(\tanh^{2}x-x^{2}\right) dx <0$.
From Eq.\ (\ref{qAqBsg1eq}) follows that $q\propto \varepsilon^{1/\left(\gamma -3\right)}$ just below the transition point.
This is the same scaling relation as in
the case of the SG transition in the Ising model on SF networks \cite{Kim05}, only the critical temperature is different.
For $\gamma>4$ the following equation for $q$ is obtained from Eq.\ (\ref{qAsg3}),
\begin{equation}
\left( \frac{1}{K{\bf T}_{2}}-\frac{1}{K {\bf T}_{2,c}^{SG}} \right) Q =
2 \left[ \frac{\left( \gamma-2\right)^{2}}{\left(4- \gamma\right)\left(\gamma-1\right)}
+3 \frac{\left( \gamma -2\right)}{3-\gamma}\right]Q^{2}.
\label{qAqBsg3eq}
\end{equation}
Hence, $q\propto \varepsilon$ just below the SG transition temperature, as in
the case of the SG transition in the Ising model on SF networks \cite{Kim05}; only the critical temperature and the proportionality
constant are different. Thus, it can be seen that the critical exponent for the SG order parameter exhibits the same scaling behavior
in the case of the SG transition in the Ising model on a SF networks and on a MN with SF layers with identical distributions of the degrees of nodes.
If the SF layers have different distributions of the degrees of nodes the critical exponents for $q^{(A)}$, $q^{(B)}$ must be determined
from two-dimensional systems of nonlinear equations following from Eq.\ (\ref{qAsg3}) and from
the complementary equation for $Q^{(B)}/K^{(B)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(B)}$ in which only the lowest-order nonlinear terms are retained.
Due to complexity of these equations as well as the complex form of $T_{c}^{SG}$, Eq.\ (\ref{TcSG1}), it is not a simple task to determine
the scaling behavior of $q^{(A)}$, $q^{(B)}$ analytically. Hence, below this is done by solving the above-mentioned systems
numerically for $q^{(A)}$, $q^{(B)}$ vs.\ $\varepsilon$.
For $3 <\gamma^{(A)} <4$, $3< \gamma^{(B)} <4$ the following
system of equations for $q^{(A)}$, $q^{(B)}$ is obtained from Eq.\ (\ref{qAsg3}),
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{Q^{(A)}}{K^{(A)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(A)}} &=& \frac{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-2\right)^{2}}{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-1\right)}
2^{\gamma^{(A)}-1} \frac{\Gamma\left( \gamma^{(A)}-\frac{3}{2}\right)}{\sqrt{\pi}} D\left(\gamma^{(A)}\right)
\left( Q^{(A)}\right)^{\gamma^{(A)}-2}
\nonumber\\
&+& \frac{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-2\right)^{2}}{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-1\right)\left( \gamma^{(A)}-3\right)} Q^{(A)}
+ \frac{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-2\right)}{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-1\right)} \frac{\left( \gamma^{(B)}-1\right)}{\left( \gamma^{(B)}-2\right)} Q^{(B)},
\nonumber\\
\frac{Q^{(B)}}{K^{(B)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(B)}} &=& \frac{\left( \gamma^{(B)}-2\right)^{2}}{\left( \gamma^{(B)}-1\right)}
2^{\gamma^{(B)}-1} \frac{\Gamma\left( \gamma^{(B)}-\frac{3}{2}\right)}{\sqrt{\pi}} D\left(\gamma^{(B)}\right)
\left( Q^{(B)}\right)^{\gamma^{(B)}-2}
\nonumber\\
&+& \frac{\left( \gamma^{(B)}-2\right)}{\left( \gamma^{(B)}-1\right)} \frac{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-1\right)}{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-2\right)} Q^{(A)}
+ \frac{\left( \gamma^{(B)}-2\right)^{2}}{\left( \gamma^{(B)}-1\right)\left( \gamma^{(B)}-3\right)} Q^{(B)}.
\label{qAqBsg1}
\end{eqnarray}
It is then possible, e.g., to evaluate $Q^{(B)}$ from the first equation and insert it to the second one to obtain a nonlinear equation for $Q^{(A)}$
which can be solved numerically. The results of this procedure are summarized in Fig.\ 3. For $\gamma^{(A)} =\gamma^{(B)}=3.5$
($\mu^{(A)}=\mu^{(B)}=1/2$) the scaling relation $q^{(A)}\propto \varepsilon^{\beta}$ is obtained with $\beta =1.98$ which agrees well
with $\beta=1/\left( \gamma^{(A)}-3\right) =2$ predicted from Eq.\ (\ref{qAqBsg1eq}). For $\gamma^{(A)}=3.5$ and
$4> \gamma^{(B)}=3.75 > \gamma^{(A)}$ ($\mu^{(B)}=4/11$) the scaling relation $q^{(A)}\propto \varepsilon^{\beta}$ is obtained with $\beta =1.95$
which is still close to $\beta = 1/\left(\gamma^{(A)} -3\right) =2$ (the difference can be due to fitting error); thus, the scaling behavior of $q^{(A)}$
in the vicinity of $T_{c}^{SG}$ is still determined by the lowest-order nonlineatity $\left( Q^{(A)}\right)^{\gamma^{(A)}-2}$ in Eq.\ (\ref{qAqBsg1}).
Since in the first approximation $Q^{(B)}\propto Q^{(A)}$ the scaling behavior of $q^{(B)}$ is the same as that of $q^{(A)}$.
For $3 <\gamma^{(A)} <4$, $\gamma^{(B)} >4$ in the system of equations for $q^{(A)}$, $q^{(B)}$ obtained from Eq.\ (\ref{qAsg3})
the equation for $Q^{(A)}/K^{(A)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(A)}$ is identical as in Eq.\ (\ref{qAqBsg1}) and the second equation is
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{Q^{(B)}}{K^{(B)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(B)}} &=&
\frac{\left( \gamma^{(B)}-2\right)}{\left( \gamma^{(B)}-1\right)} \frac{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-1\right)}{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-2\right)} Q^{(A)}
+ \frac{\left( \gamma^{(B)}-2\right)^{2}}{\left( \gamma^{(B)}-1\right)\left( \gamma^{(B)}-3\right)} Q^{(B)}
\nonumber\\
&-&\frac{\left( \gamma^{(B)}-2\right)^{2}\left( \gamma^{(A)}-1\right)}{\left( \gamma^{(B)}-1\right)}
\left[ \frac{2Q^{(A)2}}{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-3\right)\left( \gamma^{(B)}-2\right)} \right. \nonumber\\
&+& \left. \frac{4 Q^{(A)}Q^{(B)}}{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-2\right)\left( \gamma^{(B)}-3\right)}
+ \frac{2Q^{(B)2}}{\left( \gamma^{(A)}-1\right)\left( \gamma^{(B)}-4\right)} \right].
\label{qAqBsg2}
\end{eqnarray}
It is again possible to evaluate $Q^{(B)}$ from the first equation in Eq.\ (\ref{qAqBsg1}) and insert it into Eq.\ (\ref{qAqBsg2})
to obtain a nonlinear equation for $Q^{(A)}$ which can be solved numerically.
For $\gamma^{(A)}=3.5$ and
$\gamma^{(B)}=4.5 > 4$ ($\mu^{(B)}=2/7$) the scaling relation $q^{(A)}\propto \varepsilon^{\beta}$ is obtained with $\beta =2.0$ (Fig.\ 3),
again in agreement with $\beta = 1/\left( \gamma^{(A)}-3 \right) =2$; thus, the scaling behavior of $q^{(A)}$
in the vicinity of $T_{c}^{SG}$ is again determined by the lowest-order nonlineatity $\left( Q^{(A)}\right)^{\gamma^{(A)}-2}$ in
the first equation in Eq.\ (\ref{qAqBsg1}).
For $\gamma^{(A)}>4$, $\gamma^{(B)}>4$,
in the system of equations for $q^{(A)}$, $q^{(B)}$ obtained from Eq.\ (\ref{qAsg3})
the equation for $Q^{(B)}/K^{(B)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(B)}$ is identical as in Eq.\ (\ref{qAqBsg2}) and the equation
for $Q^{(A)}/K^{(A)}{\bf T}_{2}^{(A)}$ can be obtained from it by replacing $(A)$ with $(B)$ and vice versa. The system of
two quadratic equations for $Q^{(A)}$, $Q^{(B)}$ can be solved by evaluating, e.g., $Q^{(A)}$ from one equation,
inserting it to the other one and solving for $Q^{(B)}$ numerically. From such solution, independently of $\gamma^{(A)}$, $\gamma^{(B)}$,
the scaling relation $q^{(A)} \propto \varepsilon$ is obtained with high accuracy, i.e., the scaling exponent $\beta =1$ is the same as that
resulting from Eq.\ (\ref{qAqBsg3eq}) valid for $\gamma^{(A)}=\gamma^{(B)}$. Thus, the scaling behavior of $q^{(A)}$
in the vicinity of $T_{c}^{SG}$ is again determined by the lowest-order nonlineatity $\left( Q^{(A)}\right)^{2}$ in Eq.\ (\ref{qAqBsg2}).
It is interesting to note that for $\gamma^{(A)}>3$, $\gamma^{(B)}>3$, i.e., when $T_{c}^{SG}$ is finite
the last term in Eq.\ (\ref{qAsg3}) containing $\left( Q^{(A)}\right)^{\gamma^{(A)}-2} \left( Q^{(B)}\right)^{\gamma^{(B)}-1}$
is of higher order than the leading nonlinear terms in Eq.\ (\ref{qAqBsg1}) and Eq.\ (\ref{qAqBsg2}) and can be omitted.
Let us also mention that taking into account the results of Ref.\ \cite{Kim05} logarithmic corrections to the scaling behavior
of $q^{(A)}$, $q^{(B)}$ in the vicinty of $T_{c}^{SG}$ can be expected for $\gamma^{(A)}$, $\gamma^{(B)}$ being integer
numbers. Unfortunately, verification of the presence of such correction from numerical solution of the systems of nonlinear equations like
Eq.\ (\ref{qAqBsg1}) or Eq.\ (\ref{qAqBsg2}) is practically impossible, thus this case is not considered in this paper.
\section{Summary and conclusions}
In this paper the SG and FM transitions in the Ising model on MNs with both FM and AFM interactions were studied using the
replica method; in particular, the MNs with the layers in the form of random ER graphs and SF networks were considered. The critical
temperatures for these transitions from the paramagnetic phase were determined from the RS solution. For the Ising model on MNs with
SF layers it was shown that the transition temperature is finite if the distributions of the degrees of nodes within both layers have a finite
second moment, and that depending on the model parameters this transition can be to the FM or SG phase. It was also shown that the
correlation between the degrees of nodes within different layers significantly influences the critical temperatures for the FM and SG transitions
and thus the phase diagram. In particular, in the case of MN with two independently generated SF layers corresponding to (balanced) FM and
AFM interactions for small mean degrees of nodes within both layers the transition is to the FM or SG phase, depending on
the details of the two degree distributions, while for high mean degrees of nodes it is to the FM phase; this result was confirmed in MC simulations.
In contrast, in the case of MNs with maximally correlated layers the transition can be to the SG phase also for high mean degrees of nodes
within the two layers, depending on the details of the two degree distributions. The scaling behavior for the SG parameter was determined
from the RS solution by means of a semi-analytic procedure. In most cases the critical exponent has the universal value $\beta =1$, only in the
case of SF layers characterized by the distributions of the degrees of nodes with diverging third moment its value becomes dependent on the
details of this distribution.
Application of the replica method to the Ising model on MNs with both FM and AFM interactions leads to many results which
have already been reported for the Ising model on MNs with purely FM interactions, e.g., the occurrence, in a natural way, of the
sets of the order paramaters associated with consecutive layers or the dependence of the critical temperature on the correlations
between the degrees of nodes within different layers \cite{Krawiecki17}. Although the methods used in this paper are direct generalization
of the ones used in Refs.\ \cite{Viana85,Kim05} to the case of MNs with possibly heterogeneous layers both the calculations and the
results exhibit some peculiar properties due to the fact that the statistical averages must be evaluated over the separately generated
layers rather than over the whole network. The problems remaining for future research comprise, e.g.,
investigation of the stability of the FM and SG phases, obtaining
the full phase diagram for the Ising model on MNs and determination of the critical behavior of the model at the FM and SG phase borders.
\section*{Appendix A}
In networks generated from the static model there is $\langle k\rangle =K$,
$N\sum_{i} v_{i}^{2} =\left( \langle k^{2}\rangle -\langle k\rangle\right)/\langle k\rangle^2$ \cite{Lee04}. Thus the result of
Eq.\ (\ref{TcFM1}) and Eq.\ (\ref{TcSG1}) can be written in a more general form,
\begin{equation}
T_{c}^{FM}=J {\rm atanh}^{-1} \left\{
\frac{\frac{\langle k^{(A)2}\rangle}{\langle k^{(A)} \rangle} - \frac{\langle k^{(B)2}\rangle}{\langle k^{(B)} \rangle} -\sqrt{\Delta}}
{2 \left[ \langle k^{(A)} \rangle \langle k^{(B)} \rangle -
\left( \frac{\langle k^{(A)2}\rangle}{\langle k^{(A)} \rangle}-1\right) \left( \frac{\langle k^{(B)2}\rangle}{\langle k^{(B)} \rangle} -1\right)
\right]}
\right\}
\label{TcFM1gen}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{displaymath}
\Delta = \left( \frac{\langle k^{(A)2}\rangle}{\langle k^{(A)} \rangle} - \frac{\langle k^{(B)2}\rangle}{\langle k^{(B)} \rangle} -2 \right)^{2}
-4 \langle k^{(A)} \rangle \langle k^{(B)} \rangle,
\end{displaymath}
and
\begin{equation}
T_{c}^{SG}=J {\rm atanh}^{-1} \left\{
\frac{\frac{\langle k^{(A)2}\rangle}{\langle k^{(A)} \rangle} + \frac{\langle k^{(B)2}\rangle}{\langle k^{(B)} \rangle} -2 -\sqrt{\Delta}}
{2 \left[\left( \frac{\langle k^{(A)2}\rangle}{\langle k^{(A)} \rangle}-1\right) \left( \frac{\langle k^{(B)2}\rangle}{\langle k^{(B)} \rangle} -1\right)
- \langle k^{(A)} \rangle \langle k^{(B)} \rangle \right]}
\right\}^{1/2}
\label{TcSG1gen}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{displaymath}
\Delta = \left( \frac{\langle k^{(A)2}\rangle}{\langle k^{(A)} \rangle} - \frac{\langle k^{(B)2}\rangle}{\langle k^{(B)} \rangle} \right)^{2}
+4 \langle k^{(A)} \rangle \langle k^{(B)} \rangle,
\end{displaymath}
using the moments of the distributions of the degrees of nodes within each layer.
It should be noted that the necessary condition for the occurrence of the FM or SG transition is that the critical temperatures $T_{c}^{FM}$,
$T_{c}^{SG}$ given by Eq.\ (\ref{TcFM1gen}) and Eq.\ (\ref{TcSG1gen}), respectively, are real and positive.
In the case of the critical temperature for the SG transition it can be easily shown that this requires that
\begin{equation}
\frac{\langle k^{(A)2}\rangle}{\langle k^{(A)} \rangle} + \frac{\langle k^{(B)2}\rangle}{\langle k^{(B)} \rangle} +\sqrt{\Delta} >4,
\end{equation}
which is also a condition for the occurrence of a giant component in a MN with two independently generated layers
\cite{Lee14}, in which nodes are connected via edges in any layer (but not necessarily in both layers). Thus, in the case of a MN with
two layers, one with purely FM and the other one with purely AFM interactions, the SG transition can appear
in a MN above the percolation threshold, in analogy with the case of complex networks \cite{Kim05}. In contrast, this is not enough for the
possibility of appearance of the FM transition, for which higher densities of connections within layers are necessary.
It can be expected that Eq.\ (\ref{TcFM1gen}) and Eq.\ (\ref{TcSG1gen}) are valid for any multiplex
network consisting of independently generated, possibly heterogeneous
layers with finite second moments of the distributions of the degrees of nodes (note, however, that in the case of random ER layers
the above expressions are not properly determined; this is since the equations for $T_{c}^{FM}$ ($T_{c}^{SG}$) are linear (quadratic)
rather than quadratic (quartic) with respect to $\tanh \beta J$, see Sec.\ 4.2).
In particular, if the distributions of the degrees of nodes within the layers $G^{(A)}$, $G^{(B)}$ obey power scaling laws in the form
$p_{k^{(A)}} = \left( \gamma^{(A)}-1\right) \left( \tilde{m}^{(A)}\right)^{\gamma^{(A)}-1} \left( k^{(A)}\right)^{-\gamma^{(A)}}$ for
$k^{(A)}>\tilde{m}^{(A)}$,
$p_{k^{(B)}} = \left( \gamma^{(B)}-1\right) \left( \tilde{m}^{(B)}\right)^{\gamma^{(B)}-1} \left( k^{(B)}\right)^{-\gamma^{(B)}}$ for
$k^{(B)}>\tilde{m}^{(B)}$, respectively,
with fixed minimum degrees of nodes $\tilde{m}^{(A)}$, $\tilde{m}^{(B)}$
the critical temperature can be obtained by inserting in Eq.\ (\ref{TcFM1gen}) and Eq.\ (\ref{TcSG1gen})
\begin{displaymath}
\frac{\langle k^{(A)2}\rangle}{\langle k^{(A)} \rangle}= \tilde{m}^{(A)} \frac{\gamma^{(A)}-2}{\gamma^{(A)}-3}, \;\;
\langle k^{(A)} \rangle = \tilde{m}^{(A)} \frac{\gamma^{(A)}-1}{\gamma^{(A)}-2},
\end{displaymath}
and similar expressions for the moments of $p_{k^{(B)}}$.
\section*{Appendix B}
In this Appendix a general expansion formula is derived for a sum of a form
\begin{equation}
S\left( y_{A},y_{B}\right) = \left( \lambda_{A}-1\right) \left( \lambda_{B}-1\right) y_{A}^{\lambda_{A}-2} y_{B}^{\lambda_{B}-1}
\int_{y_{A}}^{\infty} \int_{y_{B}}^{\infty} \frac{F\left( x_{1},x_{2}\right) }{x_{1}^{\lambda_{A}} x_{2}^{\lambda_{B}}} dx_{2} dx_{1},
\label{s}
\end{equation}
using a method which is a generalization of the one from Ref.\ \cite{Kim05} to the case of two-dimensional integrals.
Let us assume that $\lambda_{A}$, $\lambda_{B}$ are not integer numbers and, for some $m_{1}$, $m_{2}$, there is $m_{1} < \lambda_{A} < m_{1}+1$,
$m_{2} < \lambda_{B} < m_{2} +1$. The expansion of the function $F\left( x_{1},x_{2}\right)$ in the Taylor series is
\begin{eqnarray}
F\left( x_{1},x_{2}\right) &= & \sum_{n_{1},n_{2}=0}^{\infty} f_{n_{1},n_{2}} x_{1}^{n_{1}}x_{2}^{n_{2}}= \nonumber \\
&=& \sum_{n_{1}=0}^{m_{1}-1} \sum_{n_{2}=0}^{m_{2}-1} f_{n_{1},n_{2}} x_{1}^{n_{1}}x_{2}^{n_{2}} \nonumber \\
&+& \sum_{n_{1}=m_{1}}^{\infty} \sum_{n_{2}=0}^{m_{2}-1} f_{n_{1},n_{2}} x_{1}^{n_{1}}x_{2}^{n_{2}}
+ \sum_{n_{1}=0}^{m_{1}-1} \sum_{n_{2}=m_{2}}^{\infty} f_{n_{1},n_{2}} x_{1}^{n_{1}}x_{2}^{n_{2}} \nonumber \\
&+& \sum_{n_{1}=m_{1}}^{\infty} \sum_{n_{2}=m_{2}}^{\infty} f_{n_{1},n_{2}} x_{1}^{n_{1}}x_{2}^{n_{2}},
\label{Taylorexp}
\end{eqnarray}
where the expansion coefficients are
\begin{equation}
f_{n_{1},n_{2}} = \frac{1}{\left( n_{1}+n_{2}\right) !} {n_{1}+n_{2} \choose n_{1}}
\left. \frac{\partial ^{n_{1}+n_{2}} F}{\partial x_{1}^{n_{1}} \partial x_{2}^{n_{2}}} \left( x_{1},x_{2}\right) \right|_{(0,0)}.
\label{Taylorcoeff}
\end{equation}
The first sum in Eq.\ (\ref{Taylorexp}) can be integrated term by term which yields
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \sum_{n_{1}=0}^{m_{1}-1} \sum_{n_{2}=0}^{m_{2}-1} f_{n_{1},n_{2}}
\int_{y_{A}}^{\infty} x_{1}^{n_{1}-\lambda_{A}} dx_{1} \int_{y_{B}}^{\infty} x_{2}^{n_{2}-\lambda_{B}} dx_{2} \nonumber \\
&& = \sum_{n_{1}=0}^{m_{1}-1} \sum_{n_{2}=0}^{m_{2}-1} f_{n_{1},n_{2}}
\frac{(-1)}{n_{1}-\lambda_{A}+1} \frac{(-1)}{n_{2}-\lambda_{B}+1} y_{A}^{n_{1}-\lambda_{A}+1} y_{B}^{n_{2}-\lambda_{B}+1}.
\label{c1}
\end{eqnarray}
Concerning the remaining terms it should be noted that in the converging Taylor series, Eq.\ (\ref{Taylorexp}), the order of summation and
integration can be exchanged. Then, e.g., from integration of the second sum, after evaluating the integral
$\int_{y_{B}}^ {\infty} x_{2}^{n_{2}-\lambda_{B}} dx_{2}= - \left( n_{2}-\lambda_{B} +1 \right)^{-1} y_{B}^{n_{2}-\lambda_{B} +1}$
for $0 \le n_{2} \le m_{2}-1$ and dividing in two parts and evaluating the integral
$\int_{y_{A}}^ {\infty} x_{1}^{n_{1}-\lambda_{A}} dx_{1}=\left( \int_{0}^ {\infty} - \int_{0}^ {y_{A}} \right) x_{1}^{n_{1}-\lambda_{A}} dx_{1}=
\int_{0}^ {\infty}x_{1}^{n_{1}-\lambda_{A}} dx_{1} - \left( n_{1}-\lambda_{A} +1 \right)^{-1} y_{A}^{n_{1}-\lambda_{A} +1}$
for $n_{1} \ge m_{1}$ it is obtained that
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \sum_{n_{1}=m_{1}}^{\infty} \sum_{n_{2}=0}^{m_{2}-1} f_{n_{1},n_{2}}
\int_{y_{A}}^ {\infty} x_{1}^{n_{1}-\lambda_{A}} dx_{1} \int_{y_{B}}^ {\infty} x_{2}^{n_{2}-\lambda_{B}} dx_{2} = \nonumber \\
&& - \sum_{n_{2}=0}^{m_{2}-1} I_{1}\left( \lambda_{A},n_{2}\right)
\frac{y_{B}^{ n_{2}-\lambda_{B} +1}}{ n_{2}-\lambda_{B} +1}
+ \sum_{n_{2}=0}^{m_{2}-1} \sum_{n_{1}=m_{1}}^{\infty} f_{n_{1},n_{2}}
\frac{y_{A}^{ n_{1}-\lambda_{A} +1}}{ n_{1}-\lambda_{A} +1} \frac{y_{B}^{ n_{2}-\lambda_{B} +1}}{ n_{2}-\lambda_{B} +1}, \nonumber\\
&& \label{c2}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation}
I_{1}\left( \lambda_{A},n_{2}\right) = \sum_{n_{1}=m_{1}} ^{\infty}f_{n_{1},n_{2}} \int_{0}^{\infty} x_{1}^{n_{1}-\lambda_{A}} dx_{1}.
\label{I1}
\end{equation}
Since $m_{1}< \lambda_{A}<m_{1}+1$ the integrals in Eq.\ (\ref{I1}) are not singular and the whole series converges. Taking into account that, from
Eq.\ (\ref{Taylorcoeff}),
\begin{eqnarray}
\sum_{n_{1}=0}^{\infty} f_{n_{1},n_{2}}x_{1}^{n_{1}}&=& \frac{1}{n_{2}!} \sum_{n_{1}=0}^{\infty} \frac{1}{n_{1}!}
\frac{\partial^{n_{1}}}{\partial x_{1}^{n_{1}}} \left. \left[ \frac{\partial^{n_{2}}F}{\partial x_{2}^{n_{2}}} \left( x_{1},x_{2} \right)\right] \right|_{(0,0)}
x_{1}^{n_{1}} = \frac{1}{n_{2}!} \left. \frac{\partial^{n_{2}}F}{\partial x_{2}^{n_{2}}} \left( x_{1},x_{2} \right) \right|_{x_{2}=0}, \nonumber\\
&&
\end{eqnarray}
Eq.\ (\ref{I1}) can be rewritten as
\begin{eqnarray}
I_{1}\left( \lambda_{A},n_{2}\right) &= & \int_{0}^{\infty} x_{1}^{-\lambda_{A}}
\left( \sum_{n_{1}=0}^{\infty} f_{n_{1},n_{2}}x_{1}^{n_{1}} - \sum_{n_{1}=0}^{m_{1}-1} f_{n_{1},n_{2}}x_{1}^{n_{1}} \right) dx_{1}
\nonumber\\
&=& \int_{0}^{\infty} x_{1}^{-\lambda_{A}}
\left( \frac{1}{n_{2}!} \left. \frac{\partial^{n_{2}}F}{\partial x_{2}^{n_{2}}} \left( x_{1},x_{2} \right) \right|_{x_{2}=0}
- \sum_{n_{1}=0}^{m_{1}-1} f_{n_{1},n_{2}}x_{1}^{n_{1}} \right) dx_{1}. \nonumber\\
&& \label{I11}
\end{eqnarray}
The third and fourth sum in Eq.\ (\ref{Taylorexp}) can be integrated in a similar way, and finally from Eq.\ (\ref{s}) it is obtained that
\begin{eqnarray}
S\left( y_{A},y_{B}\right) &=&\left( \lambda_{A}-1\right) \left( \lambda_{B}-1\right) \left[
\sum_{n_{1}=0}^{\infty} \sum_{n_{2}=0}^{\infty}
f_{n_{1},n_{2}}\frac{y_{A}^{n_{1}-1} y_{B}^{n_{2}}}{\left( n_{1}-\lambda_{A}+1\right) \left( n_{2}-\lambda_{B}+1\right)}
\right. \nonumber\\
&& - \sum_{n_{1}=0}^{\infty} I_{2}\left( \lambda_{B},n_{1}\right)
\frac{y_{A}^{ n_{1}-1} y_{B}^{\lambda_{B}-1}}{ n_{1}-\lambda_{A} +1}
- \sum_{n_{2}=0}^{\infty} I_{1}\left( \lambda_{A},n_{2}\right)
\frac{y_{A}^{\lambda_{A}-2}y_{B}^{n_{2}}}{ n_{2}-\lambda_{B} +1} \nonumber\\
&& \left. + I\left( \lambda_{A}, \lambda_{B}\right) y_{A}^{\lambda_{A}-2}y_{B}^{\lambda_{B}-1} \right],
\label{Sfinal}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
I_{2}\left( \lambda_{B},n_{1}\right)&=& \sum_{n_{2}=m_{2}} ^{\infty}f_{n_{1},n_{2}} \int_{0}^{\infty} x_{2}^{n_{2}-\lambda_{B}} dx_{2}
\nonumber\\
&=& \int_{0}^{\infty} x_{2}^{-\lambda_{B}}
\left( \frac{1}{n_{1}!} \left. \frac{\partial^{n_{1}}F}{\partial x_{1}^{n_{1}}} \left( x_{1},x_{2} \right) \right|_{x_{1}=0}
- \sum_{n_{2}=0}^{m_{2}-1} f_{n_{1},n_{2}}x_{2}^{n_{2}} \right) dx_{2}, \nonumber\\
\label{I2}
&&
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
I\left( \lambda_{A}, \lambda_{B}\right) &=&
\sum_{n_{1}=m_{1}}^{\infty} \sum_{n_{2}=m_{2}}^{\infty} f_{n_{1},n_{2}}
\int_{y_{A}}^{\infty} x_{1}^{n_{1}-\lambda_{A}} dx_{1} \int_{y_{B}}^{\infty} x_{2}^{n_{2}-\lambda_{B}} dx_{2} \nonumber \\
&=& \int_{0}^{\infty}\int_{0}^{\infty} x_{1}^{-\lambda_{A}}x_{2}^{-\lambda_{B}} \left[ F\left( x_{1},x_{2}\right) -
\sum_{n_{2}=0}^{m_{2}-1} \frac{x_{2}^{n_{2}}}{n_{2}!} \left. \frac{\partial^{n_{2}}F}{\partial x_{2}^{n_{2}}} \left( x_{1},x_{2} \right) \right|_{x_{2}=0}
\right. \nonumber \\
&& \left.
- \sum_{n_{1}=0}^{m_{1}-1}
\frac{x_{1}^{n_{1}}}{n_{1}!} \left. \frac{\partial^{n_{1}}F}{\partial x_{1}^{n_{1}}} \left( x_{1},x_{2} \right) \right|_{x_{1}=0}
+ \sum_{n_{1}=0}^{m_{1}-1} \sum_{n_{2}=0}^{m_{2}-1} f_{n_{1},n_{2}} x_{1}^{n_{1}}x_{2}^{n_{2}} \right] dx_{1}dx_{2}
\nonumber\\
\label{I}
\end{eqnarray}
and the integrals in Eq.\ (\ref{I2}) and Eq.\ (\ref{I}) converge.
In particular, it can be seen that for $F\left( x_{1},x_{2}\right) = x_{1}\tanh^{2} \sqrt{x_{1}+x_{2}}$ there is
$f_{0,0}=f_{1,0}=0$ and $f_{0,n_{2}}=0$ for $n_{2}=0,1,2\ldots$,
thus also $I_{2}\left( \lambda_{B},0\right)=0$ from Eq.\ (\ref{I2}) and terms corresponding to $n_{1}=0$ (containing $y_{A}^{-1}$)
in the sums in Eq.\ (\ref{Sfinal}) disappear.
|
\section{Introduction}
In this article, we consider the problem of the existence of solutions for
the following fractional three-point boundary value problems(BVPs)
at resonance\\
\begin{equation}\label{model-equ}
\begin{gathered}
D_{0^+}^{\alpha}x(t)=f(t,x(t),D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(t)), \quad 1<\alpha\leq 2,\;
t\in [0,1], \\
I_{0+}^{2-\alpha}x(t)|_{t=0}=\theta, \quad x(1)=Ax(\xi),
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where $D_{0^+}^{\alpha}$ and $I_{0^+}^{\alpha}$ represents the Riemann-Liouville
differentiation and integration, respectively;
$\theta$ is the zero vector in
$l^2:=\{x=(x_1,x_2,\dots,.)^{\top}:\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}|x_i|^2<\infty\}$;
$A:l^2\to l^2$ is a bounded linear operator satisfying
$1\leq\operatorname{dim}\ker (I-A\xi^{\alpha-1})<\infty$; $\xi\in(0,1)$
is a fixed constant; $f:[0,1]\times l^2\times l^2\to l^2$ is a Carath\'eodory
function, that is,
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] for each $(u,v)\in l^2\times l^2$, $t\mapsto f(t,u,v)$ is measurable
on $[0,1]$;
\item[(ii)] for a.e. $t\in[0,1],\;(u,v)\mapsto f(t,u,v)$ is continuous on
$l^2\times l^2$;
\item[(iii)] for every bounded set $\Omega\subseteq l^2\times l^2$,
$\{f(t,u,v):(u,v)\in \Omega\}$ is a relatively compact set in $l^2$.
Moreover,
\[
\varphi_\Omega(t)=\sup\{\|f(t,u,v)\|_{l^2}:(u,v)\in \Omega\}
\in L^1[0,1],
\]
where $\|x\|_{l^2}=\sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}|x_i|^2}$ is the norm
of $x=(x_1,x_2,\dots,\cdot)^\top$ in $l^2$.
\end{itemize}
System \eqref{model-equ} is said to be at resonance in $l^2$ if
$\operatorname{dim}\ker (I-A\xi^{\alpha-1}) \geq1$, otherwise, it is said to be
non-resonant. The requirement $1\leq\operatorname{dim}\ker (I-A\xi^{\alpha-1})$
is to make the problem to be resonant and the requirement
$\operatorname{dim}\ker (I-A\xi^{\alpha-1}) <\infty$ is to make the
kernel operator to be a Fredholm operator which is a basic requirement in
applying the coincidence degree theory introduced by Mawhin.
In a recent paper \cite{Zhou2}, the authors studied the three-point BVPs \eqref{model-equ} at resonance in
infinite dimension space by assuming one of the following conditions holds
(A1) $A\xi^{\alpha-1}$ is idempotent, that is,
$A^2\xi^{2\alpha-2}=A\xi^{\alpha-1}$;
(A2) $A^2\xi^{2\alpha-2}=I$, where $I$ stands for the identity
operator in $l^2$.
The assumptions (A1) and (A2) are important in constructing the operator $Q$ in \cite{Zhou2}
which plays a key role in the process of the proof.
Our objective in this paper is
to remove the restricted conditions (A1) and (A2) to study the existence of solutions for BVPs \eqref{model-equ}. It deserves to point out
that the problem is new even when $\alpha=2$, that is, system \eqref{model-equ} is a
second order differential system with resonant
boundary conditions.
In the past three decades, the existence of solutions
for the fractional differential equations with boundary value
conditions have attained a great deal of attentions from many researchers, for instance,
see \cite{Ba3,YCHen,JWH1,JWH2,Kosmatov1,Kosmatov2,Ba1,zhou1}.
However, all results derived in these papers are for one equation with
$\operatorname{dim}\ker L =1$ or for two equations with
$\operatorname{dim}\ker L =2$. The case of problems where the $\operatorname{dim}\ker L$ can
take any value in $\mathbb{N}$ have treated with little attention.
Recently, the authors in \cite{PhungTruong,Phung2}
investigated the following second order differential system
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
u''(t)=f(t,u(t),u'(t)), \quad 0<t<1,\\
u'(0)=\theta,u(1)=Au(\eta)
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where $f:[0,1]\times\mathbb{R}^n\times\mathbb{R}^n\to\mathbb{R}^n$
is a Carath\'eodory function and the square matrix $A$
satisfies certain conditions.
These results for second order differential equations in
\cite{PhungTruong} and \cite{Phung2} were generalized to fractional order case $\alpha\in(1,2]$ in \cite{GeZhouEJQTDE} and \cite{Zhou2}. It should be highlighted that, in \cite{Phung2}, the authors successfully removed the constricted conditions used in \cite{PhungTruong} by making use of the property of Moore-Penrose pseudo-inverse matrix technique. Inspired by this, in this paper, we use the generalized inverse of the bounded linear operator in infinite dimensional space \cite{Petry} to remove the restricted conditions (A1) and (A2),
so that we can derive the existence of the solution for three-point BVPs \eqref{model-equ}.
We proceed as follows: in Section 2, we give some necessary
background and some preparations for our consideration.
The proof of the main results is presented
in Section 3 by applying the coincidence degree theory of
Mawhin. In Section 4, an illustrative example is included.
\section{Preliminaries}
In this section, we present some necessary definitions and lemmas which
will be used later. These definitions and lemmas can be found in
\cite{Mawhin1,Kilbas,Mawhin,Petry} and the references therein.\\
\begin{definition}[\cite{Kilbas}] \label{def2.1}
The fractional integral of order $\alpha>0$ of a function
$x:(0,\infty)\to \mathbb{R}$ is given by
\[
I^{\alpha}_{0^+}x(t)=\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}
\int^{t}_{0}{(t-s)^{\alpha-1}x(s)ds},
\]
provided that the right-hand side is pointwise defined on $(0,\infty)$.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}\label{rmk2.1}
The notation $I^{\alpha}_{0^+}x(t)|_{t=0}$ means that the limit is taken
at almost all points of the right-hand side neighborhood
$(0, \varepsilon) (\varepsilon > 0)$ of $0$ as follows:
\[
I^{\alpha}_{0^+}x(t)|_{t=0}=\lim_{t\to 0^+}I^{\alpha}_{0^+}x(t).
\]
Generally, $I^{\alpha}_{0^+}x(t)|_{t=0}$ is not necessarily to be zero.
For instance, let $\alpha\in(0,1)$, $x(t)=t^{-\alpha}$.
Then
\[
I^{\alpha}_{0^+}t^{-\alpha}|_{t=0}=\lim_{t\to0^+}
\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^t(t-s)^{\alpha-1}s^{-\alpha}ds
=\lim_{t\to0^+}\Gamma(1-\alpha)=\Gamma(1-\alpha).
\]
\end{remark}
\begin{definition}[\cite{Kilbas}]\label{def2.2}
The fractional derivative of order $\alpha>0$
of a function $x:(0,\infty)\to \mathbb{R}$ in Riemann-Liouville sence is given by
\[
D^{\alpha}_{0^+}x(t)=\frac{1}{\Gamma(n-\alpha)}
\Big(\frac{d}{dt}\Big)^{n}\int^{t}_{0}{\frac{x(s)}{(t-s)^{\alpha-n+1}}ds},
\]
where $n=[\alpha]+1$, provided that the right-hand side is pointwise defined
on $(0,\infty)$.
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}[\cite{Kilbas}] \label{Lem2.1}
Assume that $x\in C(0,+\infty)\cap L_{\rm loc}(0,+\infty)$ with a
fractional derivative of order $\alpha>0$ belonging to
$C(0,+\infty)\cap L_{\rm loc}(0,+\infty)$. Then
\[
I_{0^+}^{\alpha}D_{0^+}^{\alpha}x(t)=x(t)+c_1t^{\alpha-1}
+c_2t^{\alpha-2}+\dots+c_{n}t^{\alpha-n},
\]
for some $c_i\in\mathbb{R},i=1,\dots,n$, where $n=[\alpha]+1$.
\end{lemma}
For any $x(t)=(x_1(t),x_2(t),\dots)^\top \in l^2$, the
fractional derivative of order $\alpha>0$ of $x$ is defined by
\[
D^{\alpha}_{0^+}x(t)=(D^{\alpha}_{0^+}x_1(t),D^{\alpha}_{0^+}x_2(t),\dots)^\top
\in l^2.
\]
The following definitions and the coincidence degree theory are fundamental in the
proof of our main result. We refer the readers to \cite{Mawhin1,Mawhin}.\\
\begin{definition}\label{Fredhop}
Let $X$ and $Y$ be normed spaces. A linear operator
$L:\operatorname{dom}(L)\subset X\to Y$ is said to be a Fredholm operator of
index zero provided that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $\operatorname{im}L$ is a closed subset of $Y$;
\item[(ii)] $\operatorname{dim}\ker L=\operatorname{codim}\operatorname{im}L<+\infty$.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
It follows from Definition \ref{Fredhop} that, if $L$ is a Fredholm operator of index zero, then there exist continuous projectors
$P:X\to X$ and $Q:Y\to Y$ such that
\[
\operatorname{im}P=\ker L,\quad
\ker Q= \operatorname{im}L,\quad
X=\ker L\oplus\ker P,\quad Y=\operatorname{im}L\oplus\operatorname{im}Q,
\]
and the mapping $L|_{\operatorname{dom}L\cap\ker P}:\operatorname{dom}
L\cap\ker P\to\operatorname{im}L$ is invertible.
We denote the inverse of $L|_{\operatorname{dom}L\cap\ker P}$ by
$K_P:\operatorname{im}L\to\operatorname{dom}L\cap\ker P$.
The generalized inverse of $L$ denoted by
$K_{P,Q}:Y\to\operatorname{dom}L\cap\ker P$ is defined by
$K_{P,Q}=K_P(I-Q)$. Furthermore, for every isomorphism
$J:\operatorname{im}Q\to \ker L$, we can obtain that the mapping
$K_{P,Q}+JQ: Y\to \operatorname{dom}L$ is also an isomorphism and for all
$x\in \operatorname{dom}L$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{isomorphism}
(K_{P,Q}+JQ)^{-1}x= (L+J^{-1}P)x.
\end{equation}
\begin{definition}\label{lcompact}
Let $L$ be a Fredholm operator of index zero,
$\Omega \subseteq X$ be a bounded subset and
$\operatorname{dom}L \cap \Omega \neq \emptyset$.
Then the operator $N: \overline{\Omega}\to Y$ is called to be
$L$-compact in $\overline{\Omega}$ if
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] the mapping $QN:\overline{\Omega} \to Y$ is continuous and
$QN(\overline{\Omega}) \subseteq Y $ is bounded;
\item[(ii)] the mapping $K_{P,Q}N:\overline{\Omega} \to X$ is
completely continuous.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
The following lemma is the main tool in this paper.
\begin{lemma}[\cite{Mawhin}] \label{lem2.2}
Let $\Omega\subset X$ be a bounded subset, $L$ be a Fredholm mapping of index zero
and $N$ be $L$-compact in $\overline{\Omega}$. Suppose that the following
conditions are satisfied:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $Lx\neq\lambda Nx$ for every
$(x,\lambda)\in((\operatorname{dom}L\backslash\ker L)\cap\partial\Omega)\times(0,1)$;
\item[(ii)] $Nx\not\in \operatorname{im}L$ for every
$x\in\ker L\cap\partial\Omega$;
\item[(iii)] $\deg(JQN|_{\ker L\cap\partial\Omega},\Omega\cap\ker L,0)\neq0$,
with $Q:Y\to Y$ a continuous projector such that $\ker Q=\operatorname{im}L$ and
$J:\operatorname{im}Q\to\ker L$ is an isomorphism.
\end{itemize}
Then the equation $Lx=Nx$ has at least one solution in
$\operatorname{dom}L\cap\overline{\Omega}$.
\end{lemma}
In this paper, we use spaces $\mathbb{X}$, $\mathbb{Y}$ introduced as
\[
\mathbb{X}=\big\{x(t)\in l^2:x(t)=I_{0+}^{\alpha-1}u(t),
u\in C([0,1];l^2),t\in [0,1] \big\}
\]
with the norm
$\|x\|_\mathbb{X}=\max \{\|x\|_{C([0,1];l^2)},\|D_{0+}^{\alpha-1}x\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}\}$
and $\mathbb{Y}=L^1([0,1];l^2)$ with the norm
$\|y\|_{L^1([0,1];l^2)}=\int_0^1\|y(s)\|_{l^2}ds$,
respectively, where $\|x\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}=\sup_{t\in[0,1]}\|x(t)\|_{l^2}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lem2.3}
$F\subset \mathbb{X}$ is a sequentially compact set if and only if
$F(t)$ is relatively compact and equicontinuous which are understood in the
following sense:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(1)] for any $t\in[0,1]$, $F(t):=\{x(t)|x\in F\}$ is a relatively
compact set in $l^2$;
\item[(2)] for any given $\varepsilon>0$, there
exists $\delta>0$ such that for all $x\in F$,
\[
\|x(t_1)-x(t_2)\|_{l^2}<\varepsilon,\;\|D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(t_1)
-D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(t_2)\|_{l^2}<\varepsilon,
\]
for $t_1,t_2\in[0,1]$, $|t_1-t_2|<\delta$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
In order to use Lemma \ref{lem2.2}, we define the linear operator
$L:\operatorname{dom}L \subseteq\mathbb{X}\to\mathbb{Y}$ by
\begin{equation}\label{Ldef}
Lx:=D_{0^+ }^\alpha x,
\end{equation}
where $\operatorname{dom}L=\{x\in X: D_{0^+ }^\alpha x\in Y,
I_{0+}^{2-\alpha}x(0)=\theta, x(1)=Ax(\xi)\}$ and define $N:X\to Y$
by
\begin{equation}\label{N}
Nx(t):=f(t,x(t),D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(t)), \quad t\in [0,1].
\end{equation}
Then the problem \eqref{model-equ} can be equivalently rewritten as $Lx=Nx$.
Now we define operator $\mathcal{M}$ as:
\begin{equation}\label{M-def}
\mathcal{M}=I-A\xi^{\alpha-1},
\end{equation}
and define a continuous linear operator $h:\mathbb{Y}\rightarrow l^2$ by
\begin{equation}\label{hdef}
h(y):=\frac{A}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^{\xi}(\xi-s)^{\alpha-1}y(s)ds-\frac{I}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^1(1-s)^{\alpha-1}y(s)ds.
\end{equation}
In order to remove the restricted conditions (A1) and (A2), we will employ the following lemma
on the property of bounded linear operator in general Hilbert space.
\begin{lemma}\label{M+exist}\cite{Petry}
If $\mathcal{M}$ is a bounded linear transformation from Hilbert space $H_1$ to Hilbert space $H_2$ with closed rang $R(\mathcal{M})$, then the generalized inverse $\mathcal{M}^+$ of $A$ is characterized as the unique solution $X$ of the following equivalent equations:\\
(\uppercase\expandafter{\romannumeral1}) $X\mathcal{M}X=X, \;(X\mathcal{M})^*=X\mathcal{M}, \;\mathcal{M}X\mathcal{M}=\mathcal{M}, (\mathcal{M}X)^*=\mathcal{M}X$;\\
(\uppercase\expandafter{\romannumeral2}) $\mathcal{M}X=P_{R(\mathcal{M})},\; N(X^*)=N(\mathcal{M})$ where $P_{R(\mathcal{M})}$ denotes the orthogonal projection of $H_2$ onto $R(\mathcal{M})$;\\
(\uppercase\expandafter{\romannumeral3}) $\mathcal{M}X=P_{R(\mathcal{M})},\; X\mathcal{M}=P_{R(\mathcal{M}^*)}, \; X\mathcal{M}X=X$;\\
(\uppercase\expandafter{\romannumeral4}) $X\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^*=\mathcal{M}^*,XX^*\mathcal{M}^*=X$;\\
(\uppercase\expandafter{\romannumeral5}) $X\mathcal{M}x=x$ for all $x\in R(\mathcal{M}^*)$ and $Xy=0$ for all $y\in N(\mathcal{M}^*)$;\\
(\uppercase\expandafter{\romannumeral6}) $X\mathcal{M}=P_{R(\mathcal{M}^*)}, \; N(X)=N(\mathcal{M}^*)$;\\
(\uppercase\expandafter{\romannumeral7}) $\mathcal{M}X=P_{R(\mathcal{M})},\; X\mathcal{M}=P_{R(\mathcal{M})}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{remark}
By the definition of $\mathcal{M}$ given in \eqref{M-def}, since $A$ is a bounded linear operator,
we know that $\mathcal{M}$ satisfies the condition in Lemma \ref{M+exist}. Thus, for such $\mathcal{M}$, there exists
unique $\mathcal{M}^+$ satisfies the equations in Lemma \ref{M+exist}.
\end{remark}
The next lemma plays a vital role in estimating the boundedness of some sets.
\begin{lemma}\label{boundinequ}\cite{Zhou2}
Let $z_1,z_2\geq 0$, $\gamma_1,\gamma_2\in[0,1)$ and $\lambda_i,\mu_i\geq0,i=1,2,3$,
and the following two inequalities hold,
\begin{equation}\label{baseineq}
\begin{gathered}
z_1\leq\lambda_1z_1^{\gamma_1}+\lambda_2z_2+\lambda_3,\\
z_2\leq\mu_1z_1+\mu_2z_2^{\gamma_2}+\mu_3.
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
Then $z_1,z_2$ is bounded if $\lambda_2\mu_1<1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemL}
The operator $L$, defined by \eqref{Ldef}, is a Fredholm operator of index zero.
\end{lemma}
\noindent
Proof\\
For any $x\in \operatorname{dom}L$, by Lemma \ref{Lem2.1}
and $I_{0+}^{2-\alpha}x(0)=\theta$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{integralequation}
x(t)=I_{0+}^\alpha Lx(t)+ct^{\alpha-1},
\quad c\in l^2, \; t\in [0,1],
\end{equation}
which, together with $x(1)=Ax(\xi)$, yields
\begin{equation}\label{KerLeq}
\begin{aligned}
\ker L&=\{x\in \mathbb{X}:x(t)=ct^{\alpha-1}, t\in [0,1], c\in \ker\\
&\simeq \ker\mathcal{M}t^{\alpha-1}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Now we claim that
\begin{equation}\label{ImL}
\operatorname{im}L=\{y\in Y: h(y) \in \operatorname{im}\mathcal{M}\}.
\end{equation}
Actually, for any $y\in \operatorname{im}L$, there exists a function
$x\in \operatorname{dom}L$ such that $y=Lx$. It follows from
\eqref{integralequation} that
$x(t)=I_{0^+}^{\alpha}y(t)+ct^{\alpha-1}$, this jointly with $x(1)=Ax(\xi)$, follows
\[
\frac{A}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^\xi(\xi-s)^{\alpha-1}y(s)ds
-\frac{I}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^1(1-s)^{\alpha-1}y(s)ds
=\mathcal{M}c,\quad c\in l^2,
\]
which means that $h(y)\in \operatorname{im}\mathcal{M}$.
On the other hand, for any $y\in\mathbb{Y}$ satisfying
$h(y)\in \operatorname{im}\mathcal{M}$, there exists a constant
$c^*$ such that $h(y)=\mathcal{M}c^*$.
Let $x^*(t)=I_{0^+ }^\alpha y(t)+c^*t^{\alpha-1}$, a straightforward
computation shows that $x^*(0)=\theta$ and
$x^*(1)=Ax^*(\xi)$. Hence,
$x^*\in \operatorname{dom}L$ and $y(t)=D_{0^+ }^\alpha x^*(t)$, which implies
that $y\in \operatorname{im}L$.
Furthermore, notice that if $y=ct^{\alpha-1}$,
$c\in l^2$, then
\begin{equation}\label{gker}
\begin{aligned}
h(y)
&=\frac{A}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^\xi(\xi-s)^{\alpha-1}y(s)ds
-\frac{I}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^1(1-s)^{\alpha-1}y(s)ds\\
&=\frac{(\xi^{2\alpha-1}A-I)c}{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Also, the relation
\begin{equation}\label{MM+}
(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)(\xi^{2\alpha-1}A-I)=(\xi^{\alpha}-1)(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)
\end{equation}
holds.
This is deduced from\\
$$(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)(I-A\xi^{\alpha-1})=(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)\mathcal{M}=0,$$
which is equivalent to
\begin{equation}\label{MM-equi}
\begin{aligned}
&(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)A\xi^{\alpha-1}=(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)\\
&\Leftrightarrow(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)\xi^{2\alpha-1}A=\xi^{\alpha}(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)\\
&\Leftrightarrow(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)(\xi^{2\alpha-1}A-I)=(\xi^{\alpha}-1)(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Define the continuous linear mapping $Q:\mathbb{Y}\to\mathbb{Y}$ by
\begin{equation}\label{Q}
Qy(t):=\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}{\xi^\alpha-1}(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)h(y)t^{\alpha-1},
\quad t\in [0,1],\; \;y\in \mathbb{Y}.
\end{equation}
Then it follows from \eqref{hdef}, \eqref{ImL}, \eqref{MM+} and Lemma \ref{M+exist} that
\begin{align*}
Q^2y(t)
&=\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}{\xi^\alpha-1}(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)h(Qy(t))t^{\alpha-1}\\
&=\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}{\xi^\alpha-1}(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)
\frac{(\xi^{2\alpha-1}A-I)}{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}
\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}{\xi^\alpha-1}(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)h(y)t^{\alpha-1}\\
&=\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}{\xi^\alpha-1}(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)^2h(y)t^{\alpha-1}\\
&=\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}{\xi^\alpha-1}(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)h(y)t^{\alpha-1}
=Qy(t),
\end{align*}
and
\begin{gather*}
y\in \ker Q\Leftrightarrow h(y)\in\ker (I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)
\Leftrightarrow h(y)\in \operatorname{im} \mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+
\Leftrightarrow h(y)\in \operatorname{im} \mathcal{M}
\Leftrightarrow y\in \operatorname{im}L,
\end{gather*}
which implies that $Q$ is a projection operator with $\ker Q= \operatorname{im}L$.
Therefore,
$\mathbb{Y}=\ker Q \oplus \operatorname{im} Q=\operatorname{im}L \oplus
\operatorname{im}Q $.\\
Finally, we shall prove that $\operatorname{im}Q=\ker L$. Indeed, for any
$z\in \operatorname{im} Q$, let $z=Qy$, $y\in \mathbb{Y}$.
we have
\[
(\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)z(t)=(\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)Qy(t)
=\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}{\xi^\alpha-1}\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)g(y)t^{\alpha-1}
=\theta,
\]
which implies $z\in \ker L$.
Conversely, for each $z\in \ker L$, there exists a constant
$c^*\in \ker (\mathcal{M})$ such that $z=c^*t^{\alpha-1}$ for
$t\in [0,1]$. By \eqref{gker} and \eqref{MM-equi}, we derive
\[
Qz(t)=\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}{\xi^\alpha-1}
(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)h(c^*t^{\alpha-1})t^{\alpha-1}=c^*t^{\alpha-1}=z(t),\quad t\in [0,1],
\]
which implies that $z\in \operatorname{im}Q$. Hence we know that
$\operatorname{im}Q=\ker L$. By assumption that $\operatorname{dim}\ker (I-A\xi^{\alpha-1})<\infty$,
the operator $L$ is a Fredholm operator of
index zero. The proof is completed.
Now to establish the generalized inverse of $L$, we define the operator $P:\mathbb{X}\to\mathbb{X}$ by
\begin{equation}\label{Popdef}
Px(t)=\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})D_{0+}^{\alpha-1}x(0)t^{\alpha-1}.
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-Pdef}
The following assertions hold:\\
(1) The mapping $P:\mathbb{X}\to\mathbb{X}$ defined by \eqref{Popdef},
is a continuous projector satisfying
\[
\operatorname{im}P=\ker L, \quad \mathbb{X}=\ker L\oplus\ker P;
\]
(2) The linear operator $K_P: \operatorname{im}L\to \operatorname{dom}L \cap\ker P$, which is the inverse of $L|_{\operatorname{dom}L \cap\ker P}$,
can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{KPydef}
K_Py(t)=\mathcal{M}^+h(y)t^{\alpha-1}+I_{0+}^\alpha y(t),
\end{equation}
moreover, $K_P$ satisfies
\[
\|K_Py\|_{\mathbb{X}}\leq C\|y\|_{L^1([0,1];l^2)},
\]
where $C=1+\|\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|(1+\|A\|).$
\end{lemma}
\noindent
Proof\\
(1) By Lemma \ref{M+exist}, $I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}$ is a projection on $\ker \mathcal{M}\subset l^2$.
It follows from \eqref{Popdef} that $P$ is a continuous projection.
If $v\in\operatorname{im}P$, there exists $x\in \mathbb{X}$ such that $v=Px$,
then
\[
v=\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}
(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})D_0^{\alpha-1}x(0)t^{\alpha-1}.
\]
By \eqref{KerLeq} and Lemma \ref{M+exist},
we have $\mathcal{M}(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})D_0^{\alpha-1}x(0)=0$,
which gives $v\in \ker L$.
Conversely, if $v\in \ker L$, then
$v(t)=c_*t^{\alpha-1}$ for some $c_*\in\ker \mathcal{M}=\operatorname{im}(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})$, that is,
$c_*=(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})\bar{c}_*$ for $\bar{c}_*\in l^2$. Thus, we deduce that
\begin{align*}
Pv(t)&=\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})D_{0+}^{\alpha-1}v(0)t^{\alpha-1}
=(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})c_*t^{\alpha-1}\\
&=(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})^2\bar{c}_*t^{\alpha-1}=(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})\bar{c}_*t^{\alpha-1}\\
&=v(t), \quad t\in [0,1],
\end{align*}
which gives $v\in\operatorname{im}P$. Thus, we get that
$\ker L=\operatorname{im}P$ and consequently
$\mathbb{X}={\rm ker }L\oplus \ker P$.
(2) Let $y\in \operatorname{im}L$. There exists
$x\in \operatorname{dom}L$ such that $y=Lx$ and $h(y)\in \operatorname{im}\mathcal{M}$. By the
definitions of $P$ and $K_P$, we obtain that
\begin{align*}
PK_Py(t)&=\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}(K_Py(0))t^{\alpha-1}\\
&=\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})[\mathcal{M}^+D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}h(y(0))+I_{0^+}^\alpha y(0)]t^{\alpha-1}\\
&=0,
\end{align*}
and
\[
\mathcal{M}(K_Py(0))=\mathcal{M}[\mathcal{M}^+h(y(0))+I_{0^+}^{\alpha}y(0)]=h(y).
\]
Thus, $K_Py\in {\rm ker }P \cap\operatorname{dom}L$, $K_P$ is well defined.
On the other hand, if $x\in {\rm ker }P \cap\operatorname{dom}L$, then $x(t)=I_{0^+}^{\alpha}Lx(t)+ct^{\alpha-1}$, and
$$\mathcal{M}c=h(Lx),\ \ c\in {\rm ker }(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}).$$
Hence
\begin{align*}
K_PL_Px(t)&=\mathcal{M^+}h(Lx)t^{\alpha-1}+I_{0^+}^{\alpha}Lx(t)\\
&=\mathcal{M}^+h(Lx)\\
&=\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}ct^{\alpha-1}+I_{0^+}^{\alpha}Lx(t)\\
&=ct^{\alpha-1}+I_{0^+}^{\alpha}Lx(t)=x(t)
\end{align*}
and $L_PK_Px(t)=x(t), \ t\in [0,1]$ for all $x\in \operatorname{im}L$, then $K_P=L_P^{-1}$.
Finally, by the definition of $K_P$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{DKPy}
(D^{\alpha-1}_{0^+}K_Py)(t)=\Gamma(\alpha)\mathcal{M}^+h(y)+I_{0^+}^1y(t).
\end{equation}
It follows from \eqref{hdef}, \eqref{KPydef} and \eqref{DKPy} that
\begin{align*}
\|D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}K_Py\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}&= \Gamma(\alpha)\|\mathcal{M}^+\|\|h(y)\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}+\bigg\|\int_0^{\cdot}y(s)ds\bigg\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}\\
&\leq \Gamma(\alpha)\|\mathcal{M}^+\|\|h(y)\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}+\|y\|_{L^1([0,1];l^2)},
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
\|K_Py\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}&= \|\mathcal{M}^+\|\|h(y)\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}
+\bigg\|\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^{\cdot}(\cdot-s)^{\alpha-1}y(s)ds\bigg\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}\\
&\leq \|\mathcal{M}^+\|\|h(y)\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}+\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\|y\|_{L^1([0,1];l^2)},
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
\|h(y)\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}\leq \frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}(1+\|A\|)\|y\|_{L^1([0,1];l^2)}.
\end{align*}
This show that
\begin{align*}
\|K_Py\|_\mathbb{X}&=\max\{\|D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}K_Py\|_{C([0,1];l^2)},\|K_Py\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}\}\\
&\leq[1+\|\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|(1+\|A\|)]\|y\|_{L^1}.
\end{align*}
This completes of the proof.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem-N-compact}
Let $f$ be a Carath\'eodory function. Then $N$, defined by \eqref{N},
is L-compact.
\end{lemma}
\noindent
Proof\\
Let $\Omega$ be a bounded subset in $\mathbb{X}$. By
hypothesis (iii) on the function $f$,
there exists a function $\varphi_\Omega(t)\in L^1[0,1]$ such that for all
$x\in \Omega$,
\begin{equation}\label{fphi}
\|f(t,x(t),D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(t))\|_{l^2}\leq \varphi_\Omega(t), \quad
\text{a.e. }t\in [0,1],
\end{equation}
which, along with \eqref{hdef}, implies
\begin{equation}\label{gbound}
\begin{aligned}
\|h(Nx(t))\|_{l^2}
&=\bigg\|\frac{A}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^\xi(\xi-s)^{\alpha-1}
{f(s,x(s),D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(s))}ds\\
&\quad -\frac{I}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^1(1-s)^{\alpha-1}
{f(s,x(s),D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(s))}ds\bigg\|_{l^2}\\
&\leq \frac{\|A\|+1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\|\varphi_\Omega\|_{L^1[0,1]}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Thus, from \eqref{Q} and \eqref{gbound}, it follows that
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\|QNx\|_{L^1([0,1];l^2)}
&=\big\|\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}{\xi^\alpha-1}(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})h(Nx)
\big\|_{l^2}\int_0^1s^{\alpha-1}ds\\
&\leq \frac{\Gamma(2\alpha)(\|A\|+1)\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|}{|1-\xi^\alpha|}
\|\varphi_\Omega\|_{L^1[0,1]}<\infty.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
This shows that $QN(\overline{\Omega}) \subseteq\mathbb{Y}$ is bounded. The
continuity of $QN$ follows from the hypothesis on $f$ and the
Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem.
Next, we shall show that $K_{P,Q}N$ is completely continuous.
For any $x\in \Omega$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{KPQdef}
\begin{aligned}
K_{P,Q}Nx(t)
&=K_P(I-Q)Nx(t)=K_PNx(t)-K_PQNx(t)\\
&=\mathcal{M}^+h(Nx)t^{\alpha-1}+I_{0+}^\alpha Nx(t)\\
&\;\;\;-
\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}{\xi^\alpha-1}(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})h(Nx(t))I_{0+}^\alpha
t^{\alpha-1},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{KPQdefD}
\begin{aligned}
D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}K_{P,Q}Nx(t)&=\Gamma(\alpha)\mathcal{M}^+h(Nx)+I_{0+}^1Nx(t)\\
&\;\;\;-
\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}{\xi^\alpha-1}(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})h(Nx(t))I_{0+}^1
t^{\alpha-1}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
By the hypothesis on $f$ and the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem,
it is easy to see that $K_{P,Q}N$ is continuous.
Since $f$ is a Carath\'eodory function, for every bounded set
$\Omega_0\subseteq l^2\times l^2$,
the set $\{f(t,u,v):(u,v)\in \Omega_0\}$ is relatively compact set in $l^2$.
Therefore, for almost all $t\in[0,1]$, $\{K_{P,Q}Nx(t):x\in\Omega\}$ and
$\{D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}K_{P,Q}Nx(t):x\in\Omega\}$ are relatively compact in $l^2$.
From \eqref{gbound}, \eqref{KPQdef} and \eqref{KPQdefD}, we derive that
\begin{align*}
&\ \ \ \ \|K_{P,Q}Nx\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}\\
&=\big\|\mathcal{M}^+h(Nx)t^{\alpha-1}+I_{0+}^\alpha Nx(t)-\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}{\xi^\alpha-1}
(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})h(Nx(t))I_{0+}^\alpha t^{\alpha-1}\big\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}\\
&\leq\|\mathcal{M}^+\|\frac{\|A\|+1}{\alpha\Gamma(\alpha)}\|\varphi_{\Omega}\|_{L^1[0,1]}+\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\|\varphi_\Omega\|_{L^1(0,1)}
+\frac{\Gamma(2\alpha)\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|}{|\xi^\alpha-1|}\|h(Nx(t))\|_{l^2}\\
&\leq \|\mathcal{M}^+\|\frac{\|A\|+1}{\alpha\Gamma(\alpha)}\|\varphi_{\Omega}\|_{L^1[0,1]}+\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\|\varphi_\Omega\|_{L^1(0,1)}
+\frac{\Gamma(2\alpha)\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|(\|A\|+1)}{\Gamma(\alpha)|\xi^\alpha-1|}
\|\varphi_\Omega\|_{L^1(0,1)}\\
&<\infty,
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
&\ \ \ \ \|D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}K_{P,Q}Nx\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}\\
&\leq\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)}{\alpha}\|\mathcal{M}^+\| \|\varphi_{\Omega}\|_{L^1}+\big\|I_{0+}^1 Nx(t)-\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}{\xi^\alpha-1}
(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})h(Nx(t))I_{0+}^1 t^{\alpha-1}\big\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}\\
&\leq \frac{\Gamma(\alpha)}{\alpha}\|\mathcal{M}^+\| \|\varphi_{\Omega}\|_{L^1}+\|\varphi_\Omega\|_{L^1(0,1)}+\frac{\Gamma(2\alpha)
\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|}{|\xi^\alpha-1|}\|h(Nx(t))\|_{l^2}\\
&\leq \frac{\Gamma(\alpha)}{\alpha}\|\mathcal{M}^+\| \|\varphi_{\Omega}\|_{L^1}+\|\varphi_\Omega\|_{L^1(0,1)}
+\frac{\Gamma(2\alpha)\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|(\|A\|+1)}{\Gamma(\alpha)|\xi^\alpha-1|}
\|\varphi_\Omega\|_{L^1(0,1)}\\
&<\infty,
\end{align*}
which shows that $K_{P,Q}N\overline{\Omega}$ is uniformly bounded in
$\mathbb{X}$. Noting that
\begin{equation}\label{inequality}
b^p-a^p\leq (b-a)^p \quad \text{for any } b\geq a>0, 0< p\leq1.
\end{equation}
for any $t_1,t_2\in [0,1]$ with $t_1<t_2$, we shall see that
\begin{align*}
&\ \ \ \ \|K_{P,Q}Nx(t_2)-K_{P,Q}Nx(t_1)\|_{l^2}\\
&\leq\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\Big\|\Gamma(\alpha) \mathcal{M}^+h(Nx)(t_2^{\alpha-1}-t_1^{\alpha-1})+\int_0^{t_1}{[(t_2-s)^{\alpha-1}-(t_1-s)^{\alpha-1}]
Nx(s)}ds\\
&\quad +\int_{t_1}^{t_2}{(t_2-s)^{\alpha-1}Nx(s)}ds
-\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}{\xi^\alpha-1}(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})h(Nx(t))
[I_{0+}^\alpha t_2^{\alpha-1}-I_{0+}^\alpha t_1^{\alpha-1}]\Big\|_{l^2}\\
&\leq\|\mathcal{M}^+h(Nx)\|_{l^2}(t_2-t_1)^{\alpha-1}+ \frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^{t_1}{(t_2-t_1)^{\alpha-1}\varphi_\Omega(s)}ds
+\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_{t_1}^{t_2}{\varphi_\Omega(s)}ds\\
&\quad +\frac{\Gamma^2(\alpha)\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|(\|A\|+1)}{|\xi^\alpha-1|}
\|\varphi_\Omega\|_{L^1(0,1)}|t_2^{2\alpha-1}- t_1^{2\alpha-1}|\\
&\leq \frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^{t_1}(t_2-t_1)^{\alpha-1}\varphi_{\Omega}(s)ds+\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_{t_1}^{t^2}\varphi_{\Omega}(s)ds\\
&\quad+\|\mathcal{M}^+\|\frac{\|A\|+1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\|\varphi_{\Omega}\|_{L^1}(t_2-t_1)^{\alpha-1}\\
&\quad+\frac{\Gamma^2(\alpha)\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|(\|A\|+1)}{|\xi^{\alpha}-1|}\|\varphi_{\Omega}\|_{L^1}|t_2^{2\alpha-1}-t_1^{2\alpha-1}|\to 0, \quad \text{as } t_2\to t_1
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
&\ \ \ \ \|D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}K_{P,Q}Nx(t_2)-D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}K_{P,Q}Nx(t_1)\|_{l^2}\\
&=\big\|\int_{t_1}^{t_2}{Nx(s)}ds\big\|_{l^2}
+\big\|\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}{\xi^\alpha-1}(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})h(Nx(t))
\int_{t_1}^{t_2}s^{\alpha-1}ds\big\|_{l^2}\\
&\leq \int_{t_1}^{t_2}{\varphi_\Omega(s)}ds
+\frac{\Gamma(2\alpha)\|I-\rho_A\|(\|A\|+1)}{|\xi^\alpha-1|}
\|\varphi_\Omega\|_{L^1(0,1)}|t_2^{\alpha}-t_1^{\alpha}|
\to 0, \quad \text{as } t_2\to t_1.
\end{align*}
Then $K_{P,Q}N\overline{\Omega}$ is equicontinuous in
$\mathbb{X}$. By Lemma \ref{Lem2.3}, $K_{P,Q}N\overline{\Omega}\subseteq\mathbb{X}$
is relatively compact. Thus we can conclude that the operator $N$
is $L$-compact in $\overline{\Omega}$. The proof is completed.
\section{Main results}
\begin{theorem}\label{mainresults}
Let $f$ be a Carath\'eodory function and the following conditions
hold:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(H1)] There exist five nonnegative functions $a_1, a_2, b_1, b_2,c\in L^1[0,1]$
and two constants $\gamma_1,\gamma_2\in[0,1)$ such that
for all $t\in [0,1]$, $u,v \in l^2$,
\[
\|f(t,u,v)\|_{l^2}\leq a_1(t)\|u\|_{l^2}+b_1(t)\|v\|_{l^2}
+a_2(t)\|u\|^{\gamma_1}_{l^2}+b_2(t)\|v\|^{\gamma_2}_{l^2} +c(t)
\]
holds.
\item[(H2)] There exists a constant $A_1>0$ such that for
$x\in\operatorname{dom}L$, if $\|D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(t)\|_{l^2}>A_1$
for all $t\in [0,1]$, then
\begin{align*}
& \frac{A}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^\xi(\xi-s)^{\alpha-1}{f(s,x(s),
D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(s))}ds\\
&-\frac{I}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^1(1-s)^{\alpha-1}{f(s,x(s),
D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(s))}ds\notin\operatorname{im} \mathcal{M}.
\end{align*}
\item[(H3)]
There exists a constant $A_2>0$ and an isomorphism $J:\operatorname{im}Q\to \ker L$ such that for any $e=\{(e_i)\}\in l^2$
satisfying $e=\xi^{\alpha-1}Ae$ and $\|e\|_{l^2}>A_2$, either
\[
\langle e,JQNe\rangle_{l^2}\leq 0 \quad \text{or} \quad
\langle e,JQNe\rangle_{l^2}\geq 0\quad \text{holds},
\]
where $\langle \cdot,\cdot\rangle_{l^2}$ is the inner product in $l^2$.
\end{itemize}
Then \eqref{model-equ} has at least one solution in space $\mathbb{X}$ provided that
\begin{equation}\label{Thcondition}
\begin{gathered}
\Gamma(\alpha)>\max\big\{(\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|+1)\|a_1\|_{L^1(0,1)},
(\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|+1)\|b_1\|_{L^1(0,1)}\big\},\\
\frac{(\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|+1)^2\|a_1\|_{L^1(0,1)}\|b_1\|_{L^1(0,1)}}
{(\Gamma(\alpha)-(\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|+1)\|a_1\|_{L^1(0,1)})
(\Gamma(\alpha)-(\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|+1)\|b_1\|_{L^1(0,1)})}<1.
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
To prove the above theorem, we need the following auxiliary lemmas.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-Ome1}
The set
$
\Omega_1=\big\{x\in \operatorname{dom}L\backslash\ker
L:Lx=\lambda Nx \text{ for some } \lambda \in [0,1]\}
$ is bounded in $\mathbb{X}$.
\end{lemma}
\noindent
Proof\\
For any $x\in \Omega_1$, $x \notin\ker L$, we have
$\lambda\neq 0$. Since $Nx\in \operatorname{im}L=\ker Q$,
by \eqref{ImL}, we have $h(Nx)\in \operatorname{im} \mathcal{M}$, where
\begin{equation}\label{hDef}
\begin{aligned}
h(Nx)&=\frac{A}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^\xi(\xi-s)^{\alpha-1}{f(s,x(s),
D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(s))}ds\\
&\quad -\frac{I}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^1(1-s)^{\alpha-1}{f(s,x(s),
D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(s))}ds.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
From (H2), there exists $t_0\in [0,1]$ such that
$\|D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(t_0)\|_{l^2}\leq A_1$. Then from the equality
$D_{0+}^{\alpha-1}x(0)=D_{0+}^{\alpha-1}x(t_0)-\int_0^t{D_{0+}^\alpha
x(s)}ds$, we deduce that
\[
\|D_{0+}^{\alpha-1}x(0)\|_{l^2}
\leq A_1+\|D_{0+}^\alpha x\|_{L^1(0,1;l^2)}
= A_1+\|Lx\|_1\leq A_1+\|Nx\|_{L^1(0,1;l^2)},
\]
which implies
\begin{equation}\label{P}
\|Px\|_{\mathbb{X}}
=\|\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}(I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M})D_{0+}^{\alpha-1}x(0)t^{\alpha-1}
\|_{\mathbb{X}}
\leq \frac{\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|}{\Gamma(\alpha)}( A_1+\|Nx\|_{L^1(0,1;l^2)}).
\end{equation}
Further, for $x\in \Omega_1$, since $\operatorname{im}P=\ker L,
\mathbb{X}=\ker L\oplus\ker P $, we have
$(I-P)x \in \operatorname{dom}L \cap \ker P$ and $LPx=\theta$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{I-P}
\begin{aligned}
\|(I-P)x\|_{\mathbb{X}}
&=\|K_PL(I-P)x\|_{\mathbb{X}}\leq \|K_PLx\|_{\mathbb{X}}\\
&\leq \frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\|Lx\|_{L^1(0,1;l^2)}
\leq \frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\|Nx\|_{L^1(0,1;l^2)}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
From \eqref{P} and \eqref{I-P}, we conclude that
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}\label{|x|}
\|x\|_{\mathbb{X}}
&=\|Px+(I-P)x\|_{\mathbb{X}} \leq \|Px\|_{\mathbb{X}}+\|(I-P)x\|_{\mathbb{X}}\\
&\leq\frac{\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|}{\Gamma(\alpha)}A_1+\frac{\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|+1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}
\|Nx\|_{L^1(0,1;l^2)}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Moreover, by the definition of $N$ and (H1), we derive
\begin{equation}\label{NX}
\begin{aligned}
&\ \ \ \ \|Nx\|_{L^1(0,1;l^2)}\\
&= \int_0^1{\|f(s,x(s),D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(s))\|_{l^2}}dt\\
&\leq\|a_1\|_{L^1(0,1)}\|x\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}
+\|b_1\|_{L^1(0,1)}\|D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}\\
&\quad +\|a_2\|_{L^1(0,1)}\|x\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}^{\gamma_1}
+\|b_2\|_{L^1(0,1)}\|D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}^{\gamma_2}
+\|c\|_{L^1(0,1)}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Thus,
\begin{equation}\label{x}
\begin{aligned}
\|x\|_{\mathbb{X}}
&\leq \frac{\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|}{\Gamma(\alpha)}A_1+\frac{\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|+1}{\Gamma(\alpha)}
\Big(\|a_1\|_{L^1(0,1)}\|x\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}\\
&\quad +\|b_1\|_{L^1(0,1)}\|D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}\Big)
+\frac{\|I-\mathcal{M}^+\mathcal{M}\|+1}{\Gamma(\alpha)} \\
&\ \ \quad\times \Big(\|a_2\|_{L^1(0,1)}\|x\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}^{\gamma_1}
+\|b_2\|_{L^1(0,1)}\|D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}^{\gamma_2}\\
&\ \ \ \ \quad +\|c\|_{L^1(0,1)}\Big).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
It follows from \eqref{Thcondition}, \eqref{x},
$\|x\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}\leq \|x\|_{\mathbb{X}}$,
$\|D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}\leq \|x\|_{\mathbb{X}}$ and Lemma \ref{boundinequ} that there exists $M_0>0$ such that
\[
\max\{\|x\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}, \|D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x\|_{C([0,1];l^2)}\}\leq M_0,
\]
which means that $\Omega_1$ is bounded in $\mathbb{X}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-Ome2}
The set
$
\Omega_2=\{x \in\ker L:N x\in \operatorname{im}L\}
$ is bounded in $\mathbb{X}$.
\end{lemma}
\noindent
Proof\\
For any $x\in \Omega_2$, it follows from $x \in\ker L $ that
$x=et^{\alpha-1}$ for some $e\in \ker \mathcal{M}\subset l^2$,
and it follows from
$N x\in \operatorname{im}L$ that $h(N x) \in \operatorname{im}\mathcal{M}$,
where $h(N x)$ is defined by \eqref{hDef}. By hypothesis $(H_2)$, we arrive at
$\|D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(t_0)\|_{l^2}=\|e\|_{l^2}\Gamma(\alpha)\leq A_1$.
Thus, we obtain $\|x\|\leq \|e\|_{l^2}\Gamma(\alpha)\leq A_1$.
i.e., $\Omega_2$ is bounded in $\mathbb{X}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-Ome3}
Let $\Omega_3=\{x\in\ker L:-\lambda x+(1-\lambda)JQNx=\theta, \; \lambda \in [0,1]\}$ if the first part of $(H_3)$ holds,
and $\Omega_3=\{x\in \ker L:\lambda x+(1-\lambda)JQNx=\theta, \; \lambda \in [0,1]\}$ if the other part of (H3) holds.
Then, the set $\Omega_3$ is bounded in $\mathbb{X}$.
\end{lemma}
\noindent
Proof\\
If the first part of $(H_3)$ holds, that is, $\langle e, JQNe\rangle_{l^2}\leq 0$,
then for any $x\in \Omega_3$, we know that
\[
x=et^{\alpha-1}\quad \text{with } e\in \ker \mathcal{M}\text{ and }
\lambda x=(1-\lambda)JQNx.
\]
If $\lambda=0$, we have $Nx\in\ker Q= \operatorname{im}L$, then
$x\in \Omega_2$, by the argument above, we get that $\|x\| \leq A_1$.
Moreover, if $\lambda\in (0,1]$ and if $\|e\|_{l^2}>A_2$, by
(H3), we deduce that
\[
0<\lambda \|e\|^2_{l^2}=\lambda\langle e,e\rangle_{l^2}
=(1-\lambda)\langle e,JQNe\rangle_{l^2}\leq 0,
\]
which is a contradiction. Then
$\|x\|_{\mathbb{X}}=\|et^{\alpha-1}\|_{\mathbb{X}}\leq
\max\{\|e\|_{l^2}, \Gamma(\alpha)\|e\|_{l^2}\}$.
That is to say, $\Omega_3$ is bounded.\\
For the case of the second part of $(H_3)$ holds, we can obtain the result that $\Omega_3$ is bounded by a similar method as above, so we omit it.
{\it Proof of Theorem 3.1}:
We first construct an open bounded subset $\Omega$ in $\mathbb{X}$ such that
$\cup_{i = 1}^3\overline{\Omega}_i \subseteq \Omega$.
By Lemmas \ref{lemL} and \ref{lem-N-compact}, we know that $L$ is a Fredholm
operator of index zero and $N$ is $L$-compact on $\overline{\Omega}$. Thus,
it follows from Lemmas \ref{lem-Ome1}, \ref{lem-Ome2} and \ref{lem-Ome3} that
conditions (i) and (ii) of Lemma \ref{lem2.2} hold.
By the construction of $\Omega$ and the argument
above, to complete the theorem, it suffices to prove that
condition (iii) of Lemma \ref{lem2.2} is satisfied.
To this end, let
\begin{equation}
H(x,\lambda)=\pm \lambda x+(1-\lambda)JQNx,
\end{equation}
here we let the isomorphism $J:\operatorname{im}Q\to \ker L$ be the
identical operator. Since $\Omega_3\subseteq \Omega$,
$H(x,\lambda)\neq 0$ for $(x,\lambda)\in\ker L \cap
\partial \Omega \times [0,1]$, then by homotopy property of degree, we obtain
\begin{align*}
\deg \left( {JQN{|_{\ker L\cap \partial \Omega }},\Omega\cap\ker L,\theta} \right)
&= \deg \left( {H\left(
\cdot,0\right),\Omega\cap\ker L,\theta} \right)\\
&=\deg \left( {H\left( \cdot,1\right),\Omega\cap\ker L,\theta} \right)\\
&=\deg \left( {\pm Id,\Omega\cap\ker L,\theta} \right)=\pm 1\neq 0.
\end{align*}
Thus (H3) of Lemma \ref{lem2.2} is fulfilled and Theorem
\ref{mainresults} is proved.
\section{Example}
In this section, we shall present an example to illustrate our main result
in $l^2$.
Consider the following system with $\operatorname{dim}\ker L=k$,
$k=1,2,3,\dots$ in $l^2$.
\begin{equation}\label{exampleker2}
\begin{gathered}
\begin{aligned}
&D_{0^+}^{3/2} \begin{pmatrix}
x_1(t)\\
x_2(t)\\
x_3(t)\\
x_4(t)\\
\vdots
\end{pmatrix} \\
&=\frac{1}{10} \begin{pmatrix}
\begin{cases}
1, &\text{if } \|D_{0^+}^{1/2}x(t)\|_{l^2}< 1\\
D_{0^+}^{1/2}x_1(t)+[D_{0^+}^{1/2}x_1(t)]^{-1}-1,
&\text{if } \|D_{0^+}^{1/2}x(t)\|_{l^2}\geq 1
\end{cases} \\
\big(x_2(t)+D_{0^+}^{1/2}x_2(t)\big)/2\\
\big(x_3(t)+D_{0^+}^{1/2}x_3(t)\big)/2^2\\
\big(x_4(t)+D_{0^+}^{1/2}x_4(t)\big)/2^3\\
\vdots
\end{pmatrix}
\end{aligned}\\
I_{0^+}^{\frac{1}{2}}x_i(0)=0, \quad i=1,2,\dots\\
x(1)=Ax(1/4).
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
For all $t\in[0, 1]$, let
$u=(x_1,x_2,x_3,\dots)^{\top}$, $v=(y_1,y_2,y_3,\dots)^{\top}\in l^2$ and
$f=(f_1,f_2,\dots)^{\top}$ with
\[
f_1(t,u,v)=\begin{cases}
1/10, &\text{if } \|v\|_{l^2}< 1,\\
(y_1+y_1^{-1}-1)/10, &\text{if } \|v\|_{l^2}\geq 1,
\end{cases}
\]
$f_i(t,u,v)=\frac{1}{5}\frac{x_i+y_i}{2^{i}}$, $i=2,3,4,\dots$.
Moreover,
\begin{equation}\label{Adef2x2x}
A=\begin{bmatrix}
{B_1}&0&{0}&{0}&{0}&{0}&\dots\\ {0}&{B_2}&0&{0}&{0}&{0}&\dots\\
\vdots& &\ddots& & & &\vdots\\
{0}&0&{0}&{B_k}&{0}&{0}&{\dots}\\
{0}&0&{0}&{0}&{0}&{0}&{\dots}\\{0}&0&{0}&{0}&{0}&{0}&{\dots}
\\ \vdots& & & & & &\ddots
\end{bmatrix}
\quad\text{with}\quad
B_i=\begin{bmatrix} {\frac{3}{2}}&{0}&{0}\\ {0}&{\frac{7}{4}}&{0}\\{0}&{0}&{2}
\end{bmatrix},
\end{equation}
and we denote
\[\mathcal{M}_i=I-\xi^{\frac{1}{2}}B_i=
\begin{pmatrix}
\frac{1}{4}&0&0\\
0&\frac{1}{8}&0\\
0&0&0
\end{pmatrix},
\]
then
\[
\mathcal{M}^+_i=
\begin{pmatrix}
4&0&0\\
0&8&0\\
0&0&0
\end{pmatrix},
\]
$i=1,2,\dots,k$, $k\in \mathbf{N}$.
Obviously, $\operatorname{dim}\ker (I_3-\xi^{\alpha-1}B_i)=\operatorname{dim}\ker (I_3-B_i/2)=1$,
$i=1,2,\dots$, where $I_3$ is the $3\times 3$ identity matrix.
Then $\operatorname{dim}\ker (I-A\xi^{\alpha-1})=k$,
$k\in \mathbf{N}$ and the problem \eqref{exampleker2},
with $A$ and $f$ defined above, has one solution if and only if problem
\eqref{model-equ} admits one solution.
Checking (H1) of Theorem \ref{mainresults}:
For some $r\in \mathbb{R}$,
$\Omega=\{(u,v)\in l^2\times l^2:
\|u\|_{l^2}\leq r, \|v\|_{l^2}\leq r\}$, let
$\varphi_\Omega(t)=\frac{1}{10}[(r+1/r+1)^2+\frac{4r^2}{3}]^{1/2}\in L^1[0,1]$.
Letting
\begin{equation}\label{abex2e}
a_1(t)=b_1(t)=\frac{1}{5\sqrt{3}},\quad
a_2(t)=b_2(t)=0 , \quad c(t)=\frac{r+1/r+1}{10},
\end{equation}
condition (H1) is satisfied.
Checking (H2) of Theorem \ref{mainresults}:
From the definition of $f$ it follows that $f_1>1/10>0$ when
$ \|D_{0^+}^{1/2}x(t)\|_{l^2}> 1$.
This,
\[
(B_1\xi^{\alpha}-I)\begin{pmatrix}
{f_1}\\
{f_2}\\
{f_3}
\end{pmatrix}
=\begin{bmatrix}
{-13/16}&{0}&{0}\\
{0}&{-25/32}&{0}\\
{0}&{0}&{-3/4}
\end{bmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
{f_1}\\
{f_2}\\
{f_3}
\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}
-\frac{13}{16}f_1\\
-\frac{25}{32}f_2\\
-\frac{3}{4}f_3
\end{pmatrix},
\]
and $\operatorname{im} (\mathcal{M})
=\{(2\tau_1,\tau_1,0,2\tau_2,\tau_2,0,2\tau_3,\tau_3,0\dots)^{\top}:\tau_{i}\in \mathbb{R},
i=1,2,\dots\}$ implies that
condition (H2) is satisfied.
Checking (H3) of Theorem \ref{mainresults}:
Since $\operatorname{dim}\ker (\mathcal{M})=k$, $k\in \mathbf{N}$,
for any $e\in l^2$ satisfying $e=\xi^{\alpha-1}Ae$, $e$ can be expressed as
$e=e_1+e_2+\dots+e_k$, with
\[
e_i=\sigma_{i}(\varepsilon_{3i}), \quad \sigma_{i} \in \mathbb{R},\quad
i=1,2,\dots,k,j=1,2,
\]
where $\varepsilon_j=( {0,0, \dots 0,\mathop 1_{{\rm{j}} - th}, 0, 0,\dots }
)^{\top}\in l^2$ is a vector with all elements equaling to 0 except the
$j$-th equaling to 1, $j=1,2,\dots$, that is
\[
e=(0,0,\sigma_{1},0,0,\sigma_{2},0,0,\sigma_3,\cdots)^{\top}.
\]
In addition, for any $y\in \mathbb{Y}$, by \eqref{Q}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{Qexample11}
Qy(t)=\frac{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(2\alpha)}{\xi^\alpha-1}
(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)h(y)t^{\alpha-1}=-\frac{8\sqrt{\pi}}{7}(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)h(y)t^{\alpha-1},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
h(y)= \frac{A}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^{1/4}(\frac{1}{4}-s)^{\alpha-1}y(s)ds
-\frac{I}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^1(1-s)^{\alpha-1}y(s)ds.
\end{equation}
By \eqref{N}, let $d=t^{1/2}+\frac{\sqrt{\pi}}{2}$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{Nct1ex11}
N(et^{1/2})\\
=\frac{1}{10} \begin{cases}
\Big(1,0, \frac{d\sigma_{1}}{2^2},0,0,\frac{d\sigma_{2}}{2^{5}},0,0,\frac{d\sigma_3}{2^8},\dots,0,0,\frac{d\sigma_i}{2^{3i-1}}\dots\Big)^\top,\\
\quad\text{if } |\sigma_{11}|< 1,\; 2\leq i\leq k;\\[4pt]
\Big(-1, 0, \frac{d\sigma_{1}}{2^2},0,0,\frac{d\sigma_{2}}{2^{5}},0,0,\frac{d\sigma_3}{2^8},\dots,0,0,\frac{d\sigma_i}{2^{3i-1}}\dots\Big)^\top_,\\
\quad\text{if }|\sigma_{11}|\geq 1,\; 2\leq i\leq k.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
For $|\sigma_{11}|>1$, let $\hat{d}=\frac{\pi}{128}+\frac{\sqrt{\pi}}{24}$, $\tilde{d}=\frac{\pi}{8}+\frac{\sqrt{\pi}}{3}$, and let $A_2=1$, we have
\begin{align*}
\int_0^{1/4}(1/4-s)^{1/2}(Nes^{1/2})ds=\frac{1}{10}\Big(
-\frac{1}{12},0,\frac{\hat{d}\sigma_1}{2^2},0,0,\frac{\hat{d}\sigma_2}{2^5},0,0,\frac{\hat{d}\sigma_3}{2^8},0,0,\frac{\hat{d}\sigma_4}{2^{11}},
\cdots\Big)^{\top},
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
\int_0^{1}(1-s)^{1/2}(Nes^{1/2})ds=\frac{1}{10}\Big(
-\frac{3}{2},0,\frac{\tilde{d}\sigma_1}{2^2},0,0,\frac{\tilde{d}\sigma_2}{2^5},0,0,\frac{\tilde{d}\sigma_3}{2^8},0,0,\frac{\tilde{d}\sigma_4}{2^{11}},
\cdots\Big)^{\top},
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
h(Net^{1/2})&=\frac{A}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^{1/4}(1/4-s)^{1/2}Nes^{1/2}ds-\frac{I}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\int_0^1(1-s)^{1/2}Nes^{1/2}ds\\
=\frac{1}{5\sqrt{\pi}}&\Big(
\frac{11}{8},0,\frac{(2\hat{d}-\tilde{d})\sigma_1}{2^2},0,0,\frac{(2\hat{d}-\tilde{d})\sigma_2}{2^5},0,0,\frac{(2\hat{d}-\tilde{d})\sigma_3}{2^8},
0,0,\frac{(2\hat{d}-\tilde{d})\sigma_4}{2^{11}},\cdots
\Big)^{\top}.
\end{align*}
Then
\begin{align*}
Q(Net^{1/2})
=&-\frac{8\sqrt{\pi}t^{1/2}}{7}(I-\mathcal{M}\mathcal{M}^+)h(Net^{1/2})\\
=&-\frac{8t^{1/2}}{35}\Big(
0,0,\frac{(2\hat{d}-\tilde{d})\sigma_1}{2^2},0,0,\frac{(2\hat{d}-\tilde{d})\sigma_2}{2^5},0,0,\frac{(2\hat{d}-\tilde{d})\sigma_3}{2^8},
0,0,\frac{(2\hat{d}-\tilde{d})\sigma_4}{2^{11}},
\cdots\Big)^\top,
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
\langle e,QNet^{1/2}\rangle
=&-\frac{8t^{1/2}}{35}
\Big(\frac{(2\hat{d}-\tilde{d})}{2^2}\sigma_1^2+\frac{(2\hat{d}-\tilde{d})}{2^5}\sigma_2^2+\frac{(2\hat{d}-\tilde{d})}{2^8}\sigma_3^2
+\frac{(2\hat{d}-\tilde{d})}{2^{11}}\sigma_4^2+\cdots
\Big)>0.\\
\end{align*}
Therefore, \eqref{exampleker2} admits at least one solution.
\begin{remark}
By a simply calculation of $B$, we can get
\[
B^2=
\begin{pmatrix}
\frac{9}{4}&0&0\\
0&\frac{49}{16}&0\\
0&0&4
\end{pmatrix},
\]
from which, we can see that $A$ does not satisfies the conditions (A1) and (A2), so the result in \cite{Zhou2} is no longer applicable. Thus, our result is more general than the one in \cite{Zhou2}.
\end{remark}
\section{Concluding remarks}
In this paper, we consider the fractional BVPs at resonance in $l^2$. The dimension of the kernel of the fractional differential operator with the boundary conditions be any positive integer.
We remove the restricted conditions $A^2\xi^{2\alpha-2}=A\xi^{\alpha-1}$ and $A^2\xi^{2\alpha-2}=I$
on the operator $A$, which have been used in \cite{Zhou2}.
Our result can also be easily generalized to other fractional BVPs, for instance,
\begin{equation}\label{consys}
\begin{gathered}
D_{0^+}^{\alpha}x(t)=f(t,x(t),D_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(t)), {\kern 5pt}1<\alpha\leq 2,{\kern 5pt} t\in (0,1),\\
x(0)=\theta, D_{0^+ }^{\alpha -1}x(1)=AD_{0^+}^{\alpha-1}x(\xi),
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where the bounded linear operator $A\in \mathcal{L}(l^2)$ satisfies $1\leq\operatorname{dim}\ker (I-A)<\infty$ which leads this system is resonant. Moreover, notice that $\mathbb{R}^n$ is the closed space of $l^2$,
taking $\alpha=2$, the system \eqref{consys} becomes the system of second order differential equations, which can be regarded as a generalization results in \cite{PhungTruong} and \cite{Phung2}.
\section*{Acknowledgements} This work is supported by "the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities" (No. CUSF-DH-D-2017083).
|
\section*{Introduction}
One of the main achievements in the algebraic $K$-theory of rings is the solution of the excision problem, first rationally by Suslin--Wodzicki \cite{SuslinWod} and later integrally by Suslin \cite{Suslin}: For a two-sided ideal $I$ in a unital ring $A$ one defines the relative $K$-theory spectrum $K(A,I)$ as the homotopy fibre of the map of $K$-theory spectra $K(A) \to K(A/I)$, so that its homotopy groups $K_{*}(A,I)$ fit in a long exact sequence
\[
\dots \to K_{i}(A,I) \to K_{i}(A) \to K_{i}(A/I) \to K_{i-1}(A,I) \to \dots
\]
If $I$ is a not necessarily unital ring, one defines $K_{*}(I) := K_{*}(\mathbf{Z} \ltimes I, I)$ where $\mathbf{Z} \ltimes I$ is the unitalization of $I$.
For every unital ring $A$ containing $I$ as a two-sided ideal there is a canonical map $\mathbf{Z} \ltimes I \to A$. It induces a map $K_{*}(I) \to K_{*}(A,I)$ and one says that $I$ satisfies excision in algebraic $K$-theory if this map is an isomorphism for all such $A$.
Equivalently, $I$ satisfies excision in algebraic $K$-theory if, for every ring $A$ containing $I$ as a two-sided ideal and any ring homomorphism $A \to B$ sending $I$ isomorphically onto an ideal of $B$, the pullback square of rings
\begin{equation} \label{diag:Milnor-square}
\begin{split}
\[email protected]@R-0.3cm{
A \ar[r] \ar[d] & A' \ar[d] \\
B \ar[r] & B'
}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $A' = A/I$, $B' = B/I$
induces a homotopy cartesian square of non-connective $K$-theory spectra
\begin{equation} \label{diag:K-spectra-square}
\begin{split}
\[email protected]@R-0.3cm{
K(A) \ar[r] \ar[d] & K(A') \ar[d] \\
K(B) \ar[r] & K(B').
}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
A ring $I$ is called \emph{Tor-unital} if $\Tor^{\mathbf{Z} \ltimes I}_{i}(\mathbf{Z},\mathbf{Z}) = 0$ for all $i > 0$.
Every unital ring is Tor-unital, since if $I$ is unital, then $\mathbf{Z} \ltimes I \cong \mathbf{Z} \times I$ and the projection to $\mathbf{Z}$ is flat.
\begin{thm}[Suslin]\label{thm:thm1}
If $I$ is Tor-unital, then $I$ satisfies excision in algebraic $K$-theory.
\end{thm}
In fact, both statements are equivalent \cite[Thm.~A]{Suslin}.
For $\mathbf{Q}$-algebras, this was proven before by Suslin and Wodzicki \cite[Thm.~A]{SuslinWod}. Wodzicki \cite{Wodzicki} gives many examples of Tor-unital $\mathbf{Q}$-algebras, for instance all $C^{*}$-algebras. These results are the main ingredients in the proof of Karoubi's conjecture about algebraic and topological $K$-theory of stable $C^{*}$-algebras in \cite[Thm.~10.9]{SuslinWod}.
On the other hand, by work of Morrow \cite{Morrow} ideals $I$ in commutative noetherian rings are pro-Tor-unital in the sense that the pro-groups $\{ \Tor_{i}^{\mathbf{Z} \ltimes I^{n}}(\mathbf{Z},\mathbf{Z})\}_{n}$ vanish for all $i > 0$.
Suslin's proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:thm1}
uses the description of algebraic $K$-theory in terms of Quillen's plus-construction
and relies on a careful study of the homology of affine groups.
By completely different methods we prove the following generalization of Theorem~\ref{thm:thm1}:
\begin{thm}\label{thm:thm2}
Assume that \eqref{diag:Milnor-square} is a homotopy pullback square of ring spectra such that the multiplication map $A' \otimes_{A} A' \to A'$ is an equivalence. Then the square \eqref{diag:K-spectra-square} of non-connective $K$-theory spectra is homotopy cartesian.
\end{thm}
Here the tensor denotes the derived tensor product, and $K$-theory is the non-connective $K$-theory of perfect modules.
\begin{ex}
\label{ex:Suslin-Nisnevich}
Assume that \eqref{diag:Milnor-square} is a diagram of discrete rings. When viewed as a diagram of ring spectra,
this is a homotopy pullback square if and only if the induced sequence of abelian groups
\[
0 \to A \to A' \oplus B \to B' \to 0
\]
is exact. The multiplication map $A' \otimes_{A} A' \to A'$ is an equivalence if and only if $\Tor^{A}_{i}(A', A') = 0$ for all $i > 0$ and the ordinary tensor product of $A'$ with itself over $A$ is isomorphic to $A'$ via the multiplication.
There are two basic cases where both conditions are satisfied: The first one is that $A' = A/I$ for a Tor-unital two-sided ideal $I$ in $A$ (see Example~\ref{ex:classical-Milnor}). This gives Suslin's result.
The second one is that \eqref{diag:Milnor-square} is an elementary affine Nisnevich square, i.e.,
all rings are commutative, $A' = A[f^{-1}]$ is a localization of $A$, $A \to B$ is an \'etale map inducing an isomorphism $A/(f) \cong B/(f)$, and $B' = B[f^{-1}]$ (see Example~\ref{ex:Nisnevich}).
Note that by \cite[Prop.~2.3.2]{AHW} the family of coverings of the form $\{\Spec(A[f^{-1}]) \to \Spec(A), \Spec(B) \to \Spec(A) \}$
generate the Nisnevich topology on the category of affine schemes (of finite presentation over some base).
Thus Theorem~\ref{thm:thm2} also implies Nisnevich descent for the algebraic $K$-theory of affine schemes.
\end{ex}
In general, the condition that $A' \otimes_{A} A' \to A'$ be an equivalence is equivalent to $\LMod(A) \to \LMod(A')$ being a localization, where $\LMod$ denotes the $\infty$-category of left modules in spectra.
In particular, under this condition $\LMod(A')$ is a Verdier quotient of $\LMod(A)$.
The usual method that is used, for example, to produce localization sequences in $K$-theory (see \cite[\S3]{Schlichting} for an overview, \cite[Thm.~0.5]{Neeman-Ranicki} for the case of a non-commutative localization where a similar condition on Tor-groups appears),
would be to apply Neeman's generalization of Thomason's localization theorem \cite[Thm.~2.1]{Neeman-connection} in order to deduce that also
the induced functor on the subcategories of compact objects, which are precisely the perfect modules, $\Perf(A) \to \Perf(A')$ is a Verdier quotient.
However, Neeman's theorem does not apply here, since the kernel of $\LMod(A) \to \LMod(A')$ need not be compactly generated. Indeed, there is an example by Keller \cite[\S2]{Keller} of a ring map $A \to A'$ satisfying the hypotheses of Theorem~\ref{thm:thm2}, where this kernel has no non-zero compact objects at all and $\Perf(A')$ is not a Verdier quotient of $\Perf(A)$.
Instead, under the conditions of Theorem~\ref{thm:thm2} we prove a derived version of Milnor patching (Theorem~\ref{thm:pullback-modules-tor-unital-case}) saying that \eqref{diag:Milnor-square} induces a pullback diagram of $\infty$-categories of left modules, i.e.,
\[
\LMod(A) \simeq \LMod(A') \times_{\LMod(B')} \LMod(B).
\]
Its proof is inspired by a similar patching result for connective modules over connective ring spectra due to Lurie \cite[Thm.~16.2.0.2]{sag}.
We use this to show that $\LMod(A)$ can be embedded as a full subcategory in the lax pullback $\LMod(A') \laxtimes{\LMod(B')} \LMod(B)$ (see Section~\ref{section1}) and to identify the Verdier quotient with $\LMod(B')$.
Now the Thomason--Neeman theorem applies and gives
an exact sequence of small stable $\infty$-categories
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:exact-sequence-perfect-modules}
\Perf(A) \xrightarrow{i} \Perf(A') \laxtimes{\Perf(B')} \Perf(B) \xrightarrow{\pi} \Perf(B'),
\end{equation}
i.e., the composite $\pi\circ i$ is zero and the induced functor from the Verdier quotient of the middle term by $\Perf(A)$ to
$\Perf(B')$ is an equivalence up to idempotent completion.
This
implies the assertion of Theorem~\ref{thm:thm2} not only for algebraic $K$-theory, but for any invariant which can be defined for small stable $\infty$-categories and which sends exact sequences of such to fibre sequences.
In fact, in Section~\ref{section1} we prove the existence of the analog of the exact sequence~\eqref{eq:exact-sequence-perfect-modules} for any so-called excisive square of small stable $\infty$-categories (Theorem~\ref{thm:main-theorem-new}). In Section~\ref{section2} we then prove that any square of ring spectra satisfying the hypotheses of Theorem~\ref{thm:thm2} yields an excisive square of $\infty$-categories of perfect modules (see Theorem~\ref{thm:excisive-square-ring-spectra}). These are the two main results of the paper.
\begin{rem}
The failure of excision in $K$-theory is measured in (topological) cyclic homology: Corti{\~n}as \cite{Cortinas-Obstruction} proved
that the fibre of the rational Goodwillie--Jones Chern character from rational algebraic $K$-theory to negative cyclic homology satisfies excision, i.e., sends the pullback square of rings \eqref{diag:Milnor-square} with $B \to B'$ surjective to a homotopy pullback square of spectra without any further condition. Geisser and Hesselholt \cite{GeisserHesselholt} proved the analogous result with finite coefficients, replacing the Goodwillie--Jones Chern character by the cyclotomic trace map from $K$-theory to topological cyclic homology.
Both use pro versions of the results of Suslin and Wodzicki.
Building on these results, Dundas and Kittang \cite{Dundas-Kittang-1, Dundas-Kittang-2} prove that the fibre of the cyclotomic trace satisfies excision also for connective ring spectra, and with integral coefficients (under the technical assumption that both, $\pi_{0}(B) \to \pi_{0}(B')$ and $\pi_{0}(A') \to \pi_{0}(B')$ are surjective).
In this general situation, i.e., without assuming any Tor-unitality condition, one still has the sequence \eqref{eq:exact-sequence-perfect-modules}, but the induced functor $f$ from the Verdier quotient to $\Perf(B')$ need not be an equivalence up to idempotent completion.
It would therefore be interesting to find conditions on an invariant $E$ that guarantee that $E(f)$ is still an equivalence.\footnote{We give a sufficient condition in a forthcoming article with Markus Land: it suffices that the natural map $E(C) \to E(\pi_{0}(C))$ is an equivalence for any connective $E_{1}$-ring spectrum $C$.}
From the results mentioned above we know that $E(f)$ is an equivalence for $E$ the fibre of the cyclotomic trace.
\end{rem}
We use $\infty$-categorical language. More concretely, we use the model of quasi-categories, which are the fibrant objects for the Joyal model structure on simplicial sets, as developed by Joyal \cite{Joyal} and Lurie in his books \cite{htt,halg,sag}.
\smallskip
\noindent\textit{Acknowledgements.}
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the referee for the efforts taken to improve both the exposition and the results of this paper.
The referee gave a hint which led to a simplification of the proof of the main result of the first version of this paper, and also suggested to formulate the general categorical Theorem~\ref{thm:excisive-square} in terms of excisive squares and to deduce the excision result via Theorem~\ref{thm:excisive-square-ring-spectra}.
I would also like to thank Justin Noel and Daniel Sch{\"a}ppi for discussions about (lax) pullbacks of $\infty$-categories.%
\section{Pullbacks and exact sequences of stable $\infty$-categories}
\label{section1}
In this section, we discuss the pullback and the lax pullback of a diagram $A \to C \leftarrow B$ of $\infty$-categories. In the stable case, we relate these by exact sequences.
We further prove our first main result (Theorem~\ref{thm:excisive-square}) saying that any excisive square of small stable $\infty$-categories (see Definition~\ref{dfn:excisive-square}) yields a pullback square upon applying any localizing invariant.
Let $I = \Delta[1] \in \cat{sSet}$ be the standard simplicial 1-simplex. For any $\infty$-category $C$, we denote by $C^{I} = \mathrm{Fun}(I,C)$ the arrow category of $C$. The inclusion $\{0,1\} \subseteq I$ induces the source and target maps $s,t\colon C^{I} \to C$.
Consider a diagram of $\infty$-categories
\begin{equation}\label{diag:diag1}\begin{split}
\xymatrix{
& B \ar[d]^{q}\\
A \ar[r]^{p} & C.
}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{dfn}
The \emph{lax pullback} $A \laxtimes{C} B$ of \eqref{diag:diag1} is defined
via the pullback diagram
\begin{equation}\label{diag:diag-lax-pullback}
\begin{split}
\xymatrix{
A \laxtimes{C} B \ar[d]_{(\mathrm{pr}_{1},\mathrm{pr}_{2})} \ar[r]^{\mathrm{pr}_{3}} & C^{I} \ar[d]^{(s,t)} \\
A\times B \ar[r]^{p \times q} & C\times C
}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
in simplicial sets.
\end{dfn}
By \cite[Ch.~5, Thm.~A]{Joyal} the map $C^{I} \xrightarrow{(s,t)} C \times C$ is a categorical fibration, i.e., a fibration in the Joyal model structure. Since the lower and upper right corners in \eqref{diag:diag-lax-pullback} are $\infty$-categories, this implies that $A \laxtimes{C} B$ is indeed an $\infty$-category, and that \eqref{diag:diag-lax-pullback} is homotopy cartesian with respect to the Joyal model structure.
\begin{rem}\label{rem:mapping-spaces}
The objects of $A \laxtimes{C} B$ are triples of the form $(a,b, g \colon p(a) \to q(b))$ where $a$, $b$ are objects of $A$, $B$ respectively and $g$ is a morphism $p(a) \to q(b)$ in $C$.
If $(a,b,g)$ and $(a',b',g')$ are two objects of $A \laxtimes{C} B$, the mapping space between these sits in a homotopy cartesian diagram of spaces
\[
\xymatrix{
\Map( (a,b,g), (a',b',g') ) \ar[r] \ar[d] & \Map_{C^{I}}(g,g') \ar[d] \\
\Map_{A}(a,a') \times \Map_{B}(b,b') \ar[r] & \Map_{C}( p(a), p(a') ) \times \Map_{C}( q(b), q(b') ).
}
\]
Indeed, using Lurie's $\Hom^{\mathrm{R}}$-model for the mapping spaces \cite[\S 1.2.2]{htt} gives a cartesian diagram of simplicial sets in which the right vertical map is a Kan fibration by \cite[Lemma 2.4.4.1]{htt}.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}
Denote by $C^{(I)} \subseteq C^{I}$ the full subcategory spanned by the equivalences in $C$. It follows from \cite[Prop.~5.17]{Joyal} that the pullback of the diagram
\[
\xymatrix{
& C^{(I)} \ar[d]^{(s,t)} \\
A \times B \ar[r]^{p\times q} & C \times C
}
\]
in simplicial sets models the homotopy pullback of $\infty$-categories $A \times_{C} B$. In particular, we can identify $A \times_{C} B$ with the full subcategory of $A \laxtimes{C} B$ spanned by those objects $(a,b,g)$ where $g$ is an equivalence in $C$.
\end{rem}
\begin{lemma}\phantomsection
\label{lem:stability-of-pullbacks}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Let $K$ be a simplicial set and $\delta\colon K \to A \laxtimes{C} B$ a diagram. If the compositions of $\delta$ with the projections to $A$ and $B$ admit colimits and these colimits are preserved by $p$ and $q$ respectively, then $\delta$ admits a colimit, which is preserved by the projections to $A$ and $B$.
The same statement holds for diagrams in $A \times_{C} B$.
\item If $A$ and $B$ are idempotent complete, then $A \laxtimes{C} B$ and $A \times_{C} B$ are idempotent complete.
\item If $A$, $B$, and $C$ are presentable and $p$ and $q$ commute with colimits, then both $\infty$-categories $A \laxtimes{C} B$ and $A \times_{C} B$ are presentable. Moreover, a functor from a presentable $\infty$-category $D$ to $A \times_{C} B$ or $A \laxtimes{C} B$ preserves colimits if and only if the compositions with the projections to $A$ and $B$ do.
\item If $A$, $B$, and $C$ are stable, and $p$ and $q$ are exact, then both $\infty$-categories $A \laxtimes{C} B$ and $A \times_{C} B$ are stable.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
For the definition of a presentable $\infty$-category see \cite[Def.~5.5.0.1]{htt}, for that of an idempotent complete $\infty$-category \cite[\S4.4.5]{htt}, and for that of a stable $\infty$-category \cite[Def.~1.1.1.9]{halg}.
\begin{proof}
(i) The assumptions and \cite[Prop.~5.1.2.2]{htt} (applied to the projection $C \times I \to I$) imply that the composition of $\delta$ with the projection to $C^{I}$ also admits a colimit. Now the claim follows from \cite[Lemmas~5.4.5.4, 5.4.5.2]{htt}.
(ii) Let $\Idem$ be the nerve of the 1-category with a single object $X$ and $\Hom(X,X) = \{ \mathrm{id}_{X}, e\}$, where $e \circ e = e$. An $\infty$-category $D$ is idempotent complete if and only if any diagram $\Idem \to D$ admits a colimit.\footnote{This is Cor.~4.4.5.15 in the 2017 version of HTT, available at the author's homepage.} It follows from \cite[Prop.~4.4.5.12, Lemma~4.3.2.13]{htt} that every functor between $\infty$-categories $D \to D'$ preserves colimits of diagrams indexed by $\Idem$. Hence the claim follows from part (i).
By construction of the lax pullback, it suffices to check the remaining assertions for pullbacks and functor categories.
(iii) For the functor category see \cite[Prop.~5.5.3.6, Cor.~5.1.2.3]{htt} and for the pullback \cite[Prop.~5.5.3.12]{htt}.
(iv) See \cite[Prop.~1.1.3.1]{halg} for the functor category, \cite[Prop.\ 1.1.4.2]{halg} for the pullback.
\end{proof}
From now on, we will mainly be concerned with stable $\infty$-categories. Recall that by \cite[Thm.~1.1.2.14]{halg} the homotopy category $\Ho(A)$ of a stable $\infty$-category $A$ is a triangulated category.
\begin{recollection} \label{recollection}
We recall the $\infty$-categorical version of Verdier quotients. For a detailed discussion see \cite[\S 5]{Blumberg-Tabuada-Gepner}.
Let $\Pr^{\mathrm{L}}_{\mathrm{st}}$ denote the $\infty$-category of presentable stable $\infty$-categories and left adjoint (equivalently, colimit preserving) functors, and let $\mathrm{Cat}^{\mathrm{ex}}_{\infty}$ be the $\infty$-category of small stable $\infty$-categories and exact functors.
Both admit small colimits.
Given a fully faithful functor $A \to B$ in either of these, $B/A$ denotes its cofibre. By \cite[Prop.~5.9, 5.14]{Blumberg-Tabuada-Gepner} the functor $B \to B/A$ induces an equivalence of the Verdier quotient $\Ho(B) / \Ho(A)$ with $\Ho(B/A)$.
A sequence $A \to B \to C$ in $\Pr^{\mathrm{L}}_{\mathrm{st}}$ or $\mathrm{Cat}^{\mathrm{ex}}_{\infty}$ is called \emph{exact} if the composite is zero, $A \to B$ is fully faithful, and the induced map $B/A \to C$ is an equivalence after idempotent completion.
It follows from \cite[Prop.~5.10]{Blumberg-Tabuada-Gepner} and the above that $A \to B \to C$ is exact if and only $\Ho(A) \to \Ho(B) \to \Ho(C)$ is exact (up to factors) in the sense of triangulated categories (see e.g.~\cite[Def.~3.1.10]{Schlichting}).
If $C$ is a localization of $B$, i.e., the functor $B \to C$ has a fully faithful right adjoint, and $A \to B$ induces an equivalence of $A$ with the kernel of $B \to C$, i.e., the full subcategory of objects of $B$ that map to a zero object in $C$, then $A \to B \to C$ is exact.
\end{recollection}
For the remainder of this section, we
assume that \eqref{diag:diag1} is a diagram of stable $\infty$-categories and exact functors.
The pair of functors $B \to A \times B$, $b \mapsto (0,b)$, and $B \to C^{I}$, $b \mapsto ( 0 \to q(b) )$, induces a functor $r\colon B \to A \laxtimes{C} B$.
Similarly, the functors $A \to A \times B$, $a \mapsto (a,0)$, and $A \to C^{I}$, $a \mapsto ( p(a) \to 0 )$, induce a functor $s \colon A \to A \laxtimes{C} B$.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:split-exact-sequence}
Assume that \eqref{diag:diag1} is a diagram of stable $\infty$-categories and exact functors. We have a split exact sequence
\[
\xymatrix@1{
B \ar[r]_-{r} & A \laxtimes{C} B \ar[r]_-{\mathrm{pr}_{1}} \ar@/_{1pc}/[l]_-{\mathrm{pr}_{2}} & A , \ar@/_{1pc}/[l]_-{s}
}
\]
i.e., the sequence is exact, $\mathrm{pr}_{2}$ and $s$ are right adjoints of $r$, $\mathrm{pr}_{1}$, respectively, and $\mathrm{id}_{B} \simeq \mathrm{pr}_{2}\circ r $, $\mathrm{pr}_{1} \circ s \simeq \mathrm{id}_{A}$ via unit and counit, respectively.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
By construction, we have $\mathrm{id}_{B} = \mathrm{pr}_{2} \circ r$ and we claim that this is a unit transformation for the desired adjunction (see \cite[Prop.~5.2.2.8]{htt}). That is, we have to show that for any object $b$ in $B$ and $(a',b',g') $ in $A \laxtimes{C} B$
the map $\Map( r(b), (a', b', g') ) \to \Map(b, b') $ induced by $\mathrm{pr}_{2}$ is an equivalence. This map is the second component of the left vertical map in the diagram
\[
\xymatrix{
\Map( r(b) , (a',b',g') ) \ar[r] \ar[d] & \Map( (0 \to q(b) ),g') \ar[d] \\
\Map(0,a') \times \Map(b,b') \ar[r] & \Map( 0 , p(a') ) \times \Map( q(b), q(b') ).
}
\]
By Remark \ref{rem:mapping-spaces} this diagram is homotopy cartesian.
Since
the functor $C \to C^{I}$, $c \mapsto (0 \to c)$, is a left adjoint of $t\colon C^{I} \to C$, the right vertical map is an equivalence. Hence the left vertical map is an equivalence (use that $\Map(0,a')$ and $\Map(0,p(a'))$ are contractible).
Similarly, one shows that $s$ is a right adjoint of $\mathrm{pr}_{1}$. Since the counit $\mathrm{pr}_{1}\circ s \to \mathrm{id}_{A}$ is an equivalence, $s$ is fully faithful. Since moreover $r$ induces an equivalence of $B$ with the kernel of $\mathrm{pr}_{1}$, the sequence in the statement of the lemma is exact by Recollection~\ref{recollection}.
\end{proof}
We let $\pi$ be the composition of functors $A \laxtimes{C} B \xrightarrow{\mathrm{pr}_{3} } C^{I} \xrightarrow{\mathrm{Cone}} C$, where
$\mathrm{Cone}\colon C^{I} \to C$ sends a morphism in $C$ to its cofibre.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:exact-sequence-of-presentable-cats}
Assume that \eqref{diag:diag1} is a diagram of stable $\infty$-categories and exact functors.
Assume furthermore that $q\colon B \to C$ admits a fully faithful right adjoint $v \colon C \to B$.
Then the composite
\[
\rho\colon C \xrightarrow{v} B \xrightarrow{r} A \laxtimes{C} B
\]
is a fully faithful right adjoint of $\pi$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Since $v$ is fully faithful by assumption, and $r$ is fully faithful by Proposition~\ref{prop:split-exact-sequence}, the functor $\rho$ is fully faithful.
The functor $\mathrm{Cone}\colon C^{I} \to C$ has the right adjoint $\beta$ mapping $c$ to $(0 \to c)$ \cite[Rem.~1.1.1.8]{halg}.
By the construction of $r$ we have a canonical equivalence $\mathrm{pr}_{3} \circ r \simeq \beta \circ q$. Hence the counit of the adjoint pair $(\mathrm{Cone},\beta)$ induces a natural transformation $\pi \circ r = \mathrm{Cone} \circ \mathrm{pr}_{3} \circ r \simeq \mathrm{Cone} \circ \beta \circ q \to q$ and hence $\pi \circ r \circ v \to q \circ v$. Composing with the counit of the adjoint pair $(q,v)$ we get a natural transformation $\eta\colon \pi \circ \rho = \pi \circ r \circ v \to \mathrm{id}_{C}$. We claim that $\eta$ is a counit transformation for the desired adjunction. This will imply the claim by \cite[Prop.~5.2.2.8]{htt}. We thus have to show that the composition
\begin{equation}\label{eq:counit-composition}
\Map( (a,b,g), \rho(c) ) \xrightarrow{\pi} \Map( \pi((a,b,g)), \pi(\rho(c)) ) \xrightarrow{\eta} \Map(\pi((a,b,g)), c)
\end{equation}
is an equivalence for every object $(a,b,g)$ in $A \laxtimes{C} B$ and any object $c$ in $C$.
From Remark~\ref{rem:mapping-spaces} we have a homotopy pullback square of spaces
\begin{equation}\label{diag:dddd}\begin{split}
\xymatrix{
\Map( (a,b,g) , \rho(c) ) \ar[r]^{\mathrm{pr}_{3}} \ar[d] & \Map( g, (0 \to q(v(c))) ) \ar[d] \\
\Map( a,0) \times \Map(b, v(c) ) \ar[r] & \Map(p(a),0 ) \times \Map( q(b), q(v(c)) ).
}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Since $v$ is fully faithful, $q(v(c)) \simeq c$ and the lower horizontal map is an equivalence by adjunction.
Hence the upper horizontal map $\mathrm{pr}_{3}$ is an equivalence, too.
The $(\mathrm{Cone},\beta)$-adjunction yields an equivalence
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Cone-beta-adjunction}
\Map(g, (0 \to q(v(c))) ) \xrightarrow{\simeq} \Map( \mathrm{Cone}(g), q(v(c))).
\end{equation}
By construction, \eqref{eq:counit-composition} is the composition of the equivalences $\mathrm{pr}_{3}$ in \eqref{diag:dddd} and \eqref{eq:Cone-beta-adjunction} and the map induced by the counit $q(v(c)) \to c$, which is an equivalence by fully faithfulness of $v$. Hence \eqref{eq:counit-composition} is an equivalence, as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
\label{cor:exact-sequence-of-presentable-cats}
Assume that \eqref{diag:diag1} is a diagram in $\Pr^{\mathrm{L}}_{\mathrm{st}}$.
If the right adjoint of $B \to C$ is fully faithful, then
the sequence
\[
A \times_{C} B \to A \laxtimes{C} B \xrightarrow{\pi} C
\]
is exact.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
An object $(a,b,g)$ of $A \laxtimes{C} B$ belongs to $A \times_{C} B$ if and only if $g$ is an equivalence, if and only if $\mathrm{Cone}(g) \simeq 0$. This shows that the composite is trivial and that $A \times_{C} B$ is precisely the kernel of $\pi$.
The claim now follows, since $\pi$ admits a fully faithful right adjoint by Proposition~\ref{prop:exact-sequence-of-presentable-cats}.
\end{proof}
Let $A'$ be a small stable $\infty$-category. Then the $\infty$-category $\Ind(A')$ of Ind-objects of $A'$ \cite[Def.~5.3.5.1]{htt} is presentable \cite[Thm.~5.5.1.1]{htt} and stable \cite[Prop.~1.1.3.6]{halg}.
A stable $\infty$-category $A$ is called \emph{compactly generated} if there exists a small stable $\infty$-category $A'$ and an equivalence $\Ind(A') \simeq A$ (see \cite[Def.~5.5.7.1]{htt} and the text following it). If this is the case, then $A' \to A$ induces an equivalence of the idempotent completion of $A'$ \cite[\S 5.1.4]{htt} with the full stable subcategory $A^{\omega}$ of the compact objects in $A$ \cite[Lemma~5.4.2.4]{htt}.
In particular, if $A$ is compactly generated, $A^{\omega}$ is (essentially) small and $\Ind(A^{\omega}) \simeq A$.
Whether a stable $\infty$-category is idempotent complete or compactly generated only depends on its homotopy category \cite[Lemma~1.2.4.6, Rem.~1.4.4.3]{halg}.
\begin{prop}
\label{prop:lax-pullback-cptly-generated}
Assume that \eqref{diag:diag1} is a diagram in $\Pr^{\mathrm{L}}_{\mathrm{st}}$ in which $A$ and $B$ are compactly generated and the functors $p\colon A \to C$ and $q\colon B \to C$ map compact objects to compact objects. Then $A \laxtimes{C} B$ is compactly generated as well and $(A \laxtimes{C} B)^{\omega} \simeq A^{\omega} \laxtimes{C^{\omega}} B^{\omega}$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma~\ref{lem:stability-of-pullbacks}(iii) the $\infty$-category $A \laxtimes{C} B$ is presentable and hence admits all small colimits.
Let $D' := A^{\omega} \laxtimes{C^{\omega}} B^{\omega}$. This is an (essentially) small full stable subcategory of $A \laxtimes{C} B$. It follows from \cite[Lemmas 5.4.5.7, 5.3.4.9]{htt} that $D'$ consists of compact objects in $A \laxtimes{C} B$. Hence the induced functor $\Ind(D') \to A \laxtimes{C} B$ is fully faithful.
Since the functors $r\colon B \to A \laxtimes{C} B$ and $s\colon A \to A \laxtimes{C} B$ preserve colimits by Lemma~\ref{lem:stability-of-pullbacks}(iii) and since $A$ and $B$ are compactly generated, it follows that the essential image of $\Ind(D')$ in $A \laxtimes{C} B$ contains $A$ and $B$. Proposition~\ref{prop:split-exact-sequence} implies that every object $X$ of $A \laxtimes{C} B$ sits in a fibre sequence $X' \to X \to X''$ with $X' \in B$ and $X'' \in A$.
Hence the essential image of $\Ind(D')$ must be all of $A \laxtimes{C} B$, and hence the latter is compactly generated.
Since $A^{\omega}$ and $B^{\omega}$ are idempotent complete, so is $D'$ by Lemma~\ref{lem:stability-of-pullbacks}(ii).
Hence $D' \simeq (A \laxtimes{C} B)^{\omega}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{dfn}
\label{dfn:excisive-square}
An \emph{excisive square} of small stable $\infty$-categories is a commutative square
\begin{equation}
\label{diag:excisive-square}
\begin{split}
\[email protected]@R-0.2cm{
D \ar[r] \ar[d] & B \ar[d]^-{q}\\
A \ar[r]^-{p} & C
}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
in $\mathrm{Cat}^{\mathrm{ex}}_{\infty}$ such that the induced square
\begin{equation}
\label{diag:ind-excisive-square}
\begin{split}
\[email protected]@R-0.3cm{
\Ind(D) \ar[r] \ar[d] & \Ind(B) \ar[d]^{}\\
\Ind(A) \ar[r]^{} & \Ind(C)
}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
in $\Pr^{\mathrm{L}}_{\mathrm{st}}$ is a pullback square and $\Ind(B) \to \Ind(C)$ is a localization, i.e., its right adjoint is fully faithful.
\end{dfn}
The following is the categorical version of our first main result.
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:main-theorem-new}
Assume that \eqref{diag:excisive-square} is an excisive square of small stable $\infty$-categories. Then there is an exact sequence
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:fundamental-exact-sequence-new}
D \xrightarrow{i} A \laxtimes{C} B \xrightarrow{\pi} C.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
If we apply Corollary~\ref{cor:exact-sequence-of-presentable-cats} to the pullback diagram \eqref{diag:ind-excisive-square}, we get the exact sequence
\[
\Ind(D) \to \Ind(A) \laxtimes{\Ind(C)} \Ind(B) \to \Ind(C)
\]
in $\Pr^{\mathrm{L}}_{\mathrm{st}}$. Clearly, the first and the third term in this sequence are compactly generated. Proposition~\ref{prop:lax-pullback-cptly-generated} implies that also the middle term is compactly generated, and that the functors preserve compact objects.
Recall from Recollection~\ref{recollection} that we can test exactness on the level of homotopy categories.
Thus we may apply the Thomason--Neeman localization theorem \cite[Thm.~2.1]{Neeman-connection} to conclude that the induced sequence of compact objects is exact.
But up to idempotent completion this is exactly \eqref{eq:fundamental-exact-sequence-new}.
\end{proof}
We now apply this to localizing invariants.
\begin{dfn}
\label{dfn:weakly-localizing}
A \emph{weakly localizing invariant} is a functor
\[
E \colon \mathrm{Cat}^{\mathrm{ex}}_{\infty} \to T
\]
from $\mathrm{Cat}^{\mathrm{ex}}_{\infty}$ to some stable $\infty$-category $T$ which sends exact sequences in $\mathrm{Cat}^{\mathrm{ex}}_{\infty}$ to fibre sequences in $T$.
\end{dfn}
\begin{ex}
Any localizing invariant in the sense of \cite{Blumberg-Tabuada-Gepner} is weakly localizing.
Concrete examples are non-connective algebraic $K$-theory \`a la Bass-Thomason \cite[\S9.1]{Blumberg-Tabuada-Gepner}, topological Hochschild homology $THH$ \cite[\S10.1]{Blumberg-Tabuada-Gepner}, or $p$-typical topological cyclic homology $TC$ for some prime $p$ \cite[\S10.3]{Blumberg-Tabuada-Gepner}, \cite{Blumberg-Mandell}. In all these examples $T$ is the $\infty$-category of spectra.
\end{ex}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:excisive-square}
Assume that \eqref{diag:excisive-square} is an excisive square of small stable $\infty$-categories, and let
$E\colon \mathrm{Cat}^{\mathrm{ex}}_{\infty} \to T$ be a weakly localizing invariant.
Then the induced square in $T$
\begin{equation}
\label{diag:thm-excisive-square}
\begin{split}
\[email protected]@R-0.3cm{
E(D) \ar[r] \ar[d] & E(B) \ar[d] \\
E(A) \ar[r] & E(C)
}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
is cartesian.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Applying $E$ to the exact sequence \eqref{eq:fundamental-exact-sequence-new} provided by Theorem~\ref{thm:main-theorem-new} yields the fibre sequence
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:E-excisive-square}
E(D) \xrightarrow{E(i)} E( A \laxtimes{C} B) \xrightarrow{E(\pi)} E(C)
\end{equation}
in $T$. On the other hand, applying $E$ to the split exact sequence of Proposition~\ref{prop:split-exact-sequence} gives an equivalence
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:E-split-exact-sequence}
E(s) \oplus E(r) \colon E(A) \oplus E(B) \xrightarrow{\simeq} E( A \laxtimes{C} B )
\end{equation}
with inverse induced by the projections $\mathrm{pr}_{1}$, $\mathrm{pr}_{2}$. Combining \eqref{eq:E-excisive-square} and \eqref{eq:E-split-exact-sequence}, we get a fibre sequence
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:E-fibre-sequence}
E(D) \to E(A) \oplus E(B) \to E(C)
\end{equation}
where the first map is induced by the given functors $D \to A$ and $D \to B$. The map $E(A) \to E(C)$ is induced by the functor $a \mapsto \mathrm{Cone}( p(a) \to 0 ) \simeq \Sigma p(a)$.
Since the endofunctor $\Sigma\colon C \to C$ induces $-\mathrm{id}$ on $E(C)$, the map $E(A) \to E(C)$ in \eqref{eq:E-fibre-sequence} is the negative of the map induced by the functor $p\colon A \to C$. Finally, the map $E(B) \to E(C)$ in \eqref{eq:E-fibre-sequence} is induced by the functor $b \mapsto \mathrm{Cone}( 0 \to q(b) ) \simeq q(b)$. Thus \eqref{eq:E-fibre-sequence} being a fibre sequence in $T$ implies that \eqref{diag:thm-excisive-square} is cartesian.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
This theorem can also be used to prove the Mayer-Vietoris property of algebraic $K$-theory for the Zariski topology \cite[Thm.~8.1]{thomason} for quasi-compact quasi-separated schemes without using Thomason's localization theorem \cite[Thm.~7.4]{thomason}. Together with Example~\ref{ex:Suslin-Nisnevich} one may then deduce Nisnevich descent for noetherian schemes in general.
\end{rem}
\section{Application to ring spectra}
\label{section2}
In this section, we apply the constructions of Section~\ref{section1} to the $\infty$-categories of (perfect) modules over an $E_{1}$-ring spectrum, discuss Tor-unitality, and
we prove our second main result (Theorem~\ref{thm:excisive-square-ring-spectra}) saying that a pullback square of ring spectra where one map is Tor-unital (Definition~\ref{dfn:tor-unital}) yields an excisive square upon applying $\Perf(-)$. From this we finally deduce Theorems~\ref{thm:thm1} and~\ref{thm:thm2} of the Introduction.
The $\infty$-categories of $E_{1}$-ring spectra and their modules are discussed in \cite[Ch.~7]{halg}.
For an $E_{1}$-ring spectrum $A$, we write $\LMod(A)$ for the stable $\infty$-category of left $A$-module spectra, which we will simply call left $A$-modules henceforth.
A left $A$-module is called \emph{perfect} if it belongs to the smallest stable subcategory $\Perf(A)$ of $\LMod(A)$ which contains $A$ and is closed under retracts. By \cite[Prop.~7.2.4.2]{halg}, $\LMod(A)$ is compactly generated and the compact objects are precisely the perfect $A$-modules.
\begin{ex}
Any discrete ring $A$ can be considered as an $E_{1}$-ring spectrum. Then $\Ho(\LMod(A))$ is equivalent to the unbounded derived category of $A$ in the classical sense \cite[Rem.~7.1.1.16]{halg}.
\end{ex}
\begin{dfn}
\label{dfn:tor-unital}
A map $f\colon A \to A'$ of $E_{1}$-ring spectra is called \emph{Tor-unital} if the following equivalent conditions are satisfied:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The map $A'\otimes_{A} A' \to A'$ given by multiplication is an equivalence.
\item The map $A' \to A' \otimes_{A} A'$ induced from $A \to A'$ by $A' \otimes_{A} (-)$ is an equivalence.
\item If $I$ is the fibre of $A \to A'$ in $\LMod(A)$, we have $A' \otimes_{A} I \simeq 0$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{dfn}
We have the following easy but important further characterization of Tor-unitality:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:Tor-unital-implies-ff}
A morphism $A \to A'$ of $E_{1}$-ring spectra is Tor-unital if and only if the forgetful functor $\LMod(A') \to \LMod(A)$ is fully faithful.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By \cite[Prop.~4.6.2.17]{halg} the forgetful functor $v$ is right adjoint to $A' \otimes_{A} - \colon \LMod(A) \to \LMod(A')$. It is fully faithful if and only if the counit $A' \otimes_{A} M \to M$ is an equivalence for every $A'$-module $M$. Taking $M=A'$, we see that fully faithfulness of $v$ implies Tor-unitality of $A \to A'$. The converse follows, since $\LMod(A')$ is generated by $A'$ under small colimits and finite limits, and the tensor product preserves both.
\end{proof}
Now consider any pullback square of $E_{1}$-ring spectra
\begin{equation}\label{diag:ring-spectra}
\begin{split}
\[email protected]@R-0.3cm{
A \ar[r] \ar[d] & A' \ar[d] \\
B \ar[r] & B'.
}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:stability-of-Tor-unitality}
Assume that \eqref{diag:ring-spectra} is a pullback square of $E_{1}$-ring spectra in which $A \to A'$ is Tor-unital.
Then also $B \to B'$ is Tor-unital. Moreover, the canonical map $A' \otimes_{A} B \to A' \otimes_{A} B'$
induced from $B \to B'$ is an equivalence.
\end{lemma}
See Remark~\ref{rem:Luries-patching} for a partial converse.
\begin{proof}
Write $I$ for the fibre of $A \to A'$.
Since $A \to A'$ is Tor-unital, $A' \otimes_{A} I \simeq 0$. As by assumption \eqref{diag:ring-spectra} is a pullback square, the fibre of $B \to B'$ is equivalent (as left $A$-module) to $I$, hence $A' \otimes_{A} B \to A' \otimes_{A} B'$ is an equivalence, too.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:Tor-unital-implies-ff} the counit $A' \otimes_{A} M \to M$ is an equivalence for every $A'$-module $M$. In particular, $A' \otimes_{A} B' \to B'$ is an equivalence.
Summing up, the canonical map $A' \otimes_{A} B \to B'$ is an equivalence. Thus
\[
B' \otimes_{B} B' \simeq (A' \otimes_{A} B) \otimes_{B} B' \simeq A' \otimes_{A} B' \simeq B'
\]
and $B \to B'$ is Tor-unital.
\end{proof}
\begin{ex}
\label{ex:Milnor-square-as-pullback-of-ring-spectra}
\label{ex:classical-Milnor}
Let $A \to B$ be a morphism of discrete unital rings sending a two-sided ideal $I$ of $A$ isomorphically onto an ideal of $B$. Then the Milnor square
\[
\[email protected]@R-0.3cm{
A \ar[r] \ar[d] & A/I \ar[d] \\
B \ar[r] & B/I
}
\]
is a pullback diagram in rings.
Since $B \to B/I$ is surjective, this diagram is also a pullback when considered as a diagram of $E_{1}$-ring spectra.
The map $A \to A/I$ is Tor-unital if and only if $\Tor_{i}^{A}( A/I, A/I ) = 0$ for all $i > 0$.
In particular, if the discrete, not necessarily unital ring $I$ is Tor-unital in the classical sense that $\Tor^{\mathbf{Z}\ltimes I}_{i}(\mathbf{Z},\mathbf{Z}) = 0$ for all $i > 0$, then Lemma~\ref{lem:stability-of-Tor-unitality} applied to the Milnor square
\[
\[email protected]@R-0.3cm{
\mathbf{Z} \ltimes I \ar[r] \ar[d] & \mathbf{Z} \ar[d] \\
A \ar[r] & A/I
}
\]
implies that $A \to A/I$ is Tor-unital for any ring $A$ containing $I$ as a two-sided ideal.
\end{ex}
\begin{ex}
\label{ex:Nisnevich}
Assume that $A$ is a commutative, unital discrete ring, and let $f \in A$. Then $A \to A[f^{-1}]$ is Tor-unital.
Assume further that $A \to B$ is an \'etale ring map which induces an isomorphism $A/(f) \xrightarrow{\sim} B/(f)$. Then
the diagram
\[
\[email protected]@R-0.3cm{
A \ar[r] \ar[d] & A[f^{-1}] \ar[d] \\
B \ar[r] & B[f^{-1}],
}
\]
viewed as a diagram of $E_{1}$-ring spectra, is a pullback square.
Indeed, this is equivalent to the exactness of the sequence
\[
0 \to A \to A[f^{-1}] \oplus B \to B[f^{-1}] \to 0,
\]
which may be checked directly. Alternatively, one may use the Mayer--Vietoris exact sequence of \'etale cohomology groups
\[
0 \to A \to A[f^{-1}] \oplus B \to B[f^{-1}] \to H^{1}_{\mathrm{\acute{e}t}}(\Spec(A), \mathcal{O}_{\Spec(A)}),
\]
which may be deduced from \cite[Prop.~III.1.27]{Milne}, together with the vanishing of the higher \'etale cohomology of quasi-coherent sheaves on affine schemes.
\end{ex}
The following is a derived version of Milnor patching:
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:pullback-modules-tor-unital-case}
Assume that \eqref{diag:ring-spectra} is a pullback square of $E_{1}$-ring spectra where the morphism $A \to A'$ is Tor-unital.
Then extension of scalars induces an equivalence
\begin{equation*}
\LMod(A) \simeq \LMod(A') \times_{\LMod(B')} \LMod(B).
\end{equation*}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let $F$ be the functor $\LMod(A) \to \LMod(A') \times_{\LMod(B')} \LMod(B)$ induced by extension of scalars.
Since both $\infty$-categories are presentable and $F$ preserves colimits by Lemma~\ref{lem:stability-of-pullbacks}(iii), $F$ admits a right adjoint $G$. Explicitly, if $(M,N,g)$ is an object of $ \LMod(A') \times_{\LMod(B')} \LMod(B)$, then $G(M,N,g)$ is the pullback in left $A$-modules
\[
G(M,N,g) \simeq M \times_{B'\otimes_{B}N} N
\]
where the map $M \to B' \otimes_{B} N$ is the composition $M \to B' \otimes_{A'} M \xrightarrow{g} B' \otimes_{B} N$.
We claim that the unit
\[
P \to (A' \otimes_{A} P) \times_{B' \otimes_{B} ( B \otimes_{A} P )} (B \otimes_{A} P)
\]
of the adjunction is an equivalence for any $A$-module $P$. Since also $G$ commutes with colimits, it suffices to check this for $P = A$. In that case the claim follows from the assumption that \eqref{diag:ring-spectra} is a pullback square.
Hence $F$ is fully faithful.
It now suffices to show that the right adjoint $G$ of $F$ is conservative.
For this it is enough to show that $G$ detects zero objects. So let $(M,N,g)$ be an object of the pullback and assume that $G(M,N,g) \simeq 0$.
There is a
fibre sequence of left $A$-modules
\[
G(M,N,g) \to M \oplus N \to B' \otimes_{B} N
\]
and hence the map
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:MoplusN}
M \oplus N \xrightarrow{\simeq} B' \otimes_{B} N
\end{equation}
is an equivalence. Extending scalars from $A$ to $A'$ we get an equivalence
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:A'otimesMoplusN}
A' \otimes_{A} M \oplus A' \otimes_{A} N \xrightarrow{\simeq} A' \otimes_{A} B' \otimes_{B} N.
\end{equation}
From Lemma \ref{lem:stability-of-Tor-unitality} we know that $A' \otimes_{A} B \to A' \otimes_{A} B'$ is an equivalence.
Since $\LMod(B)$ is generated by $B$ under colimits and finite limits, we conclude that $A' \otimes_{A} P \to A' \otimes_{A} B' \otimes_{B} P$ is an equivalence for every left $B$-module $P$. Applying this with $P=N$, we see that the restriction of \eqref{eq:A'otimesMoplusN} to the second summand is an equivalence.
Hence $A' \otimes_{A} M \simeq 0$. Since $M$ is an $A'$-module, Lemma \ref{lem:Tor-unital-implies-ff} implies that the counit is an equivalence $A' \otimes_{A} M \simeq M$, i.e., $M \simeq 0$. But then also $B' \otimes_{B} N \simeq B' \otimes_{A'} M \simeq 0$, and hence $N \simeq 0$ by \eqref{eq:MoplusN}.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
\label{rem:Luries-patching}
Without the Tor-unitality assumption Theorem~\ref{thm:pullback-modules-tor-unital-case} does not hold, see \cite[Warning 16.2.0.3]{sag} for a counter example.
However, if one assumes instead that
\eqref{diag:ring-spectra} is a pullback square of connective ring spectra with $\pi_{0}(B) \to \pi_{0}(B')$ surjective, then
\cite[Prop.\ 16.2.2.1]{sag} implies that restricting the functors $F$ and $G$ from the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:pullback-modules-tor-unital-case} to the subcategories of connective modules gives inverse equivalences
\begin{equation*
\LMod(A)_{\geq 0} \leftrightarrows \LMod(A')_{\geq 0} \times_{\LMod(B')_{\geq 0}} \LMod(B)_{\geq 0}.
\end{equation*}
One can use this to show that in this situation, Tor-unitality of $B \to B'$ implies Tor-unitality of $A \to A'$:
Let $I$ be the fibre of $B \to B'$. Since $\pi_{0}(B) \to \pi_{0}(B')$ is surjective, $I$ is connective. Since $B \to B'$ is Tor-unital, $B' \otimes_{B} I \simeq 0$.
Hence we may view $(0, I, 0)$ as an object of the pullback $\LMod(A')_{\geq 0} \times_{\LMod(B')_{\geq 0}} \LMod(B)_{\geq 0}$.
The functor $G$ sends $(0,I,0)$ to the $A$-module $0 \times_{0} I \simeq I$. By the above the counit $F(I) \simeq F(G(0,I,0))\to (0,I,0)$ is an equivalence. Looking at the first component we deduce that $A' \otimes_{A} I \to 0$ is an equivalence, i.e., $A \to A'$ is Tor-unital.
\end{rem}
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:excisive-square-ring-spectra}
Assume that \eqref{diag:ring-spectra} is a pullback square of $E_{1}$-ring spectra where the morphism $A \to A'$ is Tor-unital. Then the square
\begin{equation}
\label{diag:excisive-square-perf}
\begin{split}
\[email protected]@R-0.3cm{
\Perf(A) \ar[r] \ar[d] & \Perf(B) \ar[d] \\
\Perf(A') \ar[r] & \Perf(B')
}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
is excisive. In particular, if $E \colon \mathrm{Cat}^{\mathrm{ex}}_{\infty} \to T$ is a weakly localizing invariant, then the induced square
\begin{equation*}
\label{diag:E-excisive-square-perf}
\begin{split}
\[email protected]@R-0.3cm{
E(\Perf(A)) \ar[r] \ar[d] & E(\Perf(B)) \ar[d] \\
E(\Perf(A')) \ar[r] & E(\Perf(B'))
}
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
in $T$ is cartesian.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Applying $\Ind$ to diagram \eqref{diag:excisive-square-perf} yields the diagram
\begin{equation*}
\label{diag:excisive-square-mod}
\begin{split}
\[email protected]@R-0.3cm{
\LMod(A) \ar[r] \ar[d] & \LMod(B) \ar[d] \\
\LMod(A') \ar[r] & \LMod(B')
}
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
This is a pullback diagram by Theorem~\ref{thm:pullback-modules-tor-unital-case}.
As $A \to A'$ is Tor-unital, so is $B \to B'$ by Lemma~\ref{lem:stability-of-Tor-unitality}.
Hence the right adjoint of $\LMod(B) \to \LMod(B')$, which is the forgetful functor, is fully faithful by Lemma~\ref{lem:Tor-unital-implies-ff}. So the square~\eqref{diag:excisive-square-perf} is excisive. Now the second assertion follows by applying Theorem~\ref{thm:excisive-square}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorems~\ref{thm:thm1} and \ref{thm:thm2}]
If we apply Theorem~\ref{thm:excisive-square-ring-spectra} with $E=K$, we immediately get Theorem~\ref{thm:thm2}.
Now let $I$ be a ring which is Tor-unital in the classical sense, and let $A$ be any unital ring containing $I$ as a two-sided ideal.
Then the Milnor square
\[
\[email protected]@R-0.3cm{
\mathbf{Z} \ltimes I \ar[r] \ar[d] & \mathbf{Z} \ar[d] \\
A \ar[r] & A/I,
}
\]
viewed as square of $E_{1}$-ring spectra, is a pullback square (see Example~\ref{ex:Milnor-square-as-pullback-of-ring-spectra}).
By assumption, the top horizontal map is Tor-unital in our sense.
Hence we may apply Theorem~\ref{thm:thm2} to deduce that the map on relative $K$-groups $K_{*}(I) = K_{*}(\mathbf{Z} \ltimes I, I) \to K_{*}(A, I)$ is an isomorphism.
\end{proof}
\providecommand{\bysame}{\leavevmode\hbox to3em{\hrulefill}\thinspace}
|
\section{Introduction}
Several diagnostic protocols are usually adopted by dermatologists
for analyzing and classifying skin lesions, such as the so-called
\emph{ABCD-rule} of dermoscopy \cite{Stol94}.
Due to the subjective nature of examination, the accuracy of
diagnosis is highly dependent upon human vision and
dermatologist's expertise.
Computerized dermoscopic image analysis systems, based on a
consistent extraction and analysis of image features, do not have
the limitation of this subjectivity. These systems involve the use
of a computer as a second independent and objective diagnostic
method, which can potentially be used for the pre-screening of
patients performed by non-experienced operators. Although
computerized analysis techniques cannot provide a definitive
diagnosis, they can improve biopsy decision-making, which some
observers feel is the most important use for dermoscopy
\cite{Burroni04}.
Recently, numerous researches on this topic propose systems for
the automated detection of malignant melanoma in skin lesions
(e.g., \cite{Celebi07,Celebi09,Maglogiannis09,Cozza2011,Celebi2015,Celebi2015b}).
In our previous study on dermoscopic images \cite{Cozza2011}, the
segmentation of the skin area and the lesion area was achieved by
a semi-automatic process based on Otsu algorithm \cite{Otsu1979},
supervised by a human operator. Here, we propose a full automatic
segmentation method consisting of three main steps: selection of
the image ROI, selection of the segmentation band, and
segmentation.
The paper is organized as follows.
In Section \ref{ProposedApproach} we describe the proposed
algorithm, providing details of its main steps.
In Section \ref{ExpRes} we provide a thorough analysis of
experimental results on the ISIC 217 dataset \cite{ISICdataset}.
Conclusions are drawn in Section \ref{Conclusioni}.
\section{SDI Algorithm} \label{ProposedApproach}
The block diagram of the segmentation algorithm proposed for
dermoscopic images, named SDI algorithm, is shown in Fig.
\ref{Fig:Overall}. The three main steps are described in the
following.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.99\linewidth]{SDIscheme2.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Block diagram of the SDI algorithm.} \label{Fig:Overall}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Selection of the Image ROI}
In order to achieve an easier and more accurate segmentation of
the skin lesion, it is advisable to select the region of interest
(ROI), i.e., the subset if image pixels that belong to either the
lesion or the skin. This region excludes image pixels belonging to
(usually dark) areas of the image border and/or corners, as well
as those belonging to hair, that will not be taken into account in
the subsequent steps of the SDI algorithm.
In the proposed approach, the Value band of the image in the HSV
color space is chosen in order to select dark image pixels; these
are excluded from the ROI if they cover most of the border or the
angle regions of the image.
Concerning hair, many highly accurate methods have been proposed
in the literature \cite{Celebi2015}. Here, we adopted a bottom-hat
filter in the Red band of the RGB image.
An example of the ROI selection process is reported in Fig.
\ref{Fig:ROIselection} for the ISIC 2017 test image no. 15544.
Here, we observe that the wide dark border on the left of the
image, as well as the dark hair over the lesion, have properly
been excluded from the ROI mask.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.28\linewidth]{15544.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.28\linewidth]{15544ROI.png}\\
(a) & (b)\\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Selection of the ROI (b) for image 15544 (a).}
\label{Fig:ROIselection}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Selection of the Segmentation Band}
Lesion segmentation can be made easier if the proper color band of the dermoscopic image is chosen. After thorough experimentation, we selected two color bands that allow proper segmentation: the Red band (Rnorm) in the normalized RGB color space and the Value band (V) of the image in the HSV color space.
Indeed, Rnorm is often a good choice for segmentation of
dermoscopic images, as the normalized RGB space eliminates the
effect of varying intensities due to uneven illumination and it is
free from shadow and shading effects. For example, for ISIC
training image 122 (first row of Fig.
\ref{Fig:Channelselection122}-(a)) the Rnorm band (Fig.
\ref{Fig:Channelselection122}-(b)) is not affected by the uneven
illumination of the image (brighter in the upper part), and its
binarization (Fig. \ref{Fig:Channelselection122}-(c)) provides a
quite faithful lesion segmentation. Instead, the V band (Fig.
\ref{Fig:Channelselection122}-(d)) is affected by the uneven
illumination and its binarization (Fig.
\ref{Fig:Channelselection122}-(e)) includes into the segmentation
mask also scarcely illuminated skin areas in the bottom of the
lesion.
However, there are cases where the V band is a better choice, as shown for ISIC training image 12481 (second row of Fig. \ref{Fig:Channelselection122}). Here, the Rnorm band almost annihilates the discrimination of the lesion by the surrounding skin, leading to a wrong segmentation, while thresholding in V band provides an almost perfect segmentation.
A comparison of the segmentations provided by the two color bands allows us to automatically select the most appropriate for the final segmentation.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2pt} \centering
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{122.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{122Rnorm.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{ISIC_0000122BW1.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{122Value.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{122BW1Value.png}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{12481.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{12481Rnorm.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{12481BW1Rnorm.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{12481Value.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{12481BW1Value.png}\\
(a) & (b) & (c) & (d) & (e)\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Selection of the segmentation band for images 122 (first
row) and 12481 (second row): (a) color image; (b) Red band in the
normalized RGB color space; (c) binarization of (b); (d) inverted
Value band of the image in the HSV color space; (e) binarization
of (d).} \label{Fig:Channelselection122}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Segmentation}
Once the proper color band of the image has been selected,
segmentation is achieved by the Otsu algorithm, that computes the
optimal threshold separating the two classes of pixels (skin and
lesion) so that their intra-class variance is minimal
\cite{Otsu1979}.
The lesion area is then selected in the obtained binary mask as
the connected component having maximum area. This choice is based
on the assumption that dermoscopic images tend to mainly frame the
lesion to be analyzed, that thus appear in the image as the
predominant objects over the patient skin.
The convex hull of the segmented lesion is then adopted as final
segmentation result. Indeed, although the segmented lesion better
highlights the lesion contours, generally its convex hull better
conforms to the ground truth provided by the dermatologist.
An example of the segmentation process is reported in Fig.
\ref{Fig:SegmentationCH} for the ISIC 2017 train image no. 122.
Here, we observe that the initial SDI segmentation (the connected
component having maximum area, reported in Fig.
\ref{Fig:SegmentationCH}-(b)) provides a quite faithful
segmentation of the image lesion (Fig.
\ref{Fig:SegmentationCH}-(a)). The final SDI segmentation (the
convex hull, reported in Fig. \ref{Fig:SegmentationCH}-(c)) gives
a lesion segmentation that is much rougher, but more similar to
the ground truth mask (Fig. \ref{Fig:SegmentationCH}-(d)).
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2pt} \centering
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{122.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{ISIC_0000122BW1.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{ISIC_0000122BW2.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{ISIC_0000122_GT.png} \\
(a) & (b) & (c) & (d)\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Segmentation: (a) image 122; (b) initial SDI
segmentation; (c) final SDI segmentation; (d) ground truth.}
\label{Fig:SegmentationCH}
\end{figure}
\section{Analysis of Experimental Results} \label{ExpRes}
Here we analyze in detail some of the results achieved by the SDI
algorithm on the test segmentation set of the ISIC 2017 challenge,
highlighting pro's and con's.
In Fig. \ref{Fig:Hair}, we report two examples showing that the
bottom-hat filter adopted for excluding hair from the image ROI
performs quite well.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2pt} \centering
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{12092.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{12092ROI.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{12092Channel.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{12092ResultNoCH.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{12092ResultCH.png}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{13399.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{13399ROI.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{13399Channel.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{13399ResultNoCH.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{13399ResultCH.png}\\
(a) & (b) & (c) & (d) & (e)\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Analysis of results for images 12092 (first row) and
13399 (second row), including hair: (a) image; (b) Rnorm band
selected for segmentation; (c) Rnorm binarization; (d) initial SDI
segmentation; (e) final SDI segmentation.} \label{Fig:Hair}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{Fig:Ink} shows that the selection of the image ROI
partly succeeds in excluding from the ROI also ink marker signs.
Moreover, the remaining ink pixels that are included into the ROI
do not affect the final segmentation, thanks to the selection of
the Rnorm band for segmentation.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2pt} \centering
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{13216.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{13216ROI.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{13216Channel.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{13216ResultNoCH.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{13216ResultCH.png}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{13414.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{13414ROI.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{13414Channel.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{13414ResultNoCH.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{13414ResultCH.png}\\
(a) & (b) & (c) & (d) & (e)\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Analysis of results for images 13216 (first row) and
13414 (second row), including ink markers: (a) image; (b) Rnorm
band selected for segmentation; (c) Rnorm binarization; (d)
initial SDI segmentation; (e) final SDI segmentation.}
\label{Fig:Ink}
\end{figure}
We point out the choice of the connected component having the
maximum area is not always the best for selecting a correct lesion
segmentation. An extreme example is shown in Fig.
\ref{Fig:Highlights}. Here, we can observe that image 14574 is
perfectly segmented, while image 14575, that looks pretty similar
to the previous one, is wrongly segmented. The error is due to a
very different binarization (Fig. \ref{Fig:Highlights}-(c)),
leading to the wrong connected component.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2pt} \centering
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{14574.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{14574Channel.png}&
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{14574bin.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{14574ResultNoCH.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{14574ResultCH.png}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{14575.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{14575Channel.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{14575bin.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{14575ResultNoCH.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\linewidth]{14575ResultCH.png}\\
(a) & (b) & (c) & (d) & (e)\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Analysis of results for images 14574 (first row) and
14575 (second row): (a) image; (b) Rnorm band selected for
segmentation; (c) Rnorm binarization; (d) initial SDI
segmentation; (e) final SDI segmentation.} \label{Fig:Highlights}
\end{figure}
Finally, we observe that, although most of the times the convex
hull of the initial SDI segmentation better conforms to the ground
truth (see Fig. \ref{Fig:SegmentationCH}), it can erroneously
include into the final segmentation also wide skin areas. This is
the case, for example, of image 12272 (Fig. \ref{Fig:CH}), where
the ruler mark has been erroneously included into the initial SDI
segmentation, leading to a too wide convex hull in the final
result.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\includegraphics[width=0.28\linewidth]{12272.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.28\linewidth]{12272ResultNoCH.png} &
\includegraphics[width=0.28\linewidth]{12272ResultCH.png}\\
(a) & (b) & (c)\\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Analysis of results for image 12272: (a) image; (b)
initial SDI segmentation; (c) final SDI segmentation.}
\label{Fig:CH}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions} \label{Conclusioni}
We proposed the SDI algorithm for dermoscopic image segmentation,
consisting of three main steps: selection of the image ROI,
selection of the segmentation band, and segmentation.
The reported analysis of experimental results achieved by the SDI
algorithm on the ISIC 2017 dataset allowed us to highlight its
pro's and con's.
This leads us to conclude that, although some accurate results can
be achieved, there is room for improvements in different
directions, that we will go through in future investigations.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This research was supported by LAB GTP Project, funded by MIUR.
|
\section{Control of skyrmion size by band parameters}
We demonstrate the change of skyrmion sizes by the electron filling and band dispersion.
In our model, we can modify the electron filling by the chemical potential $\mu$ and the band dispersion by the hopping integrals $t_{ij}$ in the model~(1) in the main text.
Figure~\ref{fig:susceptibility} displays a typical variation of the bare magnetic susceptibility $\chi^0_{\bf q}$ and corresponding spin textures of the $n_{\rm sk}=2$ SkXs whose ordering vectors ${\bf Q}_\nu$ are predetermined by the multiple peaks of $\chi^0_{\bf q}$.
Here, we draw the spin textures by Eq.~(2) in the main text.
In Figs.~\ref{fig:susceptibility}(a)-\ref{fig:susceptibility}(f), we show
the results at $\mu=-4.05$, $-3.8$, and $-3.5$ with $t_2=0$ and $t_3=-0.85$ ($t_2$ and $t_3$ are the second- and third-neighbor hopping integrals).
For these parameters, the peaks of $\chi^0_{\bf q}$ locate on the $\Gamma$-K lines and
the length of ordering vectors $|{\bf Q}_\nu|$ becomes longer ($0.18\pi\rightarrow0.25\pi\rightarrow0.33\pi$) as $\mu$ increases.
Accordingly, the period of SkXs becomes shorter as shown in the figures.
We confirm that the $n_{\rm sk}=2$ SkXs are obtained by the modified KPM-LD simulation for these cases as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:KPM_supp}
(the simulation data in the case of $\mu=-3.5$ are presented in the main text).
On the other hand, Figs.~\ref{fig:susceptibility}(g)-\ref{fig:susceptibility}(l) present the results at
$\mu=0$, $0.4$, and $0.8$ with $t_2=0.3$ and $t_3=0$.
In these cases,
$|{\bf Q}_\nu|$ changes as $1.21\pi\rightarrow 1.08\pi\rightarrow 0.95\pi$ along the $\Gamma$-K lines;
the period of SkXs becomes shorter
for ${\bf Q}_\nu$ farther from the K point.
Interestingly, these SkXs show the antiferromagnetic spin patterns (the NN spins are almost antiparallel).
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.92\textwidth]{Fig_sup1_03_01.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:susceptibility}
(a)-(c)[(d)-(f)] Bare susceptibility $\chi^0_{\bf q}$ (SkX patterns) obtained for
$t_2 = 0$, $t_3=-0.85$,
and $T=0.01$:
(a) $\mu=-4.05$ ($n\sim 0.24$), (b) $\mu=-3.8$ ($n\sim 0.32$),
and (c) $\mu=-3.5$ ($n\sim 0.4$).
(g)-(i)[(j)-(l)] $\chi^0_{\bf q}$ (SkX patterns) for $t_2 = 0.3$, $t_3=0$, and $T=0.01$:
(g) $\mu=0$ ($n\sim 0.66$), (h) $\mu=0.4$ ($n\sim 0.73$), and (i) $\mu=0.8$
($n\sim 0.83$).
$\chi^0_{\bf q}$ are calculated for
a triangular lattice with
$N_s=240^2$
with taking the broadening factor $0.01$.
The SkX patterns are drawn by Eq.~(2) in the main text.
The gray hexagons represent the 1st Brillouin zones and
the gray arrows show the wave vectors for the peaks.
}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=0.92\textwidth]{Fig_sup2_02_03.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:KPM_supp}
Spin configurations of the $n_{\rm sk}=2$ SkXs in real space
obtained by the modified KPM-LD simulations:
(a) for the parameters in Figs.~\ref{fig:susceptibility}(a) and \ref{fig:susceptibility}(d),
and (b) for Figs.~\ref{fig:susceptibility}(b) and \ref{fig:susceptibility}(e).
We take $J=0.2$ and $0.6$ in (a) and (b), respectively.
}
\end{figure}
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
Probing the mass-radius relationship for planets smaller than Earth is interesting to theorists as it may be used to constrain the formation and composition of these bodies, a topic of debate in the current literature \citep[e.g][]{2010apf..book.....A,2010exop.book..297C,2013SSRv..180...71S,2014ApJ...780...53C,2016ApJ...817...80D}. A few planets in this size regime have been characterized \citep[e.g.][]{2013SSRv..180...71S,2013ApJ...773L..15R,2015Natur.522..321J,2017Natur.542..456G}; however, due to the small number of characterizable systems, little is yet known about the masses or compositions of the smallest ($\lesssim1R_\oplus$, $\lesssim1M_\oplus$) planets, despite them being among the most common in the galaxy \citep{2015ApJ...808...71M}.
Recent work has demonstrated the effectiveness of using photodynamic modeling to extract transit timing variations (TTVs) and planetary properties from systems with a low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) \citep[e.g.,][]{2012Sci...337..556C,2015MNRAS.454.4267B,2016Natur.533..509M}. This technique takes advantage of the many transits of short-period planets observed in the \emph{Kepler\ } data by fitting the entire light curve and all transits simultaneously. Here we apply this technique to Kepler-444.
Kepler-444's planets (b, c, d, e, and f from inside to out) range in radii from 0.4 to 0.8 $R_\oplus$ and in orbital period from 3.6 to 9.8 days \citep{2015ApJS..217...16R,2015ApJ...799..170C}. Their period ratios are near, but not exactly on, mean motion resonances (MMRs; see Table~\ref{table:prats}). Despite the compact architecture of the system, it is around a star $11.2\pm1.0$ Gyr old \citep{2015ApJ...799..170C} and therefore has likely been in a stable configuration for billions of years. A tight binary pair of M-dwarf stars also orbit together around Kepler-444 with a period of approximately 460 years and a distance of $\sim$ 60 AU \citep{2015ApJ...799..170C}. Such a configuration poses a puzzle regarding the early history of the Kepler-444 system, as planetary formation and migration in a truncated protoplanetary disk in the presence of a very nearby binary star pair is not well understood, with several effects newly proposed \citep[e.g.,][]{2015Natur.524..439T,2016MNRAS.459.2925X}. Recent studies have attempted to understand the possible histories of the system and use it to place constraints on formation mechanisms \citep{2016ApJ...817...80D,2016CeMDA.tmp...21P}. However, such studies were unable to use the actual compositions or masses of the Kepler-444 planets since they were hitherto unknown. In this paper, we use photodynamics to put constraints on the masses of the planets in the Kepler-444 system and report mass detections for two of the planets: $M_d=0.036^{+0.065}_{-0.020}M_\oplus$ and $M_e=0.034^{+0.059}_{-0.019}M_\oplus$.
\section{Methods}
\label{sec:methods}
We initially identified potential transit timing variations in the Kepler-444 system by simultaneously fitting the raw \emph{Kepler\ } light curve with a planet transit model \citep{2002ApJ...580L.171M} and a 1-day wide polynomial to take into account systematic effects and stellar activity.
We also compute the expected period of the TTV signal between each pair of planets analytically \citep{2012ApJ...761..122L} (Table~\ref{table:prats}), noting that period of the expected signal for planets d and e matches the TTV observations well (Fig.~\ref{fig:photottv}).
We find statistically significant TTV between planets d and e, but the signal for all other planets is undetectably low as theoretically expected. The same conclusion was reached independently by \cite{2016arXiv161103516H}, a survey of many \emph{Kepler\ } systems showing TTVs.
In order to perform a more robust, simultaneous fit for all planetary parameters, we first reprocessed the raw \emph{Kepler\ } lightcurve data. We use short-cadence (58.8 second integration) data when it was available (\emph{Kepler\ } observing quarters 4, 6, and 15-17) and long cadence data (29.4 minute integrations) otherwise. We first discarded points whose quality flag had a value equal to or greater than 16. We then detrended the light curves by masking out the expected transit times plus 20\% of the transit duration to account for possible TTVs and then fit a cubic polynomial model with a 1000-minute width centered on photometric data points spaced by 30 minute intervals. We interpolated between these points to determine a baseline and divide the measured flux at each data point by these values. This detrending method produces two regions of extreme curvature in the lightcurve due to edge effects, so we discard the small regions with times BJD-2454900 = 1405.10 to 1405.18 days and 1490.88 to 1490.97 days. To account for certain Quarters showing higher noise levels than others despite all quarters having similar quoted uncertainties, we assign an uncertainty of 5.3030402e-05 to points in Quarter 12, 2.3470900e-04 in Quarter 16, and 6.5361999e-04 in Quarter 17, an increase over other regions by a factors of roughly 5, 4, and 11 respectively (the ratio of their out of transit standard deviation). Lastly, we increase the uncertainties in all points by a multiplicative factor of 1.38073 so that a fiducial fit to the light curve has a $\chi^2=1.000$. This approach substantially increases the uncertainties on the fitted parameters compared to using the values reported by \emph{Kepler\ }, allowing unmodeled noise to propagate to the final uncertainties on our parameter posteriors. We used data from \emph{Kepler\ } Data Release 21 (DR21) for this analysis because there is less scatter in the DR21 data compared to the DR25.
Our photodynamic model integrates Newtonian equations of motions for the star and five planets including the light travel time effect (which in this case is negligible). When any of the planets pass in front of the star along the line of sight, a synthetic light curve is generated \citep{2012MNRAS.420.1630P}, which can then be compared to the data. The parameters we include for each planet in the differential evolution Markov chain Monte Carlo \cite[DEMCMC;][]{TerBraak2005} fit are $\{P,T_0,e^{1/2}\cos(\omega),e^{1/2}\sin(\omega),i,\Omega,R_p/R_\star,M_p/M_\star\}$, where $P$ is the period, $T_0$ is the mid-transit time, $e$ is eccentricity, $\omega$ is the argument of periapse, $i$ is inclination to the sky plane, $\Omega$ is nodal angle on that plane, and $R$ and $M$ are radius and mass respectively (with subscripts $p = b,c,d,e,f$ for the planets and $\star$ for the star). The star had five additional parameters: $\{M_\star,R_\star,c_1,c_2,dilute\}$, where $c_i$ are the two quadratic limb-darkening coefficients and $dilute$ is the amount of dilution from other nearby sources.
We put physically sensible, but permissive, minima ($\rho_p=0.0$) and maxima ($\rho_p=\rho_{\mathrm{Fe}}$) on the bulk planet densities, where $\rho_p$ is a planet's bulk density and $ \rho_{\mathrm{Fe}}$ is the density of iron for a body of planet p's size. Taking values from \cite{2007ApJ...669.1279S}, the maximum densities for the 5 planets from b to f respectively are (9.5, 9.7, 10.3, 10.5, 12.2) g/cm$^3$, differing due to the compressibility of iron. The prior on mass is otherwise flat between 0 and these values
Since the mass and eccentricity implied by TTVs may be degenerate \citep{2012ApJ...761..122L} and result in measured eccentricity values so high that the system go unstable on timescales much shorter than the age of the system \cite{2015ApJ...807...44P}, we use a Rayleigh prior on the eccentricity of all planets with width parameter $\sigma=0.02$. This is consistent with the values measured in other tightly packed planetary systems \citep{2014ApJ...787...80H,2014ApJ...790..146F}, and is consistent with long term stability because even moderate eccentricity has been shown to destabilize tightly packed systems \citep{2015ApJ...807...44P}.
The dilution is well-measured \citep{2015ApJ...799..170C} so we fix $dilute= 0.0394$ since it would otherwise be highly degenerate with $R_p/R_\star$. This implies that the $R_p/R_\star$ value uncertainties may be slightly underestimated, but since \cite{2015ApJ...799..170C} report $dilute=0.0394 \pm 0.0001$, this will have only a very small effect on the reported posteriors. We also fix $\Omega_p=0$ for all planets since we expect very small mutual inclinations between the planets because we see five planets transit \cite[see, e.g.,][]{2011Natur.470...53L}. Additionally, even modest values of $\Omega$ may greatly increase likelihood that the system becomes unstable over the system's lifetime due exchange of eccentricity and inclination on secular time scales. Since the transit information gives only the stellar density and planet-to-star mass ratio (via TTVs), we model with a fixed $M_\star=0.758M_\odot$, which sets the overall scale of the system. We use generic flat priors in all other parameters.
\section{Results}
Median values and 68.3\% confidence intervals from the of photodynamic model are reported in Table 2. The full data set of the DEMCMC chains can be downloaded from the online version of this article. We ran a 64-chain DEMCMC for 900,000 generations recording every 1,000 generation, conservatively throwing out the first 50,000 generations as a burn-in. The autocorrelation timescale for the slowest converging parameters was approximately 60,000 generations, thus we are left with $\ ^{\displaystyle >}_{\displaystyle \sim}\ 850$ independent samples for each parameter. By numerically fitting the TTVs, the model produces mass constraints based on the \emph{Kepler\ } data. Consistent with the measurement of individual transit times described in \S\ref{sec:methods}, planets b, c, and f do not induce significant TTVs on the other planets, which means their masses are not significantly detected. However, the TTVs in planets d and e are both significant enough to confidently place upper and lower bounds on the mass. The posteriors in mass are inconsistent with zero mass and fall off much more rapidly than the prior near $m=0$. Photodynamically measured TTVs are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:photottv}, with the resulting mass constraints for planets d and e shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:mass} and reported for all planets in Table~\ref{table:allparams}. Compared to the masses derived in \citet[][$M_d=0.2^{+0.5}_{-0.1}M_\mathrm{\oplus}$ and $M_e=0.1^{+0.2}_{-0.1}M_\mathrm{\oplus}$]{2016arXiv161103516H}, these new measurements ($M_\mathrm{d}=0.036^{+0.065}_{-0.020}M_\oplus$ and $M_\mathrm{e}=0.034^{+0.059}_{-0.019}M_\oplus$) are more precise. This is due in part to more a more restrictive and physical prior and in part to due to the photodynamic analysis method used in this study.
We compute the posterior of $Z_{j+1,j}$ for each neighboring planet pair by approximating the value as $|z_{j+1}-z_j| / \sqrt{2}$ \cite[see, e.g., ][Eq. 4]{2016arXiv161103516H}, where $z_j = e_j e^{i \omega_j}$ for each planet $j$ and $i$ is the imaginary unit. We find the median and 68\% confidence intervals or upper limits $Z_{c,b}=0.022^{+0.013}_{-0.011}$, $Z_{d,c}=0.021^{+0.013}_{-0.010}$, $Z_{e,d}\le0.023$, $Z_{f,e}\le0.020$. We note that the interior planets are consistent with the prior alone, but the planet pair with detected masses (d and e) has a smaller value preferring low free eccentricity (Fig.~\ref{fig:mass}). The absence of measurable TTVs induced by planet f on planet e also constrains $Z_{f,e}$.
We also numerically integrate 100 draws from the DEMCMC posterior for 100 Myr to make sure we are exploring regions of parameter space stable for times comparable to a reasonable fraction of the system's age. 95\% of the samples remain stable. Since approximately equal numbers of systems are likely to go unstable in logarithmic bins of time \citep{2015ApJ...807...44P}, we expect $>80$\% of our posterior to be stable for the measured system age of $\sim$11 Gyr.
Importantly, we note that at the 95\% confidence level, both planets are inconsistent with being purely iron. Planet d requires a composition with a fraction of rock as least as great as Mercury ($\sim$30\%), and, like Earth, planet e can be no more than 30\% iron by mass. These measurements are plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:comp} along with theoretical composition tracks taken from \cite{2007ApJ...669.1279S}.
\section{Followup Observations}
\subsection{Radial Velocities}
\label{sec:rvs}
The radial velocity (RV) signal induced on a host star by a planet is given by \cite{1999ApJ...526..890C}:
\begin{equation}
K = \bigg( \frac{2 \pi G}{P} (M_\star+M_\mathrm{p}) \bigg)^{1/3} \frac{M_\mathrm{p}}{(M_\star+M_\mathrm{p})} \frac{\sin(i)}{\sqrt{1-e^2}},
\end{equation}
where $K$ is the RV amplitude, $G$ the Newtonian gravitational constant, $P$ the planet's period, $M_\star$ the stellar mass, and $M_\mathrm{p}$ the planet's mass. Inserting values for for Kepler-444 planets, we see that the expected $K$ values range from $\sim$4-20 cm/s. This is below the current RV detection threshold \citep[e.g.,][]{2015arXiv150301770P}
\subsection{PLATO}
Because of the shallow transit depth, photometric follow-up is precluded for most existing instruments. However, the ESA's Planetary Transits and Oscillations of Stars Mission (PLATO) has recently received approval with operational dates of 2024-2020\footnote{See PLATO SCIRD - http://sci.esa.int/plato/42730-scird-for-plato/.}. The precision goal for PLATO is $3.4\times10^{-5}$ in 1 hour for stars with $m_\mathrm{V}\le11$. Since Kepler-444 is 2 magnitudes brighter, we may expect a factor of $\sim$10 times more photons and thus a precision of $1\times10^{-5}$ per hour. Each planned 50 second exposure should therefore have a precision of $\sqrt{3600/50} \times10^{-5}\approx8\times10^{-5}$. Taking several solutions from the \emph{Kepler\ } data posteriors, based on the planned observing strategy we produce 2-year sets of simulated PLATO transits beginning in 2025. We then add Gaussian noise to this data with $\sigma=8\times 10^{-5}$.
Finally, we refit the combined actual \emph{Kepler\ } data and simulated, noisy PLATO data to test how informative the PLATO measurements will be in further constraining the planet masses. We find that the mass constraints of planets d and e are improved to having $\sim$20\% 1-$\sigma$ uncertainties. Such a measurement may allow tight constraints on the fraction of the planet which is iron, rocky, or volatile, potentially distinguishing a water-rich planet from an Earth-like composition. Additionally, we find that in some cases Planet b (the smallest radius planet $R_b=0.406\pm0.013 R_\oplus$) interacts with Planet c sufficiently to induce observable TTVs and a 99.7\% confidence (3-$\sigma$ equivalents) non-zero mass detection of Planet b. Such a measurement would make it (as of right now) the smallest exoplanet with a detected mass orbiting a main sequence star. To conclude, we note that the results in this section are dependent on the true noise properties and observing strategy of PLATO, which are currently uncertain.
\section{Implications for Formation and Tidal Evolution}
\citet[][hereafter P16]{2016CeMDA.tmp...21P} performs an in-depth analysis of the possible migration history of the Kepler-444 system, considering both migration and circularization effects due to planet-disk interactions. Since the planets are very low mass, P16 assumes they are in the Type I migration regime with migration timescale, $\tau_\mathrm{mig}\propto M_\mathrm{p}^{-1}$. If the planets migrate at different rates (due to mass and local disk density), then one would expect them to approach MMRs with other planets, at which point they would get trapped near those MMRs \citep{1996MNRAS.280..854M,2002ApJ...567..596L,2007ApJ...654.1110T}. Since the planets are up to 2\% away from resonance, P16 speculate that significant relative contraction of the planets did not occur, although significant migration as a unit might have. In order to match the observed period ratios, P16 assumes that planet e is significantly (by a factor of $\sim$3) more massive than d. This allows e to easily migrate more quickly than, and thus contract and approach resonance with, planet d while the other planets remain relatively more distant from resonances. Our photodynamical fit finds that $M_\mathrm{e}/M_\mathrm{d}=0.93^{+0.14}_{-0.13}$, a significant departure from that assumption.
This suggests that the present-day observed period ratios combined with smooth disk migration alone are generally insufficient for modeling specifics of the formation of the system.
Many factors may have changed the migration of the planets while the disk was present, including local disk properties \citep{2014AA...569A..56C} or turbulence in the disk \citep{2007ApJ...670..805O,2009AA...497..595R}. Alternately, the planets may have moved after the dispersal of the gas and dust disk, for instance via a combination of planetesimal crossings \citep{1984Icar...58..109F,2007prpl.conf..669L} or damping from tides raised by the star \citep{2013ApJ...774...52L}. Therefore, we caution against strict interpretations of observed exoplanet masses and architectures (or ensembles of these architectures) when it is likely that the systems have evolved substantially since their natal formation.
We infer from the $M_\mathrm{e}/M_\mathrm{d}$ ratio that the system underwent significant orbital period changes after a migration formation, or formed in situ.
We also note that very high, iron-like densities are disfavored, suggesting that large amounts of collisional stripping due to high velocity giant impacts likely did not occur \citep{2010ApJ...712L..73M,2014NatGe...7..564A}.
Since the planets orbit very close to their host star, we consider the effects of tidal dissipation on the observed orbital period ratios. It is possible that tides on planets in or near a MMR causes their proximity to orbital resonance to change (generally spreading planets apart away from resonance)
over Gyr timescales \citep{2011CeMDA.111...83P,2013ApJ...774...52L}. Following \citet[][henceforth P11]{2011CeMDA.111...83P}, we define $\delta_j$ as the distance from orbital resonance by
\begin{equation}
\delta=\frac{n_{j} }{ n_{j+1}}-\frac{ (k+1) }{ k},
\end{equation}
where $n_j$ is the $j^{th}$ planet's mean motion and $k$ is the degree of the near first order resonance between planets $j$ and $j+1$.
P11 equation (40) gives the relation between the change in $\delta_j$ as a function of time and orbital parameters of the system. To determine analytically the amount tides would move planets away from exact resonance as a function of time (equation (42)), P11 integrates equation (40) from $t'=0$ to $t'=t$ and assumes $\delta_{j,t=0} = 0$, i.e., the system begins in exact MMR. If, however, we integrate from $t'=0$ to $t'=11$ Gyr (the age of Kepler-444), and we know $\delta_{j,t=11 Gyr}$ based on the observed system, we may solve for $\delta_{j,t=0}$ as a function of $Q/k_2$, the ratio of the tidal $Q$ factor and the love number. This factor enters via the tidal circularization time
\begin{equation}
t_{c,j}=\frac{4}{63}\frac{M_j a_j^{13/2}}{(GM_\star^3)^{1/2}R_j^5}\frac{3Q}{2k_2},
\end{equation}
for the $j^{th}$ planet \citep{1966Icar....5..375G,1996ApJ...470.1187R}. We solve for the total change in distance from resonance since the planets' formation $\Delta_j=\delta_{j,t=11Gyr}-\delta_{j,t=0}$. For the inner pair of planets (b and c, $k=4$), we find that $\Delta_1\approx7\times10^{-4}-7\times10^{-7}$ for values of $Q/k_2$ ranging from 1-1000, using the approximation that $(Q/k_2)_b\approx(Q/k_2)_c$ which is reasonable given their similar size and proximity in the system. In the solar system, the rocky planets and large, rocky moons have $ 10\ ^{\displaystyle <}_{\displaystyle \sim}\ Q/k_2\lesssim500$ \citep{1966Icar....5..375G}. Since the observed $\delta_{1,t=11Gyr}=1.27\times10^{-2}$, we see that tidal dissipation was insufficient to have moved the innermost pair a significant distance from its current period ratio and rules out tidal dissipation breaking a natal MMR.
These findings are confirmed by long-term numerical N-body integrations, following \cite{2016AJ....152..105M}.
The other pairs of planets have longer periods, and in the case of c and d, are further from resonance. They are thus generally less affected by tides. However, the period ratio of planets d and e are very close to resonance (Table~\ref{table:prats}) so even a small amount of dissipation may significantly impact their $\delta_3$. Following \citet{2013ApJ...774...52L}, we can set a limit on the tidal $Q/k_2$ factor for the innermost planet by using their equation (18) with the observed system age and planet parameters. We find $(Q/k_2)_d\gtrsim12$. This limit is very near solar system values for rocky bodies, and possibly hints that the pair started in an exact MMR and was driven apart via this mechanism. This suggests that disk migration may have driven this pair of planets together, but the lack of tidally-broken commensurabilities among the other planets suggests the migration was not smooth or there were significant external perturbations after the disk dissipated.
\acknowledgements
We thank an anonymous referee for insightful comments which considerably added to the quality of this manuscript. This research is supported by Grant NNX14AB87G issued through NASA's \emph{Kepler\ } Participating Science Program.
|
\section{Introduction}
The six-point multi-ratio equation appears in the theory of integrable systems
on a discrete domain with octahedral cells \cite{DN,Bog,ks1,slg,ks,DDM,ABSo,SKP}.
It has the following geometric meaning, which has not been considered previously in this area.
\begin{figure}[b!]
\begin{center}
\input{skp-pic2.tex}
\end{center}
\caption{Concurrent secants of a conic.}
\label{skp-illustration2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\input{octahedron.tex}
\end{center}
\caption{Octahedron with labelled vertices.}
\label{octahedron}
\end{figure}
\begin{lemma}\label{gg}
If three lines meet a rationally parameterised conic at points corresponding to the three pairs of parameter values,
\begin{equation}\label{stencil}
\{x_{12},x_{34}\}, \{x_{13},x_{24}\}, \{x_{14},x_{23}\},
\end{equation}
then the concurrence of the lines, Figure \ref{skp-illustration2}, is expressed analytically as
\begin{equation}
\frac{(x_{12}-x_{24})(x_{13}-x_{23})(x_{14}-x_{34})}{(x_{12}-x_{23})(x_{14}-x_{24})(x_{13}-x_{34})}=1.\label{skp}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
The calculation to verify this is straightforward, but a more affecting argument in the moduli space of quadratic polynomials, given by Dolgachev \cite{Dolg} (Proposition 9.4.9), is also provided in appendix \ref{roots}.
Correspondence with the octahedron is shown in Figure \ref{octahedron}.
The results of applying Lemma \ref{gg} are consistent with the observations of Adler \cite{AdlInc} on other multi-ratio expressions.
In those cases, there is an interesting connection between integrability and the generalisations of Pascal's theorem due to M\"obius.
The situation here is similar, but involves a different extension of Pascal's figure, described in Section \ref{Pascal}.
The main result in Section \ref{Gosset-Elte} uses Lemma \ref{gg} to associate a combinatorial polytope or tessellation identified by the Coxeter symbol $k_{i,j}$, inscribed in a conic, with a generalised form of Coble's birational group; the group is defined in Section \ref{Coble}.
The points on the conic become points of a circle pattern when the conic is viewed as a model of the inversive plane.
This generalises the previous geometric view of equation (\ref{skp}) established by Konopelchenko, Schief and King \cite{ks1,ks2}, more precisely their circle-pattern is recovered in the case $k=0$ here.
The connection is explained in Section \ref{Clifford}.
A planar incidence-geometry view of Coble's group has been established by Kajiwara, Masuda, Noumi, Ohta and Yamada \cite{10E9}, with particular attention to the solution in the case $1_{5,2}$ in terms of elliptic functions, and its equivariant extension to the $1_{6,2}$ case, that corresponds to the elliptic Painlev\'e equation \cite{sc}.
The view established here treats uniformly all cases $k_{i,j}$, but turns out to be especially natural with-respect-to a simpler class of solutions that are rational; these are described in Section \ref{solutions}.
The Desargues maps introduced by Doliwa \cite{DDM} are combinatorially rich point-line configurations that are naturally considered in projective space of any dimension $M>1$, but, that are considered here in a restricted commutative and affine setting, $\mathbb{A}^M$.
In this case, they are shown in Section \ref{Desargues} to separate into $M$ independent systems each equivalent to case $k=0$ of Coble's group,
and this is applied to establish the natural determining-set for the configurations.
Throughout this paper, the projective or affine space is defined over a field, the case of a skew-field is discussed briefly at the end of Section \ref{Desargues}, where it is argued that the initial value problem and therefore the diagonalisation of the Desargues maps, is applicable to the general projective case, but raising this to the level of a proof is outside the scope of this work.
\section{Birational group}\label{Coble}
Coble's group \cite{COBI,COBII} has the following generalisation, connecting it with equation (\ref{skp}).
\begin{definition}[\cite{SKP}]\label{actions}
Let integers $i,j$ be positive and $k$ be non-negative.
Introduce actions on the arrays of variables
\begin{equation}
\left[\begin{array}{c}
y_0\\
y_1\\
\vdots\\
y_k
\end{array}\right],
\quad
\left[\begin{array}{cccc}
y_{00} & y_{10} & \cdots & y_{i0}\\
y_{01} & y_{11} & \cdots & y_{i1}\\
\vdots & \vdots & & \vdots \\
y_{0j} & y_{1j} & \cdots & y_{ij}
\end{array}\right],\label{Xdef}
\end{equation}
as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{rational_actions}
\begin{array}{rll}
t_m: & y_{(m-1)n} \leftrightarrow y_{mn}, & m \in \{1,\ldots,i\},\ n\in\{0,\ldots,j\},\\
s_n: & y_{m(n-1)} \leftrightarrow y_{mn}, & m \in \{0,\ldots,i\},\ n\in\{1,\ldots,j\},\\
r_n: & y_{n-1} \leftrightarrow y_{n}, & n\in\{1,\ldots,k\},\\
r_0: & y_0\leftrightarrow y_{00}, \ y_{mn}\rightarrow \bar{y}_{mn}, \ & m\in\{1,\ldots,i\},\ n\in\{1,\ldots,j\},
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where trivial actions are omitted, and $\bar{y}_{mn}$ is determined by the six-point multi-ratio equation imposed on variables
\begin{equation}\label{sixvars}
\{y_0,\bar{y}_{mn}\},\{y_{0n},y_{m0}\},\{y_{00},y_{mn}\},
\end{equation}
cf. Lemma \ref{gg}, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{yeqn}
\frac{(y_0-y_{m0})(y_{0n}-y_{mn})(y_{00}-\bar{y}_{mn})}{(y_0-y_{mn})(y_{00}-y_{m0})(y_{0n}-\bar{y}_{mn})}=1.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick]
\node at (-3,0) [draw,circle,fill=white,minimum size=8pt,inner sep=0pt]{};
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=4pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node (r0) at (0,0) [label={[label distance=2pt]below:$r_0$}]{};
\node (r1) at (-1.2,0) [label={[label distance=2pt]below:$r_1$}]{};
\node (rk) at (-3,0) [label={[label distance=2pt]below:$r_k$}]{};
\node (s1) at (1,0.8) [label={[label distance=2pt]above:$s_1$}]{};
\node (t1) at (1,-0.8) [label={[label distance=2pt]below:$t_1$}]{};
\node (sj) at (2.8,0.8) [label={[label distance=2pt]above:$s_j$}]{};
\node (ti) at (2.8,-0.8) [label={[label distance=2pt]below:$t_i$}]{};
\draw[dashed] (rk)--(r1);
\draw (r1)--(r0)--(s1);
\draw (r0)--(t1);
\draw[dashed] (s1)--(sj);
\draw[dashed] (t1)--(ti);
\draw (r1)--(-1.6,0);
\draw (rk)--(-2.6,0);
\draw (s1)--(1.4,0.8);
\draw (sj)--(2.4,0.8);
\draw (t1)--(1.4,-0.8);
\draw (ti)--(2.4,-0.8);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Coxeter graph with nodes corresponding to actions of Definition \ref{actions}.}
\label{cdd}
\end{figure}
The generators (\ref{rational_actions}) satisfy relations encoded in the Coxeter graph of Figure \ref{cdd}.
Specifically, the group relations correspond to identities in the field of rational functions in the variables (\ref{Xdef}).
The original group of Coble can be viewed as a partial integration of this one that is available if $k=1$.
To give the description of this group afforded by Lemma \ref{gg}, is the principal aim of this paper.
\section{Extension of Pascal's hexagon}\label{Pascal}
A suitable starting point is an elementary but intriguing extension to Pascal's figure of a hexagon inscribed in a conic.
\begin{prop}\label{direct}
Consider six points on a conic, $C$, labelled as follows:
\begin{equation} \label{exhex}
p_{\{1,3\}},p_{\{2,4\}},p_{\{1,5\}},p_{\{2,3\}},p_{\{1,4\}},p_{\{2,5\}}.
\end{equation}
Use $a+b$ to denote the line determined by two points.
By Pascal's theorem, the points
\begin{equation}\label{pascal-points}
\begin{split}
p_3:=(p_{\{1,4\}}+p_{\{2,5\}})\cap(p_{\{2,4\}}+p_{\{1,5\}}),\\
p_4:=(p_{\{1,3\}}+p_{\{2,5\}})\cap(p_{\{2,3\}}+p_{\{1,5\}}),\\
p_5:=(p_{\{1,3\}}+p_{\{2,4\}})\cap(p_{\{2,3\}}+p_{\{1,4\}}),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
are collinear, determining a line $\pi$,
\begin{equation}\label{pascal-line}
p_3+p_4 = p_4+p_5 = p_5+p_3 =: \pi.
\end{equation}
Add one further point to the figure, $p_{\{1,2\}}$, chosen freely on $C$.
Lines connecting this point with the determining points of the Pascal line (\ref{pascal-points}), intersect $C$ at three further points:
\begin{equation}\label{augment}
\begin{split}
p_{\{4,5\}}:=(p_{\{1,2\}}+p_3)\cap(C \setminus p_{\{1,2\}}),\\
p_{\{3,5\}}:=(p_{\{1,2\}}+p_4)\cap(C \setminus p_{\{1,2\}}),\\
p_{\{3,4\}}:=(p_{\{1,2\}}+p_5)\cap(C \setminus p_{\{1,2\}}).\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The following incidences then occur, determining two final points on $\pi$:
\begin{equation}\label{new-points}
\begin{split}
\pi\cap (p_{\{2,3\}}+p_{\{4,5\}}) = \pi \cap (p_{\{2,4\}}+p_{\{3,5\}}) = \pi \cap (p_{\{2,5\}}+p_{\{3,4\}}) =: p_1,\\
\pi\cap (p_{\{1,3\}}+p_{\{4,5\}}) = \pi \cap (p_{\{1,5\}}+p_{\{3,4\}}) = \pi \cap (p_{\{1,4\}}+p_{\{3,5\}}) =: p_2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
See Figure \ref{conic}.
\end{prop}
\begin{figure}[t]
{\input{conic_theorem.tex}}
\caption{
Illustration of Proposition \ref{direct},
points $p_{\{\alpha,\beta\}}$ and $p_\gamma$ are labelled as $\alpha\beta$ and $\gamma$ respectively.
The combinatorial symmetries of this figure correspond to free permutation of the five indices.
}
\label{conic}
\end{figure}
\begin{proof}
Pascal's theorem can be applied to demonstrate that
\begin{equation}\label{showing}
\pi\cap (p_{\{2,3\}}+p_{\{4,5\}}) = \pi \cap (p_{\{2,4\}}+p_{\{3,5\}}),
\end{equation}
and the other equalities in (\ref{new-points}) are established in the same way.
Consider the inscribed hexagon whose vertices are, in consecutive order,
\begin{equation}\label{hex2}
p_{\{1,2\}},p_{\{3,5\}},p_{\{2,4\}},p_{\{1,5\}},p_{\{2,3\}},p_{\{4,5\}}.
\end{equation}
Because of how $p_{\{1,2\}}$, $p_{\{4,5\}}$ and $p_{\{3,5\}}$ have been defined, two of the three determining points for the Pascal line of this hexagon are already known, they are
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
(p_{\{1,2\}}+p_{\{4,5\}})\cap(p_{\{2,4\}}+p_{\{1,5\}})=p_3,\\
(p_{\{1,2\}}+p_{\{3,5\}})\cap(p_{\{2,3\}}+p_{\{1,5\}})=p_4.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Therefore, it is common with the original Pascal line (\ref{pascal-line}), and the third determining point from hexagon (\ref{hex2}) must also be somewhere on it, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
(p_{\{3,5\}}+p_{\{2,4\}})\cap(p_{\{2,3\}}+p_{\{4,5\}})\in\pi,\\
\end{equation}
confirming (\ref{showing}).
\end{proof}
That the actions in the case $(i,j,k)=(2,1,0)$ of Definition \ref{actions} satisfy relations encoded in the corresponding Coxeter graph (Figure \ref{cdd}), can be regarded as an analytic formulation of Proposition \ref{direct}.
Identify the elements of the arrays (\ref{Xdef}) with points on $C$ as follows,
\begin{equation}\label{Sdef}
\left[\begin{array}{c}
p_{\{1,2\}}\\
\end{array}\right],
\quad
\left[\begin{array}{cccc}
p_{\{1,3\}} & p_{\{1,4\}} & p_{\{1,5\}}\\
p_{\{2,3\}} & p_{\{2,4\}} & p_{\{2,5\}}
\end{array}\right],
\end{equation}
and the actions (\ref{rational_actions}) with the permutations of indices that generate the combinatorial symmetries of the figure,
\begin{equation}\label{indact}
s_1: 1\leftrightarrow 2, \
r_0: 2\leftrightarrow 3, \
t_1: 3\leftrightarrow 4, \
t_2: 4\leftrightarrow 5.
\end{equation}
The array on the right in (\ref{Sdef}) corresponds to the vertices of the original hexagon (\ref{exhex}), and on the left, to the added point, $p_{\{1,2\}}$.
The actions $s_1$, $t_1$ and $t_2$ in (\ref{indact}) generate the subgroup of combinatorial symmetries of the initial hexagon, and the induced action on the array on the right in (\ref{Sdef}) is simply to permute the rows and columns, confirming identification with the actions in (\ref{rational_actions}).
The index permutation $2\leftrightarrow 3$, $r_0$ in (\ref{indact}), induces transposition of the first array elements in (\ref{Sdef}), but it induces a set of geometric operations on entries corresponding to $p_{\{2,4\}}$ and $p_{\{2,5\}}$.
The new points, $p_{\{3,4\}}$ and $p_{\{3,5\}}$, are determined from the given ones by (\ref{pascal-points}) and (\ref{augment}).
Performing these operations analytically using Lemma \ref{gg}, by identifying points on $C$ with corresponding values of a parameter, confirms the action of $r_0$ listed in Definition \ref{actions}.
This case illustrates the general situation.
The arrays (\ref{Xdef}) correspond to the set of points on a conic from which a figure is determined, and elements of the group generated by (\ref{rational_actions}) obtain the image of this determining-set under corresponding combinatorial symmetries of the figure.
In the case just described the following can be checked by inspection.
\begin{remark}\label{strong}
With regard to the group of combinatorial symmetries of Figure \ref{conic}, each point is contained in some image of the determining-set, and the subgroup that fixes the determining-set point-wise, is trivial.
This means the figure can be recovered from the determining-set using the birational group, and the birational group faithfully represents the combinatorial symmetries of the figure.
\end{remark}
\begin{figure}[t!]
{\input{sixteen.tex}}
\caption{
Example in the sequence of extensions of Pascal's hexagon corresponding to row three of Table \ref{sequence}.
}
\label{sixteen}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[t!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{llll}
& Points on $C$ & Points on $\pi$ & Pascal sub-figures\\
\hline
\rule{0pt}{3ex}
\parbox[c,c]{72pt}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=2pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node (4) at (1.2,0.2) {};
\node (5) at (1.2,-0.2) {};
\node (6) at (1.6,-0.2) {};
\draw (4);
\draw (5)--(6);
\end{tikzpicture}
} &
$6\ [2]$ & $3\ [2]$ & $1$
\\
\rule{0pt}{3ex}
\parbox[c,c]{72pt}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=2pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node at (1.2,0) [draw,circle,fill=white,minimum size=4pt,inner sep=0pt]{};
\node (4) at (1.2,0) {};
\node (5) at (1.6,0.2) {};
\node (6) at (1.6,-0.2) {};
\node (7) at (2.0,-0.2) {};
\draw (4)--(5);
\draw (4)--(6)--(7);
\end{tikzpicture}
} &
$10\ [3]$ & $5\ [3]$ & $10$
\\
\rule{0pt}{3ex}
\parbox[c,c]{72pt}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=2pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node at (0.8,0) [draw,circle,fill=white,minimum size=4pt,inner sep=0pt]{};
\node (3) at (0.8,0) {};
\node (4) at (1.2,0) {};
\node (5) at (1.6,0.2) {};
\node (6) at (1.6,-0.2) {};
\node (7) at (2.0,-0.2) {};
\draw (3)--(4)--(5);
\draw (4)--(6)--(7);
\end{tikzpicture}
} &
$16 \ [5]$ & $10\ [4]$ & $80$
\\
\rule{0pt}{3ex}
\parbox[c,c]{72pt}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=2pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node at (0.4,0) [draw,circle,fill=white,minimum size=4pt,inner sep=0pt]{};
\node (2) at (0.4,0) {};
\node (3) at (0.8,0) {};
\node (4) at (1.2,0) {};
\node (5) at (1.6,0.2) {};
\node (6) at (1.6,-0.2) {};
\node (7) at (2.0,-0.2) {};
\draw (2)--(3)--(4)--(5);
\draw (4)--(6)--(7);
\end{tikzpicture}
} &
$27\ [10]$ & $27\ [5]$ & $720$
\\
\rule{0pt}{3ex}
\parbox[c,c]{72pt}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=2pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node at (0,0) [draw,circle,fill=white,minimum size=4pt,inner sep=0pt]{};
\node (1) at (0,0) {};
\node (2) at (0.4,0) {};
\node (3) at (0.8,0) {};
\node (4) at (1.2,0) {};
\node (5) at (1.6,0.2) {};
\node (6) at (1.6,-0.2) {};
\node (7) at (2.0,-0.2) {};
\draw (1)--(2)--(3)--(4)--(5);
\draw (4)--(6)--(7);
\end{tikzpicture}
} &
$56\ [27]$ & $126\ [6]$ & $10080$
\\
\rule{0pt}{3ex}
\parbox[c,c]{72pt}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=2pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node at (-0.4,0) [draw,circle,fill=white,minimum size=4pt,inner sep=0pt]{};
\node (0) at (-0.4,0) {};
\node (1) at (0,0) {};
\node (2) at (0.4,0) {};
\node (3) at (0.8,0) {};
\node (4) at (1.2,0) {};
\node (5) at (1.6,0.2) {};
\node (6) at (1.6,-0.2) {};
\node (7) at (2.0,-0.2) {};
\draw (0)--(1)--(2)--(3)--(4)--(5);
\draw (4)--(6)--(7);
\end{tikzpicture}
} &
$240\ [126]$ & $2160\ [7]$ & $483840$
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{
Enumerative description of the finite figures related to case $(i,j)=(2,1)$ of Definition \ref{actions}.
The first row corresponds to a single hexagon, and is a case ($k=-1$) not included in Definition \ref{actions}.
The second row corresponds to Figure \ref{conic}, and the third row to Figure \ref{sixteen}.
The number of lines (not including $\pi$) through each point is included in brackets.
}
\label{sequence}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Loosely speaking, incrementing $k$ iterates the procedure described in Proposition \ref{direct} by adding, at each step, a further freely chosen point on $C$, joining it to the previously marked points of $\pi$, and then adding more lines and points until the figure is symmetric.
For example, Figure \ref{sixteen} shows the next in the sequence after Figure \ref{conic}.
After some iterations the symmetrisation procedure fails to terminate, corresponding to when the associated reflection group is affine.
Some details of this sequence are given in Table \ref{sequence}.
On the other hand, larger values of $i$ and $j$, due to the possible choices of three columns and two rows, or two columns and three rows, from the array on the right in (\ref{Xdef}), mean the determining-set involves multiple Pascal figures each with a different Pascal line.
Under the group action, these Pascal lines form a configuration $\Pi$, the cases of finite configurations are listed in Table \ref{main}.
The affine cases lead to configurations with a finite number of lines through each point and points on each line, but which are unbounded in number of points and lines.
The combinatorial description of the general figure is obtained via a connection with certain uniform polytopes and tessellations.
\begin{table}[t!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
&Points on $C$&Configuration $\Pi$\\
\hline
\rule{0pt}{3ex}
\parbox[c,c]{72pt}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=2pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node at (0,0) [draw,circle,fill=white,minimum size=4pt,inner sep=0pt]{};
\node (1) at (0,0) {};
\node (2) at (0.4,0.2) {};
\node (3) at (1.0,0.2) {};
\node (4) at (0.4,-0.2) {};
\node (5) at (1.0,-0.2) {};
\draw (4)--(1)--(2);
\draw[dashed] (4)--(5);
\draw[dashed] (2)--(3);
\end{tikzpicture}
} &
$\frac{(i+j+2)!}{(i+1)!(j+1)!}$ $\left[\frac{i(i+1)j(j+1)}{4}\right]$ & $(p_{i+j-2},q_5)$, $p=\frac{(i+j+2)!}{(i-1)!(j-1)!4!}$
\\
\rule{0pt}{3ex}
\parbox[c,c]{72pt}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=2pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node at (0,0) [draw,circle,fill=white,minimum size=4pt,inner sep=0pt]{};
\node (1) at (0,0) {};
\node (2) at (0.4,0) {};
\node (4) at (0.8,0.2) {};
\node (3) at (0.8,-0.2) {};
\node (5) at (1.4,0.2) {};
\draw (1)--(2)--(3);
\draw (2)--(4);
\draw [dashed] (4)--(5);
\end{tikzpicture}
} &
$2^{j+2}$ $\left[\frac{(j+3)!}{(j-1)!4!}\right]$ & $(p_{j-1},q_{10})$, $p=\frac{2^{j-1}(j+3)!}{(j-1)!4!}$
\\
\rule{0pt}{3ex}
\parbox[c,c]{72pt}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=2pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node at (0,0) [draw,circle,fill=white,minimum size=4pt,inner sep=0pt]{};
\node (1) at (0,0) {};
\node (2) at (0.4,0) {};
\node (3) at (0.8,0) {};
\node (4) at (1.2,0.2) {};
\node (5) at (1.2,-0.2) {};
\node (6) at (1.6,-0.2) {};
\draw (1)--(2)--(3)--(4);
\draw (3)--(5)--(6);
\end{tikzpicture}
} &
$27$ $[10]$ & $(27_1,1_{27})$
\\
\rule{0pt}{3ex}
\parbox[c,c]{72pt}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=2pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node at (0,0) [draw,circle,fill=white,minimum size=4pt,inner sep=0pt]{};
\node (1) at (0,0) {};
\node (2) at (0.4,0) {};
\node (3) at (0.8,0) {};
\node (4) at (1.2,0) {};
\node (5) at (1.6,0.2) {};
\node (6) at (1.6,-0.2) {};
\node (7) at (2.0,-0.2) {};
\draw (1)--(2)--(3)--(4)--(5);
\draw (4)--(6)--(7);
\end{tikzpicture}
} &
$56$ $[27]$ & $(126_1,1_{126})$
\\
\rule{0pt}{3ex}
\parbox[c,c]{72pt}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=2pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node at (0,0) [draw,circle,fill=white,minimum size=4pt,inner sep=0pt]{};
\node (1) at (0,0) {};
\node (2) at (0.4,0) {};
\node (3) at (0.8,0) {};
\node (4) at (1.2,0) {};
\node (5) at (1.6,0) {};
\node (6) at (2.0,0.2) {};
\node (7) at (2.0,-0.2) {};
\node (8) at (2.4,-0.2) {};
\draw (1)--(2)--(3)--(4)--(5)--(6);
\draw (5)--(7)--(8);
\end{tikzpicture}
} &
$240$ $[126]$ & $(2160_1,1_{2160})$
\\
\rule{0pt}{3ex}
\parbox[c,c]{72pt}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=2pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node at (0,0) [draw,circle,fill=white,minimum size=4pt,inner sep=0pt]{};
\node (1) at (0,0) {};
\node (2) at (0.4,0) {};
\node (3) at (0.8,0.2) {};
\node (4) at (1.2,0.2) {};
\node (5) at (0.8,-0.2) {};
\node (6) at (1.2,-0.2) {};
\draw (1)--(2)--(3)--(4);
\draw (2)--(5)--(6);
\end{tikzpicture}
} &
$72$ $[30]$ & $(270_2,54_{10})$
\\
\rule{0pt}{3ex}
\parbox[c,c]{72pt}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=2pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node at (0,0) [draw,circle,fill=white,minimum size=4pt,inner sep=0pt]{};
\node (1) at (0,0) {};
\node (2) at (0.4,0) {};
\node (3) at (0.8,0) {};
\node (4) at (1.2,0.2) {};
\node (5) at (1.2,-0.2) {};
\node (6) at (1.6,-0.2) {};
\node (7) at (2.0,-0.2) {};
\draw (1)--(2)--(3)--(4);
\draw (3)--(5)--(6)--(7);
\end{tikzpicture}
} &
$126$ $[60]$ & $(756_2,56_{27})$
\\
\rule{0pt}{3ex}
\parbox[c,c]{72pt}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=2pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node at (0,0) [draw,circle,fill=white,minimum size=4pt,inner sep=0pt]{};
\node (1) at (0,0) {};
\node (2) at (0.4,0) {};
\node (3) at (0.8,0.2) {};
\node (4) at (1.2,0.2) {};
\node (5) at (0.8,-0.2) {};
\node (6) at (1.2,-0.2) {};
\node (7) at (1.6,-0.2) {};
\draw (1)--(2)--(3)--(4);
\draw (2)--(5)--(6)--(7);
\end{tikzpicture}
} &
$576$ $[105]$ & $(7560_3,2268_{10})$
\\
\rule{0pt}{3ex}
\parbox[c,c]{72pt}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=2pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node at (0,0) [draw,circle,fill=white,minimum size=4pt,inner sep=0pt]{};
\node (1) at (0,0) {};
\node (2) at (0.4,0) {};
\node (3) at (0.8,0) {};
\node (4) at (1.2,0.2) {};
\node (5) at (1.2,-0.2) {};
\node (6) at (1.6,-0.2) {};
\node (7) at (2.0,-0.2) {};
\node (8) at (2.4,-0.2) {};
\draw (1)--(2)--(3)--(4);
\draw (3)--(5)--(6)--(7)--(8);
\end{tikzpicture}
} &
$2160$ $[280]$& $(60480_3,6720_{27})$
\\
\rule{0pt}{3ex}
\parbox[c,c]{72pt}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\tikzstyle{every node}=[draw,circle,fill=black,minimum size=2pt,inner sep=0pt];
\node at (0,0) [draw,circle,fill=white,minimum size=4pt,inner sep=0pt]{};
\node (1) at (0,0) {};
\node (2) at (0.4,0) {};
\node (3) at (0.8,0.2) {};
\node (4) at (1.2,0.2) {};
\node (5) at (0.8,-0.2) {};
\node (6) at (1.2,-0.2) {};
\node (7) at (1.6,-0.2) {};
\node (8) at (2.0,-0.2) {};
\draw (1)--(2)--(3)--(4);
\draw (2)--(5)--(6)--(7)--(8);
\end{tikzpicture}
} &
$17280$ $[280]$& $(604800_4,241920_{10})$
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{
Enumerative description of finite figures related to Definition \ref{actions}.
The number of secants through each point on $C$ is included in brackets.
The Pascal lines form a configuration, $\Pi$.
The notation $(p_\alpha,q_\beta)$ denotes a configuration of $p$ points and $q$ lines with $\alpha$ lines through each point and $\beta$ points on each line; the constraint $p\alpha=q\beta$ corresponds to the total number of point-line incidences.
}
\label{main}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Gosset-Elte figures inscribed in a conic}\label{Gosset-Elte}
A combinatorial polytope in a projective space, is a point-line figure whose incidences correspond to the vertex-edge incidences of the polytope.
Concerning the octahedron and its higher dimensional counterparts, namely the cross-polytopes, we use the following terminology.
\begin{definition}\label{central}
A combinatorial cross-polytope with the property that the lines joining opposing vertices (its axes) are all concurrent at a point, will be called a cross-polytope with a centre.
\end{definition}
This allows to describe Figure \ref{skp-illustration2} as an octahedron with a centre inscribed in a conic.
However, the edges are not marked, rather, the lines correspond to the axes, so it is a simpler skeleton from which the octahedron can be recovered.
In the same way, Figures \ref{conic} and \ref{sixteen}, are skeletons of a four-dimensional rectified simplex, and a five-dimensional demicube.
Indeed, the planar figures corresponding to Definition \ref{actions} for values of $(i,j,k)$ satisfying $i+j+k+1\ge ijk-1$, can each be described in terms of a corresponding figure from the Gosset-Elte family of uniform polytopes and tessellations.
Coxeter \cite{cox-vf,rp} introduced this family, giving a unified construction from the reflection group associated with Figure \ref{cdd}, and its members are subsequently identified by the corresponding (Coxeter) symbol $k_{i,j}$.
Gosset and Elte separately discovered between them the exceptional cases, but the family also includes the infinite sequences of rectified simplexes corresponding to the case $k=0$, the cross-polytopes when $i=j=1$, and the demihypercubes when $i=k=1$.
The connection between Definition \ref{actions} and the combinatorial Gosset-Elte figures is based on the idea of a {\it determining set}.
Under the two constraints that (i), vertices correspond to points on a conic, and (ii), each octahedral cell has a centre, the remainder of the figure is determined uniquely from a freely chosen sub-figure.
This sub-figure, which does not contain any whole octahedral cell, will be described first, and then related to the full figure.
\begin{definition}\label{ds}
The figure associated with initial data arrays (\ref{Xdef}):
View the entries of arrays (\ref{Xdef}) as parameters corresponding to points on a conic, and add lines joining pairs of points whose entries, (i) are from distinct arrays, (ii) both belong to the first array, and, (iii) both belong to a common row or column of the second array.
\end{definition}
The combinatorial polytope described in Definition \ref{ds} can be called a {\it compound simplex}, its associated Coxeter-graph is obtained from Figure \ref{cdd} by deleting the node labelled $r_0$.
\begin{prop}\label{description}
For generic values of the parameters, Definition \ref{ds} is a determining sub-figure of a combinatorial $k_{i,j}$-polytope or tessellation inscribed in a conic, constrained by the condition that all cross-polytope (or $k_{1,1}$) facets have a centre (Definition \ref{central}).
Birational actions generated by (\ref{rational_actions}) determine the image of this sub-figure under combinatorial symmetries of the $k_{i,j}$-figure.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The correspondence associating variables to vertices, and equations to octahedral cells of the $k_{i,j}$-polytopes and tessellations, was made previously in \cite{SKP}.
In outline, the discrete domain, like the corresponding $k_{i,j}$-figure, is a realisation of an incidence structure expressible in terms of cosets of the underlying Coxeter group.
The proposition is therefore implied directly by Lemma \ref{gg}, because it is clear that imposing that all octahedral cells have a centre, is equivalent to imposing that the cross-polytope facets do.
The set of initial values for the discrete system corresponds to the determining-set of the figure. The consistency of the initial-value-problem was established previously by reducing it to verifying the relations satisfied by the associated actions (\ref{rational_actions}).
That the figure in its entirety is determined, rather than some part of it, follows from the fact that the combinatorial symmetries are transitive on vertices and edges of the $k_{i,j}$ figures.
\end{proof}
Because the vertices of the combinatorial $k_{i,j}$-figure are confined to a conic, the centres of all cross-polytope facets belonging to the same $k_{1,2}$ or $k_{2,1}$-facet, are collinear.
In the case of the rectified four-simplex ($0_{1,2}$-polytope) this was established as part of Proposition \ref{direct}, and the more general assertion follows by repeated application of this case.
\begin{remark}\label{Pi}
The cross-polytope centres (Proposition \ref{description}) are therefore points of a planar point-line configuration ($\Pi$ in Table \ref{main}), which is a projective realisation of the incidence structure given by associating points with $k_{1,1}$-facets, and lines with the $k_{2,1}$ and $k_{1,2}$-facets, of the $k_{i,j}$-figure.
\end{remark}
\section{Ambient solution}\label{solutions}
An application of this geometric view of Coble's group (Proposition \ref{description}, Remark \ref{Pi}), is that the special situation when {\it all} cross-polytope centres align (the configuration $\Pi$ in Table \ref{main} collapses to a line) can be identified, that suggests the birational group should linearise in terms of the associated geometric group on the conic.
To formulate this, recall first the participating group.
Denote the conic and the single Pascal line by $C$ and $\pi$ respectively.
For any $a,b,e\in C\setminus \pi$, there exists a unique point $c\in C\setminus \pi$ such that the lines determined by the pairs $\{a,b\}$ and $\{c,e\}$, intersect $\pi$ at the same point.
The resulting mapping $(a,b)\mapsto c$ turns $C\setminus \pi$ into a group with identity $e$.
In terms of corresponding parameters $(x,y,z)$ for $(a,b,c)$, use the notation $z=x*y$ for the product, and $x^{-1}$ for the inverse of $x$.
This product is equivalent to either addition or multiplication in the field, depending on how $\pi$ meets $C$.
\begin{prop}\label{solution}
The cross-polytope centres described in Proposition \ref{description} lie on a common line $\pi$ if, and only if, elements of the array on the right in (\ref{Xdef}) are such that
\begin{equation}\label{fortress}
y_{mn}=y_{00}^{-1}*y_{m0}*y_{0n}, \quad m\in\{1,\ldots, i\},n\in\{1,\ldots, j\}.
\end{equation}
This reduces the birational actions (\ref{rational_actions}) to linear ones for the remaining variables:
\begin{equation}\label{linear-actions}
\begin{array}{rll}
t_m: & y_{(m-1)0} \leftrightarrow y_{m0}, & m \in \{2,\ldots,i\},\\
t_1: & y_{00}\leftrightarrow y_{10}, \ y_{0n} \rightarrow y_{00}^{-1}*y_{10}*y_{0n}, & n \in \{1,\ldots,j\},\\
s_n: & y_{0(n-1)} \leftrightarrow y_{0n}, & n\in\{2,\ldots,j\},\\
s_1: & y_{00}\leftrightarrow y_{01}, \ y_{m0} \rightarrow y_{00}^{-1}*y_{01}*y_{m0}, & m \in \{1,\ldots,i\},\\
r_n: & y_{n-1} \leftrightarrow y_{n}, & n\in\{1,\ldots,k\},\\
r_0: & y_0\leftrightarrow y_{00}.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The intersection of lines determined by the two pairs $\{y_{mn},y_{\alpha\beta}\}$ and $\{y_{m\beta},y_{\alpha n}\}$ taken from the array on the right in (\ref{Xdef}), where $m\neq \alpha$ and $n\neq \beta$, is the centre of an octahedral cell.
The condition for these centres to be on $\pi$ can be expressed in terms of the geometric group on $C\setminus \pi$, as
\begin{equation}\label{reinforced}
y_{mn}*y_{\alpha\beta}=y_{m\beta}*y_{\alpha n}, \quad m,\alpha\in \{0,\ldots, i\},\ n,\beta\in \{0,\ldots, j\}.
\end{equation}
The conditions (\ref{fortress}) are clearly a subset of the conditions (\ref{reinforced}).
That (\ref{fortress}) implies (\ref{reinforced}) is established by substitution, relying on associativity of the group and therefore Pascal's theorem in geometric terms.
To verify that all octahedral centres are on $\pi$, it is sufficient to show that the actions (\ref{rational_actions}) preserve the condition (\ref{fortress}).
For the actions $t_1,\ldots,t_i,s_1,\ldots,s_j$ this follows from the established equivalence between (\ref{fortress}) and (\ref{reinforced}).
For the action $r_0$ it follows from the concurrence of lines determined by the three pairs of points (\ref{sixvars}), which was the content of Lemma \ref{gg}.
For the remaining actions $r_1,\ldots,r_k$ it is trivial.
\end{proof}
In the case $k_{1,2}$, corresponding to the sequence in Table \ref{sequence}, there is only a single Pascal line, so there is no loss of generality if (\ref{fortress}) is assumed.
The subgroup associated with the $1_{5,2}$-tessellation is known to be linearised by substitution of elliptic functions, and Proposition \ref{solution} shows that rational functions are sufficient for the $5_{2,1}$-tessellation.
Nevertheless, it determines an $\tilde{E}_8$ action on $\mathbb{P}^1\times \mathbb{P}^1$ by equivariant extension to the case $5_{3,1}$.
It would therefore be interesting to know where this fits in relation to the QRT maps \cite{qrt1} and classification of discrete Painlev\'e equations \cite{sc}.
\remark{
The linear representation (\ref{linear-actions}) of the Coxeter group encoded in Figure \ref{cdd} can of course be realised in any abelian group, and in particular when the conic is replaced with a cubic curve.
However, in the general case, when the representation of the Coxeter group is birational (Section \ref{Coble}),
the algebraic view is along the lines described by M\"obius, relying on closure in the non-commutative M\"obius group, which is incompatible with the generalisation to a cubic curve.
In other words, if the combinatorial Gosset-Elte figures, with the same constraint that octahedral cells have a centre, were to be inscribed in a cubic curve, it would correspond to the linear group (\ref{linear-actions}) when the octahedral centres are also on the curve, but a group that is not in general birational when the positions of the centres are unconstrained.
}
\section{Associated circle patterns}\label{Clifford}
If the projective plane over $\mathbb{C}$ is viewed as a four-dimensional real space, then a conic in the plane is seen as a quadric surface in the space.
Three points on the conic correspond to points on the surface that are either on a line within the surface, or determine a plane that cuts it.
In this way, the surface constitutes an inversive plane; each curve determined by a set of three points, corresponds to a circle.
\begin{remark}\label{four-points}
The ambient notion of general-position for sets of points in an inversive plane, has the requirement that no four points be on the same circle.
The corresponding requirement is absent in the projective setting.
\end{remark}
In this model of the inversive plane, equation (\ref{skp}) is an analytic form of a geometric constraint established in \cite{ks1,ks2}, that the four circles determined by sets of points
\begin{equation}\label{faces1}
\{x_{12},x_{23},x_{13}\},
\{x_{23},x_{34},x_{24}\},
\{x_{13},x_{34},x_{14}\},
\{x_{12},x_{24},x_{14}\},
\end{equation}
are concurrent at a point.
Or, equivalently, due to Clifford's four-circle theorem, that the circles determined by the sets
\begin{equation} \label{faces2}
\{x_{12},x_{13},x_{14}\},
\{x_{12},x_{23},x_{24}\},
\{x_{13},x_{23},x_{34}\},
\{x_{14},x_{24},x_{34}\},
\end{equation}
are.
The resulting figure of eight circles and eight points, is the $C_4$ pattern appearing first in Clifford's chain of theorems.
By symmetry, the condition on the participating points can be reduced to the equivalent one, that any three of the circles meet at a point.
The sets of points (\ref{faces1}) and (\ref{faces2}) correspond to the eight faces of the octahedron.
In summary.
\begin{coro}[of Proposition \ref{description}] \label{circles}
View the entries of arrays (\ref{Xdef}) as points in the inversive plane.
In general position, these points determine a combinatorial $k_{i,j}$-polytope or tessellation, constrained by the condition that the vertices of each octahedral cell correspond to points of a $C_4$ circle pattern (see above).
When the inversive plane is identified with $\mathbb{C}\cup\{\infty\}$, the actions (\ref{rational_actions}) give the image of the determining-set under combinatorial symmetries of the $k_{i,j}$-figure.
\end{coro}
The statement of existence and movability of the circle patterns in the case $k=0$ was given originally in relation to the integrability of equation (\ref{skp}) in \cite{ks1}.
Longuet-Higgins \cite{LH} actually related Clifford's chain to the $1_{1,j}$-polytopes (demihypercubes), and added new examples to previously known configurations of points and hyperspheres in connection with the remaining (finite) list of $1_{i,j}$-polytopes.
The patterns here are planar, so they have a different nature, but they exist uniformly in relation to all of the $k_{i,j}$-polytopes and tessellations.
The mismatch between patterns corresponding to our and the Longuet-Higgins Coxeter symbol, is seen already in the case of the $C_4$ pattern described above.
The two additional points are on the same footing as the original ones, and the eight taken together correspond to vertices of the four-dimensional cross-polytope, whereas the original constraint corresponds to the octahedron.
This feature is related to Remark \ref{four-points}, however, a generalisation to higher dimension without this feature as been obtained \cite{CSC}, and it would be interesting to know if those patterns have a projective formulation.
Circle patterns for Riccati solutions of discrete Painlev\'e equations have been related to discrete analogues of holomorphic functions \cite{Aga,AgaBob}.
The circle patterns here are instead associated with the general solution, but the hypergeometric solutions of the elliptic Painlev\'e equation \cite{10E9} are also framed geometrically in terms of a conic.
\section{Desargues maps}\label{Desargues}
In terms of the Coxeter symbol, the Desargues maps of Doliwa \cite{DDM,Daff} in the fundamental region, are a combinatorial $0_{i,j}$-polytope satisfying the condition that the vertices of each $0_{i,0}$-facet are collinear.
It means some edges coalesce resulting in a point-line configuration; in summary we emphasise the following.
\begin{remark}\label{Doliwa}
In the fundamental region the Desargues map is a point-line realisation of the incidence structure defined by vertices and $0_{i,0}$-facets of the $0_{i,j}$-polytope.
\end{remark}
This is a
$
(p_{j+1},q_{i+2}),\ p=(i+j+2)!/[(i+1)!(j+1)!],
$
configuration, the first few cases are given in Table \ref{configs}.
Although they are both simplexes, the $0_{0,j}$-facets are distinguished from the $0_{i,0}$ ones, which breaks the antipodal symmetry of the $0_{i,i}$-polytopes, or equivalently the Coxeter graph automorphism.
There is a direct relationship between the Desargues maps whose image is in $\mathbb{A}^M$, $M>1$, over a field, and the form of Coble's group in Definition \ref{actions}, which leads to the following.
\begin{table}[t!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lllll}
$(6_2,4_3)$ & $(10_3,10_3)$ & $(15_4,20_3)$ & $(21_5,35_3)$ & $(28_6,56_3)$ \\
$(10_2,5_4)$ & $(20_3,15_4)$ & $(35_4,35_4)$ & $(56_5,70_4)$ & $(84_6,126_4)$ \\
$(15_2,6_5)$ & $(35_3,21_5)$ & $(70_4,56_5)$ & $(126_5,126_5)$ & $(210_6,252_5)$ \\
$(21_2,7_6)$ & $(56_3,28_6)$ & $(126_4,84_6)$ & $(252_5,210_6)$ & $(462_6,462_6)$ \\
$(28_2,8_7)$ & $(84_3,36_7)$ & $(210_4,120_7)$ & $(462_5,330_7)$ & $(924_6,792_7)$
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Enumerative description of the first few of Doliwa's configurations associated with Coxeter symbol $0_{i,j}$. The balanced $(10_3)$, corresponding to Coxeter symbol $0_{1,2}$, is Desargues' configuration.}
\label{configs}
\end{table}
\begin{prop}\label{dd}
Freely choose a point in $\mathbb{A}^M$, $j+1$ lines through it, and $i+1$ additional points on each line.
In general position, this is a determining-set for Doliwa's configuration associated with Coxeter symbol $0_{i,j}$ (Remark \ref{Doliwa}).
Denote the first freely chosen point by $y_0$ and, for each $n\in\{0,\ldots,j\}$, denote the $i+1$ additional points on the $n^{th}$ line passing through $y_0$, by $y_{0n},\ldots,y_{in}$.
Then generators (\ref{rational_actions}) in the case $k=0$, acting diagonally on $\mathbb{A}^M$, give the image of this determining-set under combinatorial symmetries of the configuration.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The connection between this geometric setting and equation (\ref{skp}) can be formulated as follows.
Suppose lines $l_1,\ldots,l_4 \subset \mathbb{A}^M$ intersect pairwise,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&l_1 \cap l_2 = x_{12}, \quad
l_1 \cap l_3 = x_{13}, \quad
l_2 \cap l_3 = x_{23}, \\
&l_1 \cap l_4 = x_{14}, \quad
l_2 \cap l_4 = x_{24}, \quad
l_3 \cap l_4 = x_{34},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
for some set of points $x_{12},\ldots,x_{34}\in \mathbb{A}^M$, forming the configuration of a complete quadrilateral $(6_2,4_3)$.
Then the points satisfy the analytic condition
\begin{equation}
\frac{(x^{{(\alpha)}}_{12}-x^{{(\alpha)}}_{24})(x^{{(\alpha)}}_{13}-x^{{(\alpha)}}_{23})(x^{{(\alpha)}}_{14}-x^{{(\alpha)}}_{34})}{(x^{{(\alpha)}}_{12}-x^{{(\alpha)}}_{23})(x^{{(\alpha)}}_{14}-x^{{(\alpha)}}_{24})(x^{{(\alpha)}}_{13}-x^{{(\alpha)}}_{34})}=1, \quad \alpha \in \{1,\ldots,M\},\label{component}
\end{equation}
in which the affine coordinate notation $x_{mn} = (x_{mn}^{(1)},\ldots,x_{mn}^{(M)})$ has been used.
Because the condition (\ref{component}) determines one point from the others, it follows that the diagonal actions described in the proposition preserve the collinearity assumed for the points of the determining-set; it is trivial for all actions except $r_0$, and for this one it is sufficient to consider the case $i=j=1$, $M=2$.
In a projective setting, the multi-ratio condition emerges by projection of the quadrilateral from a point onto a line,
equivalent to the above for the affine case, and this has been described in earlier works \cite{Bog,DDM}.
The affine setting used in this proposition is practical, and not really a restriction: it differs by the implied meaning of {\it general-position} for the determining sub-figure.
Observe now (separately from the above) that the $0_{i,0}$ sub-graph of generators (\ref{rational_actions}), i.e., $r_0,t_1,\ldots,t_i$, freely permutes entries $y_0,y_{00},y_{10},\ldots,y_{i0}$ of arrays (\ref{Xdef}), so in accordance with the correspondence described in Proposition \ref{description}, these entries correspond to vertices of a $0_{i,0}$-facet.
Also notice, that all rows of the array on the right in (\ref{Xdef}) are on the same footing, because the rows are themselves freely permuted by the actions $s_1,\ldots,s_j$.
Therefore the entries of rows of the array on the right in (\ref{Xdef}) correspond to vertices of $j+1$ $0_{i,0}$-facets whose common vertex corresponds to $y_0$.
The second paragraph of the Proposition follows by combining these two observations.
The first shows that the diagonal actions described determine a point-line figure in $\mathbb{A}^M$, and the second that it coincides with Doliwa's $0_{i,j}$ configuration.
It is clear the general configuration is determined by the group actions, because, first, all that is imposed is the linearity and multi-ratio constraints on each octahedral cell, which are both necessary.
Second, that the whole configuration is obtained, and not some part of it, follows from the fact that the group of combinatorial symmetries of the $0_{i,j}$ polytope acts transitively on vertices.
This establishes the first paragraph of the Proposition.
\end{proof}
\begin{table}[t!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lllll}
\!\! -&\!\!$(5_1,1_5)$&\!\!$(15_2,6_5)$&\!\!$(35_3,21_5)$&\!\!$(70_4,56_5)$\\
\!\!$(5_1,1_5)$&\!\!$(30_2,12_5)$&\!\!$(105_3,63_5)$&\!\!$(280_4,224_5)$&\!\!$(630_5,630_5)$\\
\!\!$(15_2,6_5)$&\!\!$(105_3,63_5)$&\!\!$(420_4,336_5)$&\!\!$(1260_5,1260_5)$&\!\!$(3150_6,3780_5)$\\
\!\!$(35_3,21_5)$&\!\!$(280_4,224_5)$&\!\!$(1260_5,1260_5)$&\!\!$(4200_6,5040_5)$&\!\!$(11550_7,16170_5)$\\
\!\!$(70_4,56_5)$&\!\!$(630_5,630_5)$&\!\!$(3150_6,3780_5)$&\!\!$(11550_7,16170_5)$&\!\!$(34650_8,55440_5)$
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Enumerative description of the first few configurations associated with Coxeter symbol $0_{i,j}$ described in Remark \ref{Pi}. Entry corresponding to Coxeter symbol $0_{2,2}$ is Schl\"afli's double-six.}
\label{configs2}
\end{table}
This proposition shows that the Desargues maps whose image is in $\mathbb{A}^M$ over a field, decompose into $M$ simpler independent systems, each equivalent to case $k=0$ of Coble's group.
The corresponding result in a projective space over a skew-field is likely to hold, because the consistency for Doliwa's configurations is encoded in Desargues' theorem, and not Pascal's \cite{DDM,ks2}. The suitable notion of general-position for the inital data, will be weaker in the projective case.
The circle patterns corresponding to the case $k=0$ have also been generalised in this direction \cite{CSC}.
Given the view established by Lemma \ref{gg}, it would therefore be interesting to know if this form of Coble's group can extend to the skew-field setting in the case $k>0$.
In this regard, a basic question to shed some light, is to know the geometric origin of the consistency property underlying the movability of the point-line configurations $\Pi$ of Remark \ref{Pi}.
The first few cases associated to the Coxeter symbol $0_{i,j}$ are displayed Table \ref{configs2} for comparison with Table \ref{configs}.
The connection between the Desargues maps and the polytope inscribed in a conic, is not a geometric one.
It is possible to see the Desargues maps as a special case of the circle patterns \cite{ks2} in which all circles become lines, but they then appear in a restricted two-dimensional setting.
However, Proposition \ref{dd} is equivalent to a symmetry of the actions (\ref{rational_actions}) present when $k=0$.
A similar kind of symmetry is also present in the case $k=1$; it is inferred from the integration that recovers Coble's group in its original form \cite{SKP}.
It is therefore an interesting question to understand the geometric origin of these symmetries in the context of Lemma \ref{gg}.
\vspace{10pt}
\noindent {\bf\large Acknowledgements}\\
\noindent I am very grateful to Pavlos Kassotakis for our discussions on this topic.
|
\section{S\'election d'estimateurs}
\label{VC.sec.pb}
Ce texte se place dans le cadre g\'en\'eral de la pr\'evision,
tel que pr\'esent\'e par \citet{Arl_2016_JESchap2},
dont on utilise les notations et auquel on fait r\'eguli\`erement r\'ef\'erence
par la suite.
On peut alors formaliser le probl\`eme de s\'election d'estimateurs\footnote
Compte-tenu de la terminologie introduite par \citet{Arl_2016_JESchap2},
il serait plus logique de parler de s\'election de r\`egles d'apprentissage.
Nous utilisons n\'eanmoins ici l'expression \og{}s\'election d'estimateurs\fg{},
plus courante et plus concise.}
comme suit.
\medbreak
On dispose d'une collection de r\`egles d'apprentissage
$(\widehat{f}_m)_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n}$
et d'un \'echantillon $D_n$.
On souhaite pouvoir choisir l'une de ces r\`egles $\widehat{f}_{\widehat{m}}$
\`a l'aide des donn\'ees uniquement.
Cette question g\'en\'erale recouvre de nombreux exemples :
\begin{itemize}
\item s\'election de mod\`eles :
\SAindex{selection modeles@s\'election de mod\`eles
pour tout $m \in \mathcal{M}_n$, $\widehat{f}_m$ est une r\`egle par minimisation du risque empirique
sur un mod\`ele $S_m$.
\item choix d'un hyperparam\`etre :
$m$~d\'esigne alors un ou plusieurs param\`etres r\'eels dont d\'epend la r\`egle $\widehat{f}_m$
(par exemple, le nombre de voisins $k$ pour les $k$ plus proches voisins,
ou bien le param\`etre de r\'egularisation $\lambda$ pour les SVM).
\item choix entre des m\'ethodes de natures diverses
(par exemple, entre les $k$ plus proches voisins, les SVM et les for\^ets al\'eatoires).
\end{itemize}
\medbreak
Les enjeux du probl\`eme et approches pour le r\'esoudre sont
essentiellement les m\^emes que pour le probl\`eme de s\'election de mod\`eles,
que \citet[section~3.9]{Arl_2016_JESchap2} d\'ecrit en d\'etail.
Nous n'en rappelons donc ici que les grandes lignes.
Tout d'abord, il faut pr\'eciser l'objectif (pr\'evision ou identification
de la \og{}meilleure\fg{} r\`egle $\widehat{f}_m$).
Ce texte se focalise sur l'objectif de pr\'evision :
on veut minimiser le risque de l'estimateur final $\widehat{f}_{\widehat{m}(D_n)} (D_n)$
--- entra\^in\'e sur l'ensemble des donn\'ees, celles-l\`a m\^emes qui ont servi \`a choisir $\widehat{m}(D_n)$.
Atteindre un tel objectif n\'ecessite d'\'eviter deux d\'efauts principaux :
le surapprentissage
\SAindex{surapprentissage
(lorsqu'un pr\'edicteur \og{}colle\fg{} excessivement aux observations,
ce qui l'emp\^eche de g\'en\'eraliser correctement)
et le sous-apprentissage
\SAindex{sous-apprentissage
(quand un pr\'edicteur \og{}lisse\fg{} trop les observations
et devient incapable de reproduire les variations du pr\'edicteur de Bayes).
Il s'agit donc de trouver le meilleur compromis entre ces deux extr\^emes.
Dans de nombreux cas\footnote
Par exemple, pour des estimateurs lin\'eraires en r\'egression,
des r\`egles par minimisation du risque empirique
ou des r\`egles par moyennes locales. },
ceci se formalise sous la forme d'un compromis biais-variance
\SAindex{compromis biais-variance
ou approximation-estimation.
Comment faire ?
Comme pour la s\'election de mod\`eles,
on consid\`ere habituellement des proc\'edures de la forme :
\begin{equation}
\label{VC.eq.sel-estim.def-mh-gal}
\widehat{m} \in \mathop{\argmintmp}_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n} \bigl\{ \crit(m;D_n) \bigr\}
\, .
\end{equation}
On peut les analyser avec le lemme fondamental de l'apprentissage
\citep[lemme~2]{Arl_2016_JESchap2}.
Deux strat\'egies principales sont possibles :
choisir un crit\`ere $\crit(m;D_n)$
proche du risque $\mathcal{R}_P( \widehat{f}_m(D_n) )$ simultan\'ement pour tous les
$m \in \mathcal{M}_n$,
ou bien choisir un crit\`ere qui majore le risque.
La validation crois\'ee suit la premi\`ere strat\'egie.
Alors, au vu du raisonnement expos\'e par
\citet[section~3.9]{Arl_2016_JESchap2},
il suffit\footnote{Il n'y a cependant pas \'equivalence,
voir la section~\ref{VC.sec.sel-estim}.} de d\'emontrer que
$\crit(m;D_n)$ est un bon estimateur
\SAindex{risque!estimation@estimation d'un risque
du risque\footnote
En toute rigueur, il faut parler d'estimation du risque
\emph{moyen}, le risque \'etant une quantit\'e al\'eatoire.
Par abus de langage, on parle dans ce texte d'estimation
(et d'estimateurs) du risque de $\widehat{f}_m$,
et du biais et de la variance de ces estimateurs.
\`A chaque fois, il est sous-entendu que c'est le risque moyen qu'on estime,
m\^eme si c'est le risque que l'on souhaite \'evaluer aussi pr\'ecis\'ement que possible.
}
de $\widehat{f}_m(D_n)$ pour en d\'eduire que la proc\'edure d\'efinie par
\eqref{VC.eq.sel-estim.def-mh-gal} fonctionne bien.
\SAindex{selection estimateurs@s\'election d'estimateurs|)
C'est pourquoi, apr\`es avoir d\'efini les proc\'edures de validation crois\'ee
(section~\ref{VC.sec.def}),
nous commen\c{c}ons par \'etudier leurs propri\'et\'es pour l'estimation du risque
d'une r\`egle d'apprentissage fix\'ee (section~\ref{VC.sec.estim-risque}),
avant d'aborder la s\'election d'estimateurs
(section~\ref{VC.sec.sel-estim}).
En guise de conclusion, la section~\ref{VC.sec.concl} consid\`ere
plusieurs questions pratiques importantes,
dont celle du choix de la meilleure proc\'edure
de validation crois\'ee.
\section{D\'efinition}
\label{VC.sec.def}
\'Etant donn\'e une r\`egle d'apprentissage $\widehat{f}_m$,
un \'echantillon $D_n$ et une fonction de co\^ut $c$,
la validation crois\'ee estime le risque $\mathcal{R}_P(\widehat{f}_m(D_n))$
en se fondant sur le principe suivant :
on d\'ecoupe l'\'echantillon $D_n$ en deux sous-\'echantillons
$D_n^{(e)}$ (l'\'echantillon d'entra\^inement)
et $D_n^{(v)}$ (l'\'echantillon de validation),
on utilise $D_n^{(e)}$ pour entra\^iner un pr\'edicteur
$\widehat{f}_m(D_n^{(e)})$,
puis on mesure l'erreur commise par ce pr\'edicteur
sur les donn\'ees restantes $D_n^{(v)}$.
Alors, du fait de l'ind\'ependance entre $D_n^{(e)}$ et $D_n^{(v)}$,
on obtient une bonne \'evaluation\footnote
Comme expliqu\'e en section~\ref{VC.sec.estim-risque},
c'est en r\'ealit\'e le risque de $\widehat{f}_m(D_n^{(e)})$ que l'on \'evalue,
d'o\`u un l\'eger biais (beaucoup moins probl\'ematique que celui du risque
empirique). }
du risque de $\widehat{f}_m(D_n)$.
En particulier, on \'evite l'optimisme excessif\footnote
Les raisons de cet optimisme sont d\'etaill\'ees par
\citet[section~3.9]{Arl_2016_JESchap2}. } du risque
empirique $\widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n(\widehat{f}_m(D_n))$.
Et l'on peut proc\'eder \`a un ou plusieurs d\'ecoupages
du m\^eme \'echantillon,
d'o\`u un grand nombre de proc\'edures de validation crois\'ee possibles.
\subsection{Cas g\'en\'eral}
\label{VC.sec.def.gal}
Dans tout ce texte,
$D_n = (X_i,Y_i)_{1 \leq i \leq n}$
d\'esigne un \'echantillon de variables al\'eatoires ind\'ependantes et de m\^eme loi~$P$.
On suppose qu'une fonction de co\^ut $c: \mathcal{Y} \times \mathcal{Y} \to \R^+$
est fix\'ee et sert \`a d\'efinir le risque $\mathcal{R}_P$ et le risque empirique
$\widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n$ sur $D_n$ (une quantit\'e d\'efinie par \citet[section~3.1]{Arl_2016_JESchap2}).
Un sous-ensemble propre\footnote
Un sous-ensemble propre de $\{1, \ldots, n\}$ est une partie
non-vide de $\{1, \ldots, n\}$ dont le compl\'ementaire est non-vide.
La terminologie \og{}d\'ecoupage de l'\'echantillon\fg{} n'est pas classique ;
nous l'utilisons ici pour clarifier l'exposition.
}
$E$ de $\{1, \ldots, n\}$ est appel\'e \og{}d\'ecoupage\fg{} de l'\'echantillon.
Il correspond \`a la partition de $D_n$ en deux sous-\'echantillons :
\[
D_n^{E} := (X_i, Y_i)_{i \in E}
\qquad \text{et} \qquad
D_n^{E^c} := (X_i, Y_i)_{i \in \{1 , \ldots, n\} \backslash E}
\, .
\]
Pour tout d\'ecoupage $E$ de l'\'echantillon,
on d\'efinit le risque empirique sur le sous-\'echantillon $D_n^{E}$ par :
\[
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^E:
f\in \mathcal{F} \mapsto \frac{1}{\card(E)} \sum_{i \in E}
c \bigl( f(X_i) , Y_i \bigr)
\, .
\]
On peut maintenant d\'efinir formellement les estimateurs
par validation crois\'ee du risque.
\begin{definition}[Validation crois\'ee]
\label{VC.def.VC}
\SAindex{validation simple
Soit $\widehat{f}_m$ une r\`egle d'apprentissage.
L'estimateur par validation \textup{(}simple\textup{)}\footnote
Le terme anglais pour la validation, ou validation simple, est \og{}hold-out\fg{} :
il s'agit de l'erreur sur des donn\'ees \og{}mises de c\^ot\'e\fg{}
au moment de l'entra\^inement. }
du risque de $\widehat{f}_m$ pour l'\'echantillon $D_n$ et le d\'ecoupage $E$
est d\'efini par :
\begin{align*}
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{val}} (\widehat{f}_m;D_n;E)
&=
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^{E^c} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m(D_n^E) \bigr)
\\
&=
\frac{1}{\card(E^c)} \sum_{i \in E^c} c \bigl( \widehat{f}_m( D_n^E; X_i) , Y_i \bigr)
\, .
\end{align*}
On appelle $D_n^E$
\SAindex{echantillon apprentissage@\'echantillon d'apprentissage
\SAindex{echantillon entrainement@\'echantillon d'entra\^inement
l'\'echantillon d'entra\^inement\footnote{Le terme \og{}\'echantillon d'apprentissage\fg{} est parfois
utilis\'e pour d\'esigner l'\'echantillon d'entra\^inement ;
il arrive aussi qu'on l'utilise pour d\'esigner la r\'eunion de l'\'echantillon
d'entra\^inement et de l'\'echantillon de validation, lorsqu'une partie des donn\'ees
est mise de c\^ot\'e dans un \'echantillon test.},
tandis que $D_n^{E^c}$ est appel\'e
\SAindex{echantillon validation@\'echantillon de validation
\'echantillon de validation.
L'estimateur par validation crois\'ee\footnote{En anglais : \og{}cross-validation\fg{}.}
du risque de $\widehat{f}_m$ pour l'\'echantillon $D_n$ et la suite de d\'ecoupages
$(E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V}$ est d\'efini par :
\begin{align*}
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
= \frac{1}{V} \sum_{j=1}^V \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{val}} ( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; E_j )
\, .
\end{align*}
\'Etant donn\'e une famille de r\`egles d'apprentissage
$(\widehat{f}_m)_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n}$,
la proc\'edure de s\'election d'estimateurs
par validation crois\'ee associ\'ee
est d\'efinie par :
\begin{equation*}
\widehat{m}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
\in \mathop{\argmintmp}_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n} \Bigl\{
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
\Bigr\}
\, .
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
\SAindex{risque!estimation@estimation d'un risque|(
Une erreur courante mais grave est d'utiliser
\[
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
\]
pour estimer le risque de $\widehat{f}_m(D_n)$ lorsque la r\`egle d'apprentissage $\widehat{f}_m$ d\'epend
d\'ej\`a elle-m\^eme des donn\'ees.
Par exemple, si $\widehat{f}_m$ est construite sur un sous-ensemble $m$ des covariables disponibles,
et si ce sous-ensemble a \'et\'e choisi \`a l'aide d'une partie des donn\'ees $D_n$
(par une proc\'edure automatis\'ee ou simplement \og{}\`a l'\oe il\fg{}),
alors on obtient une estimation \emph{fortement biais\'ee} du risque !
En g\'en\'eral, cette estimation est tr\`es optimiste,
conduisant \`a sous-estimer le risque de pr\'evision r\'eel.
Pour \'eviter ce biais, il faut prendre en compte la \emph{totalit\'e du processus}
menant des donn\'ees $D_n$ au pr\'edicteur $\widehat{f}_m(D_n)$
(c'est-\`a-dire, \emph{tout} ce qu'on a fait \`a partir du moment o\`u l'on a eu acc\`es
\`a au moins une observation).
Formellement, il faut d\'ecrire comment $m$ d\'epend des donn\'ees, et le noter $\widehat{m}(D_n)$.
On d\'efinit alors $\widetilde{f}: D_n \mapsto \widehat{f}_{\widehat{m}(D_n)} (D_n)$
puis on applique la validation crois\'ee \`a $\widetilde{f}$
en calculant :
\[ \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widetilde{f} ; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr) \, . \]
Le m\^eme probl\`eme se pose quand on veut estimer le risque de l'estimateur
s\'electionn\'e par la validation crois\'ee (ou par toute autre proc\'edure de s\'election
d'estimateurs).
\SAindex{selection estimateurs@s\'election d'estimateurs
Si l'on utilise la valeur (calcul\'ee en cours de proc\'edure)
\[
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_{ \widehat{m}^{\mathrm{vc}} ( D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} ) } ; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
= \min_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n} \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
\, ,
\]
alors on commet pr\'ecis\'ement l'erreur mentionn\'ee ci-dessus,
et l'on sous-estime fortement le risque.
Il faut donc d\'efinir
\[
\widetilde{f}^{\mathrm{vc}}: D_n \mapsto \widehat{f}_{ \widehat{m}^{\mathrm{vc}} ( D_n; (E_{j,n})_{1 \leq j \leq V_n} ) }
\]
(en sp\'ecifiant bien comment la suite de d\'ecoupages
$(E_{j,n})_{1 \leq j \leq V_n}$ est choisie pour chaque entier $n \geq 1$)
et lui appliquer la validation crois\'ee en calculant
\[ \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widetilde{f}^{\mathrm{vc}} ; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr) \, . \]
Dans le cas de la validation simple,
ceci conduit \`a un d\'ecoupage de l'\'echantillon en \emph{trois sous-\'echantillons} :
un
\SAindex{echantillon entrainement@\'echantillon d'entra\^inement
\'echantillon d'entra\^inement $D_n^{E}$,
un \'echantillon de validation $D_n^{V}$
\SAindex{echantillon validation@\'echantillon de validation
--- pour choisir parmi les $\widehat{f}_m(D_n^E)$ ---,
et un
\SAindex{echantillon test@\'echantillon test
\'echantillon test $D_n^{T}$
--- pour \'evaluer le risque de l'estimateur final $\widehat{f}_{\widehat{m}(D_n^E, D_n^V)} (D_n^E)$ ---,
o\`u $E$, $V$ et $T$ forment une partition de $\{1, \ldots, n\}$.
Signalons toutefois que d'autres approches permettent d'\'eviter la n\'ecessit\'e
de recourir \`a un d\'ecoupage de l'\'echantillon en trois,
en particulier le \og{}reusable hold-out\fg{} r\'ecemment propos\'e par
\citet{dwor_2015}, qui repose sur l'id\'ee de n'acc\'eder \`a l'\'echantillon de validation
que par l'interm\'ediaire d'un m\'ecanisme de
confidentialit\'e diff\'erentielle\footnote{Le terme anglais est
\og{}differential privacy\fg{}. }.
\SAindex{risque!estimation@estimation d'un risque|)
\begin{rqpar}[Cadre plus g\'en\'eral]
\label{VC.rk-cadre-le-plus-general}
On peut d\'efinir la validation crois\'ee hors du cadre de pr\'evision
ou pour une fonction de risque plus g\'en\'erale que celle d\'efinie
par \citet{Arl_2016_JESchap2}.
Il suffit en effet que le risque d'un \'el\'ement $f$ de l'ensemble $\mathcal{F}$ des sorties
possibles d'une r\`egle d'apprentissage v\'erifie :
\begin{equation}
\label{VC.hyp.cadre-le-plus-general}
\forall n \geq 1, \qquad \mathcal{R}_P(f) = \E \bigl[ \mathcal{E}(f;D_n) \bigr]
\end{equation}
o\`u $D_n$ est un \'echantillon de $n$ variables al\'eatoires ind\'ependantes et de loi~$P$,
et $\mathcal{E}$ est une fonction \`a valeurs r\'eelles, prenant en entr\'ee un \'el\'ement de $\mathcal{F}$
et un \'echantillon de taille quelconque.
La fonction $\mathcal{E}$ mesure l'\og{}ad\'equation\fg{} entre $f$ et l'\'echantillon~$D_n$.
\SAindex{validation simple
L'estimateur par validation simple se d\'efinit alors par :
\[
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{val}} (\widehat{f}_m;D_n;E)
:=
\mathcal{E} \Bigl( \widehat{f}_m \bigl( D_n^{E^c} \bigr) ; D_n^{E^c} \Bigr)
\]
et l'estimateur par validation crois\'ee s'en d\'eduit.
Dans le cas de la pr\'evision, \eqref{VC.hyp.cadre-le-plus-general}
est v\'erifi\'ee avec :
\[
\mathcal{E} \bigl( f; (X_i,Y_i)_{1 \leq i \leq n} \bigr)
= \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n c\bigl( f(X_i) , Y_i \bigr) = \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n(f)
\, .
\]
La relation \eqref{VC.hyp.cadre-le-plus-general} est \'egalement v\'erifi\'ee dans d'autres cadres.
Par exemple, en estimation de densit\'e,
\SAindex{estimation de densit\'e
il est classique de consid\'erer le risque quadratique
\SAindex{risque!quadratique
d\'efini par \eqref{VC.hyp.cadre-le-plus-general} avec :
\[
\mathcal{E} \bigl( f; (X_i)_{1 \leq i \leq n} \bigr)
= \lVert f \rVert^2_{L^2} - \frac{2}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n f(X_i)
\, .
\]
L'exc\`es de risque correspondant est $\lVert f - f^{\star} \rVert^2_{L^2}$
o\`u $f^{\star}$ est la densit\'e (inconnue) des observations
\citep{arlo_2016}.
On peut aussi obtenir la distance de Kullback-Leibler entre $f$ et $ f^{\star}$ comme exc\`es de risque
en d\'efinissant le risque par
\eqref{VC.hyp.cadre-le-plus-general} avec :
\[
\mathcal{E} \bigl( f; (X_i)_{1 \leq i \leq n} \bigr)
= - \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n \ln \bigl( f(X_i) \bigr)
\, ,
\]
qui est l'oppos\'e de la log-vraisemblance de~$f$ au vu de l'\'echantillon $(X_i)_{1 \leq i \leq n}$.
\end{rqpar}
\subsection{Exemples}
\label{VC.sec.def.ex}
Comme l'indique la d\'efinition~\ref{VC.def.VC},
il y a autant de proc\'edures de validation crois\'ee
que de suites de d\'ecoupages $(E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V}$.
Au sein de cette grande famille,
certaines proc\'edures sont toutefois plus classiques que d'autres.
La plupart des proc\'edures utilis\'ees v\'erifient les deux hypoth\`eses suivantes :
\begin{gather}
\label{VC.eq.hyp-Ind}
\tag{\ensuremath{\mathbf{Ind}}}
(E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V}
\text{ est ind\'ependante de } D_n
\\
\label{VC.eq.hyp-Reg}
\tag{\ensuremath{\mathbf{Reg}}}
\card(E_1) = \card(E_2) = \cdots = \card(E_V)
= n_e \in \{ 1, \ldots, n-1 \}
\, .
\end{gather}
On suppose toujours dans ce texte que
\eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Ind} et \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Reg}
sont v\'erifi\'ees.
\begin{rqpar}[Sur l'hypoth\`ese~\eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Ind}]
\label{VC.rk.hyp-Ind}
L'hypoth\`ese \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Ind} garantit que l'\'echantillon
d'entra\^inement $D_n^{E_j}$ et l'\'echantillon de validation
$D_n^{E_j^c}$ sont ind\'ependants pour tout $j$,
ce qui est crucial pour l'analyse men\'ee
en section~\ref{VC.sec.estim-risque.biais} notamment.
Cependant, il est parfois sugg\'er\'e de choisir $(E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V}$
en utilisant l'\'echantillon $D_n$ pour diverses raisons :
\begin{itemize}
\item pour que l'ensemble du support de $P_X$
soit repr\'esent\'e dans chaque \'echantillon d'entra\^inement
et chaque \'echantillon de validation.
\item en classification, pour que toutes les classes soient
\SAindex{classification supervis\'ee
repr\'esent\'ees dans chaque \'echantillon d'entra\^inement
et chaque \'echantillon de validation
(en particulier lorsque les effectifs des classes sont tr\`es
d\'es\'equilibr\'es,
\SAindex{classification supervis\'ee!multiclasse
ou lorsque le nombre de classes est grand).
\end{itemize}
Nous ne connaissons cependant pas de r\'esultat th\'eorique
justifiant l'int\'er\^et d'un tel choix.
En r\'egression, dans les simulations de \citet[section~6.2]{brei_1992},
une telle strat\'egie n'a pas d'impact sur les performances.
\end{rqpar}
\begin{rqpar}[\'Echantillon ordonn\'e et hypoth\`ese~\eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Ind}]
Souvent, en pratique, on dispose d'un \'echantillon
\og{}ordonn\'e\fg{}.
Par exemple, lorsque $\mathcal{X} = \R$, on a souvent
$X_1 \leq X_2 \leq \cdots \leq X_n$
(ce qui signifie, si $D_n$ contient bien les r\'ealisations de $n$ variables
al\'eatoires ind\'ependantes de loi~$P$, que l'\'echantillon initial a \'et\'e r\'eordonn\'e).
Alors, si l'on veut utiliser une proc\'edure de validation crois\'ee
v\'erifiant l'hypoth\`ese~\eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Ind},
il faut prendre soin d'appliquer au pr\'ealable une permutation al\'eatoire
uniforme des indices $\{1, \ldots, n\}$.
Sinon, le d\'ecoupage $E = \{1, \ldots, n/2\}$
ne peut pas \^etre consid\'er\'e ind\'ependant de $D_n$.
Notons toutefois que ceci n'est pas n\'ecessaire pour les proc\'edures
\og{}leave-one-out\fg{} et \og{}leave-$p$-out\fg{}.
\end{rqpar}
\begin{rqpar}[Sur l'hypoth\`ese~\eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Reg}]
Nous ne connaissons pas d'argument th\'eorique en faveur des proc\'edures
de validation crois\'ee v\'erifiant \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Reg},
si ce n'est qu'elles sont plus simples \`a analyser que les autres.
Il n'emp\^eche que l'hypoth\`ese \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Reg}
est toujours v\'erifi\'ee (au moins approximativement)
dans les applications.
Les r\'esultats th\'eoriques mentionn\'es dans ce texte
restent valables (au premier ordre)
lorsque \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Reg} n'est v\'erifi\'ee qu'approximativement,
cas in\'evitable si l'on utilise la validation crois\'ee
\og{}$V$-fold\fg{} avec $n$ non-divisible par~$V$.
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!V-fold@$V$-fold
\end{rqpar}
\medbreak
Parmi les proc\'edures v\'erifiant les hypoth\`eses \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Ind} et
\eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Reg}, on peut distinguer deux approches.
Soit l'on consid\`ere la suite de \emph{tous} les d\'ecoupages
$E_j$ tels que $\card(E_j) = n_e$.
Lorsque $n_e = n-1$, on obtient le
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!leave-one-out
leave-one-out\footnote
En fran\c{c}ais, la proc\'edure leave-one-out peut
\^etre nomm\'ee validation crois\'ee \og{}tous sauf un\fg{} : chaque d\'ecoupage laisse
exactement une observation hors de l'\'echantillon
d'entra\^inement.
En anglais, on trouve aussi les noms \og{}delete-one cross-validation\fg{},
\og{}ordinary cross-validation\fg{},
et m\^eme parfois simplement \og{}cross-validation\fg{}.
Dans le cas o\`u $\widehat{f}_m$ est un estimateur des moindres carr\'es en r\'egression lin\'eaire
\citep[exemple~4 en section~3.2]{Arl_2016_JESchap2},
le leave-one-out est parfois appel\'e PRESS (Prediction Sum of Squares), ou PRESS de Allen ;
\SAindex{PRESS
notons que ce terme d\'esigne parfois directement
la formule simplifi\'ee \eqref{VC.eq.LOO-reg-lin} que l'on peut
d\'emontrer dans ce cadre.} :
\begin{align*}
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{loo}}( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n )
:=&
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \Bigl( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n; \bigl( \{ j \}^c \bigr)_{1 \leq j \leq n} \Bigr)
\\
=& \frac{1}{n} \sum_{j=1}^n c \bigl( \widehat{f}_m( D_n^{(-j)} ; X_j ) , Y_j \bigr)
\end{align*}
o\`u $D_n^{(-j)} = (X_i,Y_i)_{1 \leq i \leq n, \, i \neq j}$.
Dans le cas g\'en\'eral, en posant $p = n-n_e$,
on obtient le
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!leave-p-out@leave-$p$-out
leave-$p$-out\footnote
En anglais, on trouve aussi les termes
\og{}delete-$p$ cross-validation\fg{}
et \og{}delete-$p$ multifold cross-validation\fg{}.} :
\begin{align*}
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{lpo}}( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; p)
:=&
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \Bigl( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n; \bigl\{ E \subset \{1, \ldots, n\}
\, / \, \card(E) = n-p \bigr\} \Bigr)
\, .
\end{align*}
\medbreak
En pratique, il est souvent trop co\^uteux algorithmiquement
(voire impossible)
d'utiliser le leave-one-out ou le leave-$p$-out.
Une deuxi\`eme approche est donc n\'ecessaire :
n'explorer que partiellement l'ensemble des
$\binom{n}{n_e}$ d\'ecoupages possibles
avec un \'echantillon d'entra\^inement de taille~$n_e$.
Consid\'erer un seul d\'ecoupage am\`ene \`a la validation simple
\SAindex{validation simple
ou \og{}hold-out\fg{} ;
toutes ces proc\'edures sont \'equivalentes car on a fait l'hypoth\`ese~\eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Ind}.
En revanche, d\`es que l'on consid\`ere un nombre de d\'ecoupages
$V \in \bigl[ 2 , \binom{n}{n_e} \bigr[$,
plusieurs proc\'edures non-\'equivalentes sont possibles.
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!V-fold@$V$-fold
La plus classique est la validation crois\'ee par blocs,
appel\'ee validation crois\'ee \og{}$V$-fold\fg{}
ou \og{}$k$-fold\fg{}.
On se donne une partition $(B_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V}$ de
$\{1, \ldots, n\}$ en $V$ blocs de m\^eme taille\footnote
Il faut prendre les $B_j$ de m\^eme taille pour avoir
l'hypoth\`ese \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Reg}.
Lorsque $V$ ne divise pas $n$, il suffit de les prendre
de tailles \'egales \`a un \'el\'ement pr\`es ; les performances th\'eoriques et
pratiques sont alors similaires \`a ce que l'on a quand
\eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Reg} est v\'erifi\'ee exactement.},
puis on proc\`ede \`a un \og{}leave-one-out par blocs\fg{},
c'est-\`a-dire, on utilise la suite de d\'ecoupages
$(B_j^c)_{1 \leq j \leq V}$ :
\begin{align*}
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vf}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; (B_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
:=& \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; (B_j^c)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
\\
=& \frac{1}{V} \sum_{j=1}^V \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^{B_j} \biggl( \widehat{f}_m \Bigl( D_n^{B_j^c} \Bigr) \biggr)
\, .
\end{align*}
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!Monte-Carlo
On peut \'egalement proc\'eder \`a une validation crois\'ee Monte-Carlo
(ou validation crois\'ee r\'ep\'et\'ee),
en choisissant $E_1, \ldots, E_V$ al\'eatoires,
ind\'ependants et de loi uniforme sur l'ensemble
des parties de taille $n_e$ de $\{1, \ldots, n\}$.
\begin{remarque}[$V$-fold ou Monte-Carlo ?]
\label{VC.sec.def.ex.rk-VF-ou-MC}
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!V-fold@$V$-fold
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!Monte-Carlo
On discute dans la suite
les m\'erites de ces deux approches.
Intuitivement, on peut d\'ej\`a dire que la validation crois\'ee $V$-fold
pr\'esente l'avantage de faire un usage \og{}\'equilibr\'e\fg{} des donn\'ees :
chaque observation est utilis\'ee exactement $V-1$ fois
pour l'entra\^inement et une fois pour l'apprentissage.
Ce n'est en rien garanti avec la validation crois\'ee Monte-Carlo.
En revanche, on peut s'interroger sur les inconv\'enients
de toujours utiliser ensemble (soit pour l'entra\^inement, soit pour la validation)
les observations d'un m\^eme bloc.
L'approche \og{}Monte-Carlo\fg{}, par son caract\`ere al\'eatoire,
permet d'\'eviter d'\'eventuels biais induits par ce lien entre observations.
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!incompl\`ete \'equilibr\'ee
Notons qu'il existe une mani\`ere d'\'eviter ces deux \'ecueils :
la validation crois\'ee incompl\`ete \'equilibr\'ee\footnote
En anglais, on parle de \og{}balanced-incomplete cross-validation\fg{},
qui s'appuie sur la notion de \og{}balanced-incomplete block-design\fg{}.}
\citep[section~4.3.2]{arlo_2010},
qui pr\'esente l'inconv\'enient de n'\^etre possible que pour d'assez grandes valeurs de $V$.
\end{remarque}
Signalons enfin que bien d'autres proc\'edures de
validation crois\'ee \og{}non-exhaustives\fg{} existent.
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!V-fold repetee@$V$-fold r\'ep\'et\'ee
Par exemple, avec la validation crois\'ee $V$-fold r\'ep\'et\'ee,
on choisit plusieurs partitions $(B_j^{\ell})_{1 \leq j \leq V}$,
$\ell \in \{1, \ldots, L\}$, et l'on explore l'ensemble des d\'ecoupages
\[
\bigl\{ ( B_j^{\ell} )^c \,/ \, j \in \{ 1 , \ldots, V \}
\text{ et } \ell \in \{1, \ldots, L \} \bigr\}
\, .
\]
\subsection{Astuces algorithmiques}
\label{VC.sec.def.algo}
La complexit\'e algorithmique du calcul \og{}na\"if\fg{} de
\[
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
= \frac{1}{V} \sum_{j=1}^V \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^{E_j^c} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m(D_n^{E_j}) \bigr)
\]
est de l'ordre de $V$ fois celle de l'entra\^inement de $\widehat{f}_m$
sur un \'echantillon de taille $n_e$ (c'est en g\'en\'eral le plus co\^uteux),
plus l'\'evaluation de $\widehat{f}_m(D_n^{E_j})$ en $n-n_e$ points.
Il est cependant parfois possible de faire beaucoup plus rapide.
\medbreak
Tout d'abord, on dispose dans certains cas de formules closes
pour l'estimateur par validation crois\'ee du risque de $\widehat{f}_m$,
au moins pour le leave-one-out et le leave-$p$-out\footnote
Au vu des r\'esultats des sections~\ref{VC.sec.estim-risque} et
\ref{VC.sec.sel-estim}, en particulier la
proposition~\ref{VC.pro.var-ho-geq-lpo} en section~\ref{VC.sec.estim-risque.var}
qui montre que la variance de la validation crois\'ee est minimale
pour le leave-$p$-out --- \`a $n_e$ fix\'ee ---,
il semble inutile de consid\'erer un autre type de validation crois\'ee
quand on sait calculer rapidement tous les estimateurs
par leave-$p$-out. } \citep[section~9]{arlo_2010}.
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!leave-one-out
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!leave-p-out@leave-$p$-out
\SAindex{moindres carres@moindres carr\'es!regression lineaire@r\'egression lin\'eaire|(
Par exemple, si $\widehat{f}_m$ est un estimateur des moindres carr\'es en r\'egression lin\'eaire,
la formule de Woodbury
\citep[section~2.7]{press_etal_NRC1992}
permet de d\'emontrer \citep{golu_1979} :
\begin{align}
\notag
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{loo}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m ; (x_i,y_i)_{1 \leq i \leq n} \bigr)
&= \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{\Bigl[ y_i - \widehat{f}_m \bigl( (x_i,y_i)_{1 \leq i \leq n} ; x_i \bigr) \Bigr]^2}{1 - \mathbf{H}_{i,i}}
\\
\label{VC.eq.LOO-reg-lin}
&= \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{\bigl( y_i - (\mathbf{H} \mathbf{y})_i \bigr)^2}{1 - \mathbf{H}_{i,i}}
\\
\notag \text{o\`u} \qquad
\mathbf{H}
&= \mathbf{X} \bigl( \mathbf{X}^{\top} \mathbf{X} \bigr)^{-1} \mathbf{X}^{\top}
\qquad \text{et} \qquad
\mathbf{y} = (y_i)_{1 \leq i \leq n} \in \R^n
\, .
\end{align}
Le calcul de l'estimateur leave-one-out avec \eqref{VC.eq.LOO-reg-lin} est
aussi co\^uteux que celui
d'\emph{un seul} entra\^inement de $\widehat{f}_m$ sur $D_n$,
via le calcul de la matrice~$\mathbf{H}$.
\begin{rqpar}[Validation crois\'ee g\'en\'eralis\'ee]
\label{VC.rk.GCV}
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!generalisee@g\'en\'eralis\'ee (GCV)
La formule close \eqref{VC.eq.LOO-reg-lin} obtenue pour le leave-one-out
en r\'egression lin\'eaire a conduit \`a en d\'efinir
une version \og{}invariante par rotation\fg{} \citep{golu_1979},
appel\'ee validation crois\'ee g\'en\'eralis\'ee ou GCV
(de l'anglais \og{}generalized cross-validation\fg{}).
Par rapport \`a la formule \eqref{VC.eq.LOO-reg-lin},
les d\'enominateurs $1-\mathbf{H}_{i,i}$
sont remplac\'es par $1 - n^{-1} \mathrm{trace}(\mathbf{H})$ :
\[
\mathrm{GCV} ( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n )
= \frac{\lVert \mathbf{y} - \mathbf{H} \mathbf{y} \rVert^2 }{n - \mathrm{trace}(\mathbf{H}) }
\, .
\]
Ce crit\`ere s'applique, plus g\'en\'eralement,
\`a tout estimateur \og{}lin\'eaire\fg{}
en r\'egression avec le co\^ut quadratique,
notamment les $k$ plus proches voisins
\SAindex{k plus proches voisins@$k$ plus proches voisins
\citep[section~5.4]{Arl_2016_JESchap2},
les estimateurs par noyau
\SAindex{noyau (r\`egle d'apprentissage)
\citep[section~5.5]{Arl_2016_JESchap2}
et les estimateurs ridge.
\SAindex{regression@r\'egression!ridge
\citet{efro_1986} explique pourquoi,
malgr\'e son nom, GCV est beaucoup plus proche
des crit\`eres $C_p$ et $C_L$ de Mallows
que de la validation crois\'ee proprement dite.
\end{rqpar}
\SAindex{moindres carres@moindres carr\'es!regression lineaire@r\'egression lin\'eaire|)
\medbreak
Par ailleurs, m\^eme en l'absence de formule close,
on peut r\'eduire la complexit\'e algorithmique de la validation crois\'ee
en entra\^inant d'abord $\widehat{f}_m$ sur l'\'echantillon $D_n$ tout entier
(une fois pour toutes),
puis, pour chaque d\'ecoupage $E_j$,
en \og{}mettant \`a jour\fg{} $\widehat{f}_m(D_n)$ afin d'obtenir
$\widehat{f}_m(D_n^{E_j^c})$.
Lorsque cette mise \`a jour est efficace,
le gain algorithmique est important.
Cette id\'ee s'applique dans plusieurs cadres,
dont l'analyse discriminante (lin\'eaire ou quadratique)
\SAindex{analyse discriminante!lineaire@lin\'eaire
\SAindex{analyse discriminante!quadratique
et les $k$~plus proches voisins
\SAindex{k plus proches voisins@$k$ plus proches voisins
\citep[section~9]{arlo_2010}.
\SAindex{moindres carres@moindres carr\'es!regression lineaire@r\'egression lin\'eaire
Consid\'erons ici \`a nouveau l'estimateur des moindres carr\'es en r\'egression lin\'eaire.
Son calcul n\'ecessite d'inverser la matrice $\mathbf{X}^{\top} \mathbf{X}$ de taille $p$,
ce qui a un co\^ut de l'ordre de $p^3$.
Lorsque $n-n_e$ est significativement plus petit que~$n$,
on peut utiliser la formule de Woodbury
\citep[section~2.7]{press_etal_NRC1992} pour d\'eduire
$(\mathbf{X}_{(E_j^c)}^{\top} \mathbf{X}_{(E_j^c)})^{-1}$ de $(\mathbf{X}^{\top} \mathbf{X})^{-1}$
\`a moindres frais,
\[
\text{o\`u} \qquad
\mathbf{X}_{(E_j^c)} = (x_{i,k})_{1 \leq i \leq n , k \in E_j^c}
\, .
\]
\SAindex{regression@r\'egression!ridge
La formule de Woodbury est \'egalement utile en r\'egression ridge,
o\`u l'essentiel du temps de calcul de l'estimateur est consacr\'e
\`a l'inversion de la m\^eme matrice $\mathbf{X}^{\top} \mathbf{X}$.
\medbreak
\SAindex{selection estimateurs@s\'election d'estimateurs|(
Enfin, dans un contexte de s\'election d'estimateurs,
il n'est pas toujours n\'ecessaire de calculer
\[
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
\]
pour chaque $m \in \mathcal{M}_n$.
Les valeurs de l'erreur de validation obtenues sur les premiers d\'ecoupages
$E_1$, $E_2$, $E_3$, $\ldots$ peuvent suffire \`a \'eliminer certains $\widehat{f}_m$
(et donc de gagner en temps de calcul),
sans trop perdre sur la qualit\'e du pr\'edicteur final
\citep{krue_2015}.
\subsection{Variantes}
\label{VC.sec.def.var}
Pour le probl\`eme de s\'election d'estimateurs,
il y a plusieurs variantes de la validation crois\'ee,
qui ne suivent pas la d\'efinition~\ref{VC.def.VC}
mais reposent sur le m\^eme principe d'entra\^inement et validation
selon plusieurs d\'ecoupages successifs.
\medbreak
\citet{yang_2006,yang_2007} propose la
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!vote@(par) vote
\og{}validation
crois\'ee par vote\fg{}\footnote
Le terme anglais est \og{}cross-validation with voting\fg{}.
Par opposition, Yang nomme \og{}cross-validation with averaging\fg{}
la validation crois\'ee habituelle, celle de la d\'efinition~\ref{VC.def.VC}. },
lorsque l'objectif est d'\emph{identifier} la meilleure r\`egle d'apprentissage
(comme expliqu\'e par \citet[section~3.9]{Arl_2016_JESchap2};
voir aussi la remarque~\ref{VC.rk.identification}
en section~\ref{VC.sec.concl.choix}).
Pour chacun des $j \in \{1, \ldots, V\}$,
on s\'electionne un estimateur par validation simple :
\begin{equation}
\label{VC.eq.VC-vote.mhj}
\widehat{m}_j \in \mathop{\argmintmp}_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n} \bigl\{ \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{val}} (\widehat{f}_m;D_n;E_j) \bigr\}
\, .
\end{equation}
Ensuite, on r\'ealise un vote majoritaire parmi les $\widehat{m}_j$
pour d\'eterminer $\widehat{m}$.
Clairement, ceci n'a de sens que lorsque $\mathcal{M}_n$ est discret.
Yang propose cette variante dans un contexte o\`u $\mathcal{M}_n$ est fini
et de petite taille.
Supposons par exemple que l'on veut choisir, pour un probl\`eme de classification,
entre les plus proches voisins, la r\'egression logistique
et les for\^ets al\'eatoires.
Si les param\`etres de chaque m\'ethode sont choisis
par une boucle interne de validation crois\'ee,
on a $\card(\mathcal{M}_n) = 3$.
Cela fait donc sens d'effectuer un vote majoritaire
parmi les $\widehat{m}_j$ obtenus sur $V \gg 3$ d\'ecoupages diff\'erents.
\medbreak
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!agregee@agr\'eg\'ee
La validation crois\'ee agr\'eg\'ee\footnote{En anglais, on utilise les termes
\og{}CV bagging\fg{} ou \og{}averaging cross-validation\fg{},
pour un ensemble de m\'ethodes similaires \`a celle qui est d\'ecrite ici. }
est une variante largement utilis\'ee en pratique
pour ses bonnes performances en pr\'evision,
mais peu mentionn\'ee dans la litt\'erature \citep{jung_2015,mail_2016}.
L'id\'ee est de ne pas \emph{s\'electionner} l'un des $\widehat{f}_m$
\SAindex{agregation@agr\'egation
mais d'en \emph{combiner} plusieurs pour obtenir un pr\'edicteur
encore plus performant (parfois meilleur que le choix oracle,
d'apr\`es des r\'esultats exp\'erimentaux).
Comme pour la validation crois\'ee par vote,
pour chaque d\'ecoupage $E_j$, $j \in \{1, \ldots, V\}$, on s\'electionne
$\widehat{m}_j$ d\'efini par \eqref{VC.eq.VC-vote.mhj}.
Ensuite, on construit un pr\'edicteur $\widetilde{f} (D_n)$
en agr\'egeant les pr\'edicteurs $\widehat{f}_{\widehat{m}_j} (D_n)$ obtenus
avec chaque d\'ecoupage.
En r\'egression, on fait une moyenne :
\[
\widetilde{f} (D_n) = \frac{1}{V} \sum_{j=1}^V \widehat{f}_{\widehat{m}_j} (D_n)
\, .
\]
En classification, on proc\`ede \`a un vote majoritaire :
\[
\widetilde{f} (D_n ; x)
= \mathop{\argmaxtmp}_{y \in \mathcal{Y}} \card \bigl\{ j \in \{1, \ldots, V\} \, / \,
\widehat{f}_{\widehat{m}_j} (D_n ; x) = y \bigr\}
\, .
\]
Cette id\'ee d'agr\'egation est \`a rapprocher du bagging,
\SAindex{bagging
bien que la validation crois\'ee agr\'eg\'ee ne co\"incide pas exactement
avec le bagging appliqu\'e \`a la validation simple.
\SAindex{selection estimateurs@s\'election d'estimateurs|)
\section{Estimation du risque : biais et variance}
\label{VC.sec.estim-risque}
\SAindex{risque!estimation@estimation d'un risque|(
Si l'on utilise la validation crois\'ee pour estimer le risque (moyen)
d'une r\`egle d'apprentissage $\widehat{f}_m$ fix\'ee,
il est naturel de s'int\'eresser \`a deux quantit\'es :
son biais et sa variance.
\subsection{Biais}
\label{VC.sec.estim-risque.biais}
Sous les hypoth\`eses \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Ind} et \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Reg},
l'esp\'erance d'un crit\`ere par validation crois\'ee g\'en\'eral
se calcule ais\'ement :
\begin{equation}
\label{VC.eq.E.gal}
\E \Bigl[ \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr) \Bigr]
= \E \Bigl[ \mathcal{R}_P \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_{n_e}) \bigr) \Bigr]
\end{equation}
o\`u $D_{n_e}$ d\'esigne un \'echantillon de $n_e$ variables ind\'ependantes
et de m\^eme loi~$P$.
\begin{proof}
Par d\'efinition de la validation crois\'ee, on a :
\[
\E \Bigl[ \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr) \Bigr]
= \frac{1}{V} \sum_{j=1}^V
\E \biggl[ \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^{E_j^c} \Bigl( \widehat{f}_m \bigl(D_{n}^{E_j} \bigr) \Bigr) \biggr]
\, .
\]
D'apr\`es l'hypoth\`ese \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Ind},
$D_n^{E_j}$ et $D_n^{E_j^c}$ sont deux \'echantillons ind\'ependants
de variables ind\'ependantes de loi~$P$,
donc
\[
\E \Bigl[ \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr) \Bigr]
= \frac{1}{V} \sum_{j=1}^V
\E \biggl[ \mathcal{R}_P \Bigl( \widehat{f}_m \bigl(D_{n}^{E_j} \bigr) \Bigr) \biggr]
\, .
\]
Comme l'hypoth\`ese \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Reg} garantit que les $E_j$ sont tous de m\^eme taille, on a
\[
\E \biggl[ \mathcal{R}_P \Bigl( \widehat{f}_m \bigl(D_{n}^{E_j} \bigr) \Bigr) \biggr]
=
\E \Bigl[ \mathcal{R}_P \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_{n_e}) \bigr) \Bigr]
\]
pour tout $j$, d'o\`u le r\'esultat.
\end{proof}
En vue d'estimer le risque moyen
\[
\E \Bigl[ \mathcal{R}_P \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n) \bigr) \Bigr]
\, ,
\]
d'apr\`es~\eqref{VC.eq.E.gal},
le biais de la validation crois\'ee s'\'ecrit :
\begin{equation}
\label{VC.eq.biais.gal}
\E \Bigl[ \mathcal{R}_P \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_{n_e}) \bigr) \Bigr]
- \E \Bigl[ \mathcal{R}_P \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n) \bigr) \Bigr]
\, .
\end{equation}
En particulier, il ne d\'epend pas du nombre $V$ de d\'ecoupages !
C'est seulement une fonction de la taille $n_e$ de l'\'echantillon d'entra\^inement
(en plus de $n$, $P$ et $\widehat{f}_m$).
La mani\`ere dont le risque moyen varie avec la taille $n$ de l'\'echantillon
joue donc un r\^ole cl\'e dans l'analyse en esp\'erance de la validation crois\'ee.
\medbreak
Supposons tout d'abord que le risque moyen diminue quand on a
plus d'observations :
\begin{equation}
\label{VC.eq.regle-intelligente}
\forall P \in \mathcal{M}_1(\mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{Y}),
\qquad
n \in \N \backslash \{0\} \mapsto
\E \Bigl[ \mathcal{R}_P \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n) \bigr) \Bigr]
\text{ est d\'ecroissante,}
\end{equation}
en notant $\mathcal{M}_1(\mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{Y})$ l'ensemble
des mesures de probabilit\'e sur $\mathcal{X} \times \mathcal{Y}$.
Alors, le biais \eqref{VC.eq.biais.gal} est une fonction d\'ecroissante
de la taille $n_e$ de l'\'echantillon d'entra\^inement.
En particulier, il est minimal lorsque $n_e = n-1$
(par exemple, pour le leave-one-out).
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!leave-one-out
\begin{remarque}[R\`egles intelligentes]
\label{VC.rk.regle-intelligente}
\SAindex{regle apprentissage@r\`egle d'apprentissage!intelligente
\SAindex{classification supervis\'ee
\SAindex{k plus proches voisins@$k$ plus proches voisins
\SAindex{noyau (r\`egle d'apprentissage)
\SAindex{partition!regle classification@r\`egle de classification
L'hypoth\`ese \eqref{VC.eq.regle-intelligente}, qui semble faible au premier abord,
est la d\'efinition d'une r\`egle d'apprentissage \og{}intelligente\fg{}\footnote
En anglais, \og{}smart rule\fg{}.}
\citep[section~6.8]{devr_1996}.
Mais attention ! Toutes les r\`egles d'apprentissage classiques ne sont pas \og{}intelligentes\fg{} :
par exemple, la r\`egle du plus proche voisin
et certaines r\`egles par noyau (avec un noyau et une fen\^etre fixes)
ne sont pas intelligentes en classification binaire
\citep[section~6.8 et probl\`emes 6.14--6.15]{devr_1996} !
Une r\`egle par partition sur une partition $\mathcal{A}$ ind\'ependante de~$n$
n'est pas non plus intelligente,
m\^eme si elle l'est \og{}presque\fg{} (voir les exercices
\ref{VC.exo.intelligente-majorite} et \ref{VC.exo.intelligente-part-random}).
\citet[probl\`eme~6.16]{devr_1996} conjecturent m\^eme
qu'aucune r\`egle universellement consistante n'est intelligente.
\SAindex{consistance!universelle
\end{remarque}
\medbreak
Pour quantifier plus pr\'ecis\'ement le biais,
faisons une hypoth\`ese plus forte, qui implique \eqref{VC.eq.regle-intelligente} :
\begin{equation}
\label{VC.eq.hyp-risque-n-OLS}
\exists \alpha(m) \in \R, \,
\beta(m) > 0, \,
\forall n \geq 1, \qquad
\E \Bigl[ \mathcal{R}_P \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n) \bigr) \Bigr]
= \alpha(m) + \frac{\beta(m)}{n}
\, .
\end{equation}
Par exemple, \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-risque-n-OLS}
est v\'erifi\'ee en estimation de densit\'e
\SAindex{moindres carres@moindres carr\'es!estimation de densit\'e
par moindres carr\'es\footnote
Ce cadre n'est pas un exemple de probl\`eme de pr\'evision,
mais on peut tout de m\^eme y d\'efinir la validation crois\'ee,
voir la parenth\`ese~\ref{VC.rk-cadre-le-plus-general}
en section~\ref{VC.sec.def.gal}. } ;
$\alpha(m)$ est alors l'erreur d'approximation
\SAindex{erreur approximation@erreur d'approximation
et $\beta(m)/n$ est l'erreur d'estimation
\SAindex{erreur estimation@erreur d'estimation
(deux quantit\'es d\'efinies par \citet[section~3.4]{Arl_2016_JESchap2}).
\SAindex{partition!regle regression@r\`egle de r\'egression
En r\'egression avec le co\^ut quadratique,
\eqref{VC.eq.hyp-risque-n-OLS}
est approximativement v\'erifi\'ee pour les r\`egles par partition
\citep{arlo_2008}.
Alors, le biais \eqref{VC.eq.biais.gal} d'un crit\`ere
par validation crois\'ee s'\'ecrit :
\[
\beta(m) \parenj{ \frac{1}{n_e} - \frac{1}{n} }
= \parenj{ \frac{n}{n_e} - 1 } \frac{\beta(m)}{n}
\, .
\]
On peut distinguer trois situations :
\begin{itemize}
\item si $n_e \sim n$ (comme pour le leave-one-out),
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!leave-one-out
alors le biais est n\'egligeable devant $\beta(m)/n$ :
au premier ordre, la validation crois\'ee estime
le risque moyen sans biais.
\item si $n_e = \kappa n$ avec $\kappa \in \,\, ]0,1[$,
alors le biais vaut
$( \kappa^{-1} - 1 ) \beta(m) / n$ :
la validation crois\'ee estime correctement l'erreur d'approximation
$\alpha(m)$ mais surestime d'un facteur $\kappa^{-1}>1$ l'erreur d'estimation
$\beta(m)/n$.
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!V-fold@$V$-fold
C'est notamment le cas de la validation crois\'ee $V$-fold
avec $\kappa^{-1} - 1 = 1/(V-1)$.
\item si $n_e \ll n$, alors le biais est de l'ordre de
\[
\frac{\beta(m)}{n_e} \gg \frac{\beta(m)}{n}
\, .
\]
La validation crois\'ee surestime fortement l'erreur d'estimation,
et donc aussi le risque (sauf si l'erreur d'approximation $\alpha(m)$
domine l'erreur d'estimation, auquel cas il peut n'y avoir quasiment pas de surestimation).
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Correction du biais}
\label{VC.sec.estim-risque.corr}
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!corrig\'ee|(
Plut\^ot que de minimiser le biais en choisissant $n_e$ proche de $n$
(ce qui n\'ecessite souvent de consid\'erer un grand nombre $V$
de d\'ecoupages \`a cause de la variance),
il est parfois possible de corriger le biais.
\begin{definition}[Validation crois\'ee corrig\'ee]
\label{VC.def.VC-corrigee}
Soit $\widehat{f}_m$ une r\`egle d'apprentissage.
L'estimateur par validation crois\'ee corrig\'ee\footnote
Le terme anglais est \og{}bias-corrected cross-validation\fg{}.}
du risque de $\widehat{f}_m$ pour l'\'echantillon $D_n$ et la suite de d\'ecoupages
$(E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V}$ est d\'efini par :
\begin{align*}
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc-cor}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
&=
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
\\
&\qquad
+ \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n) \bigr)
- \frac{1}{V} \sum_{j=1}^V \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n^{E_j}) \bigr)
\, .
\end{align*}
\end{definition}
La validation crois\'ee corrig\'ee a \'et\'e propos\'ee par \citet{burm_1989},
qui la justifie par des arguments asymptotiques,
en supposant que $\widehat{f}_m$ est \og{}r\'eguli\`ere\fg{}.
\`A la suite de \citet{arlo_2008} et \citet{arlo_2016},
on peut d\'emontrer qu'elle est \emph{exactement} sans biais, pour tout $n\geq 1$,
sous une hypoth\`ese similaire \`a \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-risque-n-OLS}.
\begin{proposition}
\label{VC.pro.VC-corrigee.sans-biais}
On suppose \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Ind} v\'erifi\'ee et qu'une constante $\gamma(m) \in \R$ existe
telle que pour tout entier $n\geq 1$ :
\begin{equation}
\label{VC.eq.hyp-penid-n-OLS}
\E \Bigl[ \mathcal{R}_P \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n) \bigr)
- \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n) \bigr) \Bigr]
= \frac{\gamma(m)}{n}
\, .
\end{equation}
Alors, pour tout $n\geq 1$ et toute suite de d\'ecoupages $(E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V}$,
la validation crois\'ee corrig\'ee estime sans biais le risque moyen de $\widehat{f}_m$ :
\begin{equation}
\label{VC.eq.pro.VC-corrigee.sans-biais}
\E \Bigl[ \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc-cor}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr) \Bigr]
= \E \Bigl[ \mathcal{R}_P \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n) \bigr) \Bigr]
\, .
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
On part de la d\'efinition de la validation crois\'ee corrig\'ee,
en remarquant que :
\[
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^{E_j^c} - \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n
=
\frac{\card(E_j)}{n} \bigl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^{E_j^c} - \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^{E_j} \bigr)
\, .
\]
Alors,
\begin{align*}
& \qquad
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc-cor}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
\\
&=
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n) \bigr)
+ \frac{1}{V} \sum_{j=1}^V
\Bigl[
( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^{E_j^c} - \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n) \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n^{E_j}) \bigr)
\Bigr]
\\
&=
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n) \bigr)
+ \frac{1}{V} \sum_{j=1}^V
\frac{\card(E_j)}{n}
\Bigl[
( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^{E_j^c} - \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^{E_j}) \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n^{E_j}) \bigr)
\Bigr]
\\
&=
\mathcal{R}_P \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n) \bigr)
+ (\widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n - \mathcal{R}_P) \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n) \bigr)
\\
&\qquad + \frac{1}{V} \sum_{j=1}^V
\frac{\card(E_j)}{n}
\Bigl[
(\widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^{E_j^c} - \mathcal{R}_P) \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n^{E_j}) \bigr)
\Bigr]
\\
& \qquad
+ \frac{1}{V} \sum_{j=1}^V
\frac{\card(E_j)}{n}
\Bigl[
(\mathcal{R}_P - \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^{E_j}) \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n^{E_j}) \bigr)
\Bigr]
\, .
\end{align*}
Or, le troisi\`eme terme ci-dessus est d'esp\'erance nulle
car $D_n^{E_j}$ et $D_n^{E_j^c}$ sont ind\'ependants
d'apr\`es \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Ind}.
En utilisant l'hypoth\`ese \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-penid-n-OLS},
on en d\'eduit que
\begin{align*}
& \qquad
\E \Bigl[
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc-cor}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
- \mathcal{R}_P \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n) \bigr)
\Bigr]
\\
&= \frac{- \gamma(m)}{n}
+ \frac{1}{V} \sum_{j=1}^V
\frac{\card(E_j)}{n} \frac{\gamma(m)}{\card(E_j)}
= 0
\, .
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{rqpar}[Sur l'hypoth\`ese \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-penid-n-OLS}]
\label{VC.rk.eq.hyp-penid-n-OLS}
\SAindex{selection modeles@s\'election de mod\`eles!p\'enalisation
\SAindex{partition!regle regression@r\`egle de r\'egression
L'hypoth\`ese \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-penid-n-OLS} porte sur l'esp\'erance de la
p\'enalit\'e id\'eale (voir \citet[section~3.9]{Arl_2016_JESchap2}).
Elle est v\'erifi\'ee en estimation de densit\'e par moindres carr\'es \citep{arlo_2016},
\SAindex{moindres carres@moindres carr\'es!estimation de densit\'e
et elle l'est (approximativement) pour les r\`egles de r\'egression par partition
avec le co\^ut quadratique \citep{arlo_2008}.
On peut noter que dans les deux cas, les hypoth\`eses
\eqref{VC.eq.hyp-risque-n-OLS} et \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-penid-n-OLS}
sont v\'erifi\'ees avec $\gamma(m) = 2 \beta(m)$,
ce qui est li\'e \`a l'heuristique de pente
\citep{birg_2006,arlo_2009b,lera_2012}.
De mani\`ere plus g\'en\'erale, l'argument asymptotique de \citet{burm_1989}
peut se r\'esumer \`a \'etablir que \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-penid-n-OLS} est approximativement valide
sous des hypoth\`eses de r\'egularit\'e sur $\widehat{f}_m$ et sur le co\^ut~$c$.
\end{rqpar}
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!corrig\'ee|)
\subsection{Variance}
\label{VC.sec.estim-risque.var}
L'\'etude de la variance des estimateurs par validation crois\'ee
est plus d\'elicate que celle de leur esp\'erance.
On peut toutefois \'etablir quelques r\'esultats g\'en\'eraux.
En revanche, des r\'esultats quantitatifs pr\'ecis
(et valables pour les proc\'edures par blocs)
ne sont actuellement connus que dans des cadres particuliers,
comme celui consid\'er\'e \`a la fin de cette section.
\subsubsection{In\'egalit\'e g\'en\'erale}
On a tout d'abord une in\'egalit\'e g\'en\'erale entre les variances
des estimateurs par validation simple,
par validation crois\'ee et par leave-$p$-out,
\`a taille d'\'echantillon d'entra\^inement $n_e = n-p$ fix\'ee.
\begin{proposition}
\label{VC.pro.var-ho-geq-lpo}
\SAindex{validation simple
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!leave-p-out@leave-$p$-out
Soit $n,V \geq 1$ des entiers,
$D_n$ un \'echantillon de $n$ variables al\'eatoires ind\'ependantes
et de m\^eme loi, $n_e \in \{1, \ldots, n-1 \}$ et
$E_0, E_1, \ldots, E_V$ des parties de $\{1, \ldots, n\}$
ind\'ependantes de $D_n$ et
telles que $\card(E_j) = n_e$ pour tout $j \in \{0, \ldots, V\}$.
On a alors :
\begin{align*}
\var\bigl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{val}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; E_0 ) \bigr)
&\geq
\var\Bigl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr) \Bigr)
\\
&\geq
\var \bigl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{lpo}} ( \widehat{f}_m; D_n ; n - n_e ) \bigr)
\, .
\end{align*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
On commence par faire une remarque g\'en\'erale.
Si $Z_1, \ldots, Z_K$ sont des variables al\'eatoires r\'eelles de m\^eme loi, alors :
\begin{equation}
\label{VC.eq.pro.var-ho-geq-lpo.pr.1}
\var(Z_1) \geq \var\parenj{ \frac{1}{K} \sum_{i=1}^K Z_i }
\, .
\end{equation}
En effet, par convexit\'e, on a :
\[
\frac{1}{K} \sum_{i=1}^K Z_i^2
\geq
\mathopen{}\left( \frac{1}{K} \sum_{i=1}^K Z_i \right)^2 \mathclose{}
\, .
\]
En int\'egrant cette in\'egalit\'e, on obtient :
\[
\E \bigl[ Z_1^2 \bigr]
\geq
\E\crochj{ \mathopen{}\left( \frac{1}{K} \sum_{i=1}^K Z_i \right)^2 \mathclose{} }
\, .
\]
Le r\'esultat s'en d\'eduit en retranchant de chaque c\^ot\'e :
\[
\Bigl( \E \bigl[ Z_1 \bigr] \Bigr)^2
=
\mathopen{}\left( \E\crochj{ \frac{1}{K} \sum_{i=1}^K Z_i } \right)^2 \mathclose{}
\, .
\]
Or, la loi de
$\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{val}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; E \bigr)$
est la m\^eme quel que soit $E \subset \{ 1, \ldots , n \}$ de taille $n_e$,
y compris $E=E_j$ (par ind\'ependance des $E_j$ avec $D_n$).
En effet, passer de $E$ \`a $E'$ de m\^eme taille \'equivaut \`a permuter les observations de $D_n$,
ce qui ne change pas la loi de $D_n$ car les observations sont
ind\'ependantes et de m\^eme loi.
L'in\'egalit\'e \eqref{VC.eq.pro.var-ho-geq-lpo.pr.1} implique donc la premi\`ere in\'egalit\'e.
Pour obtenir la deuxi\`eme, notons $\Sigma_n$ l'ensemble des
permutations de $\{1, \ldots, n\}$
et $D_n^{\sigma} = (X_{\sigma(i)},Y_{\sigma(i)})_{1 \leq i \leq n}$
pour toute permutation $\sigma \in \Sigma_n$.
On a alors, pour tout $j \in \{ 1, \ldots, V \}$,
\begin{align*}
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{lpo}}\bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; n-n_e \bigr)
&=
\frac{1}{n!} \sum_{\sigma \in \Sigma_n}
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{val}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n^{\sigma}; E_j \bigr)
\, ,
\\
\text{et donc} \qquad
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{lpo}}\bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; n-n_e \bigr)
&=
\frac{1}{n!} \sum_{\sigma \in \Sigma_n}
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n^{\sigma}; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
\, .
\end{align*}
Or, $D_n^{\sigma}$ a m\^eme loi que $D_n$, puisque
les observations sont ind\'ependantes et de m\^eme loi,
si bien que \eqref{VC.eq.pro.var-ho-geq-lpo.pr.1} s'applique
et donne la deuxi\`eme in\'egalit\'e.
\end{proof}
\begin{rqpar}[Variance conditionnelle et \eqref{VC.eq.pro.var-ho-geq-lpo.pr.1}]
En utilisant la formule \eqref{VC.eq.varcond} ci-apr\`es
et le fait qu'une variance est positive ou nulle, on obtient que
\begin{equation*}
\var(Z) \geq \var \bigl( \E [Z \, \vert \, X] \bigr)
\, ,
\end{equation*}
ce qui d\'emontre l'in\'egalit\'e \eqref{VC.eq.pro.var-ho-geq-lpo.pr.1}
d'une autre mani\`ere.
\end{rqpar}
Le r\'esultat de la proposition~\ref{VC.pro.var-ho-geq-lpo} est naturel :
\`a taille d'\'echantillon d'entra\^inement $n_e$ fix\'ee,
il vaut mieux consid\'erer plusieurs d\'ecoupages qu'un seul,
et il vaut encore mieux les consid\'erer tous.
Mais c'est un r\'esultat limit\'e :
l'am\'elioration est-elle stricte ?
Si oui, combien gagne-t-on ?
La proposition~\ref{VC.pro.var-ho-geq-lpo} ne permet pas de savoir.
Pire encore : on ne peut pas comparer ce qui se passe avec deux et avec trois d\'ecoupages !
Intuitivement, plus le nombre $V$ de d\'ecoupages est grand,
plus la variance est petite.
La r\'ealit\'e est malheureusement un peu plus compliqu\'ee,
et cela d\'epend de \emph{comment} on d\'ecoupe.
Cinq d\'ecoupages bien choisis peuvent \^etre meilleurs que six mal choisis !
\subsubsection{Validation crois\'ee Monte-Carlo}
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!Monte-Carlo|(
Si l'on se limite \`a une famille particuli\`ere de d\'ecoupages
(la validation crois\'ee Monte-Carlo),
cette intuition peut \^etre justifi\'ee et quantifi\'ee.
\begin{proposition}
\label{VC.pro.var-MCCV}
Soit $n > n_e \geq 1$ des entiers.
Si $E_1, \ldots, E_V \subset \{1, \ldots, n\}$
sont ind\'ependantes, de loi uniforme sur l'ensemble des parties
de $\{1, \ldots, n\}$ de taille $n_e$,
et ind\'ependantes de $D_n$, alors on a :
\begin{align*}
&\qquad
\var \Bigl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr) \Bigr)
\\
&=
\var \bigl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{lpo}} ( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; n-n_e ) \bigr)
+ \frac{1}{V} \E \biggl[ \var \Bigl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^{E_1^c} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m \bigl(D_n^{E_1}\bigr) \bigr)
\, \Big\vert \, D_n \Bigr) \biggr]
\\
&=
\var \bigl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{lpo}} ( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; n-n_e ) \bigr)
\\
&\qquad
+ \frac{1}{V} \Bigl[
\var \bigl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{val}}( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; E_1) \bigr)
- \var \bigl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{lpo}} ( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; n-n_e ) \bigr)
\Bigr]
\, .
\end{align*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Avant toutes choses, rappelons la d\'efinition de la variance conditionnelle
\SAindex{variance conditionnelle
et une propri\'et\'e fondamentale.
Si $X$ et $Z$ sont deux variables al\'eatoires,
si $Z$ est \`a valeurs r\'eelles et si $\E [ Z^2 \, \vert \, X ] < + \infty$,
la variance conditionnelle de $Z$ sachant $X$ est d\'efinie par :
\[
\var ( Z \, \vert \, X )
= \E \bigl[ Z^2 \, \vert \, X \bigr] - \E [Z \, \vert \, X]^2
\, .
\]
On a alors, en int\'egrant cette d\'efinition :
\begin{equation}
\label{VC.eq.varcond}
\var(Z) = \E\bigl[ \var ( Z \, \vert \, X) \bigr]
+ \var \bigl( \E [Z \, \vert \, X] \bigr)
\, .
\end{equation}
En vue d'appliquer la formule \eqref{VC.eq.varcond}, on pose :
\[
X = D_n \qquad \text{et} \qquad
Z = \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
\, .
\]
D'une part, puisque les $E_j$ sont de loi uniforme sur l'ensemble des parties de
$\{ 1, \ldots, n\}$ de taille $n_e$, on obtient :
\[
\E[Z \, \vert \, D_n] = \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{lpo}} ( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; n-n_e )
\, .
\]
D'autre part, conditionnellement \`a $D_n$,
les $E_j$ sont ind\'ependantes et de m\^eme loi, si bien que l'on a :
\[
\var( Z \, \vert \, D_n) =
\frac{1}{V} \var \biggl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^{E_1^c} \Bigl( \widehat{f}_m \bigl(D_n^{E_1}\bigr) \Bigr)
\, \Big\vert \, D_n \biggr)
\]
Avec \eqref{VC.eq.varcond}, on en d\'eduit la premi\`ere formule.
Lorsque $V=1$, la validation crois\'ee Monte-Carlo correspond
\`a la validation simple, et donc :
\begin{align*}
&\qquad \var\Bigl(
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{val}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; E_1 \bigr)
\Bigr)
\\
& = \var\Bigl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{lpo}}\bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; n-n_e \bigr) \Bigr)
+
\E \biggl[ \var \Bigl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^{E_1^c} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m \bigl(D_n^{E_1}\bigr) \bigr)
\, \Big\vert \, D_n \Bigr) \biggr]
\, .
\end{align*}
La deuxi\`eme formule en d\'ecoule.
\end{proof}
La proposition~\ref{VC.pro.var-MCCV} d\'emontre que la variance du crit\`ere
par validation crois\'ee Monte-Carlo
est une fonction d\'ecroissante du nombre $V$ de d\'ecoupages,
ce qui confirme l'intuition \'enonc\'ee pr\'ec\'edemment.
Plus pr\'ecis\'ement, cette variance est une fonction affine de $1/V$,
comprise entre la variance du crit\`ere par validation simple
($V=1$)
et la variance du crit\`ere leave-$p$-out correspondant
(obtenu quand $V \rightarrow +\infty$).
En particulier, lorsque les variances des crit\`eres
par validation simple et par leave-$p$-out
ne diff\`erent que par une constante multiplicative,
l'essentiel de l'effet de $V$ sur la d\'ecroissance de la variance
est obtenu avec un nombre $V$ de d\'ecoupages petit
(par exemple, $V=20$ suffit \`a obtenir au moins $95\%$ de la
d\'ecroissance esp\'er\'ee).
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!Monte-Carlo|)
\begin{remarque}
\label{VC.rk.var.pro-ho-lpo-et-MCCV.generalisation}
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!corrig\'ee
Les propositions \ref{VC.pro.var-ho-geq-lpo} et \ref{VC.pro.var-MCCV}
s'\'etendent \`a la validation crois\'ee corrig\'ee,
et plus g\'en\'eralement \`a toute quantit\'e de la forme
\[
\frac{1}{V} \sum_{j=1}^V F (D_n; E_j)
\]
avec $E_1, \ldots, E_V$ ind\'ependantes, de m\^eme loi et ind\'ependantes de $D_n$.
Elles s'appliquent donc aussi \`a la
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!V-fold repetee@$V$-fold r\'ep\'et\'ee
validation crois\'ee $V$-fold r\'ep\'et\'ee,
d\'efinie \`a la fin de la section~\ref{VC.sec.def.ex}
(voir l'exercice~\ref{VC.exo.var-VF-repete}).
\end{remarque}
\medbreak
Il est malheureusement difficile d'\'enoncer un r\'esultat plus pr\'ecis en toute g\'en\'eralit\'e.
On peut seulement d\'etailler comme suit la variance de l'estimateur
par validation simple :
\SAindex{validation simple
\begin{equation}
\label{VC.eq.var-hold-out}
\begin{split}
\var \Bigl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n^{E^c} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n^E) \bigr) \Bigr)
&=
\var \Bigl( \mathcal{R}_P \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n^E) \bigr) \Bigr)
\\
&\hspace{-1cm}+
\frac{1}{\card(E^c)} \E \biggl[ \var \Bigl( c \bigl( \widehat{f}_m ( D_n^E ; X) , Y \bigr)
\, \Big\vert \, \widehat{f}_m (D_n^E) \Bigr) \biggr]
\, .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
La formule ci-dessus souligne le r\^ole de l'\'echantillon de validation,
qui fait diminuer la variance de l'estimation du risque de $\widehat{f}_m(D_n^E)$,
jusqu'\`a atteindre (virtuellement) sa valeur minimale possible
(la variance du risque de $\widehat{f}_m(D_n^E)$)
lorsque l'\'echantillon de validation est infini.
Soulignons n\'eanmoins l'int\'er\^et limit\'e de \eqref{VC.eq.var-hold-out},
qui ne permet pas (telle quelle)
de comparer diff\'erentes valeurs de $n_e = \card(E)$,
notamment parce que $n_e$ est li\'e \`a
la taille de l'\'echantillon de validation $\card(E^c) = n-n_e$.
\subsubsection{Quantification pr\'ecise dans un cadre particulier}
\SAindex{moindres carres@moindres carr\'es!estimation de densit\'e|(
En consid\'erant une r\`egle $\widehat{f}_m$ et un co\^ut $c$ particuliers,
il est parfois possible d'\'enoncer des r\'esultats plus pr\'ecis,
soit asymptotiquement (quand $n$ tend vers l'infini, avec
$n_e = \card(E_j)$ \'eventuellement li\'e \`a $n$),
soit pour une valeur de $n$ fix\'ee
\citep[section~5.2]{arlo_2010}.
\`A titre d'illustration,
consid\'erons le cas de l'estimation de densit\'e
avec le co\^ut des moindres carr\'es
et $\widehat{f}_m$ un estimateur par histogrammes r\'eguliers
de pas $h_m>0$
\citep[\'enoncent un r\'esultat valable pour
des estimateurs par projection g\'en\'eraux]{arlo_2016}.
On a alors, pour la validation crois\'ee $V$-fold :
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!V-fold@$V$-fold
\begin{equation}
\label{VC.var-VFCV.histo-reg-densite}
\begin{split}
&\var \Bigl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vf}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; (B_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr) \Bigr)
\\
&\qquad = \frac{1}{n^2} C_1^{\mathrm{vf}} (V,n) \mathcal{W}_1 ( h_m, P)
+ \frac{1}{n} C_2^{\mathrm{vf}} (V,n) \mathcal{W}_2 ( h_m, P)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
o\`u les $\mathcal{W}_i(h_m,P)$ ne d\'ependent que de $h_m$ et de la loi $P$ des observations
\citep[en donnent une formule close en section~5]{arlo_2016},
\begin{align*}
C_1^{\mathrm{vf}} (V,n)
&=
1 + \frac{4}{V-1} + \frac{4}{(V-1)^2} + \frac{1}{(V-1)^3} - \frac{V^2}{n (V-1)^2}
\\
\text{et} \qquad
C_2^{\mathrm{vf}} (V,n)
&=
\mathopen{} \left( 1 + \frac{V}{n(V-1)} \right)^2 \mathclose{}
\, .
\end{align*}
En particulier, la variance diminue avec $V$
et le gain induit par l'augmentation de $V$ est limit\'e :
pour $n$ assez grand,
le premier terme varie de 10 \`a 1 quand $V$ augmente,
tandis que le deuxi\`eme terme reste \`a peu pr\`es constant.
Lorsque $h_m$ est fixe par rapport \`a $n$,
la diminution de variance li\'ee \`a l'augmentation de $V$ est encore plus faible :
elle ne se voit que dans le premier terme du membre de droite
de \eqref{VC.var-VFCV.histo-reg-densite}, qui est un terme du deuxi\`eme ordre.
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!Monte-Carlo|(
Une formule similaire peut \^etre \'etablie dans le m\^eme cadre pour la validation
crois\'ee Monte-Carlo \citep[section~8.1]{arlo_2016} :
\begin{equation}
\label{VC.var-MCCV.histo-reg-densite}
\begin{split}
& \var \Bigl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr) \Bigr)
\\
&\qquad
= \frac{1}{n^2} C_1^{\mathrm{MC}} (V, n, n_e) \mathcal{W}_1 ( h_m, P)
+ \frac{1}{n} C_2^{\mathrm{MC}} (V, n, n_e) \mathcal{W}_2 ( h_m, P)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
o\`u les $\mathcal{W}_i$ sont les m\^emes qu'\`a l'\'equation \eqref{VC.var-VFCV.histo-reg-densite},
\begin{align*}
C_1^{\mathrm{MC}} (V,n,n_e)
&=
\frac{1}{V} \parenj{ \frac{n^2}{n_e^2} + \frac{2 n^2}{n_e (n-n_e)} - \frac{1}{n} \frac{n^3}{n_e^3} }
\\
&\qquad + \parenj{ 1 - \frac{1}{V} } \crochj{ 1 + \frac{1}{n-1}
\mathopen{} \left( \frac{n}{n_e} + 1 \right)^2 \mathclose{} - \frac{1}{n} \frac{n^2}{n_e^2} }
\\
\text{et} \qquad
C_2^{\mathrm{MC}} (V,n,n_e)
&=
\frac{1}{V} \parenj{ \frac{n}{n-n_e} + \frac{1}{n^2} \frac{n^3}{n_e^3} }
+ \parenj{ 1 - \frac{1}{V} } \mathopen{} \left( 1 + \frac{1}{n} \frac{n}{n_e} \right)^2 \mathclose{}
\, .
\end{align*}
Ainsi, lorsque $n$ tend vers l'infini et $n_e \sim \tau n$ avec $\tau \in \,\, ]0,1[$ fix\'e,
les valeurs extr\^emes de la variance sont donn\'ees par
\begin{align*}
C_1^{\mathrm{MC}} (1,n,n_e)
&\xrightarrow[n \rightarrow +\infty]{} \frac{1}{\tau^2} + \frac{2}{\tau (1-\tau)} > 11
\\
\text{et} \qquad
C_2^{\mathrm{MC}} (1,n,n_e)
&\xrightarrow[n \rightarrow +\infty]{} \frac{1}{1-\tau} > 1
\end{align*}
\SAindex{validation simple
d'une part (pour la validation simple), et par
\begin{align*}
C_1^{\mathrm{MC}} (\infty,n,n_e)
\xrightarrow[n \rightarrow +\infty]{} 1
\qquad \text{et} \qquad
C_2^{\mathrm{MC}} (\infty,n,n_e)
\xrightarrow[n \rightarrow +\infty]{} 1
\end{align*}
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!leave-p-out@leave-$p$-out
d'autre part (pour le leave-$(n-n_e)$-out).
Le gain li\'e \`a l'augmentation du nombre de d\'ecoupages est donc
de l'ordre d'une constante (fonction de $\tau$ uniquement),
et il n'est pas \'enorme
(au plus un facteur $12$ lorsque $\tau=1/2$, par exemple).
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!V-fold@$V$-fold
Les formules \eqref{VC.var-VFCV.histo-reg-densite} et \eqref{VC.var-MCCV.histo-reg-densite}
permettent \'egalement d'\'evaluer l'int\'er\^et de consid\'erer une suite
\og{}structur\'ee\fg{} de d\'ecoupages (avec le $V$-fold)
par rapport \`a une suite al\'eatoire (avec la m\'ethode Monte-Carlo).
Il suffit pour cela de comparer les valeurs des constantes
$C_i$ pour une m\^eme taille d'\'echantillon d'entra\^inement
$n_e = n (V-1)/V$ et un m\^eme nombre de d\'ecoupages $V$.
Lorsque $n$ tend vers l'infini,
\[
\forall V \geq 3,
\qquad
\frac{C_1^{\mathrm{MC}} \parenj{ V, n , \frac{n (V-1)}{V} }}{ C_1^{\mathrm{VF}} (V, n ) }
> 1
\]
et ce rapport tend vers $3$ lorsque $V$ tend vers l'infini,
tandis que
\[
\frac{C_2^{\mathrm{MC}} \parenj{ V, n , \frac{n (V-1)}{V} }}{ C_2^{\mathrm{VF}} (V, n ) }
\xrightarrow[n \rightarrow +\infty]{} 2 - \frac{1}{V} \in \crochj{ \frac{3}{2} , 2}
\, .
\]
La validation crois\'ee par blocs permet donc d'avoir
une variance plus faible qu'avec la validation crois\'ee Monte-Carlo,
avec un gain de l'ordre d'une constante num\'erique,
compris entre $3/2$ et $3$ environ\footnote
Le gain exact d\'epend de l'ordre de grandeur relatif de
$\mathcal{W}_1(h_m,P)$ et $\mathcal{W}_2(h_m,P)$. }.
\begin{rqpar}[Validation crois\'ee corrig\'ee]
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!corrig\'ee
La variance du crit\`ere par validation crois\'ee corrig\'ee
s'\'ecrit d'une mani\`ere similaire \`a \eqref{VC.var-VFCV.histo-reg-densite}
(pour le $V$-fold)
et \eqref{VC.var-MCCV.histo-reg-densite}
(pour la proc\'edure Monte-Carlo),
avec les m\^emes conclusions sur l'influence de~$V$.
\end{rqpar}
\SAindex{moindres carres@moindres carr\'es!estimation de densit\'e|)
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!Monte-Carlo|)
\medbreak
Notons pour finir que l'essentiel des conclusions obtenues ci-dessus
pour les histogrammes en estimation de densit\'e sont
probablement valables pour tout pr\'edicteur $\widehat{f}_m$ \og{}r\'egulier\fg{},
au moins asymptotiquement au vu des r\'esultats de \citet{burm_1989}.
Toutefois, des comportements exp\'erimentaux diff\'erents sont rapport\'es
dans la litt\'erature,
notamment pour des pr\'edicteurs \og{}instables\fg{},
\SAindex{stabilit\'e
\SAindex{arbre de decision@arbre de d\'ecision!CART
\SAindex{reseau de neurones@r\'eseau de neurones
\SAindex{selection modeles@s\'election de mod\`eles!p\'enalisation
par exemple un arbre CART,
un r\'eseau de neurones
ou le r\'esultat d'une proc\'edure
de s\'election de variables par p\'enalisation \og{}$\ell^0$\fg{}
telle que AIC ou $C_p$ \citep{brei_1996}.
\SAindex{AIC
\SAindex{cp@$C_p$
\citet[section~5.2]{arlo_2010} donnent d'autres r\'ef\'erences \`a ce sujet.
\SAindex{risque!estimation@estimation d'un risque|)
\section{Propri\'et\'es pour la s\'election d'estimateurs}
\label{VC.sec.sel-estim}
\SAindex{selection estimateurs@s\'election d'estimateurs|(
Revenons au probl\`eme (d\'ecrit en section~\ref{VC.sec.pb})
de choisir parmi une famille de r\`egles d'apprentissage
$(\widehat{f}_m)_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n}$, avec un objectif de pr\'evision :
on veut minimiser le risque du pr\'edicteur final
$\widehat{f}_{\widehat{m}(D_n)} (D_n)$.
\'Etant donn\'e une suite de d\'ecoupages $(E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V}$ --- dont
on suppose toujours qu'elle v\'erifie \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Ind} et \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Reg} ---
la proc\'edure de validation crois\'ee correspondante s\'electionne :
\[
\widehat{m}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( D_n ; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
\in \mathop{\argmintmp}_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n} \Bigl\{
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr) \Bigr\}
\, .
\]
\subsection{Diff\'erence entre s\'election d'estimateurs et estimation du risque}
\label{VC.sec.sel-estim.diff-avec-estim-risq}
\SAindex{risque!estimation@estimation d'un risque
La section~\ref{VC.sec.estim-risque} d\'etaille les performances
de $\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} ( \widehat{f}_m )$ comme estimateur du risque de $\widehat{f}_m$.
Intuitivement, ceci devrait permettre d'\'evaluer les performances de
la validation crois\'ee pour la s\'election d'estimateurs.
Cette intuition est en partie correcte, mais en partie seulement, attention !
On constate en effet empiriquement que la meilleure proc\'edure de
s\'election d'estimateurs ne correspond pas toujours au meilleur estimateur du risque
\citep{brei_1992}.
Il y a au moins deux raisons \`a ce ph\'enom\`ene.
\subsubsection{R\^ole des incr\'ements}
Un premier \'el\'ement d'explication peut \^etre obtenu en consid\'erant
l'exemple jouet suivant.
Supposons que l'on veut comparer les proc\'edures
\[
\widehat{m}_1 \in \mathop{\argmintmp}_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n} \bigl\{ \mathcal{C}_1(m;D_n) \bigr\}
\qquad \text{et} \qquad
\widehat{m}_2 \in \mathop{\argmintmp}_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n} \bigl\{ \mathcal{C}_2(m;D_n) \bigr\}
\]
o\`u $\mathcal{C}_1$ est un estimateur sans biais du risque
et, pour tout $m \in \mathcal{M}_n$,
\[
\mathcal{C}_2(m;D_n) = \mathcal{C}_1(m;D_n) + Z
\]
avec $Z$ une variable al\'eatoire de loi normale
$\mathcal{N}(1,1)$ ind\'ependante de $D_n$ et de~$m$.
Clairement, $\widehat{m}_1 = \widehat{m}_2$ et il n'y a aucune diff\'erence entre
ces deux proc\'edures pour la s\'election d'estimateurs.
En revanche, $\mathcal{C}_2$ est bien plus mauvais que $\mathcal{C}_1$
pour l'estimation du risque :
$\mathcal{C}_1$ est un estimateur sans biais du risque
tandis que $\mathcal{C}_2$ poss\`ede un biais strictement positif (\'egal \`a~$1$)
et une variance strictement sup\'erieure \`a celle de $\mathcal{C}_1$.
Consid\'erer seulement l'esp\'erance et la variance de $\mathcal{C}_i(m)$
pour chaque $m \in \mathcal{M}_n$ peut donc \^etre trompeur pour
la s\'election d'estimateurs.
Que faire pour corriger ce probl\`eme ?
\`A la suite de \citet[section~4]{arlo_2016},
on peut remarquer que l'essentiel est de \emph{bien classer}
les r\`egles $\widehat{f}_m$ les unes par rapport aux autres\footnote{%
\`A premi\`ere vue, l'essentiel est de bien classer la meilleure r\`egle
parmi $(\widehat{f}_m)_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n}$ par rapport aux autres.
Mais si l'on demande que ceci soit encore vrai pour toute
sous-collection $(\widehat{f}_m)_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n'}$, $\mathcal{M}_n' \subset \mathcal{M}_n$,
alors on demande \`a bien classer \emph{toutes} les r\`egles
$\widehat{f}_m$ les unes par rapport aux autres.}.
Autrement dit, une proc\'edure de la forme
\[
\widehat{m} \in \mathop{\argmintmp}_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n} \bigl\{ \mathcal{C}(m; D_n) \bigr\}
\]
est bonne lorsque,
avec grande probabilit\'e,
pour tout $m,m' \in \mathcal{M}_n$,
\[
\signe \bigl( \mathcal{C}(m;D_n) - \mathcal{C}(m';D_n) \bigr)
= \signe \bigl( \mathcal{R}_P(\widehat{f}_m(D_n)) - \mathcal{R}_P(\widehat{f}_{m'}(D_n) \bigr)
\, ,
\]
sauf \'eventuellement lorsque $\widehat{f}_m$ et $\widehat{f}_{m'}$
ont des risques \og{}proches\fg{}
(une erreur entre $m$ et $m'$ \'etant alors de faible importance pour le risque
du pr\'edicteur final).
Si l'on veut se focaliser sur une esp\'erance ou une variance
(pour \'evaluer la qualit\'e d'un crit\`ere $\mathcal{C}$ ou pour comparer
deux crit\`eres $\mathcal{C}_1$ et $\mathcal{C}_2$),
c'est donc
\[
\var \bigl( \mathcal{C}(m; D_n) - \mathcal{C}(m';D_n) \bigr)
\, , \qquad
m,m' \in \mathcal{M}_n \, ,
\]
qu'il faut consid\'erer ;
la section~\ref{VC.sec.sel-estim.var} le fait pour le cas de la validation crois\'ee.
\subsubsection{Surp\'enalisation}
\SAindex{selection modeles@s\'election de mod\`eles!p\'enalisation|(
Le paragraphe pr\'ec\'edent explique pourquoi,
entre deux crit\`eres dont les incr\'ements ont la m\^eme esp\'erance,
il vaut mieux choisir celui dont la variance des incr\'ements
est la plus petite.
Il est moins \'evident de comparer des crit\`eres qui n'ont pas la
m\^eme esp\'erance.
Pour ce faire, prenons le point de vue de la p\'enalisation
\citep[section~3.9]{Arl_2016_JESchap2},
en posant\footnote
En d\'efinissant $\penal(m;D_n) = \mathcal{C}(m;D_n) - \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n(\widehat{f}_m(D_n))$,
on peut \'ecrire tout crit\`ere $\mathcal{C}$ comme un crit\`ere empirique p\'enalis\'e. } :
\[
\mathcal{C}(m;D_n)
= \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n \bigl( \widehat{f}_m(D_n) \bigr) + \penal(m;D_n)
\, .
\]
L'id\'eal est alors que la p\'enalit\'e $\penal(m;D_n)$
soit proche de
\[
\penal_{\mathrm{id}}(m;D_n) := \mathcal{R}_P \bigl( \widehat{f}_m(D_n) \bigr)
- \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n \bigl( \widehat{f}_m(D_n) \bigr)
\]
ou son esp\'erance (qui est, dans de nombreux cas, proportionnelle \`a la
\og{}complexit\'e\fg{} de $\widehat{f}_m$).
Consid\'erons alors, pour tout $C > 0$,
la proc\'edure (th\'eorique) qui s\'electionne
\[
m_C \in \mathop{\argmintmp}_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n} \Bigl\{ \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n \bigl( \widehat{f}_m(D_n) \bigr)
+ C \E\bigl[ \penal_{\mathrm{id}}(m;D_n) \bigr] \Bigr\}
\, .
\]
Lorsque $C=1$, $m_C$ suit le principe d'estimation sans biais du risque.
\SAindex{selection estimateurs@s\'election d'estimateurs!principe d'estimation sans biais du risque
Lorsque $C>1$, $m_C$ surp\'enalise, c'est-\`a-dire qu'elle choisit une r\`egle d'apprentissage
moins \og{}complexe\fg{}.
Lorsque $C<1$, $m_C$ sous-p\'enalise et choisit une r\`egle plus \og{}complexe\fg{}.
La figure~\ref{VC.fig.surpen} repr\'esente, sur un exemple, la performance pour la s\'election
d'estimateurs de $m_C$ en fonction de la constante de surp\'enalisation~$C$.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{VC-fig-surpen.pdf}
\caption{\textit{Performance de $m_C$ pour la s\'election de mod\`eles
\textup{(}mesur\'ee par l'esp\'erance de
$\ell(f^{\star},\widehat{f}_{m_C})/\inf_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n} \{ \ell(f^{\star},\widehat{f}_m) \}$\textup{)}
en fonction de la constante de surp\'enalisation~$C$,
\'evalu\'ee sur un jeu de donn\'ees simul\'e,
en r\'egression lin\'eaire avec des estimateurs des moindres carr\'es
\SAindex{moindres carres@moindres carr\'es!regression lineaire@r\'egression lin\'eaire
\textup{(}m\^eme cadre que celui de \citep[figure~4]{Arl_2016_JESchap2}\textup{)}.
Ici, la valeur optimale de $C$ est $1,12$.
}}
\label{VC.fig.surpen}
\end{figure}
On peut observer que la performance est bonne pour $C=1$,
et qu'elle est un peu meilleure lorsque $C$ est l\'eg\`erement plus grand.
Surp\'enaliser (donc, utiliser un estimateur \emph{biais\'e} du risque)
peut ainsi \^etre b\'en\'efique !
\SAindex{surapprentissage
\`A notre connaissance, il n'existe pas de r\'esultat th\'eorique
rendant pleinement compte de ce ph\'enom\`ene.
On peut n\'eanmoins proposer l'hypoth\`ese suivante :
en surp\'enalisant, on diminue la probabilit\'e\footnote
Cette probabilit\'e reste non-nulle, \`a cause de la variabilit\'e
du crit\`ere $\mathcal{C}(m;D_n)$.}
de surapprendre fortement,
au prix d'une diminution de la \og{}complexit\'e\fg{}
moyenne de la r\`egle s\'electionn\'ee.
Lorsque le gain li\'e au premier point est plus fort que la perte
li\'ee au deuxi\`eme point,
il est b\'en\'efique de surp\'enaliser.
\SAindex{regle du 1 ecart-type@r\`egle du 1 \'ecart-type
La r\`egle du \og{}1 \'ecart-type\fg{}\footnote
En anglais, \og{}1 s.e. rule\fg{}.} de \citet{Breiman84}
semble \^etre, empiriquement, un bon moyen de surp\'enaliser\footnote
Pr\'ecisons toutefois que cette r\`egle n'est pas directement formul\'ee
en ces termes. }.
La section~\ref{VC.sec.sel-estim.surpen} discute les
cons\'equences de ce ph\'enom\`ene sur les proc\'edures de
validation crois\'ee.
\SAindex{selection modeles@s\'election de mod\`eles!p\'enalisation|)
\subsection{Analyse au premier ordre : esp\'erance}
\label{VC.sec.sel-estim.E}
Au premier ordre, pour les proc\'edures de validation crois\'ee
usuelles\footnote
Les proc\'edures utilisant un \'echantillon
de validation de taille $n-n_e \ll n$ \emph{et} un nombre de d\'ecoupages $V$ petit
font exception.
Les garanties th\'eoriques ne s'appliquent pas
\citep{arlo_2010}, et l'on constate en pratique que ces
proc\'edures sont extr\^emement variables et se comportent mal,
m\^eme lorsque leur esp\'erance fournit une bonne proc\'edure
de s\'election d'estimateurs.},
les r\'esultats th\'eoriques connus \`a ce jour indiquent tous
que la performance pour la s\'election d'estimateurs
est celle de la proc\'edure (th\'eorique) qui minimise l'esp\'erance du crit\`ere correspondant.
Pour prendre un exemple,
supposons que les hypoth\`eses \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Ind},
\eqref{VC.eq.hyp-Reg} et~\eqref{VC.eq.hyp-risque-n-OLS}
sont v\'erifi\'ees.
Alors, pour tout $m,m' \in \mathcal{M}_n$, on a :
\begin{align}
\label{VC.eq.E-incr-Rcv-hyp-OLS}
\begin{split}
&
\E \Bigl[ \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
- \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_{m'} ; D_n ; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr) \Bigr]
\\
&\qquad = \alpha(m) - \alpha(m') + \frac{\beta(m) - \beta(m')}{n_e}
\end{split}
\\
\label{VC.eq.E-incr-R-hyp-OLS}
\begin{split}
\text{et} \qquad &
\E \Bigl[ \mathcal{R}_P \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n) \bigr)
- \mathcal{R}_P \bigl( \widehat{f}_{m'} (D_n) \bigr)\Bigr]
\\
&\qquad
= \alpha(m) - \alpha(m') + \frac{\beta(m) - \beta(m')}{n}
\, .
\end{split}
\end{align}
Comme en section~\ref{VC.sec.estim-risque.biais},
on voit que le biais de la validation crois\'ee vient du
fait que l'\'echantillon d'entra\^inement est de taille $n_e$
au lieu de~$n$ ;
en particulier, ce biais d\'epend uniquement de $n_e$.
Quel impact sur la s\'election d'estimateurs ?
En comparant \eqref{VC.eq.E-incr-Rcv-hyp-OLS}
et \eqref{VC.eq.E-incr-R-hyp-OLS}, on observe que la diff\'erence
des erreurs d'approximation $\alpha(m) - \alpha(m')$
est correctement estim\'ee,
tandis que la diff\'erence des erreurs d'estimation
$(\beta(m) - \beta(m'))/n$
est estim\'ee \`a un facteur multiplicatif $n/n_e>1$ pr\`es.
Puisque $\beta(m)$ mesure en g\'en\'eral la \og{}complexit\'e\fg{} de $\widehat{f}_m$
(par exemple, via la dimension du mod\`ele sous-jacent),
ceci signifie que la validation crois\'ee tend \`a s\'electionner une r\`egle $\widehat{f}_{\widehat{m}}$
de complexit\'e plus petite que celle de la meilleure r\`egle (l'oracle).
C'est naturel : la validation crois\'ee \og{}fait comme si\fg{} chaque r\`egle d'apprentissage
$\widehat{f}_m$ \'etait entra\^in\'ee avec $n_e$ observations,
ce qui la conduit \`a faire un choix plus conservateur que celui qu'il faut faire
quand on dispose de $n > n_e$ observations.
Sur le plan quantitatif, l'impact de $n_e$ est
en g\'en\'eral similaire \`a ce que l'on a d\'ecrit en section~\ref{VC.sec.estim-risque.biais}
pour l'estimation du risque.
\citet{shao_1997} \'enonce des r\'esultats pr\'ecis en r\'egression lin\'eaire par moindres carr\'es
\SAindex{moindres carres@moindres carr\'es!regression lineaire@r\'egression lin\'eaire
et \citet[section~6]{arlo_2010} donnent les r\'ef\'erences
de nombreux autres r\'esultats, que l'on peut r\'esumer ainsi.
Pour la validation crois\'ee, trois cas sont \`a distinguer :
\begin{itemize}
\item
lorsque $n_e \sim n$, on obtient une performance
optimale au premier ordre.
\item
lorsque $n_e \sim \kappa n$ avec $\kappa \in \,\, ]0,1[$,
on obtient une performance sous-optimale :
le pr\'edicteur final perd un facteur constant
(fonction de $\kappa$ notamment) par rapport au risque
du meilleur pr\'edicteur.
\item
lorsque $n_e \ll n$, la performance est \'egalement sous-optimale,
mais la perte est d'un facteur qui tend vers l'infini lorsque
$n$ tend vers l'infini.
\end{itemize}
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!corrig\'ee
Pour la validation crois\'ee corrig\'ee, le biais \'etant nul,
on obtient une performance optimale au premier ordre
quel que soit $n_e$.
\medbreak
La principale limite de ces r\'esultats au premier ordre est qu'ils ne font aucune
diff\'erence entre des proc\'edures utilisant des \'echantillons
d'entra\^inement de m\^eme taille et dont les performances empiriques
sont bien diff\'erentes
(par exemple, la validation simple et le leave-$p$-out).
Il semble donc bien qu'en pratique,
les termes de deuxi\`eme ordre comptent !
\subsection{Analyse au deuxi\`eme ordre : variance}
\label{VC.sec.sel-estim.var}
L'\'etude de la variance (des incr\'ements du crit\`ere,
d'apr\`es la section~\ref{VC.sec.sel-estim.diff-avec-estim-risq})
permet d'expliquer bon nombre de ph\'enom\`enes observ\'es empiriquement
(en supposant l'heuristique de la section~\ref{VC.sec.sel-estim.diff-avec-estim-risq}
correcte, ce que l'on fait tout au long de cette section).
Tout d'abord, les r\'esultats g\'en\'eraux de la section~\ref{VC.sec.estim-risque.var},
sur la variance d'un estimateur par validation crois\'ee
du risque d'une r\`egle $\widehat{f}_m$,
se g\'en\'eralisent \`a la variance des incr\'ements
\[
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
- \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_{m'}; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
\]
quelles que soient $\widehat{f}_m$ et $\widehat{f}_{m'}$ deux r\`egles d'apprentissage.
Ceci confirme donc l'intuition selon laquelle,
\`a taille d'\'echantillon d'entra\^inement $n_e$ fix\'ee,
le leave-$(n-n_e)$-out est la meilleure proc\'edure de s\'election d'estimateurs,
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!leave-p-out@leave-$p$-out
\SAindex{validation simple
la validation simple la moins bonne,
toutes les autres proc\'edures de validation crois\'ee ayant des performances entre les deux.
Et pour la validation crois\'ee Monte-Carlo,
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!Monte-Carlo
la performance en s\'election d'estimateurs s'am\'eliore quand $V$ augmente.
De plus, la variance des incr\'ements \'etant une fonction affine croissante de $1/V$,
si les valeurs de variance sont comparables pour validation simple et pour
le leave-$(n-n_e)$-out,
il n'est pas n\'ecessaire de prendre $V$ tr\`es grand pour avoir une performance
tr\`es proche de l'optimum (\`a $n_e$ fix\'ee).
\medbreak
\SAindex{moindres carres@moindres carr\'es!estimation de densit\'e|(
Pour pouvoir \'enoncer des r\'esultats quantitatifs pr\'ecis
sur la variance des incr\'ements, comme en section~\ref{VC.sec.estim-risque.var},
consid\'erons le cadre de l'estimation de densit\'e
avec le co\^ut des moindres carr\'es et des estimateurs par
histogrammes r\'eguliers de pas $h_m>0$ \citep{arlo_2016}.
Alors, les r\'esultats \'enonc\'es en section~\ref{VC.sec.estim-risque.var}
se g\'en\'eralisent, seuls les termes $\mathcal{W}_i(h_m,P)$ devant \^etre chang\'es en
$\mathcal{W}_i(h_m, h_{m'},P)$.
Toutes les comparaisons qualitatives entre m\'ethodes \'enonc\'ees
en section~\ref{VC.sec.estim-risque.var}
sont donc encore valables pour la s\'election d'estimateurs.
La nouveaut\'e vient des aspects quantitatifs.
Si $h_m$ et $h_{m'}$ sont de \og{}bonnes\fg{} valeurs
(suffisamment diff\'erentes pour qu'il soit utile de savoir choisir entre les deux),
alors $\mathcal{W}_2( h_m, h_{m'}, P) \ll \mathcal{W}_2 (h_m, P)$ :
la variance des incr\'ements est donc beaucoup plus faible que la variance
des crit\`eres, un ph\'enom\`ene d\'ej\`a remarqu\'e par \citet[sections~5.1 et 7.3]{brei_1992}
dans un autre cadre.
Par ailleurs, $n^{-1} \mathcal{W}_2( h_m, h_{m'}, P)$ est alors du m\^eme ordre de grandeur que
$n^{-2} \mathcal{W}_1( h_m, h_{m'}, P)$.
L'ordre de grandeur de la variance des incr\'ements est donc aussi impact\'e par les
valeurs de $C_1^{\mathrm{vf}}(V,n)$ ou $C_1^{\mathrm{MC}} (V,n,n_e)$.
Ceci change la donne pour la validation crois\'ee $V$-fold :
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!V-fold@$V$-fold
\`a $V$ fix\'e, la variance des incr\'ements diminue au premier ordre !
Cependant, cette diminution reste de l'ordre d'une constante num\'erique
(au plus $C_1^{\mathrm{vf}}(2,n)$ qui tend vers $10$ quand
$n$ tend vers l'infini).
De plus, vu la formule donnant $C_1^{\mathrm{vf}}(V,n)$,
il suffit de prendre $V=5$ ou $10$
pour que la variance soit tr\`es proche de son minimum.
Nous renvoyons aux r\'esultats de la fin de la section~\ref{VC.sec.estim-risque.var}
pour discuter le cas Monte-Carlo
et la comparaison avec le $V$-fold
(\`a r\'einterpr\'eter en tenant compte de la diff\'erence d'ordre de grandeur des
$\mathcal{W}_i$ quand on consid\`ere les incr\'ements).
Les exp\'eriences num\'eriques de \citet[section~6]{arlo_2016} permettent \'egalement
de bien visualiser les ordres de grandeur des termes $\mathcal{W}_i$ dans des cas r\'ealistes.
\subsection{Analyse au deuxi\`eme ordre : surp\'enalisation}
\label{VC.sec.sel-estim.surpen}
La deuxi\`eme partie de la section~\ref{VC.sec.sel-estim.diff-avec-estim-risq}
met en \'evidence un deuxi\`eme facteur important \`a prendre en compte au deuxi\`eme ordre,
en plus de la variance des incr\'ements :
le fait que \og{}surp\'enaliser\fg{}
un peu am\'eliore souvent les performances.
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!V-fold@$V$-fold|(
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!corrig\'ee|(
Prenons le cas de l'estimation de densit\'e par moindres carr\'es.
Alors, en comparant la validation crois\'ee $V$-fold et la validation crois\'ee
$V$-fold corrig\'ee,
\citet{arlo_2016} montrent que la validation crois\'ee $V$-fold surp\'enalise
d'un facteur :
\[ 1 + \frac{1}{2 (V-1)} \, . \]
Plus g\'en\'eralement, si l'on suppose
\eqref{VC.eq.hyp-risque-n-OLS} et \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-penid-n-OLS}
v\'erifi\'ees avec $\gamma(m) = 2 \beta(m)$
(comme c'est le cas en estimation de densit\'e par moindres carr\'es),
alors, la validation crois\'ee avec un \'echantillon d'entra\^inement de taille $n_e$
surp\'enalise d'un facteur :
\[
\frac{1}{2} \parenj{ 1 + \frac{n}{n_e} } > 1
\, .
\]
Lorsque surp\'enaliser est b\'en\'efique, \`a variance constante,
il est donc pr\'ef\'erable de prendre $n_e \approx \kappa n$
avec $\kappa \in \,\, ]0,1[$ fonction du facteur de surp\'enalisation optimal.
Par exemple, si l'optimum est de surp\'enaliser d'un facteur $1,12$
(comme dans le cadre de la figure~\ref{VC.fig.surpen}),
on obtient que le mieux est d'avoir $n_e = n/1,24$,
ce qui correspond au $5$-fold.
Si l'optimum est de surp\'enaliser d'un facteur $3/2$,
le mieux est d'avoir $n_e = n/2$,
ce qui correspond au $2$-fold.
Et lorsque le facteur de surp\'enalisation optimal est plus grand,
il faut prendre $n_e$ encore plus petit,
ce qui est impossible avec une m\'ethode \og{}$V$-fold\fg{} !
Attention toutefois \`a ne pas oublier que ceci
n'est correct que si l'on compare des crit\`eres de \emph{m\^eme variance}.
Si l'on augmente la variance pour surp\'enaliser
(comme on le fait en diminuant $V$ pour le $V$-fold),
on gagne d'un c\^ot\'e mais on perd de l'autre.
\textit{In fine}, de nombreux cas de figure peuvent se produire quand on trace
le risque du pr\'edicteur final obtenu par validation crois\'ee
$V$-fold en fonction de $V$ :
il peut d\'ecro\^itre avec $V$, augmenter avec $V$,
ou \^etre minimal pour une valeur de $V$ \og{}interm\'ediaire\fg{},
comme le montrent des simulations num\'eriques \citep{arlo_2016}.
Si l'on veut y voir clair, il faut raisonner en changeant un seul facteur \`a la fois
parmi le nombre $V$ de d\'ecoupages (qui influe sur la variance)
et la taille $n_e$ de l'\'echantillon d'entra\^inement (qui d\'efinit la surp\'enalisation,
en influant assez peu sur la variance).
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!Monte-Carlo|(
Ceci peut se faire naturellement avec la validation crois\'ee Monte-Carlo.
Peut-on le faire avec une strat\'egie \og{}$V$-fold\fg{},
qui est un peu meilleure que la strat\'egie Monte-Carlo
en termes de variance ?
Oui, avec la p\'enalisation $V$-fold
\SAindex{selection modeles@s\'election de mod\`eles!p\'enalisation|(
\citep{arlo_2008,arlo_2016}.
Sans la d\'efinir pr\'ecis\'ement ici, d\'ecrivons-en le principe :
il s'agit d'une m\'ethode de p\'enalisation
\[
\widehat{m}_C \bigl( D_n; (B_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr) \in
\mathop{\argmintmp}_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n} \Bigl\{ \widehat{\mathcal{R}}_n \bigl( \widehat{f}_m (D_n) \bigr)
+ C \penal_{\mathrm{vf}} \bigl( m; D_n; (B_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr) \Bigr\}
\]
d\'efinie pour une partition $(B_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V}$
en $V$ blocs de m\^eme taille,
qui co\"incide avec la validation crois\'ee $V$-fold corrig\'ee si $C=1$.
En estimation de densit\'e par moindres carr\'es, elle co\"incide avec la validation
crois\'ee $V$-fold si
\[
C = 1 + \frac{1}{2(V-1)}
\, .
\]
Alors, on peut choisir pour $C$ un \og{}bon\fg{} facteur de surp\'enalisation
(en supposant que l'on conna\^it une telle valeur),
et ensuite on choisit $V$ aussi grand que possible afin de minimiser la variance.
\begin{remarque}[P\'enalisation $V$-fold ou validation crois\'ee Monte-Carlo ?]
\label{VC.penVF-vs-VCMC}
On a propos\'e deux strat\'egies pour d\'ecoupler $V$ et $n_e$ :
la validation crois\'ee Monte-Carlo et la p\'enalisation $V$-fold.
Laquelle choisir en pratique ?
Au vu des calculs de variance de \citet{arlo_2016},
la p\'enalisation $V$-fold semble pr\'ef\'erable :
pour une m\^eme valeur de $V$ et de la constante de surp\'enalisation,
on obtient le plus souvent une variance plus faible.
Cependant, ceci est valable dans un cadre bien pr\'ecis,
et il n'est pas certain que cela soit toujours vrai hors de ce cadre.
Pire encore, le fait que la p\'enalisation $V$-fold
surp\'enalise bien d'un facteur $C$
(en particulier, le fait qu'elle estime sans biais le risque lorsque $C=1$)
n'est vraisemblablement pas valable lorsque l'hypoth\`ese \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-penid-n-OLS}
n'est pas v\'erifi\'ee.
Au final, il semble raisonnable d'utiliser la p\'enalisation $V$-fold
pour la s\'election parmi des pr\'edicteurs \og{}r\'eguliers\fg{}
--- c'est-\`a-dire, susceptibles de v\'erifier \eqref{VC.eq.hyp-penid-n-OLS},
au moins approximativement.
Dans les autres cas, mieux vaut utiliser la validation crois\'ee Monte-Carlo
(ou $V$-fold r\'ep\'et\'ee, si c'est possible).
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!V-fold repetee@$V$-fold r\'ep\'et\'ee
Et quoi qu'il en soit, il ne faut pas oublier de bien choisir $V$ et $C$ ou $n_e$,
selon le cas.
\end{remarque}
\SAindex{selection modeles@s\'election de mod\`eles!p\'enalisation|)
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!Monte-Carlo|)
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!V-fold@$V$-fold|)
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!corrig\'ee|)
\SAindex{moindres carres@moindres carr\'es!estimation de densit\'e|)
\section{Conclusion}
\label{VC.sec.concl}
\SAindex{risque!estimation@estimation d'un risque|(
\subsection{Choix d'une proc\'edure de validation crois\'ee}
\label{VC.sec.concl.choix}
Comment choisir une proc\'edure de validation crois\'ee pour un probl\`eme donn\'e ?
Tout d'abord, lorsque le temps de calcul disponible est limit\'e,
il faut prendre en compte la complexit\'e algorithmique
des proc\'edures de validation crois\'ee.
Dans la plupart des cas,
celle-ci est proportionnelle au nombre $V$ de d\'ecoupages
(il faut mettre en \oe uvre $V$ fois chaque r\`egle $\widehat{f}_m$ consid\'er\'ee).
Parfois, les crit\`eres de validation crois\'ee peuvent \^etre
calcul\'es plus efficacement, comme d\'etaill\'e par \citet[section~9]{arlo_2010}.
\medbreak
\SAindex{moindres carres@moindres carr\'es!estimation de densit\'e
Dans les cas \og{}r\'eguliers\fg{}, comme l'estimation de densit\'e par moindres carr\'es,
les r\'esultats d\'ecrits en section~\ref{VC.sec.sel-estim}
sugg\`erent la strat\'egie suivante.
Dans un premier temps, choisir un facteur de surp\'enalisation
($1$~si l'on veut estimer le risque ;
souvent un peu plus pour un probl\`eme de s\'election d'estimateurs).
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!Monte-Carlo
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!V-fold repetee@$V$-fold r\'ep\'et\'ee
Si l'on utilise la validation crois\'ee Monte-Carlo
(ou le $V$-fold r\'ep\'et\'e), ceci se fait en choisissant la taille $n_e$
de l'\'echantillon d'entra\^inement.
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!V-fold@$V$-fold
Si l'on utilise la p\'enalisation $V$-fold (d\'efinie en section~\ref{VC.sec.sel-estim.surpen},
voir notamment la remarque~\ref{VC.penVF-vs-VCMC}),
ceci se fait directement avec le param\`etre~$C$.
Puis on choisit le nombre $V$ de d\'ecoupages,
en le prenant aussi grand que possible pour optimiser
la performance statistique, dans la limite des capacit\'es de calcul.
Les calculs de variance report\'es en section~\ref{VC.sec.sel-estim.var}
indiquent qu'il n'est pas n\'ecessaire de prendre $V$ tr\`es grand
pour avoir une performance quasi optimale.
Avec une pr\'ecision importante : ceci n'est totalement vrai que si $n_e$
est de l'ordre de $\kappa n$ avec $\kappa \in \,\, ]0,1[$.
Sinon (par exemple lorsque $n_e = n-1$),
la variance de la validation simple peut \^etre \emph{beaucoup} plus grande que celle
du leave-$(n-n_e)$-out,
et alors il est n\'ecessaire de prendre $V$ tr\`es grand pour obtenir une variance
du bon ordre de grandeur.
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!V-fold@$V$-fold
Si l'on s'impose d'utiliser la validation crois\'ee $V$-fold,
choisir $V$ peut s'av\'erer plus d\'elicat,
car ce param\`etre d\'etermine simultan\'ement le facteur de surp\'enalisation
(via la taille $n(V-1)/V$ de l'\'echantillon d'entra\^inement)
et le nombre de d\'ecoupages.
Pour la s\'election d'estimateurs, en admettant que dans la plupart des cas
il est bon de surp\'enaliser \og{}un peu\fg{} (comme on le constate empiriquement),
alors prendre $V$ entre $5$ et $10$ est un tr\`es bon choix (voire optimal).
En effet, on surp\'enalise alors d'un facteur entre $1,05$ et $1,12$
et l'on a une variance proche de sa valeur minimale possible.
Cette fourchette de valeurs de $V$ correspond d'ailleurs
aux conseils classiques dans la litt\'erature statistique\footnote
C'est par exemple le conseil donn\'e par \citet[section~7.10.1]{hast-2009}.
Les intuitions g\'en\'eralement propos\'ees pour \'etayer ce conseil sont cependant
diff\'erentes des arguments donn\'es dans ce texte,
et parfois en contradiction avec les r\'esultats th\'eoriques
rapport\'es dans ce texte.
Par exemple, il est faux de dire que le $5$-fold a \emph{toujours} une variance plus faible
que le leave-one-out.}.
Si l'objectif est d'estimer le risque d'un pr\'edicteur,
la situation est un peu diff\'erente car il faut choisir $V$
le plus grand possible pour minimiser le biais (et la variance) :
les formules donnant biais et variance en fonction de $V$
permettent alors d'\'evaluer o\`u se situe le meilleur compromis entre
pr\'ecision statistique et complexit\'e algorithmique.
\medbreak
\SAindex{stabilit\'e
Dans le cas g\'en\'eral, en particulier quand on s'int\'eresse \`a un ou plusieurs
pr\'edicteurs \og{}instables\fg{},
le comportement des proc\'edures de validation crois\'ee peut \^etre diff\'erent,
ce dont t\'emoignent plusieurs r\'esultats empiriques rapport\'es par
\citet[sections 5.2 et~8]{arlo_2010}, en particulier
ceux de \citet[section~7]{brei_1996}.
Il semble alors pr\'ef\'erable de r\'ealiser des exp\'eriences num\'eriques
(par exemple, sur des donn\'ees synth\'etiques)
pour d\'eterminer le comportement de la validation crois\'ee
en fonction de $n_e$ et~$V$.
Au vu des sections \ref{VC.sec.estim-risque} et~\ref{VC.sec.sel-estim},
trois quantit\'es cl\'e sont \`a \'etudier.
D'une part, le risque moyen $\E[\mathcal{R}_P(\widehat{f}_m(D_n))]$
et sa d\'ependance en la taille $n$ de l'\'echantillon
permettent de comprendre le biais de la validation crois\'ee
(et son comportement au premier ordre pour la s\'election d'estimateurs).
D'autre part, pour prendre en compte la variance,
la quantit\'e \`a calculer d\'epend de l'objectif.
Si l'on s'int\'eresse \`a l'estimation du risque,
alors il faut calculer la variance de l'estimateur par validation crois\'ee
du risque d'une r\`egle~$\widehat{f}_m$.
Si l'on s'int\'eresse \`a la s\'election d'estimateurs,
alors la quantit\'e \`a calculer est
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\var \Bigl(
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
- \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_{m^{\circ}}; D_n; (E_j)_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr)
\Bigr)
\\ \text{o\`u} \qquad
m^{\circ} \in \mathop{\argmintmp}_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n} \biggl\{ \E \Bigl[ \mathcal{R}_P \bigl( \widehat{f}_m(D_n) \bigr) \Bigr] \biggr\}
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
est le choix oracle et $m$ est \og{}proche\fg{} de l'oracle.
Notons que l'on peut s'\'epargner certains calculs de variance en utilisant
la proposition~\ref{VC.pro.var-MCCV} et
la formule \eqref{VC.eq.var-hold-out} en section~\ref{VC.sec.estim-risque.var},
ainsi que leurs g\'en\'eralisations aux incr\'ements d'estimateurs par validation crois\'ee.
\begin{remarque}[Objectif d'identification]
\label{VC.rk.identification}
\SAindex{selection modeles@s\'election de mod\`eles!consistance en s\'election
On aboutit \`a des conclusions diff\'erentes quand on a pour objectif
d'\emph{identifier}
le \og{}vrai\fg{} mod\`ele\footnote
Le vrai mod\`ele est d\'efini comme le plus petit mod\`ele
contenant $f^{\star}$, en supposant qu'il existe.}
ou la r\`egle d'apprentissage dont l'exc\`es de risque d\'ecro\^it le plus
vite parmi $(\widehat{f}_m)_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n}$
\citep[section~7]{arlo_2010}.
\SAindex{moindres carres@moindres carr\'es!regression lineaire@r\'egression lin\'eaire
Par exemple, en r\'egression lin\'eaire par moindres carr\'es,
la validation crois\'ee choisit le vrai mod\`ele avec probabilit\'e~$1$
asymptotiquement si et seulement si $n_e \ll n$
\citep[avec des hypoth\`eses sur $V$,][]{shao_1997}.
Ce ph\'enom\`ene se g\'en\'eralise \`a d'autres cadres
et a \'et\'e nomm\'e \og{}paradoxe de la validation crois\'ee\fg{} par
\citet{yang_2006,yang_2007} :
pour l'identification, plus on a d'observations \`a disposition,
plus il faut en utiliser une fraction petite pour l'entra\^inement.
On peut rapprocher ces r\'esultats du fait qu'il est n\'ecessaire
de surp\'enaliser fortement pour une identification optimale,
d'o\`u le fait que BIC fonctionne, alors que AIC et $C_p$ sont sous-optimales.
\SAindex{BIC
\SAindex{AIC|(
\SAindex{cp@$C_p$|(
Signalons enfin que pour l'identification, Yang conseille d'utiliser la variante
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!vote@(par) vote
\og{}par vote majoritaire\fg{}
de la validation crois\'ee, d\'efinie en section~\ref{VC.sec.def.var}.
\end{remarque}
\subsection{Validation crois\'ee ou proc\'edure sp\'ecifique ?}
Lorsqu'une autre proc\'edure de s\'election d'estimateurs
est disponible --- par exemple, $C_p$ ou AIC ---,
faut-il la pr\'ef\'erer \`a la validation crois\'ee ?
Si l'on est dans le cadre sp\'ecifique pour lequel cette proc\'edure
a \'et\'e construite (pour $C_p$, la r\'egression lin\'eaire homosc\'edastique avec
le co\^ut quadratique et des estimateurs des moindres carr\'es),
\SAindex{moindres carres@moindres carr\'es!regression lineaire@r\'egression lin\'eaire
\SAindex{regression@r\'egression!homoscedastique@homosc\'edastique
alors c'est elle qu'il faut utiliser.
Des exp\'eriences num\'eriques montrent en effet
que la validation crois\'ee fonctionne alors souvent un peu
moins bien que les proc\'edures sp\'ecifiques.
C'est le prix de l'\og{}universalit\'e\fg{} de la validation crois\'ee.
En revanche, si l'on risque de sortir un peu du cadre o\`u la proc\'edure
\og{}sp\'ecifique\fg{} est connue pour \^etre optimale
(par exemple, pour $C_p$, si l'on soup\c{c}onne les donn\'ees d'\^etre h\'et\'erosc\'edastiques),
alors il est plus s\^ur d'utiliser une proc\'edure \og{}universelle\fg{}
comme la validation crois\'ee
(si les capacit\'es de calcul disponibles le permettent).
\SAindex{AIC|)
\SAindex{cp@$C_p$|)
\subsection{Limites de l'universalit\'e}
Il est bon de garder en t\^ete que la validation crois\'ee ne peut pas fonctionner
parfaitement d'une mani\`ere totalement universelle,
ne serait-ce qu'\`a cause des r\'esultats \og{}on n'a rien sans rien\fg{}
\citep[section~6]{Arl_2016_JESchap2}.
En particulier, la validation crois\'ee suppose implicitement
qu'il est possible d'\'evaluer le risque d'un pr\'edicteur
$f \in \mathcal{F}$ \`a partir de $n-n_e$ observations.
Ce n'est clairement pas possible dans l'exemple construit pour d\'emontrer le
premier r\'esultat \og{}on n'a rien sans rien\fg{} de
\citet[th\'eor\`eme~3 en section~6]{Arl_2016_JESchap2}.
\medbreak
Des probl\`emes se posent \'egalement lorsque les hypoth\`eses explicitement faites
par la validation crois\'ee sont viol\'ees
(donn\'ees ind\'ependantes et de m\^eme loi ;
et pour la s\'election d'estimateurs, la collection $(\widehat{f}_m)_{m \in \mathcal{M}_n}$ est suppos\'ee
n'\^etre \og{}pas trop grande\fg{}) \citep[section~3.9]{Arl_2016_JESchap2}.
\begin{itemize}
\item
Lorsque les donn\'ees sont \emph{d\'ependantes},
les \'echantillons d'entra\^inement et de validation ne sont plus n\'ecessairement
ind\'ependants,
ce qui peut induire un biais assez fort pour l'estimation du risque
d'une r\`egle d'apprentissage.
Dans le cas de d\'ependance \`a courte port\'ee, ce biais peut \^etre \'evit\'e
en utilisant des \'echantillons d'entra\^inement $D_n^{E}$ et
de validation $D_n^{V}$ tels que $E$ et $V$ sont suffisamment \'eloign\'es.
\item
Pour une s\'erie temporelle \emph{non-stationnaire},
si l'on s'int\'eresse \`a la pr\'evision du \og{}futur\fg{} \`a partir du \og{}pass\'e\fg{},
on ne peut pas utiliser la validation crois\'ee telle quelle.
En choisissant un \'echantillon d'entra\^inement dans le pass\'e
par rapport \`a l'\'echantillon de validation
(et en les \'eloignant si besoin),
on peut appliquer la validation simple,
mais sans garantie en raison de la non-stationnarit\'e.
Si l'on a observ\'e une s\'erie assez longue, on peut \'egalement utiliser une fen\^etre glissante
pour multiplier les couples entra\^inement/validation.
\item
\SAindex{donnees aberrantes@donn\'ees aberrantes
En pr\'esence de \emph{donn\'ees aberrantes},
il est indispensable d'utiliser des pr\'edicteurs robustes et/ou une fonction de co\^ut robuste.
\item
Pour la s\'election d'estimateurs parmi une \emph{collection exponentielle}
\citep[section~3.9]{Arl_2016_JESchap2},
\SAindex{selection estimateurs@s\'election d'estimateurs!principe d'estimation sans biais du risque
le principe d'estimation sans biais du risque ne fonctionne plus
et bon nombre de conclusions de ce texte sont erron\'ees.
Une id\'ee est alors de \og{}surp\'enaliser\fg{} fortement,
en prenant un \'echantillon d'entra\^inement de petite taille
(comme indiqu\'e en section~\ref{VC.sec.sel-estim}),
ce qui permet d'avoir une proc\'edure de la deuxi\`eme famille d\'ecrite
par \citet[section~3.9]{Arl_2016_JESchap2}.
Une deuxi\`eme strat\'egie --- appel\'ee \og{}validation crois\'ee en deux \'etapes\fg{} ou
\og{}double cross\fg{} \citep{stone-1974} --- est la suivante.
D'abord, on forme un nombre polynomial de groupes de r\`egles d'apprentissage.
Puis, \`a l'int\'erieur de chaque groupe, on utilise la validation crois\'ee pour s\'electionner une r\`egle ;
on dispose donc d'une \og{}m\'eta-r\`egle\fg{} associ\'ee \`a chaque groupe.
Enfin, on s\'electionne par validation crois\'ee l'une de ces m\'eta-r\`egles
(en suivant les conseils formul\'es \`a la fin de la section~\ref{VC.sec.def.gal}).
Cette deuxi\`eme strat\'egie s'applique par exemple pour le probl\`eme de d\'etection de ruptures.
\SAindex{detection de ruptures@d\'etection de ruptures
\end{itemize}
\citet[section~8]{arlo_2010} d\'etaillent tous ces points
et donnent des r\'ef\'erences bibliographiques.
\SAindex{risque!estimation@estimation d'un risque|)
\SAindex{selection estimateurs@s\'election d'estimateurs|)
\section{Annexe : exercices}
\begin{exercice}
\label{VC.exo.intelligente-majorite}
\SAindex{regle apprentissage@r\`egle d'apprentissage!intelligente|(
\SAindex{partition!regle classification@r\`egle de classification|(
On se place en classification $0$--$1$.
Soit $\widehat{f}$ la r\`egle par partition associ\'ee \`a la partition
triviale $\mathcal{A} = \{ \mathcal{X} \}$;
autrement dit, $\widehat{f}( (x_i,y_i)_{1 \leq i \leq n} ; x)$
r\'ealise un vote majoritaire parmi les $y_i$,
sans tenir compte des $x_i$ ni de $x$.
\\
D\'emontrer que $\widehat{f}$ n'est pas intelligente.
En d\'eduire qu'aucune r\`egle par partition (sur une partition $\mathcal{A}$ fixe quand $n$ varie)
n'est intelligente.
\\
Modifier l\'eg\`erement $\widehat{f}$ pour la rendre intelligente.
\end{exercice}
\begin{exercice}
\label{VC.exo.intelligente-part-random}
On se place en classification $0$--$1$.
Soit $\widetilde{f}$ la r\`egle par partition associ\'ee \`a la partition
triviale $\mathcal{A} = \{ \mathcal{X} \}$,
avec une d\'ecision \og{}randomis\'ee\fg{} dans les cas d'\'egalit\'e :
\SAindex{regle apprentissage@r\`egle d'apprentissage!randomis\'ee
s'il y a exactement $n/2$ des $y_i$ qui sont \'egaux \`a~$1$,
$\widetilde{f}( (x_i,y_i)_{1 \leq i \leq n} ; x)$ vaut $1$ avec probabilit\'e~$1/2$
et vaut $0$ avec probabilit\'e~$1/2$.
La notion de r\`egle intelligente s'\'etend naturellement \`a $\widetilde{f}$
en prenant aussi l'esp\'erance sur la randomisation interne $\widetilde{f}$
dans la d\'efinition de son risque moyen.
\\
D\'emontrer que $\widetilde{f}$ est intelligente.
En d\'eduire que tout r\`egle par partition (sur une partition $\mathcal{A}$ fixe quand $n$ varie),
randomis\'ee de la m\^eme mani\`ere en cas d'\'egalit\'e, est intelligente.
\end{exercice}
\SAindex{regle apprentissage@r\`egle d'apprentissage!intelligente|)
\SAindex{partition!regle classification@r\`egle de classification|)
\begin{exercice}
\label{VC.exo.var-VF-repete}
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee!V-fold repetee@$V$-fold r\'ep\'et\'ee
D\'emontrer la remarque~\ref{VC.rk.var.pro-ho-lpo-et-MCCV.generalisation}
en section~\ref{VC.sec.estim-risque.var}.
En particulier, si
$(B_j^{\ell})_{1 \leq j \leq V}$,
$\ell \in \{1, \ldots, L\}$,
est une suite de partitions de $\{1, \ldots, n\}$,
ind\'ependantes et de m\^eme loi uniforme sur l'ensemble
des partitions de $\{1, \ldots, n\}$ en $V$ blocs de m\^eme taille,
ind\'ependante de $D_n$,
d\'emontrer la formule suivante pour la variance de l'estimateur
par validation crois\'ee $V$-fold r\'ep\'et\'ee
du risque d'une r\`egle d'apprentissage $\widehat{f}_m$ :
\begin{align*}
&\qquad \var \biggl(
\widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vc}} \Bigl( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; \bigl( ( B_j^{\ell})^c \bigr)_{1 \leq j \leq V, 1 \leq \ell \leq L} \Bigr)
\biggr)
\\
&=
\var\parenj{ \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{lpo}}\parenj{ \widehat{f}_m; D_n; \frac{n (V-1)}{V} } }
\\
&\qquad + \frac{1}{L} \biggl[
\underbrace{ \var \Bigl( \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{vf}} \bigl( \widehat{f}_m ; D_n ; (B_j^{1})_{1 \leq j \leq V} \bigr) \Bigr)
- \var\parenj{ \widehat{\mathcal{R}}^{\mathrm{lpo}}\parenj{ \widehat{f}_m; D_n; \frac{n (V-1)}{V} } }
}_{\geq 0}
\biggr]
\, .
\end{align*}
\end{exercice}
\begin{exercice}
\label{VC.exo.eq.var-hold-out}
D\'emontrer la formule \eqref{VC.eq.var-hold-out}
donnant la variance du crit\`ere par validation simple.
\SAindex{validation simple
\end{exercice}
\section*{Remerciements}
Cet texte fait suite \`a un cours donn\'e dans le cadre des Journ\'ees
d'\'Etudes en Statistique 2016.
Il s'agit d'une version pr\'eliminaire du chapitre~3
du livre \emph{Apprentissage statistique et donn\'ees massives},
\'edit\'e par Fr\'ed\'eric Bertrand, Myriam Maumy-Bertrand,
Gilbert Saporta et Christine Thomas-Agnan,
\`a para\^itre aux \'editions Technip.
Je remercie vivement tous les coll\`egues avec qui j'ai travaill\'e sur ce sujet,
en particulier mes coauteurs Alain Celisse, Matthieu Lerasle et Nelo Magalh\~aes.
Je remercie \'egalement
Matthieu Lerasle pour avoir relu ce texte,
ainsi que
les \'etudiants qui ont suivi mon cours de master 2
\og{}apprentissage statistique et r\'e\'echantillonnage\fg{}
\`a l'Universit\'e Paris-Sud
et les participants des JES 2016 pour leurs questions et commentaires.
\SAindex{validation croisee@validation crois\'ee|)}%
\bibliographystyle{plainnat-fr}
|
\section{Introduction}
Consider the incidence of a time-harmonic acoustic wave onto a bounded,
penetrable, and isotropic elastic solid, which is immersed in a homogeneous and
compressible air or fluid. Due to the interaction between the incident wave and
the solid obstacle, an elastic wave is excited inside the solid region,
while the acoustic incident wave is scattered in the air/fluid region. This
scattering phenomenon leads to an air/fluid-solid interaction problem. The
surface of the elastic solid divides the whole three-dimensional space into a
bounded interior domain and an open exterior domain where the elastic wave and
the acoustic wave occupies, respectively. The two waves are coupled together on
the surface via the interface conditions: continuity of the normal
component of velocity and the continuity of traction. The acoustic-elastic
interaction problems have received ever-increasing attention due to their
significant applications in geophysics and seismology \cite{h-94,
h-89}. These problems have been examined mathematically by using either
variational method \cite{gl-16, glz-16} or boundary integral equation method
\cite{lm-c95, hss-na17}. Many computational approaches have also been developed
to numerically solve these problems such as boundary element method
\cite{fkw-nme06, sm-jcp06} and coupling of finite and boundary element methods
\cite{ea-nme91}.
Since the work by B\'{e}renger \cite{b-jcp94}, the perfectly matched layer
(PML) technique has been extensively studied and widely used to
simulate various wave propagation problems, which include acoustic waves
\cite{bp-mc07, cm-sjsc98, hsz-sjma03, ls-c98, ty-anm98}, elastic waves
\cite{bpt-mc10, cxz-mc, ct-g01, hsb-jasa96, jllz-2}, and electromagnetic waves
\cite{bw-sjna05, cw-motl94}. The PML is to surround the domain of interest by a
layer of finite thickness fictitious material which absorbs all the waves coming
from inside the computational domain. It has been proven to be an effective
approach to truncated open domains in the wave computation. Combined with the
PML technique, the adaptive finite element method (FEM) has recently been
developed to solve the diffraction grating problems \cite{blw-mc10, cw-sjna03,
jllz-1} and the obstacle scattering problems \cite{cc-mc08, cw-nm08, cl-sjna05}.
Despite the large number of work done so far, they were concerned with a single
wave propagation problem, i.e., either an acoustic wave, or an elastic wave, or
an electromagnetic wave. It is very rare to study rigorously the PML problem for
the interaction of multiple waves.
This paper aims to investigate the adaptive finite element PML method for
solving the acoustic-elastic interaction problem. An exact transparent
boundary condition (TBC) is developed to reduce the problem equivalently into a
boundary value problem in a bounded domain. The PML technique is adopted to
truncated the unbounded physical domain into a bounded computational domain.
The variational approach is taken to incorporate naturally the interface
conditions which couple the two waves. The well-posedness and exponential
convergence of the solution are established for the truncated PML problem by
using a PML equivalent TBC. The proofs rely on the error estimate between the
two transparent boundary operators. To effciently resolve the solution with
possible singularities, the a posteriori error estimate based adaptive FEM is
developed to solve the truncated PML problem. The error estimate consists of the
PML error and the finite element discretization error, and provides a
theoretical basis for the mesh refinement. Numerical experiments are reported to
show the competitive behavior of the proposed method.
The paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we introduce the model
equations for the acoustic-elastic interaction problem. In section 3,
we present the PML formulation and prove the well-posedness and convergence of
the solution for the truncated PML problem. In section 4, we discuss the
numerical implementation and show some numerical experiments. The paper is
concluded with some general remarks in section 5.
\section{Problem formulation}
In this section, we introduce the model equations for acoustic and elastic
waves, and present an interface problem for the acoustic-elastic interaction. In
addition, an exact transparent boundary condition is introduced to reformulate
the scattering problem into an boundary value problem in an bounded domain.
\subsection{Problem geometry}
Consider an acoustic plane wave incident on a bounded elastic solid which
is immersed in a homogeneous compressible air/fluid in three dimensions. The
problem geometry is shown in Figure \ref{fig:geo}. Due to the wave interaction,
an elastic wave is induced inside the solid region, while the scattered acoustic
wave is generated in the open air/fluid region. The wave propagation described
above leads to an air/fluid-solid interaction problem. The surface of the solid
divides the whole three-dimensional space into the interior domain and the
exterior domain, where the elastic wave and the acoustic wave occupies,
respectively. Let the solid $\Omega_s\subset \mathbb R^3$ be a bounded domain
with a Lipschitz boundary $\Gamma_s$. The exterior domain $\Omega_e =\mathbb
R^3\setminus\bar \Omega_s$ is assumed to be connected and filled with a
homogeneous, compressible, and inviscid air/fluid with a constant density
$\rho_a>0$. Denote by $B=\{\boldsymbol{x}=(x_1, x_2, x_3)^\top\in \mathbb R^3:
|x_j| < L_j, j=1,2,3\}$ the rectangular box with the boundary $\partial B$,
where $L_j$ are sufficiently large such that $\bar \Omega_s\subset B$. Define
$\Omega_a = B\setminus\bar \Omega_s$. Let $\boldsymbol{n}_1$ be the unit normal
vector on $\Gamma_s$ directed from $\Omega_s$ into $\Omega_e$, and let
$\boldsymbol n_2$ be the unit outward normal vector on $\partial B$.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{profile0}
\caption{A two-dimensional schematic of the problem geometry for the
acoustic-elastic interaction.}
\label{fig:geo}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Wave equations}
Let the elastic solid be impinged by a time-harmonic sound wave $p^{\rm
inc}$, which satisfies the three-dimensional Helmholtz equation:
\[
\Delta p^{\rm inc}+ \kappa^2 p^{\rm inc} =0\quad\text{in}~ \Omega_e,
\]
where $\kappa=\omega/c$ is the wavenumber, $\omega>0$ is the angular frequency,
and $c$ is the speed of sound in the air/fluid. The total acoustic wave
field $p$ also satisfies the Helmholtz equation:
\begin{equation}\label{p}
\Delta p+ \kappa^2 p =0\quad\text{in}~ \Omega_e.
\end{equation}
The total field $p$ consists of the incident field $p^{\rm inc}$ and the
scattered field $p^{\rm sc}$:
\[
p=p^{\rm inc} + p^{\rm sc}\quad\text{in} ~ \Omega_e,
\]
where scattered field $p^{\rm sc}$ is required to satisfy the Sommerfeld
radiation condition:
\[
\lim_{r\to\infty} r (\partial_r p^{\rm sc}-{\rm i}\kappa p^{\rm sc})=0,\quad
r=|\boldsymbol x|.
\]
The time-harmonic elastic wave satisfies the three-dimensional Navier equation:
\begin{equation}\label{ne}
\nabla\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma (\boldsymbol u)+\omega^2\boldsymbol
u=0\quad\text{in}~ \Omega_s,
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol{u}=(u_1, u_2,u_3)^\top$ is the displacement of the elastic
wave, and the stress tensor $\boldsymbol{\sigma}(\boldsymbol{u})$
is given by the generalized Hook law:
\begin{equation}\label{ghl}
\boldsymbol{\sigma}(\boldsymbol{u})=2\mu\boldsymbol{\epsilon}(\boldsymbol{u})
+\lambda{\rm tr}(\boldsymbol{\epsilon}(\boldsymbol{u}))I,\quad
\boldsymbol{\epsilon}(\boldsymbol{u})=\frac{1}{2}(\nabla\boldsymbol{u}
+\nabla\boldsymbol{u}^\top).
\end{equation}
Here $\mu(\boldsymbol x)\in L^\infty(\Omega_s), \lambda(\boldsymbol x)\in
L^\infty(\Omega_s)$ are the Lam\'{e} parameters satisfying $\mu>0, \lambda>0$,
and $\nabla\boldsymbol u$
is the displacement gradient tensor given by
\[
\nabla\boldsymbol{u}=\begin{bmatrix}
\partial_{x_1} u_1 & \partial_{x_2} u_1&\partial_{x_3}
u_1\\
\partial_{x_1} u_2 & \partial_{x_2} u_2&\partial_{x_3}
u_2\\
\partial_{x_1} u_3 & \partial_{x_2} u_3&\partial_{x_3}
u_3
\end{bmatrix}.
\]
Substituting \eqref{ghl} into \eqref{ne} yields
\begin{equation}\label{une}
\nabla\cdot(\mu(\nabla\boldsymbol{u}+\nabla\boldsymbol{u}^\top))+
\nabla(\lambda\nabla\cdot\boldsymbol{u})+\omega^2\boldsymbol{u}=0
\quad\text{in}~ \Omega_s.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Interface conditions}
To couple the acoustic wave equation and the elastic wave equation, the
kinematic interface condition is imposed to ensure the continuity of the normal
component of the velocity:
\begin{equation}\label{inc1}
\partial_{\boldsymbol n_1} p =\rho_a\omega^2
\boldsymbol{n}_1\cdot\boldsymbol{u}
\quad\text{on} ~\Gamma_s,
\end{equation}
In addition, the dynamic interface condition is required to ensure the continuity of traction:
\begin{equation}\label{inc2}
- p \boldsymbol{n}_1=\boldsymbol{\sigma}(\boldsymbol{u})\cdot\boldsymbol{n}_1
\quad\text{on} ~\Gamma_s,
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol\sigma(\boldsymbol u)\cdot\boldsymbol n_1$ denotes the
matrix-vector multiplication.
\subsection{Acoustic-elastic interaction problem}
The acoustic-elastic interaction problem can be formulated into the following
coupled boundary value problem: Given $p^{\rm inc}$, to find $(p, \boldsymbol
u)$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{bvp}
\begin{cases}
\Delta p+\kappa^2 p=0,\quad p=p^{\rm inc}+p^{\rm sc} &\quad\text{in} ~
\Omega_e,\\
\nabla\cdot \boldsymbol\sigma(\boldsymbol u)+\omega^2\boldsymbol
u=0 &\quad\text{in}~\Omega_s,\\
\partial_{\boldsymbol n_1}p=\rho_a\omega^2\boldsymbol n_1\cdot\boldsymbol
u,\quad -p\boldsymbol n_1=\boldsymbol\sigma(\boldsymbol u)\cdot\boldsymbol n_1
&\quad\text{on} ~ \Gamma_s,\\
\partial_r p^{\rm sc}-{\rm i}\kappa p^{\rm
sc}=o(r^{-1})&\quad\text{as}~r\to\infty.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
We refer to \cite{lm-c95} for the discussion on the well-posedness of the
boundary value problem \eqref{bvp}. From now on, we assume that the
acoustic-elastic interaction problem has a unique solution.
\subsection{Transparent boundary condition}
Given $v\in H^{1/2}(\partial B)$, we define the Dirichlet-to-Neumann (DtN)
operator $\mathscr{T}: H^{1/2}(\partial B)\to H^{-1/2}(\partial B)$ as follows:
\[
\mathscr{T}v=\partial_{\boldsymbol n_2}u\quad \text{on} ~\partial
B,
\]
where $u$ is the solution of the exterior Dirichlet problem of the Helmholtz
equation:
\begin{equation}\label{xi}
\begin{cases}
\Delta u+\kappa^2 u=0 &\quad\text{in} ~ \mathbb{R}^3\setminus\bar B,\\
u=v &\quad\text{on} ~ \partial B,\\
\partial_r u-{\rm i}\kappa u=o(r^{-1}) &\quad\text{as}~r\to \infty.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
It is well-known that the exterior problem \eqref{xi} has a unique solution
$u\in H^1_{loc}(\mathbb{R}^3\setminus\bar B)$ (cf., e.g., \cite{ck-j83}). Thus
the DtN operator $\mathscr{T}: H^{1/2}(\partial B)\to H^{-1/2}(\partial B)$ is
well-defined and is a bounded linear operator.
Using the DtN operator $\mathscr T$, we reformulate the boundary value problem
\eqref{bvp} from the open domain into the bounded domain: Given $p^{\rm inc}$,
to find $(p, \boldsymbol u)$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{bbvp}
\begin{cases}
\Delta p+\kappa^2 p=0 &\quad\text{in} ~ \Omega_a,\\
\nabla\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma(\boldsymbol u)+\omega^2\boldsymbol
u=0 &\quad\text{in}~\Omega_s,\\
\partial_{\boldsymbol n_1}p=\rho_a\omega^2\boldsymbol n_1\cdot\boldsymbol
u,\quad -p\boldsymbol n_1=\boldsymbol\sigma(\boldsymbol u)\cdot\boldsymbol n_1
&\quad\text{on} ~ \Gamma_s,\\
\partial_{\boldsymbol n_2} p=\mathscr{T}p+f&\quad\text{on}~\partial B,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $f=\partial_{\boldsymbol n_2} p^{\rm inc}-\mathscr{T} p^{\rm inc}$.
To study the well-posedness of \eqref{bbvp}, we define
\[
\boldsymbol{X}:=H^1(\Omega_a)\times
H^1(\Omega_s)^3=\{\boldsymbol{\Phi}=(p,\boldsymbol{u}):p\in H^1(\Omega_a),
\boldsymbol{u}\in H^1(\Omega_s)^3\},
\]
which is endowed with the inner product:
\[
(\boldsymbol{\Phi},\boldsymbol{\Psi})_{\boldsymbol{X}}:=\int_{\Omega_a}\left(
\nabla
p\cdot\nabla \bar q + p\bar q \right){
\rm d}\boldsymbol x+\int_{\Omega_s}\left(
\nabla\boldsymbol{u}:\nabla\bar{\boldsymbol
v}+\boldsymbol{u}\cdot\bar{\boldsymbol{v}}\right){\rm
d}\boldsymbol x
\]
for any $\boldsymbol{\Phi}=(p,\boldsymbol{u})$ and
$\boldsymbol{\Psi}=(q,\boldsymbol{v})$, where $A:B={\rm tr}(A B^\top)$ is the
Frobenius inner product of square matrices $A$ and $B$. Clearly,
$\|\cdot\|_{\boldsymbol{X}}=\sqrt{(\cdot,\cdot)_{\boldsymbol{X}}}$ is a norm on
$\boldsymbol{X}$.
Let $a: \boldsymbol{X}\times \boldsymbol{X}\to\mathbb{C}$ be the sesquilinear
form:
\begin{align}\label{asf}
a( p,\boldsymbol u; q, \boldsymbol{v})=&\int_{\Omega_a}\left( \nabla
p\cdot\nabla \bar q-\kappa^2 p\bar q \right){\rm d}\boldsymbol
x+\int_{\Gamma_s}\rho_a\omega^2(\boldsymbol{n}_1\cdot\boldsymbol{u} )\bar
q{\rm d}s-\int_{\partial B} (\mathscr{T}p) \bar q{\rm d}s \notag \\
&+\int_{\Omega_s}\left(\boldsymbol\sigma(\boldsymbol
u):\nabla\bar{\boldsymbol v} -\omega^2\boldsymbol{u}\cdot\bar{\boldsymbol
v} \right){ \rm d}\boldsymbol x
+\int_{\Gamma_s} ( p\boldsymbol{n}_1 )\cdot\bar{\boldsymbol{v}}{\rm
d}s.
\end{align}
The acoustic-elastic interaction problem \eqref{bbvp} is
equivalent to the following weak formulation: Find
$\boldsymbol{\Phi}=(p,\boldsymbol u)\in \boldsymbol{X}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{atbc}
a(p,\boldsymbol u; q, \boldsymbol{v})=\int_{\partial B}f \bar q{\rm d}s,\quad\forall\,
\boldsymbol{\Psi}=(q, \boldsymbol{v}) \in \boldsymbol{X}.
\end{equation}
Since we assume that the variational problem \eqref{atbc} has a unique weak
solution $(p, \boldsymbol u)\in \boldsymbol X$, the general theory in
Babu\v{s}ka and Aziz \cite[Chap. 5]{ba-73} implies that there exists a constant
$\gamma_0$ such that the following inf-sup condition is satisfied
\begin{equation}\label{infsup}
\sup_{0\ne (q,\boldsymbol{v})\in \boldsymbol{X}} \frac{|a(p,\boldsymbol u; q,
\boldsymbol{v})|}{\|(q,\boldsymbol{v})\|_{\boldsymbol{X}}} \geq
\gamma_0\|(p,\boldsymbol{u})\|_{\boldsymbol{X}} ,\quad\forall\,
(p,\boldsymbol{u}) \in \boldsymbol{X}.
\end{equation}
\section{The PML problem}
In this section, we introduce the PML formulation for the acoustic-elastic
interaction problem and establish its well-posedness. An error estimate will be
shown for the solutions between the original scattering problem and the
PML problem.
\subsection{PML formulation}
Now we turn to the introduction of an absorbing PML layer. As is shown in
Figure \ref{fig:geo1}, the domain $\Omega_a$ is surrounded by a PML layer of
thickness $d_j$ which is denoted as $\Omega_{\rm PML}$. Define $\Omega:=
\Omega_a\cup\partial B\cup\Omega_{\rm PML}$. Let $\alpha_j(t)=1+{\rm
i}\sigma_j(t)$ be the PML function which is continuous and satisfies
\[
\sigma_j(t)=0 \quad\text{for} ~|t|<L_j \quad\text{and}\quad
\sigma_j(t)=\sigma_0\left(\frac{|t|-L_j}{d_j}\right)^m \quad\text{otherwise}.
\]
Here $\sigma_0> 0$ is a constant and $m$ is an integer. Following
\cite{cw-motl94}, we introduce the PML by the complex coordinate stretching:
\begin{equation}\label{cs}
\tilde{x}_j=\int_0^{x_j} \alpha_j(\tau) {\rm d}\tau,\quad 1\leq j\leq 3.
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{profile}
\caption{A two-dimensional schematic of the geometry for the PML problem.}
\label{fig:geo1}
\end{figure}
Let $\tilde{\boldsymbol x}=(\tilde{x}_1,\tilde{x}_2,\tilde{x}_3)$. Introduce the
new function:
\begin{equation}\label{nf}
\tilde{p}(\boldsymbol{x})=\begin{cases}
p^{\rm inc}(\boldsymbol{x})+(p(\tilde{\boldsymbol
x})-p^{\rm inc}(\tilde{\boldsymbol x})),\quad&
\boldsymbol{x}\in\Omega_{\rm PML},\\
p(\tilde{\boldsymbol x}) ,\quad
&\boldsymbol{x}\in\Omega_a.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
It is clear to note that $\tilde{p}({\boldsymbol
x})=p(\boldsymbol{x})$ in $\Omega_a$ since $\tilde{\boldsymbol
x}=\boldsymbol{x}$ in $\Omega_a$. It can be verified from \eqref{p} and
\eqref{cs} that $\tilde{p}$ satisfies
\[
\mathscr{L}(\tilde{p}-p^{\rm inc})=0\quad\text{in}~\Omega,
\]
where the PML differential operator is defined by
\[
\mathscr{L}p= \nabla\cdot(A\nabla p)+ \kappa^2 b p,
\]
where
\[
A={\rm
diag}\left(\frac{\alpha_2\alpha_3}{\alpha_1},\frac{\alpha_1\alpha_3}{\alpha_2},
\frac{\alpha_1\alpha_2}{\alpha_3}\right), \quad b=\alpha_1\alpha_2\alpha_3.
\]
It can be verified from \eqref{p} and \eqref{nf} that the outgoing wave
$\tilde{p}(\boldsymbol{x})-p^{\rm inc}(\boldsymbol{x})$
in $\Omega_{\rm PML}$ decays exponentially. Therefore, the homogeneous Dirichlet
boundary condition can be imposed on $\Gamma:=\partial\Omega_{\rm
PML}\setminus\partial B$ to truncate the PML problem. We arrive at the following
truncated PML problem: Find $(\hat p,\hat{\boldsymbol{u}})$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{pmlp}
\begin{cases}
\mathscr{L}\hat{p}=g &\quad\text{in} ~ \Omega,\\
\nabla\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma(\hat{\boldsymbol
u})+\omega^2\hat{\boldsymbol{u}}=0 &\quad\text{in} ~ \Omega_s,\\
\partial_{\boldsymbol n_1} \hat p =\rho_a\omega^2
\boldsymbol{n}_1\cdot\hat{\boldsymbol{u}},\quad -\hat p
\boldsymbol{n}_1=\boldsymbol{\sigma}(\hat{\boldsymbol{u}})\cdot\boldsymbol n_1
&\quad\text{on} ~\Gamma_s,\\
\hat{p}=p^{\rm inc} &\quad\text{on} ~ \Gamma,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where
\[
g=\begin{cases}
\mathscr{L} p^{\rm inc}&\quad\text{in} ~
\Omega_{\rm PML},\\
0&\quad\text{in} ~ \Omega_a.
\end{cases}
\]
Define
\[
\boldsymbol{Y}:=H^1(\Omega)\times
H^1(\Omega_s)^3=\{\boldsymbol{\Phi}=(p,\boldsymbol{u}):p\in H^1(\Omega),
\boldsymbol{u}\in H^1(\Omega_s)^3\},
\]
which is endowed with the inner product
\[
(\boldsymbol{\Phi},\boldsymbol{\Psi})_{\boldsymbol{Y}}:=\int_{\Omega}\left(
\nabla
p\cdot\nabla \bar q + p\bar q \right){
\rm d}\boldsymbol x+\int_{\Omega_s}\left(
\nabla\boldsymbol{u}:\nabla\bar{\boldsymbol
v}+\boldsymbol{u}\cdot\bar{\boldsymbol{v}}\right){\rm
d}\boldsymbol x
\]
for any $\boldsymbol{\Phi}=(p,\boldsymbol{u})$ and
$\boldsymbol{\Psi}=(q,\boldsymbol{v})$. Obviously,
$\|\cdot\|_{\boldsymbol{Y}}=\sqrt{(\cdot,\cdot)_{\boldsymbol{Y}}}$ is a norm on
$\boldsymbol{Y}$.
The weak formulation of the truncated PML problem \eqref{pmlp} reads as
follows: Find $(\hat p,\hat{\boldsymbol{u}})\in \boldsymbol{Y}$ such that
$\hat{p}=p^{\rm inc}$ on $\Gamma$ and
\begin{equation}\label{twp}
b(\hat p,\hat{\boldsymbol{u}}; q, \boldsymbol{v})=-\int_{\Omega}g\bar q{\rm
d}\boldsymbol{x},\quad\forall\, (q, \boldsymbol{v}) \in \boldsymbol{Y}_{0},
\end{equation}
where
$\boldsymbol{Y}_{0}=\{\boldsymbol{\Phi}=(p,\boldsymbol{u})\in\boldsymbol{Y}:
p=0~\text{on}~\Gamma\}$, and the sesquilinear form $b: \boldsymbol{Y}\times
\boldsymbol{Y}\to\mathbb{C}$ is defined by
\begin{align*}
b( p,\boldsymbol u; q, \boldsymbol{v})&=\int_\Omega\left( A\nabla p\cdot\nabla
\bar q-\kappa^2 b p\bar q \right){\rm d}\boldsymbol
x+\int_{\Gamma_s}\rho_a\omega^2(\boldsymbol{n}_1\cdot\boldsymbol{u} )\bar q{\rm
d}s \notag \\
&+\int_{\Omega_s}\left(\boldsymbol\sigma(\boldsymbol
u):\nabla\bar{\boldsymbol v}-\omega^2\boldsymbol{u} \cdot\bar { \boldsymbol { v
}}\right){\rm d}\boldsymbol x +\int_{\Gamma_s} (p\boldsymbol{n}_1
)\cdot\bar{\boldsymbol{v}}{\rm d}s.
\end{align*}
We will reformulate the variational problem \eqref{twp} imposed in the
domain $\Omega\cup\bar\Omega_s$ into an equivalent variational formulation in
the domain $B=\Omega_a\cup\bar\Omega_s$, and discuss the existence and
uniqueness of the weak solution to the equivalent weak formulation. To do so, we
need to introduce the transparent boundary condition for the truncated PML
problem.
\subsection{Transparent boundary condition of the PML problem}
We start by introducing the approximate DtN operator $\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML}:
H^{1/2}(\partial B)\to H^{-1/2}(\partial B)$ associated with
the PML problem.
Given $\psi\in H^{1/2}(\partial B)$, let $\mathscr{T}^{\rm
PML}\psi=\partial_{\boldsymbol n_2}\phi$ on $\partial B$, where $\phi\in
H^1(\Omega_{\rm PML})$ is the solution of the following boundary value problem
in the PML layer:
\[
\begin{cases}
\nabla\cdot(A\nabla\phi)+\kappa^2 b\phi=0 &\quad\text{in} ~ \Omega_{\rm PML},\\
\phi=\psi &\quad\text{on} ~ \partial B,\\
\phi=0 &\quad\text{on} ~ \Gamma.
\end{cases}
\]
The PML problem \eqref{pmlp} can be reduced to the following boundary value
problem: Find $(p^{\rm PML}, \boldsymbol{u}^{\rm PML})$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{cbvp}
\begin{cases}
\Delta p^{\rm PML}+\kappa^2 p^{\rm PML}=0 &\quad\text{in} ~ \Omega_a,\\
\nabla\cdot\boldsymbol\sigma({\boldsymbol u}^{\rm
PML})+\omega^2\boldsymbol{u}^{\rm PML}=0 &\quad\text{in} ~ \Omega_s,\\
\partial_{\boldsymbol n_1} p^{\rm PML} =\rho_a\omega^2
\boldsymbol{n}_1\cdot\boldsymbol{u}^{\rm PML},\quad -p^{\rm PML}
\boldsymbol{n}_1=\boldsymbol{\sigma}(\boldsymbol{u}^{\rm PML})\cdot\boldsymbol
n_1 &\quad\text{on} ~\Gamma_s,\\
\partial_{\boldsymbol n_2} p^{\rm PML}=\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML}p^{\rm PML} + f^{\rm
PML}&\quad\text{on} ~ \partial B,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $f^{\rm PML}=\partial_{\boldsymbol n_2} p^{\rm inc}-{\mathscr{T}}^{\rm
PML}p^{\rm inc}$.
The weak formulation of \eqref{cbvp} is to find $(p^{\rm
PML},\boldsymbol{u}^{\rm PML})\in \boldsymbol{X}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{cwp}
a^{\rm PML}(p^{\rm PML},\boldsymbol u^{\rm PML}; q, \boldsymbol{v})
=\int_{\partial B}f^{\rm PML}\bar q{\rm d}s ,\quad\forall\,
(q, \boldsymbol{v}) \in \boldsymbol{X},
\end{equation}
where the sesquilinear form $a^{\rm PML}: \boldsymbol X\times
\boldsymbol X\to\mathbb{C}$ is defined by
\begin{align}\label{csf}
a^{\rm PML}( p,\boldsymbol u; q, \boldsymbol{v})=&\int_{\Omega_a}\left( \nabla
p\cdot\nabla \bar q-\kappa^2 p\bar q \right){\rm d}\boldsymbol
x+\int_{\Gamma_s}\rho_a\omega^2(\boldsymbol{n}_1\cdot\boldsymbol{u} )\bar q{\rm
d}s -\int_{\partial B}(\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML}p) \bar q{\rm d}s\notag\\
&+\int_{\Omega_s}\left(\boldsymbol\sigma(\boldsymbol u):\nabla\bar{\boldsymbol
v}-\omega^2\boldsymbol{u} \cdot\bar { \boldsymbol { v}} \right) { \rm
d}\boldsymbol x +\int_{\Gamma_s} ( p\boldsymbol{n}_1
)\cdot\bar{\boldsymbol{v}}{\rm d}s.
\end{align}
The following lemma establishes the relationship between the variational
problem \eqref{cwp} and the weak formulation \eqref{twp}. The proof is
straightforward based on our constructions of the transparent boundary
conditions for the PML problem. The details of the proof is omitted for
simplicity.
\begin{lemm}
Any solution $\hat p$ of the variational problem \eqref{twp} restricted to
$\Omega_a$ is a solution of the variational \eqref{cwp}; conversely,
any solution $p^{\rm PML}$ of the variational problem \eqref{cwp} can be
uniquely extended to the whole domain to be a solution $\hat{p}$ of the
variational problem \eqref{twp} in $\Omega$.
\end{lemm}
\subsection{Convergence of the PML solution}
Now we turn to estimating the error between $(p^{\rm PML}, \boldsymbol u^{\rm
PML})$ and $(p, \boldsymbol u)$. The key is to estimate the error of the
boundary operators $\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML}$ and $\mathscr{T}$.
\begin{lemm}\label{boe}
For any $p, q\in H^1(\Omega_a)$, there exists a constant $C>0$ such that
\[
|\langle (\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML}-\mathscr{T})p, q\rangle_{\partial B}| \leq
C\alpha_0^3(1+\kappa L)^3e^{-\kappa\gamma_1 \sigma} \|p\|_{L^2(\partial B)}
\|q\|_{L^2(\partial B)},
\]
where $L=\max_{1\leq j\leq 3}L_j,
\alpha_0=\max_{\boldsymbol{x}\in\Gamma}(|\alpha_1(x_1)|,|\alpha_2(x_2)|,
|\alpha_3(x_3)|)$,
\[
\gamma_1:=\frac{\min_{1\le
j\le3}d_j}{\left(\sum_{j=1}^3(2L_j+d_j)^2\right)^{1/2}},
\]
and $\sigma>0$ is a sufficiently large constant such that $\gamma_1\sigma\ge 1$.
\end{lemm}
\begin{proof}
The proof can follow similar arguments as that in \cite[Theorem
3.8]{bp-mc07}. For the sake of simplicity, we do not elaborate
on the details here.
\end{proof}
\begin{theo}
Let $\gamma_0$ be the constant in the inf-sup condition
\eqref{infsup}. If
\[
\gamma_2:=C\alpha_0^3(1+\kappa L)^3
e^{-\kappa\gamma_1\sigma} <\gamma_0,
\]
then the PML variational problem \eqref{cwp} has a unique weak solution $(p^{\rm
PML},\boldsymbol{u}^{\rm PML})$, which satisfies the error estimate
\begin{align}\label{ee}
\|(p-p^{\rm PML},\boldsymbol{u}-\boldsymbol{u}^{\rm PML})\|_{\boldsymbol{X}}
\leq \gamma_2 \|p^{\rm PML}-p^{\rm inc}\|_{L^2(\partial B)},
\end{align}
where $(p,\boldsymbol{u})$ is the unique weak solution of the variational problem
\eqref{atbc}.
\end{theo}
\begin{proof}
It suffices to show the coercivity of the sesquilinear form $a^{\rm PML}$
defined in \eqref{csf} in order to prove the unique solvability of the weak
problem \eqref{cwp}. Using Lemma \ref{boe}, and the assumption
$\gamma_2<\gamma_0$, we get for any $(p,\boldsymbol{u}),
(q,\boldsymbol{v})$ in $\boldsymbol{X}$ that
\begin{align*}
|a^{\rm PML}(p,\boldsymbol{u};q, \boldsymbol{v})|&\geq |a(p,\boldsymbol{u};q, \boldsymbol{v})|
-\langle (\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML}-\mathscr{T})p, q\rangle_{\partial B}|\\
&\geq|a(p,\boldsymbol{u};q, \boldsymbol{v})|-\gamma_2\|p\|_{H^1(\Omega_a)}
\|q\|_{H^1(\Omega_a)}\\
&\geq\bigl(\gamma_0-\gamma_2\bigr)\|(p,\boldsymbol{u})\|_{\boldsymbol{X}}
\|(q,\boldsymbol{v})\|_{\boldsymbol{X}}.
\end{align*}
It remains to show the error estimate \eqref{ee}. It follows from
\eqref{cwp}--\eqref{csf} that
\begin{align*}
&a(p-p^{\rm PML},\boldsymbol{u}-\boldsymbol{u}^{\rm PML}; q,\boldsymbol{v})\\
=&a(p,\boldsymbol{u};q, \boldsymbol{v})-a(p^{\rm PML},\boldsymbol{u}^{\rm
PML};q,\boldsymbol{v})\\
=&\langle f, q\rangle_{\partial B}-\langle f^{\rm PML},
q\rangle_{\partial B}+a^{\rm PML}(p^{\rm PML},\boldsymbol{u}^{\rm PML};
q,\boldsymbol{v})-a(p^{\rm PML},\boldsymbol{u}^{\rm PML};q, \boldsymbol{v})\\
=&\langle (\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML}-\mathscr{T})p^{\rm inc}, q\rangle_{\partial B}
-\langle (\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML}-\mathscr{T})p^{\rm PML}, q\rangle_{\partial B}\\
=&\langle (\mathscr{T}-\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML})(p^{\rm PML}-p^{\rm inc}),
q\rangle_{\partial B},
\end{align*}
which completes the proof upon using Lemma \ref{boe} and the trace theorem.
\end{proof}
\section{Finite element approximation}
In this section we introduce the finite element approximations of the PML
problem \eqref{twp}.
\subsection{Error representation formula}
Let $\mathcal{M}_h$ be a regular tetrahedral partition of the domain
$D=\Omega\cup\Gamma_s\cup\Omega_s=\{\boldsymbol x\in\mathbb R^3:
|x_j|<L_j+d_j, 1\leq j\leq 3\}$ such that $\mathcal{M}_h|_\Omega$ and
$\mathcal{M}_h|_{\Omega_s}$ are also regular tetrahedral partitions of
$\Omega$ and $\Omega_s$, respectively. Let $V_h\subset
H^1(\Omega)$ and $\boldsymbol{U}_h\subset H^1(\Omega_s)^3$ be the conforming
linear finite element space over $\Omega$ and $\Omega_s$, respectively, and
\[
V_{\Gamma,h}=\{p_h\in V_h: p_h=0\;\text{on}~\Gamma\}.
\]
The finite element approximation to the PML problem \eqref{twp} reads as
follows: Find $(p_h, \boldsymbol{u}_h)\in V_h\times \boldsymbol{U}_h$
such that $p_h=I_h p^{\rm inc}$ on $\Gamma$ and
\begin{equation}\label{fem-twp}
b(p_h,\boldsymbol u_h; q_h, \boldsymbol{v}_h)=-\int_{\Omega}g\bar q_h{\rm
d}\boldsymbol{x},\quad\forall\, (q_h, \boldsymbol{v}_h) \in V_{\Gamma,h} \times
\boldsymbol{U}_h.
\end{equation}
For any $\varphi\in H^1(\Omega_a)$, let $\tilde\varphi$ be its extension in
$\Omega_{\rm PML}$ such that
\begin{align}
&\nabla\cdot(\bar A\nabla\tilde\varphi)+ \kappa^2\bar{b}\tilde\varphi=0
\quad\text{in} ~\Omega_{\rm PML},\label{5.1a}\\
&\tilde\varphi=\varphi \quad\text{on} ~\partial B, \quad\varphi=0 \quad\text{on}
~\Gamma.\label{5.1b}
\end{align}
Introduce the sesquilinear form $c:H^1(\Omega_{\rm PML})\times H^1(\Omega_{\rm
PML})\to \mathbb{C}$ as follows:
\[
c(\varphi, \psi)=\int_{\Omega_{\rm PML}}\left(\bar A\nabla
\varphi\cdot\nabla\bar\psi-\kappa^2\bar{b} \varphi\bar\psi\right){\rm
d}\boldsymbol x.
\]
The weak formulation for \eqref{5.1a}--\eqref{5.1b} is: Given $\varphi\in
H^{1/2}(\partial B)$, find $\tilde\varphi\in H^1(\Omega_{\rm PML})$
such that $\tilde\varphi=0$ on $\Gamma$, $\tilde\varphi=\varphi$ on $\partial B$, and
\begin{equation}\label{wf-c}
c(\tilde\varphi, \psi)=0,\quad\forall\,\psi\in H^1_0(\Omega_{\rm PML}).
\end{equation}
In this paper we will not elaborate on the well-posedness of \eqref{wf-c} and
simply make the following assumption: There exists a unique solution to
the boundary value problem \eqref{wf-c} in the PML layer.
In order to obtain a constant independent of PML parameter $\sigma$ in the
inf-sup condition, we define
\begin{equation*}
|||\varphi|||_{\Omega_{\rm PML}}=\left(\int_{\Omega_{\rm PML}}
\sum_{j=1}^3\frac{1}{1+\sigma_j}\left|\partial_{x_j}
\varphi\right|^2+(1+\sigma_1\sigma_2\sigma_3)\kappa^2|\varphi|^2\right)^{1/2}.
\end{equation*}
By using the general theory in \cite[Chap. 5]{ba-73}, we know that there exists
a constant $\hat C > 0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{ifsp-c}
\sup_{0\ne\psi\in H^1_0(\Omega_{\rm PML})}\frac{|c(\varphi,
\psi)|}{|||\psi|||_{\Omega_{\rm PML}}}\ge \hat C |||\varphi|||_{ \Omega_{\rm
PML}},\quad\forall\,\varphi\in H^1(\Omega_{\rm PML}).
\end{equation}
The constant $\hat C$ depends on the domain $\Omega_{\rm PML}$ and the wave
number $\kappa$.
\begin{lemm}[Estimates for the extension]
For any $\varphi\in H^1(\Omega_a)$, which is extended to be a function
$\tilde\varphi\in H^1(\Omega)$ according to \eqref{5.1a}--\eqref{5.1b}. Then
there exists a constant $C>0$ independent of $\kappa$ and $\sigma$ such that
\begin{align}
\|\nabla\tilde\varphi\|_{L^2(\Omega_{\rm PML})}&\le C\hat
C^{-1}\alpha_0(1+\kappa L)\|\varphi\|_{H^{1/2}(\partial B)}, \label{est-ext1}\\
\|A\nabla\bar{\tilde\varphi}\cdot\boldsymbol{n}_3\|_{H^{-1/2}(\Gamma)}&\le C\hat
C^{-1}\alpha_0^3 (1+\kappa L)^2\|\varphi\|_{H^{1/2}(\partial
B)},\label{est-ext2}
\end{align}
where $\boldsymbol n_3$ is the unit outward normal vector on $\Gamma$.
\end{lemm}
\begin{proof}
For any $\zeta\in H^1(\Omega_{\rm PML})$ such that $\zeta=\varphi$ on $\partial
B$ and $\zeta=0$ on $\Gamma$. By the inf-sup condition in \eqref{ifsp-c} and
using \eqref{wf-c}, we know that
\begin{equation*}
\hat C |||\tilde\varphi-\zeta|||_{\Omega_{\rm PML}}\le \sup_{0\ne\psi\in
H^1_0(\Omega_{\rm PML})}\frac{|c(\tilde\varphi-\zeta,
\psi)|}{|||\psi|||_{\Omega_{\rm PML}}} =\sup_{0\ne\psi\in H^1_0(\Omega_{\rm
PML})}\frac{|c(\zeta, \psi)|}{|||\psi|||_{\Omega_{\rm PML}}}.
\end{equation*}
By Cauchy--Schwarz inequality
\begin{equation*}
|c(\zeta, \psi)|\le C\alpha_0^{3/2} (1+\kappa L)\|\zeta\|_{H^1(\Omega_{\rm
PML})}|||\psi|||_{\Omega_{\rm PML}}.
\end{equation*}
Noting
\[
|||\zeta|||_{\Omega_{\rm PML}}\le C\alpha_0^{3/2}
(1+\kappa L)\|\zeta\|_{H^1(\Omega_{\rm PML})},
\]
using the triangle inequality and the trace inequality, we conclude that
\begin{equation}\label{ext1}
|||\tilde\varphi|||_{\Omega_{\rm PML}}\le C\hat
C^{-1}\alpha_0^{3/2}(1+\kappa L)\|\varphi\|_{H^1(\partial B)},
\end{equation}
which shows the first estimate in the theorem by using the definition of
$|||\cdot|||_{\Omega_{\rm PML}}$.
Next, for any $\psi\in H^1(\Omega_{\rm PML})$ such that $\psi=0$ on $\partial
B$, using \eqref{5.1a} and the integration by parts, we obtain
\begin{align*}
\int_{\Gamma}(A\nabla\bar{\tilde\varphi}\cdot\boldsymbol n_3)\bar\psi{\rm d}s
&=\int_{\partial\Omega_{\rm PML}}(A\nabla\bar{\tilde\varphi}
\cdot\boldsymbol n_3)\bar\psi{\rm d}s\\
&=\int_{\Omega_{\rm PML}}\left(A\nabla\bar{\tilde\varphi}
\cdot\nabla\bar\psi+\nabla\cdot( A\nabla\bar{\tilde\varphi})\bar\psi\right){\rm
d}\boldsymbol x
=\int_{\Omega_{\rm PML}}\left(A\nabla\bar{\tilde\varphi}\cdot\nabla\bar\psi-
\kappa ^2 b\bar{\tilde\varphi}\bar\psi\right){\rm d}\boldsymbol x.
\end{align*}
It follows from the Cauchy--Schwarz inequality and \eqref{ext1} that
\begin{align*}
\left|\int_{\Gamma}(A\nabla\bar{\tilde\varphi}
\cdot\boldsymbol n_3)\bar\psi{\rm d}s\right|
&\le C\alpha_0^{3/2}(1+\kappa L)|||\tilde\varphi|||_{\Omega_{\rm
PML}}\|\psi\|_{H^1(\Omega_{\rm PML})}\\
&\le C\hat C^{-1}\alpha_0^{3}(1+\kappa L)^2\|\varphi\|_{H^1(\partial
B)}\|\psi\|_{H^1(\Omega_{\rm PML})},
\end{align*}
which completes the proof after using the trace inequality.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemm}[Error representation formula]
For any $\varphi\in H^1(\Omega_a)$, which is extended to be a function
$\tilde\varphi\in H^1(\Omega)$
according to \eqref{5.1a}--\eqref{5.1b}, and $\varphi_h\in V_{\Gamma,h}$, we have
\begin{align}\label{err-rep}
a(p-p_h,
\boldsymbol{u}-\boldsymbol{u}_h;\varphi,\boldsymbol{v})=&\int_{\Omega}g(\bar{
\tilde\varphi}_h-\bar{\tilde\varphi}){\rm d}\boldsymbol x
-b(p_h,\boldsymbol{u}_h;\tilde\varphi-\tilde\varphi_h,\boldsymbol{v}-\boldsymbol{v}_h) \notag\\
&-\int_{\partial B}(\mathscr{T}-\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML})(p_h-p^{\rm
inc})\bar\varphi{\rm d}s
-\int_{\Gamma}(A\nabla\bar{\tilde{\varphi}}\cdot\boldsymbol n_3)(p^{\rm inc}-I_h
p^{\rm inc}){\rm d}s.
\end{align}
\end{lemm}
\begin{proof}
First by \eqref{asf}, \eqref{atbc}, \eqref{cwp}, and \eqref{csf}, we have
\begin{align}\label{4.7}
a(p-\hat p, \boldsymbol{u}-\hat{\boldsymbol{u}};\varphi,\boldsymbol{v})&=
\int_{\partial B} f\bar\varphi{\rm d}s-\int_{\partial B} f^{\rm
PML}\bar\varphi{\rm d}s +a^{\rm PML}(\hat p,
\hat{\boldsymbol{u}};\varphi,\boldsymbol{v})-a(\hat p,
\hat{\boldsymbol{u}};\varphi,\boldsymbol{v})\notag\\
&=\int_{\partial B}(\mathscr{T}-\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML})(\hat p-p^{\rm
inc})\bar\varphi {\rm d}s.
\end{align}
Using \eqref{4.7} yields
\begin{align}\label{4.8}
a(p-p_h, \boldsymbol{u}-\boldsymbol{u}_h;\varphi,\boldsymbol{v})=& a(p-\hat p,
\boldsymbol{u}-\hat{\boldsymbol{u}};\varphi,\boldsymbol{v}) + a(\hat p-p_h,
\hat{\boldsymbol{u}}-\boldsymbol{u}_h;\varphi,\boldsymbol{v})\notag\\
=&\int_{\partial B}(\mathscr{T}-\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML})(\hat p-p^{\rm
inc})\bar\varphi{\rm d}s + b(\hat p-p_h,
\hat{\boldsymbol{u}}-\boldsymbol{u}_h;\tilde\varphi,\boldsymbol{v}) \notag\\
&-\int_{\partial B}\mathscr{T}(\hat p-p_h)\bar\varphi{\rm d}s-\int_{\Omega_{\rm
PML}}(A\nabla (\hat p-p_h)\cdot\nabla\bar{\tilde{\varphi}}-\kappa^2 b(\hat
p-p_h)\bar{\tilde{\varphi}}){\rm d}\boldsymbol x.
\end{align}
Recalling that $\boldsymbol n_2$ is the unit outer normal to $\partial B$ which
points outside $B$ and $\boldsymbol{n}_3$ is the unit outer normal
vector on $\Gamma$ directed outside $\Omega_{\rm PML}$,
we deduce that
\begin{align}\label{4.9}
\int_{\Omega_{\rm PML}}(A\nabla(\hat
p-p_h)\cdot\nabla\bar{\tilde{\varphi}}&-\kappa^2 b(\hat
p-p_h)\bar{\tilde{\varphi}}) {\rm
d}\boldsymbol x=\int_{\Gamma}(A\nabla\bar{\tilde{\varphi}}
\cdot\boldsymbol{n}_3)(\hat p-p_h){\rm d}s-\int_{\partial
B}\partial_{\boldsymbol n_2}\bar{\tilde\varphi}(\hat
p-p_h){\rm d}s \notag\\
&=\int_{\Gamma}(A\nabla\bar{\tilde{\varphi}}\cdot\boldsymbol{n}_3)(\hat
p-p_h){\rm d}s-\int_{\partial B}(\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML} (\hat
p-p_h))\bar\varphi{\rm d}s,
\end{align}
where we have used \eqref{5.1a}--\eqref{5.1b}, the definition of
$\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML}$, and the identity (c.f., \cite[Lemma 5.1]{cw-nm08})
\[
\int_{\partial B} (\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML}\varphi) \bar\psi{\rm d}s=\int_{\partial
B} (\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML}\bar\psi)\varphi {\rm d}s, \quad\forall\varphi,\psi\in
H^1(\Omega_{\rm PML}).
\]
By \eqref{twp}, \eqref{fem-twp}, and \eqref{4.8}--\eqref{4.9},
\begin{align*}
&a(p-p_h, \boldsymbol{u}-\boldsymbol{u}_h;\varphi,\boldsymbol{v}) \\
=& b(\hat p-p_h,
\hat{\boldsymbol{u}}-\boldsymbol{u}_h;\tilde\varphi,\boldsymbol{v})-\int_{
\partial B}(\mathscr{T}-\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML})(p_h-p^{\rm inc})\bar\varphi{\rm
d}s-\int_{\Gamma}(A\nabla\bar{\tilde{\varphi}}\cdot\boldsymbol{n}_3)(\hat
p-p_h){\rm d}s \\
=&\int_{\Omega}g(\bar{\tilde\varphi}_h-\bar{\tilde\varphi}){\rm d}\boldsymbol x
-b(p_h,\boldsymbol{u}_h;\tilde\varphi-\tilde\varphi_h,\boldsymbol{v}-\boldsymbol{v}_h) \\
&-\int_{\partial B}(\mathscr{T}-\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML})(p_h-p^{\rm
inc})\bar\varphi{\rm d}s
-\int_{\Gamma}(A\nabla\bar{\tilde{\varphi}}\cdot\boldsymbol{n}_3)(p^{\rm
inc}-I_h p^{\rm inc}){\rm d}\boldsymbol x,
\end{align*}
which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{A posteriori error analysis}
For any $K\in\mathcal{M}_h$, we denote by $h_K$ its diameter. Let
$\mathcal{B}_h$ denote the set of all sides that do not lie on $\Gamma$. For any
$e\in\mathcal{B}_h$, $h_e$ stands for its length. For any $K\in\mathcal{M}_h$,
we introduce the residual:
\begin{equation}\label{res}
R_K:=\begin{cases}
\nabla\cdot(A\nabla p_h)+\kappa^2 b p_h -g &\quad\text{for} ~
K\in\mathcal{M}_h|_{\Omega}\\
\nabla\cdot \boldsymbol\sigma(\boldsymbol u_h) +\omega^2\boldsymbol{u}_h
&\quad\text{for} ~ K\in\mathcal{M}_h|_{\Omega_s}
\end{cases}.
\end{equation}
For any interior side $e\in\mathcal{B}_h$ not lying on the interface $\Gamma_s$
which is the common side of $K_1, K_2\in\mathcal{M}_h$, we define the jump
residual across $e$:
\begin{equation}\label{jmp}
J_e:=\begin{cases}
(A\nabla p_h)|_{K_1}\cdot\boldsymbol{\nu}-(A\nabla
p_h)|_{K_2}\cdot\boldsymbol{\nu} &\quad\text{for} ~ e\in
\mathcal{B}_h|_{\Omega}\\
\boldsymbol\sigma(\boldsymbol u_h)\cdot\boldsymbol\nu|_{K_1} -
\boldsymbol\sigma(\boldsymbol u_h)\cdot\boldsymbol\nu|_{K_2}
&\quad\text{for} ~ e\in \mathcal{B}_h|_{\Omega_s}
\end{cases},
\end{equation}
where we have used the notation that the unit normal vector $\boldsymbol{\nu}$
on $e$ points from $K_2$ to $K_1$. If $e$ lies on the interface $\Gamma_s$, then
we define the jump residual as
\begin{equation}\label{jmp-s}
J_e:=\begin{cases}
\partial_{\boldsymbol\nu} p_h|_{K_1}-
\rho_a\omega^2\boldsymbol{\nu}\cdot \boldsymbol{u}_h|_{K_2}
&\quad\text{for} ~ e\subset K_1\in \mathcal{M}_h|_{\Omega}\\
-p_h\boldsymbol{\nu}|_{K_1}-
\boldsymbol\sigma(\boldsymbol{u}_h)\cdot\boldsymbol\nu|_{K_2}
&\quad\text{for} ~ e\subset K_2\in \mathcal{M}_h|_{\Omega_s}
\end{cases},
\end{equation}
For any $K\in\mathcal{M}_h$, we define the local error estimator $\eta_K$ as
\[
\eta_K:=\Biggl(\|h_KR_K\|_{L^2(K)}^2+\frac{1}{2}\sum_{e\subset\partial
K\setminus\Gamma_s}h_e\|J_e\|_{L^2(e)}^2 + \sum_{e\subset\partial
K\cap\Gamma_s}h_e\|J_{e}\|_{L^2(e)}^2\Biggr)^{1/2}.
\]
\begin{theo}\label{thmp}
There exists a constant $C>0$ depending only on $\gamma_1$ and the minimum angle
of the mesh $\mathcal{M}_h$ such that the following a posterior error estimate
holds
\begin{align*}
&\|p-p_h\|_{H^1(\Omega_a)}+\|\boldsymbol{u}-\boldsymbol{u}_h\|_{H^1(\Omega_s)^3}
\le C\hat C^{-1}\alpha_0^3(1+\kappa L)\Biggl(\sum_{K\in\mathcal{M}_h}
\eta_K^2\Biggr)^{1/2} \notag \\
&+C\hat C^{-1}\alpha_0^3(1+\kappa L)^3 e^{-\gamma_1 \kappa\sigma}\|p_h-
p^{\rm inc}\|_{H^{1/2}(\partial B)} +C\hat C^{-1}\alpha_0^3(1+\kappa L)^2 \|
p^{\rm inc}- I_h p^{\rm inc}\|_{H^{1/2}(\Gamma)}.
\end{align*}
\end{theo}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Pi_h:H^1_{\Gamma}(\Omega)\to V_{\Gamma,h}$
and $\boldsymbol{\Pi}_h:H^1(\Omega_s)^3\to \boldsymbol{U}_h$ be Scott--Zhang
\cite{sz-mc90} interpolation operators satisfying the following interpolation
estimates: For any $\varphi\in H^1(\Omega)$ and
$\boldsymbol{v}\in H^1(\Omega_s)^3$,
\begin{equation}\label{pi-p}
\begin{cases}
\|\varphi-\Pi_h\varphi\|_{L^2(K)}\le Ch_K \|\nabla\varphi\|_{L^2(\tilde K)^3}\\
\|\varphi-\Pi_h\varphi\|_{L^2(e)}\le Ch_K^{1/2} \|\nabla\varphi\|_{L^2(\tilde
e)^3}
\end{cases}
\quad\text{for} ~ K\in \mathcal{M}_h|_{\Omega}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{pi-u}
\begin{cases}
\|\boldsymbol{v}-\boldsymbol{\Pi}_h\boldsymbol{v}\|_{L^2(K)}\le Ch_K
\|\nabla\boldsymbol{v}\|_{L^2(\tilde K)^{3\times 3}}\\
\|\boldsymbol{v}-\boldsymbol{\Pi}_h\boldsymbol{v}\|_{L^2(e)}\le Ch_K^{1/2}
\|\nabla\boldsymbol{v}\|_{L^2(\tilde e)^{3\times 3}}
\end{cases}
\quad\text{for} ~ K\in \mathcal{M}_h|_{\Omega_s},
\end{equation}
where $\tilde K$ and $\tilde e$ are the union of all elements in $\mathcal{M}_h$
having a non-empty intersection with $K\in\mathcal{M}_h$ and the side $e$,
respectively.
Taking $\tilde\varphi_h=\Pi_h\tilde\varphi\in V_{\Gamma,h}$ and
$\boldsymbol{v}_h= \boldsymbol{\Pi}_h\boldsymbol{v}\in\boldsymbol{U}_h$ in the
error representation formula \eqref{err-rep}, we get
\begin{align}\label{I4}
&a(p-p_h, \boldsymbol{u}-\boldsymbol{u}_h;\varphi,\boldsymbol{v})\notag\\
=&\int_{\Omega}g(\overline{\Pi_h\tilde\varphi-\tilde\varphi}){\rm d}\boldsymbol
x -b(p_h,\boldsymbol{u}_h;\tilde\varphi-\Pi_h\tilde\varphi,\boldsymbol{v}
-\boldsymbol{\Pi}_h\boldsymbol{v})\notag\\
&-\int_{\partial B}(\mathscr{T}-\mathscr{T}^{\rm PML})(p_h-p^{\rm
inc})\bar\varphi{\rm d}s-\int_{\Gamma}(A\nabla\bar{\tilde{\varphi}}
\cdot\boldsymbol{n}_3)(p^{\rm inc}-I_h p^{\rm inc}){\rm d}s \notag\\
=&I_1+I_2+I_3+I_4.
\end{align}
It follows from the integration by parts and \eqref{res}--\eqref{jmp-s} that
\begin{align*}
I_1+I_2=&\sum_{K\in\mathcal{M}_h|_{\Omega}}\Biggl(\int_K
R_K(\overline{\tilde\varphi-\Pi_h\tilde\varphi}){\rm d}\boldsymbol x
+\frac{1}{2}\sum_{e\subset\partial K\backslash\Gamma_s}\int_{e}
J_e(\overline{\tilde\varphi-\Pi_h\tilde\varphi}){\rm d}s\\
&+\sum_{e\subset\partial K\cap\Gamma_s}\int_{e}
J_{e}(\overline{\tilde\varphi-\Pi_h\tilde\varphi}){\rm d}s\Biggr)
+\sum_{K\in\mathcal{M}_h|_{\Omega_s}}\Biggl(\int_K
R_K\cdot(\overline{\boldsymbol{v}-\boldsymbol{\Pi}_h\boldsymbol{v}}){\rm
d}\boldsymbol x\\
&+\frac{1}{2}\sum_{e\subset\partial K\backslash\Gamma_s}\int_{e}
J_e\cdot(\overline{\boldsymbol{v}-\boldsymbol{\Pi}_h\boldsymbol{v}}){\rm d}s
+\sum_{e\subset\partial K\cap\Gamma_s}\int_{e}
J_{e}\cdot(\overline{\boldsymbol{v}-\boldsymbol{\Pi}_h\boldsymbol{v}}){\rm
d}s\Biggr).
\end{align*}
By \eqref{pi-p}--\eqref{pi-u} and the estimate \eqref{est-ext1}, we have
\begin{align*}
|I_1+I_2|&\le C\Biggl(\sum_{K\in\mathcal{M}_h}\eta_K^2\Biggr)^{1/2}
\|\nabla\tilde\varphi\|_{L^{ 2 }(O)}\\
&\le C\hat C^{-1}\alpha_0^3(1+\kappa
L)\Biggl(\sum_{K\in\mathcal{M}_h}\eta_K^2\Biggr)^{1/2}
\|\varphi\|_{H^{1/2}(\partial B)}.
\end{align*}
By Lemma \ref{boe}, we have
\begin{equation*}
|I_3|\le C\hat C^{-1}\alpha_0^3(1+\kappa L)^3e^{-k\gamma_1\sigma}\|p_h-
p^{\rm inc}\|_{H^{1/2}(\partial B)}\|\varphi\|_{H^{1/2}(\partial B)}.
\end{equation*}
It follows from \eqref{est-ext2} that
\begin{equation*}
|I_4|\le C\hat C^{-1}\alpha_0^3(1+\kappa L)^2\|\varphi\|_{H^{1/2}(\partial
B)}\|p^{\rm inc}-I_h p^{\rm inc}\|_{H^{1/2}(\Gamma)}.
\end{equation*}
The proof is completed by using the above estimates in \eqref{I4} and the
inf-sup condition \eqref{infsup}.
\end{proof}
\section{Numerical experiments}
According to the discussion in section 4, we choose the PML medium property
as the power function and need to specify the thickness $d_j$ of the layers and
the medium parameter $\sigma$. It is clear to note from Theorem \ref{thmp} that
the a posteriori error estimate consists of two parts: the PML error
$\epsilon_{\rm PML}$ and the finite element discretization error
$\epsilon_{\rm FEM}$, where
\begin{align}
\label{eta:fem}&\epsilon_{\rm FEM}= \Biggl(\sum_{K\in\mathcal{M}_h}
\eta_K^2\Biggr)^{1/2} + \| p^{\rm inc}- I_h p^{\rm inc}\|_{H^{1/2}(\Gamma)},\\
\label{eta:pml}&\epsilon_{\rm PML}=\alpha_0^3(1+\kappa L)^3 e^{-\gamma_1
\kappa \sigma}\|p_h- p^{\rm inc}\|_{H^{1/2}(\partial B)}.
\end{align}
In our implementation, we first choose $d_j$ and $\sigma$ such that
$\alpha_0^3(1+\kappa L)^3 e^{-\gamma_1 \kappa \sigma}\le 10^{-8}$, which
makes the PML error \eqref{eta:pml} negligible compared with the finite element
discretization error \eqref{eta:fem}. Once the PML region and the medium
property are fixed, we use the standard finite element adaptive strategy to
modify the mesh according to the a posteriori error estimate. For any
$K\in\mathcal{M}_h$, we define the local a posteriori error estimator
\[
\hat\eta_K = \eta_K + \|p^{\rm inc}- I_h p^{\rm inc}\|_{H^{1/2}(\Gamma\cap\partial K)}.
\]
The adaptive FEM algorithm is summarized in Table \ref{alg}.
\begin{table}
\caption{The adaptive FEM algorithm.}
\vskip -15pt
\hrulefill
\begin{tabular}{ll}
1 & Given a tolerance $\epsilon > 0$ and mesh refinement threshold $\tau\in
(0,1)$;\\
2 & Choose $d_j$ and $\sigma$ such that $\alpha_0^3(1+\kappa L)^3 e^{-\gamma_1
\kappa\sigma}< 10^{-8}$;\\
3 & Construct an initial tetrahedral partition $\mathcal{M}_h$ over $D$ and
compute error estimators;\\
4 & While $\epsilon_h>\epsilon$ do\\
5 & \qquad choose $\hat{\mathcal{M}}_h\subset\mathcal{M}_h$ according to the
strategy $\eta_{\hat{\mathcal{M}}_h}>\tau\eta_{\mathcal{M}_h}$;\\
6 & \qquad refine all the elements in $\hat{\mathcal{M}}_h$ and obtain a new
mesh denoted still by $\mathcal{M}_h$;\\
7 & \qquad solve the discrete problem \eqref{fem-twp} on the new mesh
$\mathcal{M}_h$;\\
8 & \qquad compute the corresponding error estimators;\\
9 & End while.
\end{tabular}
\hrulefill
\label{alg}
\end{table}
In the following, we present two examples to demonstrate the competitive
numerical performance of the proposed algorithm. The first-order linear element
is used for solving the problem. Our implementation is based on parallel
hierarchical grid (PHG) \cite{phg}, which is a toolbox for developing parallel
adaptive finite element programs on unstructured tetrahedral meshes. The linear
system resulted from finite element discretization is solved by the PCG solver.
{\bf Example 1.} We consider a problem with an exact solution. We set
the elastic region $\Omega_s:=B(0,0.2)$ and the acoustic region
$\Omega_a:=B(0,0.5)\setminus\bar\Omega_s$, where $B(0,R):=\{\boldsymbol{x}\in
\mathbb{R}^3: |\boldsymbol{x}|<R\}$ denotes the
ball with radius $R>0$ and centering at the origin. Let
\begin{equation}\label{ex:s}
p(\boldsymbol x)=\frac{e^{{\rm i} \kappa |\boldsymbol x-\boldsymbol
x_0|}}{|\boldsymbol x-\boldsymbol x_0|} \quad\text{and}\quad
\boldsymbol{u}(\boldsymbol x)=\omega^2\nabla p(\boldsymbol x),
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol x_0=(1, 0, 0)^\top$. The parameters are chosen as
$\kappa=1$, $\omega=1$, $\lambda=0.5$, $\mu=0.25$, and $\rho_a=1$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{af}
\kappa^2(\lambda+2\mu)=\omega^2.
\end{equation}
First it is easy to verify that
\[
\Delta p+\kappa^2 p =0\quad\text{in} ~ \Omega_a.
\]
When $\mu$ and $\lambda$ are constants, the Navier equation \eqref{une} reduces
to
\begin{equation}\label{cne}
\mu\Delta\boldsymbol u+(\lambda+\mu)\nabla\nabla\cdot\boldsymbol
u+\omega^2\boldsymbol u=0\quad\text{in}~ \Omega_s.
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{ex:s} and \eqref{af}, we have from a straightforward calculation
that
\begin{align*}
\mu\Delta\boldsymbol u+(\lambda+\mu)\nabla\nabla\cdot\boldsymbol
u+\omega^2\boldsymbol u &=\omega^2\left(\mu\nabla\cdot\nabla(\nabla p) +
(\lambda+\mu)\nabla (\Delta p)+\omega^2\nabla p\right)\\
&=\omega^2\left(\mu\nabla\cdot\nabla(\nabla p) -\kappa^2 (\lambda+\mu)\nabla
p+\omega^2\nabla p\right)\\
&=\omega^2\left(-\kappa^2\mu (\nabla p) -\kappa^2 (\lambda+\mu)\nabla
p+\omega^2\nabla p\right)\\
&=\omega^2\left(-\kappa^2(\lambda+2\mu)+\omega^2\right)\nabla p=0.
\end{align*}
which shows that $\boldsymbol{u}=\omega^2\nabla p$ satisfies \eqref{cne} in
$\Omega_s$. It can be verified that the interface conditions
\eqref{inc1}--\eqref{inc2} are also satisfied by letting $\rho_a=1$.
Let $q=p|_{\partial B(0, 0.5)}$ and consider the following acoustic-elastic
interaction problem with the Dirichlet boundary condition:
\[
\begin{cases}
\Delta p+\kappa^2 p=0&\quad\text{in} ~ B(0, 0.5)\setminus\bar{B}(0, 0.2),\\
\mu\Delta\boldsymbol u+(\lambda+\mu)\nabla\nabla\cdot\boldsymbol
u+\omega^2\boldsymbol u=0&\quad\text{in} ~ B(0, 0.2),\\
p=q&\quad\text{on} ~ \partial B(0, 0.5).
\end{cases}
\]
We may test the adaptive FEM algorithm by solving the above boundary value
problem.
Figure \ref{ex1:err} displays the errors of $p$ and $\boldsymbol u$ against
the number of nodal points $N_p$ in $B(0, 0.5)\setminus\bar{B}(0, 0.2)$
and $N_{\boldsymbol u}$ in $B(0, 0.2)$, respectively. It clearly shows that the
adaptive FEM yields quasi-optimal convergence rates, i.e.,
\[
\|p-p_h\|_{H^1(\Omega_a)}=O(N_p^{-1/3}),\quad \eta_{p,h}=O(
N_p^{-1/3})
\]
and
\[
\|\boldsymbol{u}-\boldsymbol{u}_h\|_{\boldsymbol{H}^1(\Omega_s)}=O(
N_{\boldsymbol{u}}^{-1/3}), \quad \eta_{\boldsymbol{u},h}=O(
N_{\boldsymbol{u}}^{-1/3}),
\]
where $\eta_{p,h}$ and $\eta_{\boldsymbol{u},h}$ are the a posterior error
estimators for $p$ and $\boldsymbol u$, respectively. Figure \ref{ex1:meshp}
plots the adaptive mesh of $\Omega_a$ for solving $p_h$ and Figure \ref{ex1:sp}
plots the mesh on a cross section of the domain $\Omega_a$ on the $xz$-plane.
Figure \ref{ex1:meshu} plots the adaptive mesh of $\Omega_s$ for solving
$\boldsymbol{u}_h$ and Figure \ref{ex1:su} plot the mesh on the cross section of
the domain $\Omega_s$ on the $xz$-plane.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{analy}
\caption{Example 1: Quasi-optimality of $H^1$- error estimates and the a
posteriori error estimates.}\label{ex1:err}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{ex1p}
\caption{Example 1: An adaptive mesh with 20390 elements of
$\Omega_a$.}\label{ex1:meshp}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{ex1pc}
\caption{Example 1: The cross section of the mesh in Figure \ref{ex1:meshp} on
the $xz$-plane.}\label{ex1:sp}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{ex1u}
\caption{Example 1: An adaptive mesh with 7655 elements of
$\Omega_s$.}\label{ex1:meshu}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{ex1uc}
\caption{Example 1: The cross section of the mesh in Figure \ref{ex1:meshu} on
$xz$-plane.}\label{ex1:su}
\end{figure}
{\bf Example 2.} This example concerns the scattering of the incident plane wave
\[
p^{\rm inc}(\boldsymbol x)=e^{-{\rm i}\kappa x_3}.
\]
The Dirichlet boundary condition on the PML layer outer boundary $\Gamma$ is set
by $p=p^{\rm inc}$. We choose $\kappa=2$, $\omega=2\pi$, $\lambda=1$, $\mu=2$,
and $\rho_a=1$. Let the elastic region and the acoustic region be $\Omega_s=
B_1\backslash\bar B_0$ and $\Omega_a = B_2 \backslash \bar \Omega_s$,
respectively. Here $B_0=(-0.1,0.1)\times(-0.1,0.1)\times (-0.2,0.0), B_1
=(-0.2,0.2)\times(-0.2,0.2)\times (-0.2,0.2)$, and
$B_2=[-0.6,0.6]\times[-0.6,0.6]\times[-0.6,0.6]$. The PML domain is $\Omega_{\rm
PML} = (0, 1)\times(0, 1)\times(0, 1)\setminus\bar{B}_2 $, i.e., the thickness
of the PML layer is 0.4 in each direction. In this example, the elastic solid
is a rectangular box with a small rectuangular dent on the surface. The
solutions of $p$ and $\boldsymbol u$ may have singularities around the corners
of the dent. We choose $\sigma = 16$ and $m = 2$ for the medium property to
ensure the PML error is negligible compared to the finite element error.
For this example, we set the numerical solution on the very fine mesh to be a
reference solution since there is no analytic solution. Figure \ref{ex2:err}
shows the errors of $p$ and $\boldsymbol u$ against the number of nodal points
$N_p$ and $N_{\boldsymbol u}$. It is clear to note that the FEM algorithm yields
a quasi-optimal convergence rate. The surface plots of the amplitude of the
fields are shown as follows: Figure \ref{ex2:p} shows the real part of $p_h$ for
the cross section in $\Omega_a$ on the $yz$-plane and Figure \ref{ex2:u} shows
the real part of $\boldsymbol{u}_h$ for the cross section in $\Omega_s$ on the
$yz$-plane.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{newEx2}
\caption{Example 2: Quasi-optimality of $H^1$- error estimates and the a
posteriori error estimates.}\label{ex2:err}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{ex2pc}
\caption{Example 2: The amplitude of the real part of $p_h$ for the cross
section of $\Omega_a$ on the $yz$-plane.}\label{ex2:p}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{ex2u}
\caption{Example 2: The amplitude of the real part of $\boldsymbol{u}_h$ for the
cross section of $\Omega_s$ on the $yz$-plane.}\label{ex2:u}
\end{figure}
\section{Concluding remarks}
We have studied a variational formulation for the acoustic-elastic interaction
problem in $\mathbb{R}^3$ and adopted the PML to truncate the unbounded
physical domain. The scattering problem is reduced to a boundary value problem
by using transparent boundary conditions. We prove that the truncated PML
problem has a unique weak solution which converges exponentially to the solution
of the original problem by increasing the PML parameters. We incorporate the
adaptive mesh refinement with a posteriori error estimate for the finite element
method to handle the problem where the solution may have singularities.
Numerical results show that the proposed method is effective to solve the
acoustic-elastic interaction problem.
|
\section{Introduction}
\noindent
Random numbers are a fundamental resource for many information-theoretical tasks, in particular cryptography. For any task that requires secrecy, it is important that the random numbers are unpredictable for every observer, also a potential eavesdropper - a property, which is called true randomness \cite{frauch13}, or private randomness \cite{colbeck2009quantum}. This notion crucially depends on the process creating the random numbers and its underlying physics, and not just the numbers themselves.
In the deterministic classical world, randomness is the result of ignorance and hence a subjective property, which cannot be proven for a powerful adversary. In nature however, private randomness is made possible by the intrinsic unpredictability of quantum measurements: even if the whole system is known, outcomes cannot be predicted with certainty. Yet, even in quantum mechanics, true randomness cannot be certified without further assumptions. This is because realistic settings always exhibit a mixture of true quantum randomness and classical randomness. The latter may stem from uncontrolled environmental degrees of freedom, but needs to be attributed to an eavesdropper's malicious tampering with the devices. The challenge consists of separating and quantifying these types of randomness, while keeping the assumptions experimentally viable.
The amount of certifiable randomness depends on the level of control over the devices \cite{law14}. Device-independent (DI) randomness generation protocols \cite{col11,pironio2010random,arnon2016simple} view all devices as black boxes, and certify randomness via the violation of a Bell-type inequality and thus require loophole-free Bell tests. While these have recently been demonstrated experimentally \cite{giustina2015significant,shalm2015strong}, DI randomness generation setups are far from practical.
More practical schemes are obtained by introducing additional assumptions, e.g. semi-device-independent randomness generation \cite{li2011semi,brask2016high}, or the quantum steering scenario \cite{passaro2015optimal} and others. In this work, we discuss measurement-device-independent (MDI) randomness generation, of which a particular instance was introduced by \cite{ma15} and has recently been realized in experiment \cite{nie2016experimental}. The MDI setup consists of two devices: a well-characterized state source and a completely uncharacterized detector. While previous work \cite{ma15} provides the randomness generation rate of a specific two-outcome single-qubit setup, we introduce and analyze a general framework which encompasses all MDI randomness generation setups, with an arbitrary state source and detector. This allows us to devise practical setups that yield up to twice the randomness of the previous work \cite{ma15}.
This paper is structured as follows. In Sec.~\ref{sec:mdisetup} we introduce the general MDI randomness generation protocol. In Sec.~\ref{sec:rndgen} we discuss the eavesdropper's degrees of freedom and state the optimization problem in terms of a semidefinite program. Finally, examples and practical applications of our result are provided in Sec.~\ref{sec:results}.
\section{Measurement device-independent randomness generation}\label{sec:mdisetup
\subsection{Setup and Protocol}
The MDI randomness generation setup consists of two devices (see Fig.~\ref{mdisetup}). First,
a source, able to emit a set of well-characterized quantum states of arbitrary (finite) dimension. In particular, for the input $a$ the state $\rho(a)$ is sent. Secondly, an uncharacterized detector which announces an outcome $x$ whenever a state was sent.
The knowledge of the quantum states and the measurement results are used to characterize the detector.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{mdi0117.pdf}
\caption{The measurement-device-independent setup for randomness generation (for details see text). The trusted source sends for the input $a\in\{1,\dotsc ,n_s\}$ a known state $\rho(a)$ to an untrusted measurement device (black box), which outputs $x$ with $x\in\{1,\dotsc ,n_o\}$.
The outcome randomness $\mathcal R_X$ is characterized by the observed probability distribution $P_\textrm{obs}(x,a)$, i.e. the probability that the pair $(x,a)$ occurs.
\label{mdisetup}}
\end{figure}
We denote the user of the protocol Alice, and the adversary Eve. Alice sets up the devices in a secure laboratory which is shielded from any kind of information transfer to the outside world.
It is verified that the sending box has no further degrees of freedom than to emit a quantum state upon receiving a specific input. The adversary Eve may have built the detector, but has no access to the laboratory afterwards.
The sent states $\rho(a)$ are selected via an initial string of random numbers.
Because of that, we describe a randomness expansion scheme \cite{colbeck2009quantum,col11}:
a user with access to an initial random string $\bold A=(a_1,a_2,\dotsc)$ interacts round-wise with a device leading to a string $\bold X=(x_1,x_2,\dotsc)$, containing the in- and output of each round, respectively.
The randomness expansion protocol then outputs a processed string $\tilde{\bold X}(\bold X)$ which is close to uniform, conditioned on $\bold A$ as well as on any side information $E$ previously stored in the device.
The MDI randomness expansion protocol is as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item For every round, do Steps 2-3:
\item The sending box sends a state $\rho(a)$ of dimension $d$ with randomly chosen
$a\in\{1,\dotsc,n_s\}$ to the measurement box. On average, this uses up $\sum_{a}p_{a}(-\log_2(p_{a}))$ bits of the initial randomness per round, where $p_{a}$ denotes the probability that $\rho(a)$ was sent.
\item After the state $\rho(a)$ has been sent, the measurement box outputs $x\in\{1,\dotsc,n_o\}$ distributed according to $p_x$. Potential losses can be announced as an extra no-detection outcome which is appended to the proper outcomes, or the device randomly attributes measurement results which contributes to the noise.
The only requirement is that the detector gives an outcome in \textit{every} round.
\item After many rounds, Alice estimates the observed measurement statistics $P_\textrm{obs}(x,a)=p_{a}P_\textrm{obs}(x|a)$, i.e. the probability that the pair $(x,a)$ occurs. From that the randomness gain per round $\mathcal R_X$ can be computed (see below).
\item Alice uses some further bits of the initial random string to post-process the raw output into a shorter string of fresh private random numbers.
\end{enumerate}
In the last step of the protocol, the user applies a quantum-secure extraction protocol to transform the output string $\bold X$ to a string $\tilde{\bold X}$ that is close to uniform with respect to Eve and the input. This can be done via seeded extraction, e.g. two-universal hashing, for which some further random bits are needed. For details, see \cite{frauch13} and references therein.
\subsection{Randomness quantification}
\noindent
For the extraction protocol it is necessary to quantify the minimal number of bits needed for Eve to reconstruct the measurement result from her side information, i.e. the conditional min-entropy \cite{renner2008security}.
The single-round degrees of freedom in randomness expansion can be described by a tripartite state $\rho_{XAE}$ on the single-round classical out- and input registers and Eve's system, which reads
\begin{align}
\rho_{XAE}=\sum_xp_x\proj{x}_X\otimes\rho_{AE}(x) \label{cqstate},
\end{align}
where $\{\ket{x}\}$ denotes a family of orthonormal states on $X$.
The randomness contained in the random variable $X$, associated to $p_x$, is quantified by the conditional min-entropy
\begin{align}
\mathcal R_X &= H_\textrm{min}(X|AE)
\label{rndrate}
\end{align}
that measures the unpredictability of $X$ with respect to the classical system $A$ and the quantum system $E$.
For $cq$-states it is known \cite{koerenn} that the min-entropy can be expressed via the optimal guessing probability
\begin{align}
H_\textrm{min}(X|AE)= -\log_2(P^*_\textrm{guess}(X|AE)), \label{hminpguess}
\end{align}
defined as
\begin{align}
P^*_\textrm{guess}(X|AE) = \max\limits_{\{F(x)\}}\sum_xp_x \tr{F(x)\rho_{AE}(x)}.\label{pguess}
\end{align}
Here, $\{F(x)\}$ denotes a POVM on the system $AE$, i.e. a collection of positive-semidefinite operators $F(x)\geq0$ fulfilling $\sum_{x=1}^{n_o}F(x)=\mathbbm{1}$.
\section{Analysis of randomness generation}\label{sec:rndgen}
\subsection{Eavesdropping characterization}\label{ssec:num1}
\noindent
Before introducing the degrees of freedom in the MDI setup, we list the assumptions below.
\begin{enumerate}
\item The laboratory is shielded from any information transfer to the outside.
\item The sending device's behavior is fully characterized to emit a single specific state $\rho(a)$ upon receiving the input $a$.
\item The measurement device employs an i.i.d. strategy, i.e. it behaves independently and identically in each round.
\item We consider the asymptotic limit, i.e. the measurement statistics is precisely known.
\end{enumerate}
The first condition is necessary in any randomness expansion scheme, since otherwise the generated output could be transmitted to Eve directly. The second assumption is what differentiates MDI from fully device-independent schemes. The third condition corresponds in the language of QKD to individual attacks.
In \cite{ma15}, the authors describe how to prove security of the MDI setup against collective attacks, solely by employing the security proof against individual attacks and convexity arguments. If the arguments given there hold, this proof would also be applicable in our analysis, extending the result to collective attacks. \footnote{However, we are not sure whether the tensor product structure of the (effective) detector POVM across different rounds, employed in the proof, can be guaranteed for MDI collective attacks.}
Given these assumptions, the eavesdropper's most general strategy in the MDI setup is as follows.
Eve has built the measurement apparatus that deviates from the honest device in two ways (see
Fig.~\ref{security}). First, to obtain correlations with the measurement outcome, she has hidden a system $E'$ in the box. Her distant laboratory $E$ and the hidden system share a state $\sigma$ that may contain arbitrary amounts of entanglement.
Secondly, upon receiving the incoming states $\rho(a)$, the measurement apparatus performs an unknown measurement $\{G(x)\}$ on it and part of $\sigma$, leading to the outcome $x$ in the lab.
Eve aims to adjust her state and the performed measurements in such a way, that she is perfectly correlated with the lab outcome, while producing the measurement statistics expected from the device.
Furthermore, the analysis includes the correlation of the output system $X$ with the input system $A$. Conditioning on the input ensures the outcome randomness to be ``fresh'', i.e. independent of the initial randomness.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{sec0117.pdf}
\caption{The graphic depicts the relevant systems, states and measurement to estimate the randomness generation rate, which is conditioned on the outside systems $A$ and $E$. The primed systems are contained in the measurement box and represent internal degrees of freedom ($E'$) as well as the incoming state $\rho(a)$ ($A'$). A further internal degree of freedom is given by the unknown measurement $\{G(x)\}$, which produces the outcome $x$ in the laboratory. The state $\sigma$ provides correlations between the detector degrees of freedom and Eves site $E$.
\label{security}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Degrees of freedom in the MDI setup}
In order to characterize the general way how the state in Eq.~(\ref{cqstate}) is obtained in the MDI setup, we introduce the relevant systems and operators below. Each system $S$ is associated to a Hilbert space $\mathcal H_S$, on which the operators act.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $A$ and $X$ denote classical registers that store the input $a$ and output $x$ of each round, respectively.
\item The incoming state $\rho(a)$ is associated to $A'$.
\item Eve has equipped the measurement apparatus with an additional system $E'$ that shares an arbitrary state $\sigma$ with her site $E$.
\item The measurement box performs an unknown POVM $\{G(x)\}$ with $n_o$ outcomes on the primed system $A'E'$ whose result is stored in $X$.
\item The optimal POVM from Eq.~(\ref{pguess}) on $AE$ is denoted by $\{F(e)\}$, with $e\in\{1,\dotsc,n_o\}$.
\end{enumerate}
In the following, we formulate the security analysis as an optimization problem, whereby $A$ and $E$ try to guess $X$, while their operations are consistent with the classical data in the lab.
The initial average global state reads
\begin{align}
\rho_\textrm{in}=\sum_ap_a\proj{a}_A\otimes\rho_{A'}(a)\otimes\sigma_{E'E}, \label{totstate}
\end{align}
while the register $X$ is initialized with an uncorrelated state. We denote by $\rho_\textrm{in}(a)$ the initial global state if $a$ has occurred.
The box-measurement $\{G(x)\}$, which acts on $A'E'$, maps the state on $AE$ into an ensemble $\{p_x,\tau_{AE}(x)\}$ given by
\begin{align}
\tau_{AE}(x) =\frac1{p_{x}} \trz{A'E'}{G_{{A'E'}}(x)\otimes\mathbbm{1}_{AE}\ \rho_\textrm{in}}, \label{pmstate}
\end{align}
where $\textrm{tr}_S$ denotes the partial trace over $S$.
According to Eq.~(\ref{pguess}), these states are distinguished by a measurement $\{F(e)\}$. Its outcome $e=x$ represents the system $AE$'s guess of the output $x$ of the detector.
We denote the probability of the event $(x,e)$ as $p_{x,e}$,
which is given by
\begin{align}
p_{x,e}=p_x\trz{}{F_{AE}(e)\tau_{AE}(x)}. \label{prob1}
\end{align}
With that, the guessing probability from Eq.~(\ref{pguess}) can be formulated as $P^*_\textrm{guess}(X|AE)=\max\limits_{\{F(x)\}}\sum_x p_{x,x}$.
By combining Eq.~(\ref{pmstate}) and (\ref{prob1}), we obtain
\begin{align}
p_{x,e}
&= \trz{AE}{F_{AE}(e)\ \trz{A'E'}{G_{{A'E'}}(x)\otimes\mathbbm{1}_{AE}\ \rho_\textrm{in}}} \nonumber\\
&= \trz{}{G_{{A'E'}}(x)\otimes F_{AE}(e)\ \rho_\textrm{in}}, \label{prob2}
\end{align}
where in the second line we have used that
for all linear operators $L_1$ on $\H_1$, and $\Gamma_{12}$ on $\H_1\otimes\H_2$, it holds that
$L_1\trz{2}{\Gamma_{12}}=\trz{2}{L_1\otimes\mathbbm{1}\Gamma_{12}}$.
In Ref. \cite{tomaphd} it was proven, that when conditioning on classical information, here given by the register $A$, the optimal measurement in Eq.~(\ref{pguess}) consists of choosing an optimal POVM on $E$ for each $a$, i.e.
\begin{align}
F_{AE}(e)=\sum_{a}\proj{a}_A\otimes F_E(e|a),
\end{align}
where $\{F_E(e|a)\}$ is a family of POVMs on $E$ (with outcome $e$), indexed by $a$, fulfilling
\begin{align}
F_E(e|a)\geq0, \quad \sum_eF_E(e|a)=\mathbbm{1} \qquad \forall a.\label{measnorm}
\end{align}
Next, we consider the action of the measurement $F_{AE}(e)$ on the initial global state $\rho_\textrm{in}(a)$ for an observer with access to $A$.
The state after measurement on $E'E$ is given by
\begin{align}
\lambda_{e|a}\sigma_{E'E}(e,a)
= \trz{A'A}{\sqrt{F_{AE}(e)} \ \rho_\textrm{in}(a)
\sqrt{F_{AE}(e)}^\dagger},
\end{align}
where $\lambda_{e|a}$ denotes the probability to obtain the outcome $e$ given $a$, and $\sigma_{E'E}(e,a)$ is the corresponding conditional state.
Note, that the unitary degree of freedom of the post-measurement state will play no role in the following, as the system $E$ will be traced out.
Since Eve's outside laboratory has no access to the input, her description of the post-measurement state is given by $\sum_ap_a\lambda_{e|a}\sigma_{E'E}(e,a)$.
Note, that because of the preparation by measurement, it holds that
$\sigma_{E'}(e,a)=\trz{E}{\sigma_{E'E}(e,a)}$ is independent of $a$, when averaged over $e$
\begin{align}
\sum_e\lambda_{e|a}\sigma_{E'}(e,a) = \sigma_{E'} \qquad \forall a, \label{indofa}
\end{align}
i.e. the index $a$ determines a particular ensemble $\{\lambda_{e|a},\sigma_{E'}(e,a)\}$ of the state
$\sigma_{E'}$.
This is because a local measurement, if the outcome cannot be communicated, does not influence a remote part of a state. It is known from quantum steering, that for a suitable global state, any local state can be prepared by a measurement on the other side \cite{hughston1993complete}.
Altogether, we obtain
\begin{align}\label{probb}
p_{x,e} &= \sum_{a}p_{a} p_{x,e|a} \nonumber\\
&=\sum_{a}p_{a}\trz{}{G_{{A'E'}}(x)\rho_{A'}(a)\otimes\lambda_{e|a}\sigma_{E'}(e,a)},
\end{align}
where only the (primed) degrees of freedom in the measurement box need to be considered.
In our protocol we observe the statistics $P_\textrm{obs}(x,a)$, which constrains any valid strategy
\begin{align}
P_\textrm{obs}(x,a)&=\sum_e p_a p_{x,e|a} \nonumber\\
&= p_{a}\trz{}{G_{{A'E'}}(x)\rho_{A'}(a)\otimes\sigma_{E'}}.
\end{align}
Here, the average over Eve's outcomes was taken, because they are unobservable for the user, and we have used Eq.~(\ref{indofa}) and (\ref{probb}) in the second line.
\subsection{The optimization problem}
We summarize the results of the previous section, by stating the optimization problem for the guessing probability. Since we are left with only two subsystems in the detector $A'E'$, we omit the system subscript
\begin{empheq}[box=\fbox]{align}
&P_\textrm{guess}^*(X|AE) = \max\limits_{\{G,\hat\sigma\}} \sum_{x,a}p_{a}\trz{}{G(x)\rho(a)\otimes\hat\sigma(x|a)} \nonumber\\
&\textrm{such\ that}\quad G(x)\geq0, \quad \sum_x G(x)=\mathbbm{1}, \nonumber\\
& \hat\sigma(e|a)\geq0, \quad \sum_e\tr{\hat\sigma(e|a)}=1 \quad \forall a, \nonumber\\
&\sum_e\hat\sigma(e|a)=\sum_e\hat\sigma(e|1) \quad \forall a, \ \textrm{and} \nonumber\\
&P_\textrm{obs}(x,a)= \sum_e p_{a}\trz{}{G(x)\rho(a)\otimes\hat\sigma(e|a)}
\label{bla1}
\end{empheq}
The optimization runs over ensembles $\{\hat \sigma(e|a)\}$ with $\hat \sigma(e|a)=\lambda_{e|a}\sigma(e,a)$ of arbitrary dimension and a POVM $\{G(x)\}$ acting on it and the incoming state. The fourth line represents the requirement from Eq.~($\ref{indofa}$), and the last line ensures that the detector degrees of freedom give rise to the observed probability distribution.
This optimization problem is not straightforwardly feasible, as it has a nonlinear target function with linear and semidefinite constraints.
However, we observe that the degrees of freedom relevant for the guessing probability can be combined into a single effective measurement acting only on the known state $\rho(a)$.
For that, we define an effective measurement $M_{x,e|a}$ on $\H_{A'}$ via
\begin{align}
M_{x,e|a} := \lambda_{e|a}\trz{E'}{G_{A'E'}(x)\ \mathbbm{1}_{A'}\!\otimes\sigma_{E'}(e,a)}, \label{povm}
\end{align}
with which we can write
\begin{align}
P_\textrm{guess}^*&(X|AE) = \sum_{x,a}p_{a} \tr{M_{x,x|a}\rho_{A'}(a)}
\end{align}
by comparison with Eq.~(\ref{bla1}).
We will instead optimize over a superset of the actual degrees of freedom relevant for the guessing probability, that consists of linear operators $M_{x,e|a}$ on $\H_{A'}$ with semidefinite and linear constraints that follow from Eq.~(\ref{povm}). This, in turn, will yield an upper bound to the guessing probability and consequently a lower bound to the randomness gain.
These constraints are as follows.
The operator defined by Eq.~(\ref{povm}) is positive semidefinite, since all constituents are positive semidefinite, and furthermore fulfills for all $a$
\begin{align}
\sum_{x,e}M_{x,e|a} &= \sum_{x}\trz{E'}{G_{A'E'}(x) \mathbbm{1}_{A'}\otimes\sigma_{E'}} = \mathbbm{1}_{A'} ,
\end{align}
where we have used Eq.~(\ref{indofa}) in the first equality.
Thus, it has the properties of a family of POVMs on $\H_{A'}$, indexed by $a$, where the outcome $x$ goes to Alice and $e$ to Eve. Two further properties can be observed, which read
\begin{align}
&\sum_x M_{x,e|a} \propto \mathbbm{1}, \label{povmp1}\\
&\sum_{e} M_{x,e|a}=\sum_{e} M_{x,e|a'}, \label{povmp2}
\end{align}
where Eq.~(\ref{povmp1}) follows directly from Eq.~(\ref{povm}), and Eq.~(\ref{povmp2}) follows from Eq.~(\ref{indofa}).
Thus, strategies given by a POVM family $\{M_{x,e|a}\}$ with properties (\ref{povmp1}) and (\ref{povmp2}) include the actual strategy (\ref{bla1}), but may not fully characterize it.
The new formulation is characterized by only linear and semidefinite constraints and due to the linearity of the target function can be cast into the form of a semidefinite program (SDP).
\begin{Theorem}
The optimal guessing probability in any MDI randomness generation setup, subject to the assumptions explained in (\ref{ssec:num1}), is upper bounded by the solution of the following SDP
\end{Theorem}
\vspace*{-3ex}
\begin{empheq}[box=\fbox]{align}
&P^*_\textrm{guess}(X|AE) \leq \max\limits_{\{M_{x,e|a}\}}\sum_{x,a}p_{a} \tr{M_{x,x|a}\rho(a)} \nonumber\\
&\textrm{s.t.}\quad M_{x,e|a}\geq \,0,\quad \sum_{x,e}M_{x,e|a}= \mathbbm{1} \quad\forall a, \nonumber\\
&\sum_x M_{x,e|a} = \left[\sum_x M_{x,e|a}\right]_{11}\cdot\mathbbm{1} \quad\forall e,a,\nonumber\\
&\sum_{e} M_{x,e|a}=\sum_{e} M_{x,e|1}\quad\forall x,a, \ \mbox{and}\nonumber\\
&P_\textrm{obs}(x,a)=\sum_{e}p_{a} \tr{M_{x,e|a}\rho(a)}
\label{sdp}
\end{empheq}
The second line characterizes the operators $\{M_{x,e|a}\}$ as a POVM for each $a$. The third and fourth line ensure that the POVM family $\{M_{x,e|a}\}$ obeys the properties (\ref{povmp1}) and (\ref{povmp2}), respectively, which follow from the form of the effective measurement (\ref{povm}). The former property may be interpreted as a nonsignalling condition between the detector and Eve's site, and the latter as a nonsignalling condition between the systems $A$ and $E$.
The notation $[M]_{11}$ denotes the $(1,1)$-element of the matrix $M$.
The last line ensures that the adversary's operations actually give rise to the observed measurement statistics $P_\textrm{obs}$ in the laboratory.
The outcome of the SDP provides via Eq.~(\ref{rndrate}) and (\ref{hminpguess}) a lower bound to the randomness generated per round $\mathcal R_X$ in the measurement-device-independent setup.
\section{Results}\label{sec:results}
For any MDI setup with arbitrary detector and state source, the observed probability vector can be read into the SDP (\ref{sdp}) to determine the randomness of the output bits.
In the following, we will discuss which sets of states $\{\rho(a)\}$ and observed distributions $p_aP_\textrm{obs}(x|a)$ are optimal in practical setups.
Our model of the detector behavior consists of a proposed ideal quantum measurement mixed with white noise
\begin{align}
P_\textrm{obs}(x,a) &= \eta P_\textrm{id} (x,a)+\frac{1-\eta}{n_o}p_a, \label{obsdist}
\end{align}
where $P_\textrm{id}$ is the distribution of the ideal measurement, $\eta\in[0,1]$ is a quality parameter, $n_o$ is the number of outcomes, and $p_a$ is the input distribution.
In order to characterize the detector, we make use of the tomographically complete qubit state set $\{\ket{+},\ket{0},\ket{1},\ket{+i}\}$, corresponding to the $\pm1$-eigenstates of Pauli $\sigma_z$ and the $+1$-eigenstates of $\sigma_x,\sigma_y$. We employ pure states since we wish to minimize the input randomness.
An upper bound of the MDI randomness gain is given by the classical conditional min-entropy of the in- and output distributions~\cite{tomaphd}
\begin{align}\label{clmin}
H_\textrm{min}(X|A)=-\log\sum_a\max_{x}P_\textrm{obs}(x,a).
\end{align}
In order to maximize this expression we need to have unbiased measurement outcomes $x$ for every input $a$.
Since for an ideal quantum measurement we cannot ensure unbiased outcomes with respect to each of the input states, we make use of an input distribution $p_a$ that is almost sharp, i.e. the first state $\ket{+}$ is sent with probability $q\equiv p_1\to1$, and the other states are only sent rarely to characterize the detector. We call the parameter $q$ asymmetry of the distribution $p_a$. Furthermore, an asymmetric choice of inputs is desirable for randomness expansion in the asymptotic limit, as it reduces the input randomness, see Step 2 of the protocol in Sec.~\ref{sec:mdisetup}.
To make the limit $q\to1$ feasible in the SDP, we divide all rounds into test and generation rounds: in test rounds, states are sent according to a uniform distribution, and in generation rounds, only $\rho(1)$ is sent.
The asymptotic limit is then defined as: number of rounds $N\to\infty$. Simultaneously we take the limit $q\to1$ to ensure maximal asymmetry.
Similarly to QKD Eve's optimal strategy is now as follows:
She provides a POVM that reproduces the expected measurement statistics in the \textit{test} rounds,
but aims at optimally predicting the outcomes of \textit{generation} rounds, since test rounds have negligible contribution to the total guessing probability in the limit $q\to1$.
In this asymmetric scenario, the optimal situation for randomness generation (expansion) corresponds to the measurement statistics of a POVM with three properties: i) the POVM is extremal \cite{d2005classical}, i.e. it
cannot be given as a mixture of two different POVMs \cite{haapasalo2012quantum}. This ensures that its outcomes cannot be predicted by having access to a random variable (which determines the mixing) and thus maximizes randomness with respect to the measurement apparatus controlled by Eve.
ii) the POVM has unbiased outcomes for the first input state i.e. the output distribution has maximal entropy.
iii) the POVM has $d^2$ outcomes for the state space dimension $d$. This is because $d^2$ corresponds to the highest number of independent outcomes: any further POVM element can be written as a linear combination of previous ones, which amounts to classical post-processing that cannot increase the true randomness. Therefore, the maximally achievable randomness is $2\log d$ bits \cite{acin2016optimal}.
We stress, that this POVM is realized in the optimal \textit{honest} device, i.e. a device that implements a particular pre-defined POVM.
The semidefinite program, on the other hand, finds the optimal measurement for Eve that gives rise to the measurement statistics expected from the honest device.
\subsection{Single qubit setups}
From the previous section, it follows that a qubit measurement can have up to 4 independent outcomes. In the following, we compare the performance in randomness gain of different sets of sent states and numbers of outcomes. In practice, the configuration is chosen by taking into account which states and measurements are most readily available in the laboratory.
In general, qubit POVM elements can be decomposed as
\begin{align}
M_k=\alpha_k (\mathbbm{1}+\vec m_k \cdot \vec\sigma) \quad\textrm{with} \nonumber\\
\alpha_k>0,\quad \sum_k\alpha_k=1,\quad \sum_k\alpha_k\vec m_k=0. \label{extpovm}
\end{align}
where $k=1,\dotsc,n_o$.
To ensure unbiased measurement outcomes with respect to the most frequent state, we require
\begin{align}
\bra{+}M_k\ket{+}\equiv\alpha_k(1+\vec m_k\cdot \vec e_1)=\frac1{n_o} \quad
\forall k=1,\dotsc,n_o. \label{ext}
\end{align}
Furthermore, we have the following extremality conditions \cite{d2005classical}. The POVM elements are rank-one, which is ensured by normalized measurement directions $\lvert\vec m_k \rvert=1$. Additionally, the measurement operators are linearly independent. This is fulfilled, e.g. for four outcomes, if and only if the measurement directions form a tetrahedron, i.e. they cannot lie in a common plane.
Note, that not all $\alpha_k$ can be equal, since then the property (\ref{ext}) would force all vectors to lie in the plane defined by \mbox{$\vec m_k\cdot \vec e_1=c$}, which violates the extremality condition.
A maximally symmetric 4-outcome configuration is given by
\begin{align}\label{epovm4}
&\vec m_1=\vec e_1 \qquad \vec m_2=-\frac17\vec e_1 + \frac{4\sqrt3}{7}\vec e_2 &\nonumber\\
&\vec m_{3/4}=-\frac17\vec e_1 - \frac{2\sqrt3}{7}\vec e_2 \pm \frac67 \vec e_3 &\nonumber\\
&\alpha_1=\frac18 \quad \alpha_2=\alpha_3=\alpha_4=\frac{7}{24}, &
\end{align}
which we will make use of in the following.
Also, we will later employ a 3-outcome extremal POVM given by
\begin{align}\label{epovm3}
&\vec m_1=\vec e_2 \qquad \vec m_{2/3}=-\frac12\vec e_2 \pm \frac{\sqrt3}{2}\vec e_3 &\nonumber\\
&\alpha_1=\alpha_2=\alpha_3=\frac13. &
\end{align}
The following graphic Fig.~\ref{povmvsma} compares the performance of different numbers of outcomes and sent states in the asymptotic limit as a function of the detector quality $\eta$. For $n_s=2$ ($n_s=4$), states are drawn from the first two (all) elements of the set $\{\ket{+},\ket{0},\ket{1},\ket{+i}\}$.
The measurement statistics is described by Eq.~(\ref{obsdist}), where $P_\textrm{id}$ is the distribution, which we obtain if, for $n_o=4$, the honest device implements the 4-outcome measurement (\ref{epovm4}), and for $n_o=2$ a $\sigma_z$-measurement.
The optimization is performed with standard tools such as \texttt{YALMIP} \cite{lofberg2005yalmip}, and \texttt{SDPT3} \cite{toh1999sdpt3} as solver.
We observe that states drawn from a tomographically complete set in test rounds are clearly advantageous, since these allow for a better detector characterization.
Moreover, the figure shows that for fixed input states, the performance of an extremal 4-outcome measurement is, depending on the visibility, up to twice as good as the best projective measurement.
In particular, the maximal local randomness of two bits is reached for a noiseless detector ($\eta=1$). For a detector quality of $\eta\geq 97\%$, the setup generates more than one random bit per qubit.
In the special case of a one-qubit sending box with tomographically complete states in the asymptotic limit, and ideal statistics given by a $\sigma_z$-measurement, our bound is equal to the exact formula from previous work \cite{ma15}.
\begin{figure}[h!]\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.52\textwidth]{apovmvsma.pdf}
\caption{The randomness rate versus the detector quality defined in Eq.~(\ref{obsdist}) in the asymptotic limit and for $q\equiv p_1\to1$.
The blue (red) line depicts an extremal POVM with $n_o=4\ (=2)$ outcomes for a tomographically complete set of $n_s=4$ states. The ideal measurement statistics arises from the measurement directions in Eq.~(\ref{epovm4}) ($n_o=4$) and from a $\sigma_z$-measurement ($n_o=2$). The green line corresponds to the case of two non-orthogonal sent states and two outcomes.
\label{povmvsma}}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Randomness for different relative angles}
We are also able to study the angle-dependency between two states of the MDI randomness rate.
Consider the case of the observed distribution (\ref{obsdist}), where $P_\textrm{id}$ corresponds to the statistics of a $\sigma_x$-measurement. For any $\alpha \in [0,1]$, the two sent states are drawn from the set
$\{\ket{\phi_\alpha},\ket{\psi_\alpha}\}$ with
\begin{align}\label{anglestates}
\ket{\phi_\alpha}&=\sqrt{1-\frac\alpha2}\ket{0}+\sqrt{\frac\alpha2}\ket{1}, \nonumber\\
\ket{\psi_\alpha}&=\sqrt{1-\frac\alpha2}\ket{0}-\sqrt{\frac\alpha2}\ket{1}.
\end{align}
Fig.~\ref{rndangle} depicts the randomness generation rate for several detector qualities as a function of $\alpha \in [0,1]$.
For $\alpha=0$ both states are identical $\ket{\phi_0}=\ket{\psi_0}=\ket{0}$, and for $\alpha=1$ they become orthogonal $\ket{\phi_1}=\ket{+},\ket{\psi_1}=\ket{-}$. In both cases the randomness generation rate vanishes, as expected. However, we observe that for an infinitesimally small but non-vanishing angle, we achieve near-maximal randomness for $\eta=1$, indicating that any amount of non-orthogonality in this scenario forces Eve to provide the honest measurement.
More specifically, the $\eta=1$-line coincides with the classical min-entropy from Eq.~(\ref{clmin}).
However, the feature of much randomness for almost no quantumness comes at the cost of two requirements: i) precisely characterized states to ensure that they are not identical ii) precise determination of the observed measurement statistics $P_\textrm{obs}$, because the randomness rate is discontinuous at $\alpha=0$, where no randomness can be extracted.
\begin{figure}[h]\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.52\textwidth]{q1mxangle.pdf}
\caption{The randomness rate as a function of the angle parameter $\alpha$ (see Eq.~(\ref{anglestates})) between two sent states for several detector qualities $\eta$ and asymmetry $q=\frac12$. The statistics of the ideal measurement corresponds to a $\sigma_x$-measurement. For $\alpha=0$, the randomness rate is equal to zero.
\label{rndangle}}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{The role of the asymmetry}
In the asymptotic limit, and for a tomographically complete set of sent states, a higher asymmetry amounts to a higher gain in randomness for all detector qualities. However, we make the intriguing observation that for two sent qubit states $\{\ket{+},\ket{0}\}$, the optimal asymmetry depends on the detector quality.
For that, we make use of an ideal statistics of a $\sigma_z$-measurement. Fig.~\ref{asymmetry} shows that for detector qualities $\eta\gtrsim0.8$ maximal asymmetry $q\equiv p_1\to1$ is optimal, whereas for lower qualities a more balanced input distribution performs better.
Because $\ket{0}$ is an eigenstate of the measurement, asymmetric input distributions with higher $\ket{+}$-contribution have less classical correlation of the in- and output and thus yield higher randomness close to the ideal measurement. On the other hand, the graphic indicates that asymmetric distributions lead to higher correlations of the output and the detector degrees of freedom for an increasing noise level.
\begin{figure}[h!]\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.52\textwidth]{asymmetry.pdf}
\caption{The randomness rate of a two-state two-outcome setup with the sent states $\ket{+},\ket{0}$
and different asymmetry parameters $q\equiv p_1$. The ideal measurement statistics corresponds to a $\sigma_z$-measurement.
\label{asymmetry}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Multiple qubit setups}
\subsubsection{Performance comparison}
Here, we compare setups consisting of a sending device with states of dimension $d$ and a measurement box with $n_o=d$ outcomes. In particular, the sent states are tensor products of $m$ single-qubit states which are drawn from either the first two, or all elements of the set $\{\ket{+},\ket{0},\ket{1},\ket{+i}\}$.
The measurement statistics is described by Eq.~(\ref{obsdist}), where $P_\textrm{id}$ is the distribution where the honest device implements a $\sigma_z^{\otimes m}$-measurement.
We consider the asymmetric limit, in which the first state $\ket{+}^{\otimes m}$ is sent almost always.
To account for experimental resources, we normalize the randomness gain to the state dimension: $\mathcal R_X/\log_2d$, which is the randomness rate per qubit.
Fig.~\ref{hierarchy} depicts the randomness rate per qubit for several numbers of sent qubits $m=1,2,3$ per round.
States drawn from a tomographically complete set in test rounds are clearly advantageous, as the upper two lines show, since these allow for a better detector characterization.
Within our noise model from Eq.~(\ref{obsdist}), the normalized randomness gain is essentially independent of the number of sent qubits. More precisely, it slightly increases with dimension for four sent states per qubit (upper two lines), and slightly decreases with dimension for two sent states per qubit (lower three lines).
\begin{figure}[h!]\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.52\textwidth]{ahierarchy.pdf}
\caption{The randomness rate per qubit versus the detector quality from Eq.~(\ref{obsdist}) for different setups in the asymptotic limit. The upper two lines correspond to setups with four different sent states per qubit, whereas the lower three lines correspond to two different sent states per qubit. The ideal measurement statistics is given by a $\sigma_z^{\otimes m}$-measurement, where $m$ is the number of sent qubits.
\label{hierarchy}}
\end{figure}
Furthermore, we have investigated entangled measurements, such as a Bell state measurement, concluding that these do not generate more randomness and thus provide no advantage for increased experimental complexity.
\subsubsection{Individual vs. coherent attacks for two copies}
Next, we wish to compare the performance of a single qubit setup with a two-qubit setup, in which all observable quantities correspond to two independent copies of the single setup. This allows us to assess whether coherent attacks, which act simultaneously on both qubits, provide an advantage over individual attacks.
The results from Fig.~\ref{hierarchy} cannot be used for that, since there the two-qubit probability distribution is not the doubling of the one-qubit distribution.
Fig.~\ref{infccomp} shows the difference of normalized randomness generation
$\Delta:=\mathcal R_X(\textrm{1-qubit})-\frac12 \mathcal R_X(\textrm{2-qubit})$ of a one-qubit setup with tomographically complete states, and a two-qubit doubling. The single qubit statistics is given again by Eq.~(\ref{obsdist}).
The positive difference indicates that coherent attacks lead to more predictive power for Eve in the MDI setup. However, this assertion only holds if Eve can announce results of different round measurements simultaneously. It is an open question how Eve's predictive power behaves in a \textit{sequential} setup, where she is forced to announce an outcome in each round, but the device can have a memory.
This means, that measurements of different rounds are in tensor product form, and act in general on the post-measurement state of all previous rounds, as well as a fresh ancilla \cite{arnon2016simple}.
\begin{figure}[h!]\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.52\textwidth]{ainfccomp.pdf}
\caption{The difference of the normalized randomness rates of a one-qubit setup with tomographically complete states, and a two-qubit doubling in the asymptotic limit. The blue line corresponds to a 3-outcome POVM, whose statistics is determined by the measurement directions in Eq.~(\ref{epovm3}), and the red line to a projective measurement.
\label{infccomp}}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion and Outlook}
In this paper, we have introduced a general framework for randomness generation (i.e. expansion) with a well-characterized source of arbitrary quantum states and untrusted detector with arbitrary measurements. We presented a randomness generation protocol and analyzed its achievable gain in randomness depending on the observed measurement statistics and sent states. A lower bound on the randomness rate is calculated by a numerically feasible semidefinite program.
As an application, we have discussed several examples of simple MDI setups and outlined optimal honest strategies. In particular, we devised a one-qubit MDI setup with four outcomes, which achieves more than one random bit per qubit for experimentally achievable detector efficiencies.
These setups are practical compared to fully device-independent schemes, since no loophole-free Bell tests are required. Moreover, they achieve nonzero randomness generation even for low detector quality, whereas DI protocols abort in this scenario \cite{pironio2010random}.
Generalizations of our result are possible by relaxing assumptions we have made.
Of primary interest are attacks beyond the i.i.d. assumption.
In this scenario, i.i.d. is relaxed to sequential (round-wise) interaction with the devices, including the possibility of a detector memory. For fully device-independent sequential randomness expansion, it has been shown \cite{arnon2016simple} that for more than $10^8$ rounds, the rate for general attacks is essentially the same as for i.i.d. attacks. We expect a similar behavior to hold in the case of MDI randomness expansion.
The extension to a finite number of rounds is expected to be straightforwardly implementable in the SDP in Eq.~(\ref{sdp}). In analogy to parameter estimation in QKD, one can replace equality in the last constraint by an appropriate semidefinite constraint which includes the statistical deviation.
By comparison with previous work \cite{ma15}, we noticed that for the setup treated there, our lower bound to the randomness rate coincides with their exact rate. It is an open question whether this is the case in all MDI setups, which we leave for future work.
\newline
\textit{Remark:} During completion of this work we became aware of recent related work \cite{vsupic2017measurement}, in which a comparable semidefinite program was used to calculate the MDI randomness rate in a two-qubit setup with tomographically complete states.
\section{Acknowledgments}
The authors thank Matthias Kleinmann for discussion. FB acknowledges financial support from Evangelisches Studienwerk Villigst and from Strategischer Forschungsfonds (SFF) of the University of D\"usseldorf. We acknowledge financial support from the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF).
|
\section{Introduction}\label{introduction}
Building knowledge graphs (KG) over Web corpora is an important problem that has galvanized effort from multiple communities over two decades \cite{kgc}, \cite{kg1}. Automated knowledge graph construction from Web resources involves several different phases. The first phase involves \emph{domain discovery}, which constitutes identification of sources, followed by crawling and scraping of those sources \cite{domaindiscovery1}. A contemporaneous \emph{ontology engineering} phase is the identification and design of key classes and properties in the domain of interest (the \emph{domain ontology}) \cite{ontologyengineering}.
Once a set of (typically unstructured) data sources has been identified, an \emph{Information Extraction} (IE) system needs to extract structured data from each page in the corpus \cite{IE}, \cite{webIE}, \cite{wrapperIE}, \cite{stanfordner}. In IE systems based on statistical learning, \emph{sequence labeling} models like Conditional Random Fields (CRFs) can be trained and used for tagging the scraped text from each data source with terms from the domain ontology \cite{crf1}, \cite{stanfordner}. With enough data and computational power, deep neural networks can also be used for a range of collective natural language tasks, including chunking and extraction of named entities and relationships \cite{multitask}.
While IE has been well-studied both for cross-domain Web sources (e.g. Wikipedia) and for traditional domains like biomedicine \cite{wikipediaIE}, \cite{biomedicalNER}, it is less well-studied (Section \ref{relatedwork}) for \emph{dynamic} domains that undergo frequent changes in content and structure. Such domains include news feeds, social media, advertising, and online marketplaces, but also \emph{illicit} domains like human trafficking. Automatically constructing knowledge graphs containing important information like ages (of human trafficking victims), locations, prices of services and posting dates over such domains could have widespread social impact, since law enforcement and federal agencies could query such graphs to glean rapid insights \cite{dig}.
Illicit domains pose some formidable challenges for traditional IE systems, including deliberate information \emph{obfuscation}, non-random misspellings of common words, high occurrences of out-of-vocabulary and uncommon words, frequent (and non-random) use of Unicode characters, sparse content and heterogeneous website structure, to only name a few \cite{dig}, \cite{alvari}, \cite{ben}. While some of these characteristics are shared by more traditional domains like chat logs and Twitter, both information obfuscation and extreme content heterogeneity are unique to illicit domains. While this paper only considers the human trafficking domain, similar kinds of problems are prevalent in other illicit domains that have a sizable Web (including Dark Web) footprint, including terrorist activity, and sales of illegal weapons and counterfeit goods \cite{darkweb}.
As real-world illustrative examples, consider the text fragments \emph{`Hey gentleman im neWYOrk and i'm looking for generous...'} and \emph{`AVAILABLE NOW! ?? - (4 two 4) six 5 two - 0 9 three 1 - 21'}. In the first instance, the correct extraction for a \emph{Name} attribute is \emph{neWYOrk}, while in the second instance, the correct extraction for an \emph{Age} attribute is \emph{21}. It is not obvious what features should be engineered in a statistical learning-based IE system to achieve robust performance on such text.
To compound the problem, \emph{wrapper induction} systems from the Web IE literature cannot always be applied in such domains, as many important attributes can only be found in text descriptions, rather than template-based Web extractors that wrappers traditionally rely on \cite{wrapperIE}. Constructing an IE system that is robust to these problems is an important first step in delivering structured knowledge bases to investigators and domain experts.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.8in, width=6.7in]{approach}
\caption{A high-level overview of the proposed information extraction approach}\label{fig:approach}
\end{figure*}
In this paper, we study the problem of robust information extraction in dynamic, illicit domains with unstructured content that does not necessarily correspond to a typical natural language model, and that can vary tremendously between different Web domains, a problem denoted more generally as \emph{concept drift} \cite{conceptdrift}. Illicit domains like human trafficking also tend to exhibit a `long tail'; hence, a comprehensive solution should not rely on information extractors being tailored to pages from a small set of Web domains.
There are two main technical challenges that such domains present to IE systems. First, as the brief examples above illustrate, feature engineering in such domains is difficult, mainly due to the atypical (and varying) representation of information. Second, investigators and domain experts require a \emph{lightweight} system that can be quickly bootstrapped. Such a system must be able to generalize from few ($\approx$10-150) manual annotations, but be incremental from an engineering perspective, especially since a given illicit Web page can quickly (i.e. within hours) become obsolete in the real world, and the search for leads and information is always ongoing. In effect, the system should be designed for streaming data.
We propose an information extraction approach that is able to address the challenges above, especially the variance between Web pages and the small training set per attribute, by combining two sequential techniques in a novel paradigm. The overall approach is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:approach}. First, a \emph{high-recall recognizer}, which could range from an exhaustive Linked Data source like GeoNames (e.g. for extracting locations) to a simple regular expression (e.g. for extracting ages), is applied to each page in the corpus to derive a set of \emph{candidate annotations} for an attribute per page. In the second step, we train and apply a supervised feature-agnostic classification algorithm, based on learning word representations from random projections, to classify each candidate as correct/incorrect for its attribute.
{\bf Contributions} We summarize our main contributions as follows: (1) We present a lightweight feature-agnostic information extraction system for a highly heterogeneous, illicit domain like human trafficking. Our approach is simple to implement, does not require extensive parameter tuning, infrastructure setup and is incremental with respect to the data, which makes it suitable for deployment in streaming-corpus settings. (2) We show that the approach shows good generalization even when only a small corpus is available after the initial domain-discovery phase, and is robust to the problem of concept drift encountered in large Web corpora. (3) We test our approach extensively on a real-world human trafficking corpus containing hundreds of thousands of Web pages and millions of unique words, many of which are rare and highly domain-specific. Evaluations show that our approach outperforms traditional Named Entity Recognition baselines that require manual feature engineering. Specific empirical highlights are provided below.
{\bf Empirical highlights} Comparisons against CRF baselines based on the latest Stanford Named Entity Resolution system (including pre-trained models as well as new models that we trained on human trafficking data) show that, on average, across five ground-truth datasets, our approach outperforms the next best system on the recall metric by about 6\%, and on the F1-measure metric by almost 20\% in low-supervision settings (30\% training data), and almost 20\% on both metrics in high-supervision settings (70\% training data). Concerning efficiency, in a serial environment, we are able to derive word representations on a 43 million word corpus in under an hour. Degradation in average F1-Measure score achieved by the system is less than 2\% even when the underlying raw corpus expands by a factor of 18, showing that the approach is reasonably robust to concept drift.
{\bf Structure of the paper} Section \ref{relatedwork} describes some related work on Information Extraction. Section \ref{approach} provides details of key modules in our approach. Section \ref{evaluations} describes experimental evaluations, and Section \ref{conclusion} concludes the work.
\section{Related Work}\label{relatedwork}
Information Extraction (IE) is a well-studied research area both in the Natural Language Processing community and in the World Wide Web, with the reader referred to the survey by Chang et al. for an accessible coverage of Web IE approaches \cite{IEsurvey}. In the NLP literature, IE problems have predominantly been studied as Named Entity Recognition and Relationship Extraction \cite{stanfordner}, \cite{relex}. The scope of Web IE has been broad in recent years, extending from wrappers to Open Information Extraction (OpenIE) \cite{wrapperIE}, \cite{openIE}.
In the Semantic Web, domain-specific extraction of entities and properties is a fundamental aspect in constructing instance-rich knowledge bases (from unstructured corpora) that contribute to the Semantic Web vision and to ecosystems like Linked Open Data \cite{lod}, \cite{SWvision}. A good example of such a system is Lodifier \cite{lodifier}. This work is along the same lines, in that we are interested in user-specified attributes and wish to construct a knowledge base (KB) with those attribute values using raw Web corpora. However, we are not aware of any IE work in the Semantic Web that has used word representations to accomplish this task, or that has otherwise outperformed state-of-the-art systems without manual feature engineering.
The work presented in this paper is structurally similar to the geolocation prediction system (from Twitter) by Han et al. and also ADRMine, an adverse drug reaction (ADR) extraction system from social media \cite{rev1ref1}, \cite{rev1ref2}. Unlike these works, our system is not optimized for specific attributes like locations and drug reactions, but generalizes to a range of attributes. Also, as mentioned earlier, illicit domains involve challenges not characteristic of social media, notably information obfuscation.
In recent years, state-of-the-art results have been achieved in a variety of NLP tasks using word representation methods like neural embeddings \cite{word2vec}. Unlike the problem covered in this paper, those papers typically assume an existing KB (e.g. Freebase), and attempt to infer additional facts in the KB using word representations. In contrast, we study the problem of constructing and populating a KB per domain-specific attribute \emph{from scratch} with only a small set of initial annotations from crawled Web corpora.
The problem studied in this paper also has certain resemblances to OpenIE \cite{openIE}. One assumption in OpenIE systems is that a given fact (codified, for example, as an RDF triple) is observed in multiple pages and contexts, which allows the system to learn new `extraction patterns' and rank facts by confidence. In illicit domains, a `fact' may only be observed once; furthermore, the arcane and high-variance language models employed in the domain makes direct application of any extraction pattern-based approach problematic.
To the best of our knowledge, the specific problem of devising feature-agnostic, low-supervision IE approaches for illicit Web domains has not been studied in prior work.
\section{Approach}\label{approach}
Figure \ref{fig:approach} illustrates the architecture of our approach. The input is a Web corpus containing relevant pages from the domain of interest, and \emph{high-recall recognizers} (described in Section \ref{recognizers}) typically adapted from freely available Web resources like Github and GeoNames. In keeping with the goals of this work, we do not assume that this initial corpus is static. That is, following an initial short set-up phase, more pages are expected to be added to the corpus in a streaming fashion. Given a set of pre-defined attributes (e.g. City, Name, Age) and around 10-100 manually verified annotations for each attribute, the goal is to learn an IE model that accurately extracts attribute values from each page in the corpus without relying on expert feature engineering. Importantly, while the pages are single-\emph{domain} (e.g. human trafficking) they are \emph{multi-Web domain}, meaning that the system must not only handle pages from new websites as they are added to the corpus, but also \emph{concept drift} in the new pages compared to the initial corpus.
\subsection{Preprocessing}\label{preprocessing}
The first module in Figure \ref{fig:approach} is an automated pre-processing algorithm that takes as input a streaming set of HTML pages. In real-world illicit domains, the key information of interest to investigators (e.g. names and ages) typically occurs either in the \emph{text} or the \emph{title} of the page, not the template of the website. Even when the information occasionally occurs in a template, it must be appropriately disambiguated to be useful\footnote{For example, `Virginia' in South Africa vs. `Virginia' in the US.}. Wrapper-based IE systems \cite{wrapperIE} are often inapplicable as a result. As a first step in building a more suitable IE model, we scrape the text from each HTML website by using a publicly available text extractor called the \emph{Readability Text Extractor}\footnote{\url{https://www.readability.com/developers/api}} (RTE). Although multiple tools\footnote{An informal comparison may be accessed at \url{https://www.diffbot.com/benefits/comparison/}} are available for text extraction from HTML \cite{te1}, our early trials showed that RTE is particularly suitable for noisy Web domains, owing to its tuneability, robustness and support for developers. We tune RTE to achieve \emph{high recall}, thus ensuring that the relevant text in the page is captured in the scraped text with high probability. Note that, because of the varied structure of websites, such a setting also introduces noise in the scraped text (e.g. wayward HTML tags). Furthermore, unlike natural language documents, scraped text can contain many irrelevant numbers, Unicode and punctuation characters, and may not be regular. Because of the presence of numerous tab and newline markers, there is no obvious natural language \emph{sentence} structure in the scraped text\footnote{We also found sentence ambiguity in the actual text displayed on the browser-rendered website (in a few human trafficking sample pages), due to the language models employed in these pages.}. In the most general case, we found that RTE returned a set of strings, with each string corresponding to a set of sentences.
To serialize the scraped text as a list of tokens, we use the word and sentence tokenizers from the NLTK package on each RTE string output \cite{nltk}. We apply the sentence tokenizer first, and to each sentence returned (which often does not correspond to an actual sentence due to rampant use of extraneous punctuation characters) by the sentence tokenizer, we apply the standard NLTK word tokenizer. The final output of this process is a list of tokens. In the rest of this section, this list of tokens is assumed as representing the HTML page from which the requisite attribute values need to be extracted.
\subsection{Deriving Word Representations}\label{embeddings}
In principle, given some annotated data, a sequence labeling model like a Conditional Random Field (CRF) can be trained and applied on each block of scraped text to extract values for each attribute \cite{crf1}, \cite{stanfordner}. In practice, as we empirically demonstrate in Section \ref{evaluations}, CRFs prove to be problematic for illicit domains. First, the size of the training data available for each CRF is relatively small, and because of the nature of illicit domains, methods like distant supervision or crowdsourcing cannot be used in an obvious timely manner to elicit annotations from users.
A second problem with CRFs, and other traditional machine learning models, is the careful feature engineering that is required for good performance. With small amounts of training data, good features are essential for generalization. In the case of illicit domains, it is not always clear what features are appropriate for a given attribute. Even common features like capitalization can be misleading, as there are many capitalized words in the text that are not of interest (and vice versa).
To alleviate feature engineering and manual annotation effort, we leverage the entire raw corpus in our model learning phase, rather than just the pages that have been annotated. Specifically, we use an unsupervised algorithm to represent each word in the corpus in a low-dimensional \emph{vector space}. Several algorithms exist in the literature for deriving such representations, including neural embedding algorithms such as Word2vec \cite{word2vec} and the algorithm by Bollegala et al. \cite{bollegala2015}, as well as simpler alternatives \cite{randomindexing}.
Given the dynamic nature of streaming illicit-domain data, and the numerous word representation learning algorithms in the literature, we adapted the \emph{random indexing} (RI) algorithm for deriving contextual word representations \cite{randomindexing}. Random indexing methods mathematically rely on the Johnson-Lindenstrauss Lemma, which states that if points in a vector space are of sufficiently high dimension, then they may be projected into a suitable lower-dimensional space in a way which approximately preserves the distances between the points.
The original random indexing algorithm was designed for incremental dimensionality reduction and text mining applications. We adapt this algorithm for learning word representations in illicit domains.
Before describing these adaptations, we define some key concepts below.
\newdef{definition}{Definition}
\begin{definition}\label{contextvec}
Given parameters $d \in \mathbb{Z}^{+}$ and $r \in [0, 1]$, a \emph{context vector} is defined as a $d-$dimensional vector, of which exactly $\lfloor d r \rfloor$ elements are randomly set to $+1$, exactly $\lfloor d r \rfloor$ elements are randomly set to $-1$ and the remaining $d-2\lfloor d r \rfloor$ elements are set to $0$.
\end{definition}
We denote the parameters $d$ and $r$ in the definition above as the \emph{dimension} and \emph{sparsity ratio} parameters respectively.
Intuitively, a context vector is defined for every \emph{atomic unit} in the corpus. Let us denote the universe of atomic units as $U$, assumed to be a partially observed countably infinite set. In the current scenario, every unigram (a single `token') in the dataset is considered an atomic unit. Extending the definition to also include higher-order ngrams is straightforward, but was found to be unnecessary in our early empirical investigations. The universe is only partially observed because of the incompleteness (i.e. streaming, dynamic nature) of the initial corpus.
The actual vector space representation of an atomic unit is derived by defining an appropriate \emph{context} for the unit. Formally, a context is an abstract notion that is used for assigning \emph{distributional semantics} to the atomic unit. The distributional semantics hypothesis (also called \emph{Firth's axiom}) states that the semantics of an atomic unit (e.g. a word) is defined by the contexts in which it occurs \cite{distsem}.
In this paper, we only consider \emph{short contexts} appropriate for noisy streaming data. In this vein, we define the notion of a $(u, v)$-context window below:
\begin{definition}\label{contextwindow}
Given a list $t$ of atomic units and an integer position $0<i\leq |t|$, a $(u, v)$-context window is defined by the set $S-t[i]$, where $S$ is the set of atomic units inclusively spanning positions $max(i-u, 1)$ and $min(i+v, |t|)$
\end{definition}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1.8in, width=2.6in]{riexample}
\caption{An example illustrating the naive Random Indexing algorithm with unigram atomic units and a $(2, 2)$-context window as context}\label{riexample}
\vskip -6pt
\end{figure}
Using just these two definitions, a naive version of the RI algorithm is illustrated in Figure \ref{riexample} for the sentence `the cow jumped over the moon', assuming a $(2,2)$-context window and unigrams as atomic units. For each \emph{new} word encountered by the algorithm, a context vector (Definition \ref{contextvec}) is randomly generated, and the representation vector for the word is initialized to the 0 vector. Once generated, the context vector for the word remains fixed, but the representation vector is updated with each occurrence of the word.
The update happens as follows. Given the context of the word (ranging from a set of 2-4 words), an \emph{aggregation} is first performed on the corresponding context vectors. In Figure \ref{riexample}, for example, the aggregation is an \emph{unweighted} sum. Using the aggregated vector (denoted by the symbol $\vec{a}$), we update the representation vector using the equation below, with $\vec{w}_i$ being the representation vector derived after the $i^{th}$ occurrence of word $w$:
\begin{equation}
\vec{w}_{i+1} = \vec{w}_i+\vec{a}
\end{equation}
In principle, using this simple algorithm, we could learn a vector space representation for every atomic unit. One issue with a naive embedding of every atomic unit into a vector space is the presence of \emph{rare} atomic units. These are especially prevalent in illicit domains, not just in the form of rare words, but also as sequences of Unicode characters, sequences of HTML tags, and numeric units (e.g. phone numbers), each of which only occurs a few times (often, only once) in the corpus.
To address this issue, we define below the notion of a \emph{compound unit} that is based on a pre-specified condition.
\begin{definition}\label{compoundunit}
Given a universe $U$ of atomic units and a binary condition $R: U \rightarrow \{True,False\}$, the \emph{compound unit} $C_R$ is defined as the largest subset of $U$ such that $R$ evaluates to True on every member of $C_R$.
\end{definition}
\emph{Example:} For `rare' words, we could define the compound unit \emph{high-idf-units} to contain all atomic units that are below some document frequency threshold (e.g. 1\%) in the corpus.
In our implemented prototype, we defined six \emph{mutually exclusive}\footnote{That is, an intersection of any two compound units will always be the empty set.} compound units, described and enumerated in Table \ref{table:compoundunits}. We modify the naive RI algorithm by only learning a single vector for each compound unit. Intuitively, each atomic unit $w$ in a compound unit $C$ is replaced by a special dummy symbol $w_C$; hence, after algorithm execution, each atomic unit in $C$ is represented by the single vector $\vec{w}_C$.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{The compound units implemented in the current prototype}
\begin{tabular}{|p{0.95in}|p{2.1in}|} \hline
high-idf-units& Units occurring in fewer than fraction $\theta$ (by default, 1\%) of initial corpus\\ \hline
pure-num-units& Numerical units\\ \hline
alpha-num-units& Alpha-numeric units that contain at least one alphabet and one number\\ \hline
pure-punct-units& Units with only punctuation symbols\\ \hline
alpha-punct-units& Units that contain at least one alphabet and one punctuation character\\ \hline
nonascii-unicode-units& Units that only contain non-ASCII characters\\ \hline
\end{tabular}\label{table:compoundunits}
\end{table}
\subsection{Applying High-Recall Recognizers}\label{recognizers}
For a given attribute (e.g. \emph{City}) and a given corpus, we define a recognizer as a function that, if known, can be used to exactly determine the instances of the attribute occurring in the corpus. Formally,
\begin{definition}
A recognizer $R_A$ for attribute $A$ is a function that takes a list $t$ of tokens and positions $i$ and $j >= i$ as inputs, and returns \emph{True} if the tokens contiguously spanning $t[i]:t[j]$ are instances of $A$, and \emph{False} otherwise.
\end{definition}
It is important to note that, per the definition above, a recognizer cannot annotate \emph{latent} instances that are not directly observed in the list of tokens.
Since the `ideal' recognizer is not known, the broad goal of IE is to devise models that approximate it (for a given attribute) with high accuracy. Accuracy is typically measured in terms of precision and recall metrics. We formulate a two-pronged approach whereby, rather than develop a single recognizer that has both high precision and recall (and requires considerable expertise to design), we first obtain a list of candidate annotations that have high recall in expectation, and then use supervised classification in a second step to improve precision of the candidate annotations.
More formally, let $R_A$ be denoted as an $\eta$-recall recognizer if the expected recall of $R_A$ is at least $\eta$. Due to the explosive growth in data, many resources on the Web can be used for bootstrapping recognizers that are `high-recall' in that $\eta$ is in the range of 90-100\%. The high-recall recognizers currently used in the prototype described in this paper (detailed further in Section \ref{system}) rely on knowledge bases (e.g. GeoNames) from Linked Open Data \cite{lod}, dictionaries from the Web and broad heuristics, such as regular expression extractors, found in public Github repositories. In our experience, we found that even students with basic knowledge of GitHub and Linked Open Data sources are able to construct such recognizers. One important reason why constructing such recognizers is relatively hassle-free is because they are typically \emph{monotonic} i.e. new heuristics and annotation sources can be freely integrated, since we do not worry about precision at this step.
We note that in some cases, domain knowledge alone is enough to guarantee 100\% recall for well-designed recognizers for certain attributes. In HT, this is true for location attributes like city and state, since advertisements tend to state locations without obfuscation, and we use GeoNames, an exhaustive knowledge base of locations, as our recognizer.
Manual inspection of the ground-truth data showed that the recall of utilized recognizers for attributes like \emph{Name} and \emph{Age} are also high (in many cases, 100\%). Thus, although 100\% recall cannot be \emph{guaranteed} for any recognizer, it is still reasonable to assume that $\eta$ is high.
A much more difficult problem is engineering a recognizer to simultaneously achieve high recall \emph{and} high precision. Even for recognizers based on curated knowledge bases like GeoNames, many non-locations get annotated as locations. For example, the word `nice' is a city in France, but is also a commonly occurring adjective. Other common words like `for', `hot', `com', `kim' and `bella' also occur in GeoNames as cities and would be annotated. Using a standard Named Entity Recognition system does not always work because of the language modeling problem (e.g. missing capitalization) in illicit domains. In the next section, we show how the context surrounding the annotated word can be used to classify the annotation as correct or incorrect. We note that, because the recognizers are high-recall, a successful classifier would yield both high precision and recall.
\subsection{Supervised Contextual Classifier}\label{validate}
To address the precision problem, we train a classifier using contextual features. Rather than rely on a domain expert to provide a set of hand-crafted features, we derive a feature vector per candidate annotation using the notion of a context window (Definition \ref{contextwindow}) and the word representation vectors derived in Section \ref{embeddings}. This process of \emph{supervised contextual classification} is illustrated in Figure \ref{contextualclassifier}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1.4in, width=3.3in]{contextualclassifier}
\caption{An illustration of supervised contextual classification on an example annotation (`Phoenix')}\label{contextualclassifier}
\vskip -6pt
\end{figure}
Specifically, for each annotation (which could comprise \emph{multiple} contiguous tokens e.g. `Salt Lake City' in the list of tokens representing the website) annotated by a recognizer, we consider the tokens in the $(u, v)$-context window around the annotation. We aggregate the vectors of those tokens into a single vector by performing an unweighted sum, followed by $l2$-normalization. We use this aggregate vector as the \emph{contextual feature vector} for that annotation. Note that, unlike the representation learning phase, where the surrounding \emph{context vectors} were aggregated into an existing representation vector, the contextual feature vector is obtained by summing the actual representation vectors.
For \emph{each} attribute, a supervised machine learning classifier (e.g. random forest) is trained using between 12-120 labeled annotations, and for new data, the remaining annotations can be classified using the trained classifier. Although the number of dimensions in the feature vectors is quite low compared to \emph{tf-idf} vectors (hundreds vs. millions), a second round of dimensionality reduction can be applied by using (either supervised or unsupervised) feature selection for further empirical benefits (Section \ref{evaluations}).
\section{Evaluations}\label{evaluations}
\subsection{Datasets and Ground-truths}
We train the word representations on four real-world human trafficking datasets of increasing size, the details of which are provided in Table \ref{embeddingdatasets}. Since we assume a `streaming' setting in this paper, each larger dataset in Table \ref{embeddingdatasets} is a strict superset of the smaller datasets. The largest dataset is itself a subset of the overall human trafficking corpus that was scraped as part of research conducted in the DARPA MEMEX program\footnote{\url{http://www.darpa.mil/program/memex}}.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Four human trafficking corpora for which word representations are (independently) learned}
\begin{tabular}{|p{0.5in}|p{0.9in}|p{0.7in}|p{0.7in}|} \hline
Name&Num. websites&Total word count& Unique word count\\ \hline
D-10K & 10,000& 2,351,036&1,030,469\\ \hline
D-50K & 50,000& 11,758,647 &5,141,375\\ \hline
D-100K & 100,000& 23,536,935&10,277,732\\ \hline
D-ALL & 184,132& 43,342,278&18,940,260\\ \hline
\end{tabular}\label{embeddingdatasets}
\end{table}
Since ground-truth extractions for the corpus are unknown, we randomly sampled websites from the overall corpus\footnote{Hence, it is possible that there are websites in the ground-truth that are not part of the corpora in Table \ref{embeddingdatasets}.}, applied four high-recall recognizers described in Section \ref{system}, and for each annotated set, manually verified whether the extractions were correct or incorrect for the corresponding attribute. The details of this sampled ground-truth are captured in Table \ref{groundtruthdatasets}. Each annotation set is named using the format \emph{GT-\{RawField\}-\{AnnotationAttribute\}}, where \emph{RawField} can be either the HTML title or the scraped text (Section \ref{preprocessing}). and \emph{AnnotationAttribute} is the attribute of interest for annotation purposes.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Five ground-truth datasets on which the classifier (Section \ref{validate}) and baselines are evaluated}
\begin{tabular}{|p{1.0in}|p{0.3in}|p{0.3in}|p{1.1in}|} \hline
Name&Pos. ann.&Neg. ann.& Recognizer Used\\ \hline
GT-Text-City & 353 & 15,783 &GeoNames-Cities\\ \hline
GT-Text-State & 100& 16,036&GeoNames-States\\ \hline
GT-Title-City & 37 & 513 &GeoNames-Cities\\ \hline
GT-Text-Name & 162& 14,337&Dictionary-Names\\ \hline
GT-Text-Age & 116& 14,306&RegEx-Ages\\ \hline
\end{tabular}\label{groundtruthdatasets}
\end{table}
\vfill\eject
\subsection{System}\label{system}
The overall system requires developing two components for each attribute: a high-recall recognizer and a classifier for pruning annotations. We developed four high-recall recognizers, namely \emph{GeoNames-Cities, GeoNames-States, RegEx-Ages} and \emph{Dictionary-Names}. The first two of these relies on the freely available GeoNames\footnote{\url{http://www.geonames.org/}} dataset \cite{geonames}; we use the entire dataset for our experiments, which involves modeling each GeoNames dictionary as a trie, owing to its large memory footprint. For extracting ages, we rely on simple regular expressions and heuristics that were empirically verified to capture a broad set of age representations\footnote{The age extractors we used are also available in the Github repository accessed at \url{https://github.com/usc-isi-i2/dig-age-extractor}}. For the name attribute, we gather freely available \emph{Name} dictionaries on the Web, in multiple countries and languages, and use the dictionaries\footnote{For replication, the full set of dictionaries used may be accessed at \url{https://github.com/usc-isi-i2/dig-dictionaries/tree/master/person-names}} in a case-insensitive recognition algorithm to locate names in the raw field (i.e. text or title).
\subsection{Baselines}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Stanford NER features that were used for re-training the model on our annotation sets}
\begin{tabular}{|p{1.3in}|p{1.4in}|} \hline
useClassFeature=true& useNext=true\\ \hline
useWord=true& useSequences=true\\ \hline
useNGrams=true& usePrevSequences=true\\ \hline
noMidNGrams=true& maxLeft=1\\ \hline
useDisjunctive=true&useTypeSeqs=true\\ \hline
maxNGramLeng=6&useTypeSeqs2=true\\ \hline
usePrev=true&useTypeySequences=true\\ \hline
wordShape=chris2useLC & \\ \hline
\end{tabular}\label{nerfeatures}
\end{table}
We use different variants of the Stanford Named Entity Recognition system (NER) as our baselines \cite{stanfordner}. For the first set of baselines, we use two pre-trained models trained on different English language corpora\footnote{Details are available at \url{http://nlp.stanford.edu/software/CRF-NER.shtml#Models}}. Specifically, we use the 3-Class and 4-Class pre-trained models\footnote{In all Stanford NER pre-trained models, the \emph{distributional similarity} option was enabled, which is known to boost F1-Measure scores.}. We use the LOCATION class label for determining city and state annotations, and the PERSON label for name annotations. Unfortunately, there is no specific label corresponding to age annotations in the pre-trained models; hence, we do not use the pre-trained models as age annotation baselines.
It is also possible to \emph{re-train} the underlying NER system on a new dataset. For the second set of baselines, therefore, we re-train the NER models by randomly sampling 30\% and 70\% of each annotation set in Table \ref{groundtruthdatasets} respectively, with the remaining annotations used for testing. The features and values that were employed in the re-trained models are enumerated in Table \ref{nerfeatures}. Further documentation on these feature settings may be found on the \emph{NERFeatureFactory} page\footnote{Documentation accessed at \url{http://nlp.stanford.edu/nlp/javadoc/javanlp/edu/stanford/nlp/ie/NERFeatureFactory.html}}. All training and testing experiments were done in ten independent trials\footnote{When evaluating the pre-trained models, the training set is ignored and only the testing set is classified.}. We use default parameter settings, and report average results for each experimental run. Experimentation using other configurations, features and values is left for future studies.
\subsection{Setup and Parameters}\label{setup}
{\bf Parameter tuning} System parameters were set as follows. The number of dimensions in Definition \ref{contextvec} was set at 200, and the sparsity ratio was set at 0.01. These parameters are similar to those suggested in previous word representation papers; they were also found to yield intuitive results on semantic similarity experiments (described further in Section \ref{discussion}). To avoid the problem of rare words, numbers, punctuation and tags, we used the six compound unit classes earlier described in Table \ref{table:compoundunits}. In all experiments where defining a context was required, we used symmetric $(2,2)$-context windows; using bigger windows was not found to offer much benefit. We trained a random forest model with default hyperparameters (10 trees, with Gini Impurity as the split criterion) as the supervised classifier, used supervised k-best feature selection with $k$ set to 20 (Section \ref{validate}), and with the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) F-statistic between class label and feature used as the feature scoring function.
Because of the \emph{class skew} in Table \ref{groundtruthdatasets} (i.e. the `positive' class is typically much smaller than the `negative' class) we oversampled the positive class for balanced training of the supervised contextual classifier.
{\bf Metrics} The metrics used for evaluating IE effectiveness are Precision, Recall and F1-measure.
{\bf Implementation} In the interests of demonstrating a reasonably lightweight system, all experiments in this paper were run on a serial iMac with a 4 GHz Intel core i7 processor and 32 GB RAM. All code (except the Stanford NER code) was written in the Python programming language, and has been made available on a public Github repository\footnote{\url{https://github.com/mayankkejriwal/fast-word-embeddings}} with documentation and examples. We used Python's Scikit-learn library (v0.18) for the machine learning components of the prototype.
\subsection{Results}
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Comparative results of three systems on precision (P), recall (R) and F1-Measure (F) when training percentage is 30. For the pre-trained baselines, we only report the best results across all applicable models}
\begin{tabular}{|p{1.4in}|p{1.6in}|p{1.7in}|p{1.7in}|} \hline
Ground-truth Dataset&Our System (P/R/F) &Re-trained Baseline (P/R/F)&Pre-trained Baseline (P/R/F)\\ \hline
GT-Text-City & 0.5207/0.5050/0.5116
& {\bf 0.9855}/0.1965/0.3225
&0.7206/{\bf 0.7406}/{\bf 0.7299}
\\ \hline
GT-Text-State & {\bf 0.7852}/0.6887/{\bf 0.7310}
& 0.64/0.0598/0.1032
&0.2602/{\bf 0.8831}/0.3993
\\ \hline
GT-Title-City & 0.5374/0.5524/0.5406
& {\bf 0.8633}/0.1651/0.2685 &0.8524/{\bf 0.7341}/{\bf 0.7852}
\\ \hline
GT-Text-Name & 0.7201/{\bf 0.5850}/{\bf 0.6388}
& {\bf 1}/0.2103/0.3351
&0/0/0\\ \hline
GT-Text-Age & 0.8993/{\bf 0.9156}/{\bf 0.9068}
& {\bf 0.9102}/0.7859/0.8412
&N/A
\\ \hline \hline
\emph{Average} & 0.6925/{\bf 0.6493}/{\bf 0.6658}
& {\bf 0.8798}/0.2835/0.3741
&0.4583/0.5895/0.4786
\\ \hline
\end{tabular}\label{results30}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Comparative results of three systems when training percentage is 70}
\begin{tabular}{|p{1.4in}|p{1.6in}|p{1.7in}|p{1.7in}|} \hline
Ground-truth Dataset&Our System (P/R/F) &Re-trained Baseline (P/R/F)&Pre-trained Baseline (P/R/F)\\ \hline
GT-Text-City & 0.5633/0.6081/0.5841
& {\bf 0.9434}/0.3637/0.5000
&0.6893/{\bf 0.7401}/{\bf 0.7128}
\\ \hline
GT-Text-State & {\bf 0.7916}/0.7269/{\bf 0.7502}
& 0.7833/0.2128/0.2971
&0.1661/{\bf 0.7830}/0.2655
\\ \hline
GT-Title-City & 0.6403/{\bf 0.6667}/0.6437
& {\bf 0.9417}/0.3333/0.4790
&0.9133/0.6384/{\bf 0.7289}
\\ \hline
GT-Text-Name & 0.7174/{\bf 0.6818}/{\bf 0.6960}
& {\bf 1}/0.3747/0.5140
&0/0/0\\ \hline
GT-Text-Age & 0.9252/{\bf 0.9273}/{\bf 0.9251}
& {\bf 0.9254}/0.8454/0.8804
&N/A \\ \hline \hline
\emph{Average} & 0.7276/{\bf 0.7222}/{\bf 0.7198}
& {\bf 0.9188}/0.4260/0.5341
&0.4422/0.5404/0.4268
\\ \hline
\end{tabular}\label{results70}
\end{table*}
{\bf Performance against baselines} Table \ref{results30} illustrates system performance on Precision, Recall and F1-Measure metrics against the re-trained and pre-trained baseline models, where the re-trained model and our approach were trained on 30\% of the annotations in Table \ref{groundtruthdatasets}. We used the word representations derived from the D-ALL corpus. On average, the proposed system performs the best on F1-Measure and recall metrics. The re-trained NER is the most precise system, but at the cost of much less recall ($<$30\%). The good performance of the pre-trained baseline on the \emph{City} attribute demonstrates the importance of having a large training corpus, even if the corpus is not directly from the test domain. On the other hand, the complete failure of the pre-trained baseline on the \emph{Name} attribute illustrates the dangers of using out-of-domain training data. As noted earlier, language models in illicit domains can significantly differ from natural language models; in fact, names in human trafficking websites are often represented in a variety of misleading ways.
Recognizing that 30\% training data may constitute a sample size too small to make reliable judgments, we also tabulate the results in Table \ref{results70} when the training percentage is set at 70. Performance improves for both the re-trained baseline and our system. Performance declines for the pre-trained baseline, but this may be because of the sparseness of positive annotations in the smaller test set.
We also note that performance is relatively well-balanced for our system; on all datasets and all metrics, the system achieves scores greater than 50\%. This suggests that our approach has a degree of robustness that the CRFs are unable to achieve; we believe that this is a direct consequence of using contextual word representation-based feature vectors.
{\bf Runtimes} We recorded the runtimes for learning word representations using the random indexing algorithm described earlier on the four datasets in Table \ref{embeddingdatasets}, and plot the runtimes in Figure \ref{fig:runtime} as a function of the total number of words in each corpus.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1.8in, width=2.7in]{run-time}
\caption{Empirical run-time of the adapted random indexing algorithm on the corpora in Table \ref{embeddingdatasets}}\label{fig:runtime}
\vskip -6pt
\end{figure}
In agreement with the expected theoretical time-complexity of random indexing, the empirical run-time is linear in the number of words, for fixed parameter settings. More importantly, the absolute times show that the algorithm is extremely lightweight: on the D-ALL corpus, we are able to learn representations in under an hour.
We note that these results do not employ any obvious parallelization or the multi-core capabilities of the machine. The linear scaling properties of the algorithm show that it can be used even for very large Web corpora. In future, we will investigate an implementation of the algorithm in a distributed setting.
{\bf Robustness to corpus size and quality} One issue with using large corpora to derive word representations is \emph{concept drift}. The D-ALL corpora, for example, contains tens of different Web domains, even though they all pertain to human trafficking. An interesting empirical issue is whether a smaller corpus (e.g. D-10K or D-50K) contains enough data for the derived word representations to converge to reasonable values. Not only would this alleviate initial training times, but it would also partially compensate for concept drift, since it would be expected to contain fewer unique Web domains.
Tables \ref{initcorpus1} and \ref{initcorpus2} show that such generalization is possible. The best F1-Measure performance, in fact, is achieved for D-10K, although the average F1-Measures vary by a margin of less than 2\% on all cases. We cite this as further evidence of the robustness of the overall approach.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{A comparison of F1-Measure scores of our system (30\% training data), with word representations trained on different corpora}
\begin{tabular}{|p{0.9in}|p{0.37in}|p{0.37in}|p{0.45in}|p{0.4in}|} \hline
Ground-truth&D-10K&D-50K&D-100K&D-ALL\\ \hline
GT-Text-City &0.4980 &0.5058 & 0.4909&{\bf 0.5116} \\ \hline
GT-Text-State & 0.7362& 0.7385& {\bf 0.7526}&0.7310\\ \hline
GT-Title-City & {\bf 0.6148}& 0.5638& 0.5061&0.5406\\ \hline
GT-Text-Name & 0.6756& 0.6881& {\bf 0.6920}&0.6388\\ \hline
GT-Text-Age & {\bf 0.9387}& 0.9364& 0.9171&0.9068\\ \hline \hline
\emph{Average} & {\bf 0.6927} & 0.6865 & 0.6717 & 0.6658 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}\label{initcorpus1}
\end{table}
{\bf Effects of feature selection} Finally, we evaluate the effects of feature selection in Figure \ref{fs1} on the \emph{GT-Text-Name} dataset, with training percentage set\footnote{Results on the other datasets were qualitatively similar; we omit full reproductions herein.} at 30. The results show that, although performance is reasonably stable for a wide range of $k$, some feature selection is necessary for better generalization.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{A comparison of F1-Measure scores of our system (70\% training data), with word representations trained on different corpora}
\begin{tabular}{|p{0.9in}|p{0.37in}|p{0.37in}|p{0.45in}|p{0.4in}|} \hline
Ground-truth&D-10K&D-50K&D-100K&D-ALL\\ \hline
GT-Text-City &{\bf 0.5925} & 0.5781& 0.5716&0.5841 \\ \hline
GT-Text-State & 0.7357& {\bf 0.7641}& 0.7246 &0.7502\\ \hline
GT-Title-City & 0.6424& 0.6428& 0.6364&{\bf 0.6437}\\ \hline
GT-Text-Name & {\bf 0.7665}& 0.7091& 0.7333&0.6960\\ \hline
GT-Text-Age & 0.9311&{\bf 0.9634} & 0.9347&0.9251\\ \hline \hline
\emph{Average} & {\bf 0.7336} & 0.7315 & 0.7201 & 0.7198 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}\label{initcorpus2}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1.6in, width=3.1in]{fs-1}
\caption{Effects of additional feature selection on the \emph{GT-Text-Name} dataset (30\% training data)}\label{fs1}
\vskip -6pt
\end{figure}
\subsection{Discussion}\label{discussion}
Table \ref{examples} contains some examples (in bold) of cities that got correctly extracted, with the bold term being assigned the highest score by the contextual classifier that was trained for cities. The examples provide good evidence for the kinds of variation (i.e. concept drift) that are often observed in real-world human trafficking data over multiple Web domains. Some domains, for example, were found to have the same kind of structured format as the second row of Table \ref{examples} (i.e. \emph{Location:} followed by the actual locations), but many other domains were far more heterogeneous.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.1in, width=3.3in]{cities-tsne}
\caption{Visualizing city contextual classifier inputs (with colors indicating ground-truth labels) using the t-SNE tool}\label{fig:tsne}
\vskip -6pt
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Some representative examples of correct city extractions using the proposed method}
\begin{tabular}{|p{3.0in}|} \hline
\ldots 1332 SOUTH 119TH STREET, {\bf OMAHA} NE 68144 \ldots \\ \hline
\ldots Location: Bossier City/{\bf Shreveport} \ldots \\ \hline
\ldots to service the areas of {\bf Salt Lake City} Ogden,Farmington,Centerville,Bountiful \ldots \\ \hline
\ldots 4th August 2015 in {\bf rochester} ny, new york \ldots \\ \hline
\ldots willing to Travel ( Cali, {\bf Miami}, New York, Memphis \ldots \\ \hline
\ldots More girls from {\bf Salt Lake City}, UT \ldots \\ \hline
\end{tabular}\label{examples}
\end{table}
The results in this section also illustrate the merits of unsupervised feature engineering and contextual supervision. In principle, there is no reason why the word representation learning module in Figure \ref{fig:approach} cannot be replaced by a more adaptive algorithm like Word2vec \cite{word2vec}. We note again that, before applying such algorithms, it is important to deal with the heterogeneity problem that arises from having many different Web domains present in the corpus. While
earlier results in this section (Tables \ref{initcorpus1} and \ref{initcorpus2}) showed that random indexing is reasonably stable as more websites are added to the corpus, we also verify this robustness \emph{qualitatively} using a few domain-specific examples in Table \ref{embeddingExamples}. We ran the qualitative experiment as follows: for each seed token (e.g. `tall'), we searched for the two nearest neighbors in the semantic space induced by random indexing by applying cosine similarity, using two different word representation datasets (D-10K and D-ALL). As the results in Table \ref{embeddingExamples} show, the induced distributional semantics are stable; even when the nearest neighbors are different (e.g. for `tall'), their semantics still tend to be similar.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Examples of semantic similarity using random indexing vectors from D-10K and D-ALL}
\begin{tabular}{|p{0.8in}|p{0.95in}||p{1.1in}|} \hline
{\bf Seed-token} & {\bf D-10K} & {\bf D-ALL} \\ \hline
tall & figure, attractive & fit, cute \\ \hline
florida & california, ohio & california, texas \\ \hline
green & blue, brown & blue, brown \\ \hline
attractive & fit, figure & elegant, fit \\ \hline
open-minded & playful, sweet & passionate, playful \\ \hline
\end{tabular}\label{embeddingExamples}
\end{table}
Another important point implied by both the qualitative and quantitative results on D-10K is that random indexing is able to generalize quickly even on \emph{small} amounts of data.
To the best of our knowledge, it is currently an open question (theoretically and empirically), at the time of writing, whether state-of-the-art \emph{neural} embedding-based word representation learners can (1) generalize on small quantities of data, especially in a single epoch (`streaming data') (2) adequately compensate for concept drift with the same degree of robustness, and in the same lightweight manner, as the random indexing method that we adapted and evaluated in this paper. A broader empirical study on this issue is warranted.
Concerning contextual supervision, we qualitatively visualize the inputs to the contextual city classifier using the t-SNE tool \cite{tsne}. We use the ground-truth labels to determine the color of each point in the projected 2d space. The plot in Figure \ref{fig:tsne} shows that there is a reasonable separation of labels; interestingly there are also `sub-clusters' among the positively labeled points. Each sub-cluster provides evidence for a similar context; the number of sub-clusters even in this small sample of points again illustrates the heterogeneity in the underlying data.
A last issue that we mention is the generalization of the method to more unconventional attributes than the ones evaluated herein. In ongoing work, we have experimented with more domain-specific attributes such as \emph{ethnicity} (of escorts), and have achieved similar performance. In general, the presented method is applicable whenever the context around the extraction is a suitable clue for disambiguation.
\section{Conclusion}\label{conclusion}
In this paper, we presented a lightweight, feature-agnostic Information Extraction approach that is suitable for illicit Web domains. Our approach relies on unsupervised derivation of word representations from an initial corpus, and the training of a supervised contextual classifier using external high-recall recognizers and a handful of manually verified annotations. Experimental evaluations show that our approach can outperform feature-centric CRF-based approaches for a range of generic attributes. Key modules of our prototype are publicly available (see footnote 15) and can be efficiently bootstrapped in a serial computing environment. Some of these modules are already being used in real-world settings. For example, they were recently released as tools for graduate-level participants in the End Human Trafficking hackathon organized by the office of the District Attorney of New York\footnote{\url{https://ehthackathon.splashthat.com/}}. At the time of writing, the system is being actively maintained and updated.
{\bf Acknowledgements} The authors gratefully acknowledge the efforts of Lingzhe Teng, Rahul Kapoor and Vinay Rao Dandin, for sampling and producing the ground-truths in Table \ref{groundtruthdatasets}. This research is supported by the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA) and the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) under contract number FA8750-
14-C-0240. The views and conclusions contained herein are those of the authors and should not
be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies or endorsements, either expressed
or implied, of DARPA, AFRL, or the U.S. Government.
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
|
\section{Introduction}
\large
Consider the multiple linear regression model
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:model}
y_{i} = \bm{x}'_{i}\bm{\beta} + \epsilon_{i}, \; \;\;\;\; i = 1,\dots,n,
\end{equation}
where $y_1,\ldots,y_n$ are responses, $\epsilon_1,\ldots,\epsilon_n$ are independent and identically distributed (iid) random variables, $\bm{x}_1,\ldots,\bm{x}_n$ are known non-random design vectors, and $\bm{\beta}=(\beta_1,\ldots, \beta_p)$ is the $p$-dimensional vector of regression parameters. When the dimension $p$ is large, it is common to approach regression model (\ref{eqn:model}) with the assumption that the vector $\bm{\beta}$ is sparse, that is that the set $\mathcal{A}= \{j:\beta_j\neq 0\}$ has cardinality $p_0 = |\mathcal{A}|$ much smaller than $p$, meaning that only a few of the covariates are ``active''. The Lasso estimator introduced by Tibshirani (1996) is well suited to the sparse setting because of its property that it sets some regression coefficients exactly equal to 0. One disadvantage of the Lasso, however, is that it produces non-trivial asymptotic bias for the non-zero regression parameters, primarily because it shrinks all estimators toward zero [cf. Knight and Fu (2000)].
Building on the Lasso, Zou (2006) proposed the Adaptive Lasso [hereafter referred to as Alasso] estimator $\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n$ of $\bm{\beta}$ in the regression problem (\ref{eqn:model}) as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:modelalasso}
\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n = \operatorname*{arg\,min}_{\bm{t}}\Bigg[\sum_{i=1}^{n}(y_i - \bm{x}'_i \bm{t})^2
+\lambda_n\sum_{j=1}^{p}|\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}|^{-\gamma}|t_{j}|\Bigg],
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}$ is the $j$th component of a root-$n$-consistent estimator $\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_n$ of $\bm{\beta}$, such as the ordinary least squares (OLS) estimator when $p\leq n$ or the Lasso or Ridge regression estimator when $p>n$, $\lambda_n>0$ is the penalty parameter, and $\gamma>0$ is a constant governing the influence of the preliminary estimator $\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_n$ on the Alasso fit.
Zou (2006) showed in the fixed-$p$ setting that under some regularity conditions and with the right choice of $\lambda_n$, the Alasso estimator enjoys the so-called oracle property [cf. Fan and Li (2001)]; that is, it is variable-selection consistent and it estimates the non-zero regression parameters with the same precision as the OLS estimator which one would compute if the set of active covariates were known.
\par
In an important recent work, Minnier, Tian and Cai (2011) introduced the perturbation bootstrap in the Alasso setup. To state their main results, let $\bm{\beta}_{n}^{*N} = ( \beta_{1,n}^{*N},\dots,\beta_{p,n}^{*N} )'$ be the naive perturbation bootstrap Alasso estimator prescribed by Minnier, Tian and Cai (2011) and define $\hat {\mathcal{A}}_n=\{j: \hat \beta_{j,n}\neq 0\}$ and $\mathcal{A}_n^{*N}=\{j: \beta_{j,n}^{*N}\neq 0\}$.
These authors showed that under some regularity conditions and with $p$ fixed as $n\rightarrow \infty$
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P}_*(\mathcal{A}_n^{*N}=\hat{\mathcal{A}}_n)\rightarrow 1 \;\;\text{and}\;\; \sqrt{n}(\bm{\beta}_{n}^{*N(1)}-\hat{\bm{\beta}}_{n}^{(1)})| \bm{\varepsilon} \asymp_d \sqrt{n}(\hat{\bm{\beta}}_{n}^{(1)}-\bm{\beta}^{(1)}),
\end{align*}
where $\bm{\varepsilon}_n=(\epsilon_1,\ldots,\epsilon_n)$, $\bm{z}^{(1)}$ denotes the sub-vector of $\bm{z}\in \mathcal{R}^p$ corresponding to the co-ordinates in $\mathcal{A}= \{j:\beta_{j}\neq 0\}$, ``$\asymp_d$'' denotes asymptotic equivalence in distribution, and $\mathbf{P}_*$ denotes bootstrap probability conditional on the data.
Thus Minnier, Tian and Cai (2011) [hereafter referred to as MTC(11)] showed that, in the fixed-$p$ setting and conditionally on the data, the naive perturbation bootstrap version of the Alasso estimator is variable-selection consistent in the sense that it recovers the support of the Alasso estimator with probability tending to one and that its distribution conditional on the data converges at the same time to that of the Alasso estimator for the non-zero regression parameters. But the accuracy of inference for non-zero regression parameters relies on the rate of convergence of the bootstrap distribution of $\sqrt{n}(\bm{\beta}_{n}^{*N(1)}-\hat{\bm{\beta}}_{n}^{(1)})| \bm{\varepsilon}$ to the distribution of $\sqrt{n}(\hat{\bm{\beta}}_{n}^{(1)}-\bm{\beta}^{(1)})$ after proper studentization. Furthermore, Chatterjee and Lahiri (2013) showed that the convergence of the Alasso estimators of the nonzero regression coefficients to their oracle Normal distribution is quite slow, owing to the bias induced by the penalty term in (\ref{eqn:modelalasso}). Thus, it would be important for the accuracy of inference if second-order correctness can be achieved in approximating the distribution of the Alasso estimator by the perturbation bootstrap. Second-order correctness implies that the distributional approximation has a uniform error rate of $o_p(n^{-1/2})$. We show in this paper, however, that the distribution of the naive perturbation bootstrap version of the Alasso estimator, as defined by MTC(11), cannot be second order correct even in fixed dimension. For more details, see Section \ref{sec:naiveinconsistency}.
\par
We introduce a modified perturbation bootstrap for the Alasso estimator for which second order correctness does hold, even when the number of regression parameters $p=p_n$ is allowed to increase with the sample size $n$.
We also show in Proposition \ref{prop:compute} that the modified perturbation bootstrap version of the Alasso estimator (defined in Section \ref{sec:mpb}) can be computed by minimizing simple criterion functions. This makes our bootstrap procedure computationally simple and inexpensive.
In this paper, we consider some pivotal quantities based on Alasso estimators and establish that the modified perturbation bootstrap estimates the distribution of these pivotal quantities up to second order, i.e. with an error that is of much smaller magnitude than what we would obtain by using the Normal approximation under the knowledge of the true active set of covariates. We will refer to the Normal approximation which uses knowledge of the true set of active covariates as the oracle Normal approximation. Our main results show that the modified perturbation bootstrap method enables, for example, the construction of confidence intervals for the nonzero regression coefficients with smaller coverage error than those based on the oracle Normal approximation.
\par
More precisely, we consider pivots which are studentizations of the quantities
\[
\sqrt{n}\bm{D}_n(\hat{\bm{\beta}}_n - \bm{\beta}) \quad \text{ and } \quad \sqrt{n}\bm{D}_n(\hat{\bm{\beta}}_n - \bm{\beta}) + \breve{\bm{b}}_n,
\]
where $\bm{D}_n$ is a $q\times p$ matrix ($q$ fixed) producing $q$ linear combinations of interest of $\hat{\bm{\beta}}_n - \bm{\beta}$ and where $\breve{\bm{b}}_n$ is a bias correction term which we will define in section \ref{sec:mainresults}. We find that in the $p\leq n$ case, the modified perturbation bootstrap can estimate the distribution of the first pivot with an error of order $o_p(n^{-1/2})$ (see Theorem \ref{thm:RstarloD}). This is much smaller than the error of the oracle Normal approximation, which was shown in Theorem 3.1 of Chatterjee and Lahiri (2013) to be of the order $O_p(n^{-1/2}+||\bm{b}_n||+c_n)$, where $\bm{b}_n$ is the bias targeted by $\breve{\bm{b}}_n$ and $c_n>0$ is determined by the initial estimator $\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_n$ and the tuning parameters $\lambda_n$ and $\gamma$; both $||\bm{b}_n||$ and $c_n$ are typically greater in magnitude than $n^{-1/2}$ and hence determine the rate of the oracle Normal approximation. We also discover that the bias correction in the second pivot improves the error rate so that the modified perturbation bootstrap estimator achieves the rate $O_p(n^{-1})$ (see Theorem \ref{thm:RcheckstarloD}), which is a significant improvement over the best possible rate of oracle Normal approximation, namely $O(n^{-1/2})$. In the $p>n$ case, we find that the modified perturbation bootstrap estimates the distributions of studentized versions of both the bias-corrected and un-bias-corrected pivots with the rate $o_p(n^{-1/2})$ (see Theorems \ref{thm:hiD1}, \ref{thm:hiD2} and \ref{thm:hiD3}), establishing the second-order correctness of our modified perturbation bootstrap in the high-dimensional setting. We have explored the cases when the dimension $p$ is increasing polynomially with $n$ and when $p$ is increasing exponentially with $n$. Our adding to the pivot a bias correction term may bring to mind the desparsified Lasso introduced independently by Zhang and Zhang (2014) and van de Geer et al. (2014); these authors construct a nonsparse estimator of $\bm{\beta}$ by adding a Lasso-based bias correction to a biased, nonsparse estimator of $\bm{\beta}$ which is linear in the response values $y_1,\dots,y_n$. They consider first-order properties of this nonsparse estimator, establishing asymptotic normality under sparsity conditions. In contrast, we consider the sparse Alasso estimator of $\bm{\beta}$ and correct the bias of a pivot based on the form of the Alasso estimator. We establish second order results of our proposed perturbation bootstrap method in both before and after bias correction. The main motivation behind the bias correction is to achieve the error rate $O_p(n^{-1})$.
\par
We show that the naive perturbation bootstrap of MTC(11) is not second-order correct (see Theorem \ref{thm:naiveinconsistent}) by investigating the Karush-Kuhn-Tucker (KKT) condition [cf. Boyd and Lieven (2004)] corresponding to their minimization problem. It is shown that second order correctness is not attainable by the naive version of the perturbation bootstrap, primarily due to lack of proper centering of the naive bootstrapped Alasso criterion function. We derive the form of the centering constant by analyzing the corresponding approximation errors using the theory of Edgeworth expansion. To accommodate the centering correction, we modify the perturbation bootstrap criterion function for the Alasso; see Section \ref{sec:mpb} for details. In addition, we also find out that it is beneficial, from both theoretical and computational perspectives, to modify the perturbation bootstrap version of the initial estimators in a similar way. To prove second order correctness of the modified perturbation bootstrap Alasso, the key steps are to find an Edgeworth expansion of the bootstrap pivotal quantities based on the modified criterion function and to compare it with the Edgeworth expansion of the sample pivots. We want to mention that the dimension $p$ of the regression parameter vector can grow polynomially in the sample size $n$ at a rate depending on the number of finite polynomial moments of the error distribution. Extension to the case in which $p$ grows exponentially with $n$ is possible under the assumption of finiteness of moment generating function of the regression errors. In this regime, we have explored separately two important special cases, namely when the errors are Sub-Gaussian and Sub-Exponential.
\par
We conclude this section with a brief literature review. The perturbation bootstrap was introduced by Jin, Ying, and Wei (2001) as a resampling procedure where the objective function has a U-process structure. Work on the perturbation bootstrap in the linear regression setup is limited. Some work has been carried out by Chatterjee and Bose (2005), MTC(11), Zhou, Song and Thompson (2012), and Das and Lahiri (2016). As a variable selection procedure, Tibshirani (1996) introduced the Lasso. Zou (2006) proposed the Alasso as an improvement over the Lasso. For the Alasso and related popular penalized estimation and variable selection procedures, the residual bootstrap has been investigated by Knight and Fu (2000), Hall, Lee and Park (2009), Chatterjee and Lahiri (2010, 2011, 2013), Wang and Song (2011), MTC(11), Van De Geer et al. (2014), and Camponovo (2015), among others.
\par
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. The modified perturbation bootstrap for the Alasso is introduced and discussed in Section \ref{sec:mpb}. Assumptions and explanations of those are presented in Section \ref{sec:assum}. Negative results on the naive perturbation bootstrap approximation proposed by MTC(11) are discussed in \ref{sec:naiveinconsistency}. Main results concerning the estimation properties of the studentized modified perturbation bootstrap pivotal quantities as well as intuitions and explanations behind the modification of the modified perturbation bootstrap are given in Section \ref{sec:mainresults}. Section \ref{sec:simulation} presents simulation results exploring the finite-sample performance of the modified perturbation bootstrap in comparison with other methods for constructing confidence intervals based on Alasso estimators. Proofs are presented in Section \ref{sec:proofs}. Section \ref{sec:1.777} states concluding remarks.
\section{The modified perturbation bootstrap for the ALASSO}
\label{sec:mpb}
Let $G_1^*,\ldots, G_n^*$ be $n$ independent copies of a non-degenerate random variable $G^* \in [0,\infty)$ having expectation $\mu_{G^*}$. These quantities will serve as perturbation quantities in the construction of the perturbation bootstrap Alasso estimator.
We define our bootstrap version of the Alasso estimator as the minimizer of a carefully constructed penalized objective function which involves the Alasso predicted values $\hat{y}_i = \bm{x}'_i\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n$, $i=1,\dots,n$ as well as the observed values $y_i,\dots,y_n$.
These sets of values appear in the objective function in two perturbed least-squares criteria.
Similar modification is also needed in defining the bootstrap versions of the Alasso initial estimators, see (\ref{eqn:mpbi}). The motivation behind this construction is detailed in Section \ref{sec:naiveinconsistency}. We point out in Section \ref{sec:mainresults} why the naive perturbation bootstrap formulation of MTC(11) fails to achieve second order correctness.
We formally define the modified perturbation bootstrap version $\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n^*$ of the Alasso estimator $\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n$ as
\begin{align}\label{eqn:mpb}
\bm{\hat{\beta}_n^*} = \operatorname*{arg\,min}_{\bm{t}^*}&\Bigg[\sum_{i=1}^{n}(y_i - \bm{x}'_i \bm{t}^*)^2(G^*_i-\mu_{G^*}) \nonumber\\
&+\sum_{i=1}^{n}(\hat{y}_i-\bm{x}'_i\bm{t}^*)^2(2\mu_{G^*}-G_i^*)+\mu_{G^*}\lambda_n\sum_{j=1}^{p}|\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}^*|^{-\gamma}|t_{j}^*|\Bigg],
\end{align}
where $\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}^*$ is the $j$th component of $\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_{n}^*$, the modified perturbation bootstrap version of the Alasso initial estimator $\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_n$. We construct $\tilde{\bm{\beta}}^*_n$ as
\begin{align}\label{eqn:mpbi}
\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_n^* = \operatorname*{arg\,min}_{\bm{t}^*}&\Bigg[\sum_{i=1}^{n}(y_i - \bm{x}'_i \bm{t}^*)^2(G^*_i-\mu_{G^*}) \nonumber\\
&+\sum_{i=1}^{n}(\hat{y}_i-\bm{x}'_i\bm{t}^*)^2(2\mu_{G^*}-G_i^*)+\mu_{G^*}\tilde{\lambda}_n\sum_{j=1}^{p}|t_{j}^*|^l\Bigg],
\end{align}
where $\tilde{\lambda}_n=0$ when $\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_n$ is taken as the OLS, which we use when $p\leq n$, and $l=1$ or $2$ according as the initial estimator $\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_n$ is taken as the Lasso or Ridge regression estimator when $p>n$. Note that $\tilde{\lambda}_n$ may be different from $\lambda_n$.
\par
We point out that the modified perturbation bootstrap estimators can be computed using existing algorithms.
Define $\bm{L}_1(\bm{t}) = \sum_{i=1}^{n}(y_i - \bm{x}'_i \bm{t})^2(G^*_i-\mu_{G^*})+\sum_{i=1}^{n}(\hat{y}_i-\bm{x}'_i\bm{t})^2(2\mu_{G^*}-G_i^*)+\mu_{G^*}\tilde{\lambda}_n\sum_{j=1}^{p}c_j|t_{j}|^l$
for some non-negative constants $c_j$, $j =1,\cdots,p$. Now set $z_i=\hat{y}_i+\hat{\epsilon}_i\mu_{G^*}^{-1}(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})$, where $\hat \epsilon_i = y_i - \hat{y}_i$ for $i=1,\dots,n$ and let $\bm{L}_2(\bm{t})=\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big(z_i-\bm{x}'_i\bm{t}\big)^2+\tilde{\lambda}_n\sum_{j=1}^{p}c_j|t_{j}|^l$. Then we have the following proposition.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:compute}
$\operatorname*{arg\,min}_{\bm{t}}\bm{L}_1(\bm{t})=\operatorname*{arg\,min}_{\bm{t}}\bm{L}_2(\bm{t})$.
\end{prop}
This proposition allows us to compute $\tilde{\bm{\beta}}^*_n$ as well as $\hat{\bm{\beta}}^*_n$ by minimizing standard objective functions on some pseudo-values. Note that the modified perturbation bootstrap versions of the Alasso estimator as well as of the Alasso initial estimator can be obtained simply by properly perturbing the Alasso residuals in the decomposition $y_i=\hat{y}_i + \hat{\epsilon}_i$, $i = 1,\dots,n$.
\section{Assumptions}\label{sec:assum}
We first introduce some notations required for stating our assumptions and useful for the proofs later. We denote the true parameter vector as $\bm{\beta}_n = (\beta_{1,n},\dots,\beta_{p,n} )'$, where the subscript $n$ emphasizes that the dimension $p:=p_n$ may grow with the sample size $n$.
Set $\mathcal{A}_n=\{j: \beta_{j,n}\neq 0\}$ and $p_0:=p_{0,n}=|\mathcal{A}_n|$. For simplicity, we shall suppress the subscript $n$ in the notations $p_n$ and $p_{0n}$. Without loss of generality, we shall assume that $\mathcal{A}_n=\{1,\dots,p_0\}$. Let $\bm{C}_n=n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{x}_i\bm{x}'_i$ and partition it according to $\mathcal{A}_n = \{1,\dots,p_0\}$ as
\begin{equation*}
\bm{C}_{n} = \begin{bmatrix}
\bm{C}_{11,n} \;\;\;\bm{C}_{12,n}\\
\bm{C}_{21,n}\;\;\; \bm{C}_{22,n}
\end{bmatrix},
\end{equation*}
where $\bm{C}_{11,n}$ is of dimension $p_0\times p_0$. Define $\tilde{\bm{x}}_i=\bm{C}_n^{-1}\bm{x}_i$ (when $p\leq n$) and $sgn(x) =-1, 0 ,1$ according as $x<0$, $x=0$, $x>0$, respectively. Suppose $\bm{D}_n$ is a known $q\times p$ matrix with $\text{tr}(\bm{D}_n\bm{D}'_n)=O(1)$ and $q$ is not dependent on $n$. Let $\bm{D}_n^{(1)}$ contain the first $p_0$ columns of $\bm{D}_n$.
Define
\begin{align*}
\bm{S}_{n} = \begin{bmatrix}
\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\bm{D}_n^{(1)'}.\sigma^2 \;\;\;\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\bar{\bm{x}}^{(1)}_n.\mu_{3}\\
\bar{\bm{x}}^{(1)'}_n\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\bm{D}_n^{(1)'}.\mu_3\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; (\mu_4-\sigma^4)
\end{bmatrix},
\end{align*}
where $\bar{\bm{x}}_n=n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{x}_i=(\bar{\bm{x}}^{(1)\prime}_n,\bar{\bm{x}}^{(2)\prime}_n)^\prime$, $\sigma^2=\mathbf{Var}(\epsilon_1)=\mathbf{E}(\epsilon_1^2)$, and where $\mu_3$ and $\mu_4$ are, respectively, the third and fourth central moments of $\epsilon_1$. Define in addition the $q\times p_0$ matrix $\check{\bm{D}}_n^{(1)}=\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1/2}$ and the $p_0 \times 1$ vector $\check{\bm{x}}_i^{(1)}=\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1/2}\bm{x}_i^{(1)}$. Let $K$ be a positive constant and $r$ be a positive integer $\geq 3$ unless otherwise specified. $||\cdot||$ and $||\cdot||_{\infty}$ respectively denote the Euclidean norm and the Sup norm. $c\wedge d$ denotes $\min\{c, d\}$ for two real numbers $c$ and $d$. By $\mathbf{P_*}$ and $\mathbf{E_*}$ we denote, respectively, probability and expectation with respect to the distribution of $G^{*}$ conditional upon the observed data.
\par
We now introduce our assumptions.
\begin{enumerate}[label=(A.\arabic*)]
\item Let $\eta_{11,n}$ denote the smallest eigenvalue of the matrix $\bm{C}_{11,n}$.
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item $\eta_{11,n}>Kn^{-a}$ for some $a\in [0,1)$.
\item $\max\{n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}|x_{i,j}|^{2r}:1\leq j \leq p\}+\{n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big|(\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1})_{j.}\bm{x}_{i}^{(1)}\big|^{2r}:1\leq j \leq p_0\} = O(1)$.
\item $\max\{n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}|\tilde{x}_{i,j}|^{2r}:1\leq j \leq p\} = O(1)$, where $\tilde{x}_{i,j}$ is the $j$th element of $\tilde{\bm{x}}_i$. (when $p\leq n$)
\item[(iii)$'$]$\max\{c_{11,n}^{j,j}: 1\leq j\leq p_0\}=O(1)$, where $c_{11,n}^{j,j}$ is the $(j,j)$th element of $C_{11,n}^{-1}$. (when $p > n$)
\end{enumerate}
\item There exists a $\delta \in (0,1)$ such that for all $n>\delta^{-1}$,
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item sup$\{\bm{x}'\check{\bm{D}}_n^{(1)}\check{\bm{D}}_n^{(1)'}\bm{x}:\bm{x}\in \mathcal{R}^{q}, ||\bm{x}||=1\}<\delta^{-1}$.
\item $n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}||\check{\bm{D}}_n^{(1)}\check{\bm{x}}_i^{(1)}\check{\bm{x}}_i^{(1)'}\check{\bm{D}}_n^{(1)'}||^r = O(1)$.
\item inf$\{\bm{x}'\bm{S}_n\bm{x}:\bm{x}\in \mathcal{R}^{q+1}, ||\bm{x}||=1\}>\delta$.
\end{enumerate}
\item $\max\{|\beta_{j,n}|:j\in \mathcal{A}_n\}=O(1)$ and min$\{|\beta_{j,n}|:j\in \mathcal{A}_n\}\geq Kn^{-b}$ for some $b\geq 0$ such that $4b< 1$ and $a+2b\leq 1$, where $a$ is defined as in (A.1)(i).
\item \begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item $\mathbf{E}|\epsilon_1|^{r}< \infty$. $\mathbf{E}\epsilon_1=0$.
\item $(\epsilon_1, \epsilon_1^{2})$ satisfies Cramer's condition:\\
\hspace*{5mm}$\limsup_{||(t_1,t_2)||\rightarrow \infty}\mathbf{E}(exp(i(t_1\epsilon_1+t_2\epsilon_1^{2})))<1$.
\end{enumerate}
\item \begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item $\mathbf{E_*}(G_{1}^{*})^{r} < \infty$.
$\mathbf{Var}(G_1^*) =\sigma^2_{G^*}= \mu_{G^*}^2$, $\mathbf{E_*}(G_1^* - \mu_{G^*})^3 = \mu_{G^*}^3$.
\item $G_{i}^{*}$ and $\epsilon_i$ are independent for all $1\leq i\leq n$.
\item $((G^*_1-\mu_{G^*}), (G_1^* - \mu_{G^*})^{2})$ satisfies Cramer's condition:\\
\hspace*{9mm}$\limsup_{||(t_1,t_2)||\rightarrow \infty}\mathbf{E_*}(exp(i(t_1(G_1^*-\mu_{G^*})+t_2(G_1^* - \mu_{G^*})^{2})))<1$
\end{enumerate}
\item There exists $\delta_1 \in (0,1)$ such that for all $n>\delta_1^{-1}$,
\begin{enumerate} [label=(\roman*)]
\item
$\dfrac{\lambda_n}{\sqrt{n}}\leq \delta_1^{-1}n^{-\delta_1} \text{min}\Big{\{}\dfrac{n^{-b\gamma}}{p_0},\dfrac{n^{-b\gamma-a/2}}{\sqrt{p_0}}\Big{\}}$.
\item $\dfrac{\lambda_n}{\sqrt{n}} n^{\gamma/2} \geq \delta_1 n^{\delta_1} p_0$
\item $p_{0}=o\big(n^{1/2}(\log n)^{-3/2}\big)$.
\end{enumerate}
\item[(A.7)] There exists $C\in(0,\infty)$ and $\delta_2\in(0,\gamma^{-1}\delta_1)$, $\delta_1$ being defined in the assumption (A.6), such that
\begin{align*}
&\mathbf{P}\Big(\max\{\big|\sqrt{n}(\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}-\beta_{j,n})\big|:1\leq j\leq p\}>C.n^{\delta_2}\Big)=o(n^{-1/2})\\
& \mathbf{P_*}\Big(\max\{\big|\sqrt{n}(\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}^*-\hat{\beta}_{j,n})\big|:1\leq j\leq p\}>C.n^{\delta_2}\Big)=o_p(n^{-1/2})
\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
\par
Now we explain the assumptions briefly. Assumption (A.1) describes the regularity conditions needed on the growth of the design vectors. Assumption (A.1)(i) is a restriction on the smallest eigenvalue of $\bm{C}_{11,n}$. Assumption (A.1)(i) is a weaker condition than assuming that $\bm{C}_{11,n}$ converges to a positive definite matrix. (A.1)(ii) and (iii) are needed to bound the weighted sums of types $\big[\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{x}_i\epsilon_i\big]$, $\big[\sum_{i=1}^{n}\tilde{\bm{x}}_i\epsilon_i\big]$, $\big[\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{x}_i^{(1)}\epsilon_i\big]$ (second one only when $p\leq n$). For $r=2$ (A.1)(iii) is equivalent to the condition that the diagonal elements of the matrix $\bm{C}_n^{-1}$ are uniformly bounded. Also for general value of $r$, (A.1)(ii) and (iii) are much weaker than conditioning on $l_r$-norms of the design vectors. Here the value of $r$ is specified by the underlying Edgeworth expansion. Assumption (A.1)(iii) requires $p\leq n$ and hence is not defined when $p>n$. Note that the condition (A.1)(iii)$'$ needs $p_0\leq n$ which is true in our setup due to assumption (A.6)(iii).
\par
Assumptions (A.2)(i) bounds the eigenvalues of the matrix $\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\bm{D}_n^{(1)'}$ away from infinity. It is necessary to obtain bounds needed in the studentized setup. Assumption (A.2)(ii) is a condition similar to the conditions in (A.1)(ii) and (iii); but involving the $q\times p$ matrix $\bm{D}_n$. This condition is needed for showing necessary closeness of the covariance matrix estimators $\breve{\bm{\Sigma}}_n, \tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_n$ [defined in Section \ref{sec:mainresults}] to their population counterparts (for details see Lemma \ref{lem:Sigma}).
Assumption (A.2)(iii) bounds the minimum eigen value of the matrix $S_n$ away from $0$. This condition along with the Cramer conditions given in (A.4) and (A.5) enable certain Edgeworth expansions.
\par
Assumption (A.3) separates the relevant covariates from the non-relevant ones. The condition on the minimum is needed to ensure that the non-zero regression coefficients cannot converge to zero faster than the error rate, that is not faster than $O(n^{-1/2})$. We mention that one can assume $b<1/2$ instead of assuming $b<1/4$, but with the price of putting another restriction on the penalty parameter $\lambda_n$. We do not consider such a setting here. {We also want to point out that it is not possible to relax this minimal signal condition by the bias correction, considered in Section \ref{sec:mainresults}. With further relaxation, the bias of the Alasso estimator will be larger than the estimation error which is of order $O_p(n^{-1/2})$ and hence second-order correctness cannot be achieved by perturbation bootstrap in more relaxed minimal signal condition.}
\par
Assumption (A.4)(i) is a moment condition on the error term needed for valid Edgeworth expansion. Assumption (A.4)(ii) is Cramer's condition on the errors, which is very common in the literature of Edgeworth expansions; it is satisfied when the distribution of $(\epsilon_1, \epsilon_1^{2})$ has a non-degenerate component which is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure [cf. Hall (1992)]. Assumption (A.4)(ii) is only needed to get a valid Edgeworth expansion for the original Alasso estimator in the studentized setup. Assumptions (A.5)(i) and (iii) are the analogous conditions that are needed on the perturbing random quantities to get a valid Edgeworth expansion in the bootstrap setting. Assumption (A.5)(ii) is natural, since the $\epsilon_i$ are present already in the data generating process, whereas $G_i^*$ are introduced by the user. One can look for Generalized Beta and Generalized Gamma families for suitable choices of the distribution of $G^*$. The pdf of Generalized Beta family of distributions is
\begin{equation*}
GB(y;f,g,h,\omega, \rho)=\left\{
\begin{array}{@{}ll@{}}
\dfrac{|f|y^{f\omega-1}\Big(1-(1-c)(y/g)^f\Big)^{\rho-1}}{g^{f\omega}B(\omega,\rho)\Big(1+c(y/g)^f\Big)^{\omega+\rho}}\;\;\;& \text{for}\;\; 0<y^f<\dfrac{g^f}{1-h}\\
0\;\; & \text{otherwise}
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation*}
where $0\leq h\leq 1$ and other parameters are all positive. We interpret $1/0$ as $\infty$. The function $B(\omega,\rho)$ is the beta function. Choices of the distribution of $G^*$ can be obtained by finding solution of $(f,g,h,\omega,\rho)$ from the following two equations
\begin{align*}
\dfrac{B(\omega+2/f,\rho)}{B(\omega,\rho)}& {}_2F_1\big[\omega+2/f,2/f;h;\omega+\rho+2/f\big]\\
&=2\bigg[\dfrac{B(\omega+1/f,\rho)}{B(\omega,\rho)}{}_2F_1\big[\omega+1/f,1/f;h;\omega+\rho+1/f\big]\bigg]^2\\
\text{and}\;\; \dfrac{B(\omega+3/f,\rho)}{B(\omega,\rho)}{}_2&F_1\big[\omega+3/f,3/f;h;\omega+\rho+3/f\big]\\
&=5\bigg[\dfrac{B(\omega+1/f,\rho)}{B(\omega,\rho)}{}_2F_1\big[\omega+1/f,1/f;h;\omega+\rho+1/f\big]\bigg]^3
\end{align*}
where ${}_2F_1$ denotes hypergeometric series. The pdf of Generalized Gamma family of distributions is given by
\begin{equation*}
GG(y;\omega, \rho, \nu)=\left\{
\begin{array}{@{}ll@{}}
\dfrac{(\nu/\omega^\rho)y^{\rho-1}e^{(y/\omega)^{\nu}}}{\Gamma(\rho/\nu)}\;\;\;& \text{for}\;\; y>0\\
0\;\; & \text{otherwise}
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation*}
where all the parameters are positive and $\Gamma(\cdot)$ denotes the gamma function. For this family, the suitable choices of the distribution of $G^*$ can be obtained by considering any positive value of the parameter $\omega$ and solving the following two equations for $(\rho,\nu)$,
\begin{align*}
&\Big[\Gamma((\rho+2)/\nu)\Big]* \Gamma(\rho/\nu) = 2\Big[\Gamma((\rho+1)/\nu)\Big]^2\\
\text{and}\;\; &\Big[\Gamma((\rho+3)/\nu)\Big]* \Big[\Gamma(\rho/\nu)\Big]^2 = 5\Big[\Gamma((\rho+1)/\nu)\Big]^3.
\end{align*}
One immediate choice of the distribution of $G^*$ from Generalized Beta family is the Beta$(\alpha, \beta)$ distribution with $3\alpha=\beta=3/2$. We have utilized this distribution as the distribution of the perturbing quantities $G_i^*$'s in our simulations, presented in Section \ref{sec:simulation}. Outside these two generalized family of distributions, one possible choice is the distribution of $(M_1+M_2)$ where $M_1$ and $M_2$ are independent and $M_1$ is a Gamma random variable with shape and scale parameters $0.008652$ and $2$ respectively and $M_2$ is a Beta random variable with both the parameters $0.036490$. Another possible choice is the distribution of $(M_3+M_4)$ where $M_3$ and $M_4$ are independent and $M_3$ is an Exponential random variable with mean $\big{(}79-15\sqrt{33}\big{)}/16$ and $M_4$ is an Inverse Gamma random variable with both shape and scale parameters $\big{(}4 + \sqrt{11/3}\big{)}$.
Assumptions (A.6)(i) and (ii) can be compared with the condition (c) $\lambda_n/\sqrt{n}$ $\rightarrow 0$ and $n^{\gamma/2}\lambda_n/\sqrt{n}\rightarrow \infty$ [cf. Zou (2006), Caner and Fan (2010)]. Whereas (c) is ensuring the oracle normal approximation, (A.6)(i) and (ii) are required for obtaining Edgeworth expansions. Lastly, (A.6)(iii) limits how quickly the number of non-zero regression coefficients may grow. Though it would seem that $p_0=O(n)$ with $p_0\leq n$ should be a sufficient restriction on the growth rate of $p_0$ for approximating the distribution of the Alasso estimator, a careful analysis reveals that further reduction in the growth rate of $p_0$ is necessary for accommodating the studentization. Clearly it is difficult to comprehend what possible choices of $p_0,\lambda_n, \gamma, a, b$ would satisfy the assumptions presented in (A.6). Thus it is better to present some possible choices of those parameters.
First consider $a=0$ and $b=0$, that is assume that the smallest eigenvalue of $\bm{C}_{11,n}$ and the smallest non-zero regression coefficients are bounded away from 0. In that case it is easy to check that one set of possible choices are $p_0 = O(n^{\gamma/5})$ and $\lambda_n = C.n^{1/2-\gamma/4}$ for some constant $C> 0$, provided $\gamma \in (0,2)$. In particular if $\gamma =1$ then the choices of $p_0$ and $\lambda_n$ maybe respectively $p_0=O(n^{1/5})$ and $\lambda_n = C. n^{1/4}$ when $a=b=0$. Again $p_0$ can grow with $n$ at the rate $o(n^{1/2}(\log n)^{-3/2})$, when $\gamma>2$ and $\lambda_n = C. n^{(2-\gamma)/6}$ for some constant $C>0$ whenever $a=b=0$.
In general if $a\in [0,1/2)$ and $b<1/4$, then it can be shown that the possible choices of $\gamma$, $p_0$ and $\lambda_n$ are respectively $4a/(1-2b)< \gamma < 2/(1+2b)$, $p_0 = O(n^{[(1-2b)\gamma]/5})$ and $\lambda_n = C.n^{1/2-\gamma/4-b\gamma/2}$ for some constant $C> 0$. On the other hand if $a \in [1/2,1)$ and $a+2b<1$, one set of possible choices would be $\gamma\geq 2$, $p_0 = O(n^{2/3-(a+2b\gamma+4c)/3})$ and $\lambda_n = C.n^{1/6-(a+2b\gamma+c)/3}$ for some constants $c, C >0$. With $a=1/2$ and $b =0$, clearly the choices of $p_0$ and $\lambda_n$ reduce to $p_0=O(n^{1/2-\delta})$ and $\lambda_n=C.n^{-\delta/4}$ for some $\delta, C>0$.
\par
Assumption (A.7) places deviation bounds on both the sample and bootstrap initial estimators which are needed to get valid Edgeworth expansions. These conditions are satisfied by OLS estimator in $p\leq n$ case [cf. Lemma \ref{lem:W}]. Note that non-bootstrap part of (A.7) is satisfied if there exists a linear approximation of the type $\sum_{i=1}^{n}a_{i,j}\epsilon_i$ of $\sqrt{n}(\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}-\beta_{j,n})$, where $\max\Big{\{}\sum_{i=1}^{n}|a_{i,j}|^r: 1\leq j \leq p\Big{\}}=o\big{(}p^{-1}n^{-1/2+r\delta_2}\big{)}$ and $\mathbf{E}(|\epsilon_1|^r)< \infty$ for some $r\geq 3$. The bootstrap deviation bound corresponding to (A.7) holds provided similar approximation exits with $(G_1^*-\mu_{G^*})$ in place of $\epsilon_1$. More precisely, for the Ridge estimator and for its perturbation bootstrap version defined in Section $\ref{sec:mpb}$, if for some $r\geq 4$, the conditions
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\alph*)]
\item $\mathbf{E}|\epsilon_1|^r+\mathbf{E}_{*}(G_1^{*})^r < \infty$.
\item $\max\{n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}(|\bm{x}_i|^{2r} + |\breve{\bm{x}}_i|^{2r}):1\leq j \leq p\}=O(n^{{\delta_2}/2})$ for all $i \in \{1,\cdots, n\}$.
\item $\max\big{\{}\bm{e}'_j(\bm{C}_n+\tilde{\lambda}_n n^{-1}\bm{I}_p)^{-1}\bm{\beta}_n:1\leq j \leq p\big{\}} = O(n^{(1+\delta_2)/2}\tilde{\lambda}_n^{-1})$.
\item $\sup\big{\{}\bm{e}'_j(\bm{C}_n+\tilde{\lambda}_n n^{-1}\bm{I}_p)^{-1}\bm{z}_n:||\bm{z}_n||\leq 1 \big{\}} = O(n^{(1+\delta_2)/2}\tilde{\lambda}_n^{-1})$ for all $j \in\{1,\cdots, p\}$.
\end{enumerate}
are satisfied, then the assumption (A.7) holds. Here $\{\bm{e}_1,\cdots,\bm{e}_p\}$ is the standard basis of $\mathcal{R}^p$, $\breve{\bm{x}}_i=(\bm{C}_n+\tilde{\lambda}_n n^{-1}\bm{I}_p)^{-1}\bm{x}_i$ and $\tilde{\lambda}_n$ is the penalty parameter corresponding to the Ridge estimator [cf. Sec $\ref{sec:mpb}$]. This follows analogously to proposition 8.4 of Chatterjee and Lahiri (2013) after applying Lemma $\ref{lem:concentration}$, stated in Section \ref{sec:proofs}.
\section{ Impossibility of Second-order correctness of the naive perturbation bootstrap}
\label{sec:naiveinconsistency}
In this section we describe the naive perturbation bootstrap as defined by MTC(11) for the Alasso and show that second-order correctness can not be achievable by their naive perturbation bootstrap method. When the objective function is the usual least squares criterion function the naive perturbation bootstrap Alasso estimator $\bm{\beta}_n^{*N}$ is defined in MTC(11) as
\begin{align}\label{eqn:naivebetastar}
\bm{\beta}_n^{*N}= \operatorname*{arg\,min}_{\bm{v}_n^*}&\Bigg[\sum_{i=1}^{n}(y_i - \bm{x}'_i \bm{v}_n^*)^2G^*_i +\lambda_n^*\sum_{j=1}^{p}|\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}^{*N}|^{-\gamma}|v_{j,n}^*|\Bigg],
\end{align}
where
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item $\lambda_n^*>0$ is such that $\lambda_n^*n^{-1/2}\rightarrow 0$ and $\lambda_n^*\rightarrow \infty$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$.
\item the initial naive bootstrap estimator is defined as
\begin{equation*}
\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_{n}^{*N}= \operatorname*{arg\,min}_{\bm{v}_n^*}\Big[\sum_{i=1}^{n}(y_i - \bm{x}'_i \bm{v}_n^*)^2G^*_i\Big]
\end{equation*}
and $\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}^{*N}$ is the $j$th component of $\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_{n}^{*N}$.
\item $\{G_1^*,\ldots, G_n^*\}$ is a set of iid non-negative random quantities with mean and variance both equal to 1.
\end{enumerate}
\par
Note that the initial estimator $\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_{n}^{*N}$ is unique only when $p$ is less than or equal to $n$. We now consider the quantity $\bm{u}_n^{*N}=\sqrt{n}(\bm{\beta}_n^{*N}-\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n)$, which we can show from (\ref{eqn:naivebetastar}) to be the minimizer \begin{align}\label{eqn:ustarnaive}
\bm{u}_n^{*N}= \operatorname*{arg\,min}_{\bm{w}_n^*}\Bigg[\bm{w}_n^{*'}\bm{C}_n^{*}\bm{w}_n^{*} -2\bm{w}_n^{*}\bm{W}_n^{*}+\lambda_n^*\sum_{j=1}^{p}|\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}^{*N}|^{-\gamma}\Big(|\hat{\beta}_{j,n}+\dfrac{w_{j,n}^*}{\sqrt{n}}|-|\hat{\beta}_{j,n}|\Big)\Bigg],
\end{align}
where $\hat{\beta}_{j,n}$ is the $j$th component of the Alasso estimator $\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n$, $\bm{C}_n^*=n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{x}_i\bm{x}'_iG_i^*$, and $\bm{W}_n^{*}=n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\epsilon}_i\bm{x}_iG_i^*$. To describe the solution of MTC(11), assume $\mathcal{A}=\{j:\beta_j\neq 0\}=\{1,\dots,p_0\}$. MTC(11) claimed that when $\gamma=1$ and $p$ is fixed, $\left((\bm{u}_{n1}^{*N})',\bm{0}\right)'$ is a solution of (\ref{eqn:ustarnaive}) for sufficiently large $n$, where
\begin{equation*}
\bm{u}_{n1}^{*N}=\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\epsilon_i\bm{x}_i^{(1)}(G_i^*-1) \; \text{and}\; ||\bm{u}_n^{*N}-\left((\bm{u}_{n1}^{*N})',\bm{0}\right)'||_{\infty}=o_{p_*}(1).
\end{equation*}
However, to achieve second order correctness, we need to obtain a solution $\left((\bm{u}_{n2}^{*N})',\bm{0}\right)'$ of (\ref{eqn:ustarnaive}) such that $||\bm{u}_n^{*N}-\left((\bm{u}_{n2}^{*N})',\bm{0}\right)'||_{\infty}=o_{p_*}(n^{-1/2})$. We show that such an $\bm{u}_{n2}^{*N}$ has the form
\begin{equation*}
\bm{u}_{n2}^{*N}=\bm{C}_{11,n}^{*-1}\Big{[}\bm{W}_n^{*(1)}-\dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{\sqrt{n}}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}\Big{]}
\end{equation*}
for sufficiently large $n$, where $\bm{W}_n^{*(1)}$ is the first $p_0$ components of $\bm{W}_n^*$ and the $j$th component of $\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}$ equals to $\text{sgn}(\hat{\beta}_{j,n})||\tilde{\beta}_{jn}^{*N}|^{-\gamma}$, $j\in \mathcal{A}$ (Here we drop the subscript $n$ from the notations of true parameter values since we are considering $p$ to be fixed in this section). We establish this fact by exploring the KKT condition corresponding to (\ref{eqn:ustarnaive}), which is given by
\begin{align}\label{eqn:KKT}
2\bm{C}_n^*\bm{w}_n^*-2\bm{W}_n^{*}+\dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{\sqrt{n}}\bm{\Gamma}_n^*\bm{l}_n=\bm{0},
\end{align}
for some $\bm{l}_n=(l_{1n},\ldots, l_{pn})'$ with $l_{j,n}\in [-1,1]$ for $j=1,\ldots,p$ and $\bm{\Gamma}_n^*=\text{diag}\big(|\tilde{\beta}_{1n}^{*N}|^{-\gamma},$ $\ldots, |\tilde{\beta}_{pn}^{*N}|^{-\gamma}\big)$.
Since $\bm{C}_n^*$ is a non-negative definite matrix, (\ref{eqn:ustarnaive}) is a convex optimization problem; hence (\ref{eqn:KKT}) is both necessary and sufficient in solving (\ref{eqn:ustarnaive}).
\par
Note that $\bm{W}_n^*$ is not centered and hence we need to adjust the solution $\left((\bm{u}_{n2}^{*N})',\bm{0}\right)'$ for centering before investigating if the naive perturbation bootstrap can asymptotically correct the distribution of Alasso up to second order. Clearly, the centering adjustment term is $\bm{Ad}_n^{*}=\big{(}\bm{Ad}_n^{*(1)\prime},\bm{0}^{\prime}\big{)}^{\prime}$ where $\bm{Ad}_n^{*(1)}=\bm{C}_{11,n}^{*-1}n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\epsilon}_i\bm{x}_i^{(1)}$. It follows from the steps of the proofs of the results of Section \ref{sec:mainresults} that we need $||\bm{Ad}_n^*||=o_{p_*}(n^{-1/2})$ to achieve second-order correctness. We show that this is indeed not the case even in the fixed $p$ setting.
\par
More precisely, we negate the second-order correctness of the naive perturbation bootstrap of MTC(11) by first showing that
$\left((\bm{u}_{n2}^{*N})',\bm{0}'\right)'$ satisfies the KKT condition (\ref{eqn:KKT}) exactly with bootstrap probability converging to 1. Then we show that
$\sqrt{n}||\bm{Ad}_n^*||$ diverges in bootstrap probability to $\infty$, which in turn implies that the conditional cdf of $\bm{F}_n^{*N}=\sqrt{n}\big{(}\bm{\beta}_n^{*N}-\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n\big{)}$ can not approximate the cdf of $\bm{F}_n=\sqrt{n}\big{(}\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n-\bm{\beta}\big{)}$ with the uniform accuracy $O_p(n^{-1/2})$, needed for the validity of second-order correctness.
We formalize these arguments in the following theorem.
\par
\begin{theo} \label{thm:naiveinconsistent}
Let $p$ be fixed and $\bm{C}_n\rightarrow \bm{C}$, a positive definite matrix. Define $Z_n^{*-1}=\sqrt{n}||\bm{Ad}_n^*||$. Suppose, $(\log n/n)^{1/2}.\max\{\lambda_n, \lambda_n^*\}\rightarrow 0$ and $(\log n)^{-(\gamma+1)/2}.\min\{\lambda_n, \lambda_n^{*}\}$ $.\min\{1,$ $n^{(\gamma-1)/2}\}\rightarrow \infty$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$. Also assume that (A.1)(i), (ii) and (A.4)(i) hold with $r=4$. Then there exists a sequence of borel sets $\{\bm{A}_n\}_{n\geq 1}$ with $\mathbf{P}(\bm{\varepsilon}_n\in \bm{A}_n)\rightarrow 1$ and given $\bm{\varepsilon}_n =(\epsilon_1,\ldots,\epsilon_n)'\in \bm{A}_n$, the following conclusions hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)]
$\mathbf{P_*}\bigg(\bm{u}_{n}^{*N}=\left((\bm{u}_{n2}^{*N})',\bm{0}'\right)'\bigg)=1-o(n^{-1/2})$.
\item[(b)]
$\mathbf{P_*}\Big{(}Z_n^*> \epsilon\Big{)}=o(n^{-1/2})$ for any $\epsilon > 0$.
\item[(c)]
$\sup\limits_{\bm{x}\in \mathcal{R}^p}\Big{|}\mathbf{P_*}\big{(}\bm{F}_n^{*N}\leq \bm{x}\big{)}-\mathbf{P}\big{(}\bm{F}_n \leq \bm{x}\big{)}\Big{|} \geq K. \dfrac{\lambda_n}{\sqrt{n}}$ for some $K>0$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theo}
\begin{remark}Theorem \ref{thm:naiveinconsistent} (a), (b) state that the naive perturbation bootstrap is incompetent in approximating the distribution of Alasso up to second order. The fundamental reason behind second order incorrectness is the inadequate centering in the form of $\sqrt{n}(\bm{\beta}_n^{*N}-\hat{\bm{\beta}}_n)$. Although the adjustment term necessary for centering is $o_{p_*}(1)$, which essentially helps to establish distributional consistency in MTC(11), the term is coarser than $n^{-1/2}$, leading to second order incorrectness. Additionally, it is worth mentioning that studentization will also not help in achieving second-order correctness by naive perturbation bootstrap of MTC(11), since the necessary centering correction cannot be accomplished by any sort of studentization. Part (c) conveys uniformly how far the naive bootstrap cdf is from the original cdf.
\end{remark}
\section{Modified Perturbation Bootstrap and its Higher Order Properties}
\label{sec:mainresults}
This section is divided into two sub-sections. The first one describes briefly the motivation behind considering the perturbation bootstrap modification in Alasso. The second sub-section describes higher order asymptotic properties of our modified perturbation bootstrap method.
\subsection{Motivation for the modified perturbation bootstrap}
Theorem \ref{thm:naiveinconsistent} establishes that the naive perturbation bootstrap of MTC(11) does not provide a solution for approximating the distribution of $\sqrt{n}(\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n-\bm{\beta}_n)$ up to second order. As it is mentioned earlier, the problem occurs because $\bm{W}_n^*$ is not centered. Let $\breve{\bm{W}}_n^*$ denotes the centered version of $\bm{W}_n^*$, that is $\breve{\bm{W}}_n^*=n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\epsilon}_i\bm{x}_i(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})$, and consider the vector equation
\begin{align}\label{eqn:mKKT}
2\bm{C}_n^*\bm{w}_n^*-2\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*}+\dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{\sqrt{n}}\bm{\Gamma}_n^*\bm{l}_n=\bm{0},
\end{align}
which is same as (\ref{eqn:KKT}) after replacing $\bm{W}_n^*$ with $\breve{\bm{W}}_n^*$. Note that the solution to (\ref{eqn:mKKT}) is of the form $((\bm{u}_{n3}^{*(1)})',\bm{0}')'$, where $\bm{u}_{n3}^{*(1)}=\bm{C}_{11,n}^{*-1}\Big{[}\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*(1)}-\dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{\sqrt{n}}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}\Big{]}$. Although this form is adequate for achieving second-order correctness in fixed dimension, there are some computational and higher-dimensional issues that we now address.
\par
Note that $\bm{C}_{11,n}^*$ is a matrix involving random quantities $\{G_1^*,\dots,G_n^*\}$. Thus $\bm{C}_{11,n}^*$ will not remain same for each bootstrap iteration and hence each bootstrap iteration will require computing the inverse of $\bm{C}_{11,n}^*$ afresh. This is computationally expensive and the expense increases as the number of non-zero regression parameters increases. Therefore it will be computationally advantageous if we can replace $\bm{C}_{11,n}^*$ by $\bm{C}_{11,n}$ in the form of $\bm{u}_{n3}^{*(1)}$.
\par
Now define, $\bm{u}_{n4}^{*(1)}=\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\Big{[}\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*(1)}-\dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{\sqrt{n}}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}\Big{]}$. If we look closely at the bias term $-\dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{\sqrt{n}}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}$ $\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}$, then it is clear that the primary contribution of the bias towards $\bm{u}_{n4}^{*(1)}$ is $-\dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{\sqrt{n}}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)}$, where $j$th component of $\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)}$ is equal to $\text{sgn}(\hat{\beta}_{j,n})||\tilde{\beta}_{jn}|^{-\gamma}$, $j\in \mathcal{A}$, where $\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}$ is the $j$th component of the OLS estimator $\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_n$. By Taylor's expansion, $\big{(}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}-\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)}\big{)}$ depends on the OLS residuals. The OLS residuals again depend on all $p$ estimated regression parameters, unlike Alasso residuals which depend only on the estimates of the $p_0$ non-zero components. Since it is needed to bound $||\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}-\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)}||_{\infty}$ for achieving valid edgeworth expansion, we will come up with an implicit bound on the dimension $p$, which we do not want to impose. On the other hand, if the difference depends on Alasso residuals instead of OLS ones, then the implicit condition will be on $p_0$ and this is reasonable as $p_0$ can be much smaller than $p$. Additionally, $\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_n^{*N}$ involves inversion of the random matrix $\bm{C}_n^*$ and hence it is computationally expensive. Thus if $\bm{C}_n^*$ can be replaced by some fixed matrix, say $\bm{C}_n$, then the bootstrap will be computationally advantageous.
However, if we implement the modification described in Section \ref{sec:mpb}, then both the theoretical and computational shortcomings of the perturbation bootstrap method become resolved and the second-order correctness is achieved even in increasing dimension under some mild regularity conditions. Additionally, we also have the nice structure due to the modification, which enables us to employ existing computational algorithms, as pointed out in Proposition \ref{prop:compute}.
\subsection{Higher Order Results}
Define, $\bm{T}_n=\sqrt{n}\bm{D}_n(\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n-\bm{\beta}_n)$. Without loss of generality we assume that $\mathcal{A}_n=\{j: \beta_{j,n}\neq 0\}=\{1,\dots,p_0\}$. Hence, by Taylor's expansion it is immediate from the form of Alasso estimator that $\bm{\Sigma}_n=n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big(\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)}+\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)}\big)\big(\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)}+\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)}\big)'$ or $\bar{\bm{\Sigma}}_n=n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)}\bm{\xi}_i^{\prime(0)}$ can be considered as the asymptotic variance of $\bm{T}_n/\sigma$ at sample size $n$. Here $\bm{\xi_i}^{(0)}=\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\bm{x}_i^{(1)}$, $\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)}=\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\bm{\eta}_i$. For each $i\in\{1,\ldots,n\}$, $\bm{\eta}_i$ is a $p_0\times 1$ vector with $j$th element
$\Big(\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2n}\tilde{x}_{i,j}\dfrac{\gamma}{|\beta_{j,n}|^{\gamma+1}}sgn(\beta_{j,n})\Big)$ where $\tilde{\bm{x}}_i=\bm{C}_n^{-1}\bm{x}_i$ (when $p\leq n$) and $sgn(x) =-1, 0 ,1$ according as $x<0$, $x=0$, $x>0$, respectively, as defined earlier. The bias corresponding to $\bm{T}_n$ is $-\bm{b}_n=-\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}$ $\bm{s}_n^{(1)}\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}$, where $\bm{D}_n^{(1)}$ and $\bm{C}_{11,n}$ are as defined earlier and $\bm{s}_n^{(1)}$ is a $p_0\times 1$ vector with $j$th element $\text{sgn}(\beta_{j,n})|\beta_{j,n}|^{-\gamma}$. Although $\bar{\bm{\Sigma}}_n$ is defined for all $p$, $\bm{\Sigma}_n$ is only defined when $p\leq n$. $\bar{\bm{\Sigma}}_n$ is also the asymptotic variance of $[\mathbf{T}_n + \mathbf{b}_n]/\sigma$.
Define the set $\hat{\mathcal{A}}_n=\{j: \hat \beta_{j,n}\neq 0\}$ and $\hat p_{0,n}=|\hat{\mathcal{A}}_n|$, supposing, without loss of generality, that $\hat{\mathcal{A}}_n=\{1,\ldots,\hat{p}_{0,n}\}$. We then partition the matrix $\bm{C}_n=n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{x}_i\bm{x}'_i$ as
\begin{equation*}
\bm{C}_{n} = \begin{bmatrix}
\hat{\bm{C}}_{11,n} \;\;\; \hat{\bm{C}}_{12,n}\\
\hat{\bm{C}}_{21,n}\;\;\; \hat{\bm{C}}_{22,n}
\end{bmatrix},
\end{equation*}
where $\hat{\bm{C}}_{11,n}$ is of dimension $\hat{p}_{0,n}\times \hat{p}_{0,n}$. Similarly, we define $\hat{\bm{D}}_n^{(1)}$ as the matrix containing the first $\hat{p}_{0,n}$ columns of $\bm{D}_n$ and we define $\hat{\bm{x}}_i^{(1)}$ as the vector containing the first $\hat{p}_{0,n}$ entries of $\bm{x}_i$. Hence, the bias-correction term $\breve \mathbf{b}_n$ corresponding to $\bm{T}_n$ can be defined as
\[
\breve{\bm{b}}_n=\hat{\bm{D}}_n^{(1)}\hat{\bm{C}}_{11,n}^{-1}\hat{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)}\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}},
\]
where $\hat{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)}$ is the $\hat p_{0,n}\times 1$ vector with $j$th entry equal to $\text{sgn}(\hat{\beta}_{j,n})|\tilde \beta_{j,n}|^{-\gamma}$, $j\in \hat{\mathcal{A}_n}$.
\par
Therefore, the studentized pivots can be constructed as
\[
\mathbf{R}_n = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \hat \sigma_n^{-1} \hat \boldsymbol{\Sigma}_n^{-1/2} \mathbf{T}_n & \text{for $p \leq n$} \\\hat \sigma_n^{-1} \check \boldsymbol{\Sigma}_n^{-1/2} \mathbf{T}_n & \text{for $p>n$} \end{array} \right. \quad \text{ and } \quad
\check \mathbf{R}_n = \check \sigma_n^{-1} \check \boldsymbol{\Sigma}_n^{-1/2} [ \mathbf{T}_n + \breve \mathbf{b}_n ],
\]
where the matrices $\hat \boldsymbol{\Sigma}_n$ and $\check \boldsymbol{\Sigma}_n$ have the form
\begin{equation} \label{eqn:Sigmas}
\hat{\bm{\Sigma}}_n =n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big(\hat{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}+\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}\big)\big(\hat{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}+\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}\big)' \quad \text{ and} \quad \check{\bm{\Sigma}}_n = n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}\hat{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)'},
\end{equation}
and
\[
\hat \sigma_n^2 = n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^n \hat \epsilon_i^2 \quad \text{ and} \quad \check \sigma_n^2 = n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^n \tilde \epsilon_i^2,
\]
where $\hat \epsilon_i = y_i - \bm{x}_i^\prime \hat \bm{\beta}_{n} $, $\tilde \epsilon_i = y_i - \sum_{j \in \hat{\mathcal{A}}_n} x_{ij}\tilde \beta_{j,n}$, $\hat{\bm{\xi}_i}^{(0)}=\hat{\bm{D}}_n^{(1)}\hat{\bm{C}}_{11,n}^{-1}\hat{\bm{x}}_i^{(1)}$ and $\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}=\hat{\bm{D}}_n^{(1)}\hat{\bm{C}}_{11,n}^{-1}$ $\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i$, with
\[
\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i = \Big(\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2n}\tilde{x}_{i,j}\dfrac{\gamma}{|\hat{\beta}_{j,n}|^{\gamma+1}} \text{sgn}(\hat{\beta}_{j,n})\Big)_{j \in \hat{\mathcal{A}_n}}.
\]
\par
We construct perturbation bootstrap versions $\bm{R}_n^*$ and $\check{\bm{R}}_n^*$ of $\bm{R}_n$ and $\check{\bm{R}}_n$ first by replacing $\bm{T}_n$ with $\bm{T}_n^* =\sqrt{n}\bm{D}_n(\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n^*-\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n)$. We then replace $\hat{\bm{\Sigma}}_n$ and $\check{\bm{\Sigma}}_n$ with $\breve{\bm{\Sigma}}_n$ and $\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_n$, respectively, which we define by replacing $\hat{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}$ with $\breve{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)} = \hat{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}\hat\epsilon_i$ and $\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}$ with $\breve{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)} = \hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}\hat\epsilon_i$ in (\ref{eqn:Sigmas}). We replace $\breve{\bm{b}}_n$ with $\breve{\bm{b}}^*_n= \hat{\bm{D}}_n^{*(1)}\hat{\bm{C}}_{11,n}^{*-1}\hat{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}\lambda_n/(2\sqrt{n})$, where $\hat{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}$ is the $|\hat{\mathcal{A}^*_n}|\times 1$ vector with $j$th entry equal to $\text{sgn}(\hat{\beta}^*_{j,n})|\tilde \beta^*_{j,n}|^{-\gamma}$, $j\in \hat{\mathcal{A}^*_n}=\{j : \hat{\bm{\beta}}_{j,n}^* \neq 0\}$. The matrix $\hat{\bm{C}}_{11,n}^*$ is the $|\hat{\mathcal{A}}^*_n|\times|\hat{\mathcal{A}}^*_n|$ sub-matrix of $\bm{C}_n$ with rows and columns in $\hat{\mathcal{A}}^*_n$ and $\hat{\bm{D}}^{*(1)}_n$ is the $q \times|\hat{\mathcal{A}}^*_n|$ sub-matrix of $\bm{D}_n$ with columns in $\hat{\mathcal{A}}^*_n$. Lastly, we need
\[
\hat \sigma_n^{*2} = n^{-1}\mu_{G^*}^{-2}\sum_{i=1}^n \hat \epsilon_i^{*2} \left(G_i^* - \mu_{G^*}\right)^2 \quad \text{ and} \quad \check \sigma_n^{*2} = n^{-1}\mu_{G^*}^{-2}\sum_{i=1}^n \tilde \epsilon_i^{*2}\left(G_i^* - \mu_{G^*}\right)^2,
\]
where $\hat{\epsilon}_i^*=y_i-\bm{x}'_i\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n^*$, $\tilde{\epsilon}_i^*=y_i-\sum_{j \in \hat{\mathcal{A}}_n^*} x_{ij}\tilde \beta_{j,n}^*$. With these we construct $\mathbf{R}_n^*$ and $\check \mathbf{R}_n^*$ as
\[
\mathbf{R}_n^* = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \hat{\sigma}_n^{*-1}\hat \sigma_n \breve \boldsymbol{\Sigma}_n^{-1/2} \mathbf{T}_n^* & \text{for $p \leq n$} \\ \hat{\sigma}_n^{*-1} \hat \sigma_n \tilde \boldsymbol{\Sigma}_n^{-1/2} \mathbf{T}_n^* & \text{for $p>n$} \end{array} \right. \quad \text{ and } \quad
\check \mathbf{R}_n^* = \check \sigma_n^{*-1} \check \sigma_n \tilde \boldsymbol{\Sigma}_n^{-1/2}[\mathbf{T}_n^* + \breve \mathbf{b}_n^*].
\]
\par
We are motivated to look at these studentized or pivot quantities by the fact that studentization improves the rate of convergence of bootstrap estimators in many settings [cf. Hall (1992)].
\subsubsection{Results for $p\leq n$.}
\begin{theo}\label{thm:RstarloD}
Let (A.1)--(A.6) hold with $r=6$. Then
\begin{align*}
\sup\limits_{B \in \mathcal{C}_q}\big|\mathbf{P_*}\big(\mathbf{R}_n^*\in B\big) - \mathbf{P}\big(\mathbf{R}_n\in B\big)\big|=o_p(n^{-1/2})
\end{align*}
\end{theo}
Theorem \ref{thm:RstarloD} shows that after proper studentization, the modified perturbation bootstrap approximation of the distribution of the Alasso estimator is second-order correct. The error rate reduces to $o_p(n^{-1/2})$ from $O(n^{-1/2})$, the best possible rate obtained by the oracle Normal approximation. This is a significant improvement from the perspective of inference. As a consequence, the precision of the percentile confidence intervals based on $\mathbf{R}_n^*$ will be greater than that of confidence intervals based on the oracle Normal approximation.
\par
We point out that the error rate in Theorem \ref{thm:RstarloD} cannot be reduced to the optimal rate of $O_p(n^{-1})$, unlike in the fixed-dimension case. To achieve this optimal rate by our modified bootstrap method, we now consider a bias corrected pivot $\check{\mathbf{R}}_n$ and its modified perturbation bootstrap version $\check{\mathbf{R}}_n^*$. The following theorem states that it achieves the optimal rate.
\begin{theo}\label{thm:RcheckstarloD}
Let (A.1)--(A.6) hold with $r=8$. Then
\begin{align*}
\sup\limits_{B \in \mathcal{C}_q}\big|\mathbf{P_*}\big(\check{\mathbf{R}}_n^*\in B\big) - \mathbf{P}\big(\check{\mathbf{R}}_n\in B\big)\big|=O_p(n^{-1})
\end{align*}
\end{theo}
Theorem \ref{thm:RcheckstarloD} suggests that the modified perturbation bootstrap achieves notable improvement in the error rate over the oracle Normal approximation irrespective of the order of the bias term. Thus Theorem \ref{thm:RcheckstarloD} establishes the perturbation bootstrap method as an effective method for approximating the distribution of the Alasso estimator when $p\leq n$.
\subsubsection{Results for $p>n$}
We now present results for the quality of perturbation bootstrap approximation when the dimension $p$ of the regression parameter can be much larger than the sample size $n$. We consider the initial estimator $\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_n$ to be some bridge estimator, for example Lasso or Ridge estimator, in defining the Alasso estimator by (\ref{eqn:modelalasso}). The bootstrap version of Lasso or Ridge is defined by (\ref{eqn:mpbi}). Higher order results are presented separately for two cases based on growth of $p$ with sample size $n$. First we consider the case when $p$ can grow polynomially and then we move to the situation when $p$ can grow exponentially.
\paragraph{$p$ grows polynomially}
\begin{theo}\label{thm:hiD1}
Let (A.1)(i), (ii), (iii)$'$ and (A.2)--(A.6) and (A.7) hold and $p=O(n^{(r-3)/2})$ for some positive integer $r\geq 3$. Now if $b=0$ [cf. condition (A.3) in Section \ref{sec:assum}] and $r\geq 8$, then we have
\begin{align*}
&\sup\limits_{B \in \mathcal{C}_q}\big|\mathbf{P_*}\big(\mathbf{R}_n^*\in B\big) - \mathbf{P}\big(\mathbf{R}_n\in B\big)\big|=o_p(n^{-1/2})\\
&\sup\limits_{B \in \mathcal{C}_q}\big|\mathbf{P_*}\big(\check{\mathbf{R}}_n^*\in B\big) - \mathbf{P}\big(\check{\mathbf{R}}_n\in B\big)\big|=o_p(n^{-1/2}).
\end{align*}
\end{theo}
Theorem \ref{thm:hiD1} states that our proposed modified perturbation bootstrap approximation is second-order correct, even when $p$ grows polynomially with $n$. The error rate obtained by our proposed method is significantly better than $O(n^{-1/2})$, which is the best-attainable rate of the oracle Normal approximation. When $p$ can grow at a polynomial rate with $n$, the validity of our method depends on the existence of some polynomial moment of the error distribution.
To see why, note that it is essential to have
\begin{align}\label{eqn:reqcon}
&\mathbf{P}\Big(\max_{1\leq j \leq p}|\breve{W}_{j,n}|>K.\sqrt{\log n}\Big)= o(n^{-1/2})\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\text{and}\nonumber\\
&\mathbf{P_*}\Big(\max_{1\leq j \leq p}|\breve{W}_{j,n}^*|>K.\sqrt{\log n}\Big)= o_p(n^{-1/2})
\end{align}
to obtain second-order correctness, as presented in Theorem \ref{thm:hiD1}. Here $K\in (1, \infty)$ is a constant, $\breve{W}_{j,n}=n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\epsilon_ix_{i,j}$ and $\breve{W}_{j,n}^*=n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\epsilon}_ix_{i,j}(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})$. In view of Lemma \ref{lem:concentration}, the following bound is needed to conclude (\ref{eqn:reqcon})
\begin{align*}
p.\Big(\max_{1\leq j \leq p}\big[\sum_{i=1}^{n}|x_{i,j}|^{2r}\big]\Big)\Big(\mathbf{E}|\epsilon_1|^r\Big)^2=o\Big(n^{(r-1)/2}(\log n)^{r/2}\Big)
\end{align*}
Clearly under the assumption $\max\{n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}|x_{i,j}|^{2r}:1\leq j \leq p\}=O(1)$ [cf. condition (A.1) (ii)], we must have $p = o\big(n^{(r-3)/2}(\log n)^{r/2}\big)$ provided $\mathbf{E}|\epsilon_1|^r<\infty$. Therefore in view of condition (A.1) (ii), $p$ can grow like $\Big(a_n.n^l.(\log n)^{l+3/2}\Big)$ where $a_n\rightarrow 0$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$, provided $\mathbf{E}|\epsilon_1|^{2l+3} <\infty$. This implies that $p$ can grow polynomially with $n$ under the assumption that some polynomial moment of the error distribution exists.
\paragraph{$p$ grows exponentially}
When $p$ grows exponentially with some fractional power of $n$, existence of polynomial moment of some order of regression errors $\epsilon_i$'s [cf. condition (A.4) (i)] is not enough to achieve higher order accuracy. Indeed, we need to have some control over the moment generating function of the error variable. Following two important cases are considered in this setting.
\vspace*{5mm}
\underline{\textbf{Errors are Sub-Gaussian}}:
Suppose error $\epsilon_1$ is sub-gaussian. This means that there exists $d > 0$ such that
\begin{align}\label{eqn:subgaussianor}
\mathbf{E}[e^{\kappa \epsilon_1}]\leq e^{\kappa^2 d^2/2}\;\; \text{for all}\; \kappa \in \mathcal{R}.
\end{align}
When the regression errors have sub-gaussian tails, we need to choose the perturbing quantities $G_i^*$'s effectively to have sub-gaussian tails, that is there exists $d^*>0$ such that
\begin{align}\label{eqn:subgaussianboot}
\mathbf{E_*}[e^{\kappa (G_1^*-\mu_{G^*})}]\leq e^{\kappa^2 d^{*2}/2}\;\; \text{for all}\; \kappa \in \mathcal{R}.
\end{align}
\begin{theo}\label{thm:hiD2}
Let (A.1)(i), (ii), (iii)$'$ and (A.2)--(A.6) and (A.7) hold with $r=8$ and $b=0$. Also assume that (\ref{eqn:subgaussianor}) \& (\ref{eqn:subgaussianboot}) hold and $p=O\Big(\exp\big({n^{(\delta_1-\gamma\delta_2)}}\big)\Big)$ where $\delta_1$ and $\delta_2$ are defined in assumptions (A.6) and (A.7) in Section \ref{sec:assum}. Then the conclusions of Theorem \ref{thm:hiD1} hold.
\end{theo}
\vspace*{5mm}
\underline{\textbf{Errors are Sub-Exponential}}:
Consider the regression errors to be sub-exponential, that is there exist positive parameters $d ,h$ such that
\begin{align}\label{eqn:subexpoor}
\mathbf{E}[e^{\kappa \epsilon_1}]\leq e^{\kappa^2 d^2/2}\;\; \text{for all}\; |\kappa| < 1/h.
\end{align}
Similar to sub-gaussian case, we need to choose the perturbing quantities $G_i^*$'s to be sub-exponential besides the errors being sub-exponential, that is there exist positive parameters $d^* ,h^*$ such that
\begin{align}\label{eqn:subexpoboot}
\mathbf{E_*}[e^{\kappa (G_1^*-\mu_{G^*})}]\leq e^{\kappa^2 d^{*2}/2}\;\; \text{for all}\; |\kappa| < 1/h^*.
\end{align}
\begin{theo}\label{thm:hiD3}
Let (A.1)(i), (ii), (iii)$'$ and (A.2)--(A.5), (A.6)(i), (ii) and (A.7) hold with $r=8$ and $b=0$. Also assume that (\ref{eqn:subexpoor}) and (\ref{eqn:subexpoboot}) hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item[\emph{(a)}] If $p=O\Big(\exp\big({n^{(\delta_1-\gamma\delta_2)}}\big)\Big)$ and $p_0 = O\Big(n^{(1-\delta_1+\gamma\delta_2)/2}\Big)$ are satisfied where $\delta_1$ and $\delta_2$ are defined in assumptions (A.6) and (A.7) in Section \ref{sec:assum}, then the conclusions of Theorem \ref{thm:hiD1} hold.
\item[\emph{(b)}] If $p=O\Big(\exp\big(n\big)\Big)$, $ n^{(-\delta_1+\gamma\delta_2)} = o\big(p_0^2/n\big)$ and $p_0/\sqrt{n} = o\big((\log n)^{-3/2}\big)$ are satisfied where $\delta_1$ and $\delta_2$ are defined in assumptions (A.6) and (A.7) in Section \ref{sec:assum}, then the conclusions of Theorem \ref{thm:hiD1} hold.
\end{itemize}
\end{theo}
Theorem \ref{thm:hiD2} and \ref{thm:hiD3} show that our perturbation bootstrap method remains valid as a second order correct method even when the dimension $p$ grows exponentially with some fractional power of $n$. Moreover, we can achieve exponential growth of $p$ in some situations when errors are sub-exponential, as stated in part (b) of Theorem \ref{thm:hiD3}. To obtain higher order results stated in Theorem \ref{thm:hiD2} and Theorem \ref{thm:hiD3}, we need to relax (\ref{eqn:reqcon}) a bit for $j=p_0+1,\dots,p$. It follows from the proofs and condition (A.6)(ii) that we can relax (\ref{eqn:reqcon}) for $j=p_0+1,\dots,p$, to the following
\begin{align}\label{eqn:reqcon1}
&\mathbf{P}\Big(\max_{p_0+1\leq j \leq p}|\breve{W}_{j,n}|>K.n^{(\delta_1-\gamma\delta_2)}.p_0\Big)= o(n^{-1/2})\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\text{and}\nonumber\\
&\mathbf{P_*}\Big(\max_{p_0+1\leq j \leq p}|\breve{W}_{j,n}^*|>K.n^{(\delta_1-\gamma\delta_2)}.p_0\Big)= o_p(n^{-1/2}),
\end{align}
keeping higher order results valid. Now consider using Hoeffding's inequality in sub-gaussian case and Bernstein's inequality in sub-exponential case. As a result, the following two bounds are needed respectively in sub-gaussian and sub-exponential case to conclude (\ref{eqn:reqcon1})
\begin{align*}
&p.\exp\Bigg(-\dfrac{C_1.n^{1+2(\delta_1-\gamma\delta_2)}.p_0^2}{2.\max_{1\leq j \leq p}\Big[\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big(|x_{i,j}|^{2}+|x_{i,j}|^{4}\big)\Big]}\Bigg)=o\Big(n^{-1/2}\Big)\;\;\;\;\;\; \text{and}\\
& p.\exp\Bigg(-\dfrac{C_2.n^{1+2(\delta_1-\gamma\delta_2)}.p_0^2}{2\Big(\max_{1\leq j \leq p}\Big[\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big(|x_{i,j}|^{2}+|x_{i,j}|^{4}\big)\Big]+ C_3. n^{1/2+(\delta_1-\gamma\delta_2)}.p_0\Big)}\Bigg)=o\Big(n^{-1/2}\Big).
\end{align*}
$C_1, C_2, C_3$ are some positive constants.
In view of the assumption $\max\{n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}|x_{i,j}|^{2r}:1\leq j \leq p\}=O(1)$ [cf. condition (A.1) (ii)], the first bound is implied by $p = o\Big(\exp\big(C.n^{2(\delta_1-\gamma\delta_2)}.p_0^2\big)$ $.n^{-1/2}\Big)$, whereas $p = o\bigg(\exp\Big(\dfrac{C.n^{2(\delta_1-\gamma\delta_2)}.p_0^2}{1+p_0.n^{-1/2+(\delta_1-\gamma\delta_2)}}\Big).n^{-1/2}\bigg)$ is required to obtain the second bound. Here $C$ is some positive constant. These requirements on the growth of $p$ are implying the growth conditions stated in Theorem \ref{thm:hiD2} and Theorem \ref{thm:hiD3}.
\begin{remark}
Note that the matrices $\breve{\bm{\Sigma}}_n$ and $\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_n$ used in defining the bootstrap pivots do not depend on $G_1^*,\dots,G_n^*$. Hence it is not required to compute the negative square roots of these matrices for each Monte Carlo bootstrap iteration; these must only be computed once. This is a notable feature of our modified perturbation bootstrap method from the perspective of computational complexity.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
When the dimension $p$ is increasing exponentially, then it is important to choose the distribution of $G_i^*$'s appropriately depending on whether the regression errors are sub-gaussian or sub-exponential. Note that if a random variable $W_1$ has distribution $Beta(a_1,b_1)$, then by Hoeffding's inequality,
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{E}\Big[e^{\kappa (W_1-\mathbf{E}W_1)}\Big]\leq e^{\kappa^2 /8}\;\; \text{for all}\; \kappa \in \mathcal{R}
\end{align*}
and hence $W_1$ is sub-gaussian with parameter value $1/4$, for any choice of $(a_1,b_1)$. On the other hand, if $W_2$ has Gamma distribution with shape parameter $a_2$ and scale parameter $b_2$ then
\begin{align*}
\log\mathbf{E}\Big[e^{\kappa (W_2-\mathbf{E}W_2)}\Big]&=-a_2b_2\kappa-a_2\log (1-b_2\kappa), \;\; \text{for}\;\; |\kappa|<1/b_2\\
&\leq \dfrac{a_2b_2^2\kappa^2}{{2(1-b_2\kappa)}},\;\; \text{for}\;\; |\kappa| <1/b_2\\
& \leq a_2b_2^2\kappa^2,\;\; \text{for}\;\; |\kappa| <1/2b_2
\end{align*}
where the first inequality follows from the fact that $-\log (1-u)\leq u+\dfrac{u^2}{2(1-u)}$ for $0\leq u<1$. Therefore $W_2$ is sub-exponential with parameters $(b_2\sqrt{2a_2}, 2b_2)$ and hence $W_1+W_2$ is also sub-exponential with parameters $(\sqrt{1/4+2a_2b_2^2}, 2b_2)$ when $W_1$ and $W_2$ are independent.
These observations imply that $Beta(1/2,$ $3/2)$ is an appropriate choice for the distribution of $G_i^*$'s when the errors are sub-gaussian and the distribution of $(M_1+M_2)$ is an appropriate choice for the distribution of $G_i^*$'s when the errors are sub-exponential where $M_1$ and $M_2$ are independent and $M_1$ is a Gamma random variable with shape and scale parameters $0.008652$ and $2$ respectively and $M_2$ is a Beta random variable with both the parameters $0.036490$.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
Let us consider the problem of simultaneous inference. Suppose we want to make inference simultaneously for the regression parameters $\beta_{j,n}$ for all $j$ in the index set $\mathcal{J}_n$.
First suppose that $|\mathcal{J}_n|$, the cardinality of $\mathcal{J}_n$, is fixed. Then assuming without loss of generality that $|\mathcal{J}_n|=\{1,\dots,l\}$ and taking $\bm{D}_n = (\bm{I}_l, \bm{0})$, we can use Theorems \ref{thm:RstarloD}, \ref{thm:RcheckstarloD}, \ref{thm:hiD1}, \ref{thm:hiD2}, \ref{thm:hiD3} to make simultaneous inference. Obviously we need to utilize the fact that the perturbation bootstrap approximation holds uniformly over all convex sets of $\mathcal{R}^l$.
Now suppose that $|\mathcal{J}_n|$ is increasing with $n$. In this scenario simultaneous inference is not possible with a mere choice of the matrix $\bm{D}_n$. There are two possible ways out. One way out is to establish the validity of the bootstrap in approximating the distribution of $\max\{\sqrt{n}|\hat{\beta}_{j,n}-\beta_{j,n}|:j\in\mathcal{J}_n\}$. The Edgeworth expansion theory used in this paper is a well-developed technique in fixed dimensional settings; however, its validity in increasing dimension, more precisely how the error rate depends on the dimension \sout{the dependence of the error rate on dimension}, is still unknown, and hence future investigation is necessary. Instead of using Edgeworth expansions, one can also explore the utility of the techniques developed in Chernozhukov et al. (2013) to establish the validity of bootstrap in approximating the distribution of $\max\{\sqrt{n}|\hat{\beta}_{j,n}-\beta_{j,n}|:j\in\mathcal{J}_n\}$ based upon the component-wise asymptotic normality of $\sqrt{n}(\hat{\bm{\beta}}_{n}-\bm{\beta}_{n})$ and of $\sqrt{n}(\hat{\bm{\beta}}^*_{n}-\hat{\bm{\beta}}_{n})|\bm{\varepsilon}$, where $\bm{\varepsilon} = (\epsilon_1,\dots,\epsilon_n)'$. The second way out is to use component-wise bootstrap approximation dictated by Theorems \ref{thm:RstarloD}, \ref{thm:RcheckstarloD}, \ref{thm:hiD1}, \ref{thm:hiD2}, \ref{thm:hiD3} and then combine them using the well-known Bonferroni correction procedure. For example, suppose we want to construct a $100(1-\alpha)\%$ confidence region for $(\beta_{1,n},\dots,\beta_{l_n,n})$, where $|\mathcal{J}_n|=l_n$ is increasing with $n$ and $\alpha$ is the family wise error rate (FWER) of the region. Define $R_{j,n}=\mathbf{R}_n$ and $\check{R}_{j,n}=\check{\mathbf{R}}_n$, corresponding to defining $\bm{D}_n$ as a unit row vector in $\mathcal{R}^p$ with $j$th component equal to 1. Define $\hat{u}_\Omega^j$ as the $(1-\Omega)$th quantile of the bootstrap distribution of $|\check{R}_{j,n}^*|$ for $j\in\{1,\dots,l_n\}$ for $\Omega\in (0,1)$. Then one can have the following corollary:
\begin{cor}\label{cor:FWER}
Suppose $p_0(p_0\wedge l_n) = o(n)$ when $p\leq n$ and $p_0(p_0\wedge l_n) = o(n^{1/2})$ when $p > n$. Then if $\Omega < \alpha/l_n$, $\{(\beta_{1,n},\dots,\beta_{l_n,n}): |\check{R}_{j,n}|\leq \hat{u}_\Omega^j, j=1,\dots, l_n\}$ is a confidence region for $(\beta_{1,n},\dots,\beta_{l_n,n})$ with FWER $\leq \alpha$ for sufficiently large n.
\end{cor}
Proof: It is enough to show $\mathbf{P}(|\check{R}_{j,n}|>\hat{u}_\Omega^j$ for at least one $j)\leq \alpha$. Without loss of generality assume that $\mathcal{A}_n=\{j:\beta_{j,n}\neq 0\}=\{1,\dots, p_0\}$. Hence note that for sufficiently large n,
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P}(|\check{R}_{j,n}|>\hat{u}_\Omega^j\; \text{for}\;& \text{at least }\; \text{one}\; j) \leq \sum_{j=1}^{l_n} \mathbf{P}(|\check{R}_{j,n}|>\hat{u}_\Omega^j)\\
&\leq \sum_{j=1}^{l_n} \mathbf{P}_*(|\check{R}^*_{j,n}|>\hat{u}_\Omega^j) + \sum_{j=1}^{l_n} |\mathbf{P}_*(|\check{R}^*_{j,n}|>\hat{u}_\Omega^j)-\mathbf{P}(|\check{R}_{j,n}|>\hat{u}_\Omega^j)|\\
&= \sum_{j=1}^{l_n} \mathbf{P}_*(|\check{R}^*_{j,n}|>\hat{u}_\Omega^j) + \sum_{j=1}^{p_0 \wedge l_n} |\mathbf{P}_*(|\check{R}^*_{j,n}|\leq \hat{u}_\Omega^j)-\mathbf{P}(|\check{R}_{j,n}|\leq \hat{u}_\Omega^j)|\\
&\leq \alpha,
\end{align*}
where the first inequality follows from Boole's inequality. The third equality follows from the fact that $\check{R}_{j,n}=0$ and $\check{R}^*_{j,n}=0$ for sufficiently large n (cf. proof of Lemma 6 in the section \ref{sec:proofs}). The fourth inequality is a consequence of
\begin{align}\label{eqn:all}
\max_{j=1,\dots, p_0}\sup\limits_{B \in \mathcal{C}_q}\big|\mathbf{P_*}\big(\check{\mathbf{R}}_n^*\in B\big) - \mathbf{P}\big(\check{\mathbf{R}}_n\in B\big)\big|=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} O_p\Big{(}p_0/n\Big{)},\; \text{when $p\leq n$}\\ o_p\Big{(}p_0/\sqrt{n}\Big{)},\; \text{when $p> n$} \end{array} \right.
\end{align}
and due to the assumption that $p_0(p_0\wedge l_n) = o(n)$ when $p\leq n$ and $p_0(p_0\wedge l_n) = o(n^{1/2})$ when $p > n$. Equation (\ref{eqn:all}) is a direct consequence of Theorems \ref{thm:RcheckstarloD}, \ref{thm:hiD1}, \ref{thm:hiD2}, \ref{thm:hiD3}. We want to point out that since $\Omega$ represents bootstrap probability, it should be identified with a random variable which takes the value $\Omega$ with probability 1 and hence Corollary \ref{cor:FWER} holds only on a set $\bm{Q}_n$ with $\mathbf{P}(\bm{Q}_n)\rightarrow 1$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$. But we have omitted those subtleties to keep the corollary simple and easy to understand. Also note that the confidence region of Corollary \ref{cor:FWER} can be utilized for testing $\beta_{j,n}=0$ simultaneously for $j\in\{1,\dots,l_n\}$. Construction of confidence regions and multiple testing can similarly be carried out with $R_{j,n}$ and $R_{j,n}^*$ instead of $\check{R}_{j,n}$ and $\check{R}_{j,n}^*$ for $j\in\{1,\dots,l_n\}$.
\end{remark}
\section{Simulation results}
\label{sec:simulation}
We study through simulation the coverage of one-sided and two-sided $95\%$ confidence intervals for individual nonzero regression coefficients constructed via the pivot quantities $\bm{R}_n$ and $\check{\bm{R}}_n$ as well as via their modified perturbation bootstrap versions $\mathbf{R}^*_n$ and $\check{\bm{R}}^*_n$. To make further comparisons, we also construct confidence intervals based on a Normal approximation to the distribution of a local quadratic approximation pivot $\bm{R}_n^{\text{LQA}}$, which uses the estimator of $\text{Cov}((\beta_j,j\in\hat A_n)^\prime)$ proposed in the original Alasso paper by Zou (2006). We also consider the confidence interval from the oracle Normal approximation, which is based on the closeness in distribution of $\bm{T}_n$ to a Normal$(0,\sigma^2 \bm{D}^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\bm{D}^{(1)} )$ random variable, where we use the true active set of covariates $\mathcal{A}_n$ to compute $\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}$. We denote this by $\bm{R}_n^{\text{oracle}}$. For the sake of comparison, we also consider the confidence intervals based on the naive perturbation bootstrap from MTC(11) which in that paper are denoted by $CN^{*Q}$ and $CN^{*N}$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{lambdagrid_n200p80s4.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Coverage of $\beta_1$, $\beta_2$, $\beta_3$, and $\beta_4$ over $500$ simulation runs of the confidence intervals based on $\mathbf{R}_n^{\text{LQA}}$, $\mathbf{R}_n^{\text{oracle}}$, $\mathbf{R}_n$, $\check \mathbf{R}_n$ (dashed curves), $\mathbf{R}_n^{*}$, and $\check \mathbf{R}_n^{*}$ (dotted curves) along with the frequency of correct model selection (solid curve) over a grid of fifty $\lambda_n$ values in the $(n,p,p_0)=(200,80,4)$ case. Vertical lines show median choices of $\lambda_n$ over $500$ simulation runs when selected by minimizing the crossvalidation estimate of prediction error ($\lambda^{\operatorname{cv}}_{\operatorname{min}}$) or under the $1$-standard error rule ($\lambda^{\operatorname{cv}}_{\operatorname{+1se}}$). }
\label{fig:lambdagrid_n200p80s4}
\end{figure}
\par
Under the settings
\[
(n,p,p_0) \in \left\{(200,80,4), (150,250,6),(200,500,8) \right\},
\]
we generate $n$ independent copies $(X_1,Y_1),\dots,(X_n,Y_n)$ of $(X,Y) \in \mathbb{R}^p \times \mathbb{R}$ from the model $Y = X^\prime\bm{\beta} + \epsilon$,
where $\epsilon$ is a standard normal random variable, $X = (X_1,\dots,X_p)^\prime$ is a mean-zero multivariate normal random vector such that
\[
\text{Cov}(X_j,X_k) = \mathbf{1}(j=k) + 0.3^{|j-k|}\mathbf{1}(j\leq p_0)\mathbf{1}(k \leq p_0)\mathbf{1}(j\neq k)
\]
for $1 \leq j,k \leq p$, and $\bm{\beta} = (\beta_1,\dots,\beta_p)^\prime$ with $\beta_j$ defined as $\beta_j = (1/2)j(-1)^{j}\mathbf{1}(j \leq p_0)$ for $j=1,\dots,p$.
\par
We compute the empirical coverage over $500$ simulated data sets of one- and two-sided confidence intervals for each nonzero regression coefficient under crossvalidation-selected values of $\tilde \lambda_n$ and $\lambda_n$, where $\tilde \lambda_n$ is the value of the tuning parameter used to obtain the preliminary Lasso estimate $\tilde \bm{\beta}_n$ and $\lambda_n$ is the value of the tuning parameter used to obtain the Alasso estimate $\hat \bm{\beta}_n$. We use $\gamma=1$ throughout. For each of the $500$ simulated data sets, $1000$ Monte Carlo draws of the independent random variables $G_1^*,\dots,G_n^* \sim \text{Beta}(1/2, 3/2)$ were drawn in order to create $1000$ Monte Carlo draws of the bootstrap pivots.
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\addtolength{\tabcolsep}{4pt}
\caption{Empirical coverage of 95\% confidence intervals for nonzero regression coefficients by Alasso under $(n,p,p_0)=(200,80,4)$ using $\tilde \lambda_n=0$ and crossvalidation choice of $\lambda_n$. The median $\lambda_n$ choice was $0.987 \cdot n^{1/4}$. One-sided intervals are bounded in the $sgn(\beta_j)$ direction.}
\begin{tabular}{r|cc|cc|cc|cc}
\multicolumn{9}{l}{Coverage and \textit{(avg.~width)} of two-sided 95\% CIs: $(n,p,p_0)=(200,80,4)$ }\\ \hline\hline
&\multicolumn{2}{l|}{}&\multicolumn{2}{l|}{}&\multicolumn{2}{l|}{}&\multicolumn{2}{l}{}\\[-2ex]
$\beta_j$ & $\mathbf{R}_n^{\text{LQA}}$ & $\mathbf{R}_n^{\text{oracle}}$ & $CN^{*Q}$ & $CN^{*N}$ & $\mathbf{R}_n$ & $\check \mathbf{R}_n$ & $\mathbf{R}_n^{*}$ & $\check \mathbf{R}_n^{*}$ \\ \hline\hline
-0.50 & 0.42 & 0.31 & 0.10 & 0.45 & 0.31 & 0.42 & 0.61 & 0.68 \\
& \textit{(0.44)} & \textit{(0.30)} & \textit{(0.28)} & \textit{(0.31)} & \textit{(0.30)} & \textit{(0.29)} & \textit{(0.26)} & \textit{(0.31)} \\
1.00 & 0.54 & 0.49 & 0.16 & 0.77 & 0.49 & 0.57 & 0.95 & 0.96 \\
& \textit{(0.37)} & \textit{(0.31)} & \textit{(0.47)} & \textit{(0.48)} & \textit{(0.31)} & \textit{(0.30)} & \textit{(0.39)} & \textit{(0.44)} \\
-1.50 & 0.75 & 0.73 & 0.36 & 0.89 & 0.74 & 0.76 & 0.93 & 0.93 \\
& \textit{(0.34)} & \textit{(0.31)} & \textit{(0.46)} & \textit{(0.47)} & \textit{(0.32)} & \textit{(0.30)} & \textit{(0.37)} & \textit{(0.41)} \\
2.00 & 0.86 & 0.86 & 0.59 & 0.93 & 0.86 & 0.87 & 0.92 & 0.92 \\
& \textit{(0.32)} & \textit{(0.30)} & \textit{(0.39)} & \textit{(0.39)} & \textit{(0.31)} & \textit{(0.29)} & \textit{(0.31)} & \textit{(0.34)} \\ \hline\hline
\multicolumn{9}{l}{ Coverage of one-sided 95\% CIs}\\
\hline\hline
-0.50 & 0.29 & 0.23 & 0.08 & 0.36 & 0.23 & 0.36 & 0.63 & 0.70 \\
1.00 & 0.44 & 0.41 & 0.12 & 0.65 & 0.41 & 0.50 & 0.96 & 0.98 \\
-1.50 & 0.64 & 0.61 & 0.29 & 0.82 & 0.62 & 0.68 & 0.95 & 0.96 \\
2.00 & 0.79 & 0.78 & 0.48 & 0.88 & 0.78 & 0.80 & 0.95 & 0.96 \\ \end{tabular}
\label{tab:p80n200cvlambda}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\addtolength{\tabcolsep}{4pt}
\caption{Empirical coverage of 95\% confidence intervals for nonzero regression coefficients by Alasso under $(n,p,p_0)=(150,250,6)$ using crossvalidation choices of $\tilde \lambda_n$ and $\lambda_n$. The median $\tilde \lambda_n$ and $\lambda_n$ choices were $0.014 \cdot n^{1/2}$ and $0.119 \cdot n^{1/4}$. One-sided intervals are bounded in the $sgn(\beta_j)$ direction.}
\begin{tabular}{r|cc|cc|cc|cc}
\multicolumn{9}{l}{Coverage and \textit{(avg.~width)} of two-sided 95\% CIs: $(n,p,p_0)=(150,250,6)$ }\\ \hline\hline
&\multicolumn{2}{l|}{}&\multicolumn{2}{l|}{}&\multicolumn{2}{l|}{}&\multicolumn{2}{l}{}\\[-2ex]
$\beta_j$ & $\mathbf{R}_n^{\text{LQA}}$ & $\mathbf{R}_n^{\text{oracle}}$ & $CN^{*Q}$ & $CN^{*N}$ & $\mathbf{R}_n$ & $\check \mathbf{R}_n$ & $\mathbf{R}_n^{*}$ & $\check \mathbf{R}_n^{*}$ \\ \hline\hline
-0.50 & 0.76 & 0.67 & 0.52 & 0.78 & 0.67 & 0.80 & 0.81 & 0.83\\
& \textit{(0.71)} & \textit{(0.31)} & \textit{(0.41)} & \textit{(0.45)} & \textit{(0.32)} & \textit{(0.38)} & \textit{(0.39)} & \textit{(0.50)} \\
1.00 & 0.82 & 0.75 & 0.62 & 0.87 & 0.76 & 0.86 & 0.90 & 0.93 \\
& \textit{(0.52)} & \textit{(0.32)} & \textit{(0.42)} & \textit{(0.43)} & \textit{(0.33)} & \textit{(0.40)} & \textit{(0.42)} & \textit{(0.56)} \\
-1.50 & 0.89 & 0.86 & 0.78 & 0.90 & 0.87 & 0.92 & 0.91 & 0.95 \\
& \textit{(0.53)} & \textit{(0.32)} & \textit{(0.40)} & \textit{(0.40)} & \textit{(0.33)} & \textit{(0.40)} & \textit{(0.40)} & \textit{(0.53)} \\
2.00 & 0.88 & 0.84 & 0.82 & 0.87 & 0.85 & 0.91 & 0.87 & 0.94 \\
& \textit{(0.46)} & \textit{(0.33)} & \textit{(0.38)} & \textit{(0.39)} & \textit{(0.33)} & \textit{(0.40)} & \textit{(0.38)} & \textit{(0.50)} \\
-2.50 & 0.90 & 0.86 & 0.85 & 0.88 & 0.87 & 0.91 & 0.88 & 0.94 \\
& \textit{(0.42)} & \textit{(0.32)} & \textit{(0.37)} & \textit{(0.37)} & \textit{(0.33)} & \textit{(0.40)} & \textit{(0.36)} & \textit{(0.48)} \\
3.00 & 0.89 & 0.85 & 0.85 & 0.87 & 0.86 & 0.92 & 0.87 & 0.93 \\
& \textit{(0.45)} & \textit{(0.31)} & \textit{(0.34)} & \textit{(0.34)} & \textit{(0.32)} & \textit{(0.38)} & \textit{(0.33)} & \textit{(0.43)} \\
\hline\hline
\multicolumn{9}{l}{ Coverage of one-sided 95\% CIs}\\
\hline\hline
-0.50 & 0.71 & 0.63 & 0.45 & 0.75 & 0.64 & 0.73 & 0.84 & 0.88 \\
1.00 & 0.76 & 0.69 & 0.53 & 0.81 & 0.69 & 0.81 & 0.91 & 0.95 \\
-1.50 & 0.84 & 0.81 & 0.72 & 0.86 & 0.82 & 0.88 & 0.90 & 0.94 \\
2.00 & 0.85 & 0.82 & 0.76 & 0.84 & 0.83 & 0.86 & 0.89 & 0.92 \\
-2.50 & 0.87 & 0.83 & 0.82 & 0.86 & 0.84 & 0.88 & 0.89 & 0.92 \\
3.00 & 0.86 & 0.83 & 0.82 & 0.84 & 0.84 & 0.88 & 0.87 & 0.92 \\
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:p250n150cvlambda}
\end{table}
\par
When $p\leq n$ we set $\tilde \lambda_n=0$, whereby we use the ordinary least squares estimate for the preliminary estimator $\tilde \bm{\beta}_n$. When $p>n$, the value of $\tilde \lambda_n$ is chosen via $10$-fold crossvalidation and $\tilde \bm{\beta}_n$ is computed under the selected value of $\tilde \lambda_n$. Once $\tilde \bm{\beta}_n$ is obtained, $10$-fold crossvalidation is used to select $\lambda_n$. The values $\tilde \lambda_n$ and $\lambda_n$ are thereafter held fixed for all bootstrap computations on the same dataset. In each crossvalidation procedure, the largest value of the tuning parameter for which the crossvalidation prediction error lies within one standard error of its minimum is used so that greater penalization is preferred; see Friedman et al. (2010).
\par
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\addtolength{\tabcolsep}{4pt}
\caption{Empirical coverage of 95\% confidence intervals for nonzero regression coefficients by Alasso under $(n,p,p_0)=(200,500,8)$ using crossvalidation choices of $\tilde \lambda_n$ and $\lambda_n$. The median $\tilde \lambda_n$ and $\lambda_n$ choices were $0.01 \cdot n^{1/2}$ and $0.30 \cdot n^{1/4}$. One-sided intervals are bounded in the $sgn(\beta_j)$ direction.}
\begin{tabular}{r|cc|cc|cc|cc}
\multicolumn{9}{l}{Coverage and \textit{(avg.~width)} of two-sided 95\% CIs: $(n,p,p_0)=(200,500,8)$ }\\ \hline\hline
&\multicolumn{2}{l|}{}&\multicolumn{2}{l|}{}&\multicolumn{2}{l|}{}&\multicolumn{2}{l}{}\\[-2ex]
$\beta_j$ & $\mathbf{R}_n^{\text{LQA}}$ & $\mathbf{R}_n^{\text{oracle}}$ & $CN^{*Q}$ & $CN^{*N}$ & $\mathbf{R}_n$ & $\check \mathbf{R}_n$ & $\mathbf{R}_n^{*}$ & $\check \mathbf{R}_n^{*}$ \\ \hline\hline
-0.50 & 0.79 & 0.68 & 0.56 & 0.86 & 0.70 & 0.81 & 0.87 & 0.92 \\
& \textit{(0.69)} & \textit{(0.26)} & \textit{(0.38)} & \textit{(0.42)} & \textit{(0.27)} & \textit{(0.33)} & \textit{(0.36)} & \textit{(0.46)} \\
1.00 & 0.84 & 0.75 & 0.65 & 0.86 & 0.77 & 0.87 & 0.88 & 0.94 \\
& \textit{(0.54)} & \textit{(0.27)} & \textit{(0.34)} & \textit{(0.35)} & \textit{(0.28)} & \textit{(0.35)} & \textit{(0.34)} & \textit{(0.44)} \\
-1.50 & 0.90 & 0.85 & 0.83 & 0.88 & 0.85 & 0.91 & 0.86 & 0.94 \\
& \textit{(0.45)} & \textit{(0.27)} & \textit{(0.31)} & \textit{(0.31)} & \textit{(0.28)} & \textit{(0.35)} & \textit{(0.31)} & \textit{(0.41)} \\
2.00 & 0.89 & 0.84 & 0.86 & 0.85 & 0.85 & 0.92 & 0.86 & 0.95 \\
& \textit{(0.44)} & \textit{(0.28)} & \textit{(0.30)} & \textit{(0.30)} & \textit{(0.28)} & \textit{(0.35)} & \textit{(0.30)} & \textit{(0.40)} \\
-2.50 & 0.93 & 0.89 & 0.87 & 0.88 & 0.89 & 0.91 & 0.89 & 0.93 \\
& \textit{(0.46)} & \textit{(0.28)} & \textit{(0.30)} & \textit{(0.30)} & \textit{(0.28)} & \textit{(0.35)} & \textit{(0.30)} & \textit{(0.39)} \\
3.00 & 0.91 & 0.85 & 0.87 & 0.86 & 0.86 & 0.91 & 0.86 & 0.92 \\
& \textit{(0.46)} & \textit{(0.27)} & \textit{(0.30)} & \textit{(0.30)} & \textit{(0.28)} & \textit{(0.35)} & \textit{(0.29)} & \textit{(0.39)} \\
-3.50 & 0.91 & 0.86 & 0.87 & 0.87 & 0.87 & 0.92 & 0.87 & 0.95 \\
& \textit{(0.48)} & \textit{(0.27)} & \textit{(0.30)} & \textit{(0.30)} & \textit{(0.28)} & \textit{(0.35)} & \textit{(0.29)} & \textit{(0.39)} \\
4.00 & 0.89 & 0.86 & 0.87 & 0.87 & 0.86 & 0.90 & 0.84 & 0.92 \\
& \textit{(0.45)} & \textit{(0.26)} & \textit{(0.28)} & \textit{(0.28)} & \textit{(0.27)} & \textit{(0.33)} & \textit{(0.28)} & \textit{(0.36)} \\
\hline\hline
\multicolumn{9}{l}{ Coverage of one-sided 95\% CIs}\\
\hline\hline
-0.50 & 0.72 & 0.62 & 0.48 & 0.82 & 0.63 & 0.75 & 0.89 & 0.94 \\
1.00 & 0.79 & 0.70 & 0.59 & 0.80 & 0.71 & 0.81 & 0.87 & 0.94 \\
-1.50 & 0.87 & 0.79 & 0.79 & 0.82 & 0.80 & 0.87 & 0.87 & 0.92 \\
2.00 & 0.85 & 0.80 & 0.81 & 0.82 & 0.82 & 0.86 & 0.85 & 0.91 \\
-2.50 & 0.89 & 0.84 & 0.84 & 0.86 & 0.85 & 0.88 & 0.86 & 0.91 \\
3.00 & 0.86 & 0.79 & 0.83 & 0.82 & 0.81 & 0.86 & 0.84 & 0.90 \\
-3.50 & 0.88 & 0.82 & 0.85 & 0.85 & 0.83 & 0.88 & 0.85 & 0.91 \\
4.00 & 0.89 & 0.83 & 0.84 & 0.84 & 0.85 & 0.87 & 0.84 & 0.90 \\
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:p500n200cvlambda}
\end{table}
We begin our discussion of the simulation results with Figure \ref{fig:lambdagrid_n200p80s4}, which presents for the case $(n,p,p_0)=(200,80,4)$ a study of how the coverages of the confidence intervals based on the various pivots are affected by the choice of $\lambda_n$ and by the magnitude of the regression coefficients. Each panel of Figure \ref{fig:lambdagrid_n200p80s4} corresponds to one of the $p_0=4$ non-zero regression coefficients, where the magnitude of the coefficients increases from left to right. Each panel shows the coverage over $500$ simulated data sets of the confidence intervals based on the pivots $\mathbf{R}_n^{\text{LQA}}$, $\mathbf{R}_n^{\text{oracle}}$, $\mathbf{R}_n$, $\check \mathbf{R}_n$ (dashed curves), $\mathbf{R}_n^{*}$, and $\check \mathbf{R}_n^{*}$ (dotted curves) plotted against $50$ choices of the tuning parameter $\lambda_n$, increasing from left to right. Also appearing in each panel is a solid curve tracing the proportion of times the true model was selected by the Alasso estimator. The two vertical lines in each panel are positioned at the median choices of $\lambda_n$ when it is selected as the minimizer of the crossvalidation estimate of the prediction error and when the one-standard-error rule is used. We do not show curves for the $CN^{*Q}$ and $CN^{*N}$ intervals in Figure \ref{fig:lambdagrid_n200p80s4}, as they exhibited poorer performance and gave the plots a cluttered appearance.
\par
We see that for small values of $\lambda_n$ the confidence intervals based on all the pivots achieve close-to-nominal coverage. For such small values of $\lambda_n$, however, model selection scarcely occurs. As larger values of $\lambda_n$ are chosen, the coverage of the confidence intervals tends to drop, the drop being more gradual the larger in magnitude the regression coefficient. The confidence intervals based on the perturbation bootstrap pivots $\mathbf{R}_n^{*}$ and $\check \mathbf{R}_n^{*}$, however, are able to sustain nominal coverage for much larger values of $\lambda_n$ than the others, such that they are able to achieve close-to-nominal coverage for the model-selection-optimal choice of $\lambda_n$ for all but the smallest regression coefficient.
\par
Table \ref{tab:p80n200cvlambda} displays the coverage results for the $n > p$ case $(n,p,p_0) = (200,80,4)$ under the crossvalidation choice of $\lambda_n$ using the one-standard-error rule and Tables \ref{tab:p250n150cvlambda} and \ref{tab:p500n200cvlambda} for the $n \leq p $ cases $(n,p,p_0) \in \{(150,250,6),(200,500,8)\}$ under crossvalidation choices of $\tilde \lambda_n$ and $\lambda_n$, where both are chosen using the one-standard-error rule. The median values of the crossvalidation selections of $\tilde \lambda_n$ and $\lambda_n$ under each setting are provided in the table captions in the forms $c_1 \cdot n^{1/2}$ and $c_2 \cdot n^{1/4}$ where $c_1$ and $c_2$ are constants. These correspond to the forms of the theoretical choices of $\tilde \lambda_n$ and $\lambda_n$ under the choice of $\gamma=1$.
In Table \ref{tab:p80n200cvlambda}, we see that under $(n,p,p_0)=(200,80,4)$ the modified perturbation bootstrap intervals based on $\mathbf{R}_n^*$ and $\check \mathbf{R}_n^*$ achieve the closest-to-nominal coverage. The two-sided $\check \mathbf{R}_n^*$ interval achieves sub-nominal coverage for the smallest regression coefficient $\beta_j=-0.50$, as this coefficient was occasionally estimated to be zero, but achieves close-to-nominal coverage for the larger regression coefficients. The coverage of the other intervals is much more dramatically effected by the magnitude of the regression coefficient $\beta_j$, a phenomenon which is even more pronounced in the one-sided coverages; for example, the coverage of the $\check \mathbf{R}_n$ interval rises from $0.36$ for $\beta_1 = -0.50$ to $0.80$ for $\beta_4 = 2.00$. Given that the modified perturbation bootstrap distributions of $\mathbf{R}_n^*$ and $\check \mathbf{R}_n^*$ result in much closer-to-nominal coverages than the Normal approximations to the distributions of $\mathbf{R}_n$ and $\check \mathbf{R}_n$, we may conclude that the sample size is too small for the asymptotically-Normal pivots to have sufficiently approached their limiting distribution; the second-order correctness of the modified perturbation bootstrap is thus apparent.
\par
In the $p > n$ settings, the modified perturbation bootstrap interval based on $\check \mathbf{R}_n^*$ continues to perform well. Under the $(n,p,p_0)=(150,250,6)$ setting, for which Table \ref{tab:p250n150cvlambda} shows the results, the $\check \mathbf{R}_n^*$ interval achieves the nominal coverage across all regression coefficients except for the smallest in magnitude for both two- and one-sided intervals. Here also we see a difference between the performance of the confidence intervals based on $\mathbf{R}_n^*$ and $\check \mathbf{R}_n^*$, owing to the bias correction; the coverage of the $\mathbf{R}_n^*$ interval tends to be sub-nominal for both one- and two-sided intervals. The confidence intervals based on the asymptotic normality of the respective pivot all have sub-nominal coverage for most of the regression coefficients, and their coverages are dramatically affected by the magnitude of the true regression coefficient.
\par
The results are similar for the $(n,p,p_0)=(200,500,8)$ case, for which Table \ref{tab:p500n200cvlambda} shows the results. The only confidence interval which reliably achieves close-to-nominal coverage is the modified perturbation bootstrap interval based on $\check \mathbf{R}_n^*$. We note that the width of the $\check \mathbf{R}_n^*$ interval seems to adapt more to the magnitude of the regression coefficient than the widths of the Normal-based confidence intervals, which remain, with the exception of the $\mathbf{R}_n^{\text{LQA}}$ interval, fairly constant across all magnitudes of $\beta_j$, resulting in poorer coverage for smaller regression coefficients. In contrast, the $\check \mathbf{R}_n^*$ interval is able to achieve nominal coverage even for the smallest values of $\beta_j$ by producing suitably wider confidence intervals.
\par
We see that the modified perturbation bootstrap is able to produce reliable confidence intervals for regression coefficients in the high-dimensional setting under data-based choices of the tuning parameter, and, importantly, under levels of penalization large enough for model selection to occur.
\section{Data analysis}
\label{sec:dataanalysis}
To illustrate the construction of confidence intervals for regression coefficients in the high-dimensional linear regression model using the modified perturbation bootstrap, we present an analysis of the \texttt{riboflavin} data set considered in B\"{u}hlmann et al. (2014), which those authors make publicly available in their supplementary material. The data contains $n=71$ independent records consisting of a response variable which is the logarithm of the riboflavin production rate and of $4088$ gene expression levels in batches of \textit{Bacillis subtilis} bacteria. Of the $4088$, we pre-select $200$ genes by sorting them in order of decreasing empirical variance and keeping the first $200$. We then fit the linear regression model to the data set with $n=71$ and $p=200$ and compute confidence intervals for the regression coefficients selected by the Alasso procedure. The variables selected by our methods were different from those discovered in B\"{u}hlmann et al.~(2014). We choose $\tilde \lambda_n$ and $\lambda_n$ using $10$-fold crossvalidation. Figure \ref{fig:riboflavin1} displays the confidence intervals for the Alasso-selected covariates obtained from the $\mathbf{R}_n^{\text{LQA}}$, $\check \mathbf{R}_n$, $CN^{*N}$, and $\check \mathbf{R}_n^*$ pivots, where $1000$ bootstrap replicates were used for the bootstrap-based intervals.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.75\textwidth]{Riboflavin1.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Confidence intervals based on $\mathbf{R}_n^{\text{LQA}}$ (straight), $\check \mathbf{R}_n$ (wavy), $CN^{*N}$ (jagged), and $\check \mathbf{R}_n^*$ (wiggly) for each of the Alasso selected genes from the \texttt{riboflavin} data set.}
\label{fig:riboflavin1}
\end{figure}
\par
The interval based on the $\mathbf{R}_n^{\text{LQA}}$ pivot (straight line) and the $CN^{*N}$ interval (jagged), are symmetric around the estimated value of the regression coefficient (the $CN^{*N}$ interval is formed by adding and substracting an upper quantile of a Normal distribution with a bootstrap-estimated variance). The intervals based on $\check \mathbf{R}_n$ are asymmetric owing to the bias correction (which is quite small in this example) and, in the case of the $\check \mathbf{R}_n^*$ interval, owing to the bias correction and to the asymmetry of the bootstrap distribution of $\check \mathbf{R}_n^*$. For some of the coefficients, the $\check \mathbf{R}_n^*$ interval is highly asymmetric, suggesting that the distribution of the pivot $\check \mathbf{R}_n$ may still be far from Normal.
\par
\section{Proofs}\label{sec:proofs}
\par
\subsection{Notations}
We denote the true parameter vector as $\bm{\beta}_n = (\beta_{1,n},\dots,\beta_{p,n} )'$, where the subscript $n$ emphasizes that the dimension $p:=p_n$ may grow with the sample size $n$.
Set $\mathcal{A}_n=\{j: \beta_{j,n}\neq 0\}$ and $p_0:=p_{0,n}=|\mathcal{A}_n|$. For simplicity, we shall suppress the subscript $n$ in the notations $p_n$ and $p_{0n}$. Without loss of generality, we shall assume that $\mathcal{A}_n=\{1,\dots,p_0\}$. Let $\bm{C}_n=n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{x}_i\bm{x}'_i$ and partition it according to $\mathcal{A}_n = \{1,\dots,p_0\}$ as
\begin{equation*}
\bm{C}_{n} = \begin{bmatrix}
\bm{C}_{11,n} \;\;\;\bm{C}_{12,n}\\
\bm{C}_{21,n}\;\;\; \bm{C}_{22,n}
\end{bmatrix},
\end{equation*}
where $\bm{C}_{11,n}$ is of dimension $p_0\times p_0$. Define $\tilde{\bm{x}}_i=\bm{C}_n^{-1}\bm{x}_i$ (when $p\leq n$) and $sgn(x) =-1, 0 ,1$ according as $x<0$, $x=0$, $x>0$, respectively. Suppose $\bm{D}_n$ is a known $q\times p$ matrix with $\text{tr}(\bm{D}_n\bm{D}'_n)=O(1)$ and $q$ is not dependent on $n$. Let $\bm{D}_n^{(1)}$ contains the first $p_0$ columns of $\bm{D}_n$.
Define
\begin{align*}
\bm{S}_{n} = \begin{bmatrix}
\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\bm{D}_n^{(1)'}.\sigma^2 \;\;\;\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\bar{\bm{x}}^{(1)}_n.\mu_{3}\\
\bar{\bm{x}}^{(1)'}_n\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\bm{D}_n^{(1)'}.\mu_3\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; (\mu_4-\sigma^4)
\end{bmatrix},
\end{align*}
where $\bar{\bm{x}}_n=n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{x}_i=(\bar{\bm{x}}^{(1)\prime}_n,\bar{\bm{x}}^{(2)\prime}_n)^\prime$, $\sigma^2=\mathbf{Var}(\epsilon_1)=\mathbf{E}(\epsilon_1^2)$, and where $\mu_3$ and $\mu_4$ are, respectively, the third and fourth central moments of $\epsilon_1$. Let $K$ be a positive constant and $r$ be a positive integer $\geq 3$ unless otherwise specified. By $\mathbf{P_*}$ and $\mathbf{E_*}$ we denote, respectively, probability and expectation with respect to the distribution of $G^{*}$ conditional upon the observed data.
\par
Define $\breve{\bm{W}}_n=n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\epsilon_i\bm{x}_i$ and $\breve{\bm{W}}_n^*=n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\epsilon}_i\bm{x}_i(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})$.
Write $\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{(0)}=\breve{\bm{W}}_n$, $\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*(0)}=\breve{\bm{W}}_n^*$, $p^{(0)}=p$, $p^{(1)}=p_0$, and $p^{(2)}=p-p_0$. Define, $\tilde{b}_n=\sigma^{-1}\bm{\Sigma}_n^{-1/2}\bm{b}_n$ when $p\leq n$ and $\tilde{b}_n=\sigma^{-1}\bar{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\bm{b}_n$ when $p> n$. Recall that $\bm{b}_n=\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\bm{s}_n^{(1)}\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}$, where $\bm{D}_n^{(1)}$ and $\bm{C}_{11,n}$ are as defined earlier and $\bm{s}_n^{(1)}$ is a $p_0\times 1$ vector with $j$th element $\text{sgn}(\beta_{j,n})|\beta_{j,n}|^{-\gamma}$.
Note that under the conditions (A.2)(i), (A.3), and (A.6)(i), $||\bm{\Sigma}_n||=O(1)$, $||\bar{\bm{\Sigma}}_n||=O(1)$, $||\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1/2}||=O(1)$ and $||\bm{s}_n^{(1)}||\leq K\sqrt{p_0}.n^{b\gamma}$. Hence, $||\tilde{\bm{b}}_n|| =O(n^{-\delta_1})$.
Define $\check{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}=\breve{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\hat{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}$ and $\check{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}=\breve{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}$ or $\check{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}=\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\hat{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}$ and $\check{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}=\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}$, $i =1,\ldots, n$, according as $p\leq n$ or $p>n$. Here $\breve{\bm{\Sigma}}_n$, $\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_n$, $\hat{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}$ and $\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}$ are as defined in the next section. Also define ${\check{\bm{b}}_n}=\breve{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\bm{D}_n^{(1)} \bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\check{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)}\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}$ when $p\leq n$ and ${\check{\bm{b}}_n}=\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\bm{D}_n^{(1)} \bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\check{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)}\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}$ when $p> n$, where $\check{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)}=(\check{s}_{1n},\ldots, \check{s}_{p_0n})'$ and $\check{s}_{j,n}=sgn(\hat{\beta}_{j,n})|\hat{\beta}_{j,n}|^{-\gamma}$.
\par
We denote by $||\cdot||$ and $||\cdot||_{\infty}$, respectively, the $L^2$ and $L^{\infty}$ norm.
For a non-negative integer-valued vector $\bm{\alpha} = (\alpha_1, \alpha_2,\ldots,\alpha_l)'$ and a function $f = (f_1,f_2,\ldots,f_l):\ \mathscr{R}^l\ \rightarrow \ \mathscr{R}^l$, $l\geq 1$, write $|\bm{\alpha}| = \alpha_1 +\ldots+ \alpha_l$, $\bm{\alpha}! = \alpha_1!\ldots \alpha_l!$, $f^{\bm{\alpha}} = (f_1^{\alpha_1})\ldots(f_l^{\alpha_l})$, and $D^{\bm{\alpha}}f_1 = D_1^{\alpha_1}\ldots D_l^{\alpha_l}f_1$, where $D_jf_1$ denotes the partial derivative of $f_1$ with respect to the $j$th component of the argument, $1\leq j \leq l$.
For $\bm{t} =(t_1,\ldots t_l)'\in \mathscr{R}^l$ and $\bm{\alpha}$ as above, define $t^{\bm{\alpha}} = t_1^{\alpha_1}\ldots t_l^{\alpha_l}$. Let $\bm{\Phi}_V$ denote the multivariate Normal distribution with mean $\mathbf{0}$ and dispersion matrix $\bm{V}$ having $j$th row $\bm{V}_{j.}$ and let $\bm{\phi}_V$ denote the density of $\bm{\Phi}_V$. We write $\bm{\Phi}_V= \bm{\Phi}$ and $\bm{\phi}_V = \bm{\phi}$ when $\bm{V}$ is the identity matrix. Define for any set $B\subseteq \mathcal{R}^p$ and any $\bm{b}\in \mathcal{R}^p$, $B+\bm{b}=\{\bm{a}+\bm{b}:\bm{a}\in B\}$.
\par
Define, $\bm{A}_{1n}=$ $\Big{\{}\big{\{}||\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{(1)}||_{\infty}\leq K\sqrt{\log n}\big{\}}\cap\big{\{}||\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{(2)}||_{\infty} \leq K\sqrt{\log n}\big{\}}\cap \big{\{} ||\sqrt{n}\big(\tilde{\bm{\beta}}-\bm{\beta}\big)||_{\infty}\leq K\sqrt{\log n}\big{\}}\Big{\}}$ for $p\leq n$ and $\bm{A}_{1n}=\Big{\{}\big{\{}||\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{(1)}||_{\infty}\leq K\sqrt{\log n}\big{\}}\cap\big{\{}||\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{(2)}||_{\infty} \leq K\sqrt{\log n}\big{\}}\cap \big{\{} ||\sqrt{n}\big(\tilde{\bm{\beta}}-\bm{\beta}\big)||_{\infty} \leq C.n^{\delta_2}\big{\}}\Big{\}}$ for $p>n$. We have assumed $\mathcal{A}_n=\{1,\ldots$ $,p_0\}$. $\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{(1)}$ and $\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{(2)}$ are respectively first $p_0$ and last $(p-p_0)$ components of $\breve{\bm{W}}_n$.
Note that, $\mathbf{P}(\bm{A}_{1n})\geq 1-O(p.n^{-(r-2)/2})$ for $p\leq n$ and $\mathbf{P}(\bm{A}_{1n})\geq 1-o(n^{-1/2})$ for $p>n$ [cf.Lemma 8.1 of Chatterjee and Lahiri (2013)].\\
Note that, $\check{\bm{b}}_n=O_p(n^{-\delta_1})$, by Lemma \ref{lem:betahat} and \ref{lem:Sigma}, described below. Suppose, $r_1=\min\{a\in \mathcal{N}:||\check{\bm{b}}_n||^{a+1}=o_p(n^{-1/2})\}$, $\mathcal{N}$ being the set of natural numbers. Define the conditional Lebesgue density of two-term Edgeworth expansion of $\bm{R}_{n}^*$ as
\begin{align*}
\xi_n^*(\bm{x})=&\phi(\bm{x})\Bigg[1+\sum_{k=1}^{r_1}\dfrac{1}{k!}\big{\{}\sum_{|\bm{\alpha}|=k}\check{\bm{b}}_n^{\alpha}H_{\bm{\alpha}}(\bm{x})\big{\}}+\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{n}}\bigg[ \dfrac{1}{6}\sum_{|\bm{\alpha}|=3}\bm{t}^{\bm{\alpha}}\bar{\bm{\xi}}_n^{*(1)}({\bm{\alpha}})H_{\bm{\alpha}}(\bm{x})\\
&-\dfrac{1}{2\hat{\sigma}_n^2}\Big{\{}\sum_{|\bm{\alpha}|=1}\bm{t}^{\bm{\alpha}}\bar{\bm{\xi}}_n^{*(3)}({\bm{\alpha}})H_{\bm{\alpha}}(\bm{x})
+\sum_{|\bm{\alpha}|=1}\sum_{|\bm{\zeta}|=2}\bm{t}^{\bm{\alpha}+\bm{\zeta}}\bar{\bm{\xi}}_n^{*(3)}({\bm{\alpha}})\bar{\bm{\xi}}_n^{*(1)}({\bm{\zeta}})H_{\bm{\alpha}+\bm{\zeta}}(\bm{x})\Big{\}}\bigg]\Bigg],
\end{align*}
where $x\in \mathcal{R}^q$, $\bar{\bm{\xi}}_{n}^{*(j)}(\bm{\alpha})=n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\Big(\check{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}\hat{\epsilon}_i^j\Big)^{\bm{\alpha}}$, $j=0,1,\ldots$ and $H_{\bm{\alpha}}(\bm{x})=(-D)^{\bm{\alpha}}\phi(\bm{x})$, where $\phi(\bm{\cdot})$ is the standard normal density on $\mathcal{R}^q$.
\subsection{Preliminary Lemmas} Lemmas necessary for the proofs of the results, are stated in this section, along with their proofs.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:concentration}
Suppose $Y_1,\dots,Y_n$ are zero mean independent r.v.s and $\mathbf{E}(|Y_i|^t)< \infty$ for $i = 1,\dots,n$ and $\sum_{i = 1}^{n}\mathbf{E}(|Y_i|^t) = \sigma_t$; $S_n = \sum_{i = 1}^{n}Y_i$. Then, for any $t\geq 2$ and $x>0$
\begin{equation*}
P[|S_n|>x]\leq C[\sigma_t x^{-t} + exp(-x^2/\sigma_2)]
\end{equation*}
\end{lem}
\textbf{Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:concentration}}.
This inequality was proved in Fuk and Nagaev (1971).
\begin{lem}\label{lem:W}
Under assumptions \emph{(A.1)}, \emph{(A.3)}, \emph{(A.4)(i)} and \emph{(A.5)(i), (ii)} with $r=3$,
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item $\mathbf{P_*}\big(||\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*(1)}||>K\sqrt{p_0\log n}\big)= O_p(p_0.n^{-(r-2)/2})$.
\item $\mathbf{P_*}\big(||\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*(l)}||_{\infty}>K\sqrt{\log n}\big)= O_p(p^{(l)}.n^{-(r-2)/2})$, for $l=0, 1, 2$.
\item $\mathbf{P_*}\big(||\sqrt{n}\big(\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_n^*-\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n\big)||_{\infty}>K\sqrt{\log n}\big)= O_p(p.n^{-(r-2)/2})$, when $p\leq n$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\textbf{Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:W}}.
This lemma follows through the same line of Lemma 8.1 of Chatterjee and Lahiri (2013) and employing Lemma \ref{lem:concentration}, stated above.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:betahatnaive}
Suppose $p$ is fixed. Then under condition \emph{(A.1)(ii)} and \emph{(A.4)(i)} with r=2,
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{P_*}\Big(||\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_n^{*N} - \tilde{\bm{\beta}}_n||=o\big{(}n^{-1/2}(\log n)^{1/2}\big{)}\Big) \geq 1 - o_p\big{(}n^{-1/2}\big{)}
\end{equation*}
\end{lem}
\textbf{Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:betahatnaive}}.
This lemma is proved in Proposition 4.1 of Das and Lahiri (2016).
\begin{lem}\label{lem:betahat}
Suppose assumptions \emph{(A.1)-(A.3)}, \emph{(A.4)(i)}, \emph{(A.5)(i), (ii)} and \emph{(A.6)} hold with $r=4$. Then
\begin{align*}
||\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n-\bm{\beta}_n||_{\infty}=O_p(n^{-1/2})\;\; \text{and on the set } \bm{A}_{1n},\;\; ||\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n^*-\hat{\bm{\beta}}_n||_{\infty}=O_{p_*}(n^{-1/2})
\end{align*}
\end{lem}
\textbf{Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:betahat}}.
This lemma follows from Markov inequality and using the condition $\{n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big|(\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1})_{j.}\bm{x}_{i}^{(1)}\big|^{2r}:1\leq j \leq p_0\} = O(1)$ [stated in assumption (A.1)(ii)], after observing the form of the Alasso estimator obtained in (8.5) of Theorem 8.2 (a) of Chatterjee and Lahiri (2013) and the solution $\hat{\bm{u}}_n^*$ of the equation \ref{eqn:KKTinproofs} obtained in the proof of part (a) of Lemma \ref{lem:Rstarconverge}.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:Sigma}
Under the assumptions \emph{(A.1)-(A.3)}, \emph{(A.4)(i)} and \emph{(A.6)(i)} and \emph{(iii)} with $r=6$, we have
\begin{align*}
&||\hat{\bm{\Sigma}}_n-\bm{\Sigma}_n||=o_p(n^{-(1+\delta_1)/2}),\; ||\check{\bm{\Sigma}}_n-\bar{\bm{\Sigma}}_n||=o_p(n^{-1})\\
&||\breve{\bm{\Sigma}}_n-\sigma^2\bm{\Sigma}_n||,||\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_n-\sigma^2\bar{\bm{\Sigma}}_n||=O_p(n^{-1/2}),
\end{align*}
where $\delta_1$ is as defined in assumption \emph{(A.6)}.
\end{lem}
\textbf{Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:Sigma}}.
First we show that
$||\hat{\Sigma}_n-\Sigma_n||=o_p(n^{-(1+\delta_1)/2})$. Note that by Lemma \ref{lem:betahat}, for $n\geq n_0$ (for some $n_0$),
\begin{align*}
\hat{\bm{\Sigma}}_n-\bm{\Sigma}_n=&n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big(\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}-\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)}\big)\big(\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)}+\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)}\big)'+n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big(\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)}+\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}\big)'\big(\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}-\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)}\big)'
\end{align*}
where on the set on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$ we have
\begin{align*}
\sum_{i=1}^{n}||{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}-\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)}||^2&\leq K^2(\gamma)||\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}||^2.\dfrac{\lambda_n^2}{n^2}\Big(\operatorname*{\max}_{1\leq j \leq p}\sum_{i=1}^{n}|\tilde{x}_{i,j}|^2\Big)||\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n^{(1)}-\bm{\beta}_n^{(1)}||^2.n^{2b(\gamma+2)}\\
& \leq K(\gamma, \delta_1)n^{-(1+2\delta_1)}
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
&n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}||\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)}||^2 + n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}||\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)}||^2 +n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}||\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}||^2\\
& \leq tr\big(\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\big)+K||\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}||^2.\dfrac{\lambda_n^2}{n^2}\Big(\operatorname*{\max}_{1\leq j \leq p}n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}|\tilde{x}_{i,j}|^2\Big)||. p_0 n^{2b(\gamma+1)}\\
& =O(1),
\end{align*}
since $||\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1/2}||^2\leq K \min\{p_0, n^a\}$ and $||\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1/2}||^2\leq q||\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\bm{D}_n^{(1)'}||
$.
Therefore, by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we have $||\hat{\bm{\Sigma}}_n-\bm{\Sigma}_n||=o_p(n^{-(1+\delta_1)/2})$. It follows directly from Lemma \ref{lem:betahat} that $\check{\bm{\Sigma}}_n=\bar{\bm{\Sigma}}_n$ for sufficiently large n. Hence $||\check{\bm{\Sigma}}_n-\bar{\bm{\Sigma}}_n||=o_p(n^{-1})$.
\par
Now to prove the second part, note that for $n\geq n_1$ (for some $n_1$),
\begin{align*}
\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_n-\sigma^2\bar{\bm{\Sigma}}_n=& n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)}\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)'}(\hat{\epsilon}_i^2-\sigma^2)
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
\breve{\bm{\Sigma}}_n-\sigma^2\bm{\Sigma}_n=& n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)}\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)'}(\hat{\epsilon}_i^2-\sigma^2) + n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big(\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}-\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)}\big)\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)'}\hat{\epsilon}_i^2\\ &+n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)}\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)'}(\hat{\epsilon}_i^2-\sigma^2)+n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)}\big(\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}-\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)}\big)'\hat{\epsilon}_i^2\\ &+n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)}\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)'}(\hat{\epsilon}_i^2-\sigma^2) + n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}\big(\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}-\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)}\big)'\hat{\epsilon}_i^2\\
& +n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big(\hat{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}-\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)}\big)\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)'}\hat{\epsilon}_i^2+n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)}\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)'}(\hat{\epsilon}_i^2-\sigma^2).
\end{align*}
Now we need to find the order of the term $||n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)}\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)'}(\hat{\epsilon}_i^2-\sigma^2)||$ to find the order of $||\breve{\bm{\Sigma}}_n-\sigma^2\bm{\Sigma}_n||$, since other terms can be shown to be of smaller order by using H\"older's inequality. Note that by Lemma \ref{lem:concentration}, (A.1)(ii),
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P}\Big(\Big{\{}||\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)}\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)'}(\epsilon_i^2-\sigma^2)||>K. n^{1/2}\Big{\}} \Big)\rightarrow 0\; \text{as}\; K\rightarrow \infty
\end{align*}
and due to Lemma \ref{lem:betahat}, (A.1)(ii) and (A.2)(i) and (ii),
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P}\Big(\Big{\{}||\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)}\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)'}(\hat{\epsilon}_i^2-\epsilon_i^2)||>K.n^{1/2}\Big{\}}\Big)\rightarrow 0\; \text{as}\; K\rightarrow \infty
\end{align*}
Hence, the second part of Lemma \ref{lem:Sigma} follows.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:Rstarconverge}
Let $p\leq n$ and suppose that \emph{(A.1)}--\emph{(A.6)} hold with $r=6$. Then on a set $A_{2n}$ with $\mathbf{P}(\bm{\varepsilon}\in \bm{A}_{2n})\rightarrow 1$, when $\bm{\varepsilon}\in \bm{A}_{2n}$, we have
\begin{itemize}
\item[\emph{(a)}] if $p\leq n$, then
\begin{equation*}
\sup\limits_{B \in \mathcal{C}_q} \big|\mathbf{P_*}(\bm{R}_n^*\in B) - \int_B\xi^*_n(\bm{x})d\bm{x}\big| = o(n^{-1/2}),
\end{equation*}
\item[\emph{(b)}] if $p>n$, $b=0$ and additionally conditions \emph{(A.7)} and \emph{(A.1)(iii)}$'$ (in place of \emph{(A.1)(iii)}) hold, then
\begin{equation*}
\sup\limits_{B \in \mathcal{C}_q} \big|\mathbf{P_*}(\bm{R}_n^*\in B) - \int_B\xi^*_n(\bm{x})d\bm{x}\big| = o(n^{-1/2}).
\end{equation*}
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\textbf{Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:Rstarconverge}}.
The modified perturbation bootstrap Alasso estimator is given by
\begin{align*}
\bm{\hat{\beta}_n^*} = \operatorname*{arg\,min}_{\bm{t}^*}&\Bigg[\sum_{i=1}^{n}(y_i - \bm{x}'_i \bm{t}^*)^2(G^*_i-\mu_{G^*}) \nonumber\\
&+\sum_{i=1}^{n}[\bm{x}'_i(\bm{t}^*-\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n)]^2(2\mu_{G^*}-G_i^*)+\mu_{G^*}\lambda_n\sum_{j=1}^{p}|\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}^*|^{-\gamma}|t_{j,n}^*|\Bigg].
\end{align*}
Now, writing $\bm{\hat{u}}_n^*=\sqrt{n}\big(\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n^*-\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n\big)$, we have
\begin{align}
\bm{\hat{u}}_n^{*}&= \operatorname*{arg\,min}_{\bm{v}^*}\Bigg[\bm{v}^{*\prime}\bm{C}_n\bm{v}^{*} -2\bm{v}^{*\prime}\mu_{G^*}^{-1}\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*}+\lambda_n\sum_{j=1}^{p}|\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}^{*}|^{-\gamma}\Big(|\hat{\beta}_{j,n}+\dfrac{v_{j}^*}{\sqrt{n}}|-|\hat{\beta}_{j,n}|\Big)\Bigg]\nonumber\\\label{eqn:Zn}
&= \operatorname*{arg\,min}_{\bm{v}^*} \bm{Z}_n(\bm{v}^*)\;\;\;\;\; \text{(say)}.
\end{align}
Note that $\bm{Z}_n(\bm{v}^*)$ is convex in $\bm{v}^*$. Hence, the KKT condition is necessary and sufficient. The KKT condition corresponding to (\ref{eqn:Zn}) is given by
\begin{align}\label{eqn:KKTinproofs}
2\bm{C}_n\bm{v}^*-2\mu_{G^*}^{-1}\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*}+\dfrac{\lambda_n}{\sqrt{n}}\breve{\bm{\Gamma}}_n^*\breve{\bm{l}}_n=\bm{0}
\end{align}
for some $\breve{l}_{j,n}\in [-1,1]$ for all $j\in\{1,\ldots,p\}$, where $\breve{\bm{l}}_n=(\breve{l}_{1n},\ldots, \breve{l}_{pn})'$ and $\breve{\bm{\Gamma}}_n^*=diag\big(|\tilde{\beta}_{1n}^{*}|^{-\gamma},$ $\ldots, |\tilde{\beta}_{pn}^{*}|^{-\gamma}\big)$. It is easy to show that on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$, $\Big(\big(\bm{\hat{u}}_n^{*(1)}\big)', \bm{0}'\Big)'$, where $\bm{\hat{u}}_n^{*(1)}=\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\Big[\mu_{G^*}^{-1}\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*(1)}-\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}\Big]$ is the unique solution of (\ref{eqn:KKTinproofs}) and hence $\bm{\hat{u}}_n^{*}=\Big(\big(\bm{\hat{u}}_n^{*(1)}\big)', \bm{0}'\Big)'$, is the unique solution of the minimization problem (\ref{eqn:Zn}), where $\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}=(\tilde{s}_{1n}^*,\ldots, \tilde{s}_{p_0n}^*)$ and $\tilde{s}_{j,n}^*=sgn(\hat{\beta}_{j,n})|\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}^*|^{-\gamma}$.
To prove part (a) note that
\begin{align}\label{eq:rrs}
\hat{\sigma}_n^*\hat \sigma_n^{-1}\bm{R}_n^*&= \breve{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\bm{T}_n^*\\
&=\breve{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{\hat{u}}_n^{*(1)}\nonumber\\
&= \breve{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\Big[\mu_{G^*}^{-1}\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*(1)}-\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}\Big]\nonumber\\
&=\mu_{G^*}^{-1}n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big(\check{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}+\check{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}\big)\hat{\epsilon}_i(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})-\check{\bm{b}}_n+Q_{1n}^*\nonumber\\
&=\bm{T}_{1n}^*-\check{\bm{b}}_n+Q_{1n}^*\;\;\;\; \text(say)
\end{align}
\par
Again note that
\begin{align}
&\mu_{G^*}^2\big[\hat{\sigma}_n^{*2}-\hat{\sigma}_n^2\big]\nonumber\\
=&n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\epsilon}_i^{*2}(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})^2 - n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\epsilon}_i^2\sigma_{G^*}^2\nonumber\\
=&n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\epsilon}_i^2\Big[(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})^2-\sigma_{G^*}^2\Big] +2n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}(\hat{\epsilon}_i^*-\hat{\epsilon}_i)\hat{\epsilon}_i\Big[(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})^2-\sigma_{G^*}^2\Big]\nonumber\\\label{eqn:sigmadiff}
&+2n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}(\hat{\epsilon}_i^*-\hat{\epsilon}_i)\hat{\epsilon}_i\sigma_{G^*}^2 +n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}(\hat{\epsilon}_i^*-\hat{\epsilon}_i)^2(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})^2,
\end{align}
where under condition (A.1), (A.5)(i) and (A.6)(iii) we have that the order of the last three terms in the expression of $\mu_{G^*}^2\big[\hat{\sigma}_n^{*2}-\hat{\sigma}_n^2\big]$ is $o_{p_*}\big(n^{-1/2}(\log n)^{-1/2}\big)$ on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$, whereas
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P_*}\Big(n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\epsilon}_i^2\Big[(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})^2-\sigma_{G^*}^2\Big]>K n^{-1/2}(\log n)^{1/2}\Big)=O(p_0n^{-(r-2)/2}),
\end{align*}
by Lemma \ref{lem:concentration}.\\
Therefore, considering Taylor's expansion of $\hat{\sigma}_n^{*-1}$ around $\hat{\sigma}_n^{-1}$, we have
\begin{align}
\bm{R}_n^*&= \bm{T}_{1n}^*-\check{\bm{b}}_n-\big(2\hat{\sigma}_n^2\big)^{-1} \mu_{G^*}^{-3}Z_{1n}^*\breve{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*(1)}+Q_{2n}^*\nonumber\\ \label{eqn:Rstarexpand}
&= \bm{R}_{1n}^*-\check{\bm{b}}_n+Q_{2n}^*, \;\;\;\; \text{(say)}
\end{align}
where $Z_{1n}^*=n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\epsilon}_i^2\Big[(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})^2-\sigma_{G^*}^2\Big]$ and on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$ we have $||Q_{2n}^*||=o_{p_*}(n^{-1/2})$.
The first three cumulants of $\bm{t}'\bm{R}_{1n}^*$ are given by
$\kappa_1\big(\bm{t}'\bm{R}_{1n}^*\big)=-\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{n}}. \dfrac{1}{2\hat{\sigma}_n^2}\sum_{|\bm{\alpha}|=1}\bm{t}^{\bm{\alpha}}\bar{\bm{\xi}}_n^{*(3)}({\bm{\alpha}}) +o_p(n^{1/2})$
$\kappa_2\big(\bm{t}'\bm{R}_{1n}^*\big)=\mathbf{Var_*}\big(\bm{t}'\bm{R}_{1n}^*\big)=\bm{t}'\bm{t}+o_p(n^{-1/2})$
$\kappa_3\big(\bm{t}'\bm{R}_{1n}^*\big)=\mathbf{E_*}\big(\bm{t}'\bm{R}_{1n}^*\big)^3-3\mathbf{E_*}\big(\bm{t}'\bm{R}_{1n}^*\big)^2. \mathbf{E_*}\big(\bm{t}'\bm{R}_{1n}^*\big)+2\Big(\mathbf{E_*}\big(\bm{t}'\bm{R}_{1n}^*\big)\Big)^3$\\
\hspace*{10mm} $=\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{n}}\bigg[\sum_{|\bm{\alpha}|=3}\bm{t}^{\bm{\alpha}}\bar{\bm{\xi}}_n^{*(1)}({\bm{\alpha}})-\dfrac{3}{\hat{\sigma}_n^2}\sum_{|\bm{\alpha}|=1}\sum_{|\bm{\zeta}|=2}\bm{t}^{\bm{\alpha}+\bm{\zeta}}\bar{\bm{\xi}}_n^{*(3)}({\bm{\alpha}})\bar{\bm{\xi}}_n^{*(1)}({\bm{\zeta}})\Bigg]+o_p(n^{-1/2})$.
Now, using the quadratic form technique of Das and Lahiri (2016), we have on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$
\begin{align*}
\sup\limits_{B \in \mathcal{C}_q} \big|\mathbf{P_*}(\bm{R}_{1n}^*\in B) - \int_B\xi^*_{1n}(\bm{x})d\bm{x}\big| = o(n^{-1/2}),
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align*}
\xi_{1n}^*(\bm{x})=&\phi(\bm{x})\Bigg[1+\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{n}}\bigg[ \dfrac{1}{6}\sum_{|\bm{\alpha}|=3}\bm{t}^{\bm{\alpha}}\bar{\bm{\xi}}_n^{*(1)}({\bm{\alpha}})H_{\bm{\alpha}}(\bm{x})\\
&-\dfrac{1}{2\hat{\sigma}_n^2}\Big{\{}\sum_{|\bm{\alpha}|=1}\bm{t}^{\bm{\alpha}}\bar{\bm{\xi}}_n^{*(3)}({\bm{\alpha}})H_{\bm{\alpha}}(\bm{x})
+\sum_{|\bm{\alpha}|=1}\sum_{|\bm{\zeta}|=2}\bm{t}^{\bm{\alpha}+\bm{\zeta}}\bar{\bm{\xi}}_n^{*(3)}({\bm{\alpha}})\bar{\bm{\xi}}_n^{*(1)}({\bm{\zeta}})H_{\bm{\alpha}+\bm{\zeta}}(\bm{x})\Big{\}}\bigg]\Bigg].
\end{align*}
Now, Lemma \ref{lem:Rstarconverge} part (a) follows by Corollary 2.6 of Bhattacharya and Rao (1986) and noting that $\{B+\bm{b}: B\in \mathcal{C}_q\}=\mathcal{C}_q$ and that
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P}(\bm{R}_{n}^*\in B)&=\mathbf{P}(\bm{R}_{1n}^*\in B+\check{\bm{b}}_n) + o(n^{-1/2})\\
&=\int_{B+\check{\bm{b}}_n}\xi^*_{1n}(\bm{x})d\bm{x} + o(n^{-1/2})\\
&=\int_B\xi^*_{1n}(\bm{x}+\check{\bm{b}}_n)d\bm{x} + o(n^{-1/2})\\
&=\int_{B}\xi^*_{n}(\bm{x})d\bm{x} + o(n^{-1/2}).
\end{align*}
Now for part (b) note that for $n\geq n_0$, on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$ we have
\begin{align}
\hat{\sigma}_n^*\hat \sigma_n^{-1}\bm{R}_n^*&=\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\bm{T}_n^*\nonumber\\
&=\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{\hat{u}}_n^{*(1)}\nonumber\\
&= \tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\Big[\mu_{G^*}^{-1}\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*(1)}-\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}\Big]\nonumber\\
&=\mu_{G^*}^{-1}\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*(1)}-\check{\bm{b}}_n + Q_{3n}^*\;\;\; \text{(say)}\nonumber\\
&=\mu_{G^*}^{-1}n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\check{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}\hat{\epsilon}_i(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})-\check{\bm{b}}_n+Q_{3n}^*\\
&=\bm{T}_{2n}^*-\check{\bm{b}}_n+Q_{3n}^*,\;\;\; \text{(say)}
\end{align}
where $Q_{3n}^*=\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\bm{\Delta}_{n}^{*(1)}+Q_{1n}^*$, where $\bm{\Delta}_n^{*(1)}$ is a $p_0\times 1$ vector with $j$th component
$\lambda_n{n}^{-1/2}\big(\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}^*-\hat{\beta}_{j,n}\big) \gamma \check{s}_{j,n} |\hat{\beta}_{j,n}|^{-1}$ and $Q_{1n}^*$ is as defined in part (a).
Now since $b=0$, by (A.1)(iii)$'$, (A.2)(i), (A.3), Lemma \ref{lem:betahat} and the fact that $||Q_{1n}^*||=o_p(n^{-1/2})$, one can show that on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$,
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P_*}\big(||Q_{3n}^*||>K (p_0\lambda_n n^{-1+\delta_2}+o(n^{-1/2})\big)=o(n^{-1/2}).
\end{align*}
Now since by $(A.6)(i)$, $ p_0\lambda_n n^{-1+\delta_2}=o(n^{-1/2})$, similarly to (\ref{eqn:Rstarexpand}), we have
\begin{align}
\bm{R}_n^*&= \bm{T}_{2n}^*-\check{\bm{b}}_n-\big(2\hat{\sigma}_n^2\big)^{-1} \mu_{G^*}^{-3}Z_{1n}^*\check{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*(1)}+Q_{4n}^*\nonumber\\
&= \bm{R}_{2n}^*-\check{\bm{b}}_n+Q_{4n}^*\;\;\;\; \text{(say)}
\end{align}
where on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$ we have $||Q_{4n}^*||=o_{p_*}(n^{-1/2})$. Therefore, two-term Edgeworth expansions of $\bm{R}_{n}^*$ and $\bm{R}_{2n}^*-\check{\bm{b}}_n$ coincide on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$, by Corollary 2.6 of Bhattachary and Rao (1986). Rest of part (b) of Lemma \ref{lem:Rstarconverge} follows analogously to part (a). \\
\subsection{Proof of Results}
This section contains the proofs of the proposition and theorems.\\
Note that for any $\bm{t}\in \mathcal{R}^p$ and for each $i \in \{1,\ldots,n\}$, $y_i-\bm{x}'_i\bm{t}=\hat{\epsilon}_i+\bm{x}'_i(\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n-\bm{t})$, and hence
\begin{align*}
\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big(y_i-\bm{x}'_i\bm{t}^*\big)^2(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})=&\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big[\bm{x}'_i(\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n-\bm{t})\big]^2(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})\\
&-2(\bm{t}-\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n)'\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*}+\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\epsilon}_i^2(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})^2.
\end{align*}
Therefore,
\begin{align*}
\operatorname*{arg\,min}_{\bm{t}}\bm{L}_1(\bm{t})=\operatorname*{arg\,min}_{\bm{t}}\Big[\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big[\bm{x}'_i(\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n-\bm{t})\big]^2-2\mu_{G^*}^{-1}(\bm{t}-\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n)'\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*}
+c\lambda_n\sum_{j=1}^{p}c_j|t_{j}|^l\Big].
\end{align*}
Again, since $z_i=\bm{x}'_i\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n+\hat{\epsilon}_i\mu_{G^*}^{-1}(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{i=1}^{n}(z_i-\bm{x}'_i\bm{t})^2= \sum_{i=1}^{n}\big[\bm{x}'_i(\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n-\bm{t})\big]^2-2\mu_{G^*}^{-1}(\bm{t}-\bm{\hat{\beta}}_n)'\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*}+\mu_{G^*}^{-2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big[\hat{\epsilon}_i(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})\big]^2.
\end{equation*}
Therefore, Proposition 2.1 follows.\\
\textbf{Proof of Theorem 4.1}. The KKT condition corresponding to the Alasso criterion function, defined in MTC(11), is
\begin{align*}
2\bm{C}_n^*\bm{w}_n^*-2\bm{W}_n^{*}+\dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{\sqrt{n}}\bm{\Gamma}_n^*\bm{l}_n=\bm{0},
\end{align*}
for some $\bm{l}_n=(l_{1n},\ldots, l_{pn})'$ with $l_{j,n}\in [-1,1]$ for $j=1,\ldots,p$ and $\bm{\Gamma}_n^*=\text{diag}\big(|\tilde{\beta}_{1n}^{*N}|^{-\gamma},$ $\ldots, |\tilde{\beta}_{pn}^{*N}|^{-\gamma}\big)$. This KKT condition can be rewritten through the vector $\bm{w}^*=\big{(}\bm{w}_n^{*(1)\prime}, \bm{w}_n^{*(2)\prime}\big{)}^{\prime}$ as
\begin{align}\label{eqn:NKKT1}
2\bm{C}_{11,n}^*\bm{w}_n^{*(1)}+2\bm{C}_{12,n}^*\bm{w}^{*(2)}_n-2\bm{W}_n^{*(1)}+\dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{\sqrt{n}}\bm{\Gamma}_n^{*(1)}\bm{l}_n^{(1)}=\bm{0}
\end{align}
and for each $j\in \{p_0+1,\dots,p\}$
\begin{align}\label{eqn:NKKT2}
-\dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{2\sqrt{n}}|\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}^{*N}|^{-\gamma}\leq \Big[\big(\bm{C}_{21,n}^*\big)_{j.}\bm{w}_{n}^{*(1)}+\big(\bm{C}_{22,n}^*\big)_{j.}\bm{w}_{n}^{*(2)}-{W}_{j,n}^{*}\Big]\leq \dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{2\sqrt{n}}|\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}^{*N}|^{-\gamma}.
\end{align}
Here, $\bm{W}_n^*=n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\epsilon}_i\bm{x}_iG_i^*$, $\bm{W}_n^{*(1)}$ is the vector of the first $p_0$ components of $\bm{W}_n^*$, $W_{j,n}^*$ is the $j$th component of $\bm{W}_n^*$ for $j \in \{1,\dots,p\}$, $\bm{l}_n^{(1)}=(l_{1n},\ldots, l_{p_0n})'$ with $l_{k,n}\in [-1,1]$ for $k=1,\ldots,p_0$ and $\bm{\Gamma}_n^{*(1)}=\text{diag}\big(|\tilde{\beta}_{1n}^{*N}|^{-\gamma},\ldots,$ $ |\tilde{\beta}_{p_0n}^{*N}|^{-\gamma}\big)$ and $\bm{C}_n^*=n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{x}_i\bm{x}_i^\prime G_i^*=\begin{bmatrix}
\bm{C}_{11,n}^* \;\;\; \bm{C}_{12,n}^*\\
\bm{C}_{21,n}^*\;\;\; \bm{C}_{22,n}^*
\end{bmatrix}$
where $\bm{C}_{11,n}^*$ is of dimension $p_0\times p_0$. $\big{(}\bm{C}_{21,n}^*\big{)}_{j\cdot}$ is the $j$th row of $\bm{C}_{21,n}^*$, $j\in \{p_0+1,\dots,p\}$.
Now, to prove part $(a)$ of Theorem 4.1, it is enough to show that $\big{(}\bm{u}_{n2}^{*N\prime},\bm{0}^\prime\big{)}^\prime$ satisfies (\ref{eqn:NKKT1}) and (\ref{eqn:NKKT2}) separately with bootstrap probability $1-o_p(n^{-1/2})$. The vector $\bm{u}_{n2}^{*N}$ is defined as $\bm{u}_{n2}^{*N}=\bm{C}_{11,n}^{*-1}\Big{[}\bm{W}_n^{*(1)}-\dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{\sqrt{n}}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*N(1)}\Big{]}$, where the $j$th component of $\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*N(1)}$ is equal to $\text{sgn}(\hat{\beta}_{j,n})|\tilde{\beta}_{jn}^{*N}|^{-\gamma}$, $j\in \{1,\dots,p_0\}$.
Note that $\big{(}\bm{u}_{n2}^{*N\prime},\bm{0}^\prime\big{)}^\prime$ exactly satisfies (\ref{eqn:NKKT1}) if $\bm{l}_n^{(1)}=\big{(}\text{sgn}(\hat{\beta}_{1,n}),\dots,\hat{\beta}_{p_0,n})\big{)}$. Thus we can conclude that $\big{(}\bm{u}_{n2}^{*N\prime},\bm{0}^\prime\big{)}^\prime$ satisfies (\ref{eqn:NKKT1}) with bootstrap probability $1-o_p$ $(n^{-1/2})$, if we can show that $\Big{|}\Big{|}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{*-1}\Big{[}\bm{W}_n^{*(1)}-\dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{\sqrt{n}}\bm{\Gamma}_n^{*(1)}\bm{l}_n^{(1)}\Big{]}\Big{|}\Big{|}=o(n^{1/2})$ with bootstrap probability $1-o_p(n^{-1/2})$. Under the assumptions (A.1)(ii) and (A.4)(i) with $r=4$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eqn:Cstar}
\mathbf{P_*}&\big(||\bm{C}_{11,n}^*-\bm{C}_{11,n}\mu_{G^*}||>K.p_0.n^{-1/2}.(\log n)^{1/2}\big) \nonumber\\ &\leq \sum_{j,k=1}^{p_0}\mathbf{P_*}\big(\big|\sum_{i=1}^{n}x_{ij}x_{ik}(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})\big|>K.n^{-1/2}.(\log n)^{1/2}\big) \nonumber\\
&=o(n^{-1/2})
\end{align}
on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$ and
\begin{align*}
\mu_{G^*}^{-1}\mathbf{E_*}(\bm{W}_n^{*(1)})=n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{x}_i^{(1)}\hat{\epsilon}_i=&\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}\Big{(}\text{sgn}({\beta_{1,n}})|\tilde{\beta}_{1,n}|^{-\gamma},\dots,\text{sgn}({\beta_{p_0,n}})|\tilde{\beta}_{p_0,n}|^{-\gamma}\Big{)}^\prime\\ = &\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)} \text{(say)},
\end{align*}
where on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$, $|\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}|^{-\gamma}$ is bounded for all $j\in \{1,\dots,p_0\}$ and $n^{-1/2}\lambda_n\rightarrow 0$. These facts along with Proposition \ref{lem:betahatnaive} imply that on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P_*}\bigg(\bm{C}_{11,n}^{*-1}\Big{[}\bm{W}_n^{*(1)}-\dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{\sqrt{n}}\bm{\Gamma}_n^{*(1)}\bm{l}_n^{(1)}\Big{]}=o(n^{1/2})\bigg)=1-o(n^{-1/2}).
\end{align*}
Now, note that on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P_*}&\Big(\max_{j}\big{\{}||(\bm{C}_{21,n}^*)_{j\cdot}-(\bm{C}_{21,n})_{j\cdot}\mu_{G^*}||: j\in\{p_0+1,\dots,p\}\big{\}}>K.p_0^{1/2}.n^{-1/2}.(\log n)^{1/2}\Big)\\ &\leq \sum_{k=1}^{p_0}\sum_{j=p_0+1}^{p}\mathbf{P_*}\Big(\big|\sum_{i=1}^{n}x_{ij}x_{ik}(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})\big|>K.n^{-1/2}.(\log n)^{1/2}\Big)\\
&=o(n^{-1/2}),
\end{align*}
and due to Lemma \ref{lem:betahatnaive},
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P_*}\Big{(}\min_{j}\big{\{}|\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}^{*N}|^{-\gamma}:j\in \{p_0+1,\dots,p\}\big{\}}> K.n^{\gamma/2}(\log n)^{-\gamma/2}\Big{)}=1-o_p(n^{-1/2}).
\end{align*}
Again for $j\in \{p_0+1,\dots,p\}$,
\begin{align*}
W_{jn}^*=&n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\epsilon}_ix_{ij}(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*}) + \mu_{G^*}.n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}x_{ij}\epsilon_i\\
&- \mu_{G^*}\Big(n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}x_{ij}\bm{x}_i^{(1)}\Big)^\prime\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\Big[n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\epsilon_i\bm{x}_i^{(1)}-\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)}\Big]
\end{align*}
Since, $\bm{C}_n\rightarrow \bm{C}$, a pd matrix, and $\max\{\lambda_n, \lambda_n^{*}\}.(\log n/n)^{1/2}\rightarrow 0$, we have
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P_*}\Big{(}|W_{jn}^*|> K.(\log n)^{1/2}\Big{)}=1-o_p(n^{-1/2}).
\end{align*}
Hence due to $\min\{\lambda_n, \lambda_n^{*}\}.(\log n)^{-(\gamma+1)/2}.n^{(\gamma-1)/2}\rightarrow \infty$, we have on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P_*}\bigg(\big{(}\bm{u}_{n2}^{*N\prime},\bm{0}^\prime\big{)}^\prime\; \text{satisfies}\; (\ref{eqn:NKKT2})\bigg)=1-o_p(n^{-1/2}).
\end{align*}
Therefore part $(a)$ of Theorem 4.1 follows.
Now for part $(b)$, note that since $n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{x}_i^{(1)}\hat{\epsilon}_i=\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}\Big{(}\text{sgn}({\beta_{1,n}})|\tilde{\beta}_{1,n}|^{-\gamma},\dots,$ $\text{sgn}({\beta_{p_0,n}})$ $|\tilde{\beta}_{p_0,n}|^{-\gamma}\Big{)}^\prime = \dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)}$ (say), so due to (\ref{eqn:Cstar}) and the fact that $n^{-1/2}.$ $(\log n)^{1/2}$ $.\lambda_n\rightarrow 0$, it follows that on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$,
\begin{align} \label{eq:mtdiff}
\mathbf{P}_*\bigg{(}\sqrt{n}\Big{|}\Big{|}\big{(}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{*-1}-\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\mu_{G^*}^{-1}\big{)}n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{x}_i^{(1)}\hat{\epsilon}_i\Big{|}\Big{|}_{\infty}= o\big{(}1\big{)}\bigg{)}=1-o(n^{-1/2}).
\end{align}
Again, as $\bm{C}_n\rightarrow \bm{C}$ for some $p\times p$ positive definite matrix $\bm{C}$ and $\mathbf{P}\Big(||\tilde{\bm{\beta}}_n - \bm{\beta}||=O\big{(}n^{-1/2}$ $(\log n)^{1/2}\big{)}\Big) \geq 1 - o\big({n^{-1/2}}\big)$, we have $\mathbf{P}\Big{(}\bm{A}_{1n}\cap \bm{A}_{1n}^{\epsilon}$\Big{)} $\rightarrow 1$ for $A_{1n}^{\epsilon}=\{\lambda_n||\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}$ $\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)}|| > \epsilon^{-1}\}$ for any $\epsilon>0$. Hence, on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}\cap \bm{A}_{1n}^{\epsilon}$ we have
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P_*}\Big{(}Z_n^*> \epsilon\Big{)}=o_{p}\big(n^{-1/2}\big).
\end{align*}
Therefore part $(b)$ follows.
Now to prove part (c), It is enough to show
\begin{align}\label{eq:r}
\sup\limits_{\bm{x}\in \mathcal{R}^{p_0}}\Big{|}\mathbf{P_*}\big{(}\bm{F}_n^{*(1)}\leq \bm{x}\big{)}-\mathbf{P}\big{(}\bm{F}_n^{(1)} \leq \bm{x}\big{)}\Big{|} \geq K. \dfrac{\lambda_n}{\sqrt{n}}\; \text{for some}\; K>0.
\end{align}
where $\bm{F}_n^{*(1)}$ and $\bm{F}_n^{(1)}$ are sub vectors of $\bm{F}_n^{*}$ and $\bm{F}_n$ respectively, comprising of first $p_0$ components. Note that
\begin{align*}
\bm{F}_n^{*(1)}&=\bm{C}_{11,n}^{*-1}\Big{[}\bm{W}_n^{*(1)}-\dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{\sqrt{n}}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*N(1)}\Big{]}\\
&= \bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\mu_{G^*}^{-1}\Big{[}\bm{W}_n^{*(1)}-\dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{\sqrt{n}}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*N(1)}\Big{]} + \big{(}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{*-1}-\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\mu_{G^*}^{-1}\big{)}\Big{[}\bm{W}_n^{*(1)}-\dfrac{\lambda_n^*}{\sqrt{n}}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*N(1)}\Big{]}\\
&= \breve{F}_n^{*(1)} + \breve{\bm{R}}_{1n}^*\;\; \text{(say)}
\end{align*}
where $\bm{W}_n^{*(1)}= n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\epsilon}_i\bm{x}_i(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*})+n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\epsilon}_i\bm{x}_i\mu_{G^*}$ with $n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\bm{x}_i^{(1)}\hat{\epsilon}_i=\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)}$. Hence due to the fact that $\max\{\lambda_n,\lambda_n^*\}.n^{-1/2}\rightarrow 0$ and $\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*N(1)}$ \& $\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)}$ are bounded in respective probabilities, it follows from Lemma \ref{lem:concentration} that
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P}_*\bigg{(}\big{|}\big{|}\breve{\bm{R}}_{1n}^*\big{|}\big{|}\leq c_n .n^{-1/2}\bigg{)}=1-o_p(1)
\end{align*}
where $\{c_n\}$ is a sequence of positive constants increasing to $\infty$ with $c_n = o(\sqrt{\log n})$.
Now write $\breve{\bm{F}}_n^{*(1)}=\tilde{\bm{F}}_n^{*(1)}+\tilde{\bm{Ad}}_n^{(1)}$, where $\tilde{\bm{Ad}}_n^{(1)}=\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\hat{\epsilon}_i\bm{x}_i^{(1)}$. Now similar to (\ref{eq:rrs}), it can be shown that for sufficiently large $n$,
\begin{align*}
&\bm{F}_n^{(1)} = n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big(\tilde{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}+\tilde{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}\big)\epsilon_i +\tilde{\bm{R}}_{2n}\\
&\tilde{\bm{F}}_n^{*(1)} = \mu_{G^*}^{-1}n^{-1/2}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big(\tilde{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}\hat{\epsilon}_i+\tilde{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}\bar{\epsilon}_i\big)(G_i^*-\mu_{G^*}) +\tilde{\bm{R}}_{2n}^*
\end{align*}
where $\mathbf{P}\bigg{(}\big{|}\big{|}\tilde{\bm{R}}_{2n}\big{|}\big{|}= o(n^{-1/2})\bigg{)}=1-o(1)$ and $\mathbf{P}_*\bigg{(}\big{|}\big{|}\tilde{\bm{R}}_{2n}^*\big{|}\big{|} = o(n^{-1/2})\bigg{)}=1-o_p(1)$. Here, $\tilde{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)} = \bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\bm{x}_i^{(1)}$, $\tilde{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)} = \bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\tilde{\eta}_i$ with $j$ th component \big{[}$j\in\mathcal{A} = \{k:\beta_j\neq 0\}$\big{]} of $\tilde{\eta}_i$ is $\Big(\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2n}\tilde{x}_{i,j}\dfrac{\gamma}{|\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}|^{\gamma+1}}sgn(\hat{\beta}_{j,n})\Big)$. Here we have assumed without loss of generality that $\mathcal{A}=\{1,\dots,p_0\}$. and $\hat{\epsilon}_i$ and $\bar{\epsilon}_i$ are respectively Alasso and OLS residuals.
Then by Berry-Essen Theorem and Lemma 3.1 of Bhattacharya and Rao (1986), we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:rrp}
&\sup\limits_{\bm{x}\in \mathcal{R}^{p_0}}\Big{|}\mathbf{P}\big{(}\bm{F}_n^{(1)}\leq \bm{x}\big{)}-\bm{\Phi}_{\bm{V}_n}(\bm{x})\Big{|}= O(n^{-1/2})\nonumber\\
\text{and}\;\;&\sup\limits_{\bm{x}\in \mathcal{R}^{p_0}}\Big{|}\mathbf{P_*}\big{(}\tilde{\bm{F}}_n^{*(1)}+\breve{\bm{R}}_{1n}^*\leq \bm{x}\big{)}-\bm{\Phi}_{\tilde{\bm{V}}_n}(\bm{x})\Big{|}= O_p(c_n. n^{-1/2})
\end{align}
where $\bm{V}_n = n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big(\tilde{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}+\tilde{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}\big)^\prime\big(\tilde{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}+\tilde{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}\big)\sigma^2$ and $\tilde{\bm{V}}_n = n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\big(\tilde{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}\hat{\epsilon}_i+\tilde{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}\bar{\epsilon}_i\big)^\prime$ $\big(\tilde{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}\hat{\epsilon}_i+\tilde{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}\bar{\epsilon}_i\big)$. Now similar to Lemma \ref{lem:Sigma}, it can be shown that $\Big{|}\Big{|}\tilde{\bm{V}}_n - \bm{V}_n\Big{|}\Big{|} = o_p(c_n.n^{-1/2})$ with $c_n$, as defined earlier.
Hence by Turnbull (1930) and noting (14.66) of Lemma 14.6 of Bhattacharya and Rao (1986) and the facts that $\tilde{\bm{V}}_n=O_p(1)$ \& $\bm{V}_n=O(1)$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:rr}
\sup\limits_{\bm{x}\in \mathcal{R}^{p_0}}\Big{|}\bm{\Phi}_{\tilde{\bm{V}}_n}(\bm{x})-\bm{\Phi}_{\bm{V}_n}(\bm{x})\big{)}\Big{|}\leq \Big{|}\Big{|}\tilde{\bm{V}}_n - \bm{V}_n\Big{|}\Big{|} = o_p(c_n.n^{-1/2})
\end{align}
Therefore by (\ref{eq:rrp}) and (\ref{eq:rr}) and noting that $c_n = o(\sqrt{\log n})$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:rrq}
&\sup\limits_{\bm{x}\in \mathcal{R}^{p_0}}\Big{|}\mathbf{P_*}\big{(}\tilde{\bm{F}}_n^{*(1)}+\breve{\bm{R}}_{1n}^*\leq \bm{x}\big{)} - \mathbf{P}\big{(}\bm{F}_n^{(1)}\leq \bm{x}\big{)}\Big{|}= o_p(\lambda_n. n^{-1/2})
\end{align}
Now defining $\bm{Ad}_n^{(1)}=\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}\bm{s}_n^{(1)}$, by (\ref{eq:rrp}), (\ref{eq:rrq}) and Taylor expansion, we have for any $\bm{x}\in \mathcal{R}^{p_0}$,
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P_*}\big{(}\bm{F}_n^{*(1)}\leq \bm{x}\big{)}&=\mathbf{P_*}\Big{(}\tilde{\bm{F}}_n^{*(1)}+\breve{\bm{R}}_{1n}^*+\tilde{\bm{Ad}}_n^{(1)}\leq \bm{x}\Big{)}\\
&=\mathbf{P}\Big{(}\bm{F}_n^{(1)}\leq \bm{x}-\bm{Ad}_n^{(1)}+O(n^{-1/2})\Big{)} + o_p(\lambda_n.n^{-1/2})\\
&=\bm{\Phi}_{\bm{V}_n}\Big{(}\bm{x}-\bm{Ad}_n^{(1)}+O(n^{-1/2})\Big{)} +O(n^{-1/2}) + o_p(\lambda_n.n^{-1/2})\\
&=\bm{\Phi}_{\bm{V}_n}(\bm{x}) - \dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}\Big{[}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)\prime}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}(D_1,\dots,D_{p})^{\prime}\Phi_{\bm{V}_n}(\tilde{\bm{x}})\Big{]}+ o_p(\lambda_n.n^{-1/2})\\
&=\mathbf{P}\Big{(}\bm{F}_n^{(1)}\leq \bm{x}\Big{)} - \dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}\Big{[}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{(1)\prime}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}(D_1,\dots,D_{p})^{\prime}\Phi_{\bm{V}_n}(\tilde{\bm{x}})\Big{]}+ o_p(\lambda_n/\sqrt{n})
\end{align*}
for some $\tilde{\bm{x}}$ with $||\tilde{\bm{x}}-\bm{x}||\leq ||\bm{Ad}_n^{(1)}||$.
Therefore (\ref{eq:r}) follows from the triangle inequality and the fact that $\sup\limits_{\bm{x}\in \mathcal{R}^{p_0}}[f(\bm{x})+g(\bm{x})]\leq \sup\limits_{\bm{x}\in \mathcal{R}^{p_0}}f(\bm{x})+\sup\limits_{\bm{x}\in \mathcal{R}^{p_0}}g(\bm{x})$.\\
\textbf{Proof of Theorem 5.1}. By Lemma \ref{lem:Rstarconverge} we have
\begin{equation}
\sup\limits_{B \in \mathcal{C}_q} \big|\mathbf{P_*}(\bm{R}_n^*\in B) - \int_B\xi^*_n(\bm{x})d\bm{x}\big| = o_p(n^{-1/2}).
\end{equation}
Now, retracting the steps of Lemma \ref{lem:Rstarconverge} and using the fact that $||\hat{\bm{\Sigma}}_n-\bm{\Sigma}_n||=o_p(n^{-(1+\delta_1)/2})$ [cf. Lemma \ref{lem:Sigma}], it can be shown that
\begin{equation}
\sup\limits_{B \in \mathcal{C}_q} \big|\mathbf{P}(\bm{R}_n\in B) - \int_B\xi_n(\bm{x})d\bm{x}\big| = o(n^{-1/2}),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align*}
\xi_n(\bm{x})=&\phi(\bm{x})\Bigg[1+\sum_{k=1}^{r}\dfrac{1}{k!}\big{\{}\sum_{\bm{\alpha}=k}\tilde{\bm{b}}_n^{\alpha}H_{\bm{\alpha}}(\bm{x})\big{\}}+\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{n}}\bigg[ -\dfrac{\mu_3}{2\sigma^3}\sum_{|\bm{\alpha}|=1}\bm{t}^{\bm{\alpha}}\bar{\bm{\xi}}_n({\bm{\alpha}})H_{\bm{\alpha}}(\bm{x})\\
&+\dfrac{\mu_3}{6\sigma^3}\Big{\{}\sum_{|\bm{\alpha}|=3}\bm{t}^{\bm{\alpha}}\bar{\bm{\xi}}_n({\bm{\alpha}})H_{\bm{\alpha}}(\bm{x})-3\sum_{|\bm{\alpha}|=3}\sum_{|\bm{\zeta}|=1}\bm{t}^{\bm{\alpha}+\bm{\zeta}}\bar{\bm{\xi}}_n({\bm{\alpha}})\bar{\bm{\xi}}_n({\bm{\zeta}})H_{\bm{\alpha}+\bm{\zeta}}(\bm{x})\Big{\}}\bigg]\Bigg],
\end{align*}
where $x\in \mathcal{R}^q$, $\bar{\bm{\xi}}_{n}(\bm{\alpha})=n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\Big(\bm{\Sigma}_n^{-1/2}\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)}\Big)^{\bm{\alpha}}$. For details see the proof of Theorem 8.2 of Chatterjee and Lahiri (2013).
Now due to assumption (A.6)(i), Lemma \ref{lem:betahat} and Lemma \ref{lem:Sigma} and the facts that $||\bm{b}_n||=O(n^{-\delta_1})$ and $||\check{\bm{b}}_n||=O_p(n^{-\delta_1})$, the coefficients of $n^{-1/2}$ in $\xi^*_n(\bm{x})$ converge to those of $\xi_n(\bm{x})$ in probability and $||\tilde{\bm{b}}_n^{\bm{\alpha}}-\check{\bm{b}}_n^{\bm{\alpha}}||=o(n^{-1/2})$, for all $\bm{\alpha}$ such that $|\bm{\alpha}|\leq r_1$. Therefore Theorem 5.1 follows.\\
\textbf{Proof of Theorem 5.2}. By Lemma \ref{lem:Rstarconverge}, on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$, we have for $n>n_1$, $\hat{\mathcal{A}}_n=\mathcal{A}_n^*$ and
\begin{align}
\bm{T}_n^*+\breve{\bm{b}}_n^*
&= \bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\Big[\mu_{G^*}^{-1}\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*(1)}-\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}\Big]+\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\hat{s}_n^{*(1)}\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}\nonumber\\
&=\mu_{G^*}^{-1}\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*(1)}+\dfrac{\lambda_n}{2\sqrt{n}}\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\big(\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}-\hat{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}\big)\nonumber\\\label{eqn:Tstarplusbstar}
&=\mu_{G^*}^{-1}\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*(1)}+Q_{4n}^*,\;\;\;\; \text(say)
\end{align}
where the $j$th element of $\hat{s}_n^{*(1)}$ is $sgn\big(\hat{\beta}_{j,n}^*\big)|\tilde{\beta}_{j,n}^*|^{-\gamma}$. Now since $||\hat{\bm{\beta}}_n^*-\hat{\bm{\beta}}_n||_{\infty}=O_{p_*}(n^{-1/2})$ on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$, one can conclude that on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$, $\mathbf{P_*}\big(\tilde{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)} = \hat{\bm{s}}_n^{*(1)}\big)=1$ for sufficiently large $n$. Hence we can conclude that $\mathbf{P_*}\big(||Q_{4n}^*||\neq 0\big)=o(n^{-1})$.
Now expansion and error bounds of the quantity $\big[\check{\sigma}_n^{*2}-\check{\sigma}_n^2\big]$, similar to (\ref{eqn:sigmadiff}), hold. Thus by Taylor's expansion of $\check{\sigma}_n^*$ around $\check{\sigma}_n$ and by (\ref{eqn:Tstarplusbstar}), one has
\begin{align}
\check{\bm{R}}_n^* &=\mu_{G^*}^{-1}\tilde{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\bm{D}_n^{(1)}\bm{C}_{11,n}^{-1}\breve{\bm{W}}_n^{*(1)}\Big[1-\dfrac{1}{2\hat{\sigma}_n^2}(\hat{\sigma}_n^*-\hat{\sigma}_n)+\dfrac{3}{4\hat{\sigma}_n^4}\dfrac{(\hat{\sigma}_n^*-\hat{\sigma}_n)^2}{2}\Big] +Q_{5,n}^*\nonumber\\
&=\bm{R}_{3n}^*+Q_{5n}^*,\;\;\; \text{(say)}
\end{align}
where on the set $\bm{A}_{1n}$,
\begin{align*}
\mathbf{P_*}\big(||Q_{5n}^*||=o(n^{-1}) \big)=o(n^{-1}).
\end{align*}
Thus by Corollary 2.6 of Bhattacharya and Rao (1986), the Edgeworth expansions of $\bm{R}_{3n}^*$ and $\check{\bm{R}}_{n}^*$ agree up to order $o(n^{-1})$. Now, similarly to Lemma \ref{lem:Rstarconverge}, using the transformation technique of Bhattacharya and Ghosh (1978), one can obtain the three-term Edgeworth expansion of $\bm{R}_{3n}^*$, say $\pi^*_n(\bm{x})$, which will contain terms involving $n^{-1}$ as well as $n^{-1/2}$.
The coefficients in $\pi^*_n(\bm{x})$ will involve $\check{\sigma}_n^2$, $\mu_{G^*}$, $\mathbf{E_*}(G_1^*-\mu_{G^*})^4$, $\bar{\bm{\xi}}_{n}^{*(j)}(\bm{\alpha})=n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\Big(\check{\bm{\xi}}_i^{(0)}\hat{\epsilon}_i^j\Big)^{\bm{\alpha}}$ (for $j=1,3$) and $\bar{\bm{\eta}}_{n}^{*(j)}(\bm{\alpha})=n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\Big(\check{\bm{\eta}}_i^{(0)}\hat{\epsilon}_i^j\Big)^{\bm{\alpha}}$ (for $j=1,3$), where $\bm{\alpha}\in\mathcal{N}^q$ such that $|\bm{\alpha}|=1,\ldots,4$. Similarly, one can construct a three-term Edgeworth expansion of $\breve{\bm{R}}_n$, say $\pi_n(\bm{x})$, which will involve $\sigma^2$, $\mu_3$, $\mu_4$, $\tilde{\bm{\xi}}_{n}(\bm{\alpha})=n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\Big(\bar{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\bm{\xi}_i^{(0)}\Big)^{\bm{\alpha}}$, and $\tilde{\bm{\eta}}_n(\bm{\alpha})=n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n}\Big(\bar{\bm{\Sigma}}_n^{-1/2}\bm{\eta}_i^{(0)}\Big)^{\bm{\alpha}}$, $j=1,3$ and $\bm{\alpha}\in\mathcal{N}^q$ such that $|\bm{\alpha}|=1,\ldots,4$, in the coefficients of $n^{-l/2}$, $l=1,2$. It is easy to see that the coefficient of $n^{-1/2}$ in $\pi_n(\bm{x})$ and $\pi^*_n(\bm{x})$ match with that in $\xi_{1n}$ and $\xi_{1n}^*$ respectively, where $\xi_{1n}^*$ is as defined in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem:Rstarconverge} and $\xi_{1n}(\bm{x})=\xi_{n}(\bm{x})-\sum_{k=1}^{r}\dfrac{1}{k!}\big{\{}\sum_{\bm{\alpha}=k}\tilde{\bm{b}}_n^{\alpha}H_{\bm{\alpha}}(\bm{x})\big{\}}\phi(\bm{x})$ with $\xi_{n}(\bm{x})$ being defined as in Theorem 5.1 after replacing $\bm{\Sigma}_n$ with $\bar{\bm{\Sigma}}_n$. Now due to the conditions (A.1)--(A.6) with $r=8$, $(\check{\sigma}_n^2-\sigma_n^2)=O_p(n^{-1/2})$ and $||\tilde{\Sigma}_n-\sigma^2\Sigma_n||=O_p(n^{-1/2})$ [Lemma \ref{lem:Sigma}] and the fact that $||\tilde{\Sigma}_n^{-1/2}-\sigma^{-1}\Sigma_n^{-1/2}||\leq K.||\tilde{\Sigma}_n-\sigma^2\Sigma_n||$ [cf. Turnbull (1930)], the coefficient of $n^{-1/2}$ in $\xi^*_{1n}(\bm{x})$ converges to that of $\xi_{1n}(\bm{x})$ [Similarly as in the proof of Theorem 5.1], whereas the coefficients of $n^{-1}$ in $\pi^*_n(\bm{x})$ and $\pi_n(\bm{x})$ are bounded in respective probabilities. Therefore, theorem 5.2 follows.\\
\textbf{Proof of Theorem 5.3}. The first part follows by Lemma \ref{lem:Rstarconverge} (b) and retracing the proof of Theorem 5.1. And the second part follows analogously to the proof of Theorem 5.2.\\
\textbf{Proof of Theorem 5.4 and 5.5}. The first part follows by Lemma \ref{lem:Rstarconverge} (b) with the use of Hoeffding's and Bernstein's inequality in place of Lemma \ref{lem:concentration} and retracing the proof of Theorem 5.1. And the second part follows analogously to the proof of Theorem 5.2.
\section{Conclusion} \label{sec:1.777}
Second order results of Perturbation Bootstrap method in Alasso are established. It is shown that the naive perturbation bootstrap of Minnier et al. (2011) is not sufficient for correcting the distribution of the Alasso estimator upto second order. Novel modification is proposed in bootstrap objective function to achieve second order correctness even in high dimension. The modification is also shown to be computationally efficient. Thus, in a way the results in this paper establish perturbation bootstrap method as a significant refinement of the approximation of the exact distribution of the Alasso estimator over oracle normal approximation. This is an important finding from the perspective of valid inferences regarding the regression parameters based on adaptive lasso estimator.
|
\section{Introduction}
The three dimensional Navier-Stokes equations (3D NSE) are
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}\label{eq:NSE}
\partial_t v -\Delta v +v\cdot\nabla v+\nabla \pi = 0
\\ \nabla\cdot v = 0
\end{array}
\mbox{~in~}{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\times [0,\infty).
\end{equation}
The velocity field evolves from a given initial data $v_0:{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\to {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3$. In 1934, Leray constructed weak (i.e.~distributional) solutions for initial data in $L^2$ in \cite{leray} and proved a priori bounds for his solutions. He also observed that any solution to \eqref{eq:NSE} has a natural scaling: if $v$ satisfies \eqref{eq:NSE}, then for any $\lambda>0$
\begin{equation}
v^{\lambda}(x,t)=\lambda v(\lambda x,\lambda^2t),
\end{equation}
is also a solution with pressure
\begin{equation}
\pi^{\lambda}(x,t)=\lambda^2 \pi(\lambda x,\lambda^2t),
\end{equation}
and initial data
\begin{equation}
v_0^{\lambda}(x)=\lambda v_0(\lambda x).
\end{equation}
A solution is called self-similar (SS) if $v^\lambda(x,t)=v(x,t)$ for all $\lambda>0$ and is discretely self-similar with factor $\lambda$ (i.e.~$v$ is $\lambda$-DSS) if this scaling invariance holds for a given $\lambda>1$. Similarly, $v_0$ is self-similar (a.k.a.~$(-1)$-homogeneous) if $v_0(x)=\lambda v_0(\lambda x)$ for all $\lambda>0$ or $\lambda$-DSS if this holds for a given $\lambda>1$.
These solutions can be either forward or backward if they are defined on ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\times (0,\infty)$ or ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\times (-\infty,0)$ respectively. In this paper we work exclusively with forward solutions.
Self-similar solutions satisfy an ansatz for $v$ in terms of a time-independent profile $u$, namely,
\begin{equation}\label{ansatz1}
v(x,t) = \frac 1 {\sqrt {t}}\,u\bigg(\frac x {\sqrt{t}}\bigg),
\end{equation}
where $u$ solves the \emph{Leray equations}
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}\label{eq:stationaryLeray}
-\Delta u-\frac 1 2 u-\frac 1 2 y\cdot\nabla u +u\cdot \nabla u +\nabla p = 0
\\ \nabla\cdot u=0
\end{array}
\mbox{~in~}{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3,
\end{equation}
in the variable $y=x/\sqrt{ t}$.
Discretely self-similar solutions are determined by their behavior on the time interval $1\leq t\leq \lambda^2$ and satisfy the ansatz
\begin{equation}\label{ansatz2}
v(x,t)=\frac 1 {\sqrt{t}}\, u(y,s),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{variables}
y=\frac x {\sqrt{t}},\quad s=\log t.
\end{equation}
The vector field $u$ is $T$-periodic with period $T=2\log \lambda$ and solves the \emph{time-dependent Leray equations}
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\label{eq:timeDependentLeray}
\partial_s u-\Delta u-\frac 1 2 u-\frac 1 2 y\cdot\nabla u +u\cdot \nabla u +\nabla p = 0&
\\ \nabla\cdot u = 0&
\end{array}
\mbox{~in~}{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\times {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }.
\end{equation}
Note that the \emph{similarity transform} \eqref{ansatz2}--\eqref{variables} gives a one-to-one correspondence between solutions to \eqref{eq:NSE} and \eqref{eq:timeDependentLeray}. Moreover, when $v_0$ is SS or DSS, the initial condition $v|_{t=0}=v_0$ corresponds to a boundary condition for $u$ at spatial infinity, see \cite{KT-SSHS,BT1,BT2}.
{Self-similar and discretely self-similar solutions are important since they might shed light on questions about blow-up and uniqueness. Indeed, backward self-similar solutions were first introduced by Leray in \cite{leray} as candidates for singular solution. Ne\v cas, {R\accent23 u\v {z}i\v {c}ka} and {\v Sver\'ak} ruled out this possibility in \cite{NRS}, but the existence of nontrivial backward DSS solutions remains open. {Forward} self-similar and discretely self-similar solutions are important as they are compelling candidates for non-uniqueness \cite{JiaSverak} and other, more technical properties \cite{BT1}. Proving the existence of such solutions is the first step to pursuing these questions further.}
Until recently, self-similar solutions were known to exist only for small data in scaling invariant function spaces such as $L^3_w,\, \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ ($p<\infty$), or $BMO^{-1}$ \cite{GiMi,Kato,CP,Barraza,Koch-Tataru}.
The first large-data solutions were constructed by Jia and \v Sver\'ak in \cite{JiaSverak} and required the initial data to be H\"older continuous away from the origin. Tsai adapted the approach of Jia and \v Sver\'ak to the discretely self-similar case in \cite{Tsai-DSSI}, and, in collaboration with Korobkov with a contradiction argument, to the case of self-similar solutions on the half-space \cite{KT-SSHS}.
These large-data existence results all require the initial data is continuous away from the origin. Bradshaw and Tsai eliminated this assumption in \cite{BT1} giving a construction for any SS/DSS data in $L^3_w$. {Bradshaw and Tsai also treated a more general problem on the whole and half spaces in \cite{BT2} where they constructed \emph{rotated} self-similar and discretely self-similar solutions.}
On the whole space, the solutions of \cite{BT1,BT2} are in the local Leray class, which is a generalization of Leray's weak solutions that replaces global quantities with local analogues. Lemari\'e-Rieusset introduced local Leray solutions in \cite[Chapters 32 and 33]{LR} and offered a construction. Kikuchi and Seregin gave a revised construction with more details in \cite{KiSe}.
Note that $L^3_w$ embeds in $L^2_{u\,loc}$, making it a natural place to seek self-similar solutions. The main results of \cite{BT1} are the following two theorems.
\begin{theorem}\label{thrm.old2} {\normalfont \cite[Theorem 1.3]{BT1}}
Let $v_0$ be a $(-1)$-homogeneous divergence free vector field in ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3$ which satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{ineq:decayingdata}
\|v_0\|_{L^3_w({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)}\leq c_0,
\end{equation}
for a possibly large constant $c_0$. Then, there exists a local Leray solution $v$ to \eqref{eq:NSE} which is self-similar and additionally satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{thrm.old-conv}
\| v(t)-e^{t\Delta}v_0 \|_{L^2({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)}\leq C_0\,t^{1/4}
\end{equation}
for any $t\in (0,\infty)$ and a constant $C_0=C_0(v_0)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}\label{thrm.old} {\normalfont \cite[Theorem 1.2]{BT1} }
Let $v_0$ be a divergence free, $\lambda$-DSS vector field for some $\lambda >1$ and satisfy
\eqref{ineq:decayingdata}
for a possibly large constant $c_0$. Then, there exists a local Leray solution $v$ to \eqref{eq:NSE} which is $\lambda$-DSS and additionally satisfies \eqref{thrm.old-conv}
for any $t\in (0,\infty)$ and a constant $C_0=C_0(v_0)$.
\end{theorem}
In his 2016 book \cite{LR2}, Lemari\'e-Rieusset provides a slightly more general result in the self-similar case by extending the Leray-Schauder approach of Jia and Sverak. In particular, Lemari\'e-Rieusset first shows that any self-similar initial data in $L^\infty(S^2)$ where $S^2$ denotes the unit sphere gives rise to a self-similar local Leray solution.
He then shows that any self-similar initial data in $L^2_{u\,loc}$ can be approximated by self-similar initial data in $L^\infty(S^2)$. Since all local Leray solutions satisfy an a priori bound, the constructed local Leray solutions can be used to approximate a self-similar solution for any data in $L^2_{u\,loc}$. {We anticipate a similar argument can be made for discretely self-similar data and solutions generalizing Theorem \ref{thrm.old} to a larger class of initial data, and intend to elaborate on this in future research.} Note that Chae and Wolf recently released a pre-print \cite{Chae-Wolf} which constructs solutions for DSS data in $L^2_{loc}({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)$ via a different approach.
In this paper we generalize Theorems \ref{thrm.old2} and \ref{thrm.old} to cover self-similar and discretely self-similar data in the critical Besov spaces $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ where $3< p< 6$, for any scaling factor $\lambda>1$.
In comparison to other well known spaces we have the following strict embeddings for $3<p<\infty$,
\[L^3_w\subset \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1} \subset BMO^{-1}\subset \dot B_{\infty,\infty}^{-1}.\]
{Note $ \dot B_{q,\infty}^{3/q-1} \subset \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ if $3 \le q < p < \infty$.}
If $p=3$ then $L^3_w$ and $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ are not directly comparable.
The following theorems are the main results of this paper.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem.main2}Fix $p\in (3,6)$. Assume $v_0:{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\to {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3$ is divergence free, belongs to $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$, and is self-similar. Then there exists a self-similar distributional solution $v$ and pressure distribution $\pi$ to 3D NSE on ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\times (0,\infty)$.
Furthermore, $v$ and $v_0$ can be decomposed as $a+b$ and $a_0+b_0$ respectively so that $a_0\in L^3_w$, $b_0$ is small in $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$, {
\EQ{\label{th1.3-1}
\|a(t)-e^{t\Delta}a_0\|_{L^2} &\leq C_2 t^{1/4},\\
\int_{0}^t \norm{a(\tau)-e^{\tau\Delta}a_0}_{L^r}^q d\tau &\le C_r t^{q/4},\quad \forall\, r \in (2,6],
}
for some constant $C_r(v_0)$ with $\frac 3r + \frac 2q=\frac 32$, and
\begin{equation}\label{th1.3-2}
\norm{b(t)-e^{t\Delta}b_0}_{L^r} \le C_r \norm{b_0}_{\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}}^2 t^{-\frac 12 + \frac 3{2r}}, \quad \forall\, r \in
\left[\frac p2, \frac {3p}{6-p}\right),
\end{equation}
for some constant $C_r$. }
Also, $a$ and $b$ are self-similar.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem.main}Fix $p\in (3,6)$. Assume $v_0:{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\to {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3$ is divergence free, belongs to $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$, and is $\lambda$-DSS for some $\lambda>1$. Then, there exists a $\lambda$-DSS distributional solution $v$ and pressure distribution $\pi$ to 3D NSE on ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\times (0,\infty)$.
Furthermore, $v$ and $v_0$ can be decomposed as $a+b$ and $a_0+b_0$ respectively so that $a_0\in L^3_w$, {$b_0$ is small in $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$, $a(t)-e^{t\Delta}a_0$ satisfies \eqref{th1.3-1},
$b(t)-e^{t\Delta}b_0$ satisfies \eqref{th1.3-2}, and }
$a$ and $b$ are $\lambda$-DSS.
\end{theorem}
\noindent Comments on Theorems \ref{theorem.main2} and \ref{theorem.main}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $p>3$, then there exist discretely self-similar functions in $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}\setminus L^3_w$, a fact we prove in Lemma \ref{lemma.strictembedding}.
\item {The estimate \eqref{th1.3-1} is because $a(t)-e^{t\Delta}a_0$ is in the energy class in similarity variables. The estimate \eqref{th1.3-2} is a usual bilinear estimate for mild solutions. Combining both we have,
for all {$r \in [\frac p2, 3)$}, $\frac 3r + \frac 2q=\frac 32$,
\EQ{
\bke{\frac 1t \int_{0}^t \norm{v(\tau) - e^{\tau \Delta}v_0}_{L^r}^q d\tau}^{1/q} \le
C t^{-\frac 12 + \frac 3{2r}}.
}
Note the exponent on the right side is positive {for $r\in [\frac p2, 3)$}.
It shows that $v(t)$ converges to $e^{t\Delta}v_0$ as $t \to 0$ in some weak time-average sense, in a way that is independent of the decomposition $v_0=a_0+b_0$.}
\item In contrast to Theorems \ref{thrm.old2} and \ref{thrm.old}, we do not seek local Leray solutions since we do not have the embedding $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1} \subset L^2_{\mathrm{loc}}$ for $p\geq 3$. Indeed, it is possible to show that there exist $2$-DSS initial data in $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}\setminus L^2_{\mathrm{loc}}$ -- see Lemma \ref{lemma.notsquareintegrable}. This also ensures that our result is new in comparison to \cite[Theorem 16.3]{LR2} {and \cite{Chae-Wolf}.}
\item In \cite{BT2} we proved the existence of solutions which were rotated self-similar and rotated discretely self-similar and had data in $L^3_w$. The class of rotated discretely self-similar solutions includes but is larger than the DSS class. Such solutions have an ansatz which satisfies a system resembling the stationary and time-periodic Leray equations and it is expected that, on the whole space, the arguments in this paper can be applied to construct rotated SS and rotated DSS solutions with data in $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ ($3<p<6$), but we do not include the details presently.
\end{enumerate}
We prove Theorems \ref{theorem.main2} and \ref{theorem.main} similarly. The idea is to decompose the initial data $v_0$ as $v_0=a_0+b_0$ where $a_0$ is large in $L^3_w$ and $b_0$ is small in $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$. In the DSS case we use the Littlewood-Paley decomposition of $v_0$ (see Lemma \ref{lemma.profileslicing}) while in the self-similar case we use a lemma due to Cannone \cite[Proposition 23.1]{LR}. {The small data $b_0$ gives rise to a SS/$\lambda$-DSS mild solution $b$ in the Kato space
\EQ{
K_p = \bket{ u \in C((0,\infty);L^p)\ : \ \norm{u}_{K_p} = \sup_{0<t<\infty} t^{\frac 12 - \frac 3{2p}}\norm{u(t)}_{L^p}},
}
see \cite[Theorem 5.27]{BCD}.}
We then construct a SS/$\lambda$-DSS solution $a$ to a perturbed problem by extending the arguments in \cite{BT1}.
Our approach breaks down for $p\geq 6$. Basically, (small) strong solutions in $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ for $p\geq 6$ do not decay rapidly enough as $|x|\to \infty$ for us to get \emph{a priori} bounds for solutions to the time-periodic, perturbed Leray equations in the energy class -- see inequality \eqref{ineq.sourcetermbound}. It is conceivable that our general approach can be used for data in $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ for any $p\in (3,\infty)$ if we work in a class larger than the energy class. But constructing time-periodic solutions in such a context has not been done, even for the Navier-Stokes equations. The expansion $v_0=a_0+b_0$ fails in $BMO^{-1}$ because $BMO^{-1}$ is an $L^\infty$ based space. Consequently, we don't expect the arguments in this paper to extend to the case of self-similar or discretely self-similar data in $BMO^{-1}$.
This paper is arranged as follows. In Section \ref{sec.technical} we study discrete self-similarity in Besov spaces and give the main technical lemma. In Section \ref{sec.evolutionLeray} we prove the existence of solutions to a time periodic,
perturbed Leray equation. Section \ref{sec.DSS} contains the proof of Theorem \ref{theorem.main} which depends on Sections \ref{sec.technical} and \ref{sec.evolutionLeray}. The self-similar case is covered in Section \ref{sec.SS}. In Section \ref{Appendix} we analyze the relationships between the collections of DSS vector fields in various function spaces, for example we show $L^2_{loc}\cap $\,DSS and $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}\cap$\,DSS are not comparable.
\section{Discrete self-similarity in critical Besov spaces}\label{sec.technical}
We first recall the Littlewood-Paley characterization of Besov spaces. Fix an inverse length scale $\lambda>1$.
Let $B_r$ denote the ball of radius $r$ centered at the origin in ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3$. Fix a non-negative, radial cut-off function $\chi\in C_0^\infty(B_{1})$ so that $\chi(\xi)=1$ for all $\xi\in B_{1/\lambda}$. Let $\phi(\xi)=\chi(\lambda^{-1}\xi)-\chi(\xi)$ and $\phi_j(\xi)=\phi(\lambda^{-j}\xi)$. For a vector field $u$ of tempered distribution, let $\Delta_j u=(\mathcal F^{-1}\phi_j)*u$ for $j\in {\mathbb N}_0 $ and $\Delta_{-1}=(\mathcal F^{-1}\chi)*u$. Then, $u$ can be written as\[u=\sum_{j\geq -1}\Delta_j u.\]
If $(\mathcal F^{-1}\chi(\lambda^{-j}\cdot))*u\to 0$ as $j\to -\infty$ in the space of tempered distributions, then for $j\in {\mathbb Z}$ we define $\dot \Delta_j u = \mathcal F^{-1}\phi_j*u$ and have
\[u=\sum_{j\in {\mathbb Z}}\dot \Delta_j u.\]
For $s\in {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }$, $1\leq p,q\leq \infty$, the non-homogeneous Besov spaces include tempered distributions modulo polynomials for which the norm
\begin{align*}
&\|u\|_{B^s_{p,q}}:=
\begin{cases}
\bigg(\sum_{ j\geq -1} \big( \lambda^{sj} \|\Delta_j u \|_{L^p({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^n)} \big)^q \bigg)^{1/q} & \text{ if } q<\infty
\\ \sup_{j\geq -1} \lambda^{sj} \| \Delta_j u \|_{L^p({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^n)} & \text{ if } q=\infty
\end{cases},
\end{align*}is finite, while the homogeneous Besov spaces include tempered distributions modulo polynomials for which the norm
\begin{align*}
&\|u\|_{\dot B^s_{p,q}}:=
\begin{cases}
\bigg(\sum_{ j\in {\mathbb Z}} \big( \lambda^{sj} \|\dot \Delta_j u \|_{L^p({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^n)} \big)^q \bigg)^{1/q} & \text{ if } q<\infty
\\ \sup_{j\in {\mathbb Z}} \lambda^{sj} \| \dot \Delta_j u \|_{L^p({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^n)} & \text{ if } q=\infty
\end{cases},
\end{align*}
is finite. In this section we work with homogeneous Besov spaces while in \S \ref{sec.SS} we work with non-homogeneous spaces.
Besov spaces are typically defined using a \emph{dyadic} partition of unity in Fourier space -- i.e.~they are defined as above with $\lambda=2$. If we are working with $\lambda$-DSS data, we want the partition of unity to be \emph{$\lambda$-adic}. Fortunately, Besov spaces are independent of the scaling factor used to define the partition of unity on the Fourier side.
To see this, let $\{\phi_j\}$ be a dyadic partition of unity satisfying the properties set forth at the beginning of this section and let $\{\phi_j^\lambda \}$ be a $\lambda$-adic partition of unity satisfying the same properties.
Let $\dot \Delta_j$ and $\dot \Delta_j^\lambda$ denote the homogeneous Littlewood-Paley operators generated by $\{\phi_j\}$ and $\{\phi_j^\lambda\}$ respectively. The next lemma confirms that $\dot \Delta_j$ and $\dot \Delta_j^\lambda$ generate equivalent norms for $\dot B^\sigma_{p,q}$ for any $\sigma\in {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }$ and $1\leq q\leq \infty$. In particular, we have norm equivalence for $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ when $3<p$.
\begin{lemma}
Let $\lambda>1$. Let $\dot \Delta_j$ and $\dot \Delta_j^\lambda$ be as defined above. If $\sigma\in {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }$ and $p,q \in [1, \infty]$, then any $f$ in the homogeneous Besov space $\dot B^\sigma_{p,q}$ satisfies
\begin{align}
\label{Besov.lambda}
\norm{f}_{\dot B^\sigma_{p,q} } =\bigg\|
2^{\sigma k}\|\dot \Delta_k f \|_{L^p}
\bigg\|_{l^q_k}
\approx
\bigg\|
\lambda^{\sigma j}\|\dot \Delta_j^\lambda f \|_{L^p}
\bigg\|_{l^q_j} .
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\phi(\xi)$ and $\phi^\lambda(\xi)$ be as above. So, $\phi$ is supported in $\frac 12 \le |\xi|\le 2$ and $\phi^\lambda$ is supported in $\lambda^{-1}\le |\xi|\le \lambda$. Furthermore,
\[
\sum_j \phi (2^{-j} \xi) =\sum_j \phi^\lambda (\lambda^{-j} \xi) = 1\quad \forall \xi \not =0.
\]
Let $\dot \Delta_k f$ and $\dot \Delta_j^\lambda f$ be the corresponding Littlewood-Paley projection operators.
For each $j \in {\mathbb Z}$, let $S_j$ be the set of integers $k$ so that the intersection $[\lambda^{j-1},\lambda^{j+1}] \cap [2^{k-1},2^{k+1}]$ has positive measure. We have
$\dot\Delta_j ^\lambda f = \sum _{k \in S_j} \dot\Delta_j ^\lambda \dot\Delta_k f$, and thus
\EQ{
\lambda^{\sigma j} \norm{\dot \Delta_j ^\lambda f}_{L^p}
&\le
\sum_{k \in S_j} \lambda^{\sigma j} \norm{\dot\Delta_j ^\lambda \dot\Delta_k f}_{L^p}
\le
\sum_{k \in S_j} \lambda^{\sigma j} C_1(\lambda)\norm{ \dot\Delta_k f}_{L^p}
}
Above we have used that $\dot\Delta_j ^\lambda$ is a convolution operator whose kernel is integrable with a uniform in $j$ bound $C_1(\lambda)$. For each $k \in S_j$, we have
\[
\lambda^j = \lambda \lambda^{j-1} \le \lambda 2^{k+1} = 2\lambda 2^k,\quad
{\lambda^j = \lambda^{-1} \lambda^{j+1} \ge \lambda^{-1} 2^{k-1} = (2\lambda)^{-1} 2^k.}
\]
Thus, {for all $\sigma \in {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }$,}
\EQN{
\lambda^{\sigma j} \norm{\dot\Delta_j ^\lambda f}_{L^p}
&\le C_1(\lambda)(2\lambda )^{|\sigma|}
\sum_{k \in S_j} 2^{k\sigma} \norm{ \dot\Delta_k f}_{L^p}
}
Since every $k \in S_j $ satisfies $(2\lambda)^{-1}\le 2^k \lambda ^{-j} \le 2 \lambda$, we have $\# S_j \le C(\lambda)$ independently of $j$. The above shows
\begin{align*}
\bigg\| \lambda^{\sigma j} \norm{\dot\Delta_j ^\lambda f}_{L^p}
\bigg\|_{l^q_j}
&\leq
C(\lambda,\sigma) \bigg\| \sum _{k\in S_j} 2^{k\sigma} \norm{\dot \Delta_k f}_{L^p}\bigg\|_{l^q_j}
\\&\leq C(\lambda,\sigma)\bigg\| 2^{k\sigma} \norm{\dot \Delta_k f}_{L^p}\bigg\|_{l^q_k},
\end{align*}
where $C(\lambda,\sigma)$ depends on $\lambda$ and $\sigma$ but not on $p$ or $q$.
The reversed inequality can be shown similarly. Hence we have \eqref{Besov.lambda}.
\end{proof}
The next lemma is the main technical result of this section. It allows us to decompose any $\lambda$-DSS data in $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ into a small $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ part and a large $L^3_w$ part. The corresponding decomposition for \emph{self-similar} data is Lemma \ref{lemma.profileslicing2}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma.profileslicing}
Let $f$ be a $\lambda$-DSS, divergence free vector field in ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3$, and belong to $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ for some $\lambda \in (1,\infty)$ and $p\in (3,\infty)$. For any $\epsilon>0$, there exist divergence free $\lambda$-DSS distributions $a\in L^3_w$ and $b\in \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ so that
$f = a + b$ and $ \|b \|_{\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}}<\epsilon$.
\end{lemma}
In the proof we will use the Helmholtz
projection $\mathbb P$ (or ``Leray projection'' in \cite[p.106]{LR}),
which maps a Banach space of vector fields in ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3$ to its subspace of divergence free vector fields.
It is
given by
\begin{equation}
\label{Helmholtz}
(\mathbb Pg)_j= g_j+{\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^3} R_jR_k g_k
\end{equation}
where $R_k$ is the $k$-th Riesz transform with symbol $i \xi_k/|\xi|$. In the variable $x$ this is given by the integral operator
\[
R_kg ( x)=cP.V.\int \frac {y_k} {|y|^4} g( x-y)\,dy.
\]
Note that $\mathbb P$ is a bounded operator from $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ to $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ and from $L^3_w$ to $L^3_w$. For $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ spaces this is trivial since they're built on $L^p$ norms, where Calderon-Zygmund operators are bounded. For $L^3_w$, see \cite[Chapter 5,~Theorem 3.15]{Stein}.
\begin{proof}
Let $f$ be as in the lemma's statement. {Let $\dot \Delta_j$ be the $\lambda$-adic spectral projection described in the beginning of this section.} Since $\dot \Delta_0 f\in L^p$, for any $\epsilon_1>0$, we may find functions $a_1$ and $b_1$ satisfying:
\begin{align*}
&\dot \Delta_0 f = a_1 +b_1,
\\& b_1\in L^p\mbox{ and } \| b_1\|_{L^p}\leq \epsilon_1,
\\& a_1\in C_0^\infty.
\end{align*}
Let
\[
\tilde \Delta_0 = \sum_{j=-1,0,1}\dot \Delta_j.
\]
Looking at the Fourier side, it is clear that $\tilde \Delta_0 \dot \Delta_0 = \dot \Delta_0 $.
Let $a_2 =\tilde \Delta_0 a_1$ and $b_2 = \tilde \Delta_0 b_1$.
Then, $\dot \Delta_0 f = \tilde \Delta_0 \dot \Delta_0 f= a_2+b_2$.
Let
\[
a = \mathcal F^{-1} \bigg(\sum_{j\in {\mathbb Z}} \lambda^{2j}(\mathcal F a_2)(\lambda^j \xi) \bigg),
\]
and
\[
b = \mathcal F^{-1} \bigg(\sum_{j\in {\mathbb Z}} \lambda^{2j}(\mathcal F b_2)(\lambda^j \xi) \bigg).
\]
Direct calculation shows that, if $f(x)$ is $\lambda$-DSS, that is, $f(x) = \lambda f(\lambda x)$ for any $x$, then its Fourier transform satisfies
\begin{align}\label{eq.interscale}
\hat f (\xi) =
\lambda^2 \hat f (\lambda \xi) ,\quad \forall \xi \in{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3.
\end{align}It follows that
$\lambda^{2j} \hat f(\lambda^j\xi) = \hat f(\xi)$ for any $j \in \mathbb{Z}$.
Thus,
\begin{align*}
(\hat a +\hat b )(\xi)&=\sum_{j\in {\mathbb Z}} \lambda^{2j} (\mathcal F(a_2+b_2))(\lambda^j \xi)
=\sum_{j\in {\mathbb Z}} \lambda^{2j} \big(\phi \hat f \big)(\lambda^j\xi)
=\sum_{j\in {\mathbb Z}} \phi_{-j}(\xi)\hat f(\xi) = \hat f(\xi).
\end{align*}
Therefore, $f=a+b$. By their construction, $a$ and $b$ satisfy \eqref{eq.interscale} and are therefore $\lambda$-DSS.
Note that $f$ is $\lambda$-DSS if and only if
\begin{align}\label{DSS.Fourier}
\dot \Delta_j f(x)=\lambda^{j-i}\dot \Delta_i f(\lambda^{j-i} x), \quad \forall i,j\in {\mathbb Z}.
\end{align}
This follows from the fact that
\[
f_j(x) \mapsto \phi_j(\xi) \hat f (\xi) =\lambda^{-2j} \phi(\xi\lambda^{-j})\hat f (\xi \lambda^{-j}) = \lambda^{-2j} (\phi \hat f) (\xi \lambda^{-j})\mapsto \lambda^{j}f_0(\lambda^jx),
\]
where $\mapsto$ is the image under either the Fourier or inverse Fourier transform and we have used the dilation property of the Fourier transform.
To obtain a bound for $b$ in $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$, observe that
\begin{align*}
\mathcal F (\dot \Delta_0 b) =\phi_0(\xi) \sum_{j\in {\mathbb Z}}\lambda^{2j} ( \phi_{-1} +\phi_0 +\phi_1)(\lambda^j \xi) \mathcal F b_1(\lambda^j\xi).
\end{align*}
Since $\phi_0(\xi) ( \phi_{-1} +\phi_0 +\phi_1)(\lambda^j \xi) =0 $ except for finitely many values of $j$, by Young's convolution inequality we have
\[
\|\dot \Delta_0 b\|_{L^p}\leq C \|b_1\|_{L^p} \leq C\epsilon_1,
\]
where $C$ only depends on our original choice of $\phi$.
It follows from \eqref{DSS.Fourier} that
\[
\|b\|_{\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}}\leq C \epsilon_1.
\]
Since $a$ is $\lambda$-DSS, to show $a\in L^3_w$, it suffices to show $a\in L^\infty (B_\lambda \setminus B_1)$. Since $a_1\in C_0^\infty$, we know $a_2$ is in the Schwartz class. With a little work it follows that $\dot \Delta_0 a$ is also in the Schwartz class, and, therefore, $|\dot \Delta_0 a(x)|\lesssim (1+x^{2})^{-1}$. Because $a$ is also $\lambda$-DSS, we see that
\[
|a(x)|\leq \sum_{j\in {\mathbb Z}} |\dot \Delta_j a(x)| \leq \sum_{j\in {\mathbb Z}} \lambda^j \dot{\Delta}_0 a(\lambda^jx) \lesssim \sum_{j\geq 0} \frac {\lambda^j} {1+\lambda^{2j}x^2} +\sum_{j<0} \lambda^j \|\dot \Delta_0a\|_{L^\infty}<\infty.
\]
Therefore, $a\in L^3_w$.
To make $a$ and $b $ divergence free we simply apply the Helmholtz
projection $\mathbb P$ \eqref{Helmholtz}.
With a slight abuse of notation, let $a=\mathbb P a$ and $b=\mathbb P b$ so that $a$ and $b$ are divergence free and we still have $f=a+b$. Since $\mathbb P$ is a bounded operator on $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ and on $L^3_w$, we have
$a\in L^3_w$ and $b\in \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$. Furthermore, by taking $\epsilon_1$ sufficiently small we can ensure that $\|b\|_{\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}}<\epsilon$, where $\epsilon$ is given in the lemma's statement.
It remains to check that $\mathbb P$ preserves discrete self-similarity.
If $g$ is $\lambda$-DSS for some $\lambda>1$ then
\begin{align*}
R_kg ( x)=cP.V.\int \frac {y_k} {|y|^4} g( x-y)\,dy
&= \lambda cP.V. \int \frac { y_k } {| y |^4} g( \lambda x- \lambda y) \,dy
\\& = \lambda cP.V.\int \frac { \lambda y_k } {| \lambda y |^4} g( \lambda x- \lambda y) \lambda^3 \,dy
\\&=\lambda cP.V.\int \frac { z_k } {| z |^4} g( \lambda x- z) \,dz
\\&=\lambda R_kg(\lambda x),
\end{align*}
i.e.~$R_kg$ is also $\lambda$-DSS. Hence $ a$ and $ b$ are discretely self-similar.
\end{proof}
\section{The time-periodic perturbed Leray equations}\label{sec.evolutionLeray}
In this section we construct a periodic weak solution to the perturbed Leray system
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:wholeSpaceLeray}
\begin{array}{ll}
\partial_s u -\Delta u=\frac 1 2 u+\frac 1 2 y\cdot \nabla u -\nabla p -u\cdot\nabla u-B\cdot\nabla u - u\cdot\nabla B &\mbox{~in~}{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\times {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }
\\ \nabla\cdot u = 0 &\mbox{~in~}{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\times {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }
\\ \displaystyle \lim_{|y_0|\to\infty} \int_{B_1(y_0)}|u(y,s)-U_0(y,s)|^2\,dx= 0& \mbox{~for all~}s\in {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }
\\ u(\cdot,s)=u(\cdot, s+T) &\mbox{~in~}{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\mbox{~for all~}s\in {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R },
\end{array}
\end{equation}
for given $T$-periodic divergence free vector fields $B$ and $U_0$. Here $U_0$ serves as the boundary value of the system and is required to satisfy the following assumption.
\begin{assumption} \label{AU_0}
The vector field $U_0(y,s) :{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3 \times {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R } \to {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3$ is continuously differentiable in $y$ and $s$, periodic in $s$ with period $T>0$, divergence free, and satisfies
\begin{align*}
& \partial_s U_0-\Delta U_0-\frac 1 2 U_0-\frac 1 2 y\cdot \nabla U_0 = 0,
\\& U_0\in L^\infty (0,T;L^4\cap L^q({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)),
\\& \partial_s U_0\in L^\infty(0,T;L_{\mathrm{loc}}^{6/5}({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)),
\end{align*}
and
\[
\sup_{s\in [0,T]}\|U_0 \|_{L^q({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\setminus B_R)}\leq \Theta(R),
\]
for some $q\in (3,\infty]$ and $\Theta:[0,\infty)\to [0,\infty)$ such that $\Theta(R)\to 0$ as $R\to\infty$.
\end{assumption}
We seek solutions in the distributional sense where we are testing against test functions in $\mathcal D_T$, the collection of all smooth divergence free vector fields in ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3 \times {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }$ which
are time periodic with period $T$ and whose supports are compact in space.
\begin{definition}[Periodic weak solution]
\label{def:periodicweaksolutionR3}
Let $U_0$ satisfy Assumption \ref{AU_0} and assume $B$ is $T$-periodic and divergence free.
The field $u$ is a periodic weak solution to \eqref{eq:wholeSpaceLeray} in ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\times (0,T)$ if it is divergence free, if
\begin{equation}\notag
U:=
u-U_0\in L^\infty(0,T;L^2({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))\cap L^2(0,T;H^1({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)),
\end{equation}
and if
\begin{equation}\label{u.eq-weak}
\int_0^T \bigg( (u,\partial_s f)-(\nabla u,\nabla f)+(\frac 1 2 u+\frac 1 2 y\cdot\nabla u-u\cdot\nabla u -u\cdot \nabla B -B\cdot\nabla u,f) \bigg) \,ds =0,
\end{equation}
holds for all $f \in \mathcal D_T$.
This latter condition implies that $u(0)=u(T)$.
\end{definition}
If $u$ satisfies this definition then there exists a pressure $p$ so that $(u,p)$ constitute a distributional solution to \eqref{eq:wholeSpaceLeray} (see the standard construction of $p$ in \cite{Temam}). Our main existence theorem is the following.
\begin{theorem}[Existence of solutions to \eqref{eq:wholeSpaceLeray}]\label{thrm:existenceOnR3}
Assume $U_0(y,s)$ satisfies Assumption \ref{AU_0} with $q=10/3$ and $B\in C^1({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^4)\cap L^\infty({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R };L^p({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))$ and satisfies $\|B\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\times (0,T))}<\frac 1 {24}$. Then \eqref{eq:wholeSpaceLeray} has a periodic weak solution $u$ in ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^4$ with period $T$.
\end{theorem}
To prove Theorem \ref{thrm:existenceOnR3} we replace $U_0$ by an auxiliary vector field $W$ which is constructed to ensure
\[
\int (f\cdot\nabla W )\cdot f \leq \alpha \| f \|_{H^1}^2,
\]
for a given value $\alpha\in (0,1)$ and any $f\in H^1_0$. This bound does not hold for general $U_0$ satisfying Assumption \ref{AU_0}. A suitable construction of $W$ is given in \cite[Lemma 2.5]{BT1} and we recall it for convenience. To do so, fix $Z\in C^\infty({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)$ with $0 \le Z \le 1$, $Z(x)=1$ for $|x|>2$ and $Z(x)=0$ for $|x|<1$. This can be done so that $|{\nabla} Z|+|{\nabla}^2 Z| \lesssim 1$.
For a given $R>0$, let $\xi(y)=Z(\frac yR)$. It follows that $|\nabla^k \xi|\lesssim R^{-k}$ for $k\in \{ 0,1\}$.
\begin{lemma}[Revised asymptotic profile]
\label{lemma:W}
Fix $q\in (3,\infty]$ and suppose $U_0$ satisfies Assumption \ref{AU_0} for this $q$.
Let $Z\in C^\infty({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)$ be as above.
For any $\alpha\in (0,1)$, there exists $R_0=R_0(U_0,\alpha)\ge 1$ so that letting $\xi(y) =Z(\frac y{R_0})$ and setting
\begin{equation}
W (y,s)= \xi(y) U_0(y,s) + w(y,s),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
w(y,s)=\int_{{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3}\nabla_y \frac 1 {4\pi |y-z|} \nabla_z \xi(z) \cdot U_0 (z,s) \,dz,
\end{equation}
we have that $W$ is locally continuously differentiable in $y$ and $s$, $T$-periodic, divergence free,
$U_0 - W \in L^\infty(0,T; L^2({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))$, and
\begin{equation}\label{ineq:Wsmall}
\|W\|_{L^\infty(0,T;L^q({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))}\leq \alpha, %
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{WL4.est}
\norm{W}_{L^\infty(0,T;L^4({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))}\leq c(R_0,U_0),
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{LW.est}
\norm{ \partial_s W-\Delta W-\frac 1 2 W-\frac 1 2 y\cdot \nabla W}_{L^\infty(0,T; H^{-1}({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))} \leq c(R_0,U_0), %
\end{equation}
where $c(R_0,U_0)$ depends on $R_0$ and quantities associated with $U_0$ which are finite by Assumption \ref{AU_0}.
\end{lemma}
The proof of Lemma \ref{lemma:W} says more about $w$ (see \cite[Proof of Lemma 2.5]{BT1}). In particular, since
\begin{equation}
\label{ineq:wgradient}|\nabla w(y)|\leq \frac {C(R_0,U_0)} {1+|y|^{3}},
\end{equation}
we have $\nabla w\in L^2( 0,T;L^2({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))$.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thrm:existenceOnR3}]
The argument is similar to that from \cite[Section 2]{BT1}. Fix $T>0$ and assume $U_0$ satisfies Assumption \ref{AU_0} for this $T$. Assume $B$ is a given $T$-periodic divergence free vector field. Let $W$ be as defined in Lemma \ref{lemma:W} with $\alpha=\frac 1{24}$, $q=10/3$, and the given $U_0$. We look for a solution $u$ to \eqref{eq:wholeSpaceLeray} of the form $u=U+W$ where $U$ is divergence free and solves the perturbed system
\[
\label{perturbed-Leray}
\partial_s U -\Delta U-\frac 1 2 U-\frac 1 2 y\cdot\nabla U + (W+U)\cdot \nabla U + U\cdot \nabla W +B\cdot \nabla U +U\cdot\nabla B +\nabla p = - \mathcal R(W) ,
\]
where the source term is
\[ \label{RW.def}
\mathcal{R}(W) := \partial_s W-\Delta W-\frac 1 2 W-\frac 1 2 y\cdot \nabla W + W\cdot\nabla W+B\cdot\nabla W+W\cdot\nabla B.
\]
We use the Galerkin method following \cite{GS06} (see also \cite{Temam}). The relevant function spaces are
\begin{align*}
&\mathcal V=\{f\in C_0^\infty({ {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3;{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3}) ,\, \nabla \cdot f=0 \},
\\& X = \mbox{the closure of~$\mathcal V$~in~$H_0^1({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)$} ,
\\& H = \mbox{the closure of~$\mathcal V$~in~$L^2({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)$},
\end{align*}where $H_0^1({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)$ is the closure of $C_0^\infty({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)$ in the Sobolev space $H^1({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)$. Let $X^*({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)$ denote the dual space of $X({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)$.
Let $(\cdot,\cdot)$ be the $L^2({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)$ inner product and $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle$ be the dual product for $H^1$ and its dual space $H^{-1}$, or that for $X$ and $X^*$.
Let $\{a_{k}\}_{k\in {\mathbb N}}\subset \mathcal V$ be an orthonormal basis of $H$.
For a fixed $k$, we look for an approximation solution of the form $U_k(y,s)= \sum_{i=1}^k b_{ki}(s)a_i(y)$.
Here, $b_k=(b_{k1},\ldots,b_{kk})$ is a T-periodic solution to the system of ODEs
\begin{align}\label{eq:ODE}
\frac d {ds} b_{kj} = & \sum_{i=1}^k A_{ij}b_{ki} +\sum_{i,l=1}^k B_{ilj} b_{ki}b_{kl} +C_j,%
\end{align}
for $j\in \{1,\ldots,k\}$ and
\begin{align}
\notag A_{ij}&=- (\nabla a_{i},\nabla a_j)
+ \frac 1 2 (a_i+y\cdot \nabla a_i, a_j)
-( a_i\cdot \nabla( W+B ),a_j)
- ((W+B)\cdot\nabla a_i, a_j)
\\\notag B_{ilj}&=- ( a_i \cdot\nabla a_l, a_j)
\\\notag C_j&=-\langle \mathcal R (W),a_j\rangle.
\end{align}
For every $k\in \mathbb N$ the system of ODEs \eqref{eq:ODE} has a $T$-periodic solution $b_{k}\in H^1(0,T)$. In particular, for any $U^{0}\in \operatorname{span}(a_1,\ldots,a_k)$,
there exist $b_{kj}(s)$ uniquely solving \eqref{eq:ODE} with initial value $b_{kj}(0)=(U^{0},a_j)$, and belonging to $H^1(0,\tilde T)$ for some time $0<\tilde T\leq T$. If $\tilde T<T$ assume it is maximal--i.e.~$||b_{k}(s)||_{L^2}\to\infty$ as $s\to \tilde T^-$.
Let
\begin{equation} \notag
U_k(y,s)=\sum_{i=1}^k b_{ki}(s)a_i(y).
\end{equation}
We will prove that
\begin{equation}\label{ineq:uniformink}
||U_k||_{L^\infty (0,T;L^2({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))} + ||U_k||_{L^2(0,T;H^1({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))}<C,
\end{equation}where $C$ is independent of $k$.
Testing the equation against $U_k$ gives the initial estimate
\begin{equation} \label{ineq:1}
\frac 1 2 \frac d {ds} ||U_k||_{L^2}^2 + \frac 1 4 ||U_k||_{L^2}^2+ ||\nabla U_k||_{L^2}^2\leq -(U_k\cdot\nabla (B+W),U_k) - \langle \mathcal{R}(W), U_k\rangle.
\end{equation}
We need to estimate the right hand side of \eqref{ineq:1}.
Note that \eqref{ineq:Wsmall} and the fact that $U_k$ is divergence free guarantee that
\begin{equation}
\big| ( U_k\cdot \nabla W, U_k ) \big| \leq \frac 1 {24} ||U_k||_{H^1}^2 .%
\end{equation}
Because $\|B\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\times (0,T))}<\frac 1 {24}$, we have
\[
|(U_k\cdot\nabla B,U_k)| \leq \frac 1 {24} \| U_k \|_{H^1}^2.
\]
To estimate the source terms involving $B$ note that since $2<3<2p/(p-2)$ using $p<6$ we have $L^3_w\subset L^2+L^{2p/(p-2)}$, i.e.~we can write $W=W_1+W_2$ where $W_1\in L^2$ and $W_2\in L^{2p/(p-2)}$. This decomposition of $W$, H\"older's inequality, and the fact that $B\in L^\infty(0,T;L^p)\cap L^\infty({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\times [0,T])$ leads to the bound
\begin{align}
&\notag \bigg|\int ( W\cdot\nabla B +B\cdot \nabla W) U_k\,dy\bigg|
\\&\leq C \|\nabla U_k \|_2\big( \|W_1\|_{L^2}\|B\|_{L^\infty} +\|W_2\|_{L^{2p/(p-2)}}\|B\|_{L^p} \big)\notag
\\&\leq \frac 1 {12} \|\nabla U_k \|_2^2 + C \big( \|W_1\|_{L^2}\|B\|_{L^\infty} +\|W_2\|_{L^{2p/(p-2)}}\|B\|_{L^p} \big)^2.\label{ineq.sourcetermbound}
\end{align}
The estimate for the remaining terms from $\langle \mathcal{R}(W), U_k\rangle$ is
\begin{align}\notag
&|\langle \partial_s W-\Delta W-\frac 1 2 W-\frac 1 2 y\cdot \nabla W + W\cdot\nabla W , U_k \rangle |
\\&\leq \frac 1 {24}\|U_k\|_{H^1}^2+C(\|\partial_s W-\Delta W-\frac 1 2 W-\frac 1 2 y\cdot \nabla W\|_{H^{-1}}^2+ \|W\|_{L^4} ).\label{est.RW2}
\end{align}
We thus obtain the inequality
\begin{equation} \label{ineq:kenergyevolution}
\frac d {ds} ||U_k||_{L^2}^2
+ \frac 1 4 ||U_k||_{L^2}^2
+ \frac 1 4 ||\nabla U_k||_{L^2}^2 \leq C,
\end{equation}for a constant $C$ depending on $W$.
The Gronwall lemma implies
\begin{equation} \label{ineq:gronwall}
\begin{split}
e^{s/4} ||U_k(s)||_{L^2}^2
&\leq ||U^{0}||_{L^2}^2 + \int_0^{\tilde T} e^{\tau/4} C \,dt
\\
& \le ||U^{0}||_{L^2}^2 + e^{T/4} C T,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
for all $s\in [0,\tilde T]$. Note that $\tilde T$ cannot be a blow-up time since the right hand side is finite. Thus, $\tilde T=T$.
By \eqref{ineq:gronwall} we can choose $\rho>0$ (independent of $k$) so that
\begin{equation}\notag
||U^{0}||_{L^2}\leq \rho \Rightarrow ||U_{k}(T)||_{L^2}\leq \rho.
\end{equation}
Let $T: B_\rho^k\to B_\rho^k$ map $b_{k}(0)\to b_k(T)$, where $ B_\rho^k$ is the closed ball of radius $\rho$ in ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^k$. This map is continuous and thus has a fixed point by the Brouwer fixed-point theorem, implying there exists some $U^{0}\in \operatorname{span}(a_1,\ldots,a_k)$ so that $b_k(0)=b_k(T)$.
It remains to check that \eqref{ineq:uniformink} holds. The $L^\infty L^2$ bound follows from \eqref{ineq:gronwall}
since $\norm{U^0}_{L^2} \le \rho$, which is independent of $k$.
Integrating \eqref{ineq:kenergyevolution} in $s \in [0,T]$ and using $U_k(0)=U_k(T)$, we get
\begin{equation} \label{eq2.33}
\int_0^T \big(||U_k||_{L^2}^2
+ ||\nabla U_k||_{L^2}^2 \big)\,dt \le 4 C T
\end{equation}
which gives an upper bound for $\| U_k \|_{L^2(0,T;H^1 )}$ that is uniform in $k$.
Standard arguments (e.g.~those in \cite{Temam}) imply that there exists a $T$-periodic $U\in {L^2(0,T;H_0^1({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))}$ and a subsequence of $\{U_k\}$ (still denoted by $U_k$) so that
\begin{align*}
& U_k\rightarrow U \mbox{~weakly in}~L^2(0,T;X),
\\& U_k\rightarrow U \mbox{~strongly in}~L^2(0,T;L^2(K)) \mbox{~for all compact sets~}K\subset {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3,
\\& U_k(s)\rightarrow U (s) \mbox{~weakly in}~L^2 \mbox{~for all}~s\in [0,T].
\end{align*}
The weak convergence guarantees that $U(0)=U(T)$. Thus $U$ is a periodic weak solution of the perturbed Leray system.
Let $u=U+W$. To finish the proof we need to check that \[W-U_0 \in L^\infty(0,T;L^2({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))\cap L^2(0,T;H^1({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)).\]
The $L^\infty (0,T;L^2)$ estimate follows from Lemma \ref{lemma:W}. The $L^2(0,T;H^1)$ estimate is easy to see since $\nabla w\in L^2(0,T;L^2)$ and $\nabla ((1-\xi) U_0)$ is smooth and compactly supported.
Since $u-W$ and $W-U_0$ are in $L^\infty(0,T;L^2({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))\cap L^2(0,T;H^1({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))$, we also have $u-U_0 \in L^\infty(0,T;L^2({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))\cap L^2(0,T;H^1({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))$.
\end{proof}
\section{Construction of a discretely self-similar solution}\label{sec.DSS}
In this section we prove Theorem \ref{theorem.main} on the existence of discretely self-similar solutions.
We first recall a lemma from \cite{BT1}.
\begin{lemma}\label{th:2.1}
Suppose $a_0$ is $\lambda$-DSS, divergence free, and belongs to $L^3_w$. Let $x,t,y,s$ satisfy \eqref{variables}. Then
\begin{equation}\label{def:U0}
U_0(y,s)= {\sqrt {t}} (e^{t\Delta}a_0)(x),
\end{equation}satisfies Assumption \ref{AU_0} with $T=2\log \lambda$ and any $q \in (3,\infty]$.
\end{lemma}
We are now ready to prove Theorem \ref{theorem.main}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{theorem.main}]
Assume $3< p< 6$.
We seek a solution $v$ to 3D NSE for a given divergence free, $\lambda$-DSS initial data $v_0\in \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ by considering a perturbed problem. Assume $v_0$ is $\lambda$-DSS. By Lemma \ref{lemma.profileslicing}, we can decompose $v_0=a_0+b_0$ where $a_0$ and $b_0$ are both $\lambda$-DSS, $a_0\in L^3_w$ and $\|b_0\|_{\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}}<\epsilon_0$, where $\epsilon_0$ is a small constant.
{By \cite[Theorem 5.27]{BCD}, if $\epsilon_0$ is sufficently small, there is a unique solution $b\in K_p(\infty)$ of 3D NSE with initial data $b_0$, where
\EQ{
K_p(\infty) = \bket{ u \in C((0,\infty);L^p)\ : \ \norm{u}_{K_p} = \sup_{0<t<\infty} t^{\frac 12 - \frac 3{2p}}\norm{u(t)}_{L^p}}.
}
By \cite[Theorem 5.40]{BCD}, $b$ also belongs to a strict subspace $E_p$ of $L^\infty({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^+; \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1})$, but we do not need this fact here.
Let $b$ be the above solution and}
$\pi_b$ the corresponding pressure. Then, $v=a+b$ is a solution to 3D NSE with pressure $\pi=\pi_a+\pi_b$ if and only if $(a,\pi_a)$ satisfies
\begin{align}\label{eq.a}
&a_t-\Delta a +a\cdot \nabla a+b\cdot \nabla a+a\cdot \nabla b +\nabla \pi_a=0
\\\notag &\nabla \cdot a = 0;\qquad a(x,0)=a_0(x).
\end{align}
Note that $b$ is $\lambda$-DSS by the uniqueness of small solutions in the Koch-Tataru class. Therefore, $\sqrt{t}b(x,t)=B(y,s)$ where $B$ is time periodic with period $T=2\log\lambda$. Also, $b$ is smooth (see \cite{LR}) and, therefore, so is $B$. By \cite[Theorem 20.3]{LR} (see also \cite{BCD}) we have
\[
\|b(t)\|_{L^p}^2\lesssim t^{-1+3/p} \|b_0 \|_{\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}}^2,
\]
and, therefore, $B(y,s)\in L^\infty({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R } ; L^p (
{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))$. Indeed, we also have
Since $b$ is in the Koch-Tataru class we also have decay in $L^\infty$, i.e.,~\[\|b(t)\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)}\lesssim t^{-1/2}\|b_0\|_{BMO^{-1}}. \]
Provided $\epsilon_0$ is sufficiently small (it can be chosen to be arbitrarily small in Lemma \ref{lemma.profileslicing}) it follows that
\[
\| B(y,s)\|_{L^\infty({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }\times {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)}<\frac 1 {24}.
\]
Let $U_0(y,s)= {\sqrt {t}} (e^{t\Delta}a_0)(x)$, as in \eqref{def:U0}.
Because $a_0$ is $\lambda$-DSS, divergence free, and belongs to $L^3_w$, we have by Lemma \ref{th:2.1} that $U_0(y,s)$ satisfies Assumption \ref{AU_0}.
By Theorem \ref{thrm:existenceOnR3} with $B$ and $U_0$, we obtain a $T$-period solution $u$ to \eqref{eq:wholeSpaceLeray} and, undoing the DSS transform, we recover a $\lambda$-DSS solution $a$ to \eqref{eq.a}. We thus obtain the desired $\lambda$-DSS solution $v=a+b$ to 3D NSE.
The pressure distribution $\pi$ for $v$ is given by $\pi=\pi_a+\pi_b$ where $\pi_a$ is the image under the change of variables \eqref{variables} of the pressure distribution $p(y,s)$ for $u(y,s)$ and $\pi_b$ is the pressure distribution associated with that Koch-Tataru solution $b$.
To complete the proof, note that
\begin{equation} \notag a-e^{t\Delta}a_0 \in L^\infty(1,\lambda^2;L^2({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3))\cap L^2(1,\lambda^2;H^1({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)). \end{equation}
The $\lambda$-DSS scaling property implies that for all $t\in (0,\infty)$ that
\begin{equation}\label{ineq.a}
||a(t)-e^{t\Delta}a_0||_{L^2}^2\lesssim t^{1/2} \sup_{1\leq \tau\leq \lambda^2} ||a(\tau)-e^{\tau \Delta}a_0||_{L^2}^2,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{ineq.a2}
\int_0^t \| \nabla (a(\tau)-e^{\tau\Delta}a_0) \|_{L^2}^2\,d\tau \lesssim \int_1^{\lambda^2} \| \nabla (a(\tau)-e^{\tau\Delta}a_0) \|_{L^2}^2\,d\tau.
\end{equation}
So, for any $t>0$, by interpolating between \eqref{ineq.a} and \eqref{ineq.a2}, we see that
\EQ{
\int_{0}^t \norm{a(\tau)-e^{\tau\Delta}a_0}_{L^r}^q d\tau &\le C_r t^{q/4},
}
for {all $r\in (2,6]$} and $q$ such that $\frac 2 q +\frac 3 r=\frac 3 2$. This proves \eqref{th1.3-1}.
{
We found
$b\in K_p(\infty)$ by \cite[Theorem 5.27]{BCD}. Its proof uses
\cite[Lemma 5.29]{BCD}, which implies that, for $ \frac 2p -\frac 13 <\frac 1r \le \frac 2p$,
\[
\norm{b(t)-e^{t\Delta} b_0}_{L^r} \le C \norm{b_0}_{\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}}^2 t^{-\frac 12 + \frac 3{2r}},\quad \forall t>0.
\]
This shows \eqref{th1.3-2}.
Since $p \in (3,6)$, $\frac 13 < \frac 2p < \frac 23$, we can choose
$\frac 1r \in (\frac 13, \frac 2p]$, i.e.,~$r \in [\frac p2, 3)$.
Then the exponent $-\frac 12 + \frac 3{2r}>0$ and $\norm{b(t)-e^{t\Delta} b_0}_{L^r} \to 0$ as $t \to 0^+$.
}
\end{proof}
\section{Self-similar solutions}\label{sec.SS}
In this section we prove Theorem \ref{theorem.main2} on the existence of self-similar solutions.
We first decompose the initial data.
The definition of Besov spaces given in \S2 can be extended to describe non-homogeneous Besov spaces on compact
smooth manifolds as in \cite[Ch.~23]{LR}. Let $M$ be a compact smooth manifold of dimension $d$ and assume $T$ is a distribution on $M$. Then $T\in B^s_{p,q}(M)$ if and only if for every open subset ${\Omega}$ of $M$, smooth differomorphism $h:{\Omega} \to {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^d$, and test function $\phi$ supported on ${\Omega}$, we have $ (\phi T )\circ h^{-1}\in B^s_{p,q}({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^d)$.
The norm of $B^s_{p,q}(M)$ is defined using a finite atlas of $M$ (the choice of atlas does not matter; any two give equivalent definitions). Let $A$ be a finite set.
Let $\{{\Omega}_\alpha\}_{\alpha\in A}$ be an open cover of $M$. Let $h_{\alpha}$ be a diffeomorphism from ${\Omega}_\alpha$ to ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^2$. Let $\{\phi_\alpha\}_{\alpha\in A}$ be a partition of unity of $M$ with $\mathop{\mathrm{supp}} \phi_{\alpha} \subset {\Omega}_{\alpha}$.
Then, \[\|T \|_{B_{p,p}^{3/p-1}(S^2)}:= \sum_{\alpha\in A} \|(\phi_\alpha T)\circ h^{-1}_\alpha \|_{B_{p,p}^{3/p-1}({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^2)}.\]
Furthermore we have
\[ T=\sum_{\alpha\in A,j\geq -1} T^\alpha_j,\]
where
\[
T_j^\alpha = (\Delta_j (\phi_\alpha T \circ h_\alpha^{-1}))\circ h_\alpha.
\]
We need a lemma due to Cannone (see \cite[Proposition 23.1]{LR}).
Here, $S^{2}$ denotes the unit sphere in ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3$.
\begin{lemma}[Cannone's Lemma]\label{lemma.cannone} Let $p\in [1,\infty]$ and $T$ be a distribution on ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3$ which is homogeneous of degree $-1$. The following are equivalent:
\begin{itemize}
\item[A.]$T\in \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)$
\item[B.]$T|_{S^2} \in B_{p,p}^{3/p-1}(S^{2})$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
By inspecting the proof of Lemma \ref{lemma.cannone} (\cite[pg. 238-239]{LR}) it is clear that
\begin{align}\label{ineq.cannone}
\|T\|_{\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)}\leq \kappa \|T|_{S^2}\|_{B_{p,p}^{3/p-1}(S^2)},
\end{align}
for a constant $\kappa$ that does not depend on $T$.
This leads to an analogue of Lemma \ref{lemma.profileslicing} for self-similar functions.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma.profileslicing2}
Let $f$ be divergence free, $-1$-homogeneous, and belong to $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ for some $p\in (3,\infty)$. For any $\epsilon>0$, there exist divergence free $-1$-homogeneous distributions $a\in L^3_w$ and $b\in \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ so that
$f = a + b$ and $ \|b \|_{\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}}<\epsilon$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}Let $A$ be a finite set.
Let $\{{\Omega}_\alpha\}_{\alpha\in A}$ be an open cover of $S^2$. Let $h_{\alpha}$ be a diffeomorphism from ${\Omega}_\alpha$ to ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^2$. Let $\{\phi_\alpha\}_{\alpha\in A}$ be a partition of unity of $S^2$ with $\mathop{\mathrm{supp}} \phi_{\alpha} \subset {\Omega}_{\alpha}$.
Then, $f|_{S^2}=\sum_{\alpha\in A,j\geq -1} \Delta_j (\phi_\alpha f)$ and $\|f|_{S^2}\|_{B_{p,p}^{3/p-1}(S^2)}\equiv \sum_{\alpha\in A} \|\phi_\alpha f\circ h^{-1}_\alpha \|_{B_{p,p}^{3/p-1}({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^2)}$.
Choose $J$ so that, letting
\[
b_0=\sum_{\alpha\in A,j\geq J} (\Delta_j (\phi_\alpha f \circ h_\alpha^{-1}))\circ h_\alpha,
\]
we have $\| b_0\|_{B_{p,p}^{3/p-1}(S^2)}<\epsilon / \kappa$ (this is possible since the summation index is finite). Let $a_0=f|_{S^2}-b_0$.
Extend $a_0$ and $b_0$ to $a$ and $b$ by the $-1$-homogeneous scaling relationship. By \cite[Lemma 23.2]{LR}, $a+b=f$. By \eqref{ineq.cannone},
\[\|b\|_{\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}}\leq \kappa \|b_0\|_{B_{p,p}^{3/p-1}}\leq \epsilon.
\]
Furthermore, $a_0\in L^\infty (S^2)$ and, therefore, $a\in L^3_w$. To conclude re-define $a$ and $b$ after applying the divergence free projector to each field as in the proof of Lemma \ref{lemma.profileslicing}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{theorem.main2}] Assume $v_0$ is as in the statement of the theorem. By Lemma \ref{lemma.profileslicing2} we can write $v_0=a_0+b_0$ where $a_0$ and $b_0$ are $-1$-homogeneous, $a_0\in L^3_w$, and $\|b_0\|_{\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}}$ is smaller than the Koch-Tataru constant.
Let $b$ be the self-similar Koch-Tataru solution evolving from $b_0$ with pressure $\pi_b$ and let $B(y)=b(x,1)$ under the self-similar change of variables. To find a self-similar solution $v$ to \eqref{eq:NSE} with initial data $v_0$, we find a solution $a$ to the perturbed problem \eqref{eq.a}. The corresponding self-similar profile $A$ is divergence free and satisfies the perturbed Leray equation
\[
-\Delta A -\frac 1 2 A-\frac 1 2 y\cdot\nabla A+A\cdot \nabla A +B\cdot\nabla A + A\cdot \nabla B +\nabla p = 0.
\]
Let $A_0$ be the solution to the heat equation with initial data $a_0$ and let $U_0(y)=A_0(x,1)$ under the self-similar change of variables \eqref{variables}. Then, $U_0$ satisfies Assumption \ref{AU_0} for any $T>0$ by Lemma \ref{th:2.1}. Applying Lemma \ref{lemma:W} for $U_0$, $q=10/3$, and $\alpha=1/24$, gives a small asymptotic profile $W$. If $A=U+W$, then $U$ is divergence free and satisfies
\[
-\Delta U -\frac 1 2 U-\frac 1 2 y\cdot\nabla U +(U+W)\cdot\nabla U + U\cdot\nabla B +B\cdot\nabla U +U\cdot \nabla W +\nabla p=-\mathcal R (W),
\]
where
\[
\mathcal R (W)=-\Delta W-\frac 1 2 W-\frac 1 2 y\cdot \nabla W + W\cdot\nabla W+B\cdot\nabla W+W\cdot\nabla B.
\]
We now construct such a $U$ using a Galerkin scheme.
Let $\{ a_k \}\subset \mathcal V$ be an orthonormal basis of $H$. For $k \in \mathbb N$, the approximating solution \[
U_k(y)=\sum_{i=1}^k b_{ki}a_i(y),
\] is required to satisfy
\begin{align}\label{eq:stationaryODE}
& \sum_{i=1}^k A_{ij}b_{ki} +\sum_{i,l=1}^k B_{ilj} b_{ki}b_{kl} +C_j=0,%
\end{align}
for $j\in \{1,\ldots,k\}$,
where
\begin{align}
\notag A_{ij}&=- (\nabla a_{i},\nabla a_j)
+ \frac 1 2(a_i+y\cdot \nabla a_i, a_j)
-( a_i\cdot \nabla (W+B),a_j)
- ((W+B)\cdot\nabla a_i, a_j)
\\\notag B_{ilj}&=- (a_i \cdot\nabla a_l, a_j)
\\\notag C_j&=-\langle \mathcal R (W),a_j\rangle.
\end{align}
Let $P(x):{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^k\to{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^k$ denote the mapping
\[
P(x)_j=\sum_{i=1}^k A_{ij}x_{i} +\sum_{i,l=1}^k B_{ilj} x_{i}x_{l} +C_j.
\]
For $x\in {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^k$, let $\xi=\sum_{j=1}^k x_j a_j$. We have
\EQ{
\label{eq4.6}
P(x)\cdot x &= -\frac 1 4 ||\xi||_{L^2}^2
- ||\nabla \xi||_{L^2}^2 +(\xi \cdot \nabla \xi,W+B) - \bka{{\mathcal R}(W),\xi}
\\
& \le -\frac 1 8 ||\xi||_{L^2}^2 - \frac 1 2 ||\nabla \xi||_{L^2}^2 +C_*^2 \norm{{\mathcal R}(W)}_{H^{-1}}^2
\\
& \le -\frac 1 8 |x|^2 + C_*^2 \norm{{\mathcal R}(W)}_{H^{-1}}^2,
}
using the smallness of $\norm{W}_{L^\infty}$ and $\norm{B}_{L^\infty}$, as well as the estimates \eqref{ineq.sourcetermbound} and \eqref{est.RW2} for $\mathcal R(W)$ in Section \ref{sec.DSS}. We conclude that
\[
P(x)\cdot x< 0,\quad \text{if } |x|=\rho := 4C_* \norm{{\mathcal R}(W)}_{H^{-1}}.
\]
By Brouwer's fixed point theorem, there is one $x$ with $|x|<\rho$ such that $P(x)=0$. Then $U_k=\xi$ is our approximation solution satisfying
\eqref{eq:stationaryODE}.
By the first inequality of \eqref{eq4.6} and $P(x)=0$, $U_k$ also satisfies
the \emph{a priori} bound
\[
\norm{U_k}_{L^2}^2 + \norm{\nabla U_k}_{L^2} ^2\le 8C_*^2 \norm{{\mathcal R}(W)}_{H^{-1}}^2.
\]
This bound is sufficient to find a subsequence with a weak limit in $H^1({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)$ and a strong limit in $L^2(K)$ for any compact set $K$ in ${\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3$ -- i.e.~there exists a solution $U$ with $U\in H^1({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)$. We now obtain $A$ by setting $A=U+W$. Note that $A\in H^1_{\mathrm{loc}}\cap L^q$ for $3< q\leq 6$,
and, following \cite[pp. 287-288]{NRS} or \cite[pp. 33-34]{Tsai-ARMA}, if we define
\[
p = \sum_{i,j} R_i R_j (A_i A_j),
\]
where $R_i$ denote the Riesz transforms,
then $(A,p)$ solve the perturbed stationary Leray system in the distributional sense.
To obtain a solution to \eqref{eq:NSE}, pass from the self-similar profile $A$ to the field $a$ at time $t=1$ using the change of variable \eqref{variables} and extend $a$ to all times using the ansatz \eqref{ansatz1}. Also do this for the pressure; let $\pi_a$ be self-similar extension of the image of $p$ under the change of variables \eqref{variables}. Finally, let $v=a+b$ and $\pi=\pi_a+\pi_b$.
\end{proof}
\section{Relationships between function spaces}\label{Appendix}
In this section we state and prove lemmas clarifying the relationships between several function spaces. The first two lemmas give examples of $2$-DSS vector fields in $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ that are not in other spaces. They ensure that Theorem \ref{theorem.main} is new in comparison to Theorem \ref{thrm.old}, \cite[Theorem 16.3]{LR2}, and \cite{Chae-Wolf}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma.strictembedding}For any $p,q\in (3,\infty)$ with $q<p$, there exists a $2$-DSS function $f$ belonging to $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1} \setminus \dot B_{q,\infty}^{3/q-1}$. In particular $f\in \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}\setminus L^3_w$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma.notsquareintegrable}There exists a $2$-DSS vector field in $\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}\setminus L^2_{\mathrm{loc}}$ whenever $p>3$.
\end{lemma}
The last lemma is included for illustrative purposes.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma.BMOinversenotBesov}
There exists a $2$-DSS vector field in $BMO^{-1}\setminus \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ whenever $0<p<\infty$.
\end{lemma}
Each of these lemmas is proved by constructing explicit examples starting with a wavelet basis. We recall the essentials about wavelets.
Meyer constructed wavelets in \cite[p. 108]{Meyer}. In particular, there exists a family of functions $\{\psi_{\epsilon,j,k}\}_{\epsilon=1,\ldots,7;j\in {\mathbb Z};k\in {\mathbb Z}^3}$ so that
\begin{enumerate}
\item they are generated from given functions $\psi_\epsilon$ for $\epsilon=1,\ldots,7$ by
\[
\psi_{\epsilon,j,k}(x)=2^{3j/2}\psi_\epsilon(2^j x-k),
\]
\item they constitute an orthonormal basis of $L^2({\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3)$,
\item they are compactly supported in dyadic cubes, in particular, for $k=(k_1,k_2,k_3)$,
\[
\operatorname{supp} \psi_{\epsilon,j,k} \subset \big[2^{-j}k_1, 2^{-j}(k_1+1)\big]\times \big[2^{-j}k_2, 2^{-j}(k_2+1)\big]\times \big[2^{-j}k_3, 2^{-j}(k_3+1)\big].
\]
\end{enumerate}
Moreover the wavelets can be taken with arbitrarily high regularity, with enlarged compact support.
The parameter $\epsilon$ plays no role in what follows and is consequently suppressed.
Assume $1\leq p\leq \infty$ and $f$ is a distribution given by
\begin{equation}\label{wavelet-series}
f = \sum_{j,k}\alpha_{j,k}\psi_{j,k},
\end{equation}
with convergence understood in the space of tempered distributions $\mathcal S'$.
Then, $f\in \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ if and only if
\[
\|f\|_{\dot b_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1} }:=\sup_{j\in {\mathbb Z}} 2^{j/2} \bigg( \sum_{k} |\alpha_{j,k}|^p \bigg)^{1/p}<\infty,
\]for some sequence of wavelet coefficients $\alpha_{j,k}$ (see \cite[Proposition 6]{Cannone-handbook} and \cite[p.~200]{Meyer}), and, moreover,
\begin{equation}\label{norm-equiv}
\|f\|_{\dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}} \sim \|f\|_{\dot b_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}}.
\end{equation}
For $f\in \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$, the coefficients in the series \eqref{wavelet-series} are uniquely determined since $\alpha_{j,k} = \langle \psi_{j,k},f \rangle$.
Our first lemma describes the relationship between different scales in a discretely self-similar function. This is essentially a wavelet version of the relationship $ \dot \Delta_j f(x)=2^{j-i}\dot \Delta_i f(2^{j-i} x)$ for every $i,j\in {\mathbb Z}$, which we saw in Section \ref{sec.technical}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma.scaletoscale}
Let $f$ be a tempered distribution and let
\[
f_j=\sum_{k\in {\mathbb Z}^3} \alpha_{j,k}\psi_{j,k},
\]
where $\{\psi_{j,k}\}$ is a $2$-regular wavelet basis and $\alpha_{j,k}=\langle \psi_{j,k},f\rangle$ for all $j\in {\mathbb Z}$ and $k\in {\mathbb Z}^3$ so that
$f=\sum_{j\in {\mathbb Z}}f_j$. The following are equivalent:
\begin{itemize}
\item[i.] $f$ is $2$-DSS
\item[ii.] $ f_j(x)=2^{j-i} f_i(2^{j-i} x)$ for every $i,j\in {\mathbb Z}$,
\item[iii.] $ \alpha_{j,k} = 2^{-(j-i)/2} \alpha_{i,k}$ for every $i,j\in {\mathbb Z}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lemma.scaletoscale}] Note that
\begin{align}\label{psijtoi}\psi_{j,k}(x)
&=2^{3j/2}\psi(2^jx-k)
=2^{3j/2}\psi( 2^i 2^{j-i}x-k)
=2 ^{3(j-i)/2}\psi_{i,k}(2^{j-i}x).
\end{align}
(\emph{i.$\implies$iii.}) Assume $f$ is $2$-DSS and let $i,j\in {\mathbb Z}$. By the uniqueness of wavelet coefficients and \eqref{psijtoi} we have
\[\alpha_{j,k}
= \int \psi_{j,k}(y) f(y)\,dy
= 2^{3(j-i)/2} \int \psi_{i,k}(2^{j-i}y)f(y)\,dy.
\]
Since $f$ is $2$-DSS we have
\EQN{
\int \psi_{i,k}(2^{j-i}y)f(y)\,dy
& =
\int \psi_{i,k}(2^{j-i}y)2^{j-i}f(2^{j-i}y)\,dy
\\
& = 2^{-2(j-i)} \int \psi_{i,k}(z)f(z)\,dz
= 2^{-2(j-i)} \alpha_{i,k},
}
where we have set $z=2^{j-i}y$.
Therefore,
\[
\alpha_{j,k}=2^{-(j-i)/2} \alpha_{i,k}.
\]
(\emph{iii.$\implies$ii.}) Assume $\alpha_{j,k}=2^{-(j-i)/2} \alpha_{i,k}$ for all $i,j\in {\mathbb Z}$. Then,
\begin{align*}
f_j(x)&=\sum_{k\in{\mathbb Z}^3} \alpha_{j,k}\psi_{j,k}(x)
=\sum_{k\in {\mathbb Z}^3} 2^{-(j-i)/2} \alpha_{i,k} 2^{3(j-i)/2}\psi_{i,k}(2^{j-i}x)=
2^{j-i} f_i(2^{j-i} x) ,
\end{align*}
where we have used \eqref{psijtoi}.
(\emph{ii.$\implies$i.}) Assume $ f_j(x)=2^{j-i} f_i(2^{j-i} x)$ for every $i,j\in {\mathbb Z}$. Fix $j\in {\mathbb Z}$ and let $i=j+1$. Then
\[
f_j(2 x) = 2^{j-i}f_i( 2^{j-i+1} x)=2^{-1} f_i(x).
\]
Then,
\[2 f(2 x)= 2 \sum_{j\in {\mathbb Z}} f_j(2 x) = \sum_{i\in {\mathbb Z}} f_i(x)=f(x),
\]
implying $f$ is $2$-DSS.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lemma.strictembedding}] Assume $q\in (3,\infty]$.
For $n\in {\mathbb N}$, let $\hat n=(n,0,0)$. Let
\[ f_0= \sum_{n\in {\mathbb N}} n^{-1/q} \psi_{0,\hat n}.\]
Let $f_j(x)=2^j f_0(2^j x)$ and let $f(x)=\sum_j f_j(x)$. Then, $f$ is $2$-DSS by Lemma \ref{lemma.scaletoscale}. Also by Lemma \ref{lemma.scaletoscale} we have
\[
2^{j/2}\bigg(\sum_{n\in {\mathbb N}} |\alpha_{j,\hat n}|^p\bigg)^{1/p} =\bigg(\sum_{n\in {\mathbb N}} |\alpha_{0,\hat n}|^p\bigg)^{1/p}=\bigg(\sum_{n\in {\mathbb N}} n^{-p/q}\bigg)^{1/p}.
\]
If $p>q$, then $f\in \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$. If $p=q$ then the above series diverges. Thus $f\notin \dot B^{3/q-1}_{q,\infty}$ and, since $L^3_w\subset \dot B_{q,\infty}^{3/q-1}$, $f \notin L^3_w$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lemma.notsquareintegrable}]
As in the proof of Lemma \ref{lemma.strictembedding}, we first construct $f_0$ and then extend it to a $2$-DSS vector field using Lemma \ref{lemma.scaletoscale}. If $|k|\geq 2$ then let $\alpha_{0,k}=|k|^{-1}$. Let $\alpha_{0,k}=0$ for $|k|<2$. Define $f$ using Lemma \ref{lemma.scaletoscale}.
Then $f\in \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ because $\{ \alpha_{0,k} \}\in l^p({\mathbb Z}^3)$ provided $p>3$.
It remains to show that $f\notin L^2_{\mathrm{loc}}$. Let $A_1=\{x:1\leq |x|\leq 2 \}$. Let $\phi\in C^\infty$ be non-negative, supported on $A_1^*=\{x:2^{-1}\leq |x| \leq 4 \}$, and equal $1$ on $A_1$. Let $S_j=\{ k: \mathop{\mathrm{supp}} \psi_{j,k}\subset A_1 \}$. Note that $|S_j|\sim 2^{3j}$ {for $j \gg 1$}. If
\[
\phi f = \sum \beta_{j,k}\psi_{j,k},
\]
then $\beta_{j,k}=\alpha_{j,k}$ whenever $\mathop{\mathrm{supp}} \psi_{j,k}\subset A_1$. Since we are working with an orthonormal basis we have
\[
\int_{{\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3} (\phi f)^2\,dx = \sum_{j\in {\mathbb Z}} \sum_{k\in {\mathbb Z}^3} |\beta_{j,k}|^2 \geq \sum_{j\in {\mathbb N}} \sum_{k\in S_j} |\alpha_{j,k}|^2.
\]
Note that if $k\in S_j$ then $|k|\sim 2^{j}$. So, $\alpha_{0,k}=|k|^{-1}\sim 2^{-j}$ for all $k\in S_j$. Using Lemma \ref{lemma.scaletoscale} we have
\begin{align*} \sum_{j\in {\mathbb N}}\sum_{k\in S_j} \alpha_{j,k}^2
= \sum_{j\in {\mathbb N}} \sum_{k\in S_j} 2^{-j} \alpha_{0,k}^2
\sim \sum_{j\in {\mathbb N}} 2^{3j} 2^{-j} 2^{-2j}=\infty.
\end{align*}
Hence $\phi f\notin L^2_{\mathrm{loc}}$ and, since $|\phi f|\leq |f|$, neither is $f$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
More can be said, in particular the function $f$ constructed above does not belong to $L^q(A_1)$ for any $q\in (1,\infty)$. This is clear when $q\in (2,\infty)$ by H\"olders inequality. For $q\in (1,2)$ we can use the fact that $L^{q}$ embeds continuously in $\dot B^{0}_{q,2}$ (see \cite[Theorem 2.40]{BCD}) and adapt the above argument to show that $\phi f\notin \dot B^{0}_{q,2}$, i.e.
\[
\sum_{j\in {\mathbb Z}} \bigg( 2^{(3/2-3/q)j} \bigg(\sum_{k\in {\mathbb Z}^3} |\beta_{j,k}|^q \bigg)^{\frac 1 q} \bigg)^{2} =\infty.
\]
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lemma.BMOinversenotBesov}]
We construct a $2$-DSS vector field $f$ which belongs to $BMO^{-1}\setminus \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$. This field is similar to the one discussed in remark (4) following \cite[Theorem 1.2]{BT1}.
Let $A_j$ equal the collection of $k\in {\mathbb Z}^3$ so that the cube $Q_{j,k}$ is touching the point $k_j=(3(2^{j-1}),0,0)$. Then,
\begin{align*}
A_j=\{&(3(2^{j-1}) ,0,0 ) ,(3(2^{j-1}) ,-1, 0) ,
\\&(3(2^{j-1}) ,0,-1 ) ,(3(2^{j-1}) ,-1, -1) ,
\\&(3(2^{j-1})-1 ,0,0 ) ,(3(2^{j-1})-1 ,-1, 0) ,
\\&(3(2^{j-1}) -1,0,-1 ) ,(3(2^{j-1})-1 ,-1, -1) \}.
\end{align*}
For all $k\in A_j$ let $\alpha_{j,k}=2^{-(j-1)/2}$ and let $f$ be the $2$-DSS extension of
\[
\sum_{j\in{\mathbb N}}\sum_{k\in A_j} \alpha_{j,k}\psi_{j,k}.
\]
Let $f_j=\sum_{k\in {\mathbb Z}^3} \alpha_{j,k} \psi_{j,k}$. Then, $\mathop{\mathrm{supp}} f_j \subset {\mathbb R }}\newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R }^3\setminus B_{2^{-j}}(0)$ and $f_j$ repeats along the positive $x_1$-axis. Hence $f_j\in L^\infty\setminus L^p$ for all $p$ and, since $f$ is $2$-DSS, $f\in \dot B_{\infty,\infty}^{-1}\setminus \dot B_{p,\infty}^{3/p-1}$ for all $p<\infty$. The function $f$ is singular at the points $k_j$ and each singularity is of order $|x|^{-1}$.
With a little work we can also show that $f\in BMO^{-1}$.
Recall
\[
\|f\|_{BMO^{-1}} = \sup_{Q} \frac 1 {|Q|} \sum_{Q_{j,k}\subset Q} (2^{-j}|\alpha_{j,k}|)^2.
\]
Since $f$ is $2$-DSS we have by Lemma \eqref{lemma.scaletoscale} that if $|Q|\sim 2^{-3J}$, then
\begin{align*}
\sup_{Q} \frac 1 {|Q|} \sum_{Q_{j,k}\subset Q} (2^{-j}|\alpha_{j,k}|)^2
&=\frac 1 {2^{-3J}}\sum_{Q_{j,k}\subset Q} 2^{-2j}|\alpha_{j,k}|^2
\\&=\frac 1 {2^{-3J}}\sum_{Q_{i,k}\subset Q_0} 2^{-2(i+J)}|\alpha_{i+J,k}|^2
\\&=\frac 1 {2^{-3J}}\sum_{Q_{i,k}\subset Q_0} 2^{-3J}2^{-2i}|\alpha_{i,k}|^2,
\end{align*}
where $|Q_0|\sim 1$. Thus the $BMO^{-1}$ norm is determined by taking the supremum over cubes of volume $\sim 1$. The worst case scenario for such cubes is finite by our definition of the wavelet coefficients of $f$. Therefore, $f\in BMO^{-1}$.
\end{proof}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The research of both authors was partially supported by the NSERC grant 261356-13 (Canada). That of Z.B. was also partially supported by the NSERC grant 251124-12. {We thank Dr.~Tong-Keun Chang for finding an error in a previous proof of Lemma \ref{lemma.profileslicing}. }
|
\section{Introduction}
A goal of physics is to predict as much as possible about the universe. (Here I mean `predict' in the sense of deducing from theories and assumptions about the universe, whether or not the result of the prediction has been known by observation temporally before the prediction is made.) One part of this goal would be to predict the observed constants of physics, such as the mass and charge of the proton and of the electron, and the cosmological constant. A second part would be to make approximate predictions of astronomical parameters, such as the masses, sizes, luminosities, and lifetimes of stars, and the masses, sizes, and temperatures of habitable planets. A third part would be to make rough predictions of parameters of observers, such as typical sizes for ones in some ways like humans.
The fondest hopes of many physicists would be to find a theory that predicts all the constants of physics precisely, and perhaps also the cosmological parameters. One might expect that observers would exist for some range of times within the universe and so not expect absolutely precise predictions for $t_{\mathrm{obs}}$.
For a time it was hoped that superstring/M theory would be a predictive theory of this type, ultimately leading to precise predictions of all the constants of physics (since superstring/M theory has no fundamental adjustable dimensionless constants for the dynamical theory, in distinction to such things as vacuum expectation values whose freedom can be considered to be part of the initial or boundary conditions). Some physicists, such as David Gross, continue to hold out this hope. However, it has been discovered that superstring/M theory appears to have an enormous landscape of possible vacua \cite{BP,BP2,KKLT,Susskind}, each with different effective constants of physics (what I have simply called `constants of physics' above and shall continue to do, since if superstring/M theory is correct, there are no fundamental true constants of physics other than what can in principle be deduced from mathematical constants). Therefore, superstring/M theory by itself may not give unique predictions for the constants of physics.
If the constants of physics turn out to be analogous to cosmological parameters in that they are determined by initial conditions, it might seem rather hopeless to try to predict them, unless one can get a definite theory for the initial conditions. However, the superstring/M landscape appears to have the property that there can be transitions between huge sets of the different vacua, so that perhaps some simple sets of initial states can lead to fairly definite distributions of vacua and hence of the sets of constants of physics. This could then lead to predictions of the statistical distribution of the sets of constants of physics. Nevertheless, this distribution is complicated by the fact that different vacua are expected to lead to different numbers or different distributions of observers and observations, so that the statistical distribution of observations has an observership (or `anthropic') selection effect that modifies the original distribution of the sets of constants of physics. There is the further complication that the numbers of observations for each vacuum can be infinite, leading to the necessity of performing some regularization of the results and the corresponding `measure problem' \cite{measure}. There are many competing proposals for solving the measure problem which lead to different statistical distributions of the sets of constants of physics, but so far no single proposal is so compelling that it has become universally accepted.
Here I do not wish to go deeper into this controversial issue but point out how one can use anthropic arguments for approximate relations between the mass and charge of the proton and of the electron to get definite approximate predictions for their values, and then further anthropic arguments can be used to get approximate values for many other parameters of physics, astronomy, and even biology. These approximate values can be obtained from purely mathematical equations, using no input from observed parameters that are other than integers (such as the number of generations of quarks and leptons, and the number of dimensions of space, which are not yet predicted by these arguments). Because constants like the cosmological constant are more than a hundred orders of magnitude away from Planck values, it is far too much to expect the approximate relations to give predictions with small relative errors for the quantities themselves, but for the logarithms the predictions are very close to the observed values, generally within the order of a percent.
\section{Planck units}
To avoid the historical accidents of most conventional human units, here I shall express physical parameters as dimensionless multiples of Planck units defined in terms of the speed of light $c$, Planck's reduced constant $\hbar$, Newton's gravitational constant $G$, Coulomb's electric force constant $(4\pi\epsilon_0)^{-1}$, and Boltzmann's constant $k_B$ as \cite{NIST}
Planck mass $\sqrt{\hbar c/G} = 2.176\,470(51)\times 10^{-8}$ kg,
Planck length $\sqrt{\hbar G/c^3} = 1.616\,229(38)\times 10^{-35}$ m,
Planck time $\sqrt{\hbar G/c^5} = 5.391\,16(13)\times 10^{-44}$ s,
Planck charge $\sqrt{4\pi\epsilon_0\hbar c} = 1.875\,545\,956(41)\times 10^{-18}$ C,
Planck temperature $\sqrt{\hbar c^5/G}/k_B = 1.416\,808(33)\times 10^{32}$ K,
Planck energy $\sqrt{\hbar c^5/G} = 1.956\,114(45)\times 10^9$ J $= 1.220\,910(29)\times 10^{19}$ GeV,
Planck power $c^5/G = 3.628\,37(17)\times 10^{52}$ W,
Planck energy density $c^7/(\hbar G^2) = 4.633\,25(44)\times 10^{113}$ J/m$^3$\\ $= 2.891\,85(27)\times 10^{132}$ eV/m$^3 = 0.849\,625(80)\times 10^{200}$ eV/Mpc$^3$.
The digits in parentheses at the end of the numerical values that precede the powers of 10 are the uncertainties in the corresponding number of preceding digits. Planck units other than the Planck charge involve powers of Newton's gravitational constant $G$, which has a relative standard uncertainty of $4.7\times 10^{-5}$ that dominates the uncertainties of these Planck units \cite{NIST}.
\section{Observed Physical and Astronomical Parameters}
We can now express some of the observed constants of physics \cite{NIST} that are most important in cosmology and astronomy as follows in conventional units, followed by their values in Planck units:
Elementary charge $e = 1.602\,176\,6208(98)\times 10^{-19}$ C\\
$= \sqrt{\alpha} = [137.035\,999\,139(31)]^{-1/2} = [11.7062376167(13)]^{-1} = 0.085\,424\,543\,1148(98)$.
A possible mnemonic is that $(1 + 1/160\,000\,000)/137.036$ is within the present experimental uncertainty for the fine structure constant $\alpha = e^2$, which has a relative uncertainty of $2.3\times 10^{-10}$, 200\,000 times smaller than the relative uncertainty in Newton's gravitational constant $G$.
Note that here and henceforth I shall always use $e$ as the value of the elementary charge and {\it not} for the base of the natural logarithms. If I wish to write the exponential of $x$, in this paper I shall write it as $\exp{(x)}$, and not as $e^x$, since here $e^x$ will always mean the value of the elementary charge raised to the power $x$.
Proton mass $m_p = 1.672\,621\,898(21)\times 10^{-27}$ kg $=0.938\,272\,0813(58)$ GeV/c$^2$\\$ = 7.68502(18)\times 10^{-20} = e^{17.8903452(96)} = [1.309656(31)]e^{18} = [0.999987(23)] 2^{-26} 3^{2} 5^{10} e^{18}$.
Another expression is $m_p = 1.002\,420(23)\times 2^{-127/2}$, for which an approximation within the present uncertainty is $1.0024\times 2^{-127/2}$; the second factor is experimentally indistinguishable from the inverse square root of $2^{127}-1$, the largest number ever shown by hand to be prime, by \'{E}douard Lucas in 1876, a record that is likely to last forever among humans on Earth. The factor of 1.0024 may be replaced (and slightly improved) by the small musical interval known as the vulture comma \cite{vulture}, $2^{24} 3^{-21} 5^{4} = (1/3)(320/243)^4 \approx 1.002\,428\,866$. Therefore, within the experimental uncertainties, the proton mass in Planck units is the vulture comma divided by the square root of the largest number ever shown by hand to be prime.
Electron mass $m_e = 9.109\,383\,56(11)\times 10^{-31}$ kg $=0.000\,510\,998\,9461(31)$ GeV/c$^2$\\
$ = 4.18539(10)\times 10^{-23} = e^{20.9452458(96)} = [1.144196(27)]e^{21} = [0.999982(23)] 2^{-67} 3^{38} 5^3 e^{21}$.
Mnemonic values for the electron mass that are within one standard deviation of the experimental uncertainties are $\sqrt{m_p}\alpha^6/1.00018$ and also $\sqrt{m_p}\alpha^6/1.000188$, where $1.000188 = 2^{-4} 3^6 5^{-6} 7^3 = (1/2) (1.26)^3$ is known as the landscape comma \cite{landscape}, with 1.26 being what one iteration of Newton's method gives for the cube root of 2 when one starts with the approximation $5/4 = 1.25$, which itself is the basis for the fact that a kilobyte has roughly a thousand bytes and the fact that a musical interval of four semitones in equal temperament is fairly close to a perfect major third with simple rational ratio 5/4. Therefore, within the experimental uncertainties, the electron mass in Planck units is the square root of the proton mass multiplied by the sixth power of the fine structure constant and divided by the landscape comma. Other than the correction by the division by the landscape comma, this is the result of the rather remarkable coincidence (but surely just a coincidence) that $m_e = (\sqrt{m_p}\alpha^6)^{1.00000350(46)}$, with the exponent very near unity, but still almost 8 standard deviations away from unity in terms of the present observational data.
To get a relationship that is within the uncertainties without using the landscape comma, one may introduce the hydrogen atom mass $m_H$ and replace the landscape comma by the cube root of the hydrogen-to-proton mass ratio, $(m_H/m_p)^{1/3} \approx 1.0001815$, so that (here restoring the constants $G$, $\hbar$, and $c$)
$\left(\frac{1}{\alpha}\right)^{72} \left(\frac{Gm_e^2}{\hbar c}\right)^3
\left(\frac{m_e}{m_p}\right)^6 \left(\frac{m_H}{m_p}\right)^4 = 1.000016(140)$.
Bohr radius $a_0 = \hbar/(m_e c\alpha) = m_e^{-1} e^{-2} = 0.529\,177\,210\,67(12)\times 10^{-10}$ m\\ $= 3.274\,147(75)\times 10^{22}$.
Within its experimental uncertainties, the Bohr radius in Planck units is the landscape comma divided by the square root of the proton mass (which can be taken to be the vulture comma divided by the square root of the 12th Mersenne prime) and divided by the seventh power of the fine structure constant (which for this purpose can be taken to be 1/137.036).
Density of water $\rho_{H_2O} = 999.9720$ kg/m$^3$\\
$ = 1.939\,739(91)\times 10^{-94}$.
Age of universe $t_0 = 13.80(4)$ Gyr $= 5.040(14)$ trillion days $=4.355(13)\times 10^{17}$ s\\ $= 8.08(2)\times 10^{60}$.
A mnemonic approximation well within the current uncertainty for the age of the universe in Planck units is $e^{-57}/0.98304$, where $e = \sqrt{\alpha}$ is, as always in this paper, the elementary charge in Planck units, and $1/0.98304 = 2^{-10} 3^{-1} 5^5 = 3125/3072 \approx 1.0172526$ is the magic comma \cite{magic}. Therefore, within the observational uncertainties, the age of the universe is the magic comma divided by the 57th power of the elementary charge, which gives 13.79733(32) Gyr, where here the uncertainty given for this number of gigayears comes mainly from the $4.7\times 10^{-5}$ relative uncertainty of $G$ in the Planck time; the uncertainty in the elementary charge $e$, which is less than one part in eight billion, is negligible in comparison. For this calculation, replacing $e$ by $(137.036)^{-1/2}$ gives a negligible change of the approximation for the age of the universe, then becoming 13.79734(32) Gyr.
Cosmological constant $\Lambda = [0.998(32)]$ (10 Gyr)$^{-2}$
= [10.01(16) Gyr]$^{-2} = 1.002(32)\times 10^{-35}$ s$^{-2}$\\
$ = 2.91(9)\times 10^{-122} = [0.998(32)](3\pi\,5^{-3}2^{-400}) = [1.837(59)] e^{114} \approx$ ten square attohertz.
Therefore, within its observational uncertainty, the cosmological constant is $3\pi$ divided by $5^3 2^{400}$, without, in this case, needing to multiply or divide by any small musical intervals or commas. This further leads to the simpler and more easily memorized approximation for the Gibbons-Hawking entropy of the asymptotic empty de Sitter spacetime toward which our part of the universe appears to be headed, $S_\Lambda = 3\pi/\Lambda \approx 5^3 2^{400} \approx 3.23\times 10^{122}$. One can then work backwards from this to get $\Lambda \approx 3\pi\,5^{-3}2^{-400}$ in Planck units, with the current uncertainty in the cosmological constant (about 3.2\%) sufficient in this case to avoid needing to multiply by any small comma to get agreement with observations.
It will be interesting to see how many years pass before $e$, $m_p$, $m_e$, $t_0$, and $\Lambda$ are known with sufficiently improved accuracy that the mnemonic approximations above, which are just that and are not to be interpreted to have any fundamental significance for their present agreement with observations, will need to be replaced by improved approximations in order to fit the new data.
We can further write various observed Solar System parameters in both conventional units and in Planck units:
Solar mass $M_\odot = 1.988\,49(9)\times 10^{30}$ kg $= 1476.625\,12$ m $(c^2/G)$\\ $ = 9.136\,24(21)\times 10^{37} = 0.536\,980(12) \times 2^{127} = 0.539\,582(12)\, m_p^{-2}$.
It is interesting that $e^{-114}\Lambda = 1.837(59)$ is within its uncertainty the reciprocal of the quantity $M_\odot m_p^2 = 0.539\,582(12)$, so that one can write $\Lambda M_\odot m_p^{2} \approx e^{114}$, as well as $\Lambda M_\odot \approx 2^{127} e^{114}$.
Solar radius $R_\odot = 6.957\times 10^8$ m\\ $= 4.304\times 10^{43}$.
Solar surface temperature $T_\odot = 5772$ K\\ $= 4.074\times 10^{-29}$.
Solar photon luminosity $L_\odot = 3.828\times 10^{26}$ W\\ $ = 1.055\times 10^{-26}$.
Earth mass $M_\oplus = 5.9724(3)\times 10^{24}$ kg
$= 0.004\,436\,028\,290(9)$ m $(c^2/G)\\ = 2.744\,06(6)\times 10^{32}$.
Earth radius $R_\oplus = 6.371\times 10^6$ m\\ $= 3.942\times 10^{41}$.
Earth density $\rho_\oplus = 5514$ kg/m$^3$\\$ = 1.0696\times 10^{-93}$.
Earth standard gravity $g_\oplus \equiv 9.806\,65$ m/s$^2 = 1.032\,295\, c$/(one year)\\ $= 1.763\,53(4)\times 10^{-51}$.
Astronomical unit 1 au $\equiv 149\,597\,870\,700$ m\\
$ = 499.004\,783\,838$ light seconds\\ $= 9.255\,98(21)\times 10^{45}$.
One day $t_d = 24\times 60\times 60$ s $= 86\,400$ s\\ $= 1.602\,624(37)\times 10^{48}$.
One `month' (orbital period of the Moon) $t_m = 27.321\,661$ days $= 2\,360\,591.5$ s\\ $= 4.378\,63(10)\times 10^{49}$.
One (Julian) year = 365.25 days $= 31\,557\,600$ s\\ $ = 5.853\,58(13)\times 10^{50}$.
Earth precession period $= 25\,771.575\,34$ yr\\ $= 1.508\,560(35)\times 10^{55}$.
\section{Approximate Anthropic Formulas for the Mass and Charge of the Proton and Electron}
Brandon Carter \cite{Carter1970,Carter1974,Carter2007}, who first used the phrase ``anthropic principle'' around 1973, has argued that our existence as observers is favored by certain ranges of the parameters of physics and astronomy, so that if there is a ensemble of many different sets of values, we might expect to observe the parameters to be within favored ranges. He calculated many such favored values that I shall use here, along with the results of others such as Bernard Carr and Martin Rees \cite{Carr-Rees}, William Press \cite{Press}, and Press and Alan Lightman \cite{PressLightman}. These predicted that the proton mass $m_p$ and the electron mass $m_e$ should be approximately equal to definite powers of the elementary charge $e$ (the charge of the proton, which is assumed to be the negative of the charge of the electron, as predicted by certain Grand Unified Theories).
In order that nuclei apparently necessary for life as we know it to exist, Carr and Rees \cite{Carr-Rees}, following similar suggestions by Carter \cite{Carter1970,Carter1974,Carter2007}, showed that one needs $m_e/m_p \sim 10\, e^4$. To avoid numerical factors like 10, I shall replace it by its approximate equivalent $e^{-1}$, giving $m_e \sim m_p e^3$.
Carter \cite{Carter1970,Carter1974,Carter2007}, and also Carr and Rees \cite{Carr-Rees}, argued that life might require (or at least be favored by) the existence both of stars that transmit their energy outward by convection (which might be favorable for planetary formation) and by stars that transmit their energy outward by radiative transfer (which is favorable for the formation of supernovae that produce the heavier elements apparently needed for life). This leads to the condition that $m_p^3 \sim m_e^2 e^{12}$.
Combining these two conditions leads to $m_p \sim (m_e/m_p)^2 e^{12} \sim (e^3)^2 e^{12} = e^{18}$ and then $m_e \sim e^{18} e^3 = e^{21}$. Note that these anthropically predicted exponents are very close to the empirical exponents given earlier.
A renormalization group analysis \cite{Marciano:1981un} with $n_g = 3$ generations of quarks and leptons and $N_H = 2$ relatively light Higgs doublets in low energy $SU(3)\times SU(2)\times U(1)$ shows that the inverse coupling constants run approximately linearly with the logarithm of the energy, with calculated coefficients, between the weak scale and the unification scale. By making the approximations that the proton mass (set by the point where the $SU(3)$ coupling becomes large) is logarithmically near the weak scale (the mass of the W boson), and the unification scale is logarithmically near the Planck scale, I was able to derive the relation \cite{DNP}
$\alpha^{-1} = e^{-2} \approx -(10/\pi)\ln{m_p}$.
Then setting $m_p \sim e^{18}$ leads to an equation approximately determining $e$:
$e^2\ln{e} \approx -\pi/180$.
An interesting mnemonic is that the right hand side is the negative of the number of radians in a degree. (However, surely this is just a coincidence, depending on the historical accident that the Babylonians divided a circle into 360 degrees, using 60 as a humanly convenient counting number {\it perhaps} arising from the product of the number of fingers on one human hand and the number of phalanxes on the non-thumb fingers of the other hand).
Now let us define anthropic approximations (with subscript $a$) as quantities exactly obeying these approximate equations. For example, define the anthropic estimate for the elementary charge as $e_a$, the smaller root of the equation
$e_a^2\ln{e_a} = -\pi/180$.
Then one gets
$e_a = 0.083\,927\,766\,8145 = 0.98248\, e$.
Therefore, the anthropic estimate for the elementary charge, which did not use as input {\it any} parameter with a potentially continuous range, agrees within 1.8\% with the actual observed elementary charge.
Although it is not hard to solve the equation for $e_a$ using Newton's method even just on a pocket calculator that can calculate logarithms, for mental calculations the following approximations might be memorable and useful:
$e_a \approx \frac{7}{80} - \frac{1}{280} = \frac{47}{560} \approx 10^{-1.0761} \approx 10^{-\frac{99}{92}}$.
One can then use the Carter-Carr-Rees relations \cite{Carter1970,Carter1974,Carter2007,Carr-Rees} $m_p \sim e^{18}$ and $m_e \sim e^{21}$ to get anthropic estimates for the masses of the proton and electron:
$m_{pa} \equiv e_a^{18} = 4.2688\times 10^{-20} = 0.55547\, m_p$,
$m_{ea} \equiv e_a^{21} = 2.5236\times 10^{-23} = 0.60295\, m_e$.
These have relative errors of the order of a factor of 2, which is not surprising in view of the large exponents that result in these quantities being many orders of magnitude smaller than the Planck units. For such quantities far from unity in Planck units, it is probably more meaningful to look as the relative error of the logarithms of the various quantities:
$\ln{e_a}/\ln{e} = 1.007185$, so the logarithm of this anthropic estimate for the elementary charge has a relative error of only 0.7\%.
$\ln{m_{pa}}/\ln{m_p} = 1.013359$, with a relative error of only 1.3\%, and
$\ln{m_{ea}}/\ln{m_e} = 1.009818$, with a relative error of only 1.0\%.
Therefore, by combining the Carter-Carr-Rees power law relations between the elementary charge and the masses of the proton and electron with my renormalization group logarithmic relation, one can get the logarithms of these three quantities to agree with observation with an average relative error of only 1\%. Note that the simple equations giving these quantities do not depend on any measured parameter that might have a continuous range, though they do depend on discrete integer parameters, such as the dimension of space for the Carter-Carr-Rees relations and the number of generations and of Higgs doublets for my renormalization group relation.
\section{Approximate Anthropic Estimates for Other Physical and Astronomical Parameters}
One can, from the anthropic estimates $e_a$, $m_{pa}$, and $m_{ea}$ for $e$, $m_p$, and $m_e$, readily get estimates of other atomic constants, such as for the Bohr radius $a_0 \equiv e^{-2} m_e^{-1} = 3.2741\times 10^{24}$ in Planck units:
$a_{0a} \equiv e_a^{-2} m_{ea}^{-1} \equiv e_a^{-23} = 5.6256\times 10^{24} = 1.71819\, a_0$,
$\ln{a_{0a}}/\ln{a_0} = 1.009589$.
This has a relative error of only 1.0\% for the logarithm. One can further get an estimate for the density of liquid water as
$\rho_{H_2Oa} = m_{pa}a_{0a}^{-3} = e_a^{87} = 2.3977\times 10^{-94} = 1.23609\, \rho_{H_2O}$,
$\ln{\rho_{H_2O}}/\ln{\rho_{H_2Oa}} = 1.000983$, with the very small relative error 0.10\%.
Carter and others have shown that stellar masses should be within a couple of orders of magnitude on either side of the Landau mass $M_L = m_p^{-2}$ and hence contain a number of nucleons close to the Landau number $N_L = m_p^{-3}$. Inserting the anthropic estimate for $m_p$ gives
$M_{*a} \equiv m_{pa}^{-2} \equiv e_a^{-36} = 5.4878\times 10^{38} = 6.0066\, M_\odot$, with
$\ln{M_{*a}}/\ln{M_\odot} = 1.020511$.
For such a star, estimates of the radius, temperature, and luminosity are
$R_{*a} \equiv e_a^{-5} m_{pa}^{-2} \equiv e_a^{-41} = 1.3179\times 10^{44} = 3.0616\, R_\odot$,
$T_{*a} \equiv e_a^{26.5} = 3.0444\times 10^{-29} = 4313$ K $= 0.7473\, T_\odot$,
$L_{*a} \equiv e_a^{24} = 1.4919\times 10^{-26} = 5.4131\times 10^{26}$ W $= 1.4141\, L_\odot$.
This gives
$\ln{R_{*a}}/\ln{R_\odot} = 1.013710$,
$\ln{T_{*a}}/\ln{T_\odot} = 1.004456$,
$\ln{L_\odot}/\ln{L_{*a}} = 1.005826$.
The fraction of a star's mass-energy that is converted to radiation during its lifetime is roughly $m_e/m_p \sim e^3$, which is very roughly the nuclear binding energy per nucleon of the heavier elements produced by stellar nuclear burning. Therefore, the total energy converted to radiation by a star of mass $M_*$ is roughly $M_* m_e/m_p \sim m_p^{-2} m_e/m_p = m_e m_p^{-3} \sim e^{-33}$.
Then a typical star with luminosity $L_* \sim e^{24} \sim m_e^2 m_p^{-1}$ has a lifetime $t_* \sim M_*(m_e/m_p)/L_* \sim m_e^{-1} m_p^{-2} \sim e^{-57}$. This is precisely the same power of $e$ that we found was an excellent approximation for the age of the universe when multiplied by the magic comma that is $3125/3072 \approx 1.0172526$.
One might expect that typical observers would exist at rather random times during the lifetime of the star that supports them, so that a typical observed age of the universe would be $t_0 \sim t_*$. Therefore, let us take an anthropic estimate of the observed age of the universe to be
$t_{0a} \equiv m_{ea}^{-1} m_{pa}^{-2} \equiv e_a^{-57} = 2.1746\times 10^{61}
= 37.15$ Gyr $= 2.6920\, t_0$.
The factor of 2.6920 is mainly due to the factor $(e/e_a)^{57} = (1.01783410136)^{57} = 2.738979912$; even though the anthropic estimate $e_a$ for the elementary charge is within 1.8\% of the observed elementary charge, raising it to a power of large magnitude, such as $-57$, does lead to a relative error of the anthropic estimate for the age of the universe that is a bit more than a factor of 2. However, on a logarithmic scale, the disagreement is much less:
$\ln{t_{0a}}/\ln{t_0} = 1.007061$, with relative difference only 0.7\%.
Note that this anthropic argument gives a partial explanation for the exponent of the elementary charge $e$ that occurred in the empirical mnemonic approximation for the age of the universe as the magic comma divided by the 57th power of the elementary charge, but it does not explain why one only needs to multiply this power by a factor as close to unity as the magic comma. The latter fact is surely just a numerical coincidence.
One might note that Raphael Bousso, Lawrence Hall, and Yasunori Nomura \cite{BHN} have predicted that both $t_\Lambda$ and $t_{\mathrm obs}$ (as well as the times of galaxy structure formation and galaxy cooling) should be roughly $\alpha^2/(m_e^2 m_p)$, which with my anthropic estimates comes out to be $e_a^{-56}$, which is one power of $e_a$ smaller than my estimates above, but very close on a logarithmic scale.
Another cosmological parameter, presumably a constant of physics in our part of the universe, is the energy density of dark energy, which has an approximate observed value of
$\rho_\Lambda = \Lambda/(8\pi) \approx (3/8)5^{-3}2^{-400} = 1.16178\times 10^{-123} \approx 0.00538$ erg/m$^3 \approx 3.36$ GeV/m$^3 \approx 3.58\, m_p/$m$^3$, or about the rest-mass energy of 3.6 protons per cubit meter.
(The total mass density of the present universe is about 13/9 times this, or about 5.2 protons per cubic meter \cite{cosmicmnemonics}.)
One might further expect the energy density of the dark energy to be $\rho_\Lambda \sim 1/t_0^2$, so an anthropic value is
$\rho_{\Lambda a} \equiv t_{0a}^{-2} = e_a^{114} = 2.1147\times 10^{-123} = 1.8202\, \rho_\Lambda$,
$\ln{\rho_\Lambda}/\ln{\rho_{\Lambda a}} = 1.002120$.
The logarithm of this apparent constant of physics thus has a relative error of only about 0.2\%. (More strictly, I should say the real part of the logarithm, since anthropic arguments so far do not predict the sign of the dark energy density, so it would be anthropically acceptable for the logarithm to include an additive term of $\pi i$.)
A crude anthropic estimate for the 4-volume of the observable universe, the part within our past light cone, is
4-volume $\sim e_a^{-228} = 2.236\times 10^{245}$.
Furthermore, a crude anthropic estimate for the number of stars within the observable universe is
Number of stars $\sim N_{*a} \equiv t_{0a}/M_{*a} \equiv m_{ea}^{-1} \equiv e_a^{-21} = 3.963\times 10^{22} = 0.132(3\times 10^{23})$.
The last factor in parentheses, $3\times 10^{23}$, is an observational estimate for the number of stars in the observable universe. One reason that it is over 7 times larger than the anthropic estimate is that there are more stars of smaller mass, so that the average mass of a star is rather less than the Landau mass $m_p^{-2}$.
One can also give a crude anthropic estimate for the gravitational wave strain from the collision of two black holes of the order of the Landau mass $\sim M_{*a} \equiv m_{pa}^{-2} \equiv e_a^{-36}$ at cosmological distances $\sim t_{0a} \equiv m_{ea}^{-1} m_{pa}^{-2} \equiv e_a^{-57}$, since the strain is of the order of unity near the black holes, at a distance of the order of $M_{*a}$, but then decreases inversely with the first power of the distance $r$ as the gravitational waves propagate away from the source:
Gravitational wave strain $\sim h_a \equiv M_{*a}/t_{0a} \equiv m_{ea} \equiv e_a^{21} = 2.534\times 10^{-23}$.
It is interesting that the the crude anthropic estimate for the gravitational wave strain from colliding black holes across the universe agrees with the crude anthropic estimate for the reciprocal of the number of stars in the observable universe, and that this estimate is the same as that for the mass of the electron in Planck units, which is approximately the 21st power of the elementary charge.
\section{Approximate Anthropic Estimates for Properties of\\Biology and Habitable Planets}
Now let us focus on biological properties and properties of habitable planets.
Observed normal human body temperature is about 37 C or
$T_h = 310.15$ K $= 2.1891\times 10^{-30}$.
Press \cite{Press}, and also Press and Lightman \cite{PressLightman}, have estimated biological habitable temperatures (not so low that they freeze and not so high that they cook) as
$T_h \sim 0.1(m_e/m_p)^{1/2} m_e e^4 \sim e^{27.5}$.
Let us therefore take an anthropic estimate for the temperature of the Earth as a habitable planet as
$T_{\oplus a} \equiv e_a^{27.5} = 2.555\times 10^{-30} = 366.0$ K $= 1.167 T_h$.
This is about 88 C, which is bit too hot for humans (though not for some life on Earth), but in Planck units the logarithm is only off from that of the observed normal human body temperature by about 0.2\%:
$\ln{T_h}/\ln{T_{\oplus a}} = 1.002269$.
Press \cite{Press}, and Press and Lightman \cite{PressLightman}, used the requirement that we breathe an evolved planetary atmosphere, meaning that at the temperature $T_h$, hydrogen will have mostly escaped from the planet, but not heavier gases such as oxygen. This leads to a gravitational potential at the surface of the planet of mass $M$ and radius $R$ to be $M/R$ that is just a few times $T_h/m_p \sim e^{9.5}$, say $M/R \sim e^9$. Then one notes that $M/R^3 \sim \rho_{H_2O} \sim m_{p}a_{0}^{-3} \sim e^{87}$. Solving these relations gives anthropic estimates for the radius, mass, acceleration of gravity, and satellite orbital speed of a habitable planet as
$R_{\oplus a} \equiv m_{pa}^{-1}m_{ea}^{-1} \equiv e_a^{-39} = 9.283\times 10^{41} = 15\,003$ km $= 2.355 R_\oplus$,
$\ln{R_{\oplus a}}/\ln{R_\oplus} = 1.008943$,
$M_{\oplus a} \equiv m_{pa}^{-4}m_{ea}^{2} \equiv e_a^{-30} = 1.918\times 10^{32} = 0.6989 M_\oplus$,
$\ln{M_\oplus}/\ln{M_{\oplus a}} = 1.004819$,
$g_{\oplus a} \equiv M_{\oplus a}/R_{\oplus a}^2 \equiv m_{pa}^{-2}m_{ea}^{4} \equiv e_a^{48} = 2.226\times 10^{-52} = 0.1262 g_\oplus$,
$v_{\oplus a} \equiv \sqrt{M_{\oplus a}/R_{\oplus a}} \equiv (m_{ea}/m_{pa})^{3/2} \equiv e_a^{4.5} = 0.5447 v_\oplus$.
Press and Lightman \cite{PressLightman} estimated the length of the day, $t_d = 86\,400$ s $= 1.603\times 10^{48}$, as coming from the maximum rotation rate a planet can have without breaking up, since planets generally form with angular velocity near this maximum, which is $\omega \sim (G\rho)^{1/2} \sim (G m_p/a_0^3)^{1/2} = (G m_p m_e^3 e^6)^{1/2} \sim e^{43.5}$. The length of the day is then $t_d = 2\pi/\omega \sim e^{-44}$ if we round to the nearest whole power of the elementary charge $e$, so let us take the anthropic estimate for the length of the day to be
$t_{da} \equiv e_a^{-44} = 2.229\times 10^{47} = 200.3$ minutes $= 0.1391$ day,
$\ln{t_d}/\ln{t_{da}} = 1.018093$.
This estimate for the length of the day is of course too low because the Earth has lost a significant fraction of its spin angular momentum, most particularly by tidal friction that transfers angular momentum to the Moon, and perhaps early in the Earth-Moon evolution, also to the orbital angular momentum of the Earth-Moon system around the Sun.
For the Earth surface to be at temperature $\sim T_h \sim T_{\oplus a} \equiv e_a^{27.5}$ while the surface of the Sun is at temperature $\sim T_{*a} \equiv e_a^{26.5}$, a temperature greater by a factor of $e_a^{-1} = 11.915$ (within a factor of 2 of the actual temperature ratio $5772/288 = 20.04$), the Earth should be at a distance $r \approx (1/2)R_\odot(T_\odot/T_\oplus)^2$. Dropping the factor of 1/2 and using the anthropic estimates $R_\odot \sim R_{*a} \equiv e_a^{-41}$ and $T_\odot/T_\oplus \sim T_{*a}/T_{\oplus a} \equiv e_a^{-1}$ then gives an anthropic estimate of the conventional value of the semimajor axis of the Earth's orbit, the astronomical unit, 1 au $\equiv 149\,597\,870\,700$ m\\
$= 9.255\,98(21)\times 10^{45}$, as
$r_{\oplus a} \equiv e_a^{-43} = 1.8709\times 10^{46} = 2.0213$ au,
$\ln{r_{\oplus a}}/\ln{(\mathrm{au})} = 1.006649$.
This is coincidentally a case in which if I had left in the factor of 1/2, the anthropic estimate would have been 1.0107 au, with only a 1\% error for the actual value, but I am avoiding keeping factors of 1/2 and am only trying to get the right power of the anthropic estimate $e_a = 0.083\,927\,766\,8145$ of the elementary charge.
From the anthropic estimate of the stellar mass as $M_{*a} \equiv m_{pa}^{-2} \equiv e_a^{-36}$ and of the Sun-Earth distance (the astronomical unit) as $r_{\oplus a} \equiv e_a^{-43}$, we get an anthropic estimate for the length of the year as $2\pi/\omega_o$ with orbital angular velocity obeying $\omega_o^2 \sim M_\odot/(1\ \mathrm{au})^3 \sim M_{*a}/r_{\oplus a}^3 \equiv e_a^{93} \equiv m_{pa}^4 m_{ea}$. Then approximating $2\pi$ by $e_a^{-1/2}$ gives the anthropic estimate for the length of the year (e.g., the Julian year = yr = 365.25 days $= 31\,557\,600$ s $= 5.8536\times 10^{50}$ that is conventionally used in astronomy) as
$t_{\oplus a} \equiv e_a^{-47} = 3.7708\times 10^{50} = 235.29$ days $= 0.64419$ yr,
$\ln{\mathrm{yr}}/\ln{t_{\oplus a}} = 1.003776$.
It is not at all obvious that a planet needs a moon to have life and observers, though sometimes it is suggested that tides may help the evolution of sea life near ocean shores. Also, I have no prediction for the Moon-Earth mass ratio $M_m/M_\oplus$ that we observe to have the memorable value .0123. But one can work out a crude prediction for the length of the month (taken here to be the orbital period of the Moon around the Earth, $t_m = 27.321\,661$ days $= 2\,360\,591.5$ s $=4.3786\times 10^{49}$ Planck times) from the age of the solar system, $t_{SS} = 4.5682(3)$ Gyr $= 2.6740\times 10^{60}$, the mass $M_\oplus$ and radius $R_\oplus$ of the Earth, and the Moon-Earth mass ratio $M_m/M_\oplus$. Taking this mass ratio to be significantly smaller than unity, as it is for our Earth-Moon system, $t_m \approx 2\pi \sqrt{r^3/M_\oplus}$ in terms of the Earth-Moon separation distance $r$.
The idea is that as the Moon orbits the Earth, it provides tidal friction and torque on the Earth that increases the Moon's orbital angular momentum $L = M_m r v = M_m \sqrt{M_\oplus r}$, where $v = \sqrt{M_\oplus/r}$ is the Moon's orbital velocity under the simplifying assumption that the orbit is circular.
The tidal force per mass of the Moon on masses on opposite sides of the Earth, separated by $2R_\oplus$, is $4R_\oplus GM_m/r^3$. Since I am using Planck units, I shall continue to set $G=1$. This tidal force raises a tide on the Earth by a height of the order of the radius of the Earth multiplied by the ratio of this tidal force to the Earth's acceleration of gravity, $g \approx GM_\oplus/R_\oplus^3$, which is $h \sim (M_m/M_\oplus)(R_\oplus/r)^3 R_\oplus$. The amount of mass in this tide will be of the order of $(M_m/M_\oplus)(R_\oplus/r)^3 M_\oplus = M_m (R_\oplus/r)^3$.
Assuming that the spin angular velocity of the Earth is sufficiently greater than the orbital angular velocity $\sqrt{M_m/r^3}$ of the Moon that the line between high tides on the opposite sides of the Earth is twisted by an angle of the order of unity (in radians) from the direction to the Moon, then the torque exerted by the Moon will be of the order of the tidal force of the Moon on the tide, multiplied by the radius of the Earth, or $(R_\oplus M_m/r^3)[M_m (R_\oplus/r)^3]R_\oplus$.
The time it has taken for the Moon to move out to its present radius, which is very nearly $t_{SS}$ since the Moon apparently formed shortly after the solar system did, is roughly the orbital angular momentum of the Moon divided by this torque, or
$t_{SS} \sim \frac{M_m \sqrt{M_\oplus r}}{(R_\oplus M_m/r^3)[M_m (R_\oplus/r)^3] R_\oplus} = \frac{M_\oplus}{M_m}\left(\frac{r}{R_\oplus}\right)^5\sqrt{\frac{r^3}{M_\oplus}} \sim \frac{M_\oplus}{M_m}\left(\frac{r}{R_\oplus}\right)^5 t_m \approx \frac{1}{0.0123}(60.3357)^5$ (0.074\,802\,631 yr) = 4.8628 Gyr $= 1.0645 t_{SS}$, fortuitously within 7\% of the correct answer.
If one writes $t_{SS} \sim \frac{\rho_\oplus}{\rho_m}\left(\frac{R_m}{R_\oplus}\right)^2 \left(\frac{r}{R_m}\right)^5 t_m$, all but the first factor can be determined by observations of the Moon's angular size in the sky, the curvature of the Earth's shadow on the Moon during a lunar eclipse, and the length of the month. Then if one just assumes that the ratio of densities is of the order of unity, one gets an estimate for the age of the solar system that is 2.95 Gyr, which is about 65\% of the actual age but again within a factor of 2 of the correct answer.
If in $t_{SS} \sim \frac{M_\oplus}{M_m}\left(\frac{r}{R_\oplus}\right)^5 t_m$ we replace $r$ by $(M_\oplus t_m^2)^{1/3}$ and $M_\oplus/r_\oplus^3$ by $\rho_\oplus$, we get $t_{SS} \sim (M_\oplus/M_m)\rho_\oplus^{5/3}t_m^{13/3}$, which one can solve for the length of the month as $t_m \sim (M_m/M_\oplus)^{3/13}\rho_\oplus^{-5/13}t_{SS}^{3/13}$. Then assuming that $(M_m/M_\oplus)^{3/13}$ is of the order of unity (it is 0.36242 for the Earth-Moon system) and using the anthropic estimates $\rho_\oplus \sim \rho_{H_2Oa} \equiv m_{pa}a_{0a}^{-3} \equiv m_{pa}^{-1}m_{ea}^5 \equiv e_a^{87}$ and $t_{SS} \sim t_{0a} \equiv m_{ea}^{-1} m_{pa}^{-2} \equiv e_a^{-57}$ gives an anthropic estimate for the length of the month as
$t_{ma} \equiv \rho_{H_2Oa}^{-5/13}t_{0a}^{3/13} \equiv m_{pa}^{-1/13}m_{ea}^{-28/13} \equiv e_a^{-606/13} = e_a^{-46.6154} = 1.4540\times 10^{50} = 90.7235$ days $= 3.3206\, t_m$,
$\ln{t_{ma}}/\ln{t_m} = 1.010500$.
If we had inserted the factor $(M_m/M_\oplus)^{3/13} = 0.36242$ for the Earth-Moon system, which so far as I know is not determined by anthropic reasoning, then one gets 32.8798 days $= 1.2034 t_m$.
The spin of the Earth precesses because of the tidal torque by the Moon and the Sun, with a precession time $t_p = 25\,771.575\,34$ years that may be estimated by dividing the spin angular momentum of the Earth, $L_\oplus \sim M_\oplus R_\oplus^2 \omega_\oplus$, by the torque from the Moon (the main source), which is $\tau \sim f M_\oplus M_m R_\oplus^2/r^3$ with Earth-Moon distance $r$ as before, and with $f = 1/298.257\,223\,563$ being the flattening factor for the Earth whose order of magnitude is $f \sim \omega_\oplus^2/\rho_\oplus$. Using the length of the day as $t_d \approx 2\pi/\omega_\oplus$ and dropping factors like $2\pi$ then gives
$t_p \sim \frac{\rho_\oplus}{\rho_m}\left(\frac{r}{R_m}\right)^3 t_d = 48\,956$ yr $= 1.900 t_p$.
Adding the tidal effect of the Sun would reduce the precession time by a factor of 0.68514 to 33\,542 yr $= 1.3015 t_p$. If one ignored the effect of the Sun and also the ratio of the densities of the Earth and Moon, and wrote $R_\oplus/r = \theta_m \approx 1/220$ as the average angular radius of the Moon as seen from Earth, then one gets
$t_p \sim t_d/\theta_m^3 \approx 220^3$ days $= 10\,648\,000$ days $= 29\,153$ years $= 1.13\, t_p$.
Thus just from simple observations (but not anthropic reasoning), one can estimate the Earth's precession period as the length of the day divided by the cube of the angular radius of the Moon in the sky.
To estimate the Earth's precession period from anthropic considerations rather than from observations, return to
$t_p \sim \frac{\rho_\oplus}{\rho_m}\left(\frac{r}{R_m}\right)^3 t_d = \frac{M_\oplus}{M_m}\left(\frac{r}{R_\oplus}\right)^3 t_d \sim \frac{M_\oplus}{M_m}\rho_\oplus t_m^2 t_d$.
Now if we drop the $M_\oplus/M_m$ factor that is about 81.3 for the Earth-Moon system but which I do not know how to estimate anthropically, and if we use our previous estimates $\rho_\oplus \sim \rho_{H_2Oa} \equiv e_a^{87}$, $t_m \sim t_{ma} \equiv e_a^{-606/13}$, and $t_d \sim t_{da} \equiv e_a^{-44}$, then we get the following anthropic estimate for the Earth's precession period:
$t_{pa} \equiv \rho_{H_2Oa} t_{ma}^2 t_{da} \equiv e_a^{-653/13} = e_a^{-50.2308} = 1.1299\times 10^{54} = 1930.3$ yr $= 0.074900\, t_p$,
$\ln{t_p}/\ln{t_{pa}} = 1.020822$.
The relative error for $t_{pa}$ is larger than for $t_{ma}$ because $M_\oplus/M_m$ comes in with exponent $+1$ for $t_p$ rather than with the exponent $-3/13$ that is much closer to zero that it has for $t_m$. In fact, including the factor $M_\oplus/M_m \approx 81.3$ for the Earth-Moon system would make $(M_\oplus/M_m) t_{pa} = 6.089\, t_p$, now too large.
\section{Approximate Anthropic Estimates for the Tallest\\Running Animal}
Press and Lightman \cite{PressLightman} estimate the peak power output of an animal of temperature $T$ and height $h$ to be limited by the cooling rate which they estimate as $P \sim CTh$, where they estimate the conductivity as $C \sim m_e^2 e^6 (m_e/m_p)^{1/2}$. The anthropic estimates of Carter \cite{Carter1970,Carter1974,Carter2007} and of Carr and Rees \cite{Carr-Rees} would then make $C \sim e^{49.5}$. Since this is just an order-of-magnitude estimate, for later convenience when combined with other anthropic estimates, I shall round the exponent down to 49 and define my anthropic estimate for the conductivity to be $C_a \equiv e_a^{49}$.
Now I shall equate this to the power expended during running for the tallest land animal (e.g., a giraffe) \cite{giraffe}, which for an animal of mass $m \sim \rho_{H_2O} h^3$ and height $h$ running at speed $v$ Press and Lightman estimate to be $P \sim mv^3/h$, using up energy $\sim mv^2$ during each stride time $\sim h/v$. Going beyond Press and Lightman \cite{PressLightman}, I assume that the running speed $v$ is roughly the speed of a pendulum of length $h$ undergoing large-amplitude oscillations, so $v \sim \sqrt{g_\oplus h}$.
Today the tallest running animal on Earth is a giraffe, for which the tallest recorded had a height $h_g = 5.88$ m $=3.64\times 10^{35}$.
Equating $P \sim m g_\oplus^{3/2} h^{1/2} \sim \rho_{H_2O} g_\oplus^{3/2} h^{7/2}$ to $P \sim CTh$ then gives $h^{5/2} \sim T C \rho_{H_2O}^{-1} g_\oplus^{-3/2} \sim e_a^{27.5+49-87-72} = e_a^{-82.5}$, which leads to the following anthropic estimate for the height of the tallest running land animal:
$h_a \equiv e_a^{-33} = 3.2442\times 10^{35} = 5.2434$ m $= 0.892 h_g$,
$\ln{h_g}/\ln{h_a} = 1.001401$,\\
so the logarithm is correct to within one part in 700.
Using $h_a \equiv e_a^{-33}$ and $g_{\oplus a} \equiv e_a^{48}$ gives an estimate of the stride time and running speed for the tallest running animal as
$t_a \equiv \sqrt{h_a/g_{\oplus a}} \equiv e_a^{-40.5} = 3.8179\times 10^{43} = 2.058$ s,
$v_a \equiv \sqrt{g_{\oplus a} h_a} \equiv e_a^{7.5} = 8.4975\times 10^{-9} = 2.5475$ m/s = 9.1710 km/hr.
This is perhaps about the speed an old theorist like me can run for a short period of time, though even if I could maintain this speed for a long time, it would take 4.6009 hours ($3.0723\times 10^{47}$ Planck times) to run a marathon, whose length is exactly 26 miles and 385 yards, or 138\,435 feet, or 42.194\,988 kilometers, or $2.610\,706(61)\times 10^{39}$ Planck units. This time of 4.6009 hours is 2.2453 times the best time of 2 hours 2 minutes 57 seconds, or 7377 seconds, or 2.049\,167 hours, or $1.368\,351(32)\times 10^{47}$ Planck times.
One can also get an anthropic estimate for the specific power or power per mass of the tallest running animal as
$p_a \equiv v_a^3/h_a \equiv g_{\oplus a}^{3/2} h_a^{1/2} \equiv e_a^{55.5} = 1.8913\times 10^{-60} = 3.1530$ W/kg = 65.110 kilocalories/day/kg,
which is about 6.5 times a measurement \cite{REE} of 9.99 kilocalories per day per kilogram of the derivative of the resting energy expenditure in healthy
human individuals with respect to mass (at fixed height, age, and sex).
It is interesting that this anthropic estimate of the specific power of the tallest land animal while running is just a factor of $e_a^{-1.5} = 41.128$ times the anthropic estimate of the Hubble expansion rate of the universe, $t_{0a}^{-1} \equiv e_a^{-57} = 1.5831$ kilocalories/day/kilogram, which is about 16\% of the 9.99 kilocalories/day/kilogram mentioned above. If one takes instead the measured value of the Hubble constant, $H_0 = 67.8(9)$ km/s/Mpc, this corresponds to 0.198(3) W/kg.
Thus a convenient unit for the specific power of humans might be the {\it{hubble}}, which could be defined as the square of the speed of light multiplied by some nominal value of the Hubble constant, such as one that gives
1 hubble $\equiv 0.2$ W/kg $\approx 4.130\,019\,120\,46$ kilocalories/day/kilogram.
Then the hubble would be a unit of specific power is within the range of typical values for humans and other large animals. For example, if it went with 100\% efficiency into climbing (gaining altitude at constant velocity) with the Earth standard acceleration of gravity $g_\oplus \equiv 9.806\,65$ m/s$^2$, then one hubble would correspond to a climbing rate of 73.4196 meters per hour, or 240.878 feet per hour.
\section{Conclusions}
Therefore, if we take the two anthropic power-law relations Brandon Carter \cite{Carter1970,Carter1974,Carter2007}, and Bernard Carr and Martin Rees \cite{Carr-Rees}, found between the elementary charge $e$ and the masses of the proton $m_p$ and electron $m_e$, and combine them with the logarithmic renormalization group relation I found \cite{DNP}, one gets unique anthropic estimates for the elementary charge $e$ as the smaller solution of $e_a^2\ln{e_a} = -\pi/180$, namely $e_a = 0.083\,927\,766\,8145 \approx 47/560 \approx 10^{-1.0761} \approx 10^{-99/92}$, for the mass of the proton as $m_{pa} = e_a^{18}$, and for the mass of the electron as $m_{ea} = e_a^{21}$.
Then one can use both old and new physical, astronomical, and anthropic arguments to get estimates of the masses, sizes, and times of such things as atoms, giraffes, the Earth, the Sun, the day, the month, the year, the Earth precession time, the age of the solar system, and the age of the universe. In Planck units, the estimated logarithms of these quantities are usually within a few percent or less of the observed quantities.
Another proposal \cite{BH,BFLR1,BFRL2} is that the huge size of the universe, and the tiny value of the cosmological constant, is related to the number of vacua in the landscape. This might be so, but the absolute value of the common logarithm of the cosmological constant is just a bit more than 120, whereas the usual number given as an estimate for the common logarithm of the number of vacua is 500 (which might itself be an underestimate by a large factor). So at present it appears that the logarithm of the number of vacua may be more than four times the logarithm of the inverse cosmological constant, more than 400 times the error in the estimates of the logarithm of the inverse cosmological constant from the anthropic considerations given in this paper. Of course, the arguments used in this paper are more complex and depend more specifically upon the observed structure of the effective laws of physics in our part of the landscape than the more generic arguments of the competing proposal, so one might hope that such a simpler explanation would be viable. However, the success of the present anthropic arguments for giving good estimates for the logarithms of the size of the universe and other structures within it suggests that there may be a strong anthropic weighting toward universes that have the anthropic relations that Carter, Carr, Rees, Press, Lightman, Bousso, Hall, Nomura, and others have discovered, along with the renormalization group properties I have found that allows one to convert those anthropic relations to definite predictions of the size of the observable universe and its parts.
I have benefited from discussions on this subject with Raphael Bousso and Juan Maldacena. I appreciated the hospitality of the George P.\ and Cynthia W.\ Mitchell Institute for Fundamental Physics and Astronomy of Texas A \& M University. and of the Mitchell family at the Cook's Branch Nature Conservancy, where part of this paper was prepared. I am also grateful for the hospitality of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, where the first part of this paper was written up. Other parts were prepared during the hospitality of Paul Davies and the Beyond Center of Arizona State University and during the hospitality of Gabor Kunstatter at the Physics Department of the University of Winnipeg. This research was supported in part by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
\baselineskip 4pt
|
\section{Introduction}
In our everyday life most\footnote{GPS technology provides an exception, as it has recently become a part of many peoples day to day life and it crucially relies on knowledge of gravitational time dilation, an effect not captured by Newtonian physics.} gravitational phenomena are perfectly well described by Newtonian physics. But by making very precise measurements one can observe deviations from this theory, which are predicted by Einsteins theory of General Relativity (GR). The series of deviations is captured in the so called Post-Newtonian expansion, see \cite{Poisson:2014} for a pedagogic introduction. It is a valid approximation to GR in a regime of weak gravitational fields and small velocities. In most applications, where one is interested in computing these corrections as efficiently as possible, one starts by choosing a coordinate system that simplifies the relevant fields as much as possible. From a more conceptual point of view one could wonder if this expansion can be performed without giving up the general covariance of GR. Indeed this is the case, and it can be shown \cite{Kunzle:1976, Ehlers:1981, Dautcourt:1990} that the leading order in such a covariant expansion produces so called Newton-Cartan gravity, a covariant formulation of Newtonian gravity. Furthermore this covariant procedure can be extended to higher order \cite{Dautcourt:1996pm, Tichy:2011te} and coincides with the more standard Post-Newtonian expansion once particular coordinates are chosen.
In this paper we revisit the non-relativistic expansion of \cite{Dautcourt:1990, Dautcourt:1996pm, Tichy:2011te}, which is formulated as a large $c$ expansion of a family of metrics parametrized by the speed of light $c$. In that derivation it is assumed that the relativistic metric is such that the associated Levi-Cevita connection remains finite in the large $c$ limit. Although this might appear a natural assumption at first, one should keep in mind that the metric is allowed to diverge as $c\rightarrow \infty$. So why not the connection one could ask. In this work we relax this assumption and find that it leads to rather interesting observations, both mathematically and physically.
From the mathematical point of view we show that first of all everything, including the geodesic equation, remains consistent if one allows the Levi-Civita connection to formally diverge. Moreover the effective theory that describes approximate solutions to the Einstein equations up to Next to Next to Leading order (NNLO) in large $c$ is a generalization of standard Newton-Cartan theory where the Newton-Cartan connection now contains torsion. Interestingly enough such torsional Newton-Cartan geometries have been studied only recently in a rather different set of contexts, see for example \cite{Christensen:2013lma, Bergshoeff:2014uea, Bekaert:2014bwa, Hartong:2015zia, Geracie:2015dea, Banerjee:2016laq, Bergshoeff:2017btm}. The theory that appears out of the large $c$ expansion of GR has, as a consequence of the Einstein equations, what is called in the previously mentioned literature {\it twistless} torsion. It is standard to refer to this particular case of Newton-Cartan geometry as TTNC geometry. Although the geometry is rather well understood, the possible dynamic equations for its fields, turning the theory into something that could be called TTNC gravity, seems to be not very much explored. In \cite{Afshar:2015aku} equations where constructed using conformal tensor calculus methods, but the equations we find here, see table \ref{eomtable}, appear different and are as far as we know only the second set of explicit equations compatible with TTNC geometry that have been found so far. In \cite{Hartong:2015zia} a set of actions in 3 dimensions was constructed and a relation between TTNC gravity and Hořava-Lifshitz gravity was established. It would be interesting to see if there is some overlap with our effective theory arising out of GR.
From the physical point of view our work appears interesting as the torsion corresponds to a non-trivial timelike warpfactor already at the leading $c^2$ order. This should be compared to the standard Newtonian potential which appears in the same warpfactor, but at the subleading $c^0$ order. This implies first of all that this expansion captures effects that are {\it not} included in the standard Post-Newtonian expansion, as that expansion starts from the assumption of gravitational fields weak enough so that the $c^2$ timelike warpfactor is trivial, or in other words it assumes the metric is a weak field correction to the Minkowski metric. The generalized expansion we work out here also works around metrics which do not necessarily have this weak field form. In particular, the additional non-relativistic torsion that it includes appears at a {\it lower} order than the Newtonian potential, or said differently, at 'Pre-Newtonian' order. In summary it seems our expansion captures certain non-relativistic, but strong gravitational physics that is absent in the standard Post-Newtonian expansion which only captures non-relativistic, weak gravitational effects.
Although the previous arguments are nice conceptually, it would be extremely interesting if one could find actual real world physical situations that fall into this non-relativistic strong gravity regime, and to see if this generalized expansion can have any practical use.
Finally let us stress that although our effective non-relativistic theory has torsion, it is an approximation at large $c$ of standard relativistic GR {\it without} torsion.
The paper is organized as follows. First we rewrite the large $c$ expansion of the relativistic metric in terms of variables naturally appearing in Newton-Cartan geometry in section \ref{secgeom}. In section \ref{eqsec} we then compute the non-relativistic equations that are equivalent to the relativistic Einstein equations up to NNLO in large $c$. The remaining part of the paper is then used to discuss various mathematical and physical aspects of the effective non-relativistic theory, in section \ref{comsec}. Note that we there also provide an explicit example. Finally we have added appendix \ref{partsec}, where we discuss the geodesic equation in this expansion, to show that allowing the relativistic connection to diverge at large $c$ does not lead to inconsistencies. Although we provide a number of technical details there we feel a better physical understanding of the expanded geodesic equations is still missing.
\section{Expansion of the geometry}\label{secgeom}
In this section we introduce the expansion of the relativistic metric in powers of $c$, following \cite{Dautcourt:1990, Dautcourt:1996pm, Tichy:2011te}. We then repackage the independent coefficients in this expansion into objects that appear naturally in the formalism of non-relativistic geometry, see for example \cite{Hartong:2015zia}. As the standard Poisson equation of Newtonian gravity appears at NNLO in the equations of motion \cite{Dautcourt:1990}, we will keep track of all independent fields that appear up to NNLO. A number of those fields happen to drop out of the equations of motion up to NNLO, but we want to stress and make explicitly clear that this is an outcome, not an assumption. For this reason we work out the expansion of the geometry without imposing any dynamical constraints yet. Furthermore in \cite{Dautcourt:1990, Dautcourt:1996pm, Tichy:2011te} it was assumed that as $c\rightarrow \infty$ the relativistic Levi-Civita connection remains finite. We will perform the expansion without making this assumption and we will discuss the physical interpretation and consequences of this in section \ref{schsec}.
\subsection{Starting ansatz}
We assume an expansion of the metric ($D=d+1$, Lorentzian) in even powers\footnote{One can argue \cite{Dautcourt:1990} that odd powers of $c$ will only appear at higher order than we are interested in. This implies that one does not lose any generality by restricting to even powers here. Still this will be one of the few assumptions we put into the formalism from the start. It might be interesting to allow odd terms in the expansion from the beginning and see directly from the equations of motion that they can be consistently put to zero.} of a variable $c$ (thought of physically as the speed of light):
\begin{equation}
g_{\mu \nu} = \sum_{i=-1}^\infty \os{g}{2$i$}\!_{\mu\nu} c^{-2i} \qquad g^{\mu \nu}= \sum_{i=0}^\infty\os{g}{2$i$}^{\mu\nu} c^{-2i}\label{metexp}
\end{equation}
We furthermore assume that $\os{g}{-2}\!_{\mu\nu}$ is of rank 1 and negative, so we can write
\begin{equation}
\os{g}{-2}\!_{\mu\nu}=-\tau_\mu\tau_\nu
\end{equation}
\subsection{Diffeomorphisms}\label{difsec}
Before we start a detailed analysis of this expansion and its consequences it will be useful to investigate its behavior under diffeomorphisms, as was stressed in \cite{Tichy:2011te}. Where general relativity is invariant under coordinate transformations that can be arbitrary functions of $c$, the ansatz \eqref{metexp} is only preserved by diffeomorphisms that are analytic in $c^{-2}$. These are generated by vectorfields of the form
\begin{equation}
\xi^\mu=\sum_{i=0}^\infty \os{\xi}{$2i$}^\mu c^{-2i}
\end{equation}
For tensors of the form $T=\sum_{i=i_\mathrm{min}}^\infty \os{T}{$2i$}c^{-2i}$ the coefficients then transform as
\begin{equation}
\delta_\xi \os{T}{$2i$}=\cal L_{\os{\xi}{0}}\os{T}{$2i$}+\sum_{j=i_\mathrm{min}}^{i-1}\cal L_{\os{\xi}{$2i-2j$}}\os{T}{$2j$}
\end{equation}
First of all we see that all tensor coefficients transform as tensors under $c$-independent diffeomorphisms, generated by $\os{\xi}{0}$. For this reason we will from now on simply refer to the transformations generated by $\os{\xi}{0}$ as 'the' diffeomorphisms of the expansion.
In addition there is an infinite amount of additional gauge symmetries, that originate from the diffeorphisms with subleading $c$-dependence, which act in a more non-trivial way, mixing different coefficients. Note that up to some fixed order of the expansion there is however only a finite number of those that act non-trivially, as under those transformations a given coefficient only gets contributions from lower order coefficients, never from higher order ones.
It will be useful to repeat this same analysis in the case of a connection. Assuming a connection with the expansion $\Gamma^\lambda_{\mu\nu}=\sum_{i=-1}^\infty\os{\Gamma}{$2i$}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda c^{-2i}$ one computes that
\begin{equation}
\delta_{\xi}\os{\Gamma}{$2i$}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda=\cal L_{\os{\xi}{0}}\os{\Gamma}{$2i$}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda+\partial_\mu\partial_\nu \os{\xi}{$2i$}^\lambda+\sum_{j=-1}^{i-1}\cal L_{\os{\xi}{$2i-2j$}}\os{\Gamma}{$2j$}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda\label{condif}
\end{equation}
This transformation is interesting as it tells us that only one coefficient of the connection will act as a connection in the expanded theory while all others will behave as tensors. Indeed, as we identified $\os{\xi}{0}^\mu$ as the diffeomorphisms we see that it is only $\os{\Gamma}{0}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda$ which transforms as a connection, while all other coefficients transform as tensors under $\os{\xi}{0}^\mu$ generated diffeomorphisms. Again there are the additional symmetries generated by the $\os{\xi}{$2i$}^\mu$, $i>0$, under which the coefficients transform in a more complicated fashion.
\subsection{Metric invertibility}
The two expansions \eqref{metexp} are of course related by the condition that one series provides the inverse of the other. We can expand this condition $g_{\mu\rho}g^{\rho\nu}=\delta_{\mu}^{\nu}$ order by order and solve the resulting equations explicitely. As a first step one obtains from the leading equation (order $c^2$) the result that
\begin{equation}
\os{g}{0}^{\mu\nu}=h^{\mu\nu}\qquad\mbox{with}\qquad h^{\mu\nu}\tau_\nu=0\label{hdef}
\end{equation}
For the actual metric $g_{\mu\nu}$ to be non-degenerate $h^{\mu\nu}$ will need to have rank 3.
Before continuing it turns out to be useful to introduce two new, but dependent, fields $\tau^\mu$ and $h_{\mu\nu}$ that are defined via the conditions
\begin{equation}
\tau_\nu\tau^\nu+h_{\mu\rho}h^{\rho\nu}=\delta^\nu_\mu\qquad \tau^\rho\tau^\sigma h_{\rho\sigma}=0\label{projdef}
\end{equation}
These equations uniquely define the new fields only if we make an identification by gauge transformations of the form
\begin{equation}
\delta_\chi \tau^\mu=-h^{\mu\rho}\chi_\rho\qquad \delta_\chi{h_{\mu\nu}}=\tau_\mu\chi_\nu+\tau_\nu\chi_\mu\qquad \label{boosttransfo}
\end{equation}
Here the gauge parameter $\chi_\mu$ is purely 'spatial', i.e. $\tau^\rho\chi_\rho=0$.
This gauge transformation which we here introduced 'by hand' corresponds to the local Galilean boost symmetry in the Newton-Cartan literature, see e.g. \cite{Andringa:2010it}, so we will henceforth also refer to such transformations as boost transformations.
The main use of the relation \eqref{projdef} is that it provides two complementary projectors
\begin{equation}
\tau_\mu{}^\nu=\tau_\mu\tau^\nu \qquad h_\mu{}^\nu=h_{\mu\rho}h^{\rho\nu}
\end{equation}
We can now decompose all further metric coefficients in the expansions \eqref{metexp} along these projectors and this is a great help in solving the expanded inverse condition. The result is that both metric and inverse metric coefficients up to NNLO can be written in terms of two independent vector fields $C_\mu$ and $B_\mu$ and two symmetric 'spatial' tensors $\beta^{\mu\nu}$ and $\gamma^{\mu\nu}$. More precisely one finds that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\os{g}{0}\!_{\mu\nu}&=&2\tau_{(\mu}C_{\nu)}+h_{\mu\nu}\\
\os{g}{2}^{\mu\nu}&=&- \tau^\mu\tau^\nu+2\tau^{(\mu}h^{\nu)\lambda}C_\lambda+\beta^{\mu\nu}\\
\os{g}{2}\!_{\mu\nu}&=&B_\mu\tau_\nu+\tau_\mu B_\nu-C_\mu C_\nu-h_{\mu\rho}h_{\nu\sigma}\beta^{\rho\sigma}\\
\os{g}{4}^{\mu\nu}&=&\left(h^{\rho\sigma}C_\rho C_\sigma-2\tau^\rho C_\rho\right)\tau^\mu\tau^\nu+2\tau^{(\mu}h^{\nu)\rho}\left( B_{\rho}+(C_\sigma\tau^\sigma)C_\rho+h_{\rho\lambda}C_\sigma \beta^{\sigma\lambda}\right)+\gamma^{\mu\nu}
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\tau_\rho\beta^{\rho\mu}=\tau_\rho\gamma^{\rho\mu}=0$ and $\beta^{[\mu\nu]}=\gamma^{[\mu\nu]}=0$.
The metric coefficients are of course defined independently of the projectors we introduced and so should not transform under the boost symmetry \eqref{boosttransfo}. This then implies that the new fields need to transform as\footnote{It is straightforward to work out the boost transformations of the fields $B_\mu$ and $\gamma^{\mu\nu}$. As they will play no role in the rest of this work we don't explicitely write out these transformations here.}
\begin{equation}
\delta_\chi C_\mu=-\chi_\mu\qquad\qquad
\delta_\chi \beta^{\mu\nu}=-2\chi^{(\mu} h^{\nu)\rho}C_\rho
\end{equation}
Because the original metric $g_{\mu\nu}(c)$ is invariant under the boost transformations all derived objects and physical equations should be expressible in terms of boost-invariant quantities. There is a natural set of those:
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat \tau^\mu&=&\tau^\mu-h^{\mu\nu}C_\nu\label{htau}\\ \hat{h}_{\mu\nu}&=&h_{\mu\nu}+2\tau_{(\mu}C_{\nu)}+2 \hat{\Phi}\tau_\mu\tau_\nu\\ \hat{\Phi}&=&-\tau^\rho C_\rho+\frac{1}{2}h^{\rho\sigma}C_\rho C_\sigma\\
\hat{\beta}^{\mu\nu}&=&\beta^{\mu\nu}+h^{\mu\rho}h^{\mu\sigma}C_\rho C_\sigma\label{hbeta}\\
\hat{B}_\mu&=&B_\mu+h_{\mu\rho}\beta^{\rho\sigma}C_\sigma+\frac{1}{2}\tau_\mu \left(\beta^{\rho\sigma}C_\rho C_\sigma+(\tau^\rho C_\rho-h^{\rho\sigma}C_\rho C_\sigma)^2\right)\nonumber\\
&&-C_\mu(\tau^\rho C_\rho-h^{\rho\sigma}C_\rho C_\sigma)\\
\hat{\gamma}^{\mu\nu}&=&\gamma^{\mu\nu}+2h^{\rho(\mu}h^{\nu)\sigma}C_\rho\left(\hat B_\sigma-2\hat{\Phi}C_\sigma\right)
\end{eqnarray}
Note that these hatted, boost invariant variables satisfy constraints similar to the orginal fields:
\begin{equation}
\tau_\nu\hat \tau^\nu+\hat h_{\mu\rho}h^{\rho\nu}=\delta^\nu_\mu\qquad \hat\tau^\rho\hat\tau^\sigma\hat h_{\rho\sigma}=0\qquad \tau_\mu \hat{\beta}^{\mu\nu}=0\qquad \tau_\mu\hat\gamma^{\mu\nu}=0\label{hprojdef}
\end{equation}
It will also be useful to define the boost invariant projectors
\begin{equation}
\hat{\tau}_{\mu}{}^\nu=\tau_\mu \hat \tau^\nu\qquad \hat{h}_{\mu}{}^\nu=\hat h_{\mu\rho} h^{\rho\nu}
\end{equation}
We have summarized the expression of the coefficients of the metric and its inverse up to NNLO in terms of these boost invariant variables in table \ref{metrictable}.
\begin{table}
\framebox[1.1\linewidth]{\begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\begin{center}
\bf{\caption{\label{metrictable}The metric and its inverse.}}
\end{center}
\paragraph{LO}
\begin{eqnarray*}
\os{g}{-2}\!_{\mu\nu}&=&-\tau_\mu\tau_\nu\\
\os{g}{0}^{\mu\nu}&=&h^{\mu\nu}
\end{eqnarray*}
\paragraph{NLO}
\begin{eqnarray*}
\os{g}{0}\!_{\mu\nu}&=&-2\hat \Phi \tau_\mu\tau_\nu+\hat{h}_{\mu\nu}\\
\os{g}{2}^{\mu\nu}&=&- \hat\tau^\mu\hat\tau^\nu+\hat\beta^{\mu\nu}
\end{eqnarray*}
\paragraph{NNLO}
\begin{eqnarray*}
\os{g}{2}\!_{\mu\nu}&=&\tau_\mu\hat B_\nu+\tau_\nu\hat B_\mu-\hat{h}_{\mu\rho}\hat{h}_{\nu\sigma}\hat{\beta}^{\rho\sigma}\\
\os{g}{4}^{\mu\nu}&=& 2\hat{\Phi}\hat{\tau}^\mu\hat{\tau}^\nu+2\hat{\tau}^{(\mu}h^{\nu)\rho}\hat{B}_\rho+\hat{\gamma}^{\mu\nu}
\end{eqnarray*}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\end{minipage}}
\end{table}
\subsection{Metric compatibility}
The conditions that $\nabla_\mu g_{\nu\rho}=0$ and $\nabla_\mu g^{\nu\rho}=0$ with respect to the Levi-Civita connection can also be expanded order by order. At LO this leads to a trivial algebraic identity if one uses the explicit form of the metric coefficients obtained by the inverse condition, see table \ref{metrictable}. More interesting is the NLO part of the above compatibility conditions which read
\begin{eqnarray*}
\os{\nabla}{0}_\mu h^{\nu\lambda}&=&-\os{\Gamma}{-2}_{\mu\rho}^\nu \os{g}{2}^{\rho\lambda}-\os{\Gamma}{-2}_{\mu\rho}^\lambda \os{g}{2}^{\rho\nu}\\
\os{\nabla}{0}_\mu\left(\tau_\nu\tau_\lambda\right)&=&-\os{\Gamma}{-2}_{\mu\nu}^\rho \os{g}{0}\!_{\rho\lambda}-\os{\Gamma}{-2}_{\mu\lambda}^\rho \os{g}{0}\!_{\rho\nu}
\end{eqnarray*}
Let us first note that indeed these are good tensorial equations, as we learned from the analysis in section \ref{difsec} that indeed $\os{\Gamma}{0}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda$ transforms as a connection while $\os{\Gamma}{-2}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda$ transforms as a tensor. The above equations suggest that when $\os{\Gamma}{-2}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda\neq0$, the connection $\os{\Gamma}{0}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda$ is not the most natural connection for the expanded theory, as it is not compatible with the structure provided by $h^{\mu\nu}$ and $\tau_\mu$. This is the first place where our work differs from that of \cite{Dautcourt:1990, Dautcourt:1996pm, Tichy:2011te}, where $\os{\Gamma}{-2}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda$ was {\it assumed} to be zero. Working out the explicit form of the RHS of the above equation in terms of the fields appearing in the metric coefficients one realizes however that the above equations can equivalently be rewritten as
\begin{equation}
\os{\nabla}{nc}_\mu h^{\nu\lambda}=0\qquad\mbox{and}\qquad
\os{\nabla}{nc}_\mu\tau_\nu=0\label{nccompat}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\os{\Gamma}{nc}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda=\os{\Gamma}{0}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda+\left(-\hat{\tau}^\lambda\hat{\tau}^\rho+\hat{\beta}^{\lambda\rho}\right)\left(\tau_\mu\partial_{[\nu}\tau_{\rho]}+\tau_\nu\partial_{[\mu}\tau_{\rho]}-\tau_\rho\partial_{[\mu}\tau_{\nu]}\right)\label{ncdef}
\end{equation}
We will refer to this connection as the Newton-Cartan connection. Working out the explicit form of $\os{\Gamma}{0}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda$ in terms of the metric coefficients one finds, via table \ref{metrictable}, that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ncexplicit}
\os{\Gamma}{nc}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda&=&\frac{1}{2}h^{\lambda\rho}\left(\partial_\mu h_{\rho\nu}+\partial_\nu h_{\mu\rho}-\partial_\rho h_{\mu\nu}\right)+h^{\lambda\rho}\tau_{(\mu}K_{\nu)\rho}+\tau^\lambda\partial_{\mu}\tau_\nu\\&&+h^{\lambda\rho}\left(C_\mu\partial_{[\nu}\tau_{\rho]} +C_\nu\partial_{[\mu}\tau_{\rho]}-C_\rho\partial_{[\mu}\tau_{\nu]}\right)\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{1}{2}h^{\lambda\rho}\left(\partial_\mu \hat h_{\rho\nu}+\partial_\nu \hat h_{\mu\rho}-\partial_\rho \hat h_{\mu\nu}+2\partial_\rho \hat \Phi \tau_\mu\tau_\nu-4\hat{\Phi}(\tau_\mu\partial_{[\nu}\tau_{\rho]}+\tau_\nu\partial_{[\mu}\tau_{\rho]})\right)+\hat\tau^\lambda\partial_{\mu}\tau_\nu\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation}
K_{\mu\nu}=\partial_\mu C_\nu-\partial_\nu C_\mu\,.
\end{equation}
First of all it is interesting to note that contrary to $\os{\Gamma}{0}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda$ the connection $\os{\Gamma}{nc}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda$ is independent of the field $\hat{\beta}^{\mu\nu}$. Furthermore from the second expression for $\os{\Gamma}{nc}_{\mu\nu}^\lambda$ in \eqref{ncexplicit} one sees that it is manifestly boost-invariant and that it has a torsion $\os{\mathrm{T}}{nc}^\lambda{}_{\mu\nu}=2\os{\Gamma}{nc}_{[\mu\nu]}^\lambda$, which itself is also boost-invariant, that is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\os{\mathrm{T}}{nc}^\lambda{}_{\mu\nu}&=&2\hat\tau^\lambda\partial_{[\mu}\tau_{\nu]}\,.\label{torsion}
\end{eqnarray}
The compatibility conditions \eqref{nccompat} together with the degeneracy condition \eqref{hdef} are the defining equations of Newton-Cartan, or Galilean, geometry see for example \cite{Bekaert:2014bwa}. Although traditionally the connection is furthermore assumed to be torsionless the more general case including torsion has been introduced and studied in for example \cite{Hartong:2015zia, Bekaert:2014bwa}. What is interesting is that our analysis gives a precise meaning to all the fields appearing in the Newton-Cartan connection \eqref{ncdef} in terms of particular coefficients in the expansion of a relativistic, $c$ dependent metric, through table \ref{metrictable} and equation \eqref{metexp}.
\section{Expansion of the Einstein equations}\label{eqsec}
In this section we feed the expansion \eqref{metexp}, rewritten as in table \ref{metrictable}, into the Einstein equations up to NNLO. The resulting equations, summarized in table \ref{eomtable}, provide a dynamics for the fields of the torsional Newton-Cartan geometry that appeared in the previous section. When one puts the torsion to zero the results reduce to that of \cite{Dautcourt:1990, Dautcourt:1996pm, Tichy:2011te}.
\subsection{Setup}
We will write the Einstein equations as
\begin{equation}
R_{\mu\nu}=8\pi G_\mathrm{N}\,\cal T_{\mu\nu}\,,\qquad \cal T_{\mu\nu}=c^{-4}\left(T_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{D-2}g_{\mu\nu}g^{\rho\sigma}T_{\rho\sigma}\right)
\end{equation}
Given the expansion of the metric \eqref{metexp} one finds a corresponding expansion of the Ricci tensor
\begin{equation}
R_{\mu\nu}=\sum_{i=-2}^{\infty}\os{R}{2$i$}_{\mu\nu} c^{-2i}\label{ricexp}
\end{equation}
For this to be consistent with the Einstein equations also the energy momentum must have a similar expansion:
\begin{equation}
\cal T_{\mu\nu}=\sum_{i=-2}^{\infty}\os{\cal T}{2$i$}_{\mu\nu} c^{-2i}\label{texp}
\end{equation}
Although in full generality one could consider $\os{\cal T}{-4}_{\mu\nu}\neq 0$ we will restrict ourselves in this work to the case where
\begin{equation}
\os{\cal T}{-4}_{\mu\nu}=0\qquad\qquad \mbox{(assumption)}\label{emassump}
\end{equation}
\subsection{LO: Twistless torsion}
The coefficients in this expansion can now be explicitly computed in terms of the fields appearing in table \ref{metrictable}. For the leading term of the Ricci tensor one finds
\begin{eqnarray}
\os{R}{-4}_{\mu\nu}&=&\tau_\mu\tau_\nu h^{\kappa\lambda}h^{\rho\sigma}\partial_{[\kappa}\tau_{\rho]}\partial_{[\lambda}\tau_{\sigma]}\label{ricconstr}
\end{eqnarray}
Together with the assumption \eqref{emassump} this leads to the LO equation in table \ref{eomtable}.
It is instructive to provide some details on the solution of that LO equation. The first of the relations \eqref{hprojdef} implies we can make the following decomposition
\begin{equation}
\partial_{[\mu}\tau_{\nu]}=2\tau_{[\mu}\hat a_{\nu]}+\hat h_{\mu\rho}\hat h_{\nu\sigma}\hat a^{\rho\sigma}
\end{equation}
where $\hat a^{\mu\nu}$ is antisymmetric and without loss of generality we can choose
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat \tau^\rho \hat a_\rho&=&0\\
\tau_\rho \hat a^{\rho\mu}&=&0
\end{eqnarray} Using this decomposition it then immediatly follows that the LO equation in table \ref{eomtable} is equivalent to $\hat a^{\mu\nu}=0$. We can then summarize
\begin{equation}
h^{\kappa\lambda}h^{\rho\sigma}\partial_{[\kappa}\tau_{\rho]}\partial_{[\lambda}\tau_{\sigma]}=0\qquad\Leftrightarrow\qquad\partial_{[\mu}\tau_{\nu]}=\tau_{[\mu}\hat a_{\nu]}\qquad\Leftrightarrow\qquad \tau_{[\mu}\partial_\nu\tau_{\lambda]}=0\label{adef}
\end{equation}
Here the implication in the last equivalence is straightforward and the other direction follows from the observation that for any $p$-form $\omega$ and 1-form $\tau$ such that $\omega\wedge\tau=0$ there needs to exist a $p-1$-form $\alpha$ such that $\omega=\tau\wedge \alpha$.
Note that the 1-form $\hat a_\mu$ is not a new independent field, but is directly related to the 1-form $\tau$ via
\begin{equation}
\hat a_\mu=\cal L_{\hat \tau} \tau_\mu\,.
\end{equation}
This form also explicitely shows that $\hat a_\mu$ is boost invariant.
The condition \eqref{adef} can be seen as constraints on the torsion \eqref{torsion} of the Newton-Cartan connection. Torsion satisfying this constraint has appeared before in the Newton-Cartan literature, see for example \cite{Hartong:2015zia, Bekaert:2014bwa} and is referred to as {\it twistless torsion}. It has the physical interpretation of providing a spacelike foliation, so that all observers can agree on a common direction of time. This condition for the torsion to be twistless simplifies the expansion at higher orders quite a bit, and it will be used in the rest of this paper. As this condition is directly related to the assumption \eqref{emassump} one could contemplate relaxing it, which would further generalize the expansion. We leave this for possible future work.
\subsection{NLO \& NNLO: TTNC gravity}
Using the twistlessness of the torsion obtained at LO we now extend the calculation to NLO and NNLO. Through straightforward but somewhat tedious algebra the relevant coefficients of the Ricci tensor are computed to be
\begin{eqnarray}
\os{R}{-2}_{\mu\nu}\!&=&\!-\tau_\mu\tau_{\nu}h^{\lambda\rho}D_{\lambda}\hat a_\rho\label{higherRic}\\
\os{R}{0}_{\mu\nu}\!
&=&\!\os{R}{nc}_{\mu\nu}+\hat h_\mu{}^\rho \hat{h}_{\nu}{}^\sigma D_{\rho} \hat{a}_\sigma+\tau_\mu\tau_\nu\!\left(h^{\rho\sigma}\hat{a}_\rho \partial_\sigma(\hat{\Phi}+\frac{1}{2}\hat{\beta})- D_\rho(\hat{\beta}^{\rho\sigma}\hat{a}_\sigma)\right)+\overline{\cal K}_{\mu\rho}\tau_\nu h^{\rho\sigma} \hat{a}_\sigma\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Here $\os{R}{nc}_{\mu\nu}$ is the Ricci tensor of the connection \eqref{ncexplicit}. To keep the expressions compact we introduced the additional notation:
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat{\beta}=\hat{\beta}^{\rho\sigma}\hat h_{\rho\sigma}\,,\qquad&
D_\mu=\os{\nabla}{nc}_\mu-\hat a_\mu&\qquad\mbox{and}\quad
\overline{\cal K}_{\mu\nu}=\hat{\cal K}_{\mu\nu}-\hat{h}_{\mu\nu}h^{\rho\sigma}\hat{\cal K}_{\rho\sigma}\,.
\end{eqnarray}
The following extrinsic curvature appears:
\begin{equation}
\hat\cal K_{\mu\nu}
=\frac{1}{2}\cal L_{\hat\tau} \hat h_{\mu\nu}=\hat{h}_{\rho(\mu}\hat{h}_{\nu)}{}^{\sigma}\os{\nabla}{nc}_\sigma \hat{\tau^\rho}
\end{equation}
The equations of motion follow by equating the Ricci coefficients to the corresponding energy momentum and can be found in table \ref{eomtable}. Note that consistency requires
\begin{equation}
h^{\mu\nu}\os{\cal T}{-2}_{\nu\rho}=0\,.
\end{equation}
\begin{table}
\framebox[1.1\linewidth]{\begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\begin{center}
\bf{\caption{\label{eomtable}The equations of motion.}}
\end{center}
\paragraph{LO}
\begin{equation*}
h^{\kappa\lambda}h^{\rho\sigma}\partial_{[\kappa}\tau_{\rho]}\partial_{[\lambda}\tau_{\sigma]}=0
\end{equation*}
\paragraph{NLO}
\begin{equation*}
-\tau_\mu\tau_\nu h^{\lambda\rho}D_{\lambda}\hat a_\rho=8\pi G_\mathrm{N}\os{\cal T}{-2}_{\mu\nu}
\end{equation*}
\paragraph{NNLO}
\begin{equation*}
\os{R}{nc}_{\mu\nu}=-\hat h_\mu{}^\rho \hat{h}_{\nu}{}^\sigma D_{\rho} \hat{a}_\sigma-\tau_\mu\tau_\nu\left(h^{\rho\sigma}\hat{a}_\rho \partial_\sigma(\hat{\Phi}+\frac{1}{2}\hat{\beta})- D_\rho(\hat{\beta}^{\rho\sigma}\hat{a}_\sigma)\right)-\overline{\cal K}_{\mu\rho}\tau_\nu h^{\rho\sigma} \hat{a}_\sigma+8\pi G_\mathrm{N}\os{\cal T}{0}_{\mu\nu}
\end{equation*}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\end{minipage}}
\end{table}
\section{Comments on the effective TTNC gravity theory}\label{comsec}
In this section we collect a number of remarks about the system of equations in table \ref{eomtable}, which for simplicity we will refer to as the TTNC equations.
\subsection{Gauge Symmetries}
The TTNC equations of motion in table \eqref{eomtable} are invariant under a number of symmetries. The most obvious one, due to the manifest tensorial form of the equations, is that under diffeomorphisms. As explained in section \ref{difsec}, these diffeomorphisms of the effective theory have their origin in the $c$ independent diffeomorphisms $\os{\xi}{0}$ of General Relativity.
A second symmetry which is rather manifest is the boost symmetry \eqref{boosttransfo}, since only boost invariant objects appear in the TTNC equations.
There is however a third gauge symmetry, which is less manifest. It originates in the fact that the original expansion up to NNLO is also invariant under diffeomorphisms that are proportional to $c^{-2}$, generated by the $\os{\xi}{2}$ of section \ref{difsec}. Using the decomposition in table \ref{metrictable} we can express the action of these subleading diffeos on the metric as transformations of the non-relativistic effective fields. In doing so it is useful to introduce the notation
\begin{equation}
\Lambda=\tau_\rho \os{\xi}{2}^\rho\,,\quad \zeta^\mu=\hat{h}_\rho{}^\mu \os{\xi}{2}^\rho\,,\qquad D_\mu\Lambda=\partial_\mu\Lambda+\hat{a}_\mu\Lambda
\end{equation}
One then finds the following transformations\footnote{Fields not appearing, like $\tau_\mu$ and $h^{\mu\nu}$, are invariant.}
\begin{eqnarray}
&\delta_\Lambda\hat{\tau}^\mu=h^{\mu\rho}D_\rho\Lambda \qquad
\delta_\Lambda\hat{h}_{\mu\nu}=-2\tau_{(\mu}\hat{h}_{\nu)}{}^\rho D_\rho\Lambda
\qquad\delta_\Lambda\hat{\Phi}=\hat{\tau}^\rho D_\rho\Lambda&\nonumber\\
&\delta_\Lambda\hat{a}_\mu=-\tau_\mu \hat{a}_\rho h^{\rho\sigma}D_\sigma\Lambda\qquad\qquad
\delta_\Lambda\hat{\beta}^{\mu\nu}=-2 h^{\mu\rho}h^{\nu\sigma}\hat{\cal K}_{\rho\sigma}\Lambda&
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{equation}
\delta_\zeta\hat{\Phi}=-\hat{a}_\rho \zeta^\rho\qquad\qquad
\delta_\zeta\hat{\beta}^{\mu\nu}=-2h^{\rho(\mu}\os{\nabla}{nc}_\rho \zeta^{\nu)}
\end{equation}
Note that as any tensor, see section \ref{difsec}, also the energy momentum coefficients transform:
\begin{equation}
\delta_\Lambda \os{\cal T}{0}_{\mu\nu}=\cal L_{\Lambda\hat{\tau}}\os{\cal T}{-2}_{\mu\nu}\qquad\qquad \delta_\zeta \os{\cal T}{0}_{\mu\nu}=\cal L_{\zeta}\os{\cal T}{-2}_{\mu\nu}
\end{equation}
Although somewhat involved, one can explicitly check that the TTNC equations of table \ref{eomtable} are invariant under these local transformations.
\subsection{Absence and removal of higher order fields}
Note that when expanding out the metric and its inverse up to NNLO, as in table \ref{metrictable}, they are composed out of a rather large set of different objects:
\begin{equation}
\tau_\mu, h^{\mu\nu}, \hat \tau^\mu, \hat h_{\mu\nu}, \hat{\Phi}, \hat{\beta}^{\mu\nu}, \hat B_\mu, \hat{\gamma}^{\mu\nu}\,.
\end{equation}
The first observation is that the fields $\hat B_\mu$ and $\hat{\gamma}^{\mu\nu}$ do not appear at all in the equations of motion up to NNLO, see table \ref{eomtable}. This implies that at this order of approximation they are completely undetermined and one would need to go to higher order to fix them.
At first sight the field $\hat{\beta}^{\mu\nu}$ appears more mysteriously. It enters the equations of motion in table \ref{eomtable}, in a purely algebraic way, but is absent in other discussions of TTNC geometry in the literature. The key is to realize it can always be removed by using the extra gauge transformations, discussed in the previous subsection, that are also absent in other discussions of TTNC. Indeed, $\hat{\beta}^{\mu\nu}$ only appears in the equations of motion through $\hat{\beta}$ and $\hat{\beta}^{\mu\nu}\hat{a}_\nu$, which constitute $D$ arbitrary functions. But these also transform non-trivially under exactly $D$ independent gauge transformations, explicitly
\begin{equation}
\delta\hat{\beta}=-2(\os{\nabla}{nc}_\rho\zeta^\rho+\Lambda\hat{\cal K})\qquad\qquad \delta(\hat{\beta}^{\mu\nu}\hat{a}_\nu)=-2(h^{\rho(\mu}\os{\nabla}{nc}_\rho \zeta^{\nu)}+ h^{\mu\rho}h^{\nu\sigma}\hat{\cal K}_{\rho\sigma}\Lambda)\hat{a}_\nu
\end{equation}
So one can always go to a gauge where $\hat{\beta}=\hat{\beta}^{\mu\nu}\hat{a}_\nu=0$ {}\footnote{Note that also the energy momentum might depend on $\hat{\beta}^{\mu\nu}$, in that case the gauge that would make $\hat{\beta}^{\mu\nu}$ disappear could be slightly different, but we expect the argument to still hold.}, as this would amount to solving a set of $D$ linear (first-order differential) equations for $\Lambda$ and $\zeta$.
After this gauge fixing we find ourselves exactly in the established framework of TTNC, with fields $\tau_\mu, h^{\mu\nu}, \hat \tau^\mu, \hat h_{\mu\nu}, \hat{\Phi}$ and no extra gauge transformations. Note that up to boost transformations these fields are all determined in terms of $\tau_\mu$, $h^{\mu\nu}$ and $C_\mu$, and that our TTNC equations provide exactly the right number of equations to solve for all unconstrained components of those.
From the point of view of the relativistic metric \eqref{metexp} that we are approximating, we have learned that certain components of the NLO and NNLO coefficients can be put to zero by $c$ dependent coordinate transformations, other components are left completely arbitrary and can only be fixed by going to higher order, while a few components, such as for example $\hat{\tau}^\mu\hat{\tau}^\nu\os{g}{-4}_{\mu\nu}=\hat{\Phi}$ are completely determined already by the equations of motion at NNLO.
\subsection{Relation to other non-relativistic gravity theories}
First we comment on what happens when we put the torsion $\hat a_\mu$ to zero. It is important to note that one is only free to do so in case $\os{\cal T}{-2}_{\mu\nu}=0$, otherwise the torsion will be sourced and one is forced to turn it on. It is easy to check that when the torsion is put to zero the equations reduce to that of standard torsionless Newton-Cartan gravity. This is of course no surprise as in this case our analysis reduces to that of \cite{Dautcourt:1990, Dautcourt:1996pm, Tichy:2011te}. One interesting observation is however that in the torsionless case the fields $\hat{\beta}^{\mu\nu}$ drop automatically out of the equations in table \ref{eomtable}. This means we no longer need to fix the additional gauge transformations to remove this field. The $\zeta$ transformations are there but act trivially on all the fields that enter in the equations up to NNLO. The $\Lambda$ transformation is more interesting. Exactly when the torsion is zero it simplifies to a U(1) action on the field $C_\mu$:
\begin{equation}
\delta_\Lambda C_\mu=-\partial_\mu\Lambda
\end{equation}
This is the well known U(1) symmetry related to the Bargmann central extension of the Galilei algebra \cite{Andringa:2010it} and so we see that it arises out of GR as a diffeomorphism subleading in $c$.
It is interesting to wonder if our TTNC theory of table \ref{eomtable} is related to other theories recently proposed. In \cite{Afshar:2015aku} dynamical equations for TTNC were constructed, but a detailed comparison reveals that the equation determining the Ricci tensor of the NC-connection is different. Furthermore, although in that reference the torsion is twistless, they do not impose an additional equation for the torsion, as our NLO equation in table \ref{eomtable} does. It appears that contrary to torsionless NC, for TTNC there are many inequivalent equations of motion consistent with all the symmetries. One of those appears out of an expansion of GR and it would be interesting to understand if it has some special features compared to the others, or if there is a different relativistic origin for these others as well.
It is possible that our equations are an example of a Hořava-Lifshitz (HL) gravity. The relation between TTNC dynamics and HL gravity was worked out in full generality in three dimensions in \cite{Hartong:2015zia}. This was done at the level of the action however and no equations of motion were provided. It would be interesting to compare this to our TTNC equations by either computing the equations of motion following from \cite{Hartong:2015zia} or by deriving an action for our equations.
\subsection{Physical interpretation and an example solution}\label{schsec}
The direct origin in GR allows us to give an interpretation of the physical role torsion plays in the effective non-relativistic theory in table \ref{eomtable}. When there is no torsion, i.e. $d\tau=0$, we can always choose coordinates such that $\tau_\mu=\delta_\mu^0$. Via the expansion \eqref{metexp} and table \ref{metrictable} we see that the leading timelike warpfactor, at order $c^2$, is trivially 1. When there is non-zero twistless torsion, i.e. $\tau\wedge d\tau=0$, we can choose coordinates such that $\tau_\mu= e^\frac{\psi}{2}\delta_\mu^0$. In the relativistic metric \eqref{metexp} this implies that there is now a non-trivial timelike warpfactor\footnote{Some readers might wonder if one can not always go to Gaussian normal coordinates and put the timelike warpfactor to 1. This is true, but it would not respect the form of the expansion \eqref{metexp}. In particular it would introduce fractional powers of $c$, as can be seen for example in the case of the Schwarzschild metric in Gaussian normal coordinates:
\begin{equation*}
ds^2=-c^2d\sigma^2+\frac{2G_\mathrm{N}m}{c^2r(\sigma,\rho)}d\rho^2+r(\sigma,\rho)^2d\Omega^2 \qquad r(\sigma,\rho)=\left(\frac{3}{2}\sqrt{2G_\mathrm{N}m}(\sigma+\rho c^{-1})\right)^{2/3}\,.
\end{equation*}
In case the theory under consideration is not pure gravity, but also contains a dilaton-like scalar, then one can go to a different conformal frame where the metric has a trivial leading timelike warpfactor, see for example \cite{Julia:1994bs, Bleeken:2015ykr}.} $e^\psi$ at order $c^2$. Note that the NLO equation in table \ref{eomtable} provides an effective nonrelativistic equation of motion for this warpfactor $e^\psi$. In summary we can draw the conclusion that this generalized expansion also includes strong time dilation effects, which are absent in the standard post-Newtonian expansion. As these strong time dilation appears at a {\it lower} order than the Newtonian potential, one could refer to the equations LO a NLO in table \ref{eomtable} as 'pre-Newtonian' order.
Note that the existence of this generalized expansion should not be too much of a surprise. Indeed, as discussed in detail in e.g. \cite{Poisson:2014}, the Post-Newtonian expansion is not simply a large $c$ expansion but also a weak field expansion. In particular it describes the non-relativistic sector of the so called post-Minkowskian expansion which starts from metrics with small deviations from Minkowski space. This however begs the question if there could be strong field regimes where the physics remains non-relativistic. The expansion of this paper seems to describe exactly such a regime. In case the torsion is non-vanishing we have an order $c^2$ timelike warpfactor, meaning that at leading order the metric is no longer Minkowski but rather some background with strong gravity. Said in yet another way, the torsion seems to include strong time dilation effects which in the standard Newtonian regime are absent. Our expansion shows they can be included while preserving the non-relativistic character of the effective theory.
It will be illustrative to analyze these remarks in an explicit example. Apart from providing some insight in the physical regime described by the effective TTNC gravity in table \ref{eomtable} this will also provide an explicit solution to those equations, providing a check on the mathematical consistency of our expansion.
Let us quickly review the standard Newtonian description of the Schwarzschild metric in our formalism:
\begin{eqnarray}
ds^2&=&-c^2\left(1-\frac{2mG_\mathrm{N}}{rc^2}\right)dt^2+\left(1-\frac{2mG_\mathrm{N}}{rc^2}\right)^{-1}dr^2+r^2d\Omega^2\label{weakbhmetric}\\
&=&-c^2 dt^2+\frac{2mG_\mathrm{N}}{r}dt^2+dr^2+r^2d\Omega^2+\cal O(c^{-2})
\end{eqnarray}
Via the expansion \eqref{metexp} and table \ref{metrictable} one reads of that this metric corresponds to the nonrelativistic fields
\begin{equation}
\tau_0=1\,,\ \ \tau_i=0\,,\qquad h_{ij}=\delta_{ij}\,,\ \ h_{0\mu}=0\,,\qquad C_0=\frac{m G_\mathrm{N}}{r}\,,\ \ C_i=0\,.
\end{equation}
In particular we see that this is a torsionless configuration, $d\tau=0$, and we recognize the Newtonian potential of a point mass in $C_0$, it is well known that this solves the NC equations to which the TTNC equations in table \ref{eomtable} reduce in this case. All of this illustrates some comments made above, as we see that in the large $c$ limit the non-trivial part of the warp factor is subleading and the metric at leading order is Minkowski space, so we are not only in the non-relativistic regime but also in the weak field regime.
This last remark however suggests a way to probe another regime of the Schwarzschild metric. In the previous expansion we formally send $c\rightarrow \infty$ while keeping $m$ fixed. We could consider scaling the mass such that we keep $M=m/c^2$ fixed. The real world analog, where $c$ is large but not infinite, of this would be a situation where $\frac{2mG_\mathrm{N}}{rc^2}=\cal O(1)$. In this regime the expansion of Schwarzschild looks rather different:
\begin{equation}
ds^2=-c^2\left(1-\frac{2MG_\mathrm{N}}{r}\right)dt^2+\left(1-\frac{2MG_\mathrm{N}}{r}\right)^{-1}dr^2+r^2(d\theta^2+\sin^2\theta d\phi)\label{bhmetric}
\end{equation}
Note that the formal expansion \eqref{metexp} of this metric actually truncates at order $c^0$. We can now simply read off that
\begin{eqnarray}
\tau_\mu&=&\left(1-\frac{2MG_\mathrm{N}}{r}\right)^{1/2}\delta_{\mu}^t\\
h_{\mu\nu}&=&\begin{pmatrix}
0&0&0&0\\
0&\left(1-\frac{2MG_\mathrm{N}}{r}\right)^{-1}&0&0\\
0&0&r^2&0\\
0&0&0& r^2\sin^2\theta\\
\end{pmatrix}\\
C_\mu&=& B_\mu=0\\
\beta_{\mu\nu}&=&\psi^{\mu\nu}=0
\end{eqnarray}
From this one computes that
\begin{equation}
\hat a_\mu=\left(0,-\frac{MG_\mathrm{N}}{r^2}\left(1-\frac{2MG_\mathrm{N}}{r}\right)^{-1},0,0\right)
\end{equation}
So we now have an effective non-relativistic description with non-zero torsion! Doing a few further computations one can check that the non-relativistic fields above do indeed provide a non-trivial solution of the TTNC equations in table \ref{eomtable}. A few useful results in that computation are that $\hat{\cal K}_{\mu\nu}=0$ and
\begin{eqnarray*}
\os{R}{nc}_{\mu\nu}&=&-\hat h_\mu{}^\rho \hat{h}_{\nu}{}^\sigma D_{\rho} \hat{a}_\sigma=\frac{M}{r^3}\hat{h}_{\mu\nu}-3\frac{r}{MG_\mathrm{N}}\left(1-\frac{2MG_\mathrm{N}}{r}\right)\hat a_\mu\hat a_\nu\\
&=&\frac{MG_\mathrm{N}}{r^3}\begin{pmatrix}
0&0&0&0\\
0&-\left(1-\frac{2MG_\mathrm{N}}{r}\right)^{-1}&0&0\\
0&0&r^2&0\\
0&0&0& r^2\sin^2\theta\\
\end{pmatrix}
\end{eqnarray*}
This second way of expanding the Schwarschild\footnote{One could consider a similar expansion for the Kerr metric. It turns out that the difference between Kerr and Schwarzschild only shows up at orders higher than NNLO. We thank Hasret Nur for working this out.} metric illustrates our main point, namely that in the case where gravity remains strong at large $c$, here obtained by assuming the mass to be of order $c^2$, the strong time dilation effects are encoded in the effective non-relativistic theory as (twistless) torsion.
Finally it is interesting to point out that in this second expansion the Newtonian potential is actually zero. In this strong gravitational regime the non-relativistic physics of the Schwarzschild metric can be completely described by non-zero torsion and a curved spatial metric, with a vanishing Newtonian potential!
\section*{Acknowledgements}
It is a pleasure to thank H. Afshar, E. Bergshoeff, J. Hartong, H. Nur, N. Obers, J. Rosseel and \c{C}.Yunus for valuable discussions and correspondence. Part of this work has been previously presented at IPM Tehran, State University of Yerevan and the Simons Center for Geometry and Physics. This work was partially supported by the Bo\u{g}azi\c{c}i University Research Fund under grant number 17B03P1.
|
\subsection*{Timing Matters}
How and when did the first supermassive black holes form? Although there may not be a universal pathway, rapid seeding or growth is unavoidable within our current understanding of the most distant quasars. The first SMBHs were likely to have co-assembled within the first galaxies a few hundred million years after the Big Bang. Remarkably, primordial galaxies that could delay the onset of star formation seem to facilitate a mechanism to produce massive ($10^4$--$10^6\,\Msun$) black hole seeds, which form ``in one go'' from gas clouds with inefficient cooling. Such clouds thereby maintain high thermal pressure support, which in turn suppresses fragmentation and thus star formation. These direct collapse black holes (DCBHs) circumvent the timing crisis. DCBHs can form only early in cosmic history when a specific set of rare conditions is satisfied. At redshifts $z \gtrsim 10$, they are still beyond the reach of current telescopes. Progress will be made with next-generation observatories using wide-field surveys and follow-up deep observations of select objects. Ultimately, this will provide compelling evidence for or against formation scenarios involving direct-collapse, persistent hyper-Eddington accretion, or other more exotic possibilities \citep[e.g.][]{Dolgov_Silk_1993}. In the sections below, we briefly review the historical development of ideas about the first SMBH seeds, the physics of their formation and radiative feedback, recent progress, and our outlook for the future. Figure~\ref{fig:M_BH} provides a schematic overview of the quasar-seed timing problem.
\fig{M_BH}
\subsection*{Cosmological context}
The standard cosmological model involves dark energy and cold dark matter ($\Lambda$CDM). Both ingredients remain mysterious in terms of their underlying physics. However, the $\Lambda$CDM model matches data across scales extending from large-scale structures to galaxy formation and evolution. Historically, supermassive black hole research predates the recent cosmological perspective. Summarizing these earlier insights, \citet{Rees_1984} discussed possible routes for runaway growth in active galactic nuclei. In isolated environments, possible formation pathways include: stellar-remnant black holes after vigorous gas accretion; dense star clusters in which runaway collisions trigger the formation of a SMBH; or a cluster of post-supernovae neutron stars or black holes coalescing in the dynamically unstable central core of the galaxy. In cosmology, SMBHs can grow over longer timescales via episodic galaxy mergers and accretion from streams of cold gas along filaments of the cosmic web \citep{Mayer_2010,Mayer_2015}. Still, it was recognized that a gas cloud may conceivably bypass conventional star formation and yield a near-extremal Kerr black hole if cooling does not initiate fragmentation \citep{Rees_1984}.
Early simulations of collapsing primordial gas clouds showed that most of the gas does indeed fragment into dense stellar clumps which eventually virialize into a spheroidal galactic bulge \citep{Loeb_Rasio_1994}. The emergence of a SMBH would thus be forestalled. On the other hand, if a central seed black hole of mass $\gtrsim 10^6~\Msun$ were to form during the collapse then it could quickly grow by steady accretion to a quasar-size black hole \citep{Li_2007}. Otherwise dynamical instabilities in the inner region of the disc would inhibit the accretion required for such growth. The crucial bottleneck is the formation of the initial, million solar-mass, seed. Either way, realistic modeling of massive black hole inception is highly complex and ultimately relies on understanding both small- and large-scale phenomena. For example, low angular momentum configurations would help facilitate runaway collapse because the centrifugal barrier is significantly lower; in this context, quasar seeds could be a natural consequence of the initial collapse of regions with unusually small rotation \citep{Eisenstein_Loeb_1995}. Such low-spin cosmological perturbations might provide environments in which SMBH formation is an extreme manifestation of the $\Lambda$CDM model.
\subsection*{Forming the first massive black holes}
The main contenders for the earliest quasar seeds are DCBHs, super-Eddington accretion onto stellar remnant black holes, and runaway collisions in dense star clusters. Here we focus on DCBHs and highlight recent theoretical and observational evidence for this new class of black hole seeds; we discuss the alternative scenarios briefly.
In typical galactic environments black hole accretion is episodic because of self-regulating radiative feedback which yields accretion rates that are sub-Eddington when averaged over multiple duty cycles \citep{Johnson_2007,Milosavljevic_2009}. However, maintaining super-Eddington accretion is possible when the black hole is embedded within sufficiently dense gas; this renders the radiation pressure less effective \citep[e.g.][]{Wyithe_Loeb_2012,Pacucci_2015}. Based on one-dimensional radiation-hydrodynamics simulations, \citet{Inayoshi_2016} find accretion rates exceeding $\dot{M}_\bullet \gtrsim 10^3~L_\text{Edd}/c^2$ when the following condition is satisfied: $(n_\infty/10^5\,\text{cm}^{-3}) > (M_\bullet/10^4\,\Msun)^{-1}\;(T_\infty/10^4\,\text{K})^{3/2}$, where $n_\infty$ and $T_\infty$ are the density and temperature of the ambient gas. It remains an open question whether such growth rates are sustainable considering the violent assembly environments of the first galaxies where newly formed stars and supernovae blow away the surrounding gas. Other scenarios may also work, such as dense star clusters that undergo runaway collapse. With a ubiquitous supply of cold gas effectively trapping accretion radiation, a $\sim 10\,\Msun$ black hole seed undergoing random motions through the cluster may initiate supra-exponential growth over a dynamical timescale \citep{Alexander_2014}.
\fig{cooling}
On the other hand, forming a DCBH requires collapse without fragmentation, a cosmic ``miracle'' of sorts, that is naturally explained within the context of galaxy formation theory. The idea is that if a primordial gas cloud, devoid of any heavy chemical elements (``metals'' in astronomical terminology), is bathed in a sea of ultraviolet radiation then it will be unable to cool and form stars (figure~\ref{fig:cooling}). Specifically, according to the Jeans criterion for triggering gravitational instability, high thermal pressure is required to prevent the gas cloud from fragmenting. In present-day star-forming clouds, line cooling by heavy elements and dust radiates away thermal energy that would otherwise provide stability. But in the early universe only hydrogen and helium were available to cool the gas. Thus, a small abundance of molecular hydrogen (H$_2$) played a key role as the primary cooling agent below the $\sim 8000$\,K accessible via atomic hydrogen line cooling. If strong non-ionizing Lyman-Werner radiation (LW; with photon energies below $13.6$\;eV) from neighbouring galaxies photodissociates H$_2$ then the evolutionary track through density-temperature phase space is significantly altered (see Fig.~\ref{fig:cooling}). Only atomic cooling primarily through the Lyman-$\alpha$ (Ly-$\alpha$) line of hydrogen efficiently keeps the collapsing core below $\sim 10^4$\,K. The first idealized models of isothermal collapse including H$_2$ photodissociation still predicted that the cloud breaks up at late stages despite the higher temperature track \citep{Omakai_2001}. Gas collapse may be entirely suppressed in the minihaloes, with virial masses of $M_\text{vir} \lesssim 10^6\,\Msun$, that are predicted to host the first stars, when the LW background flux is above a critical value. More massive host haloes, on the other hand, in general become self-shielding so that molecules can form again, eventually leading to star formation \citep{Oh_Haiman_2002}. However, \citet{Bromm_Loeb_2003}, carrying out the first simulations of this collapse with cosmological initial conditions, recognized that under conditions of unusually strong LW irradiation, the inflow would continue on its near-isothermal track. The resulting free-fall collapse of the atomically-cooling gas could then produce massive black holes directly. Subsequently, the DCBH model has received increased attention \citep[e.g.][]{Begelman_2006,Regan_2009,Choi_2013,Choi_2015}. This body of work is broadly reviewed in \citet{Volonteri_2012}, \citet{Haiman_2013}, \citet{Loeb_Furlanetto_2013}, \citet{Johnson_Haardt_2016}, and \citet{Latif_Ferrara_2016}.
\subsection*{Radiation from the first black holes}
Active galactic nuclei are conspicuous manifestations of gas accretion onto supermassive black holes, with luminosities exceeding the total starlight of their host galaxies. The accretion disc radiates broadband emission from optical to X-ray wavelengths with a peak in the UV. The characteristic blackbody temperature for the Eddington luminosity near the event horizon is $T_\text{Edd} \approx 5 \times 10^5\,\text{K}~(M_\bullet/10^8\,\Msun)^{-1/4}$ \citep{Rees_1984}. DCBHs are born in gas-rich environments and may be self-shielding to ionizing photons. Still, the gas remains transparent to X-rays and the ``Compton-thick'' spectrum retains the non-thermal tail contributed by Bremsstrahlung radiation and magneto-hydrodynamical (MHD) processes \citep{Pacucci_MBH_Spectra_2015}. In these environments, radiation pressure from the black hole along with concurrent star formation and nearby supernovae are likely to have had a substantial impact on the host galaxy \citep{Jeon_2012}. Lower mass minihaloes with shallower gravitational potential wells ($M_\text{vir} \lesssim 10^5$--$10^7\,\Msun$) would have been especially susceptible to radiative feedback, which potentially depleted the reservoir of gas needed to fuel black hole growth \citep{Whalen_2004,Wise_2012}. The viability of the DCBH mechanism also relies on the regulation of chemical feedback because molecular hydrogen and metal cooling induces fragmentation \citep[][and recall figure~\ref{fig:cooling}]{Hartwig_2016}. Therefore, the eventual DCBH formation sites must remain free from star formation during collapse. Furthermore, the emission of UV and X-ray photons promotes H$_2$ formation and increases the critical LW flux needed to form DCBHs \citep{Inayoshi_Tanaka_2015,Latif_Bovino_2015}.
\fig{CR7-cartoon}
A particularly interesting source of feedback in DCBH environments is Ly-$\alpha$ photon trapping. In the vicinity of a newly collapsing primordial gas cloud, the surrounding neutral hydrogen is extremely optically thick to photons near the Ly-$\alpha$ resonant line. In one-dimensional simulations, a dense shell-like outflow structure forms in hydrodynamical response to the central source ionizing and heating of the gas. As illustrated in figure~\ref{fig:CR7-cartoon}, the Ly-$\alpha$ photons are redshifted by the galactic outflow, producing a velocity offset that may result in considerably less scattering out of the line of sight by the intervening intergalactic medium (IGM). The complex nature of the Ly-$\alpha$ radiative transfer means that explorations of Ly-$\alpha$ feedback tend to focus on order-of-magnitude estimates based on idealized calculations \citep{Oh_Haiman_2002,McKee_Tan_2008,Milosavljevic_2009}. With the aid of post-processing Monte-Carlo radiative transfer (MCRT) methods, \citet{Dijkstra_Loeb_2008} found that multiple scattering within high \HI\ column density shells is capable of enhancing the effective Ly-$\alpha$ force by one or two orders of magnitude. The first self-consistent Ly-$\alpha$ radiation hydrodynamics (RHD) simulations were performed by \citet{Smith_RHD_2017}, who coupled a MCRT code \citep[\colt;][]{Smith_2015} with spherically symmetric Lagrangian frame hydrodynamics including ionizing radiation, non-equilibrium chemistry and cooling, and self-gravity. They found that Ly-$\alpha$ radiation pressure may have a significant dynamical impact on gas surrounding DCBHs, with Ly-$\alpha$ signatures characterized by larger velocity offsets than stellar counterparts if, in both cases, the Ly-$\alpha$ spectra are shaped by radiation-driven winds. Finally, it has recently been suggested that trapped Ly-$\alpha$ cooling radiation may enhance the formation of DCBHs by accounting for the photodetachment of H$^{-}$ ions, precursors to H$_2$, by Ly-$\alpha$ photons during collapse \citep{Johnson_Dijkstra_2017}.
\subsection*{Observational evidence for DCBHs}
The DCBH scenario has received increased popularity as theoretical predictions agreed with multiple lines of observational evidence. Although individual cases currently remain tenuous, there is good reason to believe SMBH progenitor candidates may be observationally confirmed with the capabilities of next-generation observatories. Recently, the luminous COSMOS redshift~7~(CR7) Ly-$\alpha$ emitter at $z = 6.6$ was confirmed to have exceptionally strong Ly-$\alpha$ ($\gtrsim 8 \times 10^{43}\,\text{erg~s}^{-1}$) and possible \HeII\ 1640~\AA\ ($\sim 2 \times 10^{43}\,\text{erg~s}^{-1}$) emission with no detection of metal lines from the UV to the near-infrared within instrumental sensitivity \citep{Matthee_2015,Sobral_2015}. As a result, several groups have considered the CR7 source in the context of a young primordial starburst or DCBH \citep{Pallottini_2015,Agarwal_2016,Hartwig_2016,Visbal_CR7_2016,Dijkstra_DCBH_2016,Smidt_CR7_2016}. In \citet{Smith_CR7_2016}, we examined and reproduced several Ly-$\alpha$ signatures of the CR7 source under the Ly-$\alpha$ RHD framework discussed in the section above (see also figure~\ref{fig:CR7-cartoon}). As shown in figure~\ref{fig:CR7-flux}, the DCBH model reproduces the observed 160~km\,s$^{-1}$ velocity offset between the Ly-$\alpha$ and \HeII\ line peaks, whereas the stellar model fails. We also found that Ly-$\alpha$ radiation pressure turns out to be dynamically important in the case of CR7.
However, more recently, \citet{Bowler_CR7_2017} obtained deeper observations of CR7.
The authors claim the new photometry cannot be reproduced by a DCBH spectral energy distribution (SED), suggesting instead that the broadband measurements may be contaminated by forbidden, doubly-ionized oxygen [\OIII] emission lines. They propose that CR7 can be classified as a more standard low-mass, narrow-line AGN or a low-metallicity starburst getting the hard SED from massive stellar binaries. In contrast, \citet{Pacucci_CR7_2017} argue that the new photometry is still consistent with the DCBH model. Either way, deep spectroscopy with future telescopes will be needed to discriminate convincingly between particular models \citep[see also][]{Agarwal_2017}. In the near future, other sources similar to CR7 may provide additional constraints on early galaxy and quasar formation. Indeed, \citet{Pacucci_DCBH_2016} identified two objects characterized by very red colours and robust X-ray detections in the CANDLES/GOODS-S survey with photometric redshift $z \gtrsim 6$ representing promising black hole seed candidates. We note that these objects were selected based on currently available \textit{Hubble Space Telescope} and \textit{Chandra Space Telescope} data.
\fig{CR7-flux}
Another independent argument for the existence of DCBHs is found in correlations between the cosmic infrared and X-ray backgrounds (CIB and CXB), which represent the cumulative light from faint, unresolved sources in the respective wavelength ranges \citep{Cappelluti_2013}. The specific signal is encoded within the source-subtracted CIB fluctuations after accounting for foreground stars and galaxies \citep[for additional details see][]{Kashlinsky_2005,Kashlinsky_2012}. Although other models may also explain the observations, DCBHs have been implicated as a natural way to produce enough IR and X-ray emission without over-ionizing the universe during the epoch of reionization \citep{Yue_2013,Helgason_2016}.
\subsection*{Outlook for the future}
Finally, we consider the prospects for unveiling the nature of supermassive black hole seeds with next-generation facilities. Continuing technological advances are going to allow us to probe the high-redshift universe in unprecedented detail. This includes the characterization of individual objects and integrated backgrounds based on observations in the radio, infrared, optical and X-ray wavelengths. Furthermore, space-based gravitational wave detectors will constrain SMBH merger models. Lastly, high-resolution simulations of black hole environments with multiscale physics will continue to refine our understanding of the formation and evolution of galactic black holes.
\figw{density}
The \textit{James Webb Space Telescope} (\textit{JWST}) and giant segmented mirror telescopes\ASfootnotemark[1]\footnotetext[1]{\;\,Telescopes with integral field spectrographs and adaptive optics imaging will include the Giant Magellan Telescope (GMT; \href{http://www.gmto.org/}{www.gmto.org}), Thirty Metre Telescope (TMT; \href{http://www.tmt.org/}{www.tmt.org}), and the European Extremely Large Telescope (E-ELT; \href{http://www.eso.org/sci/facilities/eelt/}{www.eso.org/sci/facilities/eelt}).} may allow direct observations of the first galaxies and quasars. In particular, the Near-Infrared Camera (NIRCam) and Near-Infrared Spectrometer (NIRSpec) instruments on board the \textit{JWST} will be capable of obtaining deep photometric and spectroscopic observations. The new data will yield a more complete census of galaxies from the first billion years of cosmic history, possibly including their redshifts, spectral energy distributions, star formation rates, metallicity, and emission line properties. As a reference, figure~\ref{fig:density} illustrates the gas density from an \textit{ab initio} cosmological simulation in which primordial gas undergoes the direct collapse to a black hole \citep{Becerra_2017}. We show the galaxy at different scales to highlight the filamentary large-scale structure, gas distribution and opaque cloud within a sub-parsec region.
Several other complementary observatories will contribute to the emerging picture as well. For example, black holes often produce jets with strong radio emission, which may be observed at higher redshifts with the Atacama Large Millimeter Array (ALMA\ASfootnotemark[2]). Upcoming 21-cm cosmology experiments, such as the Square Kilometre Array (SKA\ASfootnotemark[3]), will map the distribution of neutral hydrogen over the course of early cosmic history through reionization, providing a better understanding of the contribution of high-redshift quasars to this process. Future observations will also provide better measurements of the cosmic infrared and X-ray backgrounds which exhibit a correlation that might be explained by unresolved massive black holes in faint galaxies. Eventually, many of these sources will be resolved and characterized as the proposed Lynx and Athena X-ray telescopes detect high-energy emission from distant SMBHs. Deep surveys of nearby dwarf galaxies might also reveal traces of the black hole seeding mechanism due to their relative isolation after formation. Finally, the planned Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (eLISA\ASfootnotemark[4]) promises to directly detect these massive black holes via mergers, extending gravitational wave astronomy from the stellar-mass events recently detected with the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO\ASfootnotemark[5]) to the DCBH mass range.
\footnotetext[2]{\href{http://www.almaobservatory.org/}{www.almaobservatory.org}}
\footnotetext[3]{\href{http://skatelescope.org/}{skatelescope.org}}
\footnotetext[4]{\href{https://www.elisascience.org/}{www.elisascience.org}}
\footnotetext[5]{\href{http://www.ligo.org/}{www.ligo.org}}
\subsection*{Simulations}
The field of black hole research will benefit from the steady progress in computational algorithms and hardware, as high-resolution hydrodynamical simulations will provide additional insights into the process of SMBH formation. In particular, fully coupled radiation-hydrodynamics simulations will be crucial to elucidate the astrophysical phenomena responsible for the rapid growth of the first black holes. Pioneering simulations typically focus on specific aspects of larger questions in order to balance algorithmic complexity, resolution and computational feasibility. Eventually, it will be possible to apply more efficient and robust methods to problems with broader applicability. For example, incorporating effects based on accurate but traditionally expensive techniques, such as 3D Monte-Carlo radiative transfer, will be increasingly viable and worthwhile. The goal of these simulations is to connect what can be directly observed with what is ultimately powering these sources, however challenging this may be. A smoking-gun signature of an individual DCBH may be beyond the capabilities of next-generation telescopes, but the emergence of multiple independent lines of evidence might present a compelling picture in which massive black hole seeds bridge the gap in understanding the genesis of the first quasars.
\bibliographystyle{mnras}
|
\section*{Introduction}
A central problem in immunology is the recognition of
foreign ligands by the immune system. This process is
carried out by specialized immune cells called T-cells which
activate the immune response in the presence of foreign ligands. Foreign
ligands are presented to T-cells by specialized Antigen Presenting Cells (APCs) that bind a repertoire of self and foreign peptides.
As shown in Fig. \ref{fig1}, T-cells activation occurs when specialized receptors on the
surface of T-cells, called T-cell receptors (TCRs), bind APCs, and activate downstream the TCR signaling network,
leading to an immune response.
It has been shown that T-cells have a high sensitivity to foreign ligands. A few foreign ligands (less than 10) appearing on the membrane of a T-cell are able to trigger the immune response\cite{irvine2002direct,chakraborty2014insights}. Moreover, this decision is made extremely quickly: it only takes 1-5 mins to make the decision to activate or not \cite{stoll2002dynamic}. Despite the speed with which the response is mounted, T-cells can accurately sense the existence of foreign ligands with an error rate as small as $10^{-4}-10^{-6}$\cite{mckeithan1995kinetic,alon2006introduction}. This raises natural questions about how the T-cell signaling network can operate with such high speed, sensitivity, and accuracy.
Experimental evidence suggests that T-cell activation is set by the binding time of the antigen-receptor complex \cite{feinerman2008quantitative,franccois2016case}. If the binding time of the ligand to the receptor is below a sharp threshold (3-5 sec), T-cells do not activate. However if the binding time is above this threshold, T-cells activate with extreme sensitivity. This so called `life-time' dogma places stringent conditions on the machinery of the immune response\cite{feinerman2008quantitative}. A lot is known about the biochemical networks that implement this thresholding procedure. The receptor-ligand complexes go through multiple rounds of phosphorylation (throughout we denote the number of phosphorylations by $n$). Within the life-time dogma, an immune response is triggered if the concentration of the ligand-receptor complex that has been phosphorylated $n$ times exceeds a threshold concentration.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Fig1.pdf}
\caption{ {\bf An overview of T cell activation}. A T-cell is activated when a ligand-binds a TCR receptor long enough to be phosphorylated $n=4$ times. In the ``life-time dogma'' picture
considered in this paper, foreign ligands bind more strongly to the receptor than self ligands with average disassociation times of foreign and self ligands
given by $\tau_f=10s$ and $\tau_s=1s$ respectively. If the ligand disassociates from the receptor, the receptor is dephosphorlyated and the whole process must begin anew.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
The ability of T-cells to discriminate between foreign and self ligands arises from the difference in the binding times of foreign ($\tau_f$) and self ($\tau_s$) ligands\cite{gascoigne2001t}. Typically, in the immune system, $\tau_s \sim 1s$ and $\tau_f\sim10s$. In equilibrium, this binding time difference cannot account for the incredible accuracy of the T-cell immune response. { Detailed balance places constraints on the chemical reaction rates and the reliability of the discrimination process is ultimately limited by equilibrium thermodynamics\cite{sartori2015thermodynamics}.} This binding time difference can be directly translated into a difference in binding free energies of foreign and self ligands \cite{hopfield1974kinetic, ninio1975kinetic}. Thus, a biochemical network that works at equilibrium can achieve a minimum error rate of $\tau_s/\tau_f\sim 0.1$, nearly three orders of magnitude smaller than that seen in experiments.
It is known the immune system can beat this bound by working out-of-equilibrium and consuming energy\cite{mckeithan1995kinetic}. It is now thought that the T-cell employs a form of kinetic proofreading(KPR), first proposed by Hopfield\cite{hopfield1974kinetic} and Ninio\cite{ninio1975kinetic}. But current understanding of KPR and its implications for immune response have several weaknesses: firstly, many older theoretical treatments of KPR in the context of T-cell activation involve approximating certain reactions as irreversible making it difficult to consistently calculate energy consumption ; second, it is extremely hard for KPR-based schemes to simultaneously distinguish ligands with similar binding times and operate over a large dynamic range of ligand concentrations.The later shortcoming has been addressed by a generalization of KPR called ``adaptive sorting". In adaptive sorting, an additional feedback couples the KPR cascades in the T-cell through a common kinase that regulates all the phosphorylation of all T-cell receptors \cite{lever2014phenotypic, franccois2008case,franccois2016case,lalanne2013principles,franccois2013phenotypic}.
A fundamental issue in the study of T-cell activation is to understand the trade-off between different functionalities -- accuracy, speed and dissipation -- in the immune discrimination process. Many works have studied the relation between accuracy and dissipation or accuracy and speed for some KPR-based biochemical network\cite{savageau1979energy,ehrenberg1980thermodynamic,freter1980proofreading,qian2006reducing,murugan2012speed,mehta2016landauer,banerjee102608,das2016limiting,hartich2015nonequilibrium}. Some others have discussed general error rate bounds under power constraints in the context of thermodynamics or information theory\cite{landauer1961irreversibility,bialek2005physical,mora2015physical,lang2014thermodynamics,laughlin2001energy, qian2003thermodynamic,bennett1979dissipation, andrieux2008nonequilibrium, lan2012energy}.
Early theoretical work suggests that it is always possible to reduce the error of KPR-based mechanisms by waiting longer and/or consuming more energy \cite{savageau1979energy,murugan2012speed}. However, recent research shows the trade-off between accuracy and speed is not always observed \cite{sartori2013kinetic}. A recent works which studied KPR in the context of copying polymers and DNA translation and compared experiments with theoretical calculations showed that these systems seem to optimize speed while only suffering minimal costs in accuracy \cite{banerjee102608}. This suggests that even in the context of immune recognition, these trade-offs might not be as stringent as believed and it is worth thoroughly re-examining these tradeoffs in the context of TCR-based circuits.
In this paper, we calculate the speed, power dissipation, error rate and output signal (the combined concentration of $D_N$ and $C_N$) explicitly for a KPR-based biochemical network for T-cell recognition with and without a feedback that implements adaptive sorting (shown in Fig. \ref{fig2}). We ask if there is a feasible operating region for T-cell activation networks where T cells can make fast and accurate decisions while utilizing energy efficiently. We find that such a feasible operating region exists for KPR and its generalizations. In the feasible operating region, the response time and power dissipation are consistent with those observed in experiments, implying that many mechanisms of early T-cell recognition are well described by KPR-based models.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Fig2.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Overview of KPR-based immune recognition circuits}. Receptors can form complexes with foreign ligands $C$ and self ligands $D$. These complexes disassociate at different rates given by $\tau_f^{-1}$ and $\tau_s^{-1}$, respectively. Once a receptor-ligand complex is formed, it is phosphorylated at a rate $\phi$ and dephosphorylated as a rate $b$. Importantly, ligands can directly form a complex at the $n$-th step of the KPR cascade at a rate $\gamma^n/\tau_i$($i=s, f$). In adaptive sorting circuit, the phosphorlyation/dephosphorylation rates can be modulated by a kinase-dependent feedback loop (see main text). A full definition of symbols can be found at Table. \ref{table1}. }
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
\section*{Model}
We start from the adaptive sorting model shown in Fig. \ref{fig2} \cite{franccois2008case,franccois2013phenotypic,franccois2016case,lalanne2013principles}. The receptor, $R$, can bind a foreign or self ligand, to form a complex $C_0$ and $D_0$
respectively. This complex can be phosphorylated a maximum of $N$ times. We denote a receptor-ligand complex that has been phosphorlyated $n$ times by $X_n$ with $X=C$ for foreign ligands and $X=D$ for self ligands. The dynamics of the biochemical network can be written as:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq1}
\dot{X_0}&=&\kappa RL_i -\left(\tau_i ^{-1}+\phi \right) X_0+b X_1\nonumber\\
\dot{X_n}&=&\!\!\gamma^nRL_i /\tau_i\! \!+\!\!\phi X_{n-1}\!-\! (\phi\! +\!\tau_i ^{-1}\!+\!b)X_{n}\!+\!bX_{n+1}\label{eq22:master}\\
\dot{X_N}&=&\gamma^N RL_i /\tau_i+\alpha K X_{N-1}-(b+\tau_i ^{-1})X_N\nonumber\\
\dot{K}&=&-\epsilon K(C_m+D_m)+\sigma (K_T-K)\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $N>n>0$, $X\in\{ C,D \}$, and $i \in \{ f,s \}$. $R=R_T-\sum^N_{j=0}(C_j+D_j)$ and $L_i=L^T_i-\sum^N_{j=0}X_j$ are the free concentration of receptors and ligands, with $R_T$, $L_T$ and $K_T$ the total number of receptors, ligands and kinase respectively. For notational simplicity, throughout the manuscript we assume that cell volume is fixed and hence do not distinguish between species number and concentration. In Fig. \ref{fig2}, we set $N=4$ and $m=2$. More information about molecular species and notation can be found in Table. \ref{table1}.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Definition of symbols shown in Fig. \ref{fig2}}
\label{table1}
\begin{tabular}{lc}
\hline
Symbol & Definition \\
\hline\hline
$C_n$ & Agonist complex phosphorylated n times \\
$D_n$ & Non-agonist complex phosphorylated n times \\
$R$ & Receptor \\
$K$ & Active kinase \\
$K^*$ & Inactive kinase \\
$K_T$ & Kinase \\
$\kappa$ & Ligand-receptor binding rate \\
$\phi$ & Complex phosphorylation rate \\
$\alpha K$ & Complex phosphorylation rate at the final step \\
$b$ & Complex dephosphorylation rate \\
$\sigma$ & Kinase phosphorylation rate \\
$\epsilon$ & Kinase dephosphorylation rate \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
In the adaptive sorting network, both foreign and self ligands can bind a receptor and form the receptor-ligand complex, $X_0$, which can undergo multiple rounds of phosphorlyation ($X_n$ goes to $X_{n+1}$) and dephosphorylation ($X_n$ goes to $X_{n-1}$). The receptor-ligand complexes can disassociate (at a rate $\tau_s ^{-1}$ for self ligands and $\tau_f^{-1}$ for foreign ligands). During this process, the phosphate groups are lost and and whole process reinitiates. Importantly, once a ligand is bound to a receptor, it is impossible for the biochemical machinery to distinguish between foreign and self ligands. The binding rate $\kappa$, the phosphorylation rate, $\phi$, and the dephosphorylation rate, $b$, inside the cell are the same for the foreign and self ligands and the only difference between foreign and self ligands are the lifetimes of their corresponding receptor-ligand complexes. For this reason, the decision to activate is based on the concentration of the total final products $C_N+D_N$ from both the foreign ligand ($C_N$) or self ligand ($D_N$).
In the adaptive sorting network, in addition to the phosphorylation cascade, a negative feedback is used to modulate the phosphorylation and/or dephosphorylation rates \cite{franccois2008case,franccois2016case}. For example, in Fig. \ref{fig2} the last phosphorylation step, from $X_{N-1}$ to $X_N$, is modulated by the level of active kinase $K$, which itself is dependent on the concentration of the $m$-th intermediate concentration $X_m$ through phosphorylation. With this feedback, the output signal is independent of the ligand concentration and only replies on the value of $\tau$. This model reduces to a KPR cascade when the feedback is absent, $i.e.$ $\epsilon=0$ and $\alpha=\phi/K_T$.
In many treatments of KPR, especially in the context of T-cell discrimination, the dissociation of the receptor-ligand is often treated as an irreversible process ($\gamma=0$). Often, this is a good approximation since phosphatases can easily bind free receptors and quickly remove phosphate groups from the receptors \cite{mckeithan1995kinetic}. For this reason, in most studies that seek to model T-cell discrimination, it is sensible to set $\gamma=0$. Here, we assume this rate is finite and small ($\gamma\ll 1$). The reason for this choice is that rather than focus purely on the biologically relevant regimes, the goal of this study to make a phase diagram of the performance of KPR-based TCR circuits in the speed, accuracy, energy-consumption plane. Below, we show that taking $\gamma \neq 0$ is essential to constructing an accurate phase diagram and identifying a feasible operating region in the speed-energy-accuracy plane.
In any thermodynamically consistent model, all reactions are reversible and it is important to consistently treat both the forward rate and backward rate for the formation and disassociation of a complex. Let $\gamma_{n,i}$ denote the rate at which a self ($i=s$) or foreign ligand ($i=f$) can directly form a complex at $n-th$ step of the KPR cascade (see Fig. \ref{fig2}). In such a reaction, the first $n-1$ steps of the KPR cascade are bypassed resulting in lower accuracy. There are several natural choices for how to choose $\gamma_{n,i}$. One common choice in the literature is to assume that $\gamma_{n,i}$ is independent of $n$ and given by $\gamma_{n,i}=\gamma/\tau_i$. However, with this choice never saturates the KPR accuracy bound for an N-step cascade, $\eta_{min}=\tau_s^N/\tau_f^N$, especially when N is large (see Appendix).
For this reason, in this work we choose a step-dependent rate, $\gamma_{n,i}=\gamma^n/\tau_i$ $(i=s,f)$, for directly forming a complex $C_n$ and $D_n$ This functional form is a direct consequence of assuming that there is a constant free energy difference $k_B T\mathrm{log}{\phi}/{\gamma b}$ per phosphorylation. Having a large $\gamma$ will result in a bypassing of the proofreading steps and a high error threshold for any KPR-based circuit\cite{hopfield1974kinetic}. At a biophysical level, a non-zero $\gamma$ models complicated microscopic processes that allow for the bypassing of the KPR cascade \cite{dushek2009role}.
\section*{ Defining Accuracy, Speed, and Dissipation}
Before analyzing the biochemical network outlined above, it is necessary to define accuracy, energy consumption, and speed for T-cell recognition in greater detail.
\subsection*{Accuracy}
Recall, that a T-cell makes the decision to activate based on the total concentration of the full phosphorylated complexes $C_N+D_N$ from both the foreign ligand ($C_N$) and self ligand ($D_N$). Ideally, T-cells are activated only in response to foreign ligands. Thus, following Hopfield \cite{hopfield1974kinetic} we can define the error rate $\eta$ as the ratio of $C_N$ and $D_N$:
\begin{equation}
\eta=\frac{D_N}{C_N}.
\end{equation}
The concentrations of different components can be calculated by solving the deterministic equations (\ref{eq1}) at steady state. In the immune recognition by T cells, it is important to achieve a small error rate $\sim 10^{-4}-10^{-6}$. For an irreversible $N$-step KPR process (i.e. $\gamma=0$), $\eta$ can reach a minimum value we dub the ``Hopfield limit''
\begin{equation}
\eta_{min}= {\tau_s^N}/{\tau_f^N}.
\end{equation}
We define the accuracy as one minus the error rate, $1-\eta$.
\subsection*{Energy Consumption}
In any non-equilibrium steady state, detailed balance is broken and leading to the existence of net currents in the network\cite{landauer1961irreversibility, hill2012free}.
The chemical potential difference between the reactants and products can be written as
\begin{equation}
\Delta\mu=k_BT\mathrm{ln}\frac{J_+}{J-}
\end{equation}
where $J_+, J_-$ are forward- and backward-reaction fluxes. The net current is $J=J_+-J_-$. The power dissipation is defined as \cite{hill2012free,qian2007phosphorylation}
\begin{equation}
W=k_BT J\mathrm{ln}\frac{J_+}{J-}
\end{equation}
For example, the power dissipation of the first-step phosphorylation process: \ce{$C_0$ <=>[\ce{$\phi$}][\ce{$b$}]$C_1$} can be calculated as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq5}
W=k_BT\left(\phi C_0-b C_1 \right)\mathrm{ln}\frac{\phi C_0}{b C_1 }
\end{equation}
This can be generalized to the full KPR cascade and adaptive network (see Appendix). Finally, we adapt the convention of non-equilibrium thermodynamics and use the phrases ``energy consumption'' and ``power dissipation'' interchangeably.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Fig3.pdf}
\caption{{\bf Effect of changing $\gamma$ on the speed, accuracy, and energy consumption of a KPR based-circuit}. (a) Accuracy versus mean first-passage time (1/speed) and (b) dissipation (power consumption) versus mean first-passage time (1/speed) when the the phosphorylation rate $\phi$ is varied for different choices of $\gamma=0, 0.1, 10^{-1.5}, 10^{-3}$. For all curves, $b/\phi=0.01$, $\tau_s=1$, and $\tau_f=10$. The squares indicate locations corresponding to parameters with a minimal error rate (see Fig \ref{fig2} and Table. \ref{table1} for full definition of parameters).}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
\subsection*{Speed}
The speed of decision-making process is related to the mean first passage time(MFPT) of a stochastic process\cite{srivastava2015first}. The MFPT is defined as average the time taken to produce one molecule of the final product $C_N$ from the foreign ligand $L_f$ . For example, at each time step, one molecule of the complex $C_3$ can be phosphorylated at a rate $\phi$ to yield $C_4$, or can be dephosphorylated at a rate $b$ to get a molecule to $C_2$, or alternatively decay rate $\tau_f^{-1}$ to yield a free receptor $R$. Microscopically, this can be viewed a stochastic process -- similar to a random walk-- and different realization of this process will take different amounts of time. The MFPT is taken as the average time it takes to complete to get from the starting point to the target. We use the mean MFPT to define the inverse of the decision speed. Detailed calculation procedures can be found in Appendix and \cite{bel2009simplicity}
Calculating speed in the adaptive sorting network is technically much more challenging than in KPR due to the non-linearity introduced by the additional feedback loop. To overcome this difficulty, we employ a linear-response approximation around the steady-state optimal point when calculating the speed. Such linear-response approximations are commonly employed in engineering (e.g. gain, bandwidth) and have been adapted with great success to analyze biochemical circuits \cite{detwiler2000engineering}. In the linear-response regime of adaptive sorting, the MFPT can be calculated using methods analogous to KPR (in Appendix and \cite{van1992stochastic, mehta2012energetic}).
There are various methods to analyze the speed of KPR, the forward rate for a single step\cite{rao2015thermodynamics, sartori2013kinetic}, the gap between the first and second eigenvalue of the master equation \cite{ohzeki2015mathematical}, the inverse of the smallest eigenvalue of the master equation\cite{lahiri2016universal}, and also the MFPT\cite{murugan2012speed, bel2009simplicity, sharma2011distribution}. In this work, we measure the speed using the MFPT because it accurately reflects the speed of the circuit even in the presence of rare reactions that can bypass proofreading steps. We note that measures of speed based on eigenvalues of the master equations are accurate only for long Markov chains (i.e. $N\rightarrow \infty$) dominated by nearest-neighbor transitions \cite{kim1958mean}. The circuits considered here operate very far from these regimes and for this reason the MFPT is a more accurate measure of the speed of the proofreading process.
\section*{Results}
We now analyze the speed-energy-accuracy tradeoff in KPR and adaptive-sorting circuits. One difficulty involved in identifying general principles are the large number of parameters whose choice can dramatically change the properties of the underlying circuit (see Table. \ref{table1}). For this reason, we will take a strategy based on randomly sampling these parameters in numerical simulations and looking for accessible regions in the energy-speed-accuracy plane. This spirit is similar to the one used to identify robustness in the adaptation circuit of bacterial chemotaxis \cite{barkai1997robustness, ma2009defining}. We begin by analyzing a KPR cascade where the feedback loop from the kinase $K$ in Fig. \ref{fig2} is turned off and then subsequently extend our analysis to the full adaptive sorting network.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Fig4.pdf}
\caption{Plots of the error rate and the magnitude of the output signal as a function of the mean first-passage time (1/speed) and dissipation (power consumption) for randomly sampled parameters for the KPR circuit shown in Fig \ref{fig2}. In generating these plots, we have kept the binding energy difference between self- and non-self ligands fixed by choosing $\tau_s/\tau_f=0.1$. (a) Error rate; (b) Output signal: $C_4+D_4$; (c) Error rate versus dissipation for a $MFPT=10^7 s$ corresponding to the vertical dashed line in (a); (d) Error rate versus mean first passage time (inverse speed) at fixed dissipation rate$=10^{3.2}k_BT$ corresponding to the horizontal dashed line in (a). The feasible region with high accuracy, high speed, low-dissipation, and a large output signal is labeled in (a). The behavior of circuit can be classified into four distinct regions labeled in A-D (see main text for more details).}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
\subsection*{Kinetic proofreading}
Some earlier theoretical works suggest that it is always possible to reduce the error of KPR-based mechanisms by waiting longer and/or consuming more energy\cite{savageau1979energy,murugan2012speed}. We find that this is not the case. Our results show the error rate increases dramatically at extremely slow speeds/low dissipation when $\gamma$, the rate to directly form a complex that bypasses early KPR steps, has a nonzero value. This non-monotonic relationship between accuracy and speed was already noted as a possibility by Hopfield \cite{hopfield1974kinetic} and is consistent with a recent theoretical analysis of DNA replication and protein translation\cite{banerjee102608} and polymerization\cite{sartori2013kinetic}.
We studied the effects of varying $\gamma$ with numerical simulations shown in Fig. \ref{fig3}. When $\gamma=0$, waiting longer always decreases the error rate. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig3}(a), the error rate $\eta$ monotonically decreases the with the MFPT (1/speed) and asymptotically reaches the Hopfield limit for an infinitely slow circuit: ${\tau_s^N}/{\tau_f^N}=10^{-4}$ for a circuit with $N=4$ phosphorylations. In this high accuracy regime, a ligand must bind the receptor multiple times and transverse all $N$ steps of the phosphorylation cascade before reaching the final products $X_N$. However, when $\gamma\neq 0$, for sufficiently long times, the probability to directly form a phosphorylated complex and bypass the initial kinetic proofreading steps becomes non-negligible. This leads to an increase in the error rate \cite{hopfield1974kinetic, murugan2012speed}. Thus, increasing $\gamma$ drives a cross-over in the dynamic behavior of the biochemical circuit from a regime where waiting longer increases the accuracy to one where waiting longer decreases the accuracy.
We also investigated the relationship between the speed of the circuit and power consumptions. Fig. \ref{fig3}(b) shows that over large parameter regime, the energy consumption and MFPT (1/speed) exhibit an approximate power law (linear relationship on a log-log plot). This indicates that making a decision quickly always requires a a large amount of energy consumption. This approximate power-law relationship breaks down for extremely slow circuits.
In order to better understand the relationship between speed, accuracy, and energy consumption, we randomly sampled different combinations of the three parameters: $\phi$, $b$, $\gamma$ and calculated all three quantities(see Appendix for details). The results are shown in the Fig. \ref{fig4}(a). We also calculated the total output signal (the concentration of $C_N+D_N$) for each parameter set Fig. \ref{fig4}(b). {In defining this as the output signal of the KPR-circuit, we have assumed that the downstream machinery that reads out T-cell activation is sensitive to total concentrations of the output molecules. In the discussion below, we assume that if the output signal is too small, it will be difficult for the molecular machinery downstream of the KPR machinery in T cells to activate a response.}
In both plots, each point corresponds to a different choice of the parameters. To better understand these plots, it is helpful to separate the parameters into four qualitatively distinct operating regimes (see Fig. \ref{fig4}): (A) a high-accuracy regime, (B) a high-speed, low-dissipation, low-accuracy regime, (C) a high-dissipation, low-accuracy regime, and (D) a low-dissipation, low-speed, low-accuracy regime. Region A is the discrimination regime, where the kinetic proofreading mechanism works; Region B and D are close to the equilibrium state as the power dissipation is low and the error rate $\frac{D_N}{C_N}$ is close to 1; Region D is the ``anti-proofreading'' regime and there are large refluxes through the decay(discard) pathways \cite{Murugan2014, hartich2015nonequilibrium}.
One of the most dramatic features in Fig. \ref{fig4}(a) is the blue, high-accuracy region A. In Region A, the error rate of the KPR cascade approaches its theoretically minimum possible value (i.e. the ``Hopfield Limit'') $\eta_{min}= \tau_s^N/\tau_f^N \approx 10^{-4}$ . This high accuracy region is realized when $\gamma\ll 1$, $b/\phi\ll 1$ and $\phi\ll \tau_s^{-1}$. These parameter regimes corresponds to the assumptions outlined by Hopfield as being necessary for achieving high-accuracy proofreading \cite{hopfield1974kinetic}. Many choices of parameters in Region A achieve this high accuracy.
However, as shown Fig. \ref{fig4}(b) for many of these choices of parameters the magnitude of the output signal is quite small. This motivates defining a feasible
operating regime of the KPR regime as the choice of parameters with highest accuracy and a high output signal. This region is marked as the feasible operating regime in Fig. \ref{fig4}(a) (see discussion below).
In Region B, one can make a fast decision speed with minimal energy consumption, but the error rate is well above the Hopfield limit. Here, $b/\phi\ll1$ and $\phi\gtrsim\tau_s$. In this parameter regime, there is a steady-flux of empty receptors that are converted to the fully phosphorylated output complex. The MFPT is reduced but the system becomes insensitive to the difference between foreign and self-ligand binding times: the forward rate is so large that there is no time for the intermediate complexes to decay making it impossible to distinguish $\tau^{-1}_s$ and $\tau^{-1}_f$.Region C has the highest error rate. Here, $\gamma\gtrsim1$, $b/\phi\gg1$ and $\phi\gtrsim\tau_s$. For such large values of $\gamma$, there is a continuous flux from free receptor directly to the fully-phosphorylated complex $C_N (D_N)$, with most output molecules bypassing the proofreading steps. In this region, $\gamma \ge \tau_f^{-1}, \tau_s^{-1}$ is much bigger than the binding times of ligands resulting in error rates that can be as large as $\eta=\tau^2_f/\tau^2_s=100$(see Appendix). In practice, for reasonable values of $\gamma$ (e.g. $\gamma \ll 1$), no biochemical networks operate in region C. Finally, in region D, speed decreases dramatically because of $\gamma\ll1$, $b/\phi\gg1$.
Fig. \ref{fig4}c and d show cross-sections of the error rate for a fixed speed and fixed dissipation rate respectively. These graphs were generated by selecting all parameters that lie along the vertical and horizontal dashed lines in Fig. \ref{fig4}a.
One of the most striking aspects of these plots is how dramatically the error rate decreases from the ``equilibrium value'' of $\tau_s/\tau_f=0.1$ to the theoretical maximum ``Hopfield limit'' $\left({\tau_s \over \tau_f}\right)^4=10^{-4}$ as a function of the dissipation rate and mean first-passage time. A similar plot for speed versus error rate was recently obtained by \cite{banerjee102608}.
Furthermore, the transition between these values become steeper and narrower as $\gamma$ is reduced. These plots suggest that for slow speeds (above $\sim 10^{-7} s^{-1}$) and low dissipation rates (below $\sim 10^3 k_BT/s$) there is maybe a dynamic phase transition in the KPR circuit when either the dissipation rate or speed is held fixed and other parameters are varied.
Murugan and collaborators have argued that KPR has a natural mapping to microtubule growth, a system with a known dynamical phase transition between growth and shrinkage, and it has been argued that such a transition is also likely to be a generic feature of KPR \cite{murugan2012speed}. However, unlike the systems analyzed by \cite{murugan2012speed}, we consider a non-zero transition rate, $\gamma$, which leads to qualitatively different results. In particular, our simulations show the existence of the low-fidelity region C in Fig. \ref{fig4} that arises when the mean first-passage time becomes comparable to the typical time it takes to ``bypass'' the KPR steps and directly form the complex $C_2$.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{Fig5.pdf}
\caption{\bf Effects of changing proportions of foreign ligand $p$ on the relations between Time, Dissipation and Error rate for adaptive sorting process. }
$N=4$, $m=2$, $L_T = 2.0\times 10^4$, $L_f=pL_T$, $L_s=L-L_f$. $K_T=10^3$, $\gamma=10^{-3}$, $\sigma=2s^{-1}$, $\epsilon=1s^{-1}$, $\alpha K_T=3\times 10^{-1}s^{-1}$. The dashed lines are KPR results corresponding to different $p$. The black, vertical dashed line marks indicates the experimentally-measured time it takes T-cells to make decisions.
\label{fig5}
\end{figure*}
\subsection*{Extending our results to adaptive sorting}
In the preceding section, we have focused on the speed, accuracy, and dissipation trade-offs in a simple KPR cascade. Adaptive sorting is a very promising extension of KPR relevant for understanding T-cell activation in immune recognition \cite{franccois2008case,franccois2016case,lalanne2013principles,franccois2013phenotypic}. Adaptive sorting employs an additional negative feedback loop in the last step of the KPR cascade that ensures the output signal is independent of the number of ligands in the environment. This ability to perform ``absolute ligand discrimination'' is a key feature of adaptive sorting. It accounts for how a T-cell can achieve high accuracy in natural environmental conditions where the concentration of self-ligands is large and dwarfs the concentration of foreign ligands ($C_m\gg D_m$ and $C_m\gg 1$). A natural question is to ask if there is any tradeoffs involved needed to achieve absolute ligand discrimination. One such tradeoff is antagonism, where increasing the concentration of foreign ligands actually degrades the response of the adaptive sorting circuit \cite{francois2016phenotypic}. We show here that there is another tradeoff between absolute ligand discrimination and the speed at which the T-cell receptor circuit can operate.
Fig. \ref{fig5} shows error rate, mean first-passage time, and dissipation rate of the adaptive sorting and the KPR cascade analyzed above with regards to the tradeoffs between speed-accuracy and dissipations . The dissipation and error rate of the adaptive sorting model is comparable to a KPR cascade. However, from Fig. \ref{fig5}(a,b), it takes the adaptive sorting circuit much longer to achieve a similar error rate as a KPR. For a very large input signal, the phosphorylation rate of the last step in the cascade is dramatically decreased, leading to dramatic decrease in speed because most complexes fall apart before reaching the final step of the cascade. Furthermore, notice that unlike KPR, the adaptive sorting circuit is unable to achieve even modest error rates for mean first passage times of 100s (vertical dashed lines in Fig. \ref{fig5}), corresponding to the experimentally observed time it takes T-cells to make the activation decision. However, it is likely that other adaptive sorting circuit architectures can operate at faster speeds.
\section*{Discussion}
The immune system must quickly and accurately recognize foreign ligands. To carry out this task, the T-cells work out of equilibrium by actively consuming energy. This raises natural questions about the relationship between speed, accuracy, and energy consumption in two classes of biochemical networks that have been used to model immune recognition: a KPR-based network and a generalization of KPR, adaptive sorting. By numerically sampling parameter space, we found that the behavior of these networks exhibit four different regimes, including a fast, high-accuracy regime at intermediate energy consumption which we call the feasible operating regime.
Our results also show that waiting longer or consuming more energy does not necessarily translate into a higher accuracy. The underlying reason for this is that we allow for a tiny (but) non-zero rate for bypassing the proofreading steps. While this parameter has no effect at short times, for very long times the error increases because the probability of bypassing the proofreading steps becomes significant even when absolute rates are small. Consist with this picture, recent works studying KPR in the context of DNA translation and polymerization have reached similar conclusions \cite{banerjee102608}. Moreover, the generality of this argument suggests that our conclusions should also hold for other, more complicated biochemical networks.
It has been argued that a KPR-based T-cell activation is likely to fail when the concentration of external ligands becomes large and one must instead consider an adaptive sorting based circuit \cite{franccois2008case,franccois2016case,lalanne2013principles,franccois2013phenotypic}. Unlike a simple KPR cascade, the adaptive sorting network can distinguish between foreign and self even for large ligand concentration, a property dubbed ``absolute ligand discrimination''. We have found that absolute ligand discrimination comes at a large cost in speed compared to a simple KPR-based circuit.
We can compare our results for speed accuracy, and energy consumption to experiments. T-cells spend 1-5 mins to make the decision to activate \cite{feinerman2008quantitative}. A rough estimation of the error rate from experiment suggests cells can achieve error rates in the range$10^{-4}-10^{-6}$ or smaller, with the exact number depending on properties of ligands \cite{mckeithan1995kinetic,alon2006introduction}. {The energy expended by a T-cell to make the activation decision is hard to measure directly. However, estimates of the power consumption from glucose consumption suggest a typical cell uses about $10^9 \text{ATP}/s$ \cite{pollard2003cellular,milo2010bionumbers}. These numbers set strict experimentally-derived bounds for our model. }
For a circuit with $N=4$ phosphorylations, the minimum error rate achieved by both KPR and adaptive sorting is $10^{-4}$, on par with the experimental error rates. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig5}, the KPR cascade can achieve close to this optimal accuracy in the experimentally observed decision time of $100s$. The power consumption of the circuit is $W\sim 1000 \text{ATP}/s$(where we have used the standard conversion $1\text{ATP}=14-15k_BT$ \cite{rosing1972value}), just { one-one millionth} of the total energy budget of the cell. Moreover as shown in Appendix, increasing the number of steps in the phosphorylation cascade $N$ can significantly increase the accuracy of a KPR cascade with only modest decreases in the speed and the magnitude of the output signal. An adaptive sorting circuit can also reach the optimal error rate of $~10^{-4}$ using approximately the same energy budget as a simple KPR cascade. However, the absolute ligand discrimination of adaptive sorting comes at a steep price in terms of speed. For the biologically realistic $100s$ window for making immune recognition, the KPR cascade achieves a respectable error rate between $10^{-3}$ and $10^{-4} $ whereas the adaptive sorting circuit is essentially non-functional. For this reason, it is also interesting to consider other mechanisms for balancing speed and accuracy \cite{kajita2017balancing}.
Banerjee et al. point out biological systems prefer to optimize the speed rather than the accuracy \cite{banerjee102608}. Our simple model shows the high-accuracy proofreading regime is narrowly concentrated in the speed-energy consumption plane Fig. \ref{fig4} and the accuracy sharply decreases at the boundaries of this region. Within this high-accuracy region, the speed can change significantly -- the MFPT has a range from $10^2$ seconds to $10^{12}$ seconds -- but the accuracy does not fluctuate much. An analogous phenomenon was observed in the context of polymerization by \cite{banerjee102608}.
More generally, the trade-off between speed, accuracy, and power consumption in realistic biochemical networks is still poorly understood. Our results based on a simple model of immune decisions show that thermodynamics places strict constraints on these non-equilibrium processes. Energy consumption is required to maintain these non-equilibrium processes. With extremely low energy consumption or slow speed, the decision signal will be ruined by thermal fluctuations. However, when operating in regimes with extremely large energy consumption or speed, subtle effects can suddenly transition circuits so that decisions are dominated by rare events that destroy accuracy. This suggests that great care is needed in both modeling and/or engineering KPR-based decision making circuits.
One of the most striking aspects of our simulations are the sudden transitions in accuracy as a function of the dissipation rate (at fixed speed) or speed (at fixed dissipation). This transition seem to be indicative of an out-of-equilibrium dynamic phase transition. In the future, it will be interesting to further investigate this transition and see if it is possible to adopt analytic methods and fluctuation-type theorems to better understand its origins. Our work also suggests that it is extremely difficult for adaptive sorting networks to simultaneously perform absolute ligand discrimination and operate quickly. An important area of future work is to better understand if this trade-off is fundamental or can be bypassed with more clever network architectures. Finally, it will be interesting to explore general networks and develop analytic techniques to further our understanding experimental operating regimes with regards to speed, accuracy, and power consumption.
\begin{acknowledgments}
This work was supported by NIH NIGMS MIRA grant number R35GM119461 and Simons grant in the Mathematical Modeling of Living Systems to PM.
\end{acknowledgments}
\onecolumngrid
|
\section{Introduction}
Observations suggest the gravitational collapse of the gas within young clusters as a key ingredient determining the dynamical properties of these systems.
In a recent work, \citet{KIR13} investigated the presence of gravitationally-induced motions in the Serpens-South region.
From the analysis of the N$_2$H$^+$ emission as unambiguous tracer of the dense, UV-shielded molecular gas \citep{PET16}, Kirk et al identified a longitudinal velocity gradient as part of the filamentary accretion inflow toward this proto-cluster. \citet{PER14} attributed the detection of similar linear gradients to the homologous collapse along filaments feeding the central clump of the SDC13 infrared dark cloud. Increasing evidence indicates that these gravitationally dominated accretion flows might also be involved in the formation of massive stars
\citep[e.g.,][]{GAL10,PER13}.
If generated by a free-fall collapse, gravity is expected to produce a characteristic signature on the gas velocity structure. Due to the radial dependency of the gravitational attraction, models of clouds in gravitational collapse \citep[e.g.,][]{GOM14} predict these motions to be accelerated towards the center of the potential well. Despite these expectations, such gravitationally driven accelerations remain poorly characterized in observations.
In this letter, we investigate the dynamical state of the dense gas along the Integral Shaped Filament (ISF) in Orion \citep{JOH99}. As illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:map}, the ISF harbors the Orion Nebula Cluster (ONC), the most active stellar cluster in the solar neighborhood and the nearest site for high-mass star formation, including the Trapezium stars and the Orion KL region \citep[see ][for a review]{ODE01}. Still partially embedded in the ISF, the ONC is found in association with large amounts of dense material within OMC-1 cloud, a region widely investigated in the past at millimeter wavelengths \citep[e.g.,][]{MPI90,ROD92,WIS98}.
Our results demonstrate the presence of accelerated gas motions along the OMC-1 cloud consistent with the expected gravitational collapse of this region.
\section{IRAM30m observations}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{ISF.pdf}
\caption{From left to right: (a) VISTA-NIR image of the ISF \citep{MEI16}; (b) IRAM30m integrated N$_2$H$^+$ (1-0) emission; (c) N$_2$H$^+$ line velocity centroid (V$_{LSR}$) and (d) N$_2$H$^+$ Full-Width-Half-Maximum (FWHM) as a function of declination. Map offsets are referred, in radio projection, to the position of the Orion BN source $(\alpha,\delta)_{J2000} = (05^h35^m14^s.2,-05º22'21'')$ (white cross).
N$_2$H$^+$ contours are equally spaced every 2~K~km~s$^{-1}$. For reference, the first N$_2$H$^+$ contour is superposed to the IR image. The location of the most prominent molecular fingers \citep[e.g., the OMC-1 ridge, MF3, and HVF;][]{ROD92} are indicated by red lines in the integrated intensity map. The magnitude of representative gradients with 1 (green) plus 5, and 7 (blue) km~s$^{-1}$~pc$^{-1}$ are indicated in the velocity plot. The position of the OMC-1 South clump with the most blue-shifted velocity is indicated in both maps (green cross) and kinematic plots (green dashed line).}
\label{fig:map}
\end{figure*}
We observed the entire ISF in November 2013 using the IRAM30m telescope.
We observed this region at the frequency of the N$_2$H$^+$ (1-0) line \citep[93173.764 MHz,][]{PAG09} using the EMIR receiver connected to the VESPA spectrometer achieving an effective spectral resolution of 0.06~km~s$^{-1}$. The observations were carried out in Position-Switching mode using an OFF position at approximately 1 degree from the center of our maps with no detected emission above 0.02~K. Calibrations were carried out every 15~min as well as pointing and focus every 1.5-2.0~hours. The reduction strategy, baseline subtraction, and main beam calibration follow the reduction scheme presented by \citet{HAC17}. Our final map covers a total area of $\sim$~420 arcmin$^2$ obtained from a mosaic with different tiles of 200~$\times$~200 and 100~$\times$~100 arcsec$^2$ each. A final Nyquist sampled set of 7030 spectra are obtained after the convolution of the original dataset into a final resolution of 30'', showing a typical rms of 0.15~K. All the data presented in this work will be released after their combination with existing interferometric observations (Hacar et al, in prep.).
Figure~\ref{fig:map}b illustrates the total integrated intensity map of the N$_2$H$^+$ (1-0) emission within this region.
The coverage of our maps corresponds to a $\sim$~7-pc long, north-south longitudinal cut along the entire ISF, including the ONC \citep[e.g.,][]{ODE01}, the Orion BN/KL region, the Orion Bar, and the Orion HII region around the Trapezium \citep[e.g.,][]{GOI15} (see also Fig.\ref{fig:map}a). Tracing the gas at densities of n(H$_2$)~$>$~10$^{4.5}$~cm$^{-3}$ \citep[e.g.,][]{CAS02}, the N$_2$H$^+$ emission reveals the intricate distribution of dense gas along the main spine of the ISF. Several branches and substructures are identified in regions like OMC-2/3, in agreement with previous results \citep[e.g.,][]{LI13}. Additional features, such as the molecular fingers \citep{MPI90,ROD92} and the OMC-1 South region \citep{MEZ90} are clearly distinguished by their bright N$_2$H$^+$ emission. Disconnected from the rest of the cloud, the emission of this molecule is recovered towards the south, coincident with the OMC-4 region. The distribution of the N$_2$H$^+$ (1-0) emission in our maps is in good agreement with previous studies in the same region \citep{TAT08}. Compared to these observations, however, our data is more sensitive and is better spectrally and spatially resolved by a factor of 1.5-2.
\section{Accelerated gas motions towards the ONC}\label{sec:acceleration}
We investigated the internal gas motions in the ISF from the detailed analysis of the N$_2$H$^+$ (1-0) emission profiles. This information is obtained from the hyperfine fit of the individual spectra following the same multi-line fitting strategy presented by \citet{HAC17}. This fitting procedure provides a full description of the gas emission in terms of the mean gas velocity along the line-of-sight (i.e., velocity centroids), the FWHM, line emission properties (i.e., intensity and opacity), and line multiplicity (or number of components) at each position in our map.
Using the above fitting procedure, we recover a total of 4207 components with S/N~$\ge$~3. At the angular resolution of our single-dish observations, a large fraction of the spectra present a single line component. Nevertheless, extended areas exhibiting well-separated, double peaked spectra are found in regions like the OMC-1 ridge and the OMC-4 cloud. Due to the limited beam size of our IRAM30m observations, in this work we restrict our study to the gas motions within the ISF at scales $\gtrsim$~0.25~pc. The internal physical and kinematic substructure of this region will be investigated in higher detail in a subsequent paper combining both the current single-dish observations and a new set of ALMA interferometric data (Hacar et al, in prep.).
Figure~\ref{fig:map}c shows the mean velocity of the gas along the line-of-sight (V$_{LSR}$) as a function of declination for all the detected components in our maps (red points).
Previous studies using observations of different CO isotopologs have pointed out the existence of a global north-south velocity gradient of $\lesssim$1~km~s$^{-1}$~pc$^{-1}$ in ISF \citep[green line;][]{BAL87} continuing along the entire Orion A cloud \citep{HAC16}. A similar trend is observed in the dense gas detected in N$_2$H$^+$ at large scales, with velocities ranging between V$_{LSR}\sim$~11.5~km~s$^{-1}$ in OMC-3 and $\sim$~8~km~s$^{-1}$ in OMC-4.
In addition to the above global gradient, Fig.~\ref{fig:map}c reveals a rapid change of the gas velocities in the proximity of the ONC region. The observed N$_2$H$^+$ emission exhibits a strong blue-shifted drift towards the OMC-1 cloud. Similar gas motions have been suggested from the analysis of the gas kinematics along the main axis of the OMC-1 gas molecular fingers \citep{ROD92,WIS98}.
When observed at large scales, the velocity structure within the OMC-1 cloud describes a characteristic V-shape centered around the OMC-1 South clump. In the proximity of the ONC, we identify gradient values up to 5-7~km~s$^{-1}$~pc$^{-1}$ (blue lines), that is, between 5-10 times larger than those values measured in other regions of the same complex, such as OMC-2 or OMC-3. The systematic nature of these motions indicates that the gas is accelerated in the directions of the OMC-1 region.
\section{Radial dependency of the gas motions within the OMC-1 region}\label{sec:radial}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{OMC1_collapse.pdf}
\caption{Gas velocity structure as a function of the distance to the OMC-1 South cloud for all the gas components detected with S/N~$\ge$~3 (gray squares). Different lines describe the expected velocity profile for a free-falling particle in a series of potential wells with different masses M observed at different angles $\alpha$ following Eq.~\ref{eq:infall} (see parameters in the lower right corner; masses are in M$_\sun$ and angles are in degrees). }
\label{fig:collapse}
\end{figure}
The blue-shifted velocity feature identified in Fig.~\ref{fig:map} appears to present a radial dependence respect to the position of the OMC-1 South clump.
We have highlighted this behavior in Fig.~\ref{fig:collapse} by plotting the gas velocity structure as a function of the distance to coordinates (x,y)=(45'',-120'') in our maps, selected as the position of most blue-shifted line centroid within the OMC-1 region. As deduced from this plot, the reported velocity gradient extends radially across the entire OMC-1 region and up to distances of $\sim$~400 arcsec from this central position, or $\sim$~0.8~pc at the distance of Orion \citep[D=414~pc][]{MEN07}.
Although less systematic than the velocity shifts detected in the line centroids, a similar radial dependency is observed between the derived N$_2$H$^+$ FWHM as a function of the distance to the OMC-1 South region (see Fig.~\ref{fig:map}d). In relative terms, the observed FWHM rises from approximately 0.5-1.0~km~s$^{-1}$ in regions like OMC-2 or OMC-4 to up to 2.5-3.0~km~s$^{-1}$ in the area surround the OMC-1 South cloud.
Part of these effects can be explained by thermal broadening effects in the proximity of the Trapezium stars produced by the increasing gas temperatures measured in this region \citep{WIS98}. In addition to this, the parallel evolution of the observed FWHM with the gas velocity gradients suggests that part of the reported enhanced FWHM values could be generated by the increasing contribution of the large-scale motions on the velocity field sampled along the line-of-sight (l.o.s.).
Interestingly, the direction of the gas velocity gradients within the OMC-1 region closely corresponds with the direction of the well characterized molecular fingers \citep{ROD92,WIS98}.
When isolated by their integrated emission, the gas velocity field along each of these structures describes a continuous velocity track as a function of radius with remarkably small deviations from their large-scale behavior \citep[e.g., MF3 or HVF in][; see also Fig.~\ref{fig:map}~b]{ROD92}. With perhaps the exception of the more complex OMC-1 ridge, the systematic organization of the observed physical and kinematic structrure of the gas at large scales might explain the origin of the molecular fingers within the OMC-1 region.
\section{Gravitational collapse of OMC-1 region}
The characterization of the line centroid of molecular lines and, in particular, their Doppler velocities provide information on the bulk motions of the gas along the l.o.s..
Due to the lack of information about the real 3D-space, however, the physical interpretation of the relative motions between superposed structures usually lead to ambiguous conclusions. Depending on their relative orientation, the observational detection of velocity gradients and/or velocity differences can be equally interpreted as both converging or diverging motions \citep[e.g., see Fig.~12 in][]{HEN14}.
Similar to our results, the presence of a blue-shifted, V-shape velocity structure of the dense gas associated ONC was first reported by \citet{ROD92} from the study of the HC$_3$N emission within the OMC-1 cloud. From the comparison with lower density tracers, Rodriguez et al suggested that the gas molecular fingers are produced by the interaction of the ionized and neutral gas. In particular, these authors interpret the abrupt variation of the gas velocity as the direct impact of the shock-front with the pre-existing dense gas in the area surrounding of the Trapezium region, producing a pillar-like structure showing a velocity shift respect to the outermost gas \citep[see also][]{MUR90}.
Different observables seem to be in tension with this sweep-up scenario.
First, this pillar-like configuration should favor the formation of cometary shapes with characteristic head-tail enhancements, similar to those clumpy regions exposed to stellar winds, such as the Horsehead Nebula \citep[e.g.,][]{HIL05}, not observed in any previous molecular dataset within this region.
More importantly, it is unclear how this formation mechanism would mimic the velocity structure and continuity of the cloud at large scales in regions not affected by these winds (e.g., OMC-2/3; see Fig.~\ref{fig:map}~c). Although some of the observed molecular fingers could indeed be shaped by the strong stellar feedback within the ONC region \citep[e.g., OMC-1 South,][]{ODE01},
winds alone seem an unlikely mechanism for the formation of these objects.
Alternatively, we suggest that the velocity gradient observed towards the OMC-1 region actually corresponds with dense gas material moving in the direction of the observer and towards the position of the ONC. The low extinction values measured toward the Trapezium region demonstrate that most of the dense gas detected along the OMC-1 ridge is located behind this stellar cluster \citep[e.g.,][]{ODE01}. This particular configuration allows us to break the degeneracy: red-shifted gas velocities would then be interpreted as outflowing motions along the l.o.s. and moving away from the stars. On the other hand, the observed blue-shifted velocities would be indicative of infalling material towards the cluster center.
As a unique characteristic of gravitationally generated motions, a rapid acceleration is expected in the proximity of the potential well. It is easy to prove that for a point-like mass in free-fall, the observed l.o.s. velocity V$_{LSR}$ at a given impact parameter {\it p} can be described by the following relation:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:infall}
V_{LSR}(p)=V_{sys,0}+V_{infall}(p) \cdot cos(\alpha)
\end{equation}
where $V_{sys}$ is the initial systemic velocity and V$_{infall}(p)=-\sqrt{\frac{2GM}{R}}=-\sqrt{\frac{2GM}{p\ /sin \alpha}}$ the infall velocity in a potential of a mass M as a function of the distance R to its center, respectively, with $\alpha$ describing the orientation angle of these infalling motions with respect to the l.o.s..
In such configuration, the observed velocities are expected to present an approximately $\sim p^{-1/2}$ functional dependence with respect to the center of the potential well, modulated by their viewing angle $\alpha$.
In order to describe the global motions within the OMC-1 region, in Fig.~\ref{fig:collapse} we display the expected velocity profiles for particles in free-fall in three potential wells with masses of 2250 (blue), 1500 (red), and 750 (green) M$_\sun$, all of them presenting a systemic velocity V$_{sys,0}=$~10.8~km~s$^{-1}$ similar to the observed gas velocities at the northern end of the OMC-1 region (see Fig.~\ref{fig:map}). In addition to this, we explore different projection angles $\alpha$ leading to reasonable fits of the observed gas velocities. In all cases, the kinematic signature of the gravitational infall is assumed to be blue-shifted with respect to the systemic velocity given the physical 3D configuration of this cloud (see above).
As seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:collapse}, our toy model closely reproduces most of the bulk motions observed along the OMC-1 region. We find remarkably good agreement between our fitting values and the measured masses for the ONC, estimated in $\sim$~1800~M$_\sun$ \citep[with a r$_{0}\sim$~0.2~pc,][]{HIL98}, assumed as the dominating component of the gravitational potential over the $\lesssim$~600~M$_\sun$ of gas detected within the same region \citep{GOL97}.
Moreover, our models predict the molecular fingers to be oriented close to the plane of the sky (i.e., $\alpha \sim$~55-80 deg), explaining their long projected dimensions observed at mm-wavelengths \citep[e.g.,][]{WIS98}.
Deviations from this global behaviour can be explained by the intrinsically more complex structure of the OMC-1 region and the distinct orientation of each individual molecular finger compared to our oversimplified model.
Still, the good agreement of the above results indicates that most of the accelerated motions identified within the OMC-1 region could actually correspond to the kinematic signature generated by its gravitational collapse.
\section{Discussion and conclusions}
In this letter we have investigated the global velocity structure of the ISF in Orion using a new series of IRAM30m N$_2$H$^+$ (1-0) observations. Compared to the smooth velocity gradients dominating the global velocity structure of this cloud, our large-scale maps demonstrate the presence of accelerated motions towards the OMC-1 region with gradients up to 7~km~s$^{-1}$~pc$^{-1}$. When displayed in a Position-Velocity diagram, these motions exhibit a characteristic blue-shifted, V-shape centered at the position of the OMC-1 South.
The direction of the maximum gradients observed along the OMC-1 region
seem to coincide with the orientation of the so-called molecular fingers.
Although initially interpreted as ejected material,
the large-scale continuity of these motions and the well characterized physical structure of this region suggest that the observed V-shaped profile may correspond to an accelerated material inflowing towards the ONC. The bulk of these motions, as well as their radial dependency, can be reproduced by a simplified infall model, whose physical properties mimic the expected mass, orientation, and 3D structure of the ONC region. We conclude that both the mass distribution and gas kinematic within the OMC-1 region might be dominated by the gravitational collapse of this cloud.
If confirmed, the proposed collapse of the OMC-1 region could potentially provide a significant mass accretion flow onto the ONC cluster. For a filamentary inflow, the mass accretion rate can be described by $\dot{M}=\pi r^2 \left< n(H_2)\right> \times V_{infall}(R)$ \citep[e.g., see][]{KIR13}. Falling from a distance R=0.8~pc (see Sect.~\ref{sec:radial}), and with a typical radius of r~$\sim$~0.05~pc and an average density $\left< n(H_2)\right>\sim$~10$^5$~cm$^{-3}$, the mass inflow per molecular finger is estimated in $\dot{M}_i\sim$~55~M$_\odot$~Myr$^{-1}$. The 7 molecular fingers detected in OMC-1 \citep{ROD92} would then contribute with a total $\dot{M}(total)\sim385$~M$_\odot$~Myr$^{-1}$.
Our results in the OMC-1 region provide new evidence indicating gravity as a key ingredient for the formation of massive clusters. Interestingly, the gravitational collapse of the OMC-1 region appears to continue after the formation of the main cluster core suggesting that the cluster assembling phase might expand on timescales of several Myr. In the particular case of the ONC, the still on-going collapse of the OMC-1 region could potentially explain the elongated, and still not relaxed, nature of this cluster. Moreover, the continuous inflow of fresh material contained in these star-forming molecular fingers brings a new perspective on the stellar mass segregation reported in previous studies \citep{HIL98}.
\begin{acknowledgements}
This work is part of the research programme VENI with project number 639.041.644, which is partly financed by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO). MT and AH thank the Spanish MINECO for support under grant
AYA2016-79006-P. JRG and MT thank the Spanish MINECO for support under grant AYA2012-32032.
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{Introduction}
Some recent studies have shown that a high percentage of massive stars
belong to binary or higher multiplicity systems (e.g.\ Mason et al.~\cite{Mason98},
Sana et al.\ \cite{Sana}, Sana et al.~\cite{Sana14}, Sota et al.~\cite{Sota14}).
This multiplicity enables us to observationally determine the minimum
masses of the stars through their orbital motion, but it also influences
the evolution of the stars in various ways (e.g.\ Langer \cite{Langer1}).
These evolutionary effects range from tidally induced rotational mixing
(e.g.\ de Mink et al.\ \cite{deMink}), over exchange of matter
and angular momentum through a Roche lobe overflow (RLOF) interaction
(e.g.\ Podsiadlowski et al.\ \cite{Podsiadlowski}, de Loore \&
Vanbeveren \cite{dLV}, Wellstein et al.\ \cite{Wellstein}, Hurley
et al.\ \cite{Hurley}), to the merging of both stars (e.g.\ Podsiadlowski
et al.\ \cite{Podsiadlowski}, Wellstein et al.\ \cite{Wellstein}).
In RLOF interactions, one distinguishes three different situations:
case A, if the RLOF episode occurs when the mass donor is on the core
hydrogen-burning main sequence; case B, when the star is in the hydrogen
shell burning phase; and case C, when the star is in the helium shell
burning phase (Kippenhahn \& Weigert \cite{KW}, Vanbeveren et al.\ \cite{VDLVR}).
Such binary interactions significantly affect the physical properties
of the components and their subsequent evolution. Despite considerable
progresses in theoretical models, a number of open issues, such as
the actual efficiency of accretion, remain (e.g.\ Wellstein et al.\ \cite{Wellstein},
de Mink et al.\ \cite{deMink1}, Dray \& Tout \cite{DT}). To better
understand this phenomenon, in-depth studies of systems undergoing
or having undergone mass exchange are needed.
\medskip{}
In this context, the short-period spectroscopic binary LSS~3074 (also
identified as V889 Cen and ALS 3074), classified as O4f\textbf{$^{+}$}
+ O6-7:(f): (Morrell \& Niemela \cite{Morrell}), with $P_{{\rm orb}}=2.185$
days, is an extremely interesting target. This system is located behind
the Coalsack region. The distance of this region was evaluated as
188 $\pm$ 4 pc (Seidensticker \cite{Seidensticker} and Seidensticker
\& Schmidt-Kaler \cite{Seid-Schmi}). LSS~3074 harbours one of the
very few known O4f stars. These objects are rare since they probably
represent a short-lived transition phase in the evolution of massive
O-type stars before they become Wolf-Rayet stars. In addition, the
very short orbital period of this system makes it a good candidate
for a past RLOF episode. Obtaining a good orbital and photometric
solution for this system and determining the fundamental properties
of its components are therefore of the utmost importance to better
understand these transition objects.
\medskip{}
A first preliminary orbital solution of LSS 3074 was presented by
Morrell \& Niemela (\cite{Morrell}). The low $m$ sin$^{3}i$ values
inferred from this orbital solution (8 and 9 M$_{\odot}$) are rather
surprising for such early-type objects. Niemela et al.\ (\cite{Niemela})
provided an improved orbital solution and they discussed the phase-locked
polarization variability of this system. Fitting a model to these
variations, they inferred an inclination of $i=75\text{\textdegree}$,
yielding very low absolute masses of 10-11 M$_{\odot}$ and 11-12
M$_{\odot}$ for the O4f$^{+}$ and the O6-7 component, respectively.
Niemela et al.\ cautioned however that tidal deformations could introduce
additional polarization, biasing the inclination towards 90\textdegree{}.
Optical light variations of LSS 3074 were first reported by Haefner
et al.\ (\cite{Haefner}), although these authors did not achieve
a phase coverage of the light curve allowing them to clearly distinguish
ellipsoidal variations from photometric eclipses. Haefner et al.\ suggested
an inclination of 50-55\textdegree{}, yielding again rather low masses
of 17-21 M$_{\odot}$ for both components.
\medskip{}
In the present study, we discuss our determination of the orbital
solution of this system and of the fundamental parameters of its components
through several analysis techniques. Some very preliminary results
were given in Gosset et al.\ (\cite{Gosset05}). The data used in
our study are discussed in Sect.\,\ref{data}. In Sect.\,\ref{optical-spectrum}
and Sect.\,\ref{orb_sol}, we present the optical spectrum of LSS~3074
and our determination of its orbital solution. In Sect.\,\ref{Line-profile-variability},
we perform a line profile variability study of several important lines
of the optical spectrum of LSS~3074. In Sect.\,\ref{Prelim}, we
present the preparatory treatment of our data, including the disentangling
of the observed spectra to reconstruct individual spectra of the binary
components needed for the subsequent spectral analysis, and in Sect.\,\ref{photometry},
we analyse the light curve. The spectral analyses, carried out with
the non-LTE model atmosphere code CMFGEN, are presented in Sect.\,\ref{Modelatmosphere}.
In Sect.\,\ref{Conclusions}, we conclude by a discussion concerning
the evolutionary status of LSS~3074.
\section{Observations and data reduction\textmd{ \label{data}}}
\subsection{Spectroscopy}
Optical spectra of LSS 3074 were gathered with different instruments
during several observing runs between 2002 and 2004 (see Table~\ref{journal}).
\begin{table*}[tbh]
\caption{Journal of the spectroscopic observations of LSS 3074.\label{journal}}
\begin{centering}
\begin{tabular}{c||ccc||cc||cc}
\hline
HJD-2\,450\,000 & Instrument & Exp. time & $\phi$ & RV$_{1}$ & RV$_{2}$ & RV$_{1,{\rm corr}}$ & RV$_{2,{\rm corr}}$\tabularnewline
& & (min.) & & (km~s$^{-1}$) & (km~s$^{-1}$) & (km~s$^{-1}$) & (km~s$^{-1}$)\tabularnewline
\hline
\hline
2353.719 & EMMI & 60 & 0.48 & -68.9 & & -70.3 & \tabularnewline
2354.691 & EMMI & 60 & 0.93 & -183.6 & 72.4 & -184.2 & 78.6\tabularnewline
2355.720 & EMMI & 60 & 0.40 & 108.3 & -160.7: & 101.2 & -154.4:\tabularnewline
2381.596 & FEROS & 60 & 0.24 & 165.8 & -203.6 & 161.9 & -197.4\tabularnewline
2382.597 & FEROS & 60 & 0.70 & -246.7: & 170.8: & -251.8: & 159.1:\tabularnewline
2383.598 & FEROS & 60 & 0.15 & 127.9: & -178.9: & 123.2: & -172.6:\tabularnewline
2783.576 & FEROS & 60 & 0.19 & 169.9: & -192.9 & 165.2: & -196.7\tabularnewline
2784.620 & FEROS & 60 & 0.67 & -255.6: & 177.8: & -256.1: & 173.8:\tabularnewline
3130.613 & FEROS & 60 & 0.01 & -51.3 & & -51.8 & \tabularnewline
3131.594 & FEROS & 75 & 0.46 & -31.8 & & -29.1 & \tabularnewline
3132.576 & FEROS & 75 & 0.90 & -198.0 & 77.3: & -203.1 & 69.1:\tabularnewline
3133.629 & FEROS & 40 & 0.39 & 81.5 & -156.3 & 76.9 & -161.3\tabularnewline
3133.660 & FEROS & 40 & 0.40 & 68.5 & -151.3: & 63.8 & -156.3:\tabularnewline
3134.578 & FEROS & 40 & 0.82 & -266.7 & 154.7 & -267.0 & 151.3\tabularnewline
3134.608 & FEROS & 40 & 0.83 & -257.8 & 162.8 & -258.3 & 160.8\tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\par\end{centering}
\centering{}\tablefoot{The phases ($\phi$) are computed according
to the ephemerides listed in Table\,\ref{table_solorb}. The radial
velocities are presented in Sect.~\ref{orb_sol}. The typical uncertainties
on the RVs are $10-15$ km~s$^{-1}$. The colons indicate uncertainties
larger than 20 km~s$^{-1}$.}
\end{table*}
Three spectra were obtained with the EMMI instrument on the New Technology
Telescope (NTT) at the European Southern Observatory (ESO) at La Silla
during a three-day observing run in March 2002. The EMMI instrument
was used in the \'echelle mode with grating \#9 and grism \#3, providing
a resolving power of 7700. The data were reduced using the ECHELLE
context of MIDAS, and 16 usable spectral orders, covering the wavelength
domain from 4040 to 7000 \AA{}, were extracted and normalized individually.
Twelve \'echelle spectra of LSS 3074 were taken with the Fiber-fed Extended
Range Optical Spectrograph (FEROS; Kaufer et al.\ \cite{Kaufer}).
In April 2002, the spectrograph was attached to the ESO 1.52 m telescope
at La Silla, while in May 2003 and May 2004, it was used at the 2.2
m ESO/MPE telescope at La Silla. The exposure times were 40 - 75 minutes.
The detector was an EEV CCD with 2048 $\times$ 4096 pixels of $15\,\mu$m$\times15\,\mu$m.
We used an improved version of the FEROS context within the MIDAS
package provided by ESO to reduce the data (Sana et al.\ \cite{Sana06a}).
\subsection{Photometry\label{Photometry}}
During March-April-May 2001, LSS\,3074 was observed in photometry
with the Yale 1m telescope at the Cerro Tololo Interamerican Observatory.
The telescope was operated in service mode (project A01A0098, PI E.\,Gosset)
by the YALO consortium. The telescope was equipped with the imaging
camera \textit{{ANDICAM}}.
Beyond some shortening due to bad weather conditions, the run was
initially split into two periods: from HJD 2~451~992 (2001-03-24)
to HJD 2~452~003 (2001-04-04) and from HJD 2~452~023 (2001-04-24)
to HJD 2~452~037 (2001-05-08). It was designed to optimize the Fourier
spectral window for period determination with the least observing
effort, while reaching a frequency resolution corresponding to a total
duration of about 50 days without being hampered by the aliasing due
to the central gap. In order to reduce the effect of the one-day aliasing
in the photometric data, we tried to observe the star three times
per night roughly at 3 hours before meridian, at meridian and at 3
hours after it.
The \textit{{ANDICAM}} camera was equipped with a Loral CCD of 2048
by 2048 15$\mu$m pixels. The projection of a pixel on the sky corresponds
to 0.30\arcsec\ allowing a convenient sampling. The whole field
was thus covering a 10\arcmin\ by 10\arcmin\ square on the sky.
The CCD was read out with two amplifiers. At the time of the observations
it was characterized by a 11 e$^{-}$/pixel readout noise; the gain
was set to 3.6 e$^{-}$ per ADU. Half of the CCD presented a variable
noise pattern but the amplitude was sufficiently small not to be a
concern. Moreover, LSS\,3074 was systematically centred on the best
half of the CCD.
The various measurements were performed using the Johnson system $B$,
$V$, $R$, and $I$ filters. Each measurement consisted of exposures
of 2$\times$10\,s in $B$, 2$\times$3\,s in $V$, 1$\times$1\,s
in $R$, and 2$\times$1\,s in $I$. For each night, a minimum of
five dome flat fields in each filter and of 20 bias frames were acquired.
A few Stetson standard fields (PG0918, PG1047, PG1323, PG1633, and
SA107) were observed on three good nights (May 4, 5, and 8) to calibrate
the above-mentioned photometric observations.
We reduced the raw data in the standard way (bias subtraction, division
by a combined flat field, etc.) independently for the two halves of
the CCD. The list of objects were built and the relevant instrumental
magnitudes were extracted via DAOPHOT (Stetson \cite{Stetson}) under
IRAF with both an aperture integration approach and a psf-fitting
technique. A consistent natural system was established using a multi-night,
multi-star, and multi-filter method as described in Manfroid (\cite{Manfroid1};
see also Manfroid et al.\ \cite{Manfroid2}). A set of constant stars
was iteratively constructed to perform precise relative photometry.
The differential data were calculated with an aperture radius of 1.5\arcsec
. A least-square fit of the standard star data allowed us to obtain
absolute zero points and colour transformation coefficients using
the large aperture (3.3\arcsec) data. The derived colour transformation
equations were
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
(B-V)_{std}\, =\, & 0.0236\,(\pm0.0255)\\
&+0.9991\,(\pm0.0323)\,(B-V)_{ctio}\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
(V-R)_{std}\, =\, & 0.1016\,(\pm0.0153)\\
&+0.7804\,(\pm0.0316)\,(V-R)_{ctio}\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
(V-I)_{std}\, =\, & 0.0404\,(\pm0.0237)\\
&+0.9396\,(\pm0.0249)\,(V-I)_{ctio}\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
V_{std}\, =\, & -0.0145\,(\pm0.0181)\\
&+-0.0219\,(\pm0.0229)\,(B-V)_{ctio}+V_{ctio}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\medskip{}
The internal precision of the data corresponds to $\sigma$\,=\,0.007,
0.010, 0.013, and 0.013 mag for the $B$, $V$, $R$, and $I$ filters
respectively, whereas the accuracy of the absolute magnitudes turned
out to be $\sigma$\,=\,0.02 mag. The measurements for LSS\,3074
are available at the CDS in Table~A1. During the iterative removing
of the variable stars, two stars were rejected early in the process
and turned out to be significantly variable, i.e.\ HD\,116827 and
LSS\,3072. They are further discussed in the Appendix and the corresponding
measurements are available at the CDS in Tables~A2 and A3.
\subsection{\textit{XMM-Newton} observations \label{obsxmm}}
\textit{XMM-Newton} (\cite{Jansen}) observed LSS~3074 twice. The
first observation (ObsID 0109100201), taken in August 2001, was centred
on LSS~3074 itself. The three EPIC (\cite{pn,MOS}) cameras were
operated in full-frame mode and the medium filter was used to discard
optical and UV light. The corresponding X-ray image of the field can
be found in Gosset et al.\ \cite{Gosset05}. A second observation
(ObsID 0036140201), centred on the low-mass X-ray binary XB~1323-619,
was taken in January 2003. This time, the EPIC-pn camera and the central
chip of the EPIC-MOS1 were operated in timing mode, whilst the EPIC-MOS2
was used in full-frame mode. All EPIC cameras were used in combination
with the thin filter. The detectors used in timing mode do not provide
data concerning LSS~3074. But since the star is located relatively
far off axis in the second observation, it fell on one of the peripheral
CCD chips of both MOS detectors. The raw data were processed with
SAS v15.0.0 using calibration files available in June 2016 and following
the recommendations of the \textit{XMM-Newton} team%
\footnote{http://xmm.esac.esa.int/sas/current/documentation/threads/ %
}. We notably filtered the data to keep only best-quality data (\textsc{{pattern}}
of 0--12 for EPIC-MOS and 0--4 for EPIC-pn data). Whilst the background
level was high during the first observation, no genuine background
flares due to soft protons affected either of the two observations.
In the first observation, LSS~3074 falls very close to the out-of-time
events of the very bright X-ray binary in the MOS2 data, thus rendering
these specific data difficult to use.
We extracted the EPIC spectra of LSS~3074 via the task \textit{especget}.
For the source regions, we used a circular region with radius 30\arcsec,
centred on the Simbad coordinates of the binary. The background was
evaluated over an annulus with inner and outer radii of 30 and 45\arcsec,
respectively. Specific ARF and RMF response files were computed to
calibrate the flux and energy axes. The EPIC spectra were grouped
with the SAS command \textit{specgroup} to obtain an oversampling
factor of five and to ensure that a minimum signal-to-noise ratio
of 3 (i.e.\ a minimum of 10 counts) was reached in each spectral
bin of the background-corrected spectra.
\begin{table}
\caption{Journal of X-ray observations of LSS 3074.}
\resizebox{9cm}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{c|cccc}
\hline
Rev. & Instrument & Duration & JD(start) & JD(end)\tabularnewline
& & (ks) & -2 450 000 & -2 450 000\tabularnewline
\hline
0309 & MOS1 \& pn & 9.9 \& 6.0 & 2138.830 & 2138.945\tabularnewline
0575 & MOS1 \& MOS2 & 50.5 \& 50.8 & 2668.865 & 2669.452\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{table}
The EPIC spectrum of LSS~3074 peaks between 1.0 and 2.0\,keV. It
contains very few photons at energies below 1.0\,keV (mainly as a
result of the heavy absorption) and displays very weak emission at
energies above 2\,keV. The fits of the X-ray spectra were performed
with \texttt{xspec} (\cite{Arnaud}) version 12.9.0i. To evaluate
the neutral hydrogen column density due to the interstellar medium
(ISM), we adopt $B-V=1.44$. Accounting for the intrinsic $\left(B-V\right)_{0}$
quoted by \cite{MP} and using the conversion between colour excess
and neutral hydrogen column density of \cite{Bohlin}, we estimate
$N_{H}=0.99\,10^{22}$\,cm$^{-2}$. The X-ray absorption by the ISM
was modelled using the T\"ubingen-Boulder model (\cite{Wilms}). X-ray
spectra from massive stars can be further absorbed by the material
of the ionized stellar wind. To model such an absorption, we imported
the stellar wind absorption model of \cite{HD108} into \texttt{xspec}
as a multiplicative tabular model (hereafter labelled as \texttt{wind}).
To the first approximation, the emission from massive stars can be
represented by models of collisionally ionized equilibrium optically
thin thermal plasmas. In our fits, we used \texttt{apec} models (\cite{apec})
computed with ATOMBD v2.0.2 as provided within \texttt{xspec}. The
plasma abundances were taken to be solar (\cite{Asplund}). Given
the rather low quality of the spectra, reasonable fits were obtained
for models of the kind \texttt{tbabs$\times$wind$\times$apec}. The
results are listed in Table\,\ref{specX}. Whilst the best-fit parameters
of the two observations differ, these differences could be due to
the ambiguity between a soft, highly absorbed plasma and a harder,
less absorbed plasma. We have thus also performed a fit of the combined
datasets. The results are again quoted in Table\,\ref{specX}.
We find that the X-ray flux corrected for the ISM absorption is close
to $8.6\,10^{-14}$\,erg\,cm$^{-2}$\,s$^{-1}$. If we consider
the $B$ and $V$ magnitudes of LSS~3074 along with the bolometric
corrections from \cite{MP}, we obtain $\log{L_{{\rm X}}/L_{{\rm bol}}}\simeq-7.3$
which, given the uncertainties on both the X-ray and bolometric fluxes,
is entirely compatible with the canonical value observed for most
O-type stars (Sana et al.\ \cite{Sana06b}, \cite[and references therein]{YN}).
\begin{table*}
\caption{X-ray spectral fits of LSS~3074.\label{specX}}
{\tiny }%
\begin{tabular}{c|cccccccc}
\hline
{\tiny Rev. } & {\tiny $\log{N_{{\rm wind}}}$ } & {\tiny $kT$ } & {\tiny norm } & {\tiny $\chi_{\nu}^{2}$ } & {\tiny $f_{{\rm X}}$ } & {\tiny $f_{{\rm X}}^{{\rm un}}$} & & \tabularnewline
& {\tiny (cm$^{-2}$) } & {\tiny (keV) } & {\tiny (cm$^{-5}$) } & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{{\tiny ($10^{-14}$\,erg\,cm$^{-2}$\,s$^{-1}$)}} & & \tabularnewline
\hline
{\tiny \vspace*{-2mm}
} & & & & & & & & \tabularnewline
{\tiny 0309 } & {\tiny $21.83_{-.48}^{+.25}$ } & {\tiny $0.99_{-.33}^{+.65}$ } & {\tiny $(1.26_{-0.57}^{+1.06})\,10^{-4}$ } & {\tiny $1.55(7)$ } & {\tiny $3.6$ } & {\tiny $8.7$ } & & \tabularnewline
{\tiny \vspace*{-2mm}
} & & & & & & & & \tabularnewline
{\tiny 0575 } & {\tiny $22.07_{-.16}^{+.18}$ } & {\tiny $0.47_{-.18}^{+.17}$ } & {\tiny $(4.72_{-2.54}^{+24.08})\,10^{-4}$ } & {\tiny $1.55(14)$ } & {\tiny $2.6$ } & {\tiny $8.3$ } & & \tabularnewline
{\tiny \vspace*{-2mm}
} & & & & & & & & \tabularnewline
{\tiny comb. } & {\tiny $22.00_{-.16}^{+.15}$ } & {\tiny $0.57_{-.14}^{+.21}$ } & {\tiny $(2.61_{-1.03}^{+2.38})\,10^{-4}$ } & {\tiny $1.64(24)$ } & {\tiny $2.9$ } & {\tiny $8.6$ } & & \tabularnewline
{\tiny \vspace*{-2mm}
} & & & & & & & & \tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}{\tiny \tablefoot{The normalization of the apec models is given
as $\frac{10^{-14}\,\int\, n_{e}\, n_{H}\, dV}{d^{2}}$ where $d$
is the distance of the source (in cm), $n_{e}$ and $n_{H}$ are the
electron and hydrogen densities of the source (in cm$^{-3}$). The
error bars indicate 1$\sigma$ uncertainties.} }
\end{table*}
\section{Optical spectrum of LSS~3074 \label{optical-spectrum}}
The spectrum of LSS~3074 is illustrated in Fig.\,\ref{optspectra}.
The stellar spectrum displays many absorption lines of H\,\noun{i},
He\,\noun{i}, He\,\noun{ii}, N\,\noun{iii}, N\,\noun{iv,} and
N\,\noun{v}. The most prominent emission lines are He\,\noun{ii}
$\lambda$\,4686, N\,\noun{iii} $\lambda\lambda$\,4634-41, H$\alpha$,
and He\,\noun{i} $\lambda$\,5876. Weaker emission lines of Si\,\noun{iv}
$\lambda\lambda$\,4089, 4116, 6668, and N\,\noun{iv} $\lambda\lambda$\,4058,
6212-20 as well as P-Cygni emission components in He\,\noun{ii} $\lambda$\,5412
and H$\beta$ lines are also seen. In addition to some interstellar
absorption lines (Na\,\noun{i}, CH, CH$^{+}$), there are also numerous
(and rather strong) diffuse interstellar bands (DIBs; see Herbig \cite{Herbig}).
The strength of these features is an indication of the heavy interstellar
absorption towards LSS~3074.
The presence of N\,\noun{v} $\lambda\lambda$\,4604 and 4620 may
indicate that one of the components of LSS~3074 is rather hot (O3-O4,
Walborn \cite{Walborn}, Walborn et al.\ \cite{Walborn02}). The
radial velocities of the N\noun{\,iii} $\lambda\lambda$\,4634,
4641, and N\,\noun{iv} $\lambda$\,4058 emission lines and the N\,v
absorption lines are shown in Fig.\,\ref{RVs_N} below and analysed
in Sect.\,\ref{Spectral-types}.
Several emission lines in the spectrum of the system display strong
line profile variations. The most prominent modulations are seen in
the He\noun{\,ii} $\lambda$\,4686, He\,\noun{i} $\lambda$\,5876,
and H$\alpha$ lines (see Fig.\,\ref{figprofile}) and they are presented
in Sect.\,\ref{Line-profile-variability}.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{centering}
\resizebox{18cm}{!}{\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig1draft.png}}
\par\end{centering}
\caption{Most important parts of the optical spectrum of LSS~3074 as observed
with the EMMI instrument at the NTT on HJD 2\,452\,355.7, $\phi=0.40$.\textbf{
}This spectrum is not corrected for the telluric absorption, and the
main telluric bands are shown with dashed lines (Curcio et al.\ \cite{Curcio}).\label{optspectra}}
\end{figure*}
\section{Orbital solution\textmd{\label{orb_sol}}}
Since LSS 3074 is a rather faint and heavily reddened object, the
accuracy of any radial velocity (RV) determination is mainly limited
by the S/N ratio of the data. Therefore, we have concentrated our
efforts on the strongest absorption lines that are essentially free
from blends with other features. In this way, we have measured the
RVs of H$\gamma$, He\,\textsc{i} $\lambda\lambda$\,4471, 5876,
and 7065 and He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda\lambda$\,4542, 5412, and
6406 in the spectra. We adopted the effective wavelengths of Underhill
(\cite{Underhill}), as listed in Table~\ref{rest-wavelengths}.
\textbf{}
\begin{table}
\textbf{\caption{Adopted wavelengths of the lines used to measure the RVs of LSS\,3074.}
}
\begin{centering}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\hline
Spectrum & Wavelength\,(\AA{})\tabularnewline
\hline
\hline
H\,\noun{i} & 4340.47\tabularnewline
He\,\noun{i} & 4471.48\tabularnewline
He\,\noun{ii} & 4541.59\tabularnewline
He\,\noun{ii} & 5411.52\tabularnewline
He\,\noun{i} & 5875.62\tabularnewline
He\,\noun{ii} & 6406.44\tabularnewline
He\,\noun{i} & 7065.24\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}\hfill{}%
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\hline
Spectrum & Wavelength\,(\AA{})\tabularnewline
\hline
\hline
N\,\noun{iv} & 4057.80\tabularnewline
N\,\noun{v} & 4603.83\tabularnewline
N\,\noun{v} & 4619.90\tabularnewline
N\,\noun{iii} & 4634.16\tabularnewline
N\,\noun{iii} & 4640.64\tabularnewline
\hline
& \tabularnewline
& \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\par\end{centering}
\tablefoot{These effective wavelengths are taken from Underhill (\cite{Underhill}).
The top panel displays the lines we used for the determination of
the orbital solution of the system. The bottom panel shows the main
N emission and absorption lines.\label{rest-wavelengths}}
\end{table}
For each observation, the RVs of the primary and secondary components
were computed as the mean of the corresponding RVs measured for the
above listed lines on that observation. Unfortunately, either because
of a low S/N or other problems, not all of these lines could be measured
on all of our spectra. For instance, while we managed to deblend the
primary and secondary components of the He\,\textsc{i} lines on most
of our spectra, the intensity contrast between the two components
is much larger for H$\gamma$ and for the He\,\textsc{ii} lines.
Therefore, the secondary component of the latter lines could only
be resolved on the spectra with the highest S/N ratio. Another example
is He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,5412: the proximity of several DIBs
of similar strength as the secondary line and the fact that the line
develops a P-Cygni type profile (with an emission component at a velocity
of $\sim200$\,km\,s$^{-1}$) between phase $\phi=0.35$ and $0.50$
lead to rather complex blends and thus highly uncertain RVs at these
specific orbital phases. As a result, not all of the RV data points
are based on the same set of lines. Yet, it is well known that in
early-type stars featuring relatively strong winds, the systemic velocities
of the different spectral lines can be significantly different (Rauw
et al.~\cite{HDE228766}). Therefore combining different sets of
spectral lines for different dates could bias the orbital solution.
To circumvent this problem, we tied the RVs of the different lines
to a single systemic velocity for each component. To do so, we first
noted that the He\,\textsc{i} $\lambda$\,5876 line is the one for
which RVs of both components could be determined on nearly all observations,
despite the fact that these absorptions lie on top of a broader emission.
We thus selected He\,\textsc{i} $\lambda$\,5876 as our reference
line. The positions of the primary and secondary He\,\textsc{i} $\lambda$\,5876
lines are shown in Fig.~\ref{figprofile}. For each of the other
lines that we measured, we then determined the mean RV shift compared
to He\,\textsc{i} $\lambda$\,5876, and we subtracted this mean
shift from the actual measurements. For each observation, the corrected
RVs were then averaged, resulting in a homogeneous set of values,
expressed in the rest frame of the He\,\textsc{i} $\lambda$\,5876
line.
These resulting RVs are listed in Table\,\ref{journal}. For most
data points, the uncertainties on these RVs are about 10-15 km~s$^{-1}$.
In some cases however (indicated by the colons in Table\,\ref{journal}),
the uncertainties are larger than 20 km~s$^{-1}$ and can reach $\sim$40
km~s$^{-1}$ in one case (HJD 2\,452\,382.597). To adopt the same
notations as previous investigators, we refer to the brightest and
hottest component of LSS~3074 as the primary, though its present-day
mass appears to be lower than that of its companion (see below).
\medskip{}
Owing to the severe aliasing problem, it is extremely difficult to
obtain an independent determination of the orbital period of LSS 3074
from our set of RV measurements only. A Fourier analysis of the RV$_{1}$
and RV$_{2}$ data yields the highest peaks around $\nu=0.46020$
d$^{-1}$ ($P{}_{{\rm orb}}=2.1730$ days) and $\nu=0.45762$ d$^{-1}$
($P{}_{{\rm orb}}=2.1852$ days). However, we caution that there are
many more aliases that could hide the actual orbital period. It is
worth pointing out that the second peak yields almost exactly the
same period as found by Niemela et al.\ (\cite{Niemela}). We performed
the same Fourier analysis for each of the four bandpasses of the photometric
data, $B$, $V$, $R$, and $I$, and obtained a highest peak at $\nu=0.9158$
d$^{-1}$, which corresponds to an orbital frequency of $\nu=0.9158/2=0.4579$
d$^{-1}$, corresponding to $P{}_{{\rm orb}}=2.184$ days. While the
periodogram of the photometric time series allows us to unambiguously
identify the correct alias, the natural width of its peaks is much
larger than in the case of our spectroscopic time series. In fact,
folding the RVs into the photometric period yields an unacceptably
large scatter. Therefore, combining the results from periodograms
of the photometric and spectroscopic time series, we find that the
most likely period of LSS 3074 is 2.1852 $\pm$ 0.0006 days, with
the error bars given as 1$\sigma$ deviation.
Also, the $T{}_{0}$ obtained with the photometric curves is HJD 2\foreignlanguage{french}{\emph{\,}}452\foreignlanguage{french}{\emph{\,}}000.9568,
which corresponds to a phase shift of $\sim$0.05 with the $T{}_{0}$
obtained with the RV data. If we lock the RV data to this $T{}_{0}$,
we obtain a period of 2.1849 days. Considering that this result is
well within the error bars of our previous calculations, we can admit
the phase alignment of the RV and photometric data.
As a consistency check, we also combined our measurements in the $V$
band with those taken by Haefner et al.\ in \cite{Haefner} and obtained
a highest peak of the periodogram at $\nu=0.9153$ d$^{-1}$, which
corresponds to an orbital frequency of $\nu=0.9153/2=0.45765$ d$^{-1}$,
corresponding to $P{}_{{\rm orb}}=2.1851$ days. This result tends
to confirm the quality of our determination of the orbital period
of the system.
Adopting an orbital period of 2.1852 days, we computed an orbital
solution assuming a circular orbit. The RVs were weighted according
to their estimated uncertainties. The result is shown in Fig.\,\ref{fig_solorb}
and the corresponding orbital elements are provided in Table\,\ref{table_solorb}.
\begin{table}
\caption{Orbital solution computed from our RV data of LSS 3074 assuming a
circular orbit and an orbital period of 2.1852 days.}
\noindent \begin{raggedright}
\begin{tabular}{l|cc}
\hline
& Primary & Secondary\tabularnewline
\hline
\hline
$T{}_{0}$ (HJD\emph{\,}-\emph{\,}2\emph{\,}450\emph{\,}000) & \multicolumn{2}{c}{2000.851 $\pm$ 0.008}\tabularnewline
$\gamma$ (km\emph{\,}s$^{-1}$) & -66.0 $\pm$ 5.0 & -21.7 $\pm$ 4.7\tabularnewline
\emph{K} (km\emph{\,}s$^{-1}$) & 228.5 $\pm$ 7.1 & 196.0 $\pm$ 6.1\tabularnewline
\emph{a\,}sin\,\emph{i} (R$_{\odot}$) & 9.9 $\pm$ 0.3 & 8.5 $\pm$ 0.3\tabularnewline
\textit{q} = \emph{m}$_{1}$/\emph{m}$_{2}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{0.86 $\pm$ 0.04}\tabularnewline
\emph{m}\,sin\emph{$^{3}$i }(M$_{\odot}$) & 8.0 $\pm$ 0.5 & 9.3 $\pm$ 0.7\tabularnewline
$R{}_{{\rm {RL}}}$/($a{}_{1}+a_{2}$) & 0.37 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.39 $\pm$ 0.01\tabularnewline
$R{}_{{\rm {RL}}}$\,sin\,\emph{i }(R$_{\odot}$) & 6.7 $\pm$ 0.2 & 7.2$\pm$ 0.2\tabularnewline
$\sigma_{{\rm fit}}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{3.11}\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\par\end{raggedright}
\tablefoot{$T{}_{0}$ refers to the time of conjunction with the
primary being in front. $\gamma$, $K$ and $a$~sin$i$ denote respectively
the apparent systemic velocity, the semi-amplitude of the radial velocity
curve and the projected separation between the centre of the star
and the centre of mass of the binary system. $R{}_{{\rm {RL}}}$ stands
for the radius of a sphere with a volume equal to that of the Roche
lobe computed according to the formula of Eggleton (\cite{Eggleton}).
All error bars indicate 1$\sigma$ uncertainties.\label{table_solorb}}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\resizebox{9cm}{!}{\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{rvLSS3074.png}}
\caption{Radial velocities of the components of LSS 3074 assuming a period
of 2.1852 days. The RVs of the primary and secondary stars are shown
with filled and empty circles, respectively. The solid and dashed
lines indicate the orbital solution from Table\,\ref{table_solorb}.\label{fig_solorb}}
\end{figure}
The RV amplitudes of our solution are in reasonable agreement with
values from the literature ($K{}_{1}=222$ and $K{}_{2}=218$ km~s$^{-1}$;
Niemela et al.\ \cite{Niemela}). Consequently our orbital solution
also leads to low minimum masses, similar to those of Niemela et al.\ ($m$\foreignlanguage{french}{\,}sin$^{3}i=9.5$
and 10 M$_{\odot}$ for the O4f primary and the secondary, respectively).
The apparent systemic velocity of the primary is significantly more
negative than that of the secondary. This most likely indicates that
the absorption lines of the primary are not entirely formed in the
static photosphere, but arise at least partly from an expanding stellar
wind.
Figure\,\ref{RVs_N} shows the RVs of the nitrogen emission and absorption
lines in the spectrum of LSS~3074. The adopted effective wavelengths
of the studied lines are listed in Table~\ref{rest-wavelengths}.
All the lines seem to move with the primary, but the scatter of the
velocities of the various lines is rather large, especially at phases
between the 0.25 quadrature and 0.5 conjunction. During this phase
interval, the N\,\noun{iii} emission lines yield systematically larger
velocities than the N\,\noun{v} absorption.
\begin{figure}
\resizebox{9cm}{!}{\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{RVs_N.png}}
\caption{Radial velocities of the N\,\noun{iii} and N\,\noun{iv} emission
lines and the N\,\noun{v} absorptions in the spectrum of LSS~3074.
The meaning of the various symbols is given in the upper left corner.
The solid line yields the orbital solution of the primary from Table\,\ref{table_solorb}.\label{RVs_N}}
\end{figure}
\section{Line profile variability\label{Line-profile-variability}}
The most prominent emission lines in the optical spectrum of LSS~3074
show strong profile variations (see Fig.\,\ref{figprofile}). For
instance, the He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,4686 line evolves from
a broad and skewed emission (around $\phi=0.0$) into a double-peaked
feature with rather narrow individual peaks and the strongest peak
closely following the orbital motion of the primary (at phases near
0.5).
On the other hand, the H$\alpha$ emission features a double-peaked
profile on most of our spectra and the profiles observed around the
two conjunctions are very similar. At phases near quadrature, the
peaks are broader and less clear cut. Apart from the moving absorption
lines, the He\,\textsc{i} $\lambda$\,5876 profile has a morphology
relatively similar to that of the H$\alpha$ line.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{centering}
\resizebox{18cm}{!}{\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{fig4draft_2.png}}
\par\end{centering}
\caption{Line profile variations of some important emission lines in the optical
spectrum of LSS~3074. N\,\noun{iii} $\lambda\lambda$ 4634-4641
and He\,\noun{ii} $\lambda$ 4686 are shown in the left panel; He\,\noun{i}
$\lambda$ 5876 is represented in the central panel; and H$\alpha$
is indicated in the right panel. The orbital phases computed according
to the ephemerides in Table\,\ref{orb_sol} are given on the right
of each panel. The red spectra correspond to the EMMI observations.
The vertical solid (resp.\ dotted) lines in the middle panel represent
the position of the primary (resp.\ secondary) He~\noun{i} $\lambda$
5876 line for the given observation.\label{figprofile}}
\end{figure*}
We measured the equivalent widths (EWs) of the H$\alpha$ line between
6513 and 6604 \AA. We find that $\overline{{\rm EW}}=4.09\pm0.60$
\AA. Although the dispersion around the mean is quite large, no obvious
phase-locked behaviour is apparent. In particular, we do not see any
variations attributable to the modulation of the continuum.
These complex line morphologies make it impossible to assign a single
RV to the He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,4686 and H$\alpha$ emission
lines, and suggest that these lines do not arise in the atmosphere
of one of the two stars, but stem from an extended emission region.
To further quantify this situation, we used the method of Doppler
tomography to map the emitting regions of the He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,4686
and H$\alpha$ lines in velocity space. Our method is based on the
Fourier-filtered back projection technique (Horne \cite{Horne91},
Rauw et al.\ \cite{HDE228766}, Mahy \cite{Mahy11}). The radial
velocity of any gas flow that is stationary in the rotating frame
of reference of the binary can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
v(\phi)=v_{x}\,\cos{(2\,\pi\,\phi)}-v_{y}\,\sin{(2\,\pi\,\phi)}+v_{z}\label{eqtomo}
\end{equation}
where $\phi$ stands for the orbital phase with $\phi=0.0$, corresponding
to the primary star being in front. The $(v_{x},v_{y},v_{z})$ are
the velocity coordinates of the gas flow. The $x$ and $y$ axes are
located in the orbital plane. The $x$-axis runs from the primary
to the secondary, whilst the positive $y$-axis points in the direction
of the orbital motion of the secondary. The $v_{z}$ component represents
the apparent systemic velocity of the line under consideration. The
Doppler map consists of a projection of relation given by (\ref{eqtomo})
on the $(v_{x},v_{y})$ plane. For a given value of $v_{z}$, each
pixel in a Doppler map, specified by its velocity coordinates, is
therefore associated with a particular form of equation (\ref{eqtomo}).
All our spectra listed in Table\,\ref{journal} were given equal
weights.
The Doppler maps, computed adopting $v_{z}=-44$\,km\,s$^{-1}$,
are shown in Fig.\,\ref{Dopplermap}. They reveal extended line formation
regions in velocity space with different morphologies for the two
lines. The He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,4686 line features an emission
lobe on the negative $v_{x}$ side and mostly with negative $v_{y}$.
This emission seems thus mostly associated with the primary star.
The H$\alpha$ Doppler map displays two lobes, extending on both sides
of the Roche lobes in velocity space, with the strongest one closely
matching the emission lobe of the Doppler map of He\,\textsc{ii}
$\lambda$\,4686.
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\begin{minipage}[c]{8.5cm}%
\begin{center}
\resizebox{8.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{map4686.pdf}}
\par\end{center}%
\end{minipage}\hfill{}%
\begin{minipage}[c]{8.5cm}%
\begin{center}
\resizebox{8.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{mapHalpha.pdf}}
\par\end{center}%
\end{minipage}\caption{Doppler maps of the He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,4686 (left) and
H$\alpha$ (right) emission lines in the spectrum of LSS~3074. The
crosses correspond to the radial velocity amplitudes of the centre
of mass of the primary (negative $v{}_{y}$) and secondary (positive
$v_{y}$), whereas the dashed lines indicate the Roche lobe in velocity
space for a mass ratio $m_{1}/m_{2}=0.86$. The colour scale indicates
the level of the line emissivity relative to its maximum value. \label{Dopplermap}}
\end{figure*}
A full interpretation of these Doppler maps in terms of wind-wind
interactions is beyond the scope of the present paper. However, it
is interesting to compare our Doppler maps with those of Algol-type
systems where a cool star fills up its Roche lobe and transfers matter
to a hotter companion (Richards et al.~\cite{Richards14}). Our maps
are clearly different from those presented by Richards et al.\ (\cite{Richards14}).
The structures seen in Fig.\,\ref{Dopplermap} neither resemble those
produced by gas streams that directly impact the mass gainer nor do
they feature the ring-like structure, centred on the mass gainer,
that appears for systems with Keplerian accretion disks. These results
therefore do not support the presence of an accretion disk or an accretion
stream in LSS~3074.
\section{Preparatory analysis\textmd{ \label{Prelim}}}
\subsection{Spectral disentangling\label{disent}}
The determination of the orbital solution allowed us to recover the
individual spectra of both components through the disentangling of
the normalized spectra of the binary system. For this purpose, we
used our disentangling routine (Rauw \cite{DSc}) based on the method
of Gonz\'alez \& Levato (\cite{GL}), previously used by Linder et al.\ (\cite{Linder})
and improved by Mahy et al.\ (\cite{Mahy}). In this procedure, the
mean spectra of each binary component are reconstructed in an iterative
way by shifting the observed data into the frame of reference of one
star and subtracting the best approximation of the spectrum of the
other star shifted to its observed radial velocity. In the disentangling
carried out in this work, we fixed the RVs of the binary components
to those corresponding to the orbital solution of Sect.\,\ref{orb_sol}.
For a more detailed description of the method, see Raucq et al.\ (\cite{Raucq}).
\medskip{}
As for any disentangling method, this technique also has its limitations
(Gonz\'alez \& Levato \cite{GL}). An important limitation for our study
is that broad spectral features are not recovered with the same accuracy
as narrow ones. Indeed, features that are wider than a few times the
RV amplitude are barely properly recovered. This is the case of the
wings of the Balmer lines, for example. Moreover small residual errors
in the normalization of the input spectra can lead to oscillations
of the continuum in the resulting disentangled spectra on wavelength
scales of several dozen \AA{}, and a reasonable observational sampling
of the orbital cycle is needed because the quality of the results
depends on the radial velocity ranges covered by the observations.
Finally, spectral disentangling works on continuum-normalized spectra
and does not yield the brightness ratio of the stars, which must be
determined by other techniques (see below).
\medskip{}
In the particular case of LSS 3074, we also encountered problems due
to the large brightness ratio of the system. Indeed, as shown in Sect.\,\ref{brightness},
the primary star appears much brighter than the secondary star, meaning
that the latter is faint in the observed spectra, which induces difficulties
in the disentangling procedure, a lower S/N ratio, and thus larger
uncertainties on the resulting secondary spectrum.
\subsection{Spectral types \label{Spectral-types}}
We then determined the spectral types of the stars through the measurement
of the equivalent width ratio of some spectral lines of the reconstructed
individual line spectra of the primary and secondary components. We
used the He\,\textsc{i} $\lambda$\,4471 and He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,4542
lines, on the one hand, and Si\,\textsc{iv} $\lambda$\,4089 and
He\,\textsc{i} $\lambda$\,4143 lines, on the other hand, and applied
the Conti quantitative classification criteria for O-type stars (Conti
\& Alschuler \cite{CA}, Conti \& Frost \cite{CF}, see also van der
Hucht \cite{vdHucht}) for both spectral types and luminosity classes.
In this way, we obtain O5.5\,I and O6.5-7\,I classifications for
the primary and secondary, respectively. The strong He\,\textsc{ii}
$\lambda$\,4686 and N\,\textsc{iii} $\lambda\lambda$ 4634-41 emission
lines lead to the addition of an f qualifier (see Walborn et al.\ \cite{Walborn02},
Sota et al.\ \cite{Sota11}, Ma\'iz Apell\'aniz et al.\ \cite{Jesus}
and references therein) for both components. The primary spectrum
further displays emissions of Si\,\textsc{iv} $\lambda\lambda$ 4089,
4116. Previously these features were indicated by an f$^{+}$ qualifier,
but it has been suggested that this notation is obsolete (Sota et
al.\ \cite{Sota11}).
However, the Conti criterion for the luminosity classes is formulated
for spectral types from O7 to O9.7 and its application to the spectrum
of the primary star is thus an approximation. Moreover, Walborn et
al.\ (\cite{Walborn02}) argued that it would be preferable to use
the N\,\textsc{iv}/N\,\textsc{iii} emission line ratio for the spectral
classification of the earliest O-type stars rather than the ratio
of the He\,\textsc{i}/He\,\textsc{ii} absorption lines. As shown
in Fig.\,\ref{RVs_N}, the N\,\textsc{iii} $\lambda\lambda$ 4634,
4641, and the very weak N\,\textsc{iv} $\lambda$ 4058 emission line
(when present) clearly move along with the primary star. The same
holds true for the weak, but definite N\,\textsc{v} $\lambda\lambda$\,4604
and 4620 absorption lines. As indicated in Sect.\,\ref{optical-spectrum},
the presence of these N\,\textsc{v} absorption lines points towards
a rather hot star with an O3 to O4 spectral type (Walborn et al.\ \cite{Walborn02},
Sota et al.\ \cite{Sota11}), which is at odds with our above classification
based on the helium lines. We have thus compared our disentangled
primary spectrum with the spectral atlas of Sota et al.\ (\cite{Sota11}).
The strong He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,4686 emission clearly confirms
a supergiant luminosity class. The simultaneous presence of strong
N\,\textsc{iii}, very weak N\,\textsc{iv,} and definite N\,\textsc{v}
lines in the spectrum of the primary is clearly a challenge both for
spectral classification and spectral modelling (see Sect.\,\ref{Results}).
The best match, although certainly not perfect, is found with the
spectra of HD~14\,947 (O4.5\,If) and, to a lesser extent, HD~15\,570
(O4\,If). For a highly deformed star, such as the primary of LSS~3074,
gravity darkening leads to a non-uniform surface temperature. Hence,
the discrepancy between the O5.5\,If spectral type inferred from
the relative strengths of the He\,\textsc{i} and He\,\textsc{ii}
lines and the O4-4.5\,If type derived from the nitrogen spectrum
could simply reflect the fact that these lines form over different
parts of the stellar surface. We come back to this point in Sect.\,\ref{Results}.
For the secondary star, comparison with the atlas of Sota el al.\ (\cite{Sota11})
yields a spectral classification O6.5-7\,If, in agreement with the
results from the relative strengths of the helium lines.
Finally, since our classification is based on the disentangled spectra,
it is less sensitive to a possible phase dependence of the line strengths
and should thus be more robust than a classification based only on
spectra collected near quadrature phases.
\subsection{Brightness ratio \label{brightness}}
The spectral disentangling yields the strength of the lines in the
primary and secondary stars relative to the combined continuum. But
as we mentioned earlier, it does not allow us to establish the relative
strengths of the continua. We therefore needed to first establish
the brightness ratio of the stars to further analyse the reconstructed
spectra.
To estimate the optical brightness ratio of the components of LSS~3074,
we measured the equivalent widths, referring to the combined continuum
of the two stars, of a number of spectral lines on the reconstructed
primary and secondary spectra. The results are listed in Table\,\ref{EW}
along with the mean equivalent widths of the same lines in synthetic
spectra of stars of the same spectral type, computed with the non-LTE
model atmosphere code CMFGEN (Hillier \& Miller \cite{HM}), which
we describe in Sect.\,\ref{CMFGENcode}. For comparison, we also
list the mean equivalent widths of the same lines in spectra of stars
of similar spectral type as measured by Conti (\cite{Conti1,Conti2})
and Conti \& Alschuler (\cite{CA}).
\begin{table*}[thb]
\caption{Brightness ratio determination from the dilution of prominent lines.}
\begin{centering}
\begin{tabular}{l|ccccccc}
\hline
Line & \multicolumn{6}{c}{Equivalent Width (\AA{})} & $l{}_{1}/l_{2}$\tabularnewline
\hline
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{Observations} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Synthetic spectra} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Conti (\cite{Conti1,Conti2}) } & \tabularnewline
\hline
& Primary & Secondary & O5.5 & O7 & O5.5 & O7 & \tabularnewline
\hline
\hline
He\,\textsc{i} $\lambda$\,4026 & 0.42 & 0.19 & 0.51 & 0.69 & 0.46 & 0.61 & 3.00\tabularnewline
He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,4200 & 0.41 & 0.17 & 0.53 & 0.45 & 0.58 & 0.59 & 2.00\tabularnewline
H$\gamma$ & 0.90 & 0.34 & 1.56 & 1.75 & 1.85 & 2.22 & 3.00\tabularnewline
He\,\textsc{i} $\lambda$\,4471 & 0.25 & 0.26 & 0.29 & 0.61 & 0.29 & 0.59 & 2.08\tabularnewline
He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,4542 & 0.56 & 0.19 & 0.62 & 0.53 & 0.75 & 0.67 & 2.43\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\par\end{centering}
\tablefoot{The measured EWs are compared with values for the same
lines in synthetic spectra of the same spectral type and in the compilation
of measurements from the literature. The last column yields the brightness
ratio for each line considered, using the synthetic spectra EWs. \label{EW}}
\end{table*}
The brightness ratio of the two stars can then be evaluated from
\begin{center}
$\frac{l_{1}}{l_{2}}=(\frac{EW_{1}}{EW_{2}})_{{\rm obs}}(\frac{EW_{O7}}{EW_{O5.5}})_{{\rm mean}}$.
\par\end{center}
By combining our measurements with those from synthetic spectra, we
derive an optical brightness ratio of $2.50\pm0.43$. As a consistency
check, we can also determine the brightness ratio through a comparison
with the measurements made by Conti, and we obtain $2.61\pm0.41$.
The disentangled continuum normalized primary and secondary optical
spectra are shown in Fig.\,\ref{fig1}.
\section{Light curve\textmd{\label{photometry}}}
To improve our understanding of the system LSS~3074, and in particular
its geometry, we performed an analysis of the photometric light curves
by modelling the system using the eclipsing binary star simulator
NIGHTFALL%
\footnote{For more details, see the Nightfall UserManual by Wichmann (1998)
available at the URL: http://www.hs.uni-hamburg.de/DE/Ins/Per/Wichmann/Nightfall.html%
}, developed by Wichmann, Kuster and Risse. We worked in an iterative
way. First of all, we fixed the mass ratio and orbital period to the
values obtained from the orbital solution (see Table\,\ref{table_solorb})
and the effective temperatures to typical values for stars of similar
spectral types (Martins et al.\ \cite{Martins2}). This permitted
us to obtain a first estimation of the photometric solution and of
the stellar radii and masses. Based on these approximated parameters,
together with the effective temperatures, we calculated the associated
surface gravities and stellar luminosities. This first approximation
of the stellar fundamental parameters was then used as starting point
input in our study of the atmosphere modelling procedure (see Sect.
\ref{CMFGENcode} and \ref{Method}). This procedure then permitted
us to accurately determine the effective temperatures of the stars,
giving us a new input for the light curve study with NIGHTFALL.
Inspection of the light curve reveals a lack of a plateau between
the minima, indicating important contributions of ellipsoidal variations
to the photometric variability. Actually, the shape of the light curve
suggests that almost the entire photometric variations could stem
from such ellipsoidal variations, thereby implying that at least one
of the stars must fill or overflow its Roche lobe.
The only evidence for the existence of genuine eclipses comes from
the fact that the secondary minimum seems about 0.02 mag deeper than
the primary minimum. The primary minimum corresponds to the occultation
of the primary star by the secondary. What is surprising here is that
the deeper minimum actually corresponds to the spectroscopically hotter
star being in front. Given the level of dispersion in the light curve,
it is quite possible that the small difference in depth of the minima
is not significant and could arise, for example, from intrinsic variations
of the stars. An alternative explanation for this situation could
be an atmospheric eclipse produced by the wind of the primary star.
Antokhina et al.\ (\cite{Antokhina13}) studied the impact of free
electron scattering in the wind of one star on the light curves of
close eclipsing binaries. For a contact binary made of otherwise equal
stars, these authors show that the presence of a stellar wind with
$\dot{M}=10^{-5}$\,M$_{\odot}$\,yr$^{-1}$ around one component
deepens the eclipse corresponding to the star with the wind passing
in front of its companion by about 0.08\,mag. At the same time, the
depth of the other eclipse is slightly reduced. In the case of LSS~3074,
the fact that most emission lines closely follow the motion of the
primary star suggests that this star has the strongest wind, thus
lending support to this explanation. However, as pointed out by Antokhina
et al.\ (\cite{Antokhina13}), a quantitative assessment of the impact
on the light curve requires some independent determination of the
wind parameters (mass-loss rate, asymptotic velocity and exponent
of velocity law). In our case, this is difficult to achieve (see Sect.\,\ref{Modelatmosphere}).
This is because of the lack of UV spectroscopy and the complexity
of the line emission regions. Indeed, as revealed by our tomographic
analysis, at least parts of the H$\alpha$ and He\textsc{\,ii} $\lambda$\,4686
emissions arise from an interaction zone and these lines hence do
not necessarily reflect the genuine properties of the winds. Yet,
our best-fit model atmosphere parameters (see the forthcoming Table\,\ref{CMFGENparam})
yield upper limits on the wind density that could be consistent with
the observed difference in eclipse depth. However, these best-fit
parameters also suggest that both binary components lose material
at a similar rate. Hence, one would expect both eclipses to be affected
by stellar wind absorption. We thus conclude that a better knowledge
of the wind parameters of LSS~3074 is required before we can attempt
a model of the light curve accounting for the effects of the stellar
winds. Whatever the origin of the slight difference in depth of the
minima, we need to keep in mind that this situation affects the quality
of the fits of the light curve.
To explain the shape of the secondary minimum by the sole effect of
ellipsoidal variations, we at least need to assume that either both
components of the binary system fill up (contact-contact) or even
overflow their Roche lobes (overcontact), or that one of the components
must be much smaller and much fainter than the other star that fills
up its Roche lobe. In the former case, one expects both stars to be
of very comparable size and, given their effective temperatures, also
of rather comparable brightness. To explain the depth of almost 0.2
mag by the sole effect of ellipsoidal variations is actually not possible
here without requiring the presence of true eclipses. In this context,
the necessity to invoke a contact-contact or an overcontact configuration
remains valid, along with the conclusion that sizes and brightness
of both stars should be comparable.
This is precisely the outcome of our fits with the NIGHTFALL code.
The best-fit quality ($\chi^2_{\nu} = 4.4$) is achieved for overcontact
configurations with a filling factor of 1.008 ($i \simeq 54.5^{\circ}$),
where the corresponding $V$-band brightness ratio is predicted to
be 1.09. The corresponding photometric solution is presented in Table~\ref{tab_nightfall}
and the associated plot is shown in Fig.~\ref{lightcurve}. Yet,
our spectroscopic analysis suggests an optical brightness ratio (primary/secondary)
near 2.50. This situation is thus clearly at odds with explaining
the photometric light curve via a double contact or overcontact configuration.
To achieve a brightness ratio of $2.50 \pm 0.43$, the ratio between
the mean radii of the primary and secondary stars would have to be
$1.15 \pm 0.10$. This translates into a ratio of the filling factors
of $1.23 \pm 0.11$, which is only possible for detached or semi-detached
configurations. As could be expected, the fact that the hotter star
is in front during the deepest minimum leads to difficulties to fit
this minimum.
Since the eclipses are only partial, one way to solve this issue would
be to postulate the existence of a dark spot on the side of the secondary
star facing the primary. Such a spot would then lead to a deeper minimum
when the primary star is in front. From a purely numerical point of
view this would improve the fit quality significantly with $\chi^2_{\nu}$
now approaching 2.9. In addition, it would certainly help to bring
the spectroscopic and photometric brightness ratios into better agreement.
Yet, aside from the difficulty of explaining the physical origin of
such a spot, there is another issue that concerns the fact that the
spot size and its dim factor (i.e.\ the reduction in local temperature)
are not fully independent and we lack any objective constraints on
these parameters. Test calculations have shown that for some situations,
the best-fit model would actually correspond to a spot that covers
more than 75 $\%$ of the surface of the secondary, which is clearly
not physical.
\begin{table}
\caption{Photometric solution for LSS3074.}
\begin{tabular}{c|cc}
Parameters & Primary & Secondary\tabularnewline
\hline
\hline
\textit{i} (\textdegree{}) & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$54.5\pm1.0$}\tabularnewline
\selectlanguage{french}%
\textit{q} = \emph{m}$_{1}$/\emph{m}$_{2}$\selectlanguage{english}%
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{\selectlanguage{french}%
0.86 (fixed)\selectlanguage{english}%
}\tabularnewline
Filling factor%
\footnote{The filling factor of a given binary component is defined here as
the fraction of its polar radius over the polar radius of its Roche
lobe.%
} & $1.008\pm0.010$ & $1.008\pm0.010$\tabularnewline
$T_{\rm eff}$\,(K) & 39~900 (fixed) & 34~100 (fixed)\tabularnewline
$m$\,(M$_{\odot}$) & $14.8\pm1.1$ & $17.2\pm1.4$\tabularnewline
$R_{\rm pole}$\,(R$_{\odot}$) & 7.8 & 8.4\tabularnewline
$\chi^{2}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{1820.7}\tabularnewline
$N_{{\normalcolor {\rm {dof}}}}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{415}\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\tablefoot{$N_{{\normalcolor {\rm {dof}}}}$ is the number of degrees
of freedom.}
\label{tab_nightfall}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\resizebox{9cm}{!}{\includegraphics[clip]{curves.png}}
\caption{Photometry of LSS~3074. The observational data are presented as black
dots, and the solid black line corresponds to the best-fit theoretical
light curve fit with NIGHTFALL with the parameters presented in Table\,\ref{tab_nightfall}.
The zero phase corresponds to the secondary eclipse, when the primary
is occulting the secondary.}
\label{lightcurve}
\end{figure}
As an alternative to the overcontact configuration, one might consider
a scenario where the primary star overflows its Roche lobe and transfers
matter to a geometrically thick accretion disk around the more massive
secondary star. This kind of scenario has been proposed to explain
the light curves of $\beta$~Lyrae (Wilson \cite{Wilson}), RY~Sct
(Antokhina \& Kumsiashvili \cite{RYSct}), and V455\,Cyg (Djura\v{s}evi\'{c}
et al.\ \cite{V455Cyg}), among others. On the positive side of such
a scenario, it might help reconcile the photometric and spectroscopic
brightness ratios. On the negative side, we have the lack of a clear
signature of an accretion disk in the Doppler maps of the H$\alpha$
line and the fact that LSS~3074 is a very compact system, leaving
very little room for the formation of a disk, unless the secondary
star is very small. To test this scenario, we used the disk option
in the NIGHTFALL code. In addition to the effective temperatures that
we fixed at the values obtained from our model atmosphere fits (see
Sect.\,\ref{Method}), we set the Roche lobe filling factor of the
primary star to unity and that of the secondary star to 0.75. This
choice results in a brightness ratio that is consistent with our spectroscopic
value. We tested various options for the disk available in the NIGHTFALL
code (simple disk with uniform temperature, isothermal disk and reprocessing
disk), which correspond to different prescriptions of the variations
of the disk height and temperature with radius. Since the disk in
our models resembles more an annulus than a genuine disk, these three
options actually yield nearly identical results. These models fail
to reproduce the width of the secondary minimum. This failure increases
the $\chi^{2}$ of the fits. Still, we managed to find fits with $\chi_{\nu}^{2}\sim4.6$,
but this was only possible for a disk temperature exceeding the temperatures
of both stars, which is most probably not physical%
\footnote{Raising the disk temperature allows the model to better reproduce
the depth of the primary minimum, hence partially compensating for
the increase of $\chi^{2}$ due to the poor fit of the secondary minimum.%
}. Better quality fits can be obtained if the Roche lobe filling factor
of the secondary is allowed to drop below 0.75: we obtained $\chi_{\nu}^{2}=3.9$
for a secondary filling factor of 0.47 (which would correspond to
a secondary radius of only 3.9\,R$_{\odot}$) and a disk temperature
of 51\,300\,K. Both parameters (secondary radius and disk temperature)
are most probably not physical. We thus conclude that a disk model
cannot solve the issues raised above any better than the pure Roche
potential model.
From a purely phenomenological point of view, we can expand the light
curve into a sum of sine functions. We tried a period of 2.1852/2
= 1.0926\,days and a mere sine and a period of 2.1852\,days and
the fundamental sine plus its harmonic. The results are given in Table
\ref{tab_sinus}. The photometric observations exhibit a variation
with a semi-amplitude of 0.09\,mag in all filters. The semi-amplitude
associated with the modulation on the orbital period is 0.01\,mag
reflecting the above-mentioned difference between the depths of the
two minima. The corresponding $\chi_{\nu}^{2}$ are lower than for
any other fit we tried but still not satisfactory. Including a larger
number of harmonics in our expansion does not improve the situation.
However, in terms of standard binary models, this fit is unphysical
since a modulation with a semi-amplitude as large as 0.09\,mag cannot
be explained by ellipsoidal variations for such models. The fit of
the $B$ light curve corresponds to a larger $\chi_{\nu}^{2}$; the
corresponding $\chi_{\nu}^{2}$ would be similar to those found for
the data from the other filters provided that the photometric errors
used to normalize the $\chi_{\nu}^{2}$ were 0.010\,mag instead of
0.007\,mag.
\begin{table}
\caption{Fit of the light curves of LSS~3074 by a sine function. \label{tab_sinus}}
\begin{tabular}{r|cccc}
\hline
& \multicolumn{4}{c}{Filter}\tabularnewline
\hline
& $B$ & $V$ & $R$ & $I$\tabularnewline
\hline
\hline
$P=1.0926$ d & & & & \tabularnewline
$a(P)$ & 0.0901 & 0.0910 & 0.0964 & 0.0980\tabularnewline
$\sigma{}_{a}$ & 0.0022 & 0.0022 & 0.0039 & 0.0027\tabularnewline
$\chi_{\nu}^{2}$ & 5.96 & 2.92 & 2.65 & 2.66\tabularnewline
$\sigma_{{\rm fit}}$ & 0.0171 & 0.0171 & 0.0212 & 0.0212\tabularnewline
\hline
$P=2.1852$ d & & & & \tabularnewline
$a_{1}(P)$ & 0.0118 & 0.0125 & 0.0107 & 0.0125\tabularnewline
$\sigma{}_{a_{1}}$ & 0.0020 & 0.0020 & 0.0038 & 0.0020\tabularnewline
$a_{2}(P/2)$ & 0.0896 & 0.0905 & 0.0958 & 0.0905\tabularnewline
$\sigma{}_{a_{2}}$ & 0.0019 & 0.0019 & 0.0037 & 0.0019\tabularnewline
$\chi_{\nu}^{2}$ & 4.60 & 2.20 & 2.38 & 1.30\tabularnewline
$\sigma_{{\rm fit}}$ & 0.0150 & 0.0148 & 0.0200 & 0.0148\tabularnewline
\hline
$N$ & 120 & 122 & 58 & 118\tabularnewline
$\sigma$ & 0.007 & 0.010 & 0.013 & 0.013\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\tablefoot{$P$ is the adopted period, $a{}_{i}$ the semi-amplitudes,
$\sigma{}_{a_{i}}$ the 1$\sigma$ error on semi-amplitude, $\chi_{\nu}^{2}$
the minimum reduced $\chi^{2}$, $\sigma_{{\rm fit}}$ the r.m.s of
the residuals, $N$ the number of points and $\sigma$ the expected
error.}
\end{table}
The $\chi_{\nu}^{2}$ of Table \ref{tab_sinus} are too large and
this anomaly could have several origins. One possibility is that the
above-mentioned photometric errors deduced from the comparison stars
might not apply to the case of LSS~3074. This could be due to an
unfortunate location on the CCDs or for example to strange behaviour
due to peculiar stellar colours. This interpretation is however not
very likely. Alternatively, the fitted mathematical model might not
be correct. Since any periodic function can be expanded into a Fourier
series and we found that our sine fits do not require additional terms,
the additional, non-periodic component of the model behaves similarly
to an observational noise although it must have a different origin.
A possible explanation could be an intrinsic variability of the star
at high frequencies since no low-frequency variations were previously
detected beyond the orbital one. Of course, this additional component
has an upper limit. Since the sine fits are our best models, we can
consider estimating this upper limit from the corresponding residuals.
In the $V$ filter for instance, we would need an additional variability
compared to the expected $\sigma=0.010$\,mag photometric error that
quadratically adds to it to reach $\sigma_{{\rm fit}}=0.0148$\,mag
for the two periods fit or $\sigma_{{\rm fit}}=0.0171$\,mag for
the single period fit. Considering that the difference in depth between
the two minima is not well established, we can adopt the latter and
the relevant value would thus be $\sigma_{{\rm fit}}=0.0171$\,mag.
The transition from $\sigma=0.010$ to $0.0171$\,mag translates
into a change from $\sigma=0.009$ to $\sigma^{{\rm corr}}=0.0185$\,mag
for the global fit of the data from all four filters. The substitution
by these newly estimated errors alleviates the rejection of the NIGHTFALL
model, since it reduces the $\chi{}^{2}$. However, this is purely
artificial. In addition, the $\chi_{\nu}{}^{2}$ of 4.4 could still
be due to a lack of ability of the NIGHTFALL model to fit the light
curve, even if it were noiseless. However, under the hypothesis of
the fit of the NIGHTFALL model, the errors on the parameters must
be modified to remain coherent. Even though this additional dispersion
does not stem from the same origin as the genuine photometric errors,
impact of this dispersion on the derived parameters is similar to
that of photometric errors.
To obtain the 1$\sigma$ error on the parameters of the NIGHTFALL
models, we have to consider the dispersion at $\chi_{{\rm min}}^{2}+\Delta\chi_{1\sigma}^{2}$
where $\Delta\chi_{1\sigma}^{2}=2.3$ for the 1$\sigma$ confidence
interval of the simultaneous adjustment of two free parameters ($i$
and $fill_{{\rm p}}$ = $fill_{{\rm s}}$ as is the case when we fit
the light curve assuming an overcontact configuration with NIGHTFALL).
From the values of the $\chi^{2}$ of our best-fit NIGHTFALL model,
the 1$\sigma$ error bars on the orbital inclination and the filling
factors would be unrealistically small (e.g.\ about $0.1^{\circ}$
for the error on $i$). However, as pointed out above, the dispersion
of the photometric data about the best-fit synthetic light curve exceeds
the value of our estimated photometric errors, suggesting that there
could be an intrinsic photometric variability in addition to the orbital
modulation.
Admitting the impact of the additional dispersion, we have to correct
the $\Delta\chi_{1\sigma}^{2}=2.3$ to take this effect into account.
Therefore, we have to adopt a corrected $\Delta\chi_{1\sigma,{\rm corr}}^{2}=\Delta\chi_{1\sigma}^{2}\times\left(\frac{\sigma^{{\rm corr}}}{\sigma}\right)^{2}=8.9$.
We have then estimated the errors on the NIGHTFALL model parameters
by accordingly adopting this new corrected value. In this way, rounding
the values uppards, we estimate errors of $1.0^{\circ}$ and of 0.01
for the inclination and the filling factors of both stars, respectively.
\section{Spectral analysis \textmd{\label{Modelatmosphere}}}
\subsection{Rotational velocities and macroturbulence}
In order to determine the projected rotational velocities ($v\,\sin{i}$)
of the stars of the system, we applied a Fourier transform method
(Sim\'on-D\'iaz \& Herrero \cite{Simon-Diaz}, Gray \cite{Gray}). For
the primary star, we used the profiles of the He\,\textsc{i} $\lambda$\,4471,
He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda\lambda$\, 4200, 4542, 6118, and N\,\textsc{iii}
$\lambda$\,6075 lines of the reconstructed spectrum. We selected
these lines as they are rather well isolated in the spectra and should
thus be free of blends. Unfortunately, we could not use the same lines
for the secondary star because they are particularly deformed. Indeed,
the red wing of these lines is steeper than the blue wing. We then
used the He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,5412 and Si\,\textsc{iv} $\lambda$\,4089
lines to determine the projected rotational velocity of the secondary
star. The results are presented in Table\,\ref{vsini}. The mean
$v\,\sin{i}$ of the primary star is $(110\pm13)$\,km\,s$^{-1}$,
while that of the secondary is $(127\pm6)$\,km\,s$^{-1}$. Owing
to the small number of lines usable to study the rotation of the secondary
star, we could not use a classical standard deviation method to determine
the associated error bars. We thus studied the Fourier transforms
for a sample of rotational velocities to estimate these errors. From
these values of $v\,\sin{i}$ and considering the inclination of the
system from Sect.\,\ref{photometry}, we found that the stars are
in synchronous rotation with a rotational period very close to the
orbital period of the system.
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Projected rotational velocities ($v\,\sin{i}$ expressed in km\,s$^{-1}$)
of the components of LSS~3074.}
\label{vsini}
\centering{}%
\begin{tabular}{c|cc}
\hline
Line & Primary & Secondary\tabularnewline
\hline
\hline
Si\,\textsc{iv} $\lambda$\,4089 & - & 126\tabularnewline
He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\, 4200 & 115 & -\tabularnewline
He\,\textsc{i} $\lambda$\,4471 & 97 & -\tabularnewline
He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\, 4542 & 119 & -\tabularnewline
He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,5412 & - & 128\tabularnewline
N\,\textsc{iii} $\lambda$\,6075 & 92 & -\tabularnewline
He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,6118 & 125 & -\tabularnewline
\hline
Mean value & 110 $\pm$ 13 & 127 $\pm$ 6\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Macroturbulence is defined as a non-thermal motion in the stellar
atmosphere with turbulent cells larger than the mean free-path of
the photons. The main effect of macroturbulence is an additional broadening
of the spectral lines. An approximation of the macroturbulence velocities
was obtained by applying the radial-tangential anisotropic macroturbulent
broadening formulation of Gray (\cite{Gray}) on the spectra, after
the inclusion of rotational velocity broadening. For this purpose,
we used the auxiliary program MACTURB of the stellar spectral synthesis
program SPECTRUM v2.76 developed by Gray (\cite{macturb}). We applied
this technique to the lines \ion{He}{i} $\lambda\lambda$ 4026,
4471, and 5016, and \ion{He}{ii} $\lambda$ 4542 and obtained
macroturbulence velocities of 20 and 50\,km\,s$^{-1}$, for the
primary and secondary stars, respectively.
\medskip{}
Both rotational and macroturbulence velocities were applied on the
synthetic spectra (see Sect.\,\ref{CMFGENcode}) before comparing
the latter with the disentangled spectra.
\subsection{CMFGEN code \label{CMFGENcode}}
In order to determine the fundamental properties of both components
of LSS\ 3074, we used the non-LTE model atmosphere code CMFGEN (Hillier
\& Miller \cite{HM}). This code solves the equations of radiative
transfer and statistical equilibrium in the co-moving frame, is designed
to work for both plane-parallel and spherical geometries, and can
be used to model Wolf-Rayet stars, O stars, luminous blue variables
and supernovae. A super-level approach is adopted for the resolution
of the equations of statistical equilibrium. The CMFGEN code also
further accounts for line blanketing and its impact on the energy
distribution. The hydrodynamical structure of the stellar atmosphere
is directly specified as an input to the code, and a $\beta$ law
is used to describe the velocity law within the stellar winds. We
included the following chemical elements and their ions in our calculations
: H, He, C, N, O, Ne, Mg, Al, Si, S, Ca, Fe, and Ni. The solution
of the equations of statistical equilibrium is used to compute a new
photospheric structure, which is then connected to the same $\beta$
wind velocity law. The radiative transfer equations were solved based
on the structure of the atmosphere with a microturbulent velocity
varying linearly with wind velocity from 20 km s$^{-1}$ in the photosphere
to $0.1$ \texttimes{} v$_{\infty}$ at the outer boundary, and generated
synthetic spectra were compared to the reconstructed spectra of the
primary and secondary stars.
\medskip{}
As a first approximation, the mass-loss rates and $\beta$ parameters
were taken from Muijres et al.\ (\cite{Muijres}) for the spectral
types of both stars, whilst the wind terminal velocity was assumed
equal to the mean value for stars of the same spectral type (Prinja
et al.\ \cite{Prinja}). We then estimated the surface gravities,
stellar masses, radii, and luminosities from our study of the photometric
curves. The relevant parameters were then adjusted via an iterative
process, as each adjustment of a given parameter leads to some modifications
in the value of other parameters. This process and the results we
obtained are presented in subsections \ref{Method} and \ref{Results},
respectively. As explained in Sect. \ref{lightcurve}, this iterative
process was then coupled with a second iterative process, through
the study of the photometric light curve.
\subsection{Method\label{Method}}
The first step is to adjust the effective temperature in the models
of the stars. To do so, we adjusted the relative strengths of the
He\,\textsc{i} $\lambda$\,4471 and He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,4542
lines (Martins \cite{Martins}). Final values are 39 900 and 34 100
K for the primary and secondary stars, respectively. Once the effective
temperatures were determined, we used them, together with the stellar
radii obtained in our study of the photometric curves, to constrain
the luminosities of the stars. We therefore obtained luminosities
of $1.38\times10^{5}L_{\odot}$ and $8.49\times10^{4}L_{\odot}$ for
the primary and secondary stars.
Subsequently, the binarity of the studied system causes some problems.
Indeed, the next step is to adjust the surface gravities in the models,
but as we mentioned in Sect.\,\ref{disent}, the wings of the Balmer
lines are too broad to be properly recovered by the spectral disentangling.
To circumvent this problem, we recombined the models of the primary
and secondary star spectra for several phases and compared the resulting
binary spectra directly to the observations. This permitted us to
better adjust the gravities, but with larger uncertainties than in
the case of a single star.
A second problem arises with the adjustment of the wind parameters.
Indeed, the He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,4686 and Balmer lines may
be polluted by some emission from the wind-wind interaction zone.
Therefore, the uncertainties on the terminal velocity, the $\beta$
of the velocity law, the clumping factor, the clumping velocity factor,
and the mass-loss rate are quite high. Indeed, considering the possible
existence of such additional emission polluting these diagnostic lines,
the adjustment of the models onto the reconstructed spectra may lead
to an underestimate of the terminal velocity, and an overestimate
of the $\beta$ of the velocity law, clumping factor, clumping velocity
factor, and mass-loss rate. Therefore, the obtained values can only
be considered as lower and upper limits of the real properties of
the stellar winds. However, we still adjusted them as well as possible:
we obtained for the primary and secondary stars values of 2615 and
3055 kms$^{-1}$ for $v{}_{\infty}$, 1.30 and 1.40 for $\beta$ and
$3.00\times10^{-6}$ and $3.51\times10^{-6}$ M$_{\odot}$\,yr$^{-1}$
for the mass-loss rate, based on the strength of H$\alpha$, the width
of the He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,4686 and H$\alpha$ lines, and
both the strengths of H$\gamma$ and H$\delta$, respectively. The
clumping formalism used in the CMFGEN model is
\begin{center}
$f(r)=f_{1}+(1\lyxmathsym{\textminus}f_{1})e^{(\lyxmathsym{\textminus}\frac{V(r)}{f_{2}})}$
\par\end{center}
\noindent with a clumping filling factor $f_{1}$ of 0.7, a clumping
velocity factor $f_{2}$ of 200 kms$^{-1}$ and $V(r)$ the velocity
of the wind for both primary and secondary stars, and we adjusted
these two clumping factors through the strength and shape of H$\alpha$
and H$\beta$ lines.
Finally, once the fundamental properties of the stars had been established
or fixed, we investigated the CNO abundances within their atmosphere
through the strengths of associated lines. At that point, we encountered
several problems. Indeed, there is no visible O line in both primary
and secondary spectra, and the only present C lines are the \ion{C}{iv}
$\lambda\lambda$\,5801 and 5812 lines, which cannot be considered
in the determination of the surface C abundance since they can exhibit
complex profiles influenced by various phenomena among which is continuum
fluorescence (Conti \cite{Conti2}; Bouret et al.\ \cite{Bouret}).
We thus were only able to determine upper limits for C and O abundances.
We used the \ion{N}{iii} $\lambda$\,4379 and \ion{N}{iii}
$\lambda\lambda$\,4511-15-18-24-30-35 lines to adjust the N abundance
for the primary star. The same lines were used for the secondary star
except for the \ion{N}{iii} $\lambda$\,4530 and \ion{N}{iii}
$\lambda$\,4535 lines. These N abundance diagnostic lines are taken
from Martins et al.\ (\cite{Martins3}) study of a sample of 74 objects
comprising all luminosity classes and spectral types from O4 to O9.7.
We selected, from their study, all the suggested lines that were significantly
seen in our observations. We performed a normalized $\chi^{2}$ analysis
to determine the best fit to these lines (Martins et al.\ \cite{Martins3}).
The normalization consists in dividing the $\chi^{2}$ by its value
at minimum, $\chi\text{\texttwosuperior}{}_{{\rm }{min}}$. As a 1$\sigma$
uncertainty on the abundances, we then considered abundances up to
a $\chi^{2}$ of 2.0, i.e.\ an approximation for 1 over $\chi\text{\texttwosuperior}{}_{{\rm {min}}}$,
as suggested by Martins et al.\ (\cite{Martins3}).
\subsection{Results\label{Results}}
Figure\,\ref{fig1} shows the best fit of the optical spectra of
the primary and secondary stars obtained with CMFGEN, and we present
in Table\,\ref{CMFGENparam} the associated stellar parameters.
Figure\,\ref{fig1} reveals that we encountered a lot of difficulty
adjusting the spectra of the components of LSS 3074. First of all,
it clearly shows that the noise is strongly enhanced in the reconstructed
secondary spectrum, because of the high brightness ratio of the system.
This peculiarity makes the adjustment of the secondary spectrum even
more difficult. Second, if we can see that the He lines are generally
well reproduced for both stars, some of these lines in the observed
spectra, especially for the secondary star, feature some emission
in their wings that is not reproduced by the models. We can also see
that the Balmer and He\,\textsc{ii} $\lambda$\,4686 lines are not
perfectly well recovered, probably owing to the complexity of the
winds and the presence of a wind-wind interaction zone, as discussed
in Sect.\,\ref{Method}.
Concerning the N lines, most \ion{N}{iii} features are reasonably
well reproduced by the models, but a few lines of other nitrogen ions
are not, especially in the primary spectrum. Indeed, the model predicts
a rather strong \ion{N}{iv} $\lambda$\,4058 emission, while
the observations clearly show that this is not the case. Another remarkable
issue is the presence in the observed primary spectra of the \ion{N}{v}
$\lambda\lambda$\,4604, 4620 lines, which are not predicted by the
model. These \ion{N}{v} lines are seen in the spectra of the
earliest O supergiants (starting from O4\,{}If Walborn et al.\ \cite{Walborn02},
Sota et al.\ \cite{Sota11}) and, in some cases, in the spectra of
early O main-sequence stars (e.g.\ Mahy et al.\ \cite{Mahy}), and
could suggest that our value of the primary effective temperature
(39\,900\,K) is too low. To test this hypothesis, we computed a
set of CMFGEN models with temperatures ranging from 38\,000 to 44\,000\,K.
As one can see on Fig.\,\ref{figN}, a temperature of about 44\,000\,K
would be needed to reproduce the strength of the \ion{N}{v} lines.
However, in this case, the model predicts \ion{N}{iii} emissions
that are much weaker than observed as well as a huge \ion{N}{iv}
line that is clearly not observed. To reproduce the strength of the
observed \ion{N}{iii} and \ion{N}{iv} lines, a lower temperature
of 38\,000\,K seems more indicative. But this lower temperature
is clearly not sufficient to produce the \ion{N}{v} lines. The
temperature that we determined in our CMFGEN fits is the temperature
that properly reproduces the strength of the helium lines and represents
a compromise between the contradicting trends of the nitrogen lines.
\textbf
}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{centering}
\textbf{\resizebox{8.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{figN.pdf}} }
\par\end{centering}
\textbf
\caption{Evolution of the strength of the \ion{N}{iii} $\lambda\lambda$\,4634-41,
\ion{N}{iv} $\lambda$\,4058, and \ion{N}{v} $\lambda\lambda$\,4604,
4620 lines in synthetic CMFGEN spectra as a function of effective
temperature. The primary spectrum of LSS~3074 obtained via disentangling
is shown at the bottom for comparison. \label{figN}}
}
\end{figure}
Our difficulty in reproducing simultaneously the lines of \ion{N}{iii},
\ion{N}{iv}, and \ion{N}{v} in the spectra of O supergiants
is actually not new. Crowther et al.\ (\cite{Crowther}) and Rauw
et al.\ (\cite{HDE228766}) encountered similar problems in their
attempts to fit the spectra of the O4\,Iaf$^{+}$ star HDE~269\,698
and of the O7 + O4\,If/WN8ha binary HDE~228\,766, respectively.
More recently, Bouret et al.\ (\cite{Bouret}) applied the CMFGEN
code to a sample of early O supergiants. These authors also failed
to reproduce consistently the lines of the three nitrogen ions in
the spectra of the three O4\,If supergiants HD~15\,570, HD~16\,691,
and HD~190\,429A for which they derived effective temperatures of
38\,000, 41\,000, and 39\,000\,K, respectively. We note that these
effective temperatures are very close to our best-fit value for the
primary of LSS~3074.
The origin of these difficulties is currently unclear. One possibility
could be that the models do not account (correctly) for the Auger
effect. X-ray emission arising in the wind and back illuminating the
stellar photosphere could lead to an overionization of nitrogen and
favour the formation of the N \textsc{v} lines. In the specific case
of the primary of LSS~3074, the simultaneous presence of the three
ionization stages of nitrogen could also be from a non-uniform surface
temperature as a result of gravity darkening. Applying the von Zeipel
theorem to the primary, we find that the effective temperature near
the poles should be about 15\% higher than near the equator. The observed
spectrum of the primary results from the combination of the spectra
emitted by the various regions, which have their own temperatures
(Palate \& Rauw \cite{Palate12}, Palate et al.\ \cite{Palate13}).
Therefore, gravity darkening could indeed result in a spectrum with
an unusual combination of spectral lines.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\includegraphics[width=8.8cm]{fig1.png}\hspace{0.4cm}\includegraphics[width=8.8cm]{fig3b.png}
\includegraphics[width=8.75cm]{fig4.png}\includegraphics[width=9.25cm]{fig5a.png}
\caption{Part of the normalized separated spectra of the primary (top, shifted
upwards by 0.5 continuum units in the first three panels, and by 1.0
continuum units for the last panel) and secondary stars (bottom),
along with the best-fit CMFGEN model spectra (red). \label{fig1}}
\end{figure*}
\begin{table}
\caption{Best-fit CMFGEN model parameters of the primary and secondary stars.\label{CMFGENparam}}
\begin{centering}
\begin{tabular}{c|cc}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{} & Prim. & Sec. \tabularnewline
\hline
\hline
$R$ (R$_{\odot}$) & $7.5\pm0.6$ & $8.2\pm0.7$\tabularnewline
$M$ (M$_{\odot}$) & $14.6\pm2.1$ & $17.2\pm3.0$\tabularnewline
$T_{{\rm eff}}$ ($10^{4}$\,K) & $3.99\pm0.15$ & $3.41\pm0.15$\tabularnewline
log(\emph{g}) (cgs) & $3.82\pm0.20$ & $3.83\pm0.20$\tabularnewline
log ($\frac{L}{L_{\odot}}$) & $5.14\pm0.07$ & $4.93\pm0.08$\tabularnewline
$\beta$ & $\leq$1.30 & $\leq$1.40\tabularnewline
$v_{\infty}$ (km\,s$^{-1}$) & $\geq$2615 & $\geq$3055\tabularnewline
$\dot{M}/\sqrt{f_{1}}$ (M$_{\odot}$\,yr$^{-1}$) & $\leq$$3.00\times10^{-6}$ & $\leq$$3.51\times10^{-6}$\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\par\end{centering}
\tablefoot{The quoted errors correspond to 1$\sigma$ uncertainties.}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\caption{Chemical abundances of the components of LSS~3074.}
\resizebox{9cm}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{c|ccc}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{} & Primary & Secondary & Sun\tabularnewline
\hline
\hline
He/H & 0.25 & 0.09 & 0.089\tabularnewline
C/H & $\leq6.45\times10^{-5}$ & $\leq2.05\times10^{-5}$ & $2.69\times10^{-4}$\tabularnewline
N/H & $5.65{}_{-3.02}^{+4.07}\times10^{-4}$ & $3.69_{-0.91}^{+0.83}\times10^{-4}$ & $6.76\ensuremath{\times10^{-5}}$\tabularnewline
O/H & $\leq2.67\times10^{-5}$ & $\leq1.00\times10^{-5}$ & $4.90\times10^{-4}$\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\tablefoot{Abundances are given by number as obtained with CMFGEN.
The solar abundances (\cite{Asplund}) are quoted in the last column.
The 1$\sigma$ uncertainty was set to abundances corresponding to
a normalized $\chi^{2}$ of 2.0.} \label{table4}
\end{table}
However, we can stress three very interesting results from our spectral
analysis. First of all, as we can see in Table\,\ref{CMFGENparam},
we confirm the very low masses and radii predicted by Morrell \& Niemela
(\cite{Morrell}), which is unusual for stars with such spectral types.
We can also see that the system seems to display strong winds, even
though these winds are not perfectly constrained. Finally, we found
a strong overabundance in N and a strong depletion in C and O in both
stars of the system, together with a strong He enrichment of the primary
atmosphere.
\section{Discussion and conclusion\textmd{s\label{Conclusions}}}
Our analysis of the light curve of LSS~3074 indicates that this system
is a candidate for an overcontact binary. Massive overcontact binaries
are important objects as they could be progenitors of merger events
or of binary black hole systems (Lorenzo et al.\ \cite{MYCam}, Almeida
et al.\ \cite{Almeida}). Yet, only a handful of such systems are
known and sometimes the exact configuration (double contact versus
semi-detached) is controversial (e.g.\ Ya\c{s}arsoy \& Yakut \cite{V382Cyg}
and Zhao et al.\ \cite{LYAur}, respectively). Among the best-studied
systems hosting O-type stars are HD~100\,213 (= TU Mus, Linder et
al.\ \cite{Linder07}), VFTS~352 (Almeida et al.\ \cite{Almeida}),
and MY~Cam (= BD+56\textdegree{}864, Lorenzo et al.\ \cite{MYCam}).
Lorenzo et al.\ (\cite{MYCam}) and Almeida et al.\ (\cite{Almeida})
note that the components of MY~Cam and VFTS~352 appear hotter than
one would expect from their masses. This discrepancy also exists for
LSS 3074 and is even worse than in the other systems. Lorenzo et al.\ (\cite{MYCam})
interpret this result as a consequence of the highly elongated shape
of the stars. In the case of VFTS~352, Almeida et al.\ (\cite{Almeida})
further report an enhanced He abundance. These authors interpret this
situation as the result of enhanced mixing in a tidally locked binary
(de Mink et al.\ \cite{deMink}) and suggest that the system is currently
in a long-lived overcontact phase of case A mass transfer. Again LSS
3074 also shows abundance anomalies indicating that both stars are
evolved (enhanced N abundance) and the primary is the more evolved
star (enhanced He abundance).
\subsection{Evolutionary status\label{Evolutionary-status}}
We first remark that we did not consider the possibility of quasi-chemically
homogeneous evolution as described in Heger et al.\ (\cite{Heger}),
because the observed rotational velocities of both components are
too small.
The altered CNO abundances in the atmosphere of the primary, the luminosity
of primary, and the increased helium abundance are strong arguments
that the star is in the slow phase of case B RLOF. If the star were
post-RLOF, accounting for the present mass, its luminosity would have
to be log ($\frac{L}{L_{\odot}}$) = 5.5 rather than the observed
5.14 (e.g.\ Vanbeveren et al.\ \cite{VDLVR}, formula 5.4). Moreover,
the observed CNO abundances of the secondary seem to indicate that
at least some mass lost by the primary was accreted by the secondary.
The normal (solar) helium abundance, on the other hand, lead us to
conclude that not all the helium enhanced layers lost by the primary
were accreted by the secondary. Accounting for these facts a theoretical
study can be undertaken to attempt to identify its possible progenitors.
For this purpose, the Brussels binary population synthesis code is
used. This code uses as input thousands of detailed evolutionary calculations
performed with the Brussels binary evolution code. Both codes are
described in detail in De Donder \& Vanbeveren (\cite{DeDonder}).
However, the theoretical treatment of binary evolution is still subject
to a number of uncertainties, which are typically implemented by means
of parameters. For the present discussion, two uncertain aspects of
binary mass transfer, characterized in population synthesis by two
parameters, are of interest. The first is the fraction of the mass
lost by the donor star that is actually accreted by the gainer star.
This fraction necessarily lies between zero (i.e.\ totally non-conservative
mass transfer) and one (i.e.\ totally conservative mass transfer),
and is characterized in population synthesis by the parameter $\beta_{{\rm RLOF}}$%
\footnote{The usual designation for this parameter is $\beta$, but we used
the $\beta_{{\rm RLOF}}$ designation to avoid any confusion with
the $\beta$ of the velocity law in the stellar winds.%
} (hence $0\leq\beta_{{\rm RLOF}}\leq1$). If $\beta_{{\rm RLOF}}<1$,
and thus mass is lost from the system, a second critical assumption
concerns how much angular momentum is taken along from the system
by this lost mass. This is determined by a parameter $\eta$ (for
a formal definition, see De Donder \& Vanbeveren \cite{DeDonder}).
For the present discussion, it suffices to know that the larger $\eta$,
the more angular momentum is removed from the binary by a given amount
of mass loss. A common assumption made in many population synthesis
studies is that the mass lost takes along only the specific orbital
angular momentum of the gainer star (and thus leaves this star in
a spherically symmetric way). This results in a low angular momentum
loss, characterized by a low value of $\eta \sim 0.05$. An alternative
assumption is that mass is lost through the second Lagrangian point
and forms a circumbinary ring, taking along some of the orbital angular
momentum of this ring. This entails a much larger angular momentum
loss, and has been shown to result in $\eta=2.3$. Various other,
less common assumptions are also possible (e.g.\ gainer orbital plus
spin angular momentum and specific binary angular momentum), which
all result in intermediate cases and can be approximated by taking
$\eta=1$. The purpose of this paragraph is to investigate, for various
combinations of the parameters $\beta_{{\rm RLOF}}$ and $\eta$,
whether they can indeed result in the formation of a binary in the
slow phase of case B RLOF with the physical parameters (masses and
orbital period) of LSS3074, and if so, originating from which initial
conditions. All calculations are performed for Solar-like metallicity.
\medskip{}
Table\,\ref{tab_Models} shows the initial masses and orbital period,
depending on the assumed values of $\beta_{{\rm RLOF}}$ and $\eta$,
which produce a 14.8+17.2 M$_{\odot}$ binary in the slow phase of
case B RLOF and with an orbital period of 2.2 days.
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Initial masses and orbital period, leading to a 14.8+17.2 M$_{\odot}$, 2.2 d post-RLOF binary for different combinations of $\beta_{\rm{RLOF}}$ and $\eta$.}\label{tab_Models}
\begin{tabular}{c | c c c}
\hline
&$\beta_{\rm{RLOF}}=1$ & $\beta_{\rm{RLOF}}=0.5$ & $\beta_{\rm{RLOF}}=0.1$ \\
\hline
$\eta=2.3$ & no solution & 34+7.9 M$_{\odot}$, 560 d & 34+15 M$_{\odot}$, 1000 d \\ $\eta=1$ & no solution & 34+7.9 M$_{\odot}$, 90 d & 34+15 M$_{\odot}$, 80 d \\
$\eta \sim 0.05$ & no solution & 34+7.9 M$_{\odot}$, 5.3 d & 34+15 M$_{\odot}$, 1.4 d \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
Our simulations reveal that the primary progenitor was a star with
initial mass 30-35 M$_{\odot}$. We find no physically realistic solution
if the RLOF is treated conservatively. If it is assumed that $\beta_{\rm{RLOF}}=0.5$,
we have to start with an initial 34+7.9 M$_{\odot}$ binary. It is
however doubtful that a binary with such an extreme initial mass ratio
would avoid merging. Our best guess is then a model with $\beta_{\rm{RLOF}}<0.5$,
such as the $\beta_{\rm{RLOF}}=0.1$ model of Table\,\ref{tab_Models}.
If the matter that leaves the binary takes with it the specific angular
momentum of the gainer ($\eta=0.05$), the initial period of the binary
had to be very small (of the order of 1 or 2 days) and this means
that the progenitor binary first went through a case A RLOF phase
followed by case B. Interestingly, our simulations show that the slow
case B RLOF will stop after some 10000 yrs. The primary star then
will be a 11-12 M$_{\odot}$ WR star, i.e.\ the binary will be very
similar to the WR binary CQ Cep.
\subsection{Summary and conclusions}
From what we have seen above, LSS~3074 is clearly a very peculiar
binary system that challenges our current methods of binary spectral
analysis. In this paper, we have tried to get a deeper understanding
of this system, but we encountered a number of problems that prevent
us from establishing a fully consistent explanation of all the properties
of the system. Here we discuss these problems and try to highlight
some avenues for possible solutions.
The properties of the components of LSS~3074 that we determined from
our spectral and photometric analysis do not concur with those of
genuine early O-type supergiants as determined, for instance, by Bouret
et al.\ (\cite{Bouret}). Indeed, these latter authors used the CMFGEN
code to analyse UV and optical spectra of typical early and mid-O
supergiants. They found that O4-4.5 supergiants have radii between
18.5 and 21.6\,R$_{\odot}$, $\log{g}$ in the range 3.51 to 3.66
and $\log{L/L_{\odot}}$ between 5.83 and 5.96. For O6-7.5 supergiants,
Bouret et al.\ (\cite{Bouret}) determined radii between 20.5 and
21.3\,R$_{\odot}$, $\log{g}$ between 3.41 and 3.54, and $\log{L/L_{\odot}}$
in the range 5.68 to 5.80. The components of LSS~3074 have significantly
smaller radii, which are actually even smaller than the typical radii
of early-O main-sequence stars. Stars as big as the supergiants analysed
by Bouret et al.\ (\cite{Bouret}) would not fit into such a short-period
binary system as LSS~3074, even considering, as we have here, the
possibility of an overcontact configuration. The luminosities of the
components of LSS~3074 are also far from those determined by Bouret
et al.\ (\cite{Bouret}), and are again lower than those of main-sequence
stars of the same spectral type. As for the $\log{g}$ of the stars
in LSS~3074, their values are higher than those of genuine supergiants,
indicating a more compact stellar atmosphere than for supergiants.
The values we found are intermediate between those of giants and main-sequence
stars. Last but not least, the masses of the components (14.6 and
17.2\,M$_{\odot}$ for the primary and secondary, respectively) are
considerably lower than the spectroscopic or evolutionary masses of
genuine O supergiants, which are around 50\,M$_{\odot}$ for early-O
supergiants and around 40\,M$_{\odot}$ for mid-O supergiants (Bouret
et al.\ \cite{Bouret}). In fact, the masses that we determined are
more compatible with those of O9-B0 main-sequence stars.
Yet, despite these very discrepant stellar properties, the spectrum
of the primary star of LSS~3074 is very similar to the spectrum of
HD~16\,691 (O4\,If) analysed by Bouret et al.\ (\cite{Bouret}),
including the presence of N\,\textsc{v} $\lambda\lambda$\,4605-4620
in absorption and the weakness of N\,\textsc{iv} $\lambda$\,4058.
This situation suggests that the spectra of the LSS~3074 could be
biased in some way. Our spectral analysis relies on the individual
spectra reconstructed via spectral disentangling. Such a reconstructed
spectrum is a brightness-weighted mean over the various parts of the
stellar surface that can be observed given the inclination of the
system. Owing to the effect of gravity darkening, the temperature
at the surface of a rotating star is not uniform: the polar regions
that have the higher value of $\log{g}$ are hotter than the equatorial
regions where $\log{g}$ is lower. Things are even more complicated
in a close binary system, where the local acceleration of gravity
is determined by the gradient of the Roche potential $\nabla\,\Omega$
(e.g.\ Palate \& Rauw \cite{Palate12}, Palate et al.\ \cite{Palate13}).
To evaluate whether or not this situation leads to a surface gravity
that comes close to that of a supergiant, we computed $|\nabla\,\Omega|$
over the surface of the primary star, adopting a Roche lobe filling
factor of 1.008. We then compared this value to the acceleration of
gravity one would have for a single star of same mass and radius.
Except for a small region near the bridge of material that connects
both stars, $|\nabla\,\Omega|$ is typically between 3 and 9 times
larger than the $g$ value for a single star. Therefore, the Roche
potential should lead to an increase of $\log{g}$ compared to its
value if binarity is neglected. Hence, this situation cannot explain
the discrepancy between the stellar properties and the observed spectrum.
A possible way out could be the effect of the radiation pressure on
the potential. Howarth (\cite{Howarth}) has shown that radiation
pressure leads to a scaling of the potential and a reduction of the
local gravity by a factor $1-\Gamma$, where $\Gamma$ is a measure
of the relative importance of radiation pressure over gravity. The
primary star of LSS~3074 could have lost a substantial fraction of
its initial mass to the surroundings and, as a result, appears now
as a very hot object, significantly hotter than expected from its
mass. This assumption is strengthened by the He and CNO primary surface
abundances, as shown in Sect.\,\ref{Evolutionary-status}. Given
the high temperature of the components of LSS~3074, the resulting
strong radiation pressure appears then to be the best candidate to
explain why the stars display unusual spectra.
Another odd feature of LSS~3074 is the discrepancy between the brightness
ratios inferred from spectroscopy and photometry. The spectroscopic
brightness ratio mainly stems from the weakness of the secondary spectral
lines. One possibility could be that these lines are filled in by
emission either from the primary star or from circumstellar material.
Some evidence for circumstellar emission can be seen in the He\,\textsc{i
$\lambda$\,5876 }and He\,\noun{ii} $\lambda$\,5412 lines of the
recontructed spectra, which are flanked by emission wings in the case
of the secondary. Yet, it seems unclear whether this effect applies
to all spectral lines and would be sufficient to explain the discrepancy
between photometry and spectroscopy.
The fact that the light curve of LSS~3074 is actually better fitted
by a simple sine function than by the NIGHTFALL model suggests that
the components of the binary system might actually be more elongated
than expected from the Roche potential. The inclusion of radiation
pressure in the calculation of the surface shape can actually lead
to systems that are detached whilst they would be in a contact configuration
based only on the Roche potential (Drechsel et al.\ \cite{Drechsel95},
Palate et al.\ \cite{Palate13}). Radiation pressure also changes
the ellipticity of the stars, making them appear less elongated for
a given value of the polar radius (e.g.\ Fig.~3 Palate et al.\ \cite{Palate13}),
although a further increase in the polar radius could lead to a higher
ellipticity whilst preserving a detached configuration (Drechsel et
al.\ \cite{Drechsel95}). Whilst a detailed modelling of the light
curve of LSS~3074, including the effect of radiation pressure, is
beyond the scope of the present study, we note that the temperature
distribution at the surface of the stars will also be altered and
this could possibly help explain the observed light curve. A detached
configuration resulting from the effect of radiation pressure could
in principle also help bring the photometric and spectroscopic brightness
ratios into better agreement.
\medskip{}
\begin{acknowledgements}
The Li\`ege team acknowledges support from the Fonds de la Recherche
Scientifique (F.R.S/FNRS) including especially an F.R.S/FNRS Research
Project (T.0100.15), as well as through an ARC grant for Concerted
Research Actions financed by the French Community of Belgium (Wallonia-Brussels
Federation), and an XMM PRODEX contract (Belspo). We are particularly
grateful to Reinhold Haefner for having made his IBVS data available
and to Ella Antokhina and Igor Antokhin for discussions on the photometric
solution. EG is greatly indebted to Stephanie Wachter and Suzanne
Tourtelotte for having spared no pains in facilitating the interaction
with the YALO archives. We are grateful to I.~Stevens, H.~Sana,
Y.~Naz\'e, J.-M.~Vreux, and M.~da Silva Pires for taking some of
the spectroscopic data or for discussions on earlier versions of this
work. We thank John Hillier for making his code available.\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Reinforcement learning (RL) aims to enable automatic acquisition of behavioral skills, which can be crucial for robots and other autonomous systems to behave intelligently in unstructured real-world environments. However, real-world applications of RL have to contend with two often opposing requirements: data-efficient learning and the ability to handle complex, unknown dynamical systems that might be difficult to model. Real-world physical systems, such as robots, are typically costly and time consuming to run, making it highly desirable to learn using the lowest possible number of real-world trials. Model-based methods tend to excel at this~\cite{policysearch}, but suffer from significant bias, since complex unknown dynamics cannot always be modeled accurately enough to produce effective policies. Model-free methods have the advantage of handling arbitrary dynamical systems with minimal bias, but tend to be substantially less sample-efficient~\cite{kbp-rlrs-13,slmja-trpo-15}. Can we combine the efficiency of model-based algorithms with the final performance of model-free algorithms in a method that we can practically use on real-world physical systems?
\begin{figure}
\centering
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2pt}
\begin{tabular}{r l}
\begin{adjustbox}{valign=t}
\includegraphics[width=0.52\columnwidth]{figs/hockey-cover.jpg}
\end{adjustbox}
&
\begin{adjustbox}{valign=t}
\begin{tabular}{@{}c@{}}
\includegraphics[width=0.451\columnwidth]{figs/socket-cover.jpg}
\\[0.0ex]
\includegraphics[width=0.451\columnwidth]{figs/socket-close.jpg}
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-10pt}
\caption{Real robot tasks used to evaluate our method. Left: The hockey task which involves discontinuous dynamics. Right: The power plug task which requires high level of precision. Both of these tasks are learned from scratch without demonstrations.}
\label{fig:cover}
\vspace{-1pt}
\end{figure}
As we will discuss in Section~\ref{sec:related}, many prior methods that combine model-free and model-based techniques achieve only modest gains in efficiency or performance~\cite{stochastic_value_gradients,GuLSL16}. In this work, we aim to develop a method in the context of a specific policy representation: time-varying linear-Gaussian controllers. The structure of these policies provides us with an effective option for model-based updates via iterative linear-Gaussian dynamics fitting~\cite{LevineA14}, as well as a simple option for model-free updates via the path integral policy improvement (PI$^2$) algorithm~\cite{TheodorouBS10}.
Although time-varying linear-Gaussian (TVLG) policies are not as powerful as representations such as deep neural networks~\cite{mnih_et_al_atari,lhphe-ccdrl-16} or RBF networks~\cite{DeisenrothRF11}, they can represent arbitrary trajectories in continuous state-action spaces. Furthermore, prior work on guided policy search (GPS) has shown that TVLG policies can be used to train general-purpose parameterized policies, including deep neural network policies, for tasks involving complex sensory inputs such as vision~\cite{LevineA14,Levine:2016}. This yields a general-purpose RL procedure with favorable stability and sample complexity compared to fully model-free deep RL methods~\cite{montgomery_ajay_icra_paper}.
The main contribution of this paper is a procedure for optimizing TVLG policies that integrates both fast model-based updates via iterative linear-Gaussian model fitting and corrective model-free updates via the PI$^2$ framework. The resulting algorithm, which we call PILQR, combines the efficiency of model-based learning with the generality of model-free updates and can solve complex continuous control tasks that are infeasible for either linear-Gaussian models or PI$^2$ by itself, while remaining orders of magnitude more efficient than standard model-free RL. We integrate this approach into GPS to train deep neural network policies and present results both in simulation and on a real robotic platform. Our real-world results demonstrate that our method can learn complex tasks, such as hockey and power plug plugging (see Figure~\ref{fig:cover}), each with less than an hour of experience and no user-provided demonstrations.
\section{Related Work}
\label{sec:related}
The choice of policy representation has often been a crucial component in the success of a RL procedure~\cite{policysearch,kbp-rlrs-13}.
Trajectory-centric representations, such as splines~\cite{peters_schaal_2008_reinforcement_learning_pg}, dynamic movement primitives~\cite{rl_dmps}, and TVLG controllers~\cite{peters_linear_gaussian_controller_paper,LevineA14} have proven particularly popular in robotics, where they can be used to represent cyclical and episodic motions and are amenable to a range of efficient optimization algorithms.
In this work, we build on prior work in trajectory-centric RL to devise an algorithm that is both sample-efficient and able to handle a wide class of tasks, all while not requiring human demonstration initialization.
More general representations for policies, such as deep neural networks, have grown in popularity recently due to their ability to process complex sensory input \cite{mnih_et_al_atari,lhphe-ccdrl-16,Levine:2016} and represent more complex strategies that can succeed from a variety of initial conditions~\cite{slmja-trpo-15,trpo-gae}. While trajectory-centric representations are more limited in their representational power, they can be used as an intermediate step toward efficient training of general parameterized policies using the GPS framework~\cite{Levine:2016}. Our proposed trajectory-centric RL method can also be combined with GPS to supervise the training of complex neural network policies. Our experiments demonstrate that this approach is several orders of magnitude more sample-efficient than direct model-free deep RL algorithms.
Prior algorithms for optimizing trajectory-centric policies can be categorized as model-free methods~\cite{TheodorouBS10,PetersMA10}, methods that use global models~\cite{pilco,pddp}, and methods that use local models~\cite{LevineA14,peters_linear_gaussian_controller_paper,peters_quadratic_models_paper}. Model-based methods typically have the advantage of being fast and sample-efficient, at the cost of making simplifying assumptions about the problem structure such as smooth, locally linearizable dynamics or continuous cost functions.
Model-free algorithms avoid these issues by not modeling the environment explicitly and instead improving the policy directly based on the returns, but this often comes at a cost in sample efficiency. Furthermore, many of the most popular model-free algorithms for trajectory-centric policies use example demonstrations to initialize the policies, since model-free methods require a large number of samples to make large, global changes to the behavior~\cite{TheodorouBS10,PetersMA10,peter_pastor_demonstration}.
Prior work has sought to combine model-based and model-free learning in several ways. \citet{Farshidianetal} also use LQR and PI$^2$, but do not combine these methods directly into one algorithm, instead using LQR to produce a good initialization for PI$^2$. Their work assumes the existence of a known model, while our method uses estimated local models. A number of prior methods have also looked at incorporating models to generate additional synthetic samples for model-free learning~\cite{dyna-q,GuLSL16}, as well as using models for improving the accuracy of model-free value function backups~\cite{stochastic_value_gradients}. Our work directly combines model-based and model-free updates into a single trajectory-centric RL method without using synthetic samples that degrade with modeling errors.
\section{Preliminaries}
The goal of policy search methods is to optimize the parameters $\theta$ of a policy $p(\mathbf{u}_t | \mathbf{x}_t)$, which defines a probability distribution over
actions $\mathbf{u}_t$ conditioned on the system state $\mathbf{x}_t$ at each time step $t$ of a task execution. Let $\tau = (\mathbf{x}_1, \mathbf{u}_1, \dots, \mathbf{x}_T, \mathbf{u}_T)$ be a trajectory of states and actions. Given a cost function $c(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t)$, we define the trajectory cost as $c(\tau)=\sum_{t=1}^T c(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t)$. The policy is optimized with respect to the expected cost of the policy
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\[
J(\theta) = \mathbb{E}_{p}\left[c(\tau)\right] = \int c(\tau) p (\tau) d\tau\,,
\vspace{-5pt}
\]
where $p(\tau)$ is the policy trajectory distribution given the system dynamics $p\left(\mathbf{x}_{t+1} | \mathbf{x}_{t}, \mathbf{u}_{t}\right)$
\vspace{-6pt}
\[
p (\tau) = p(\mathbf{x}_1) \prod_{t=1}^{T} p\left(\mathbf{x}_{t+1} | \mathbf{x}_{t}, \mathbf{u}_{t}\right) p(\mathbf{u}_t | \mathbf{x}_t)\,.
\vspace{-4pt}
\]
One policy class that allows us to employ an efficient model-based update is the TVLG controller $p(\mathbf{u}_t | \mathbf{x}_t) = \mathcal{N}(\mathbf{K}_{t} \mathbf{x}_t + \mathbf{k}_{t}, \mathbf{\Sigma}_{t})$.
In this section, we present the model-based and model-free algorithms that form the constituent parts of our hybrid method. The model-based method is an extension of a KL-constrained LQR algorithm~\cite{LevineA14}, which we shall refer to as LQR with fitted linear models (LQR-FLM). The model-free method is a PI$^2$ algorithm with per-time step KL-divergence constraints that is derived in previous work~\cite{chebotar-icra2017}.
\subsection{Model-Based Optimization of TVLG Policies}
\label{sec:ilqr}
The model-based method we use is based on the iterative linear-quadratic regulator (iLQR) and builds on prior work~\cite{LevineA14,synthesis}. We provide a full description and derivation in Appendix~\ref{app:lqr_flm}.
We use samples to fit a TVLG dynamics model $p(\mathbf{x}_{t+1}|\mathbf{x}_t,\mathbf{u}_t)=\mathcal{N}(\mathbf{f}_{\mathbf{x},t}\mathbf{x}_t+\mathbf{f}_{\mathbf{u},t}\mathbf{u}_t,\mathbf{F}_t)$ and assume a twice-differentiable cost function. As in \citet{synthesis}, we can compute a second-order Taylor approximation of our Q-function and optimize this with respect to $\mathbf{u}_t$ to find the optimal action at each time step $t$.
To deal with unknown dynamics, \citet{LevineA14} impose a KL-divergence constraint between the updated policy $p^{(i)}$ and previous policy $p^{(i-1)}$ to stay within the space of trajectories where the dynamics model is approximately correct. We similarly set up our optimization as
\vspace{-15pt}
{\small
\begin{align}
\!\!\min_{p^{(i)}}~~\mathbb{E}_{p^{(i)}}[Q(\mathbf{x}_t,\mathbf{u}_t)]\,
s.t.~\mathbb{E}_{p^{(i)}}\left[D_{\text{KL}}(p^{(i)}\|p^{(i-1)})\right]\leq\epsilon_t\,.\label{eq:lqr_optim}
\end{align}
}The main difference from \citet{LevineA14}
is that we enforce separate KL constraints for each linear-Gaussian policy rather than a single constraint on the induced trajectory distribution (i.e., compare Eq.~(\ref{eq:lqr_optim}) to the first equation in Section~3.1 of~\citet{LevineA14}).
LQR-FLM has substantial efficiency benefits over model-free algorithms. However, as our experimental results in Section~\ref{sec:experiments} show, the performance of LQR-FLM is highly dependent on being able to model the system dynamics accurately, causing it to fail for more challenging tasks.
\subsection{Policy Improvement with Path Integrals}
\label{pi2}
PI$^2$ is a model-free RL algorithm based on stochastic optimal control.
A detailed derivation of this method can be found in~\citet{TheodorouBS10}.
Each iteration of PI$^2$ involves generating $N$ trajectories by running the current policy. Let $S(\mathbf{x}_{i,t},\mathbf{u}_{i,t}) = c(\mathbf{x}_{i,t}, \mathbf{u}_{i,t}) + \sum^T_{j=t+1} c(\mathbf{x}_{i,j}, \mathbf{u}_{i,j})$ be the cost-to-go of trajectory $i \in \{1,\ldots,N\}$ starting in state $\mathbf{x}_{i,t}$ by performing action $\mathbf{u}_{i,t}$ and following the policy $p(\mathbf{u}_t | \mathbf{x}_t)$ afterwards. Then, we can compute probabilities $P(\mathbf{x}_{i,j}, \mathbf{u}_{i,j})$ for each trajectory starting at time step $t$
\vspace{-10pt}
{\small
\begin{equation}
P(\mathbf{x}_{i,t}, \mathbf{u}_{i,t}) = \frac{ \exp \left(-\frac{1}{\eta_t} S(\mathbf{x}_{i,t}, \mathbf{u}_{i,t}) \right)}{\int \exp\left(-\frac{1}{\eta_t} S(\mathbf{x}_{i,t}, \mathbf{u}_{i,t})\right) d \mathbf{u}_{i,t}}\,.\label{eqn:pi2update}
\end{equation}
}The probabilities follow from the Feynman-Kac theorem applied to stochastic optimal control~\cite{TheodorouBS10}.
The intuition is that the trajectories with lower costs receive higher probabilities, and the policy distribution shifts towards a lower cost trajectory region. The costs are scaled by $\eta_t$, which can be interpreted as the temperature of a soft-max distribution. This is similar to the dual variables $\eta_t$ in LQR-FLM in that they control the KL step size, however they are derived and computed differently. After computing the new probabilities $P$, we update the policy distribution by reweighting each sampled control $\mathbf{u}_{i,t}$ by $P(\mathbf{x}_{i,t}, \mathbf{u}_{i,t})$ and updating the policy parameters by a maximum likelihood estimate~\cite{chebotar-icra2017}.
To relate PI$^2$ updates to LQR-FLM optimization of a constrained objective, which is necessary for combining these methods, we can formulate the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}
\label{theo:pi2}
The PI$^2$ update corresponds to a KL-constrained minimization of the expected cost-to-go $S(\mathbf{x}_{t},\mathbf{u}_{t}) = \sum^T_{j=t} c(\mathbf{x}_{j}, \mathbf{u}_{j})$ at each time step $t$
\vspace{-2pt}
\begin{align*}
\!\min_{p^{(i)}}~\mathbb{E}_{p^{(i)}}[S(\mathbf{x}_{t},\mathbf{u}_{t})]~
s.t.~\mathbb{E}_{p^{(i-1)}}\!\!\left[D_\text{KL} \left(p^{(i)}\|\, p^{(i-1)}\right)\right]\leq \epsilon\,,
\vspace{-7pt}
\end{align*}
where $\epsilon$ is the maximum KL-divergence between the new policy $p^{(i)}\left ( \mathbf{u}_t | \mathbf{x}_t \right)$ and the old policy $p^{(i-1)}\left ( \mathbf{u}_t | \mathbf{x}_t \right)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The Lagrangian of this problem is given by
\vspace{-1pt}
{\small
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{L}(p^{(i)}\!\!, \eta_t) \!=\! \mathbb{E}_{p^{(i)}}\![S(\mathbf{x}_{t},\mathbf{u}_{t})] \!+\! \eta_t \mathbb{E}_{p^{(i-1)}}\!\left[\! D_\text{KL} \!\left(p^{(i)}\|\, p^{(i-1)}\!\right)\! \!-\! \epsilon \right].
\end{align*}
}By minimizing the Lagrangian with respect to $p^{(i)}$ we can find its relationship to $p^{(i-1)}$ (see Appendix \ref{app:pi2_proof}), given by
{\small
\begin{align}
\!\!\!p^{(i)}\!\left( \mathbf{u}_t | \mathbf{x}_t \right)
\!\propto\! p^{(i-1)}\!\left(\mathbf{u}_t| \mathbf{x}_t \right) \mathbb{E}_{p^{(i-1)}}\!\!\left[\exp \left(\!-\frac{1}{\eta_t} S(\mathbf{x}_{t},\mathbf{u}_{t}) \right)\!\right] \!. \!\!\label{pi2_update}
\end{align}
}This gives us an update rule for $p^{(i)}$ that corresponds exactly to reweighting the controls from the previous policy $p^{(i-1)}$ based on their probabilities $P(\mathbf{x}_{t},\mathbf{u}_{t})$ described earlier. The temperature $\eta_t$ now corresponds to the dual variable of the KL-divergence constraint.
\end{proof}
The temperature $\eta_t$ can be estimated at each time step separately by optimizing the dual function
\begin{align}
g(\eta_t) \!=\! \eta_t \epsilon \!+\! \eta_t \log \mathbb{E}_{p^{(i-1)}} \left [ \exp \left(-\frac{1}{\eta_t} S(\mathbf{x}_{t},\mathbf{u}_{t}) \right) \right ] \!, \!\label{eq:reps_dual}
\end{align}
with derivation following from~\citet{PetersMA10}.
PI$^2$ was used by \citet{chebotar-icra2017} to solve several challenging robotic tasks such as door opening and pick-and-place, where they achieved better final performance than LQR-FLM. However, due to its greater sample complexity, PI$^2$ required initialization from demonstrations.
\section{Integrating Model-Based Updates into PI$^2$}
Both PI$^2$ and LQR-FLM can be used to learn TVLG policies and both have their strengths and weaknesses. In this section, we first show how the PI$^2$ update can be broken up into two parts, with one part using a model-based cost approximation and another part using the residual cost error after this approximation. Next, we describe our method for integrating model-based updates into PI$^2$ by using our extension of LQR-FLM to optimize the linear-quadratic cost approximation and performing a subsequent update with PI$^2$ on the residual cost. We demonstrate in Section~\ref{sec:experiments} that our method combines the strengths of PI$^2$ and LQR-FLM while compensating for their weaknesses.
\subsection{Two-Stage PI$^2$ update}
\label{2stage_pi2}
To integrate a model-based optimization into PI$^2$, we can divide it into two steps. Given an approximation $\hat{c}(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t)$ of the real cost $c(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t)$ and the residual cost $\tilde{c}(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t) = c(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t) - \hat{c}(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t)$,
let $\hat{S}_t = \hat{S}(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t)$ be the approximated cost-to-go of a trajectory starting with state $\mathbf{x}_t$ and action $\mathbf{u}_t$, and $\tilde{S}_t = \tilde{S}(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t)$ be the residual of the real cost-to-go $S(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t)$ after approximation. We can rewrite the PI$^2$ policy update rule from Eq.~(\ref{pi2_update}) as
\begin{align}
p^{(i)}&\left ( \mathbf{u}_t | \mathbf{x}_t \right) \nonumber \\
&\propto p^{(i-1)}\left(\mathbf{u}_t| \mathbf{x}_t \right) \mathbb{E}_{p^{(i-1)}}\left[\exp \left(-\frac{1}{\eta_t} \left(\hat{S}_t + \tilde{S}_t\right) \right)\right] \nonumber \\
&\propto \hat{p}\left(\mathbf{u}_t| \mathbf{x}_t \right) \mathbb{E}_{p^{(i-1)}}\left[\exp \left(-\frac{1}{\eta_t} \tilde{S}_t \right)\right], \label{eq:pi2_res_update}
\end{align}
where $\hat{p}\left(\mathbf{u}_t| \mathbf{x}_t \right)$ is given by
\begin{align}
\hat{p}\left(\mathbf{u}_t| \mathbf{x}_t \right) \propto p^{(i-1)}\left(\mathbf{u}_t| \mathbf{x}_t \right) \mathbb{E}_{p^{(i-1)}}\left[\exp \left(-\frac{1}{\eta_t} \hat{S}_t \right)\right]\!. \label{approx_update}
\end{align}
Hence, by decomposing the cost into its approximation and the residual approximation error, the PI$^2$ update can be split into two steps: (1) update using the approximated costs $\hat{c}(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t)$ and samples from the old policy $p^{(i-1)}\left(\mathbf{u}_t| \mathbf{x}_t \right)$ to get $\hat{p}\left ( \mathbf{u}_t | \mathbf{x}_t \right)$; (2) update $p^{(i)}\left ( \mathbf{u}_t | \mathbf{x}_t \right)$ using the residual costs $\tilde{c}(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t)$ and samples from $\hat{p}\left(\mathbf{u}_t| \mathbf{x}_t \right)$.
\subsection{Model-Based Substitution with LQR-FLM}
We can use Theorem~(\ref{theo:pi2}) to rewrite Eq.~(\ref{approx_update}) as a constrained optimization problem
\begin{align}
\min_{\hat{p}}~~\mathbb{E}_{\hat{p}}\left[\hat{S}(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t)\right]\nonumber
s.t.~~\mathbb{E}_{p^{(i-1)}}\left[D_\text{KL} \left(\hat{p}\|\, p^{(i-1)}\right)\right]\leq \epsilon\,.
\end{align}
Thus, the policy $\hat{p}\left(\mathbf{u}_t| \mathbf{x}_t \right)$ can be updated using any algorithm that can solve this optimization problem. By choosing a model-based approach for this, we can speed up the learning process significantly.
Model-based methods are typically constrained to some particular cost approximation, however, PI$^2$ can accommodate any form of $\tilde{c}\left(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t\right)$ and thus will handle arbitrary cost residuals.
LQR-FLM solves the type of constrained optimization problem in Eq.~(\ref{eq:lqr_optim}), which matches the optimization problem needed to obtain $\hat{p}$, where the cost-to-go $\hat{S}$ is approximated with a quadratic cost and a linear-Gaussian dynamics model.\footnote{In practice, we make a small modification to the problem in Eq.~(\ref{eq:lqr_optim}) so that the expectation in the constraint is evaluated with respect to the new distribution $\hat{p}(\mathbf{x}_t)$ rather than the previous one $p^{(i-1)}(\mathbf{x}_t)$. This modification is heuristic and no longer aligns with Theorem~(\ref{theo:pi2}), but works better in practice.}
We can thus use LQR-FLM to perform our first update, which enables greater efficiency but is susceptible to modeling errors when the fitted local dynamics are not accurate, such as in discontinuous systems. We can use a PI$^2$ optimization on the residuals to correct for this bias.
\subsection{Optimizing Cost Residuals with PI$^2$}
In order to perform a PI$^2$ update on the residual costs-to-go $\tilde{S}$, we need to know what $\hat{S}$ is for each sampled trajectory. That is, what is the cost-to-go that is actually used by LQR-FLM to make its update?
The structure of the algorithm implies a specific cost-to-go formulation for a given trajectory -- namely, the sum of quadratic costs obtained by running the same policy under the TVLG dynamics used by LQR-FLM. A given trajectory can be viewed as being generated by a deterministic policy conditioned on a particular noise realization $\xi_{i,1},\dots,\xi_{i,T}$, with actions given by
\begin{align}
\mathbf{u}_{i,t} = \mathbf{K}_t \mathbf{x}_{i,t} + \mathbf{k}_t + \sqrt{\mathbf{\Sigma}_t} \xi_{i,t}\,, \label{eq:reparam}
\end{align}
\noindent where $\mathbf{K}_t$, $\mathbf{k}_t$, and $\mathbf{\Sigma_t}$ are the parameters of $p^{(i-1)}$. We can therefore evaluate $\hat{S}(\mathbf{x}_t,\mathbf{u}_t)$ by simulating this deterministic controller from $(\mathbf{x}_t,\mathbf{u}_t)$ under the fitted TVLG dynamics and evaluating its time-varying quadratic cost, and then plugging these values into the residual cost.
In addition to the residual costs $\tilde{S}$ for each trajectory, the PI$^2$ update also requires control samples from the updated LQR-FLM policy $\hat{p}\left (\mathbf{u}_t | \mathbf{x}_t \right)$. Although we have the updated LQR-FLM policy, we only have samples from the old policy $p^{(i-1)}\left (\mathbf{u}_t |\mathbf{x}_t \right)$. However, we can apply a form of the re-parametrization trick~\cite{KingmaW13} and again use the stored noise realization of each trajectory $\xi_{t,i}$ to evaluate what the control would have been for that sample under the LQR-FLM policy $\hat{p}$. The expectation of the residual cost-to-go in Eq.~(\ref{eq:pi2_res_update}) is taken with respect to the old policy distribution $p^{(i-1)}$. Hence, we can reuse the states $\mathbf{x}_{i,t}$ and their corresponding noise $\xi_{i,t}$ that was sampled while rolling out the previous policy $p^{(i-1)}$ and evaluate the new controls according to $\mathbf{\hat{u}}_{i,t} = \mathbf{\hat{K}}_t \mathbf{x}_{i,t} + \mathbf{\hat{k}}_t + \sqrt{\mathbf{\hat{\Sigma}}_t} \xi_{i,t}$. This linear transformation on the sampled control provides unbiased samples from $\hat{p}(\mathbf{u}_t|\mathbf{x}_t)$. After transforming the control samples, they are reweighted according to their residual costs and plugged into the PI$^2$ update in Eq.~(\ref{eqn:pi2update}).
\subsection{Summary of PILQR algorithm}
\label{sec:step-adj}
Algorithm \ref{algo:pilqr} summarizes our method for combining LQR-FLM and PI$^2$ to create a hybrid model-based and model-free algorithm.
After generating a set of trajectories by running the current policy (line 2), we fit TVLG dynamics and compute the quadratic cost approximation $\hat{c}(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t)$ and approximation error residuals $\tilde{c}(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t)$ (lines 3, 4).
In order to improve the convergence behavior of our algorithm, we adjust the KL-step $\epsilon_t$ of the LQR-FLM optimization in Eq.~(\ref{eq:lqr_optim}) based inversely on the proportion of the residual costs-to-go to the sampled costs-to-go (line 5).
In particular, if the ratio between the residual and the overall cost is sufficiently small or large, we increase or decrease, respectively, the KL-step $\epsilon_t$.
We then continue with optimizing for the temperature $\eta_t$ using the dual function from Eq.~(\ref{eq:reps_dual}) (line 6). Finally, we perform an LQR-FLM update on the cost approximation (line 7) and a subsequent PI$^2$ update using the cost residuals (line 8).
As PILQR combines LQR-FLM and PI$^2$ updates in sequence in each iteration, its computational complexity can be determined as the sum of both methods.
Due to the properties of PI$^2$, the covariance of the optimized TVLG controllers decreases each iteration and the method eventually converges to a single solution.
\section{Training Parametric Policies with GPS}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\setlength{\unitlength}{0.5\columnwidth}
\begin{picture}(1.0, 0.5)
\put(-0.5, 0.0){\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{figs/gripper.png}}
\put(0.17, 0.0){\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{figs/reacher.png}}
\put(0.84, 0.0){\includegraphics[width=0.33\columnwidth]{figs/door.png}}
\end{picture}
\vspace{-5pt}
\caption{We evaluate on a set of simulated robotic manipulation tasks with varying difficulty. Left to right, the tasks involve pushing a block, reaching for a target, and opening a door in 3D.}
\label{fig:simtasks}
\end{figure}
PILQR offers an approach to perform trajectory optimization of TVLG policies. In this work, we employ mirror descent guided policy search (MDGPS) \cite{MontgomeryL16} in order to use PILQR to train parametric policies, such as neural networks. Instead of directly learning the parameters of a high-dimensional parametric or ``global policy'' with RL, we first learn simple TVLG policies, which we refer to as ``local policies'' $p(\mathbf{u}_t | \mathbf{x}_t)$ for various initial conditions of the task.
After optimizing the local policies, the optimized controls from these policies are used to create a training set for learning the global policy $\pi_\theta$ in a supervised manner. Hence, the final global policy generalizes across multiple local policies.
Using the TVLG representation of the local policies makes it straightforward to incorporate PILQR into the MDGPS framework. Instead of constraining against the old local TVLG policy as in Theorem~(\ref{theo:pi2}), each instance of the local policy is now constrained against the old global policy
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\FOR{iteration $k \in \{1,\dots,K\}$}
\STATE{ Generate trajectories $\mathcal{D} = \{\tau_{i}\}$ by running the current linear-Gaussian policy $p^{(k-1)}\left ( \mathbf{u}_t | \mathbf{x}_t \right)$}
\STATE{Fit TVLG dynamics $\hat{p}\left(\mathbf{x}_{t+1} | \mathbf{x}_{t}, \mathbf{u}_{t}\right)$}
\STATE{Estimate cost approximation $\hat{c}(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t)$ using fitted dynamics and compute cost residuals: \\$\tilde{c}(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t) = c(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t) - \hat{c}(\mathbf{x}_t, \mathbf{u}_t) $}
\STATE{Adjust LQR-FLM KL step $\epsilon_t$ based on ratio of residual costs-to-go $\tilde{S}$ and sampled costs-to-go $S$}
\STATE{Compute $\eta_t$ using dual function from Eq.~(\ref{eq:reps_dual})}
\STATE{Perform LQR-FLM update to compute $\hat{p}\left ( \mathbf{u}_t | \mathbf{x}_t \right)$:
$\min_{p^{(i)}}~\mathbb{E}_{p^{(i)}}[Q(\mathbf{x}_t,\mathbf{u}_t)]$ \\
~~~~~~$s.t.~~\mathbb{E}_{p^{(i)}}\left[D_{\text{KL}}(p^{(i)}\|p^{(i-1)})\right]\leq\epsilon_t$}
\STATE{Perform PI$^2$ update using cost residuals and LQR-FLM actions to compute the new policy: \\
$p^{(k)}\left ( \mathbf{u}_t | \mathbf{x}_t \right) \propto \hat{p}\left(\mathbf{u}_t| \mathbf{x}_t \right) \mathbb{E}_{p^{(i-1)}}\left[\exp \left(-\frac{1}{\eta_t} \tilde{S}_t) \right)\right]$}
\ENDFOR
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{PILQR algorithm}
\label{algo:pilqr}
\end{algorithm}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
{\small
\begin{align*}
\min_{p^{(i)}}~~\mathbb{E}_{p^{(i)}}[S(\mathbf{x}_{t},\mathbf{u}_{t})]
s.t.~~\mathbb{E}_{p^{(i-1)}}\left[D_\text{KL} \left(p^{(i)}\|\, \pi^{(i-1)}_\theta\right)\right]\leq \epsilon\,.
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\end{align*}
}The two-stage update proceeds as described in Section~\ref{2stage_pi2}, with the change that the LQR-FLM policy is now constrained against the old global policy $\pi^{(i-1)}_\theta$.
\section{Experimental Evaluation}
\label{sec:experiments}
Our experiments aim to answer the following questions: (1)~How does our method compare to other trajectory-centric and deep RL algorithms in terms of final performance and sample efficiency? (2)~Can we utilize linear-Gaussian policies trained using PILQR to obtain robust neural network policies using MDGPS? (3)~Is our proposed algorithm capable of learning complex manipulation skills on a real robotic platform? We study these questions through a set of simulated comparisons against prior methods, as well as real-world tasks using a PR2 robot. The performance of each method can be seen in our supplementary video.\footnote{\mbox{\url{https://sites.google.com/site/icml17pilqr}}} Our focus in this work is specifically on robotics tasks that involve manipulation of objects, since such tasks often exhibit elements of continuous and discontinuous dynamics and require sample-efficient methods, making them challenging for both model-based and model-free methods.
\subsection{Simulation Experiments}
\label{sec:simresults}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.99\columnwidth]{figs/gripper_pusher_single_instance}
\vspace{-10pt}
\caption{Average final distance from the block to the goal on one condition of the gripper pusher task. This condition is difficult due to the block being initialized far away from the gripper and the goal area, and only PILQR is able to succeed in reaching the block and pushing it toward the goal. Results for additional conditions are available in Appendix~\ref{app:sim_res}, and the supplementary video demonstrates the final behavior of each learned policy.}
\label{fig:gripperpusher}
\end{figure}
We evaluate our method on three simulated robotic manipulation tasks, depicted in Figure~\ref{fig:simtasks} and discussed below:
\noindent {\bf Gripper pusher.} This task involves controlling a 4 DoF arm with a gripper to push a white block to a red goal area.
The cost function is a weighted combination of the distance from the gripper to the block and from the block to the goal.
\noindent {\bf Reacher.} The reacher task from OpenAI gym~\cite{gym} requires moving the end of a 2 DoF arm to a target position. This task is included to provide comparisons against prior methods. The cost function is the distance from the end effector to the target. We modify the cost function slightly: the original task uses an $\ell_2$ norm, while we use a differentiable Huber-style loss, which is more typical for LQR-based methods~\cite{synthesis}.
\noindent {\bf Door opening.} This task requires opening a door with a 6 DoF 3D arm. The arm must grasp the handle and pull the door to a target angle, which can be particularly challenging for model-based methods due to the complex contacts between the hand and the handle, and the fact that a contact must be established before the door can be opened. The cost function is a weighted combination of the distance of the end effector to the door handle and the angle of the door.
\noindent Additional experimental setup details, including the exact cost functions, are provided in Appendix~\ref{app:sim_setup}.
We first compare PILQR to LQR-FLM and PI$^2$ on the gripper pusher and door opening tasks.
Figure~\ref{fig:gripperpusher} details performance of each method on the most difficult condition for the gripper pusher task. Both LQR-FLM and PI$^2$ perform significantly worse on the two more difficult conditions of this task. While PI$^2$ improves in performance as we provide more samples, LQR-FLM is bounded by its ability to model the dynamics, and thus predict the costs, at the moment when the gripper makes contact with the block. Our method solves all four conditions with 400 total episodes per condition and, as shown in the supplementary video, is able to learn a diverse set of successful behaviors including flicking, guiding, and hitting the block. On the door opening task, PILQR trains TVLG policies that succeed at opening the door from each of the four initial robot positions. While the policies trained with LQR-FLM are able to reach the handle, they fail to open the door.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.99\columnwidth]{figs/reacher_all_new5.png}
\vspace{-10pt}
\caption{Final distance from the reacher end effector to the target averaged across 300 random test conditions per iteration. MDGPS with LQR-FLM, MDGPS with PILQR, TRPO, and DDPG all perform competitively. However, as the log scale for the x axis shows, TRPO and DDPG require orders of magnitude more samples. MDGPS with PI$^2$ performs noticeably worse.}
\label{fig:reacher}
\end{figure}
Next we evaluate neural network policies on the reacher task. Figure~\ref{fig:reacher} shows results for MDGPS with each local policy method, as well as two prior deep RL methods that directly learn neural network policies: trust region policy optimization (TRPO)~\cite{slmja-trpo-15} and deep deterministic policy gradient (DDPG)~\cite{lhphe-ccdrl-16}. MDGPS with LQR-FLM and MDGPS with PILQR perform competitively in terms of the final distance from the end effector to the target, which is unsurprising given the simplicity of the task, whereas MDGPS with PI$^2$ is again not able to make much progress. On the reacher task, DDPG and TRPO use 25 and 150 times more samples, respectively, to achieve approximately the same performance as MDGPS with LQR-FLM and PILQR. For comparison, amongst previous deep RL algorithms that combined model-based and model-free methods, SVG and NAF with imagination rollouts reported using approximately up to five times fewer samples than DDPG on a similar reacher task~\cite{stochastic_value_gradients,GuLSL16}. Thus we can expect that MDGPS with our method is about one order of magnitude more sample-efficient than SVG and NAF. While this is a rough approximation, it demonstrates a significant improvement in efficiency.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.99\columnwidth]{figs/door_opening_all5.png}
\vspace{-8pt}
\caption{Minimum angle in radians of the door hinge (lower is better) averaged across 100 random test conditions per iteration. MDGPS with PILQR outperforms all other methods we compare against, with orders of magnitude fewer samples than DDPG and TRPO, which is the only other successful algorithm.}
\label{fig:door_opening}
\vspace{1pt}
\end{figure}
Finally, we compare the same methods for training neural network policies
on the door opening task, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:door_opening}. TRPO requires 20 times more samples than MDGPS with PILQR to learn a successful neural network policy. The other three methods were unable to learn a policy that opens the door despite extensive hyperparameter tuning. We provide additional simulation results in Appendix~\ref{app:sim_res}.
\subsection{Real Robot Experiments}
To evaluate our method on a real robotic platform, we use a PR2 robot (see Figure~\ref{fig:cover})
to learn the following tasks:
\noindent {\bf Hockey.} The hockey task requires using a stick to hit a puck into a goal \SI{1.4}{\meter} away. The cost function consists of two parts: the distance between the current position of the stick and a target pose that is close to the puck, and the distance between the position of the puck and the goal. The puck is tracked using a motion capture system. Although the cost provides some shaping, this task presents a significant challenge due to the difference in outcomes based on whether or not the robot actually strikes the puck, making it challenging for prior methods, as we show below.
\noindent {\bf Power plug plugging.} In this task, the robot must plug a power plug into an outlet. The cost function is the distance between the plug and a target location inside the outlet. This task requires fine manipulation to fully insert the plug.
Our TVLG policies consist of 100 time steps and we control our robot at a frequency of 20 Hz.
For further details of the experimental setup, including the cost functions, we refer the reader to Appendix~\ref{app:real_setup}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.99\columnwidth]{figs/hockey_single_instance}
\vspace{-8pt}
\caption{Single condition comparison of the hockey task performed on the real robot. Costs lower than the dotted line correspond to the puck entering the goal.}
\label{fig:hockey-single}
\vspace{1pt}
\end{figure}
Both of these tasks have difficult, discontinuous dynamics at the contacts between the objects, and both require a high degree of precision to succeed.
In contrast to prior works~\cite{daniel2013learning} that use kinesthetic teaching to initialize a policy that is then finetuned with model-free methods, our method does not require any human demonstrations.
The policies are randomly initialized using a Gaussian distribution with zero mean. Such initialization does not provide any information about the task to be performed.
In all of the real robot experiments, policies are updated every 10 rollouts and the final policy is obtained after 20-25 iterations,
which corresponds to mastering the skill with less than one hour of experience.
In the first set of experiments, we aim to learn a policy that is able to hit the puck into the goal for a single position of the goal and the puck.
The results of this experiment are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:hockey-single}.
In the case of the prior PI$^2$ method~\cite{TheodorouBS10}, the robot was not able to hit the puck. Since the puck position has the largest influence on the cost,
the resulting learning curve shows little change in the cost over the course of training.
The policy to move the arm towards the recorded arm position that enables hitting the puck turned out to be too challenging for PI$^2$ in the limited number of trials used for this experiment.
In the case of LQR-FLM, the robot was able to occasionally hit the puck in different directions.
However, the resulting policy could not capture the complex dynamics of the sliding puck or the discrete transition, and was unable to hit the puck toward the goal.
The PILQR method was able to learn a robust policy that consistently hits the puck into the goal.
Using the step adjustment rule described in Section~\ref{sec:step-adj}, the algorithm would shift towards model-free updates from the PI$^2$ method as the TVLG approximation of the dynamics became less accurate.
Using our method, the robot was able to get to the final position of the arm using fast model-based updates from LQR-FLM
and learn the puck-hitting policy, which is difficult to model, by automatically shifting towards model-free PI$^2$ updates.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim=4pt 10pt 0pt 2pt, clip=true, width=0.99\columnwidth]{figs/hockey-diagram.jpg}
\vspace{-10pt}
\caption{Experimental setup of the hockey task and the success rate of the final PILQR-MDGPS policy. \textit{Red} and \textit{Blue}: goal positions used for training, \textit{Green}: new goal position.}
\label{fig:hockey-diagram}
\end{figure}
In our second set of hockey experiments, we evaluate whether we can learn a neural network policy using the MDGPS-PILQR algorithm that can hit the puck into different goal locations. The goals were spaced \SI{0.5}{\meter} apart (see Figure~\ref{fig:hockey-diagram}).
The strategies for hitting the puck into different goal positions differ substantially, since the robot must adjust the arm pose to approach the puck from the right direction and aim toward the target. This makes it quite challenging to learn a single policy for this task.
We performed 30 rollouts for three different positions of the goal (10 rollouts each), two of which were used during training.
The neural network policy was able to hit the puck into the goal in 90\% of the cases (see Figure~\ref{fig:hockey-diagram}).
This shows that our method can learn high-dimensional neural network policies that generalize across various conditions.
The results of the plug experiment are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:socket-single}.
PI$^2$ alone was unable to reach the socket. The LQR-FLM algorithm succeeded only 60\% of the time at convergence.
In contrast to the peg insertion-style tasks evaluated in prior work that used LQR-FLM~\cite{lwa-lnnpg-15}, this task requires very fine manipulation due to the small size of the plug.
Our method was able to converge to a policy that plugged in the power plug on every rollout at convergence.
The supplementary video illustrates the final behaviors of each method for both the hockey and power plug tasks.\footnote{\mbox{\url{https://sites.google.com/site/icml17pilqr}}}
\section{Discussion and Future Work}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim=0pt 0pt 0pt 38pt, clip=true, width=0.99\columnwidth]{figs/socket_single_instance}
\vspace{-13pt}
\caption{Single condition comparison of the power plug task performed on the real robot. Note that costs above the dotted line correspond to executions that did not actually insert the plug into the socket. Only our method (PILQR) was able to consistently insert the plug all the way into the socket by the final iteration.}
\label{fig:socket-single}
\end{figure}
We presented an algorithm that combines elements of model-free and model-based RL, with the aim of combining the sample efficiency of model-based methods with the ability of model-free methods to improve the policy even in situations where the model's structural assumptions are violated. We show that a particular choice of policy representation -- TVLG controllers -- is amenable to fast optimization with model-based LQR-FLM and model-free PI$^2$ algorithms using sample-based updates. We propose a hybrid algorithm based on these two components, where the PI$^2$ update is performed on the residuals between the true sample-based cost and the cost estimated under the local linear models. This algorithm has a number of appealing properties: it naturally trades off between model-based and model-free updates based on the amount of model error, can easily be extended with a KL-divergence constraint for stable learning, and can be effectively used for real-world robotic learning. We further demonstrate that, although this algorithm is specific to TVLG policies, it can be integrated into the GPS framework in order to train arbitrary parameterized policies, including deep neural networks.
We evaluated our approach on a range of challenging simulated and real-world tasks. The results show that our method combines the efficiency of model-based learning with the ability of model-free methods to succeed on tasks with discontinuous dynamics and costs. We further illustrate in direct comparisons against state-of-the-art model-free deep RL methods that, when combined with the GPS framework, our method achieves substantially better sample efficiency. It is worth noting, however, that the application of trajectory-centric RL methods such as ours, even when combined with GPS, requires the ability to reset the environment into consistent initial states~\cite{LevineA14,Levine:2016}. Recent work proposes a clustering method for lifting this restriction by sampling trajectories from random initial states and assembling them into task instances after the fact~\cite{montgomery_ajay_icra_paper}. Integrating this technique into our method would further improve its generality. An additional limitation of our method is that the form of both the model-based and model-free update requires a continuous action space. Extensions to discrete or hybrid action spaces would require some kind of continuous relaxation, and this is left for future work.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors would like to thank Sean Mason for his help with preparing the real robot experiments.
This work was supported in part by National Science Foundation grants IIS-1614653, IIS-1205249, IIS-1017134, EECS-0926052, the Office of Naval Research, the Okawa Foundation, and the Max-Planck-Society. Marvin Zhang was supported by a BAIR fellowship. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funding organizations.
\setlength{\bibsep}{2.85pt}
|
\section{Introduction}
Recently, there has been a surge of interest in developing various kinds of Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) neural networks for modeling complex dependencies within sequential and multi-dimensional data, due to their advantage in a wide range of applications such as speech recognition~\cite{graves2013speech}, image generation~\cite{van2016pixel}, image-to-caption generation~\cite{showtell} and multi-dimensional image processing~\cite{gridlstm}.
\begin{figure*}[!tp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{figures/graphlstm.pdf}
\caption{{An illustration of the structure evolving process of the proposed structure-evolving LSTM model. Starting from an initial graph $G^{(0)}$, the structure-evolving LSTM learns to evolve the hierarchical graph structures with a stochastic and bottom-up node merging process and then propagates the information on these generated multi-level graph topologies following a stochastic node updating scheme.}}
\label{fig:graphlstm}
\vspace{-6mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
Despite the remarkable success, existing LSTM models such as chain-structured~\cite{graves2013speech}~\cite{showtell}, tree-structured LSTM models~\cite{zhu2015long,tai2015improved} and graph-structured LSTM~\cite{liang2016semantic} can only process data with pre-fixed structures in terms of their internal information propagation route. They are therefore limited in dealing with the data containing complex multi-level correlations. For example, the structure of human social network is inherently hierarchical, where each individual is a member of several communities, ranging from small (e.g., families, friends) to large (e.g., organizations such as schools and businesses). Semantic object parsing in an image, for another example, can benefit from modeling the contextual dependencies among regions in different levels, where the lower-level graph representation on small regions (e.g., superpixels) can preserve the local and fine object boundaries while the higher-level graph on larger coherent regions captures more semantic interactions. Thus, in order to well abstract multi-level representations of such data, it is desirable to integrate the data structure evolving with LSTM parameter learning.
In this work, we seek a general and interpretable framework for representing the data via LSTM networks over the dynamically learned multi-level data structures, in which hierarchical intrinsic representations are simultaneously learned from the data along with encoding the long-term dependencies via LSTM units. Since numerous important problems can be framed as learning from graph data (tree-structure can be treated as one specific graph), our structure-evolving directly investigates the hierarchical representation learning over the initial arbitrary graph structures. However, learning dynamic hierarchical graphs is much more challenging than the convenient hierarchical convolution neural networks due to the arbitrary number of nodes, orderless node layouts and diverse probabilistic graph edges. To learn intermediate interpretable graph structures of the data and alleviate the over-fitting problem, we design a stochastic algorithm to sample the graph structure (i.e., the grouping of graph nodes) in each LSTM layer and gradually build the multi-level graph representations in a bottom-up manner. We thus name our model as the structure-evolving LSTM. Compared with existing LSTM structures with pre-fixed chain~\cite{graves2013speech}~\cite{showtell}, tree~\cite{zhu2015long,tai2015improved} or graph topologies~\cite{liang2016semantic}, the structure-evolving LSTM has the capability of modeling long-range interactions using the dynamically evolved hierarchical graph topologies to capture the multi-level inherent correlations embedded in the data.
As illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:graphlstm}, the structure-evolving LSTM gradually evolves the multi-level graph representations through a stochastic and bottom-up node merging process, starting with an initial graph in which each node indicates a data element and every two neighboring nodes are linked by an edge. To enable learn the interpretable hierarchical representation, we propose to progressively merge different graph nodes guided by the global advantage reward at each step. The new graph that is composed by the merged graph nodes and updated graph edges is thus generated by a stochastic policy that ensures not only the less overhead graph transition from the previous graph to the new graph and the advantage discriminative capability brought by the new graph.
Specifically, for two connected nodes, their merging probability is estimated from the adaptive forget gate outputs in the LSTM unit, indicating how likely the two nodes tend to be merged into a clique (i.e., a node at the higher level graph). Then the graph structure is generated by designing a Metropolis-Hasting algorithm~\cite{barbu2003graph,tu2002image}. Specifically, this algorithm stochastically merging some graph nodes by sampling their merging probabilities, and produces a new graph structure (i.e., a set of partitioned cliques). This structure is further examined and determined according to a global reward defined as an acceptance probability. Under such a stochastic sampling paradigm, the acceptance probability involves two terms: i) a state transition probability (i.e., a product of the merging probabilities); ii) a posterior probability representing the compatibility of the generated graph structure with task-specific observations. Intuitively, this global reward thus encourages the structure-evolving step that better not leads to a hugh graph shift (i.e., only very few edges are merges) and also can help boost the target-specific performance.
Once a new level of graph structure is evolved, the LSTM layer broadcasts information along the generated graph topology following a stochastic updating scheme, in order to enable global reasoning on all nodes. In turn, the updated LSTM gate outputs induce the merging probability of graph nodes for the subsequent graph structure evolving. Instead of being influenced equally by all of its neighboring nodes in each LSTM unit, our model learns the adaptive forget gates for each neighboring node when updating the hidden states of a certain node. Such an adaptive scheme has advantage in conveying semantically meaningful interactions between two graph nodes. The network parameters are then updated by back-propagation in an end-to-end way.
We leverage the structure-evolving LSTM model to address the fundamental semantic object parsing task and experimentally show that structure-evolving LSTM outperforms other state-of-the-art LSTM structures on three object parsing datasets.
\begin{figure*}[!tp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{figures/evolving.pdf}
\caption{{Illustration of the stochastic structure-evolving step for evolving a lower-level graph into a higher-level one. Given the computed merging probabilities for all nodes, our structure-evolving step takes several trials to evolve a new graph till the new graph is accepted evaluated by the acceptance probability. A new graph is generated by stochastically merging two nodes with high predicted merging probabilities and thus the new edges are produced. The acceptance probabilities are computed by considering the graph transition cost and the advantage discriminative capability brought by the new graph.}}
\label{fig:evolving}
\vspace{-6mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\section{Related Works}
Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) recurrent networks have been first introduced to address the sequential prediction tasks~\cite{graves2009offline,sutskever2014sequence,showtell,lstmempirical}, and then extended to multi-dimensional image processing tasks~\cite{byeon2014texture,theis2015generative} such as image generation~\cite{van2016pixel,theis2015generative}, person detection~\cite{stewart2015end}, scene labeling~\cite{byeon2015scene} and object parsing~\cite{liang2015semantic}. It can keep long-term
memory by training proper gating weights and has practically showed the effectiveness on a range of problems~\cite{byeon2014texture,byeon2015scene}.
For image processing, in each LSTM unit, the prediction of each pixel is designed to affected by a fixed factorization (e.g., 2 or 8 neighboring pixels~\cite{gridlstm}\cite{MDLSTM}\cite{liang2015semantic} or diagonal neighborhood~\cite{van2016pixel}\cite{theis2015generative}). Recently, Tree-LSTM~\cite{tai2015improved} introduces the structure with tree-structured topologies for predicting semantic representations of sentences. Graph LSTM~\cite{liang2016semantic} has been proposed to propagate information on a basic pre-defined graph topology to capture diverse natural visual correlations (e.g., local boundaries and homogeneous regions). However, the complex patterns in different modalities often embed hierarchal structures, representing different levels of correlations between nodes. Different from using pre-defined data structures in previous LSTMs~\cite{gridlstm,MDLSTM,liang2015semantic,liang2016semantic,theis2015generative}, the proposed structure-evolving LSTM targets on automatically learning the hierarchical graph representations by evolving from an initial graph structure. In this way, the intrinsic multi-level semantic abstractions can be learned and then used to boost the multi-scale reasoning by LSTM units.
The structure-evolving LSTM (dynamically evolving multi-level graphs) is superior to the most related Graph LSTM~\cite{liang2016semantic} (a pre-fixed single-level graph) in two aspects: 1) Structure-evolving LSTM learns more powerful representations as it progressively exploits hierarchical information along stacked LSTM layers; 2) at its later layers, the structure-evolving LSTM captures the inherent structure of the desired output benefiting from the higher-level graph topologies. These superiorities bring significant improvements on several semantic parsing datasets, which gives apple-to-apple comparison with~\cite{liang2016semantic}. Our work aims to develop a new and general principled graph evolving based learning method to learn more powerful Graph LSTM or other RNN models. Devising new Graph-LSTM unit is not within the scope of this paper. We use Graph-LSTM as a running example which by no means implies our method is limited to Graph LSTM.
\section{Structure-evolving LSTM}
Fig.~\ref{fig:graphlstm} illustrates the proposed structure-evolving LSTM network architecture. Suppose that the initialized graph for the data is denoted as $G^{(0)} =<V ^{(0)}, \mathcal{E}^{(0)} >$, where $V ^{(0)}$ and $\mathcal{E}^{(0)}$ are the corresponding graph nodes (e.g., data elements) and edges. Each node $v^0_i \in V^{(0)}, \{i \in 1, \cdots, N^0\}$ is represented by the deep features $f^{(0)}_i$ learned from the underlying CNN model with D dimensions. Based on the LSTM gate outputs and the graph $G^{(t)}$ in the previous $t$-th LSTM layer, structure-evolving LSTM then learns a higher-level graph structure $G^{(t+1)} =< V^{(t+1)}, \mathcal{E}^{(t+1)} > $ for the information propagation in the $(t + 1)$-th LSTM layer. Learning new graph structures and updating LSTM parameters are thus alternatively performed and the network parameters are trained in an end-to-end way.
\subsection{Basic LSTM Units}
Given the dynamically constructed graph structure $G^{(t)}$, the $t$-th structure-evolving LSTM layer determines the states of each node $v^t_i$ that comprise the hidden states $\mathbf{h}^t_i$ and the memory states $\mathbf{m}^t_i$ of each node, and the edge probability $p^t_{ij}$ of two nodes for evolving a new graph structure. The state of each node is influenced by its previous states and the states of connected graph nodes in order to propagate information to all nodes. Thus the inputs to LSTM units consist of the input states $\mathbf{f}^t_i$ of the node $v^t_i$ , its previous hidden states $\mathbf{h}^{(t-1)}_i$ and memory states $\mathbf{m}^{(t-1)}_i$, and the hidden and memory states of its neighboring nodes $v^t_j, j\in \mathcal{N}_{G^{(t)}}(i)$. Note that there is a flexibility in the order of node updating in the structure-evolving LSTM layers. Following ~\cite{liang2016semantic}, we randomly specify the node updating sequence to propagate information to all nodes in order to increase the model diversity during learning the LSTM network parameters.
Our structure-evolving LSTM follows the Graph LSTM units~\cite{liang2016semantic} to generate hidden and memory cells, and then show how to inject the edge merging probabilities of the nodes into the LSTM units. We thus first introduce the generation of hidden and memory cells to make this paper more self-contained. When operating on a specific node $v^t_i$, some of its neighboring nodes have already been updated while others may not. We therefore use a visit flag $q^t_j$ to indicate whether the graph node $v^t_j$ has been updated, where $q^t_j$ is set as 1 if updated and otherwise 0. We then use the updated hidden states $\mathbf{h}^t_j$ for the visited nodes and the previous states $\mathbf{h}^{t-1}_j$ for the unvisited nodes. Note that the nodes in the graph may have an arbitrary number of neighboring nodes. Let $\mathcal{N}_{G^{(t)}}(i)$ denote the number of neighboring graph nodes for the node $i$. To obtain a fixed feature dimension for the inputs of the Graph LSTM unit during network training, the hidden states $\mathbf{\bar{h}}^{t-1}_i$ used for computing the LSTM gates of the node $v^t_i$ are obtained by averaging the hidden states of neighboring nodes, computed as:
{\small
\begin{equation}
\bar{\mathbf{h}}_{i}^{t-1} = \frac{\sum_{j \in \mathcal{N}_{{G^{(t)}}}(i) }(\mathds{1}(q_j^t = 1)\mathbf{h}_{j}^{t} + \mathds{1}(q_j^t = 0)\mathbf{h}_{j}^{t-1})}{|\mathcal{N}_{{G^{(t)}}}(i)|}.
\end{equation}}
\textbf{Structure-evolving LSTM.} The structure-evolving LSTM consists of five gates: the input gate $g^u$, the forget gate $g^f$, the adaptive forget gate $\bar{g}^f$, the memory gate $g^c$, the output gate $g^o$ and the edge gate $p$. The $\mathds{1}$ is an indicator function. The $W^e$ indicates the recurrent edge gate weight parameters. The $W^u, W^f, W^c, W^o$ are the recurrent gate weight matrices specified for input features while $U^u,U^f, U^c, U^o$ are those for hidden states of each node. $U^{un}, U^{fn}, U^{cn}, U^{on}$ are the weight parameters specified for states of neighboring nodes. The structure-evolving LSTM unit specifies different forget gates for different neighboring nodes by functioning the input states of the current node with their hidden states, defined as $\bar{g}^f_{ij}, j \in \mathcal{N}_{{G^{(t)}}}(i)$. It results in the different influences of neighboring nodes on the updated memory states $\mathbf{m}_{i}^{t+1}$ and hidden states $\mathbf{h}_{i}^{t+1}$. The merging probability $p_{ij}$ of each pair of graph nodes $<i,j> \in \mathcal{E}^{(t)}$ is calculated by weighting the adaptive forget gates $\bar{g}^f_{ij}$ with the weight matrix $W^e$. Intuitively, adaptive forget gates are to identify the distinguished correlations of different node pairs, e.g. some nodes have stronger correlations than others. The merging probability for each pair is thus estimated from adaptive forget gates for graph evolving. The new hidden states, memory states and edge gates (i.e., merging probabilities of each connected pair of nodes) in the graph $G^{(t)}$ can be calculated as follows:
{\small
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
g^u_i = &\delta(W^u\mathbf{f}_{i}^{t} + U^u\mathbf{h}_{i}^{t-1} + U^{un}\bar{\mathbf{h}}_{i}^{t-1} + b^u),\\
\bar{g}^f_{ij} =& \delta(W^f\mathbf{f}_{i}^{t} + U^{fn}\mathbf{h}_{j}^{t-1} + b^f),\\
g^f_{i} = &\delta(W^f\mathbf{f}_{i}^{t} + U^f\mathbf{h}_{i}^{t-1} + b^f),\\
g^o_i = &\delta(W^o\mathbf{f}_{i}^{t} + U^o\mathbf{h}_{i}^{t-1} + U^{on}\bar{\mathbf{h}}_{i}^{t-1} + b^o),\\
g^c_i = &\tanh(W^c\mathbf{f}_{i}^{t} + U^c\mathbf{h}_{i}^{t-1} + U^{cn}\bar{\mathbf{h}}_{i}^{t-1} + b^c),\\
\mathbf{m}_{i, t} = &\frac{\sum_{j \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{G}}(i)}(\mathds{1}(q_j = 1) \bar{g}^f_{ij} \odot \mathbf{\mathbf{m}}_{j}^{t} + \mathds{1}(q_j = 0)\bar{g}^f_{ij} \odot \mathbf{\mathbf{m}}_{j}^{t-1})}{|\mathcal{N}_{{G^{(t)}}}(i)|}\\
& + g^f_{i}\odot \mathbf{\mathbf{m}}_{i}^{t-1} + g^u_i \odot g^c_i,\\
\mathbf{h}_{i}^{t} =& \tanh(g^o_i \odot \mathbf{m}_{i}^{t})\\
p_{ij}^t = &\delta(W^e \bar{g}^f_{ij}).
\end{split}
\label{eq:lstm}
\end{equation}}
\noindent{Here} $\delta$ is a logistic sigmoid function, and $\odot$ indicates a point-wise product. Let $\mathbf{W}, \mathbf{U}$ denote the concatenation of all weight matrices and $\{\mathbf{Z}_{j,t}\}_{j \in \mathcal{N}_{\mathcal{G}}(i)}$ represent all the related information of neighboring nodes. This mechanism acts as a memory system, where the information can be written into the memory states and sequentially recorded by each graph node, which is then used to communicate with the hidden states of subsequent graph nodes and previous LSTM layer. And the merging probabilities $\{p_{ij}\}, <i,j> \in \mathcal{E}^{(t)}$ can be conveniently learned and used for generating the new higher-level graph structure $G^{(t+1)}$ in the $(t+1)$-th layer, detailed in Section~\ref{sec:evolv}. During training, the merging probabilities of graph edges are supervised by approximating to the final graph structure for a specific task, such as the connections of final semantic regions for image parsing. The back propagation is used to train all the weight metrics.
\subsection{Interpretable Structure Evolving}
\label{sec:evolv}
Given the graph structure $G^{(t)} = <V^{(t)}, \mathcal{E}^{(t)}>$ and all merging probabilities $\{p_{ij}\}, <i,j> \in \mathcal{E}^{(t)}$, the higher-level graph structure $G^{(t+1)}$ can be evolved by stochastically merging some graph nodes and examined with an acceptance probability, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:evolving}. Specifically, a new graph node $G^{(t+1)}$ is constructed by merging some graph nodes with the merging probability. As there is no deterministic graph transition path from an initial graph to the final one, it is intractable to enumerate all possible $G^{(t+1)}$ for evaluation within the large search space. We thus use a stochastic
mechanism rather than a deterministic one to find a good graph transition. Such a stochastic searching scheme is also effective in alleviating the risk of getting trapped in a bad local optimum. To find a better graph transition between two graphs $G^{(t)}$ and $G^{(t+1)}$, the acceptance rate of the transition from the graph from $G^{(t)}$ to graph $G^{(t+1)}$ is defined by a Metropolis-Hastings method~\cite{barbu2003graph,tu2002image}:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\alpha(G^{(t)}\rightarrow G^{(t+1)}) = &\min(1, \\\frac{q(G^{(t+1)\rightarrow G^{(t)}})}{q(G^{(t)\rightarrow G^{(t+1)}})}
&\frac{P(G^{(t+1)}|I; \mathbf{W}, \mathbf{U})}{P(G^{(t)}|I; \mathbf{W}, \mathbf{U})}).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure*}[!tp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{figures/parsing.pdf}
\caption{{Overview of the segmentation network architecture that employs the structure-evolving LSTM layer for semantic object parsing in image domain. Based on the basic convolutional feature maps, five structure-evolving LSTM layers are stacked to propagate information on the stochastically generated multi-level graph structures (i.e., $G^{(0)}, G^{(1)}, G^{(2)}, G^{(3)}, G^{(4)}$) where $G^{(0)}$ is constructed as the superpixel neighborhood graph. The convolutional layers are appended on all LSTM layers to produce the multi-scale predictions, which are then combined to generate the final result.}}
\label{fig:parsing}
\vspace{-4mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
where $q(G^{(t+1)\rightarrow G^{(t)}})$ and $q(G^{(t)\rightarrow G^{(t+1)}})$ denote the graph state transition probability from one graph to another, and $P(G^{(t+1)}|I; \mathbf{W}, \mathbf{U})$ and $P(G^{(t)}|I; \mathbf{W}, \mathbf{U})$ denote the posterior probability of the graph structure $G^{(t+1)}$ and $G^{(t)}$, respectively. Typically, $P(G^{(t)}|I; \mathbf{W}, \mathbf{U})$ is assumed to follow a Gibbs distribution $\frac{1}{Z}\exp(-\mathcal{L}(F(I, G^{(t)}, \mathbf{W}, \mathbf{U}), Y))$, where $Z$ is the partition function, $F(I, G^{(t)}, \mathbf{W}, \mathbf{U})$ is the network prediction, $Y$ is the task-specific target and $\mathcal{L}(\cdot)$ is the corresponding loss function. For example, $Y$ can be the segmentation groundtruth and $\mathcal{L}(\cdot)$ is the pixel-wise cross-entropy loss for the image parsing task. The model is more likely to accept a new graph structure $G^{(t+1)}$ that can bring more significant performance improvement indicated by $\frac{P(G^{(t+1)}|I; \mathbf{W}, \mathbf{U})}{P(G^{(t)}|I; \mathbf{W}, \mathbf{U})}$. The graph state transition probability ratio is computed by:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{q(G^{(t+1)\rightarrow G^{(t)}})}{q(G^{(t)\rightarrow G^{(t+1)}})} \propto &\frac{\prod_{<i,j>\in \mathcal{E}^{(t+1)}}(1-(1-p^t_{ij}))}{\prod_{<i,j>\in \mathcal{E}^{(t)}}(1-(1-p^t_{ij}))}\\
&= \prod_{<i,j>\in \mathcal{E}^{(t)}\backslash\mathcal{E}^{(t+1)}}p^t_{ij}.
\label{eq:acceptance}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The state transition probability is thus calculated by multiplying all merging probabilities of eliminated edges in $G^{(t)}$. It implies that the graph nodes with larger merging probabilities $\{p^t_{ij}\}$ of $G^{(t)}$ are more encouraged to be merged in $G^{(t+1)}$. During testing, the acceptance rate is only determined by the graph state transition probability in Eqn.~\ref{eq:acceptance}. To enable finish the graph structure exploration within a specified time schedule in each step, we can empirically set the upper bound for the sampling trials, say 50 in our experiments.
In the $(t+1)$-th structure-evolving LSTM layer, the information propagation is performed on all nodes with a stochastic node updating sequence along the new graph topology $G^{(t+1)} =< V^{(t+1)}, \mathcal{E}^{(t+1)} > $. The input states $f^{t+1}_i$ for each node $v^{t+1}_i \in V^{t+1}$ are produced by averaging those of all corresponding
merged nodes in $G^{(t)}$. Similarly, the hidden and memory states of $v^{t+1}_i$ are averaged and used for further updating. The weight matrices of the structure-evolving LSTM units are shared for all stacked layers with generated hierarchical graph representations, which helps improve the capability of the network parameters in sensing multi-level semantic abstractions. The final loss for training structure-evolving LSTM includes the final task-related prediction loss and the loss on the predicted merging probabilities for all layers.
\section{Experiments}
The proposed structure-evolving LSTM aims to provide a principled framework to dynamically learn the hierarchal data structures, which is applicable for kinds of tasks (e.g., nature language understanding and image content understanding). However, among all these applications, the semantic object parsing task that requires to produce the pixel-wise labeling by considering the complex interactions between different pixels, superpixels or parts, is a perfect match to better evaluate the structure generation capability of our structure-evolving LSTM. Our dynamically evolved hierarchical graph structures can effectively capture the multi-level and diverse contextual dependencies. We thus evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed structure-evolving LSTM model on the semantic object parsing task (i.e., segmenting an object in the image into its semantic parts) where exploiting multi-level graph representations for the image content is very natural and useful for the final parsing result.
\begin{table*}[!tp]\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2pt}
\centering
\caption{Comparison of semantic object parsing performance with several state-of-the-art methods on the PASCAL-Person-Part dataset~\cite{chen2014detect} and with other variants of the structure-evolving LSTM model, including using different LSTM structures, the extracted multi-scale superpixel maps and a deterministic policy with different thresholds for the graph transition, respectively. }\label{tab:person}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccccccccccccccc}
\toprule
{Method} & head & torso & u-arms & l-arms & u-legs & l-legs & Bkg & Avg \\
\midrule
DeepLab-LargeFOV~\cite{chen2014semantic} & 78.09 & 54.02 & 37.29 & 36.85 & 33.73 & 29.61 & 92.85 & 51.78 \\
DeepLab-LargeFOV-CRF~\cite{chen2014semantic} & 80.13 & 55.56 & 36.43 & 38.72 & 35.50 & 30.82 & 93.52 & 52.95 \\
HAZN~\cite{xia2015zoom} & {80.79} & {59.11} & {43.05} & {42.76} & 38.99 & 34.46 & 93.59 & 56.11\\
Attention~\cite{chen2015attention} & {-} & {-} & {-} & {-} & - & - & - & 56.39\\
\midrule
Grid LSTM~\cite{gridlstm} & 81.85 & 58.85 & 43.10 & 46.87 & 40.07 & 34.59 & 85.97 & 55.90\\
Row LSTM~\cite{van2016pixel} & 82.60 & 60.13 & 44.29 & 47.22 & 40.83 & 35.51 & 87.07 & 56.80\\
Diagonal BiLSTM~\cite{van2016pixel} & 82.67 & 60.64 & 45.02 & 47.59 & 41.95 & 37.32 & 88.16 & 57.62\\
LG-LSTM~\cite{liang2015semantic} & {82.72} & 60.99 & 45.40 & {47.76} & 42.33 & 37.96 & 88.63 & 57.97\\
{Graph LSTM}~\cite{liang2016semantic} & {82.69} & {62.68} & {46.88} & {47.71} & {45.66} & {40.93} & {94.59} & {60.16} \\
\midrule
Graph LSTM (multi-scale superpixel maps)~\cite{liang2016semantic} & 83.93 & 64.67 & 48.79 & \textbf{49.44} & 46.57 & 41.38 & 92.36 & 61.02\\
\midrule
Structure-evolving LSTM (deterministic 0.5) & 82.93 & 62.59 & 46.91 & 48.06 & 44.73 & 40.39 & 91.77 & 59.63\\
Structure-evolving LSTM (deterministic 0.7) & \textbf{84.16} & 66.16 & 49.90 & 48.24 & 48.29 & 44.13 & 94.53 & 62.20\\
Structure-evolving LSTM (deterministic 0.9) & 83.52 & 64.17 & 48.39 & 49.02 & 46.26 & 42.20 & 93.36 & 60.99\\
\midrule
\textbf{Structure-evolving LSTM} & 82.89 & \textbf{67.15} & \textbf{51.42} & 48.72 & \textbf{51.72} & \textbf{45.91} & \textbf{97.18} & \textbf{63.57}\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}%
\vspace{-4mm}
\end{table*}%
\subsection{Semantic Object Parsing Task}
We take the object parsing task as our application scenario, which aims to generate pixel-wise semantic part segmentation for each image, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:parsing}. The initial graph $G^{(0)}$ is constructed on superpixels that are obtained through image over-segmentation using SLIC~\cite{achanta2010slic} following~\cite{liang2016semantic}. Each superpixel indicates one graph node and each graph edge connects two spatially neighboring superpixel nodes. The input image first passes through a stack of convolutional layers to generatt convolutional feature maps. The input features $f^0_i$ of each graph node $v_i$ are computed by averaging the convolutional features of all the pixels belonging to the same superpixel node $v_i$. Five structure-evolving LSTM layers are then stacked to learn multi-level graph representations by stochastically grouping some nodes into a large node with the coherent semantic meanings through a bottom-up process.
To make sure that the number of the input states for the first LSTM layer is compatible with that of the following layers, the dimensions of hidden and memory states in all LSTM layers are set the same as the feature dimension of the last convolutional layer before the LSTM stack. After that, one prediction layer with several $1\times1$ convolution filters produces confidence maps for all labels. During training, we use the groundtruth semantic edge map defined over all the superpixels to supervise the prediction of merging probabilities of all the edges in each LSTM layer. Specifically, the ground-truth merging probability of two graph nodes is set as 1 only if they belong to the same semantic label. L2-norm loss is employed for the back-propagation. The cross-entropy loss is employed on all the predictions layers to produce the final parsing result.
\subsection{Datasets and Implementation Details}
\textbf{Dataset:} We validate the effectiveness of the structure-evolving LSTM on three challenging image parsing datasets. The PASCAL-Person-part dataset~\cite{chen2014detect} concentrates on the human part segmentation on images from PASCAL VOC 2010. Its semantic labels consist of Head, Torso, Upper/Lower Arms, Upper/Lower Legs, and one background class. 1,716 images are used for training and 1,817 for testing. The Horse-Cow parsing dataset is a part segmentation benchmark introduced in~\cite{wang2014semantic}. It includes 294 training images and 227 testing images and each pixel is labeled as head, leg, tail or body. The third task, human parsing aims to predict every pixel with 18 labels: face, sunglass, hat, scarf, hair, upper-clothes, left-arm, right-arm, belt, pants, left-leg, right-leg, skirt, left-shoe, right-shoe, bag, dress and null. Originally, 7,700 images are included in the ATR dataset~\cite{ATR}, with 6,000 for training, 1,000 for testing and 700 for validation. 10,000 images are further collected by~\cite{Co-CNN} to cover images with more challenging poses and clothes variations.
\textbf{Evaluation metric:} The standard intersection over union (IOU) criterion and pixel-wise accuracy are adopted for evaluation on PASCAL-Person-Part dataset and Horse-Cow parsing dataset, following~\cite{chen2014detect}. We use the same evaluation metrics as in~\cite{ATR,Co-CNN} for evaluation on the human parsing dataset, including accuracy, average precision, average recall, and average F-1 score.
\textbf{Network architecture:} For fair comparison with~\cite{chen2014semantic,xia2015zoom,chen2015attention}, our network is based on the publicly available model, “DeepLab-CRF-LargeFOV"~\cite{chen2014semantic} for the PASCAL-Person-Part and Horse-Cow parsing dataset, which slightly modifies VGG-16 net~\cite{simonyan2014very} to FCN~\cite{long2014fully}. “Co-CNN" structure~\cite{Co-CNN} is used to compare with~\cite{ATR,Co-CNN} on one human parsing datasets for fair comparison.
\begin{table*}[!tp]\setlength{\tabcolsep}{3pt}
\centering
\caption{Performance comparison with using different numbers of structure-evolving LSTM layers. }\label{tab:step}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|ccccccccccccccccc}
\toprule
{Settings} & 1-layer & 2-layer & 3-layer & 4-layer & Structure-evolving LSTM (full)\\
\midrule
Average IoU & 58.19 & 60.23 & 62.59 & 63.18 & \textbf{63.57}\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}%
\end{table*}%
\begin{table*}[!tp]\setlength{\tabcolsep}{3pt}
\centering
\caption{Performance comparison for the predictions by using different levels of graph structures. }\label{tab:level}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c|cccccccccccccccc}
\toprule
{Settings} & 1st level & 2nd level & 3rd level & 4th level & 5th level & Structure-evolving LSTM (full)\\
\midrule
Average IoU & 57.19 & 61.29 & 60.13 & 59.87 & 59.23 & \textbf{63.57}\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}%
\end{table*}%
\begin{table}[!tp]\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2.8pt}
\centering\scriptsize
\caption{Comparison of object parsing performance with five state-of-the-art methods over the Horse-Cow object parsing dataset~\cite{wang2014semantic}. }\label{tab:horsecow}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccccccccccccccc}
\toprule
& & & & \textbf{Horse} & & &\\
\hline
{Method} & Bkg & head & body & leg & tail & Fg & IOU & Pix.Acc \\
\midrule
SPS~\cite{wang2014semantic} & 79.14 & 47.64 & 69.74 & 38.85 & - & 68.63 & - & 81.45 \\
HC~\cite{hariharan2014hypercolumns} & 85.71 & 57.30 & 77.88 & 51.93 & 37.10 & 78.84 & 61.98 & 87.18 \\
Joint~\cite{wang2015joint} & 87.34 & 60.02 & 77.52 & 58.35 & {51.88} & 80.70 & 65.02 & 88.49\\
{LG-LSTM}~\cite{liang2015semantic} & {89.64} & {66.89} & {84.20} & {60.88} & 42.06 & {82.50} & {68.73} & {90.92} \\
HAZN~\cite{xia2015zoom} & {90.87} & {70.73} & {84.45} & {63.59} & 51.16 & {-} & {72.16} & {-} \\
{Graph LSTM}~\cite{liang2016semantic} & {91.73} & {72.89} & {86.34} & {69.04} & {53.76} & {87.51} & {74.75} & {92.76} \\
\midrule
\textbf{Ours} & \textbf{92.51} & \textbf{74.89} & \textbf{87.55} & \textbf{71.93} & \textbf{57.45} & \textbf{88.76} & \textbf{76.87} & \textbf{93.45} \\
\midrule
& & & & \textbf{Cow} & & &\\
\hline
{Method} & Bkg & head & body & leg & tail & Fg & IOU & Pix.Acc \\
\midrule
SPS~\cite{wang2014semantic} & 78.00 & 40.55 & 61.65 & 36.32 & - & 71.98 & - & 78.97 \\
HC~\cite{hariharan2014hypercolumns} & 81.86 & 55.18 & 72.75 & 42.03 & 11.04 & 77.04 & 52.57 & 84.43 \\
Joint~\cite{wang2015joint} & 85.68 & 58.04 & 76.04 & 51.12 & 15.00 & 82.63 & 57.18 & 87.00\\
{LG-LSTM}~\cite{liang2015semantic} & {89.71} & {68.43} & {82.47} & {53.93} & {19.41} & {85.41} & {62.79} & {90.43}\\
HAZN~\cite{xia2015zoom} & {90.66} & \textbf{75.10} & {83.30} & {57.17} & 28.46 & {-} & {66.94} & {-} \\
{Graph LSTM}~\cite{liang2016semantic} & {91.54} & {73.88} & {85.92} & \textbf{63.67} & {35.22} & {88.42} & {70.05} & {92.43} \\
\midrule
\textbf{Ours} & \textbf{92.88} & \textbf{77.75} & \textbf{87.91} & \textbf{67.60} & \textbf{42.86} & \textbf{90.71} & \textbf{73.80} & \textbf{93.57} \\
\hline
\vspace{-2mm}
\end{tabular}%
\end{table}%
\textbf{Training:} The SLIC over-segmentation method~\cite{achanta2010slic} generates 1,000 superpixels on average for each image. The learning rate of the newly added layers over pre-trained models is initialized as 0.001 and that of other previously learned layers is initialized as 0.0001. All weight matrices used in the structure-evolving LSTM units are randomly initialized from a uniform distribution of [-0.1, 0.1]. We only use five LSTM layers for all models since only slight improvements are observed by using more LSTM layers, which also consumes more computation resources. The weights of all convolutional layers are initialized with Gaussian distribution with standard deviation 0.001. We train all the models using stochastic gradient descent with a batch size of 1 image, momentum of 0.9, and weight decay of 0.0005. We fine-tune the networks on “DeepLab-CRF-LargeFOV" and train the networks based on “Co-CNN" from scratch for roughly 60 epochs. The structure-evolving LSTM is implemented by extending the Caffe framework~\cite{jia2014caffe}. All networks are trained on a single NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X GPU with 12GB memory. In the testing stage, extracting superpixels takes 0.5s and our method takes 1.3s per image in total.
\subsection{Results and Comparisons}
\textbf{Comparisons with State-of-the-art Methods.} We report the result comparisons with recent state-of-the-art methods on PASCAL-Person-part dataset, Horse-Cow parsing dataset and ATR dataset in Table~\ref{tab:person}, Table~\ref{tab:horsecow}, Table~\ref{tab:atr}, respectively. The proposed structure-evolving LSTM structure substantially outperforms these baselines in terms of most of the metrics, especially for small semantic parts. This superior performance achieved by the structure-evolving LSTM demonstrates the effectiveness of capturing multi-scale context by propagating information on the generated graph structures.
\textbf{Comparisons with Existing LSTM Structures.} Table~\ref{tab:person} gives the performance comparison among different LSTM structures, including Row LSTM~\cite{van2016pixel}, Diagonal BiLSTM~\cite{van2016pixel}, LG-LSTM~\cite{liang2015semantic}, Grid LSTM~\cite{gridlstm} and Graph LSTM~\cite{liang2016semantic}, which use the same network architecture and number of LSTM layers. In particular, Row LSTM, Diagonal BiLSTM, LG-LSTM, Grid LSTM and LG-LSTM use the fixed locally factorized topology for all images while Graph LSTM propagates information on the fixed superpixel graph. It can be seen that exploiting the multi-level graph representations for different LSTM layers leads to over 3.41\% improvement than the pre-defined LSTM structures on average IoU.
\begin{table}[!tp]\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2.8pt}
\centering\scriptsize
\caption{Performance comparison with state-of-the-art methods when evaluating on ATR dataset~\cite{ATR}. Following~\cite{Co-CNN}, we also take the additional 10,000 images in ~\cite{Co-CNN} as extra training images, denoted as ``Ours (more data)". Comparison of human parsing performance with seven state-of-the-art methods when evaluating on ATR dataset.}\label{tab:atr}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccccccccccccccc}
\toprule
\textbf{Method} & \textbf{Acc.} & \textbf{F.g. acc.} & \textbf{Avg. prec.} & \textbf{Avg. recall} & \textbf{Avg. F-1 score} \\
\midrule
Yamaguchi et al.~\cite{yamaguchi2012parsing}& 84.38 & 55.59 & 37.54 & 51.05 & 41.80 \\
PaperDoll~\cite{Yamaguchiparsing13} & 88.96 & 62.18 & 52.75 & 49.43 & 44.76 \\
{M-CNN}~\cite{M-CNN} &{89.57} &{73.98} &{64.56} &{65.17} &{62.81}\\
ATR~\cite{ATR} & {91.11} & {71.04} & {71.69} & {60.25} & {64.38}\\
{Co-CNN}~\cite{Co-CNN} & 95.23 & 80.90 & 81.55 & 74.42 & 76.95\\
{Co-CNN (more)}~\cite{Co-CNN} & {96.02} & {83.57} & {84.95} & {77.66} & {80.14}\\
{LG-LSTM}~\cite{liang2015semantic} & {96.18} & {84.79} & {84.64} & {79.43} & {80.97}\\
{LG-LSTM (more)}~\cite{liang2015semantic} & {96.85} & {87.35} & {85.94} & {82.79} & {84.12}\\
CRFasRNN (more)~\cite{crfasrnn} & {96.34} & {85.10} & {84.00} & {80.70} & {82.08}\\
{Graph LSTM} & {97.60} & {91.42} & {84.74} & {83.28} & {83.76}\\
{Graph LSTM (more)} & {97.99} & {93.06} & {88.81} & {87.80} & {88.20}\\
\midrule
{Ours} & {97.71} & {91.76} & {89.37} & {86.84} & {87.88}\\
\textbf{Ours (more)} & \textbf{98.30} & \textbf{95.12} & \textbf{90.08} & \textbf{91.97 } & \textbf{90.85}\\
\bottomrule
\vspace{-4mm}
\end{tabular}%
\end{table}%
\begin{figure*}[!tp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.53]{figures/results.pdf}
\caption{{Comparison of parsing results of our structure-evolving LSTM and Graph LSTM on ATR dataset and the visualization of the corresponding generated multi-level graph structures. Better viewed in zoomed-in color pdf.}}
\label{fig:results}
\vspace{-6mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\textbf{Discussion on Using Stochastic Policy.} Note that the structure-evolving LSTM stochastically merges some graph nodes and employs an acceptance rate to determine whether a new graph structure should be accepted. An alternative way is deterministically merging some graph nodes by hard-thresholding, that is, two nodes are merged only if their merging probability is larger than a fixed threshold $T$. In our experiment, three thresholds (i.e., 0.5, 0.7,0.9) are tested in Table~\ref{tab:person}. Using a smaller threshold (e.g., 0.5) is more likely to obtain more aggressive graph transitions by merging more nodes while a larger threshold would prevent the graph from changing its structure. It is shown that using 0.7 threshold in the deterministic policy obtains the best performance, which is still inferior to the proposed stochastic policy. Additionally, we find that only slight performance differences are obtained after running the feed-forward prediction using the structure-evolving LSTM for ten times, which verifies the robustness of the structure-evolving LSTM.
\textbf{Comparisons with Using All Pre-defined Graph Structures.} An optional strategy to capture multi-scale context is to utilize pre-computed multi-scale superpixel maps as the intermediate graph structures, reported as “Graph LSTM (multi-scale superpixel maps)" in Table~\ref{tab:person}. Five predefined graph structures in LSTM layers can be constructed by five superpixel maps with 1000, 800, 600, 256 400, 200 superpixels, respectively. These superpixel numbers are consistent with the averaged node number of our learned graph structures for all training images. The superiority of ``Structure-evolving LSTM" demonstrates that exploiting adaptive graph structures makes the structure more consistent with the high-level semantic representation instead of just relying on the bottom-up oversegmentation.
\textbf{Discussion on Predictions with Different Levels of Graphs.} The performance of using different numbers of the structure-evolving LSTM layers is reported in Table~\ref{tab:step}. It demonstrates that exploiting more levels of graph structures makes the network parameters learn different levels of semantic abstraction, leading to better parsing results, whereas the previous LSTM model~\cite{liang2016semantic} reported that no performance gain is achieved with more than two LSTM layers. Note that the parsing prediction is produced by each LSTM layer and these predictions are element-wisely summed to generate the final result. The individual parsing performance by using each graph structure is reported in Table~\ref{tab:level}. The higher-level graph structure may wrongly merge bottom-up graph nodes, which thus may lead to the deteriorated performance. However, combining all predictions from all the structure-evolving LSTM layers can largely boost the prediction benefited from incorporating the multi-scale semantical context.
\textbf{Visualization.} The qualitative comparisons of parsing results on ATR dataset and the graph structures exploited by structure-evolving LSTM layers are visualized in Fig.~\ref{fig:results}. The structure-evolving LSTM outputs more reasonable results for confusing labels (e.g., skirt and dress) by effectively exploiting multi-scale context with the generated multi-level graph structures.
\section{Conclusion}
We presented a novel interpretable structure-evolving Graph LSTM which simultaneously learns multi-level graph representations for the data and LSTM network parameters in an end-to-end way. While following the line of graph-based RNNs, our work significantly improves the way of network learning by allowing the underlying multi-level graph structures to evolve along with the parameter learning. The network can thus learn representations to better fit the hidden structure of the data. Moreover, we propose a principled approach to evolve graph structures stochastically, which is not straightforward and could have potential impact on the application of graph-based RNNs in multiple domains. We have demonstrated its effectiveness on the object parsing task for an image. In future, the structure-evolving LSTM can be extended to enable the reversible graph transition (e.g., splitting some merged nodes) during the LSTM network optimization. We will also evaluate its performance on the tasks of other modalities, such as the social networks.
{\small
\bibliographystyle{ieee}
|
\section{Introduction}
Given the dearth of spectrum in sub-3GHz bands, use of higher frequency
bands is indispensable to meet the projected data demands of 2020
\cite{Cisco2013Whitepaper}. Faced with this challenge, cellular systems
based on the millimeter wave (mmWave) bands has been attracted lots
of interest, between 30 and 300 GHz, where the available bandwidths
are much wider than today's cellular networks \cite{ZPi2011CM,Rangan2014JPROC}.
Recent field measurements also reveal the prospect of mmWave signals
for the access link between the user equipment (UE) and base station
(BS) in cellular systems \cite{Rappaport2013TAP}.
Evaluating the system performance of mmWave cellular networks is a
crucial task in order to understand the network behavior. Recently,
several studies analyze the coverage performance and capacity in mmWave
cellular networks using results from stochastic geometry \cite{Bai2014MCOM,Kulkarni2014GLOCOM}.
In \cite{Singh2014ACSSC}, a tractable model is proposed for user's
rate distribution in noise-limited mmWave cellular networks, and a
general framework has been proposed to evaluate coverage performance
of the mmWave networks in \cite{Bai2015TWC}. However, one must remember
that the mmWave cellular communication is easily affected by propagation
environmental factors such as atmospheric conditions and physical
obstacles, so the analysis of system-level performance evaluation
of mmWave cellular network is usually single-tier network. \cite{Ghosh2012MCOM}
shows that cellular networks are becoming less regular as a variety
of demand-based low power nodes are being deployed, and small cell
networks were studied in recently literature \cite{Ge2014Network,Ge2015IET,Ge2016WCom}.
Therefore, the networks could be regarded as the multi-tier cellular
networks instead of the simple single-tier network. Moreover, as one
of the candidate technologies in 5G, mmWave will be widely applied
to various BSs with different transmit powers, antenna gains, etc
\cite{Rangan2014JPROC}. Therefore, the emergence of multi-tier mmWave
cellular networks is inevitable.
Recently a few researchers have presented some initial analysis of
multi-tier mmWave cellular networks with the aid of stochastic geometry
\cite{Renzo2015TWC}. However, the mathematical framework for multi-tier
mmWave cellular networks is not clear, and currently available mathematical
framework presented on \cite{Dhillon2012JSAC,Ge2015TCOM} for modeling
micro wave cellular networks is not directly applicable to mmWave
cellular networks. The main reasons are related to the need of incorporating
realistic path-loss, blockage models and highly directional antenna
gains. They are significantly different from micro wave communications.
The investigations \cite{Rangan2014JPROC,Singh2015JSAC} have demonstrated
large bandwidth mmWave networks tend to be noise-limited in urban
settings with blocking, in contrast to micro wave cellular networks,
which are interference-limited. Therefore, a tractable model for characterizing
the multi-tier mmWave cellular networks seems important to develop.
In this paper, we aim at proposing a normalization model which can
simplify analysis of multi-tier mmWave cellular networks. To the best
of our knowledge, the works converting multi-tier networks into single-tier
network in mmWave communication systems have not yet been analyzed
until now. Moreover, we derived the end-to-end signal-to-noise ratio
(SNR) in general case with beamforming alignment errors in the communication,
and discussed the SNR in perfect beamforming alignment case. The numerical
results proved that the normalization model is an effective model
for analysis of multi-tier mmWave cellular networks.
\section{System Model}
In this section, we introduce our system model for down-link multi-tier
mmWave cellular networks composed of $K$ independent network tiers
of BSs with different deployment densities, transmit powers, and antenna
gains. It is assumed that the BSs belonging to $k$-th tier are distributed
uniformly in $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ according to a bi-dimensional homogeneous
Poisson point process (PPP) $\Phi_{k}$ of density $\lambda_{k}$
, and have transmit power $P_{k}$ and the same beam width of the
main lobe $\omega\in\left(0,2\pi\right)$. Assuming that the multiple
cells of different tiers are distributed in the same plane, then,
the distribution of the BSs in multi-tier mmWave networks is defined
as $\Phi=\cup_{k=1}^{K}\Phi_{k}$ with density $\lambda=\sum_{k=1}^{K}\lambda_{k}$.
Without loss of generality, the typical UE is assumed to be located
at the origin $\left(0,0\right)$ and the distance between an arbitrary
BS and typical UE is $x$.
\subsection{Directional Beamforming Model}
Antenna arrays are deployed at both BSs and UEs to perform directional
beamforming. For analytical tractability, the actual antenna patterns
are approximated by a sectored antenna model. The simple model captures
the interplay between the antenna gain and half-power beam width.
Let $G_{q}\left(\theta\right)$ be an ideal sector antenna with beam
width $\omega$, main beam gain $M_{q}$, and side lobe gain $m_{q}$
with $0\leq m_{q}<1<M_{q}$. In particular, the antenna gains of a
generic BSs and UEs are denoted by $G_{\mathrm{BS}}\left(\theta\right)$,
$G_{\mathrm{UE}}\left(\theta\right)$, respectively, and $\theta$
is the angle off the boresight direction. That is
\begin{equation}
G_{q}\left(\theta\right)=\begin{cases}
M_{q}=\frac{2\pi-\left(2\pi-\omega\right)\epsilon}{\omega}, & \mathrm{if}\begin{array}{cc}
& \left|\theta\right|\leq\frac{\omega}{2}\end{array}\\
m_{q}=\epsilon, & \mathrm{Otherwise}
\end{cases},\label{eq:gain}
\end{equation}
where $q\in\left\{ \mathrm{BS,UE}\right\} $, $\epsilon\ll1$. Let
$a_{j}=G_{\mathrm{BS}}\left(\theta\right)G_{\mathrm{UE}}\left(\theta\right)$
be the total directivity gain which is from BSs to the typical UE.
Considering the general situation, the errors in channel estimation
are not neglected, so the UE and serving BS have four directivity
gains based on beamforming alignment case. That is
\begin{equation}
a_{j}=\begin{cases}
M_{\mathrm{BS}}M_{\mathrm{UE}}, & \mathrm{with}\begin{array}{c}
j=1\end{array}\\
M_{\mathrm{BS}}m_{\mathrm{UE}}, & \mathrm{with}\begin{array}{c}
j=2\end{array}\\
m_{\mathrm{BS}}M_{\mathrm{UE}}, & \mathrm{with}\begin{array}{c}
j=3\end{array}\\
m_{\mathrm{BS}}m_{\mathrm{UE}}, & \mathrm{with}\begin{array}{c}
j=4\end{array}
\end{cases},\label{eq:alignment state}
\end{equation}
where $j\in\left\{ 1,2,3,4\right\} $ is referred to the beamforming
alignment state of the UE and serving BS. For example, if the main
lobe of beam between the UE and serving BS is alignment, the directivity
gain for the desired signal link is expressed as $a_{1}=M_{\mathrm{BS}}M$$_{\mathrm{UE}}$.
\subsection{Blockage Model}
Considering the characteristic of the mmWave, a BS with mmWave can
be either the line-of-sight (LOS) BS or the non-line-of-sight (NLOS)
BS to the typical UE, which is determined by the LOS probability function
$p_{los}\left(x\right)$. We adopted the blockage model proposed in
\cite{Singh2015JSAC} as an approximation of the statistical blockage
model \cite{Renzo2015TWC}, since it is simple yet flexible enough
to capture blockage statistics, and describe the coverage and rate
trends in mmWave cellular networks. The probability that a link length
$x$ is LOS is
\begin{equation}
p_{los}\left(x\right)=\begin{cases}
C, & \mathrm{if}\begin{array}{cc}
x\leq d\end{array}\\
0, & \mathrm{Otherwise}
\end{cases},\label{eq:los probability}
\end{equation}
where $0\leq C\leq1$. The parameters $\left(C,d\right)$ are geography
and deployment dependent. $C$ should be regarded as the average fraction
of LOS area in the circle of radius $d$ around the typical UE. Also,
the NLOS probability of a link is $1-p_{los}\left(x\right)$. To simplify
the analysis, we regard the circle of radius $d$ as a LOS circle.
\subsection{SNR Model}
Recent studies on mmWave networks \cite{Singh2014ACSSC,Singh2015JSAC}
reveal that mmWave networks in urban settings are more noise limited,
in contrast to micro wave cellular networks, which are strongly interference-limited.
This is due to blocking sensitivity, the signals received from other
non-serving BSs can be almost negligible. Moreover, because the SNR
provides a good enough approximation to signal to interference plus
noise ratio (SINR) for directional mmWave cellular networks, we adopt
it to help us in derivation.
The received power in the down-link at the typical UE from the serving
BS at location $\mathbf{x}$ is given as $p_{k}h_{x}a_{j}L\left(\mathbf{x}\right)$.
Here, $p_{k}$ represents the transmit power of $k$-th tier BSs,
and we assume independent Rayleigh fading for each link, the random
variable $h$ follows an exponential distribution with mean $\nicefrac{1}{\mu}$,
which is denoted as $h_{x}\sim\exp\left(\mu\right)$. $L\left(\mathbf{x}\right)=\left\Vert \mathbf{x}\right\Vert ^{-\alpha}$
is the pathloss, and $\alpha$ is the pathloss exponent. If the link
is LOS, $\alpha$ equals to $\alpha_{L}$ and $\alpha_{N}$ otherwise,
$\alpha_{L}<\alpha_{N}$. Then, the SNR at the typical UE from its
associated BS can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
SNR=\frac{p_{k}h_{x}a_{j}L\left(\mathbf{x}\right)}{N},
\end{equation}
where $N$ is the noise power.
\section{Normalization Model of Multi-tier mmWave Networks}
Different from the single-tier mmWave cellular network where all BSs
have the same transmit power, beam width and the main lobe gain, in
multi-tiers mmWave cellular networks, the BSs of different tiers have
different parameters in power, beam width and follow different distributions
geographically. The complexity of the scenario leads to many difficulties
and enormous computing work in the performance analysis. In order
to make the analysis clearer, we propose a normalization model in
this paper, which converts a multi-tier mmWave cellular networks to
a virtual single-tier cellular network by the method of scaling. Unlike
our previous works \cite{Han2015}, which proposed a transmission
power normalization model for conventional multi-tier heterogeneous
cellular networks, our model in this paper takes LOS/NLOS paths and
directional beamforming into consideration, which are critical factors
to mmWave networks. As a result, all BSs have the same normalized
transmission power 1, and then, the virtual distance and link type
which is either LOS or NLOS become two important factors that affect
the UE's received power.
In a $K$-Tier mmWave networks, the BSs in tier $k$, $k\in\left\{ 1,2,\cdots,K\right\} $,
have transmit power $p_{k}$, beam width of the main lobe $\omega_{k}$
and follow homogeneous PPP $\Phi_{k}$ of density $\lambda_{k}$.
Due to the characteristic of mmWave communication link, we assume
each tier network is split into two parts. Let $\Phi_{k}^{L}$ be
the point process of $k$-th tier LOS BSs, and $\Phi_{k}^{N}=\Phi_{k}\setminus\Phi_{k}^{L}$
be the point process of $k$-th tier NLOS BSs. The distribution of
all BSs in whole networks can be described as $\Phi=\cup_{k=1}^{K}\Phi_{k}=\cup_{k=1}^{K}\left(\Phi_{k}^{L}+\Phi_{k}^{N}\right)$.
Then, we will discuss separately the normalization model in two parts
(scaled by LOS factors and scaled by NLOS factors).
The received signal power at the typical UE from the BS at $\mathbf{x}\in\Phi_{k}$
is given as
\begin{align}
p_{kj} & =p_{k}a_{j}L\left(\mathbf{x}\right)h_{x}=1\cdot\left(\left(p_{k}a_{j}\right)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha}}\left\Vert \mathbf{x}\right\Vert \right)^{-\alpha}h_{x}\nonumber \\
& =1\cdot\left\Vert \left(p_{k}a_{j}\right)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha}}\cdot\mathbf{x}\right\Vert ^{-\alpha}h_{x}=1\cdot L\left(\left(p_{k}a_{j}\right)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha}}\cdot\mathbf{x}\right)h_{x},\label{eq:normalized transmit power}
\end{align}
where 1 is the normalized transmit power and $L\left(\mathbf{x}\right)$
is the path loss function, and $j\in\left\{ 1,2,3,4\right\} $ indicates
that the user is associated with LOS BS in different four cases. For
example, $p_{k1}$ is the received signal power of typical UE in the
case where the main lobe of UE and serving BS are aligned.
From \eqref{eq:normalized transmit power}, it is observed that the
signal power received at the typical UE located at $\left(0,0\right)$
from the BS at $\mathbf{x}$ is equal to that received from the virtual
BS with transmit power 1 and located at $\mathbf{x}_{L}=\left(p_{k}a_{j}\right)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha_{L}}}\cdot\mathbf{x}$.
Based on this, the $k$-th tier homogeneous PPP $\Phi_{k}$ can be
respectively scaled to $\Phi_{kj}^{'}=\left(p_{k}a_{j}\right)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha_{L}}}\Phi_{k}$
of the scaled density $\lambda_{kj}^{'}=\left(\frac{1}{\left(p_{k}a_{j}\right)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha_{L}}}}\right)^{2}\lambda_{k}=\left(p_{k}a_{j}\right)^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{L}}}\lambda_{k}$.
Simultaneously, the radius $d$ of LOS circle will be scaled by different
factors in each tier network, the LOS probability function by LOS
scaling factors is given by
\begin{equation}
p_{los}\left(x_{L}\right)=\begin{cases}
C, & \mathrm{if}\begin{array}{cc}
& x_{L}\leq d_{kj}\end{array}\\
0, & \mathrm{Otherwise}
\end{cases},
\end{equation}
where $d_{kj}=d\cdot\left(p_{k}a_{j}\right)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha_{L}}}$,
that is the scaled radius of LOS circle in $k$-th tier networks and
in four beamforming alignment cases. For every $j\in\left\{ 1,2,3,4\right\} $,
let $\mathcal{D}_{j}=\left\{ d_{kj},k\in\left\{ 1,\ldots,K\right\} \right\} $
denote the set of scaled radius of $k$-th tier networks LOS circle,
and suppose that the elements of $\mathcal{D}_{j}$ are indexed in
an increasing order, that is $d_{\upsilon\left(1\right)j}\leq d_{\upsilon\left(2\right)j}\leq\cdots\leq d_{\upsilon\left(K\right)j}$
, and define $\gamma_{ij}=d_{\upsilon\left(i\right)j}$ as the scaled
radius of LOS circle in the order list $\gamma_{j}=\left\{ \gamma_{1j},\ldots,\gamma_{Kj}\right\} $.
And the corresponding scaled density can be written as $\lambda_{\upsilon\left(i\right)j}^{'}=\left(p_{\upsilon\left(i\right)}a_{\upsilon\left(i\right)j}\right)^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{L}}}\lambda_{\upsilon\left(i\right)}$.
The densities of the $K$-tier networks scaled by the LOS factors
in LOS circle can be given as
\begin{align}
\lambda_{j}^{L} & =\underset{i=1}{\sum^{K}}\underset{l\in\mathcal{C^{C}}}{\sum}\mathnormal{\lambda_{\upsilon\left(l\right)j}^{'}\mathbb{I}\left(\gamma_{\left(i-1\right)j}<x_{L}\leq\gamma_{ij}\right)}\nonumber \\
& \begin{array}{cc}
& +0\cdot\mathnormal{\mathbb{I}\left(\gamma_{Kj}\leq x_{L}\right)}\end{array},\label{eq:normalization density}
\end{align}
where $\mathbb{I}\left(\cdot\right)$ is the indicator function, $\mathcal{C}=\left\{ 0,1,\ldots,i-1\right\} $
denotes the subset of the set $\mathrm{\mathcal{K}=}\left\{ 0,1,\ldots,K\right\} $,
its supplementary set is $\mathcal{C^{\mathcal{C}}}=\left\{ i,\ldots,K\right\} $,
and $\gamma_{0j}=0$. For ease of analysis, the second term of \eqref{eq:normalization density}
is the scaled density of LOS BS outside LOS circle. It is worth noting
that the densities in \eqref{eq:normalization density} are scaled
from the densities BSs in all tiers within the circle of radius $d$
including LOS BSs and NLOS BSs, and we can get the LOS BSs densities
in four beamforming alignment cases which are $C\cdot\lambda_{j}^{L}$
respectively. The normalization model scaled by LOS scaling factors
is equivalent to converting $K$-tier mmWave networks to the virtual
single-tier mmWave network, in which there are the same four beamforming
alignment cases and the scaled densities respectively follow piecewise
constant functions which have $K$ demarcation points in every case.
\begin{figure}[tbh]
\centering{}\includegraphics[width=9cm]{Visio-Drawing15}\caption{\label{fig:The-normalization-model}The normalization model of 2-tier
mmWave cellular networks in LOS case}
\end{figure}
To explain this, consider a 2-tier mmWave network in LOS circle shown
in Fig. \ref{fig:The-normalization-model}. According to \eqref{eq:los probability},
the BSs located outside the circle of radius $d$ are NLOS BSs. In
Fig. \ref{fig:The-normalization-model}, BS $i$ is located at $\mathbf{x}_{ki}$
in $k$-th tier including BSs at $\mathbf{x}_{1i}$ in tier 1, and
BSs at $\mathbf{x}_{2i}$ in tier 2, with different transmit powers
and four directivity gains. The typical UE receives the desired signal
from the associated BS located at $\mathbf{x}_{ki}$. For ease of
analysis, we scale each tier by using different factors such that
virtual BSs at $\mathbf{x}_{L1i}^{'}$, $\mathbf{x}_{L2i}^{'}$ with
the same normalized power 1 are obtained, at the same time, the radius
$d$ of LOS circle is scaled to $d_{1j}$ and $d_{2j}$ by different
scaling factors so that the scaled density (BSs located in circle
of radius $d_{1j}$) is the sum of 2 tiers scaled density that is
$\lambda_{1j}^{'}+\lambda_{2j}^{'}$ as well as the scaled density
(BSs located at circular ring area between radius $d_{1j}$ and $d_{2j}$
) is $\lambda_{2j}^{'}$. Moreover, the probability of LOS BSs located
outside circle of radius $d_{2j}$ is 0, the scaled densities of BSs
in the LOS circle can be given as $\lambda_{j}^{L}=\left(\lambda_{1j}^{'}+\lambda_{2j}^{'}\right)\mathnormal{\mathbb{I}\left(0<x^{L}\leq d_{1j}\right)}$+$\lambda_{2j}^{'}\mathbb{I}\left(d_{ij}<x^{L}\leq d_{2j}\right)+0\cdot\left(d_{2j}<x^{L}\right)$.
It is worth emphasizing that the scaled densities respectively follow
piecewise constant functions which have two demarcation points in
four alignment cases and the probability of LOS BSs is $C$ in the
circle of radius $d_{2j}$, and the scaled densities of LOS BSs are
equal to $C\cdot\lambda_{j}^{L}$.
It is known that the typical user does not directly communicate with
an NLOS BS, instead they communicate by radio wave's reflection and
scattering, etc, so that the directivity gains can be ignored. Assume
the typical user be associated with NLOS BS, according to \eqref{eq:normalized transmit power},
there is only a case $a_{j}=1$ for all $j$ in $\left\{ 1,2,3,4\right\} $.
And the signal power received at the typical UE from the BS at $\mathbf{x}$
is equal to that received from the virtual BS $\mathbf{x}_{N}=\left(p_{k}\right)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha_{N}}}\cdot\mathbf{x}$
with transmit power 1 and located at $\left(p_{k}\right)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha_{N}}}\cdot\mathbf{x}$.
Similarly, the $k$-th tier PPP $\Phi_{k}$ is scaled to $\Phi_{k}^{'}=\left(p_{k}\right)^{-\frac{1}{\alpha_{N}}}\Phi_{k}$
of the scaled density $\lambda_{k}^{'}=\left(p_{k}\right)^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{N}}}\lambda_{k}$.
The radius $d$ of LOS circle is scaled to $d_{k}^{'}=d\cdot p_{k}^{-\frac{1}{\alpha_{N}}}$,
and let $\mathcal{D}=\left\{ d_{k},k\in\left\{ 1,\ldots,K\right\} \right\} $
denote the set of scaled radius of $k$-th tier network LOS circle,
and suppose that the elements of $\mathcal{D}$ are indexed in an
increasing order, such that $d_{\upsilon\left(1\right)}\leq d_{\upsilon\left(2\right)}\leq\cdots\leq d_{\upsilon\left(K\right)}$
, and define $\gamma_{i}=d_{\upsilon\left(i\right)}$ as the scaled
radius of LOS circle in the order list $\gamma=\left\{ \gamma_{1},\ldots,\gamma_{K}\right\} $
, and the scaled density of BSs in $\upsilon\left(i\right)$-th tier
mmWave network is $\lambda_{\upsilon\left(i\right)}^{'}=\left(p_{\upsilon\left(i\right)}\right)^{\frac{2}{\alpha_{N}}}\lambda_{\upsilon\left(i\right)}$.
The density of the $K$-tier mmWave networks scaled by the NLOS scaling
factors in the LOS circle of radius $d$ with the NLOS probability
$\left(1-p_{los}\left(x\right)\right)$ can be given by
\begin{align}
\lambda_{1}^{N} & =\underset{i=1}{\sum^{K}}\underset{l\in\mathcal{C^{C}}}{\sum}\mathnormal{\lambda_{\upsilon\left(l\right)}^{'}\mathbb{I}\left(\gamma_{\left(i-1\right)}<x_{N}\leq\gamma_{i}\right)}\nonumber \\
& \begin{array}{cc}
& +0\cdot\mathnormal{\mathbb{I}\left(\gamma_{K}\leq x_{N}\right)},\end{array}\label{eq:nlos density}
\end{align}
where $\gamma_{0}=0$, and the scaled density of BSs outside the LOS
circle of radius $d$ with the NLOS probability 1 can be given by
\begin{align}
\lambda_{2}^{N} & =\underset{i=1}{\sum^{K}}\underset{l\in\mathcal{C}}{\sum}\mathnormal{\lambda_{\upsilon\left(l\right)}^{'}\mathbb{I}\left(\gamma_{\left(i-1\right)}<x_{N}\leq\gamma_{i}\right)}\nonumber \\
& \begin{array}{cc}
& +\underset{\mathit{{\scriptstyle l\in\mathrm{\mathcal{K}}}}}{\sum}\mathnormal{\lambda_{\upsilon\left(l\right)}^{'}\mathbb{I}\left(\gamma_{K}\leq x_{N}\right),}\end{array}\label{eq:nlos density two}
\end{align}
where $\lambda_{\upsilon\left(0\right)}^{'}=0$. From \eqref{eq:nlos density}
and \eqref{eq:nlos density two}, we can get $\lambda_{1}^{N}+\lambda_{2}^{N}=\underset{\mathit{{\scriptstyle l\in\mathcal{K}}}}{\sum}\mathnormal{\lambda_{\upsilon\left(l\right)}^{'}}$
that is scaled density of PPP $\Phi^{'}=\cup_{k=1}^{K}\Phi_{k}^{'}$
by the NLOS factors scaling. According to \eqref{eq:nlos density},
the scaled density of NLOS BSs in circle of radius $\gamma_{K}$ can
be expressed as $\left(1-C\right)\lambda_{1}^{N}$. Similarly, from
\eqref{eq:nlos density two}, the scaled density of NLOS BSs outside
the circle of radius $\gamma_{1}$ can be expressed as $1\cdot\lambda_{2}^{N}$.
\section{Coverage Analysis on the Normalization Model}
In Section IV, a general and tractable model for computing coverage
and rate of mmWave systems is provided, based on the assumptions of
$K$-tier mmWave cellular networks and a simple but flexible statistical
blockage model. With these assumptions, a virtual single-tier mmWave
network is presented with the new density of BSs. In this section,
assuming the typical UE is associated with the \textit{nearest} BS
in normalization model, so the typical UE can receive the maximum
signal power from that BS in $K$-tier mmWave cellular networks. And
then the expression of the coverage probability is provided for high-SNR
in general case (with beamforming alignment errors) and the special
case (with perfect beamforming alignment) based on the normalization
model.
The coverage probability of $K$-tier mmWave cellular networks can
be given as
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{\mathcal{P}_{cov}}\left(\mathrm{T,\omega}\right)=\mathbf{\mathbb{P}_{los}}+\mathbf{\mathbb{P}_{nlos}},\label{eq:sum}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{\mathbb{P}_{los}}$ is the probability when the typical
UE can be served by the \textit{nearest} BS with LOS path, $\mathbf{\mathbb{P}_{nlos}}$
is the probability when the typical UE can be served by the \textit{nearest}
BS with NLOS path. Then, we will respectively discuss the coverage
probabilities in two cases.
\subsection{The General Case}
Here, we will discuss the general case with beamforming alignment
errors, which is closer to the practical situation. Therefore, we
investigate the effect of beamforming alignment errors on coverage
probability. We employ an error model similar to that in \cite{Wildman2014TWC}.
Let $\left|\varepsilon_{q}\right|$ be the random additive beam-steering
errors, $q\in\left\{ \mathrm{BS,UE}\right\} $, $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{BS}}$
and $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{UE}}$ are independent of each other and
have a symmetrical distribution around $\omega_{q}$. In this paper,
we assume the beamwidth of main lobe $\omega_{\mathrm{BS}}=\omega_{\mathrm{UE}}=\omega$.
The probability density function (PDF) of the effective directivity
gain $a_{j}$ with beamforming alignment errors can be explicitly
written as \cite{Renzo2015TWC}
\begin{align}
& f_{G}\left(a_{j}\right)=\nonumber \\
& F_{\left|\varepsilon_{\mathrm{BS}}\right|}\left(\frac{\omega}{2}\right)F_{\left|\varepsilon_{\mathrm{UE}}\right|}\left(\frac{\omega}{2}\right)\delta\left(a_{j}-M_{\mathrm{BS}}M_{\mathrm{UE}}\right)\nonumber \\
& +F_{\left|\varepsilon_{\mathrm{BS}}\right|}\left(\frac{\omega}{2}\right)\left(1-F_{\left|\varepsilon_{\mathrm{UE}}\right|}\left(\frac{\omega}{2}\right)\right)\delta\left(a_{j}-M_{\mathrm{BS}}m_{\mathrm{UE}}\right)\nonumber \\
& +\left(1-F_{\left|\varepsilon_{\mathrm{BS}}\right|}\left(\frac{\omega}{2}\right)\right)F_{\left|\varepsilon_{\mathrm{UE}}\right|}\left(\frac{\omega}{2}\right)\delta\left(a_{j}-m_{\mathrm{BS}}M_{\mathrm{UE}}\right)\nonumber \\
& +\left(1-F_{\left|\varepsilon_{\mathrm{BS}}\right|}\left(\frac{\omega}{2}\right)\right)\left(1-F_{\left|\varepsilon_{\mathrm{UE}}\right|}\left(\frac{\omega}{2}\right)\right)\delta\left(a_{j}-m_{\mathrm{BS}}m_{\mathrm{UE}}\right),\label{eq:alignment error}
\end{align}
where $\delta\left(\cdot\right)$ is the Kronecker's delta function,
$F_{\left|\epsilon_{q}\right|}\left(x\right)=\mathbf{\mathbb{P}}\left\{ \left|\varepsilon_{q}\right|\leq x\right\} $
is the cumulative distribution function of misalignment error. Assume
the beam-steering errors follow a Gaussian distribution with mean
equal to zero and variance equal to $\sigma_{\mathrm{BE}}^{2}$, so
absolute error $\left|\varepsilon\right|$ follows a half normal distribution
and $F_{\left|\varepsilon\right|}\left(x\right)=\mathrm{erf}\left(x/\left(\sqrt{2}\sigma_{\mathrm{BE}}\right)\right)$,
where $\mathrm{erf}\left(\cdot\right)$ denotes the error function.
From \eqref{eq:alignment error}, the probability that the typical
UE can be served by the \textit{nearest} BS with LOS path can be calculated
as
\begin{align}
\mathbf{\mathbb{P}_{los}} & =\Pr\left(SNR_{\mathbf{los}}>\mathrm{T}\right)\nonumber \\
& =\Pr\left(\frac{1\cdot h_{x}x_{L}^{-\alpha_{L}}}{N}>\mathrm{T}\right)\nonumber \\
& =\int_{0}^{\infty}f_{G}\left(a_{j}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(-\mathrm{T}Nx_{L}^{\alpha_{L}}\right)f_{j}^{L}\left(x_{L}\right)dx_{L}\nonumber \\
& =\sum_{j=1}^{4}f_{G}\left(a_{j}\right)\int_{0}^{\infty}\mathrm{exp}\left(-\mathrm{T}Nx_{L}^{\alpha_{L}}\right)f_{j}^{L}\left(x_{L}\right)dx_{L},\label{eq:los cov pro in error}
\end{align}
where $f_{j}^{L}\left(x\right)=C\cdot2\pi x\lambda_{j}^{L}\mathrm{exp}\left(-\pi x^{2}\lambda_{j}^{L}\right)$.
And the probability that the typical UE can be served by the \textit{nearest}
BS with NLOS path can be given as
\begin{align}
\mathbf{\mathbb{P}_{nlos}} & =\Pr\left(SNR_{\mathbf{nlos}}>\mathrm{T}\right)\nonumber \\
& =\Pr\left(\frac{1\cdot h_{x}x_{N}^{-\alpha_{N}}}{N}>\mathrm{T}\right)\nonumber \\
& =\int_{0}^{\infty}\mathrm{exp}\left(-\mathrm{T}Nx_{N}^{\alpha_{N}}\right)f_{1}^{N}\left(x_{N}\right)dx_{N}\nonumber \\
& \begin{array}{cc}
& +\int_{0}^{\infty}\mathrm{exp}\left(-\mathrm{T}Nx_{N}^{\alpha_{N}}\right)f_{2}^{N}\left(x_{N}\right)dx_{N}\end{array},\label{eq:nlos coverage probability}
\end{align}
where $f_{1}^{N}\left(x\right)=\left(1-C\right)2\pi x\lambda_{1}^{N}\mathrm{exp}\left(-\pi x^{2}\lambda_{1}^{N}\right)$
and $f_{2}^{N}\left(x\right)=2\pi x\lambda_{2}^{N}\mathrm{exp}\left(-\pi x^{2}\lambda_{2}^{N}\right)$.
According to \eqref{eq:sum}, \eqref{eq:los cov pro in error} and
\eqref{eq:nlos coverage probability}, the coverage probability with
beamforming alignment errors between typical UE and serving BS can
be calculated.
\subsection{The Case with Perfect Beamforming Alignment }
In this part, we assume perfect beamforming alignment case, and obtain
the upper limit expression of coverage probability. Without beamforming
alignment errors, there is only a case where the maximum directivity
gain can be exploited on the intended link. According to \eqref{eq:alignment error},
we can get the PDF of the effective directivity gain $a_{j}$ in a
special case, that is $f_{G}\left(a_{j}\right)=1\cdot\delta\left(a_{j}-M_{\mathrm{BS}}M_{\mathrm{UE}}\right)+0\cdot\delta\left(a_{j}-M_{\mathrm{BS}}m_{\mathrm{UE}}\right)+0\cdot\delta\left(a_{j}-m_{\mathrm{BS}}M_{\mathrm{UE}}\right)+0\cdot\delta\left(a_{j}-m_{\mathrm{BS}}m_{\mathrm{UE}}\right)$.
Similarly, the probability that the typical UE is served by the \textit{nearest}
BS with LOS path can be presented as
\begin{align}
\mathbf{\mathbb{P}_{los}} & =\Pr\left(SNR_{\mathbf{los}}>\mathrm{T}\right)\nonumber \\
& =\int_{0}^{\infty}f_{G}\left(a_{j}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(-\mathrm{T}Nx_{L}^{\alpha_{L}}\right)f_{1}^{L}\left(x_{L}\right)dx_{L}\nonumber \\
& =\int_{0}^{\infty}\mathrm{exp}\left(-\mathrm{T}Nx_{L}^{\alpha_{L}}\right)f_{1}^{L}\left(x_{L}\right)dx_{L},\label{eq:prefect alignment}
\end{align}
where $f_{1}^{L}\left(x\right)=C\cdot2\pi x\lambda_{1}^{L}\mathrm{exp}\left(-\pi x^{2}\lambda_{1}^{L}\right)$.
According to \eqref{eq:nlos coverage probability} and \eqref{eq:prefect alignment},
the coverage probability can be expressed as
\begin{align}
\mathbf{\mathcal{P}_{cov}\left(\mathrm{T,\omega}\right)=} & \int_{0}^{\infty}\mathrm{exp}\left(-\mathrm{T}Nx_{L}^{\alpha_{L}}\right)f_{1}^{L}\left(x_{L}\right)dx_{L}\nonumber \\
& +\int_{0}^{\infty}\mathrm{exp}\left(-\mathrm{T}Nx_{N}^{\alpha_{N}}\right)f_{1}^{N}\left(x_{N}\right)dx_{N}\nonumber \\
& +\int_{0}^{\infty}\mathrm{exp}\left(-\mathrm{T}Nx_{N}^{\alpha_{N}}\right)f_{2}^{N}\left(x_{N}\right)dx_{N}.
\end{align}
\section{Numerical Results}
In this section, we explore the relationship between beam width and
maximum coverage probability with beamforming alignment errors. And
without loss of generality, we present some simulation results for
illustrating the normalization model and characterizing the coverage
performance of the 2-tier mmWave networks as well as the effect of
different network parameters. In all figures, LOS and NLOS path loss
exponents are $\alpha_{L}=2$ and $\alpha_{N}=4$, respectively.
In order to characterize the model clearer, the scaled densities which
are converted from 2-tier mmWave cellular networks to single-tier
network are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:Normalization-densities(LOS)-of}.
There are four scaled densities in different beamforming alignment
state of \ref{eq:alignment state}. In Fig. \ref{fig:Normalization-densities(LOS)-of},
the 2nd graph and the 3rd graph is the same, because we assume the
same beam width of the main lobe between user and BSs, the directivity
gains in the cases $j=2$ and case $j=3$ are the same. The scaled
densities follow piecewise constant functions. The piecewise points
are affected by directivity gains and transmit powers, respectively,
which provide convenience for performance analysis in multi-tier mmWave
cellular networks. And the densities scaled by NLOS scaling factors
are similar to that.
\begin{figure}[tbh]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{normalization}\caption{\label{fig:Normalization-densities(LOS)-of}The densities of 2-tier
mmWave networks scaled by the LOS scaling factors in four beamforming
alignment cases ($\alpha_{L}=2$, $M=10\mathrm{dB}$, $m=-10\mathrm{dB}$,
$p_{1}=1\mathrm{w}$, $p_{2}=5\mathrm{w}$, $\lambda_{1}=\frac{1}{200}$,
$\lambda_{2}=\frac{1}{500}$, $d=200\mathrm{m}$)}
\par\end{centering}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{fig:The-comparison-of}, we compare coverage probability
based on different $\left(C,d\right)$ pairs in perfect beamforming
alignment and beamforming alignment errors cases. The empirical $\left(C,d\right)$
pair for Manhattan is $\left(0.117,200\right)$ \cite{Singh2015JSAC}.
In addition, two special cases with LOS $\left(C=1\right)$ and NLOS
$\left(C=0\right)$ in the inner circle of radius $d=200$ are considered,
and it can be interpreted to the upper limit and lower limit of coverage
probability in beamforming alignment errors cases. From the Fig. \ref{fig:The-comparison-of},
the coverage probability under the condition of perfect beamforming
alignment is higher than that in beamforming alignment errors case
at the same threshold. However, as the LOS probability $C$ decreases,
the difference becomes smaller until it tends to zero.
\begin{figure}[tbh]
\centering{}\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{coverage}\caption{\label{fig:The-comparison-of}The comparison of coverage probability
between perfect beamforming alignment and beamforming alignment errors
cases ($\alpha_{L}=2$, $\alpha_{N}=4$, $p_{1}=1\mathrm{w}$, $p_{2}=5\mathrm{w}$,
$\lambda_{1}=\frac{1}{200}$, $\lambda_{2}=\frac{1}{500}$, $\omega_{q}=20^{\circ}$,
$\sigma_{BE}=4^{\circ}$,$d=200\mathrm{m}$)}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{fig:the-coverage-probability}, the effect of beam widths
on the coverage performance is analyzed in different SNR threshold.
It is considered that the UE's beam width is equal to the BS's beam
width and the side lobe strength $m_{q}=\epsilon$ is fixed in simulation.
From Fig. \ref{fig:the-coverage-probability}, we can see that there
exists a beam width to meet the highest coverage probability at the
same threshold. And it can be interpreted that the smaller the beam
width is, the greater the main lobe gain and the beamforming alignment
errors are, so that there will be the beam width which makes the coverage
probability maximum at the same threshold.
\begin{figure}[tbh]
\centering{}\includegraphics[width=9cm]{beamwidth_T}\caption{\label{fig:the-coverage-probability}The coverage probability with
beamwidth changing in different threshold ($\alpha_{L}=2$,$\alpha_{N}=4$,$p_{1}=1\mathrm{w}$,$p_{2}=5\mathrm{w}$,$\lambda_{1}=\frac{1}{200}$,
$\lambda_{2}=\frac{1}{500}$, $\sigma_{BE}=4^{\circ}$,$\left(C,d\right)=\left(0.117,200\right)$)}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper, a normalization model for simplifying analysis and
computation of multi-tier mmWave cellular networks was introduced.
Its novelty lies in converting the multi-tier mmWave cellular networks
into a virtual single-tier mmWave network, where all BSs have the
same normalized transmit power 1 and the scaled densities respectively
follow corresponding piecewise constant functions. We have adopted
the proposed approach to analyzing some coverage performance and the
effect of beamforming alignment errors based on the noise-limited
mmWave cellular systems in this paper. Numerical simulations have
confirmed that the results met the analysis requirements. In future
work, it would be interesting to analyze more system performances
under the normalization model.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the International
Science and Technology Cooperation Program of China (Grant Nos. 2015DFG12580
and 2014DFA11640), the National Natural Science Foundation of China
(Grant Nos. 61471180, 61461136004, 61301147, 61471347, and 61210002),
the Hubei Provincial Department of Education Scientific Research Project
(Grant No. B2015188), the Shanghai Natural Science Foundation (Grant
No. 16ZR1435100), the Fundamental Research Funds of Shandong University
(Grant No. 2016JC010), a grant from Wenhua College (Grant No. 2013Y08),
the National Research Foundation of Korea-Grant funded by the Korean
Government (Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning)-NRF-2014K1A3A1A20034987),
the EU FP7-PEOPLE-IRSES (Grant No. 610524), and the EU H2020 project
(Grant No. 723227). This research is supported by the China International
Joint Research Center of Green Communications and Networking (No.
2015B01008).
\appendices{}
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{SecIntro}
The dramatic growth of mobile data services driven by wireless Internet access and smart devices has triggered the development of 5th generation mobile networks (5G) for future wireless communications~\cite{Mag2014}. In the last generations of mobile networks, various radio access schemes were utilized as key technologies, including frequency division multiple access (FDMA), time division multiple access (TDMA), code division multiple access (CDMA), and orthogonal frequency division multiple access (OFDMA). In order to respond to the challenge of providing significantly higher system capacity in the upcoming 5G, non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) has been proposed and investigated as a candidate radio access technology~\cite{ISPACS2013,VTC2013}.
\par
In contrast to the previously employed orthogonal multiple access (OMA), the power-domain downlink NOMA system supports superposition coding at the transmitter side and successive interference cancellation (SIC) at the receiver side~\cite{CM2015}. Taking advantage of the diverse and time-varying user channels, power domain diversity gain is achievable with appropriate power and radio resource allocation for the multiplexed users~\cite{ISWCS2012}. Therefore, besides the resource scheduling issue, multi-user power allocation plays another key role in the performance of NOMA systems, and consequently attracts increasing research interests on it.
\par
\subsection{Related Work}
In the literature, a number of power allocation (PA) schemes have been proposed for downlink NOMA systems. They can be classified into two broad categories: fixed PA and dynamic PA. In the fixed PA schemes, the power ratios allocated to the scheduled users are preset parameters~\cite{ISWCS2012,GCWS2013}. In contrast, the dynamic PA schemes control the power ratios based on the instantaneous user channel status. One simple and well investigated dynamic PA scheme is the fractional transmit PA (FTPA)~\cite{GCWS2013,ISWCS2012,PIMRC2013YS}. The user power ratios are determined by fractional parameters calculated according to their channel qualities. Besides FTPA, several other dynamic PA schemes have been proposed with specific targets. For instance, the overall throughput in NOMA is optimized with the constraints on decoding error, data rate demand, or maximum power per user~\cite{GC2015,PIMRC2015ZQ,TSP2016}. In~\cite{SPL2015}, fairness among users has been chosen as the primary objective for PA optimization.
\par
In order to achieve a good balance between throughput and user fairness in dynamic NOMA systems, proportional fairness (PF) has been considered in many recent research papers~\cite{IEICE2014,ICC2016LF,ICC2016MJ,WCNC2016,PIMRC2015TS,TWC2016D,TWC2016L}. The optimal PA solution for proportional fair scheduling (PFS) in single-carrier NOMA (SC-NOMA) systems has been studied by a number of authors. In~\cite{ISWCS2012}, the authors designed a PA algorithm based on the iterative water-filling (IWF) method. In~\cite{IEICE2014}, a tree-searching based transmission PA (TTPA) scheme has been proposed to reduce the power searching complexity. However, both IWF and TTPA suffer from such a high complexity for the dynamic PA that they can hardly be applied in practice. The closed-form solution of the optimal PF-based PA has been derived in~\cite{ICC2016LF,PIMRC2015TS,ICC2016MJ,WCNC2016}, which reduces significantly the computational complexity of dynamic PA. In addition, the PA optimization for PFS in multi-carrier NOMA (MC-NOMA) systems were studied in~\cite{TWC2016D} and~\cite{TWC2016L}. An iterative matching algorithm was proposed in~\cite{TWC2016D} to jointly optimize subchannel and power allocation. The tractability of the optimal PA solution has been analyzed in~\cite{TWC2016L} and the authors designed a dynamic programming algorithm to obtain the near-optimal solutions.
\par
The performance of various fixed and dynamic PA schemes has mostly been evaluated by simulations. In order to further investigate and better utilize the existing PA schemes, the analytical solution of their performance is desired but has not been studied sufficiently. The outage probability and ergodic sum rate have been analyzed based on the fixed PA scheme for the single-cell networks in~\cite{SPL2014} and~\cite{TC2016} as well as for the relaying networks in~\cite{CL2015JK} and~\cite{TVT2016}. With the aim of improving the outage performance, the authors in~\cite{CL2016} have designed a dynamic PA scheme and derived the outage probabilities for the 2-user NOMA systems. However, as a widely accepted dynamic PA strategy, the performance of PFS has not been studied for NOMA analytically so far. The performance analysis of PFS in NOMA systems is important to provide guidelines for its optimization and application. In particular, the analytical results can be used for performance prediction and assisting user association, traffic load balancing, radio resource management, etc~\cite{ICC2014}. In this paper, as far as we are aware, we present the first analytical solution for PFS performance analysis in downlink NOMA systems.
\par
\subsection{Contributions}
We focus on the performance of PFS for SC-NOMA in this paper. We consider a downlink cellular network, where multiple user terminals are served dynamically with PFS.
We assume an ideal NOMA system in order to make the performance analytically tractable. The practical and ideal NOMA systems referred in this paper are defined as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Practical NOMA system}: The maximum number of multiplexed users is controlled by a pre-defined parameter due to the limited processing capability of SIC receivers. Normally, the limitation is 2 or 3 users in practice and the corresponding NOMA systems are referred to as 2-user and 3-user NOMA in this paper~\cite{ICC2016LF}.
\par
\item \emph{Ideal NOMA system}: We assume the SIC receiver has no limitation on the number of multiplexed users for ideal NOMA. Thus, an arbitrary number of users can be multiplexed simultaneously.
\par
\end{itemize}
\par
The main contribution of this paper is three-fold:
\begin{itemize}
\item Based on the assumption of ideal NOMA, we derive a closed-form solution of the optimal PA for PFS. The performance of this PA solution is proved to be the upper bound for PFS in practical NOMA. Based on the derivation of the optimal PA, we design a low-complexity algorithm to jointly select the optimal multiplexed users and determine their assigned power.
\par
\item We develop an analytical model to analyze the throughput performance of the optimal PA solution in the ideal NOMA system. The analytical result of user data rate expectation is derived based on stochastic channel modeling. The influence of partial channel information on the analytical result is studied.
\par
\item Moreover, we use the analytical performance to estimate user data rates and overall throughput in the 2-user and 3-user NOMA systems. The system-level simulations are carried out to verify our analytical result of the upper bound. We also confirm that using it for data rate estimation in practical NOMA is feasible and results in very low deviations. Various influence factors on estimation accuracy, including SIC limitation, the number of users, partial and imperfect channel information, are carefully investigated.
\par
\end{itemize}
\par
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section II describes the system model. In Section III, we study PFS in the ideal NOMA system and derive the optimal PA solution for it. Then, its performance is analyzed in Section IV. The simulation and numerical results are presented and compared in Section V. Finally, we draw conclusions in Section VI.
\par
\section{System Model}
\label{SecModel}
We consider one base station (BS) in a downlink SC-NOMA cellular network. The BS is denoted as $b$ and the active user set associated to it is denoted as ${\bf{U}} = \left\{1,2,...,U\right\}$, where $U$ is the number of users in ${\bf{U}}$. The BS allocates radio resource and power to the users with the PFS metric in each frame.
\par
PFS considers the instantaneous user data rate along with the long-term averaged rate~\cite{VTC2000}, which is calculated as
\begin{equation}\label{eqPFR}
{R_u}\left( {t + 1} \right) = \left( {1 - \frac{1}{\tau }} \right){R_u}\left( t \right) + \frac{{{r_u}\left( t \right)}}{\tau }, \quad u\in \bf{U},
\end{equation}
\noindent where $t$ is the frame index, $\tau$ is the averaging window size, and ${r_{u}}\left(t \right)$ is the obtained data rate of user $u$ in the $t$-th frame, which depends on the system bandwidth, allocated power and user channel quality. If user $u$ is not scheduled in the $t$-th frame, ${r_{u}}\left(t \right)$ equals to 0.
\par
The scheduling metric in PFS is expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{eqw}
\omega \left( t \right) = \sum\limits_{u \in {\bf{U}}} {\frac{{{r_u}\left( t \right)}}{{{R_u}\left( t \right)}}} .
\end{equation}
\noindent In order to maximize the geometric mean of the long-term averaged user rates, $\omega \left( {t} \right)$ needs to be maximized in every frame with appropriate control of the multiplexed users and their obtained data rates~\cite{ISWCS2012}. Focusing on the PA optimization problem in one certain frame, we neglect the frame index $t$ in the following part.
\par
SIC is adopted in the NOMA system to allow superposition of multiple user signals with different transmit power levels~\cite{VTC2013}. We denote the set of users multiplexed in the considered frame as ${\bf{S}} \subseteq {\bf{U}}$. The user amount in the set is denoted as $S= \left| {\bf{S}}\right|$.
\par
Both transmission and reception use single-antenna systems. Hence, the delivered signal power from BS $b$ at a user is expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{eqrecsignal}
{P_{u,b}} = {L_{u,b}}{\left\| {{h_{u,b}}} \right\|^2}\sum\limits_{v \in {\bf{S}}} {{p_v}} ,\quad u \in {\bf{U}},
\end{equation}
\noindent where ${L_{u,b}}$ is the comprehensive channel gain, including antenna gain, path loss, and shadow fading, $h_{u,b}$ is the instantaneous Rayleigh fading gain and is modeled as a circularly symmetric complex Gaussian random variable, ${\cal{CN}}\left(0,1\right)$. Thus, its power gain, ${\left\| {h_{u,b}} \right\|^2}$, is exponentially distributed with a unit mean value. $p_v$ is the transmit power allocated to user $v \in {\bf{S}}$, which can be further expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{eqpowerratio}
{p_u} = {\lambda _u}{p_T},\quad u \in {{\bf{S}}},
\end{equation}
\noindent where $p_T$ is the total transmit power, and ${\lambda _u}$ is the power ratio assigned to user $u$ and satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{eqratiocondition}
\sum\limits_{u \in {\bf{S}}} {{\lambda _u}} = 1, \quad {\rm{and}} \quad {\lambda _u} \in \left( {0,1} \right].
\end{equation}
\par
We denote the channel quality indicator (CQI) of user $u$ as ${\Phi_u}$. It is defined as the signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) while the full transmit power of the BS, i.e., $p_T$, is allocated to the user. Hence, ${\Phi _u}$ is calculated as
\begin{equation}\label{eqSINR}
{\Phi _u} = {{{\hat P_{u,b}}} \over {\sum\limits_{i \in {{\bf{I}}_u}} {{P_{u,i}} + {\sigma _u}} }},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{eqfullpower}
{{\hat P}_{u,b}} = {L_{u,b}}{\left\| {{h_{u,b}}} \right\|^2}{p_T},
\end{equation}
\noindent ${\bf{I}}_u$ denotes the inter-cell interferer set of user $u$, $P_{u,i}$ denotes the received inter-cell interference power from BS $i$, and ${\sigma _u}$ is the additive noise received by user $u$. The inter-cell interference cancellation is not considered. Thus, the received $P_{u,i}$ has an adverse impact on CQI.
\par
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
{\includegraphics[width=3.1in]{Fig3users.eps}}
\caption{Illustration of SIC for 3-user NOMA transmission.}
\label{Fig3users}
\end{figure}
In downlink NOMA systems, SIC is carried out in user receivers for decoding. For ease of derivation, we assume that the multiplexed users in the frame are sorted in the descending order in terms of their instantaneous CQIs, which is defined as a scheduled user sequence,
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{S} = \Theta \left( {{\bf{S}}} \right) = \left\langle {c_1,c_2, \ldots ,c_{S}} \right\rangle ,
\end{equation}
\noindent where
\begin{equation}
{\Phi _{c_n}} \ge {\Phi _{c_{n + 1}}},\quad n = 1, \ldots ,{S} - 1,
\end{equation}
\noindent and $\Theta \left(\cdot \right)$ is the operator for descending sorting of the user indices in terms of their CQIs.
The $n$-th user in $\mathbb{S} $ decodes and cancels successively the interference signals of user $c_{n + 1} \sim c_{{S}}$ in reverse order by using SIC~\cite{VTC2013}.
\par
In Fig.~\ref{Fig3users}, we present an example of the reception and decoding process in the 3-user NOMA system. User 1 has the highest CQI thus needs to firstly decode and cancel the interference signal of the other two users. Then, it decodes its own signal. User 2 carries out SIC to eliminate the interference signal of user 3 and regards the signal of user 1 as noise. No SIC is necessary at user 3 for decoding its signal.
\par
The post-processing SINR of a scheduled user $c_{n}$ after SIC is calculated as
\begin{equation}\label{eqpostSINR}
{\gamma _{{c_n}}} = \left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}
{{\Phi _{{c_n}}}{\lambda _{{c_n}}},} & {n = 1,} \\
\displaystyle{\frac{{{\Phi _{{c_n}}}{\lambda _{{c_n}}}}}{{{\Phi _{{c_n}}}\sum\limits_{m = 1}^{n - 1} {{\lambda _{{c_m}}}} + 1}},} & {n = 2, \ldots ,S.} \\
\end{array}} \right.
\end{equation}
\noindent For implementation of SIC, a user with better channel quality has to be informed of the modulation and coding schemes and the power ratios allocated to the users that have lower CQIs. If $S$ is large, the signalling cost and processing complexity at user terminals become very high. Therefore, $S$ is not larger than a predefined limitation $S_{max}$ in practice. Particularly, we have $S_{max}=1$ in OMA systems.
\par
\section{Optimal PFS in Ideal NOMA Systems}
In this section, we derive a closed-form solution of the optimal PA in the ideal NOMA system, where $S_{max} = \infty$. Without the limitation on the number of multiplexed users $S$, this solution results in an upper bound of PFS performance. In order to select the corresponding multiplexed users, we design a low-complexity algorithm in the next step according to our derivation.
\par
\subsection{Derivation of the Optimal PA Solution}
We define the cumulative power ratio (CPR) allocated to the first $n$ users in the sorted user sequence $\mathbb{S}$ as
\begin{equation}
{\alpha _n} = \sum\limits_{m = 1}^n {{\lambda _{c_m}}} ,\quad n = 1, \ldots ,{S}.
\end{equation}
\noindent Without loss of generality, we define ${\alpha _0} = 0$ for ease of expression in the following derivation. According to \eqref{eqratiocondition}, we have ${\alpha _{{S}}} = 1$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eqrelationshipalpha}
{\alpha _{n - 1}} < {\alpha _n},\quad n = 1, \ldots ,{S}.
\end{equation}
\par
With the above relationship, we define a sequence of CPRs in ascending order as
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{A} = \left\langle {{\alpha _0},{\alpha _1} \ldots ,{\alpha _S}} \right\rangle .
\end{equation}
\par
Then, the PFS metric in \eqref{eqw} can be rewritten as
\begin{equation}\label{eqw2}
\omega \left( \mathbb{S}, \mathbb{A}\right) = \sum\limits_{n = 1}^S {\frac{{{r_{{c_n}}}\left( \mathbb{A} \right)}}{{{R_{{c_n}}}}}} ,
\end{equation}
\noindent where ${{r_{c_n}}\left( {\mathbb{A}} \right)}$ is the instantaneous obtainable data rate of user $c_n$ and is calculated by the Shannon capacity. Hence, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eqrshannon}
{r_{{c_n}}}\left( {\mathbb{A}} \right) = {B}{\log _2}\left( {\frac{{1 + {\alpha _n}{\Phi _{{c_n}}}}}{{1 + {\alpha _{n - 1}}{\Phi _{{c_n}}}}}} \right),\quad n = 1, \ldots ,{S},
\end{equation}
\noindent where $B$ is the system bandwidth.
\par
Combining \eqref{eqw2} and \eqref{eqrshannon}, the PFS metric is calculated as
\begin{align}\label{eqPFfactor}
\omega \left( {{\mathbb{S}},{\mathbb{A}}} \right) =& {B}\sum\limits_{n = 1}^S {\left[ {{{\log }_2}\left( {1 + {\alpha _n}{\Phi _{{c_n}}}} \right) - {{\log }_2}\left( {1 + {\alpha _{n - 1}}{\Phi _{{c_n}}}} \right)} \right]} R_{{c_n}}^{ - 1} \notag\\
{\mathop = \limits^{\eqref{eqrelationshipalpha}} }& \frac{{{B}}}{{\ln 2}}\sum\limits_{n = 1}^S {\int_{{\alpha _{n - 1}}}^{{\alpha _n}} {\frac{{{\Phi _{{c_n}}}}}{{{R_{{c_n}}}\left( {1 + x {\Phi _{{c_n}}}} \right)}}d x } }.
\end{align}
We denote the smooth coefficient function (CF) in the integral part of \eqref{eqPFfactor} as
\begin{equation}\label{eqfunctionf}
{\pi_u}\left( x \right) = \frac{{{\Phi _u}}}{{{R_u}\left( {1 + x{\Phi _u}} \right)}},\quad x\in \left( {0,1} \right) .
\end{equation}
Substituting \eqref{eqfunctionf} into \eqref{eqPFfactor}, we deduce the maximum PFS metric as follows,
\begin{align}\label{eqwint}
\omega \left( {{\mathbb{S}},{\mathbb{A}}} \right) =& \frac{{{B}}}{{\ln 2}}\sum\limits_{n = 1}^S {\int_{{\alpha _{n - 1}}}^{{\alpha _n}} {{\pi_{{c_n}}}\left( x \right)d x } } \notag \\
\le& \frac{{{B}}}{{\ln 2}}\sum\limits_{n = 1}^S {\int_{{\alpha _{n - 1}}}^{{\alpha _n}} {\mathop {\max }\limits_{m = 1}^S {\pi_{{c_m}}}\left( x \right)d x } } \\
=& \frac{{{B}}}{{\ln 2}}\int_0^1 {\mathop {\max }\limits_{m = 1}^S {\pi_{{c_m}}}\left( x \right)d x } \notag\\
\le& \frac{{{B}}}{{\ln 2}}\int_0^1 {\mathop {\max }\limits_{u \in {\bf{U}} } {\pi_u}\left( x \right)d x } \notag
\end{align}
\noindent Thus, the maximum PFS metric is calculated as
\begin{equation}\label{eqmaxPFfactor}
{\omega^*}=\frac{{{B}}}{{\ln 2}}\int_0^1 {\mathop {\max }\limits_{u \in {{\bf{U}}}} {\pi_u}\left( x \right)d x }.
\end{equation}
\par
To express the selected user set for obtaining the maximum PFS metric, we define a user index selection function as
\begin{equation}\label{eqselecteduser}
l\left( x \right) = \mathop {\arg \max }\limits_{u \in {{\bf{U}}}} {\pi_u}\left( x \right).
\end{equation}
\noindent We denote the optimal scheduled user set as
\begin{equation}\label{eqselecteduserset}
{{\bf{ S}}^*} = \left\{ {l\left( x \right)\left| x \in \left( {0,1} \right) \right.} \right\}.
\end{equation}
\noindent The corresponding optimal scheduled user sequence is
\begin{equation}\label{eqoptimalusersequence}
\mathbb{S}^* = \Theta \left( {{{{\bf{ S}}}^*}} \right) = \langle {{ c^*_1},{ c^*_2}, \ldots ,{ c^*_{ S^*}}} \rangle,\quad {S^*} = \left| {\bf{S}}^* \right|.
\end{equation}
\par
We denote the optimal CPR sequence for maximizing the PFS metric as
\begin{equation}
{\mathbb{A}^*} = \left\langle {\alpha _0^{\rm{*}},\alpha _1^{\rm{*}}, \ldots ,\alpha _{{S^*}}^{\rm{*}}} \right\rangle,
\end{equation}
\noindent in which $\alpha^*_0$ is fixed to 0, and $\alpha^*_{S^*}$ is naturally 1. In order to solve ${\mathbb{A}^*}$, we utilize the theorem and corollaries presented as follows.
\par
Firstly, we consider the condition that ${\Phi _u} \ne {\Phi _v},\; \forall u,v \in {{\bf{U}}}$.
\par
\textbf{Theorem 1.}
\emph{For two users who have ${\Phi _u} > {\Phi _v},\; u,v \in {{\bf{U}}}$,}
\par
\begin{description}
\item[\emph{Case 1)}] \quad \emph{if they meet the condition:}
\begin{equation}\label{eqconditionalpha}
0 < \frac{{{\Phi _v}}}{{{\Phi _u}}} < \frac{{{R_v}}}{{{R_u}}} < \frac{{1 + \Phi _u^{ - 1}}}{{1 + \Phi _v^{ - 1}}} < 1,
\end{equation}
\emph{then it holds that}
\begin{equation
\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}
{{\pi _u}\left( x \right) = {\pi _v}\left( x \right),} & {x = {\theta _{u,v}},} \notag \\
{{\pi _u}\left( x \right) > {\pi _v}\left( x \right),} & {x \in \left( {0,{\theta _{u,v}}} \right),} \notag\\
{{\pi _u}\left( x \right) < {\pi _v}\left( x \right),} & {x \in \left( {{\theta _{u,v}},1} \right),} \notag\\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\emph{where}
\begin{equation}\label{eqalpha}
{\theta_{u,v}} = {\theta_{v,u}} = \frac{{{R_u}\Phi _u^{ - 1} - {R_v}\Phi _v^{ - 1}}}{{{R_v} - {R_u}}};
\end{equation}
\item[\emph{Case 2)}] \quad \emph{if they meet the condition:}
\begin{equation}
\frac{{{R_v}}}{{{R_u}}} \le \frac{{{\Phi _v}}}{{{\Phi _u}}},
\end{equation}
\emph{then it holds that}
\begin{equation}
{\pi_u}\left( x \right) < {\pi_v}\left( x \right),\quad x \in \left( {0,1} \right); \notag
\end{equation}
\item[\emph{Case 3)}] \quad \emph{if they meet the condition:}
\begin{equation}\label{eqconditiona3}
\frac{{{R_v}}}{{{R_u}}} \ge \frac{{1 + \Phi _u^{ - 1}}}{{1 + \Phi _v^{ - 1}}},
\end{equation}
\noindent\emph{ then it holds that}
\begin{equation}
{\pi_u}\left( x \right) > {\pi_v}\left( x \right),\quad x \in \left( {0,1} \right). \notag
\end{equation}
\end{description}
\par
The proof of Theorem 1 is given in Appendix~A. Based on this theorem, we deduce two corollaries as follows.
\par
\textbf{Corollary 1.}
\emph{In the optimal scheduled user sequence $\mathbb{S}^*$, it holds that}
\begin{align}\label{eqrelationships}
{{\pi _{c_n^*}}\left( x \right) > {\pi _{c_{n + 1}^*}}\left( x \right),} & \quad{x \in \left( {0,{\theta _{c_n^*,c_{n + 1}^*}}} \right),} \notag \\
{{\pi _{c_n^*}}\left( x \right) < {\pi _{c_{n + 1}^*}}\left( x \right),} &\quad{x \in \left( {{\theta _{c_n^*,c_{n + 1}^*}},1} \right),} \notag\\
n =1,2, \ldots ,&{S^*}-1. \notag
\end{align}
\par
\begin{Proof}
According to~\eqref{eqselecteduser}, \eqref{eqselecteduserset} and~\eqref{eqoptimalusersequence}, it is obvious that
\begin{equation}\label{eqC1proof}
\begin{aligned}
&\forall {c_n^*} \in \mathbb{S}^*,\quad \exists \, {y} \in \left( {0,1} \right), \\
{\rm{s.t.,}}\quad &{\pi _{c_n^*}}\left( y \right) > {\pi _{c_m^*}}\left( y \right),\quad m\ne n.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\noindent Due to this fact, every pair of scheduled users in $\mathbb{S}^*$ must meet condition \eqref{eqconditionalpha} in Case 1 of Theorem 1. Otherwise, one of them must has lower CF than the other as shown in Case 2 or 3 of Theorem 1 thus is not selected by \eqref{eqselecteduserset}. Therefore, according to Case 1 of Theorem 1, we have the CF relationships between two adjacent users in $ \mathbb{S}^*$ as shown in Corollary 1.
\end{Proof}
\par
\textbf{Corollary 2.}
\emph{In the optimal scheduled user sequence $\mathbb{S}^*$, it holds that}
\begin{equation}\label{eqCorollary2}
{\theta _{c_{n - 1}^*,c_n^*}} < {\theta _{c_n^*,c_{n + 1}^*}},\quad n = 2, \ldots ,{S^*} - 1.
\end{equation}
\begin{Proof}
According to Corollary 1, we have
\begin{align}
{{\pi _{c_n^*}}\left( x \right) < {\pi _{c_{n - 1}^*}}\left( x \right),} & \quad{x \in \left( {0,{\theta _{c_{n-1}^*,c_{n}^*}}} \right)},\label{eqrelationshipsC2proof1}\\
{{\pi _{c_n^*}}\left( x \right) < {\pi _{c_{n + 1}^*}}\left( x \right),} & \quad{x \in \left( {{\theta _{c_n^*,c_{n + 1}^*}},1} \right)},\label{eqrelationshipsC2proof2}\\
n =2, \ldots ,&{S^*}-1. \notag
\end{align}
Assuming that the $n$-th user in $\mathbb{S}^*$ leads to
\begin{equation}\label{C2proof}
{\theta _{c_{n - 1}^*,c_n^*}} \ge {\theta _{c_n^*,c_{n + 1}^*}},
\end{equation}
due to~\eqref{eqrelationshipsC2proof1} and~\eqref{eqrelationshipsC2proof2}, it is clear that
\begin{align}
&\nexists \, {y} \in \left( {0,1} \right), \notag \\
{\rm{s.t.,}}\quad &{\pi _{c_n^*}}\left( y \right) > {\pi _{c_m^*}}\left( y \right),\quad m \ne n. \notag
\end{align}
\noindent This conflicts with~\eqref{eqC1proof}. Therefore, user $c_n^*$ cannot be selected by~\eqref{eqselecteduserset} as a scheduled user in $\mathbb{S}^*$. Thus, assumption~\eqref{C2proof} is false and~\eqref{eqCorollary2} holds.
\end{Proof}
\par
By Corollary 1 and 2, formula~\eqref{eqselecteduser} can be expanded into
\begin{equation}\label{eqselectedusers2}
l\left( x \right) = \left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}
{c_1^*,} & {x \in \left( {0,{\theta _{c_1^*,c_2^*}}} \right),} \\
{c_n^*,} & \begin{array}{l}
x \in \left( {{\theta _{c_{n - 1}^*,c_n^*}},{\theta _{c_n^*,c_{n + 1}^*}}} \right) \\
{\rm{and}} \quad n = 2, \ldots ,{S^*} - 1, \\
\end{array} \\
{c_{{S^*}}^*,} & {x \in \left( {{\theta _{c_{{S^*} - 1}^*,c_{{S^*}}^*}},1} \right)} .\\
\end{array}} \right.
\end{equation}
\par
Thus, the maximum PFS metric is the integral of the multiple CFs that are maximum along $S^*$ adjacent regions in $x\in\left(0,1\right)$. We can calculate it as follows,
\begin{align}\label{eqoptimalweight}
{\omega^*} &= \frac{{{B}}}{{\ln 2}}\int_0^{{\theta _{c_1^*,c_2^*}}} {{\pi _{c_1^*}}\left( x \right)} dx \notag\\
&+ \frac{{{B}}}{{\ln 2}}\sum\limits_{n = 2}^{{S^*} - 1} {\int_{{\theta _{c_{n - 1}^*,c_n^*}}}^{{\theta _{c_n^*,c_{n + 1}^*}}} {{\pi _{c_n^*}}\left( x \right)} dx}\notag \\
&+ \frac{{{B}}}{{\ln 2}}\int_{{\theta _{c_{{S^*} - 1}^*,c_{{S^*}}^*}}}^1 {{\pi _{c_{{S^*}}^*}}\left( x \right)} dx.
\end{align}
\par
Comparing~\eqref{eqoptimalweight} to~\eqref{eqwint}, it is a clear fact that the optimal CPRs are
\begin{equation}\label{eqoptimalalpha}
\alpha _n^* = \theta_{ {c_n^*,c_{n + 1}^*} },\quad n = 1, \ldots ,{S^*} - 1.
\end{equation}
\par
So far, we have solved the optimal user sequence $\mathbb{S}^*$ and CPR sequence $\mathbb{A}^*$ for the maximum PFS metric, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eqoptimalwww}
{\omega^*} = \omega \left( \mathbb{S}^*,\mathbb{A}^* \right).
\end{equation}
\par
We considered the condition that ${\Phi _u} \ne {\Phi _v}$ in the analysis above. Although the possibility of ${\Phi _u} = {\Phi _v}$ is very low in realistic systems, we consider this special case in the following part for the sake of analysis completeness.
\par
\textbf{Theorem 2.} \emph{For two users who have ${\Phi _u}= {\Phi _v},\; u,v \in {{\bf{U}}}$,}
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{if ${R_v} < {R_u}$, then ${\pi_u}\left( x \right) < {\pi_v}\left( x \right)$;}
\item \emph{if ${R_v} > {R_u}$, then ${\pi_u}\left( x \right) > {\pi_v}\left( x \right)$;}
\item \emph{if ${R_v} = {R_u}$, then ${\pi_u}\left( x \right) = {\pi_v}\left( x \right)$.}
\end{enumerate}
\par
\begin{proof}
If ${\Phi _u}= {\Phi _v}$, we have
\begin{equation}
\frac{{{\pi _u}\left( x \right)}}{{{\pi _v}\left( x \right)}} = \frac{{{R_v}}}{{{R_u}}}.
\end{equation}
\noindent Thus, the three cases in Theorem 2 obviously hold.
\end{proof}
\par
According to Theorem 2, when two users have the same level of CQI, only one of them will be scheduled. Coincidentally, when they also have the identical averaged data rate, we can randomly select one of them for scheduling. This choice has no influence on maximizing the PFS metric in~\eqref{eqwint}. Thus, Theorem 2 indicates that the scheduled users in $\mathbb{S}^*$ must have mutually different CQIs.
\par
The optimal solution presented in~\eqref{eqoptimalwww} is based on the assumption that $S_{max} = \infty$. However, $S_{max}$ is normally a small number in practical NOMA systems as we discussed in Section II. Thus, the number of scheduled users, $S$, is limited by $S_{max}$, and it is possible that $S^*>S_{max} \ge S$. If so, the maximum PFS metric in~\eqref{eqoptimalwww} cannot be guaranteed with a small $S_{max}$. Therefore, the performance of the ideal NOMA system with $S_{max} = \infty$ is the upper bound for PFS in practice.
\par
\subsection{Algorithm for Optimal PFS}
Based on the analysis above, we design now a low-complexity algorithm to calculate $\mathbb{S}^*$ and $\mathbb{A}^*$ jointly in Algorithm~1. The computational complexity of Algorithm 1 is no more than $\left(U+1\right)U/2$ for user set selection, thus is much lower than $\left(2^U-1\right)$ in the full user set comparison method~\cite{ISWCS2012,IEICE2014}. Moreover, this algorithm has the advantage that it is unnecessary to sort the users in terms of their CQI before its execution. Therefore, the computational complexity can be further reduced.
\par
We present a 4-user example of their CF curves in Fig.~\ref{Schematic}. By using Algorithm~1, we obtain the optimal scheduled user sequence, $\mathbb{S}^* = \langle 3,\,2,\,1\rangle$, and corresponding CPRs, $\mathbb{A}^*=\langle 0,\,0.134,\,0.591,\,1\rangle$. The maximum PFS metric is the integral along the segments A-B-C-D. User 2 and 4 meet condition~\eqref{eqconditiona3} in Theorem 1. Therefore, user 4 has a lower CF than user 2 within $x\in\left(0,1\right)$ and must not be selected for the optimal solution.
\par
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
{\includegraphics[width=3.1in]{CF4.eps}}
\caption{A 4-user example of the CF curves.}
\label{Schematic}
\end{figure}
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{{\bf{Algorithm 1}} Optimal PFS in Ideal NOMA}
\label{alg:A}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE $c_1 = \mathop {\arg \max }\limits_{u \in {\bf{U}}} \pi_u\left( 0 \right),$
\STATE $ \mathbb{S}_1 = \langle {c_1}\rangle,$ $\quad \mathbb{A}_1 = \langle 0\rangle,$
\STATE ${{\bf{V}}_1} = \left\{ \left. u \right|\theta_{{c_1},u} \in \left( {0,1} \right),u \in \left( {\bf{U}}/c_1\right)\right\} ,$
\STATE $n=1.$
\WHILE {${{\bf{V}}_n} \ne \varnothing$}
\STATE ${c_{n + 1}} = \mathop {\arg \min }\limits_{u \in {{\bf{V}}_n}} \theta_{{c_n},u},$
\STATE $\mathbb{S}_{n+1} = \langle\mathbb{S}_n,c_{n + 1}\rangle,$ $\quad \mathbb{A}_{n+1} = \langle\mathbb{A}_n,\theta_{c_n,c_{n + 1}}\rangle,$
\STATE ${{\bf{V}}_{n + 1}} = \left\{ \left. u \right|\theta_{{c_{n+1},u}} \in \left( {0,1} \right),u \in \left( {{\bf{V}}_n}/c_{n+1}\right)\right\} ,$
\STATE $n= n+1.$
\ENDWHILE
\STATE $\mathbb{S}^* = \mathbb{S}_{n},$ $\quad \mathbb{A}^* = \langle\mathbb{A}_{n},1\rangle.$\\
\COMMENT {Note: If there are multiple maximums in line 1 or multiple minimums in line 6, the algorithm chooses the user with the smallest CQI, $\Phi_u$, due to Corollary 1. If multiple users have the same smallest CQI, it randomly chooses one of them due to Theorem 2.}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Performance Analysis of PFS}
In this part, we analyze the throughput performance of the optimal PA solution developed for ideal NOMA in the last section. The analytical solution of user data rate expectation is derived based on stochastic SINR modeling.
\par
\subsection{Expectation of User Data Rate}
Under the fluctuant radio channels, the CQI of a user is a random variable. We denote the cumulative distribution function (CDF) and probability distribution function (PDF) of CQI as
\begin{align}\label{eqCDFPDFCQI}
{F_{{\Phi _u}}}\left( \phi \right) =& {\rm{P}}\left\{ {{\Phi _u} < \phi } \right\},\\
{f_{{\Phi _u}}}\left( \phi \right) =& \frac{{\partial {F_{{\Phi _u}}}\left( \phi \right)}}{{\partial \phi }}, \quad \phi>0.
\end{align}
\par
Thus, the CF defined in~\eqref{eqfunctionf} is a random variable depending on $\Phi _u$, $R _u$ and $x$. We derive its conditional CDF as follows,
\begin{align}\label{eqCDFCF}
{F_{{\pi _u}}}\left( {g\left| x \right.} \right) =& {\rm{P}}\left\{ {{\pi _u}\left( x \right) < g} \right\} \\
=& {\rm{P}}\left\{ {\frac{{{\Phi _u}}}{{\left( {{\Phi _u}x + 1} \right){R_u}}} < g} \right\} \notag\\
=& {\rm{P}}\left\{ {{\Phi _u} < \frac{{g{R_u}}}{{1 - g{R_u}x}}} \right\} \notag\\
=& {F_{{\Phi _u}}}\left( {\frac{{g{R_u}}}{{1 - g{R_u}x}}} \right),\notag\\
g \in &\left( {0,\frac{1}{{x{R_u}}}} \right),\quad x\in\left(0,1\right). \notag
\end{align}
Consequently, the conditional PDF of the CQI is derived as
\begin{equation}\label{eqPDFCF}
{f_{{\pi_u}}}\left( {g \left| x \right.} \right) = {f_{{\Phi _u}}}\left( {\frac{{g{R_u}}}{{1 - g{R_u}x}}} \right)\frac{{{R_u}}}{{{{\left( {1 - g{R_u}x} \right)}^2}}}.
\end{equation}
\par
We denote the expectation of user data rate as
\begin{equation}\label{eqmeanrate}
{{\overline r}_u} = \mathbb{E}\left[ {{r_u}} \right],\quad u\in{\bf{U}}.
\end{equation}
Thus, the overall throughput is expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{}
{\overline r_\Sigma } = \sum\limits_{u \in {\bf{U}}} {{{\overline r}_u}}.
\end{equation}
\par
When $\tau\gg 1$, we have the approximation that
\begin{equation}\label{eqapproximationrate}
{{\overline r}_u} = \mathbb{E}\left[ {{R_u}} \right] \approx {R_u}
\end{equation}
\noindent This approximation is proved in Appendix~B. Thus, the expectation of the PFS metric approximately equals to 1, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eqwapproxi}
{{\overline \omega }_u} = \mathbb{E}\left[ {\frac{{{r_u}}}{{{R_u}}}} \right] \approx 1.
\end{equation}
\par
On the other hand, we can calculate ${{\overline \omega }_u}$ with~\eqref{eqCDFCF} and~\eqref{eqPDFCF} as follows,
\begin{align}\label{eqwapproxi2}
{{\overline \omega }_u} = & \int_0^1 {\int_0^{\frac{1}{{x{R_u}}}} {{f_{{\pi_u}}}\left( {g \left| x \right.} \right)\prod\limits_{v \in \left( {{\bf{U}}/u} \right)} {{F_{{\pi_v}}}\left( {g \left| x \right.} \right)} } \,g\,dg\,dx} \notag \\
\mathop \approx \limits^{\eqref{eqapproximationrate}} &\int_0^1 {\int_0^{\frac{1}{{x{{\overline r}_u}}}} {{f_{{\Phi _u}}}\left( {\frac{{g{{\overline r}_u}}}{{1 - g{{\overline r}_u}x}}} \right)\frac{{g{{\overline r}_u}}}{{{{\left( {1 - g{{\overline r}_u}x} \right)}^2}}}} } \notag\\
& \times \prod\limits_{v \in \left( {{\bf{U}}/u} \right)} {{F_{{\Phi _v}}}\left( {\frac{{g{{\overline r}_v}}}{{1 - g{{\overline r}_v}x}}} \right)\,dg\,dx} \notag \\
\mathop \approx \limits^{\eqref{eqwapproxi}}& 1,
\end{align}
\noindent which is the mean value of ${{\omega }_u}$ under the condition that user $u$ is selected by~\eqref{eqselecteduserset}. Assuming ergodicity of the radio channels, the expectation of user data rate ${\overline r}_u$ can be obtained by solving~\eqref{eqwapproxi2}.
\par
\subsection{Stochastic SINR Model}\label{SINRmodel}
In order to solve~\eqref{eqwapproxi2}, we use the stochastic SINR models in~\cite{SECON2015} to formulate ${F_{{\Phi _u}}}\left( \phi \right)$ and ${f_{{\Phi _u}}}\left( \phi \right)$ for multi-cell scenarios, which are presented as follows,
\begin{equation}\label{eqSINRCDFMIA}
{F_{{\Phi _u}}}\left( \phi \right) = 1 - \exp \left( { - \frac{{{\sigma _u}}}{{{{\hat p}_{u,b}}}}\phi } \right)\prod\limits_{i \in {{\bf{I}}_u}} {{{\left( {\frac{{{p_{u,i}}}}{{{{\hat p}_{u,b}}}}\phi + 1} \right)}^{ - 1}}},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eqSINRPDFMIA}
{f_{{\Phi _u}}}\left( \phi \right) = \left( {\frac{{{\sigma _u}}}{{{{\hat p}_{u,b}}}} + \sum\limits_{i \in {{\bf{I}}_u}} {\frac{{{p_{u,i}}}}{{{p_{u,i}}\phi + {{\hat p}_{u,b}}}}} } \right)\left[ {1 - {F_{{\Phi _u}}}\left( \phi \right)} \right],
\end{equation}
\noindent where
\begin{equation}\label{eqRSRP}
{{\hat p}_{u,b}} = \mathbb{E}\left[ {{{\hat P}_{u,b}}} \right] = {L_{u,b}}{p_T},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eqIRSRP}
{p_{u,i}} = \mathbb{E}\left[ {{P_{u,i}}} \right] = {L_{u,i}}{p_T},\quad i \in {{\bf{I}}_u}.
\end{equation}
\par
In cellular networks, a user terminal can measure the reference signal received powers (RSRPs) of its associated BS and relatively strong inter-cell interferers nearby~\cite{3GPP36214}. It reports periodically the RSRP of BS $b$ and at most $I_{max}$ largest inter-cell interfering RSRPs (IRSRPs) in ${{{{\bf{I}}}_u}}$. The BS set including the $I_{max}$ reported interferers is denoted as ${{{{\bf{I}}}'_u}}\subseteq{{{{\bf{I}}}_u}}$. Hence, the reported RSRPs can be used to estimate ${{\hat p}_{u,b}}$ and ${p_{u,i}},\;i\in{\bf{I'}}_u$. Particularly, in the single-cell scenario, we have ${\bf{I}}'_u={\bf{I}}_u=\varnothing$.
\par
We denote the sum power of the unreported weaker inter-cell interference signals and additive noise as
\begin{equation}\label{eqasnoise}
{{p}'_{u,\sigma }} = \sum\limits_{i \in \left( {{{\bf{I}}_u} - {{{\bf{I}}}'_u}} \right)} {{p_{u,i}}} + {\sigma _u},
\end{equation}
\noindent which can be calculated according to the difference between the total received reference signal power and the sum of the reported RSRPs~\cite{SECON2015}. This part is regarded as additive noise without fluctuation in the estimated SINR model.
\par
With the estimated parameters, i.e., ${{\hat p}_{u,b}}$, ${{p}'_{u,\sigma }}$ and ${p_{u,i}}$, $i\in{\bf{I'}}_u$, we can calculate the CDF and PDF of user CQI as follows,
\begin{equation}\label{eqSINRCDFMIAaprox}
{F_{\Phi {'_u}}}\left( \phi \right) = 1 - \exp \left( { - \frac{{{{p}'_{u,\sigma }}}}{{{{\hat p}_{u,b}}}}\phi } \right)\prod\limits_{i \in {\bf{I}}{'_u}} {{{\left( {\frac{{{p_{u,i}}}}{{{{\hat p}_{u,b}}}}\phi + 1} \right)}^{ - 1}}},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eqSINRPDFMIAaprox}
{f_{\Phi {'_u}}}\left( \phi \right) = \left( {\frac{{{{p}'_{u,\sigma }}}}{{{{\hat p}_{u,b}}}} + \sum\limits_{i \in {\bf{I}}{'_u}} {\frac{{{p_{u,i}}}}{{{p_{u,i}}\phi + {{\hat p}_{u,b}}}}} } \right)\left[ {1 - {F_{\Phi {'_u}}}\left( \phi \right)} \right].
\end{equation}
\par
When all the IRSRPs are accessible and reported, the estimated SINR model is identical with that in~\eqref{eqSINRCDFMIA}, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eqCDFrelation1}
{F_{{{\Phi '}_u}}}\left( \phi \right) = {F_{{{\Phi}_u}}}\left( \phi \right), \quad {{\bf{I}}^\prime }_u = {{\bf{I}}_u}.
\end{equation}
\noindent However, in reality, many weak interference signals cannot be identified by user terminals. Moreover, for the sake of less signalling overhead, $I_{max}$ is a limited number no larger than 8 according to~\cite{3GPP36331}. Therefore, we have the relationship as follows,
\begin{equation}\label{eqCDFrelation2}
{F_{{{\Phi '}_u}}}\left( \phi \right) > {F_{{{\Phi}_u}}}\left( \phi \right), \quad {{\bf{I}}^\prime }_u \subset {{\bf{I}}_u}.
\end{equation}
\noindent This means when partial IRSRPs are obtainable, the estimated CDF of user CQI in~\eqref{eqSINRCDFMIAaprox} is larger than the actual one, i.e., the estimated CQI is smaller. The proof of~\eqref{eqCDFrelation2} is presented in Appendix~C.
\par
Substituting~\eqref{eqSINRCDFMIAaprox} and~\eqref{eqSINRPDFMIAaprox} into~\eqref{eqwapproxi2}, we have the equations of the estimated user data rate, denoted as ${\overline r}'_u$. The closed-form solution of ${\overline r}'_u$ is intractable, we can nevertheless calculate the results by numerical methods~\cite{JIEA1992}. Thus, the overall throughput is calculated as
\begin{equation}\label{}
{\overline r'_\Sigma } = \sum\limits_{u \in {\bf{U}}} {{{\overline r'}_u}}.
\end{equation}
\noindent Although this analytical performance is the upper bound for PFS, it can be used as an estimation of user data rate and overall throughout in practical NOMA systems. In the following section, its estimation accuracy is evaluated by comparison with the simulation results.
\par
\section{Simulations and Numerical Results}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Simulation Parameters}\label{TableParameters}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|}
\hline {\textbf{Parameter}} & \textbf{Value} \\
\hline Inter site distance & 500 m \\
\hline Minimum link distance & 35 m \\
\hline Bandwidth & 10 MHz @ 2.0 GHz\\
\hline BS transmit power ($p_T$) & 46 dBm\\
\hline BS transmit antenna gain & 15 dBi \\
\hline Path loss & 128.1+37.6log($d$[km])\\
\hline Standard deviation of shadow fading & 8 dB\\
\hline Fast fading & Rayleigh model \\
\hline Noise power density& -174 dBm/Hz \\
\hline Noise figure & 5 dB \\
\hline Frame duration & 10 $ms$ \\
\hline Averaging window size ($\tau$)& 1000 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
In this section, the throughput performance of PFS in ideal and practical NOMA systems is evaluated by system-level simulations in Matlab. In practical NOMA systems with $S_{max} = 2$ and~$3$, the optimal multiplexed users and their assigned power are obtained by the tree searching-based user set selection scheme proposed in~\cite{ICC2016LF}. Then, the analytical performance of the upper bound is calculated and compared to the simulation results. The simulation parameters are configured according to~\cite{3GPP36839} and listed in Table~\ref{TableParameters}. A downlink cellular network with 37 cells is deployed in a hexagonal grid pattern. To avoid the edge effect, only the performance of the central cell is computed and other 36 BSs act as interferers. User terminals are uniformly randomly distributed in the cell. The long-term averaged user rates are initialized randomly, and we compute the statistic performance over 10,000 frames after 2,000 initial frames. The number of reported IRSRPs, i.e., $I_{max}$, is set to 8~\cite{3GPP36331}.
\par
\subsection{Throughput Performance of PFS}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfigure[Overall throughput]{
\label{TPOverall}
\includegraphics[width=3.1in]{TPOverall.eps}}
\subfigure[Cell-edge throughput]{
\label{TPCelledge}
\includegraphics[width=3.1in]{TPCelledge.eps}}
\caption{Simulation results of the throughput performance in NOMA and OMA systems.}
\label{FigTPperformance}
\end{figure}
The throughput performance of NOMA ($S_{max}>1$) and OMA ($S_{max} =1$) systems is presented in Fig.~\ref{FigTPperformance}. The cell-edge throughput shown in Fig.~\ref{TPCelledge} is defined as the mean rate of the lowest 5\% users. Compared to OMA, the NOMA system significantly improves the performance in terms of both spectrum efficiency and user fairness. The performance increases while there are more users in the cell, owing to the user diversity gain brought by PFS. Particularly, we have the ideal NOMA system with $S_{max} = \infty$. Consistent with our analysis in Section~III, it results in the highest throughput. The performance of PFS in practical NOMA ($S_{max}=2,\,3$) is extremely close to the upper bound, especially when there are fewer users. Due to this fact, it is feasible to use the analytical performance of the upper bound for data rate estimation in the practical system with a small $S_{max}$. In the following part, we investigate the relative deviation of the data rate estimation with various influence factors.
\par
\subsection{Number of Associated Users}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfigure[Estimated overall throughput]{
\label{errorTPusernumber}
\includegraphics[width=3.1in]{errorTPusernumber.eps}}
\subfigure[Estimated data rate per user]{
\label{errorCDFusernumber}
\includegraphics[width=3.1in]{errorCDFusernumber.eps}}
\caption{Relative deviation of the data rate estimation with different numbers of users.}
\label{Figerrorusernumber}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{errorTPusernumber}, we present the relative deviation of the estimated overall throughput, which is calculated as $\left( {{{\overline r'}_\Sigma } - {{\overline r}_\Sigma }} \right)/{\overline r_\Sigma }$. The analytical results are slightly lower than the simulation ones while $S_{max} = \infty$ due to the bias effect of the analytical SINR model with partial CQI information, which is explained in Section~\ref{SINRmodel}. The ideal NOMA system has the advantage that an arbitrary number of users can be multiplexed simultaneously. Therefore, its user diversity gain is higher than practical NOMA with a small $S_{max}$, especially when there are more users who have likely diverse CQIs. Nevertheless, the throughput estimation is very accurate even in the scenario with 25 users, where the relative deviation is lower than 0.005 for 3-user NOMA and is no more than 0.04 for 2-user NOMA.
\par
We calculate the relative deviation of the estimated data rate per user, i.e., $\left( {{{\overline r'}_u} - {{\overline r}_u}} \right)/{\overline r_u}$, and present its CDF in Fig.~\ref{errorCDFusernumber}. The estimated user date rates have extremely low deviations in the case that $S_{max} = \infty$, verifying our analytical result of the upper bound. The estimation results are very accurate when $S_{max} = 3$. This attributes to the smaller performance gap between the ideal and practical NOMA systems with $S_{max} = 3$, as shown in Fig.~\ref{FigTPperformance}. However, even when $S_{max}=2$, the estimation accuracy is very favorable for performance prediction. For instance, when there are 25 users, more than 97.5\% statistical relative deviations are within the range of~$\pm 0.10$.
\par
\subsection{Partial Channel Information}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfigure[Estimated overall throughput]{
\label{errorTPReport}
\includegraphics[width=3.1in]{errorTPReport.eps}}
\subfigure[Estimated data rate per user]{
\label{errorCDFReport}
\includegraphics[width=3.1in]{errorCDFReport.eps}}
\caption{Relative deviation of the data rate estimation with different numbers of reported IRSRPs (25 users).}
\label{FigerrorReport}
\end{figure}
We investigate the influence of partial channel information on the estimation performance. The relative deviation of the estimated overall throughput with different numbers of reported IRSRPs is presented in Fig.~\ref{errorTPReport}. With fewer IRSRPs reported per user, the negative bias of the estimated SINR shown in~\eqref{eqCDFrelation2} becomes more evident. Thus, the estimated throughput is lower than the actual result when $I_{max}$ is small. The relative deviations are reduced within the range of $\pm 0.04 $ when $I_{max}\ge 1$, and barely change when $I_{max}>3$, indicating that the estimation of SINR distribution is accurate enough.
\par
We calculate the relative deviations of the estimated user data rates and their CDFs with different numbers of reported IRSRPs, as shown in Fig.~\ref{errorCDFReport}. When $I_{max} = 1$, the estimated user SINR distributions are inaccurate due to the lack of channel information. Thus, the relative deviations have large negative bias and wide extension. This inaccuracy drawback is remedied by increasing $I_{max}$ and becomes negligible in comparison with other influence factors (e.g., the number of users and $S_{max}$) when $I_{max}$ is larger than 4. As shown in Fig.~\ref{errorCDFReport}, the difference between the results with $I_{max} = 4$ and $8$ is less than 0.01. Therefore, it is reasonable to set $I_{max}$ to a smaller number than $8$ so that fewer IRSRPs are reported for the sake of reduction in signalling overhead.
\par
\subsection{Imperfect Channel Measurement}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfigure[Estimated overall throughput]{
\label{errorTPCSI}
\includegraphics[width=3.1in]{errorTPCSI.eps}}
\subfigure[Estimated data rate per user]{
\label{errorCDFCSI}
\includegraphics[width=3.1in]{errorCDFCSI.eps}}
\caption{Relative deviation of the data rate estimation with different CVs of the measured RSRPs (25 users, $I_{max} = 8$).}
\label{FigerrorCSI}
\end{figure}
We consider the estimation deviation caused by the imperfect measurements of RSRPs. Each reported RSRP is the mean value of multiple samples of the received reference signal power. Under the Rayleigh fading channel, the reported RSRP follows the Erlang distribution. We denote its coefficient of variation (CV) as $\varepsilon>0$ for imperfect measurement. In Fig.~\ref{FigerrorCSI}, we present the relative deviation of the data rate estimation with different CVs of the measured RSRPs. The estimated overall throughput is insensitive to the inaccuracy of the measured RSRPs. However, as shown in Fig.~\ref{errorCDFCSI}, the CDFs of relative deviation per user indicate that the imperfect measurements enlarge the deviation range of the estimated user data rates. When $\varepsilon = 0.10$, only $81.2\%$ and $85.0\%$ statistical relative deviations are within the range of~$\pm 0.10$ in the 2-user and 3-user NOMA systems, respectively. As $\varepsilon$ is reduced by half, these proportions rise to $95.2\%$ and $99.2\%$. Thus, in order to improve the data rate estimation performance, high-precision channel measurement is always desired.
\par
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper, we analyzed the throughput performance of PFS for downlink NOMA systems. We derived a closed-form solution of the optimal PA for PFS based on the assumption of an arbitrary number of multiplexed users. Based on this optimal solution, we designed a low-complexity algorithm for joint power allocation and user set selection. The throughput performance of this optimal PA solution is analyzed based on the stochastic SINR model and acts as the upper bound for PFS. The simulation results verified our analysis on the upper bound performance. The analytical results are very close to the actual performance in the 2-user and 3-user NOMA systems. The relative deviation of the estimated data rate keeps at a significantly low level even when user amount increases to 25. Therefore, it is very feasible and accurate to use our analytical results for data rate estimation in practical NOMA. Moreover, we investigated the impact of partial and imperfect channel information on the estimation performance. With more than 4 reported IRSRPs, the negative bias effect of the SINR model can be relieved. Hence, only partial channel information is necessary for ensuring the estimation accuracy so that the signalling overhead can be reduced considerably. The imperfect RSRP measurement has negligible influence on the estimated overall throughput but leads to a larger deviation of the estimated data rate per user. Thus, it is necessary to enhance the channel measurement accuracy in order to improve the estimation performance.
\par
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\appendices
\section{Proof of Theorem 1}
\begin{Proof}
Assuming ${\Phi _u} > {\Phi _v},u,v \in {\bf{U}}$, and letting ${\pi _u}\left( x \right) = {\pi _v}\left( x \right)$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eqAPtheta}
x = {\theta _{u,v}} = \frac{{{R_u}\Phi _u^{ - 1} - {R_v}\Phi _v^{ - 1}}}{{{R_v} - {R_u}}}.
\end{equation}
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Case 1}: If $0 < {\theta _{u,v}} < 1$, equally, we have
\begin{equation}
\left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}
{{\Phi _u} > {\Phi _v},} \notag \\
{0 < \frac{{{R_u}\Phi _u^{ - 1} - {R_v}\Phi _v^{ - 1}}}{{{R_v} - {R_u}}} < 1} . \notag\\
\end{array}} \right.
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eqAPthetarange}
\Leftrightarrow 0 < \frac{{{\Phi _v}}}{{{\Phi _u}}} < \frac{{{R_v}}}{{{R_u}}} < \frac{{1 + \Phi _u^{ - 1}}}{{1 + \Phi _v^{ - 1}}} < 1.
\end{equation}
Under this condition,
\begin{itemize}
\item when $x \in \left( {0,{\theta _{u,v}}} \right)$, it holds that
\begin{align}\label{}
&{\pi _u}\left( x \right) - {\pi _v}\left( x \right) \notag\\
& = \frac{{{R_v}\Phi _v^{ - 1} - {R_u}\Phi _u^{ - 1} - x\left( {{R_u} - {R_v}} \right)}}{{{R_u}{R_v}\left( {\Phi _u^{ - 1} + x} \right)\left( {\Phi _v^{ - 1} + x} \right)}} \notag\\
&\mathop > \limits^{\eqref{eqAPthetarange}} \frac{{{R_v}\Phi _v^{ - 1} - {R_u}\Phi _u^{ - 1} - {\theta _{u,v}}\left( {{R_u} - {R_v}} \right)}}{{{R_u}{R_v}\left( {\Phi _u^{ - 1} + x} \right)\left( {\Phi _v^{ - 1} + x} \right)}} \notag\\
& \mathop = \limits^{\eqref{eqAPtheta}} 0 ;\notag
\end{align}
\item when $x \in \left( {{\theta _{u,v}}},1 \right)$, on the contrary, it holds that
\end{itemize}
\begin{equation}\label{}
{\pi _u}\left( x \right) - {\pi _v}\left( x \right)<0. \notag
\end{equation}
\item \emph{Case 2}: If user $u$, $v$ have relationship as
\begin{equation}
\frac{{{R_v}}}{{{R_u}}} \le \frac{{{\Phi _v}}}{{{\Phi _u}}}, \notag
\end{equation}
then we have
\begin{equation}
\frac{{{\pi _u}\left( x \right)}}{{{\pi _v}\left( x \right)}} = \frac{{{\Phi _u}}}{{{\Phi _v}}}\frac{{{R_v}}}{{{R_u}}}\frac{{\left(1 + x{\Phi _v}\right)}}{{\left(1 + x{\Phi _u}\right)}} < 1. \notag
\end{equation}
\item \emph{Case 3}: If user $u$, $v$ have relationship as
\begin{equation}
\frac{{{R_v}}}{{{R_u}}} \ge \frac{{1 + \Phi _u^{ - 1}}}{{1 + \Phi _v^{ - 1}}}, \notag
\end{equation}
then we have
\begin{align}
&\frac{1}{{{\pi _u}\left( x \right)}} - \frac{1}{{{\pi _v}\left( x \right)}}\notag \\
= & \left( {1 + \Phi _u^{ - 1}} \right){R_u} - \left( {1 + \Phi _v^{ - 1}} \right){R_v} + \left( {1 - x} \right)\left( {{R_v} - {R_u}} \right) \notag\\
\le &\left( {1 - x} \right)\left( {\frac{{1 + \Phi _u^{ - 1}}}{{1 + \Phi _v^{ - 1}}} - 1} \right){R_u} \notag\\
<& 0 .\notag
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
So far, the three cases in Theorem 1 are proved completely.
\end{Proof}
\section{}
\begin{Proof}
According to the definition in \eqref{eqPFR}, the expectation of the long-term averaged data rate is expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{eqAPeR}
\mathbb{E}\left[ {{R_u}\left( {t + 1} \right)} \right] = \left( {1 - \frac{1}{\tau }} \right)\mathbb{E}\left[ {{R_u}\left( t \right)} \right] + \frac{1}{\tau }\mathbb{E}\left[ {{r_u}\left( t \right)} \right].
\end{equation}
\par
Assuming ergodicity for $R_u\left( t \right)$ for stable PFS, it holds that
\begin{equation}\label{eqAPRR}
\mathbb{E}\left[ {{R_u}\left( {t + 1} \right)} \right] = \mathbb{E}\left[ {{R_u}\left( t \right)} \right].
\end{equation}
\par
Substituting~\eqref{eqAPRR} into~\eqref{eqAPeR}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eqAPB3}
\mathbb{E}\left[ {{R_u}\left( t \right)} \right] = \mathbb{E}\left[ {{r_u}\left( t \right)} \right] = {{\overline r}_u}
\end{equation}
\par
When the averaging window size $\tau \gg 1$, we have the approximation as
\begin{equation}\label{eqAPB4}
\frac{1}{\tau ^{n}} \approx 0,\quad n \ge 2.
\end{equation}
\par
Considering again the ergodicity of $R_u\left( t \right)$, we assume that for a certain frame $t$ there exists
\begin{equation}\label{eqAPB5}
{R_u}\left( {{t} + N} \right) = {R_u}\left( {{t}} \right),
\end{equation}
\noindent which means that the status ${R_u}\left( {t} \right)$ repeats after a long enough period, i.e, $N$ frames after frame $t$. Then, we can deduce ${R_u}\left( {t} \right)$ as follows,
\begin{align}\label{eqAPB6}
&{R_u}\left( {{t} + N} \right) \notag\\
&= {\left( {1 - \frac{1}{\tau }} \right)^N}{R_u}\left( {{t}} \right) + \sum\limits_{n = 0}^{N - 1} {\frac{1}{\tau }{{\left( {1 - \frac{1}{\tau }} \right)}^{N-n-1}}{r_u}\left( {{t} + n} \right)} \notag\\
&\mathop \approx \limits^{\eqref{eqAPB4}} \left( {1 - \frac{N}{\tau }} \right){R_u}\left( {{t}} \right) + \sum\limits_{n = 0}^{N - 1} {\frac{1}{\tau }{r_u}\left( {{t} + n} \right)} ,
\end{align}
\begin{equation}\label{eqAPB7}
\mathop \Rightarrow \limits^{\eqref{eqAPB5}} {R_u}\left( {{t}} \right) \approx \frac{1}{N}\sum\limits_{n = 0}^{N - 1} {{r_u}\left( {{t} + n} \right)} \approx {{\overline r}_u}.
\end{equation}
\par
Combining~\eqref{eqAPB3} and~\eqref{eqAPB7}, it is proved that
\begin{equation}\label{eqAPB8}
{R_u}\left( t \right) \approx \mathbb{E}\left[ {{R_u}\left( t \right)} \right] = {{\overline r}_u} ,\quad \forall t.
\end{equation}
\end{Proof}
\section{}
\begin{Proof}
Considering the property that
\begin{equation}\label{eqC1}
e^x > 1 + x,\quad x > 0,
\end{equation}
\noindent the relationship in~\eqref{eqCDFrelation2} can be proved as follows,
\begin{align}
{F_{\Phi {'_u}}}\left( \phi \right) &= 1 - \exp \left( { -\phi \frac{{{{p}'_{u,\sigma }}}}{{{{\hat p}_{u,b}}}} } \right)\prod\limits_{i \in {\bf{I}}{'_u}} {{{\left( {\frac{{{p_{u,i}}}}{{{{\hat p}_{u,b}}}}\phi + 1} \right)}^{ - 1}}} \notag \\
&= 1 - \exp \left( { - \phi \frac{{{\sigma _u}}}{{{{\hat p}_{u,b}}}}} \right)\frac{{{\prod \limits_{i \in {{{\bf{I'}}}_u}}}{{\left( {{p_{u,i}}\hat p_{u,b}^{ - 1}\phi + 1} \right)}^{ - 1}}}}{{{\prod \limits_{i \in \left( {{{\bf{I}}_u} - {{{\bf{I'}}}_u}} \right)}}{\exp \left( {{p_{u,i}}\hat p_{u,b}^{ - 1}\phi } \right)}}} \notag \\
& \mathop > \limits^{\eqref{eqC1}} 1 - \exp \left( { - \phi \frac{{{\sigma _u}}}{{{{\hat p}_{u,b}}}}} \right)\frac{{{\prod \limits_{i \in {{{\bf{I'}}}_u}}}{{{\left( {{p_{u,i}}\hat p_{u,b}^{ - 1}\phi + 1} \right)}}^{ - 1}}}}{{{\prod \limits_{i \in \left( {{{\bf{I}}_u} - {{{\bf{I'}}}_u}} \right)}}{\left( {{p_{u,i}}\hat p_{u,b}^{ - 1}\phi + 1} \right)}}} \notag \\
&= {F_{{\Phi _{u}}}}\left( \phi \right). \notag
\end{align}
\end{Proof}
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The authors would like to thank Prof. Petri~M\"{a}h\"{o}nen for the fruitful discussion and his constructive feedback on this work.
\par
|
\section{Introduction}
The Internet offers a staggering variety of virtual communities for the intrepid wanderer to explore.
Faced with this abundance of options, a user may have fleeting relationships with some communities, choosing to allocate only a small proportion of her time to each \cite{tan_all_2015}.
Alternatively, a user may commit to forming a more steadfast relationship with one particular community, establishing her loyalty to that group by consistently preferring it above all others.
While there is a rich literature studying various flavors of user-to-user relationships within individual communities \cite{mckenna_causes_1999,fiore_observed_2002,arguello_talk_2006,danescu-niculescu-mizil_mark_2011,ellis_equality_2016},
less focus has been directed at understanding relationships that exist between {\em users} and {\em communities}
Loyalty is a fundamental example of such a relationship.
In multi-community platforms like Reddit, users have no shortage of alternative communities to peruse \cite{tan_all_2015,hessel_science_2016}, so understanding why a user chooses to be loyal to one community and not to others is a central problem.
Characterizing these loyal relationships in terms of the traits of their two components---users and communities---can
offer insights into how community identity arises online \cite{cassell_language_2005,nguyen_language_2011}, and also guide community maintainers towards fostering better user involvement, with their most faithful users in mind.
Loyalty is fundamentally about the preferences and commitments of active, engaged users, and while there has been considerable effort spent studying how to attract and retain new users \cite{karnstedt_churn_2010,dror_churn_2012} or improve user engagement \cite{arguello_talk_2006,backstrom_characterizing_2013}, there is comparatively little understanding of how already-active users choose to allot their time between communities \cite{tan_all_2015}.
In particular, loyalty
can
only exist within the context of multi-community dynamics:
unlike the well-studied issue of
user churn or retention, which is usually defined in terms of a single, isolated community \cite{dror_churn_2012,danescu-niculescu-mizil_no_2013}, understanding loyalty requires examining user preferences in the context of multiple communities
\xhdr{Present work}
Our aim is to provide a thorough characterization of user loyalty in the
multi-community platform, Reddit.
To this end, we develop a measure of loyalty in terms of user preference and commitment; loyal users prefer one community above all others and maintain this preference for a substantial period of time.
Applying this measure to Reddit, we characterize loyal {\em users}, as well as {\em communities} that foster user loyalty.
The large-scale, multi-community nature of Reddit, where users can peruse thousands of
communities, makes it an ideal setting to study
loyal behavior.
We reveal behavioral traits that systematically distinguish loyal users across a diverse set of communities, and show that loyal communities share similar structural features. Together these observations provide a cross-community characterization of loyalty that lends a new perspective on user-community dynamics.
First, we characterize loyalty at the community level.
We show that topics that reflect strong external interests, like sports and videogames, tend to engender high rates of loyalty in communities.
Moreover, we show that
beyond topical characterizations, there are structural, social network features that distinguish highly loyal communities.
We find that loyal communities tend to have denser user-user interaction networks, even after controlling for community-wide activity levels.
The interaction networks of loyal communities are also less clustered and contain more bridging ties connecting active and inactive users.
Overall, our results suggest that loyalty is conducive to, and thrives in, communities that are more inclusive and cohesive.
Second we find that, at the individual-level, loyal users exhibit many characteristic behavioral patterns that generalize across communities.
For example, loyal users tend to comment on less popular
and more esoteric
posts, and do so using language that signals collective identity.
These features are even exhibited in the very first contributions a user makes to a community, suggesting that certain users are already loyal from the very beginning.
The fact that (future) loyalty can be detected in users' first contributions also shows that the features we uncover are {\em predictive} of loyalty and not simply the result of users having repeated interactions with the community.
We exploit this observation in the task of predicting which users will eventually become loyal, a task of practical importance to community maintainers.
\section{Related Work}
Research on loyalty and associated concepts spans a wide-variety of disciplines, including sociology \cite{connor_sociology_2007}, social psychology \cite{van_vugt_social_2004}, and marketing \cite{chaudhuri_chain_2001}.
\xhdr{Theories and studies of loyalty}
In social psychology, phenomena related to loyalty pertain to social identity theory and its counterparts \cite{tajfel_social_2010}, which address the interface between social identity and overt manifestations of loyal behavior \cite{zdaniuk_group_2001,van_vugt_social_2004}.
One area in which loyalty has received considerable direct attention is marketing, where the notion of brand loyalty plays a central role \cite{tucker_development_1964,jacoby_brand_1971,day_two-dimensional_1976,chaudhuri_chain_2001}.
Unlike work in the previously mentioned areas, marketing specialists have spent considerable effort on quantifying objective measures of loyalty in a data-driven manner (\citeauthor{jacoby_brand_1971} \citeyear{jacoby_brand_1971}; \citeauthor{day_two-dimensional_1976} \citeyear{day_two-dimensional_1976}; {\em inter alia}).
Brand loyalty has been measured in numerous ways, but almost all approaches somehow quantify the extent to a which customer repeatedly purchases one brand
over its competitors; see Jacoby and Chestnut \shortcite{jacoby_brand_1978} and Odin et al \shortcite{odin_conceptual_2001} for comprehensive surveys.
Our operationalization of loyalty draws inspiration from such characterizations.
\xhdr{Loyalty in online communities}
Within the study of online communities there has been little direct work on loyalty.
Notable exceptions are Sharara et al \shortcite{sharara_understanding_2011}, who develop a measure of loyalty for dynamic affiliation networks, and Newell et al \shortcite{newell_user_2016}, who investigate platform-level loyalty through a case-study of a large-scale user migration event.
We substantially extend these works by uncovering common, predictive traits that are indicative of both user- and community-level loyalty.
There are numerous works exploring the related phenomenon of user retention or churn in online communities \cite{arguello_talk_2006,karnstedt_churn_2010,dror_churn_2012,ngonmang_churn_2012,oentaryo_collective_2012,danescu-niculescu-mizil_no_2013}.
However, predicting user churn is fundamentally distinct from the more nuanced concept of loyalty, which emphasizes the preferences and commitments of active users in a {\em multi-community} environment.
The concept of loyalty can also be viewed as a specific form of user engagement \cite{lampe2010motivations,zhang2017typology}.
Unlike previous work on user engagement---which often focuses on characterizing and steering short-term engagement within a single community \cite{rashid_motivating_2006,anderson2013steering}---our analysis of loyalty focuses on longer-term participation and explicitly addresses user preferences within a large-scale, multi-community setting.
In other words, instead of modeling {\em how much} a user engages with a single community, we model {\em the proportion} of activity that an individual user chooses to allocate to that community, above others.
Our work is also closely related to studies of socialization, acculturation, and sociolinguistics in online communities \cite{cassell_language_2005,danescu-niculescu-mizil_mark_2011,nguyen_language_2011,danescu-niculescu-mizil_no_2013}.
None of these works have directly studied loyalty per se, but a number of the user-community dynamics uncovered in these are relevant here.
In particular, these studies have revealed important stylistic changes in user writing---such as a decreased use of
first person pronouns over time---as users become more ``socialized'' in a community.
We uncover similar stylistic markers of loyalty in the present work.
\section{Operationalizing Loyalty}\label{sec:defining-loyalty}
We start by conceptualizing user-community loyalty at a high level, motivated by prior work in marketing and social psychology. We then describe how we operationalize a measure of loyalty in Reddit, the multi-community platform studied in this paper.
\subsection{Motivating a definition of loyalty}
\label{sub:motivating_a_definition_of_loyalty}
We define loyalty as a combination of {\em preference} and {\em commitment}.
Loyal users exhibit a clear preference for one community and sustain this preference over time.
Various formal and intuitive definitions of loyalty exist \cite{fletcher_loyalty:_1995}.
However, for the task of quantifying loyalty in a multi-community setting, our approach---which combines both preference and commitment---has a number of benefits.
For example, we could simply define users as loyal if they make consistent contributions to a community over time; however, this approach is confounded by baseline differences in activity levels and would improperly assume that all highly active users are also loyal.
Another alternative would be to define users as loyal if they comment substantially more in one community compared to others, ignoring temporal considerations; however, such a time-agnostic approach could be easily confounded by transient fads.
In our definition, we measure the relative extent to which users prefer one community over others, disentangling the notion of user-community loyalty from baseline rates of user engagement, and we require that this preference is sustained over time, ensuring that we measure actual commitment and not just transient interest.
Lastly, while some notions of loyalty permit individuals to be loyal to multiple groups at the same time \cite{fletcher_loyalty:_1995}, we choose to study an exclusive variant where users can be loyal to at most one community at a point in time.
This choice has both theoretical and practical motivations.
From a theoretical perspective,
we want to know which community a user is most attached to (not a set of communities they interact with), since this primary community is likely to more strongly influence the user's online (Reddit) identity, as well as how they interact with other communities \cite{hewstone_intergroup_2002,tajfel_social_2010}.
From a practical perspective, allowing users to be loyal to multiple communities would also introduce unnecessary complications, requiring various activity-based thresholds to determine which communities are included in this ``loyal set''.
Opting for an exclusive variant of loyalty simplifies our analyses by focusing them on
the strongest user-community relationships.
That said, definitions of loyalty that allow users to be loyal to multiple groups, along with other reasonable variations, could prove useful for certain applications, and exploring this space is an interesting direction for future work.
\subsection{Operationalizing loyalty on Reddit}
\label{sub:defining_loyalty_on_reddit}
We perform our analysis on a dataset of posts and comments from Reddit, a popular website where users form topical discussion-based communities (called subreddits).
Users can submit \emph{posts} to a subreddit, consisting of a post title along with urls, images, and/or explanatory text; users can also \emph{comment} on existing posts and reply to each others' comments in a thread-based interface. Posts and comments also receive scores, or votes, that serve as a form of community feedback.
Reddit contains thousands of active communities that are constantly changing, with new user-defined communities arising daily \cite{tan_all_2015}.
The large number of possible communities to explore makes Reddit an ideal dataset for studying loyalty.
A loyal Reddit user must decide to consistently allot time to a particular community, despite an ample availability of often closely related alternatives \cite{hessel_science_2016}.
Our full dataset consists of all comments and posts made to Reddit in
2014: approximately $10^{8}$ comments made by $10^{7}$ users in $10^{4}$ communities.\footnote{\url{https://archive.org/details/2015_reddit_comments_corpus}. For computational simplicity, we discard the long-tail of inactive communities that have less than 250 users per month.}
The following subsections describe the subsets we use in different parts of our analysis.
\xhdr{Loyal users}
We define user loyalty on Reddit based on commenting behavior, which we view as a strong proxy for latent engagement.
To focus our attention on loyalty instead of platform-level retention, all of the following definitions are restricted to users who commented at least 10 times within the relevant time period.
Additionally, we only consider {\em top-level comments} that are initial responses to a post.
Top-level comments more clearly
demonstrate a user’s evaluative choice to comment in a particular community compared to lower-level comments, which may result from the social obligation to maintain a conversation.
We say that a user $X$ {\em prefers} a community $A$ in month $t$ if at least 50\% of the comments that $X$ submits across Reddit in $t$ are to $A$. $X$ is then {\em loyal} to $A$ at $t$ if $X$ prefers $A$ at both $t$ and $t+1$ (i.e., exhibits commitment). We use monthly time windows, following common practice in studies of user engagement and churn (\citeauthor{oentaryo_collective_2012} \citeyear{oentaryo_collective_2012}; \citeauthor{danescu-niculescu-mizil_no_2013} \citeyear{danescu-niculescu-mizil_no_2013}; {\em inter alia}).
Note that this definition is specific to a particular month, so a user is loyal at a particular point in time $t$ and her loyalty can shift over time.
For simplicity, we use the phrase ``loyal users'' to refer to the set of users who were loyal to a community at some point in time, and when examining the behavior of a loyal user, we only use data from the time-period in which she was loyal.
To provide a reference point for the behavior of loyal users, we contrast loyal users with {\em vagrant} users who fleetingly interact with a community before wandering off.
We define a {\em vagrant} of $A$ as a user who comments between 1 and 3 times in $A$ at $t$, and, while still active on Reddit at time $t+1$, does not contribute to $A$ in $t+1$.
This definition of vagrant users ensures that we are comparing loyal users to other active Reddit users who interacted with community $A$.
In order to have enough statistical power for within-community analyses, we restrict our user-level studies to communities with at least 25 loyal and 25 vagrant users per month.
This results in $242$ communities covering a diverse range of populations and topics, from videogame communities like {/r/starcraft} to religious communities like {/r/Catholicism}.
In total our analysis set contains 177,593 loyal users and 1,989,530 vagrants, with the median community containing 353 and 3,046 of each category, respectively.
Across all communities in each month, these loyal and vagrant users contribute about 10\% each of all of the comments made to a community.
\xhdr{Loyal communities}
\newcommand{loyalty-rate}{loyalty-rate}
\newcommand{non-loyal}{non-loyal}
As a natural extension of our user-level definition, we say a {\em community} is loyal if it tends to retain a high proportion of loyal users month after month.
We focus on success at retaining loyal users, rather than counts of loyal users at particular points in time, in order to minimize confounds due to differences in community sizes and popularities.
We compute a {\em loyalty-rate} for each community $A$ as the expected proportion of users who prefer\footnote{To achieve sufficient statistical power, in community-level experiments we only require that users comment in $A$ more than any other community that month, without the 50\% threshold used in the user-level experiments.
Analogous trends hold without this relaxation but do not reach the same significance levels.} $A$ at $t$ and sustain this preference at $t+1$.
Users who prefer $A$ at $t$ and then leave Reddit altogether are ignored, since we seek to model inter-community loyalty and not platform-level churn.
By focusing on month-to-month dynamics and ignoring longer time-scales, this definition makes a Markov-esque assumption regarding user behavior.
Nonetheless, we generally find that in communities with higher loyalty rates, individual loyal users also tend to stay for more months in total, indicating that these monthly transition rates do signal longer-term commitment (Spearman's $\rho=0.53, p<10^{-10}$, comparing loyalty rates with the average tenure of loyal users).
We analyze all communities with at least 25 loyal users in one month, resulting in 1440 communities (with a median loyalty rate of $60.7\%$).
For the purpose of this study, we denote \emph{loyal communities}, as the top-25\% of this distribution and \emph{non-loyal} communities as the bottom-25\%.
\section{User-level Loyalty}\label{sec:individuals}
We have shown that certain types of communities tend to foster loyal behavior and that loyal communities exhibit characteristic patterns in their user-user interaction networks.
In this section, we analyze loyalty at the level of individual users.
We show that loyalty manifests in remarkably consistent ways across a diverse range of communities and that these markers of individual-level loyalty are present even in users' very first contributions to a community.
To reason about our findings in a multi-community setting,
throughout this section we will say that an effect holds in a particular direction in $X$\% of subreddits, and report the $p$-value under a binomial test where positive and negative outcomes correspond to subreddits where the effect holds in that direction, or the opposite, respectively.
\subsection{Post selection}\label{sec:post_selection}
We study the posts that loyals and vagrants choose to comment on, as a proxy for understanding the {\em tastes} of each user type.
Across a wide range of communities, we find that loyal users tend to engage with less popular and more esoteric content.
To prevent a few very active commenters from dominating our analyses, we sample posts by randomly selecting $100$ loyals and vagrants per subreddit, then drawing one commented-on post per sampled user, referring to the resultant post collections as {\em loyal-} and {\em vagrant-selected} posts respectively.
\xhdr{Post popularity} First, we compare the quantity of community feedback given to posts that loyals and vagrants tend to select. We find that in {\em all} subreddits, loyals respond to lower-scoring posts than vagrants; while in 95\% of subreddits ($p < 10^{-9}$), vagrant-selected posts get more comments overall.
These results suggest that loyals inherently have interests beyond what is currently popular in a community, and may play the important role of surfacing new content that has not yet received community feedback.
One explanation for this effect is that because Reddit displays posts to users ranked by score, loyal users who are more active within a community inevitably navigate further down this ranking and engage with lower-scoring posts. However, we find that users who {\em eventually} become loyal tend to write even their {\em first} comment to a community on less popular posts, compared to vagrants, before any further activity (see also Section \ref{sec:future_classification}).
\xhdr{Content preference}
To explore this post selection process in more depth, we examine the {\em content} of posts that attract loyal and vagrant users.
We show that in addition to commenting on lower-scoring posts, loyal users also tend to prefer posts with more {\em esoteric} content.
We quantify a post's {\em esotericity} as follows: for a particular noun $\mathcal{N}$, we compute the inverse document frequency (IDF) of $\mathcal{N}$ over all of the posts in that month. The {\em esotericity} of a post $E$ is then the mean IDF of nouns in the post.\footnote{We ignore nouns that only occur once.}
We focus on nouns to ensure we measure post content as opposed to linguistic style.
Averaging $E$ across posts in our loyal- and vagrant-selected samples, we find that loyals tend to select more esoteric posts than vagrants in 71\% of subreddits ($p < 10^{-9}$).
Thus loyal users not only select lower-scoring posts, they also tend to comment on content that is more esoteric.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{comment_feats_new.png}
\caption{\textbf{Linguistic features of comments written by loyal and vagrant users.} Light bars indicate percentages of subreddits where a feature is exhibited more by loyal vs vagrant commenters; dark bars indicate the proportion of subreddits in which this effect is significant (Wilcoxon signed-rank test at the $p < 0.01$ level). \label{fig:comment_feats}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Linguistic style of comments}\label{sec:user_language}
Having compared how loyals and vagrants select posts to comment on, we now turn to understanding how their comments are written stylistically. To control for the effect of selecting different posts, we construct a dataset of pairs of comments which are responses to the same post, where one comment in the pair is written by a loyal and the other by a vagrant. The median subreddit contains 3065 such pairs.
We characterize loyal and vagrant comments in terms of linguistic features capturing a comment's lexical style. Motivated by studies of socialization and engagement in online communities \cite{cassell_language_2005,nguyen_language_2011,danescu-niculescu-mizil_no_2013} we explore features relating to comment length (verbosity), distribution of personal pronouns and affect words,
comparing how much each feature is exhibited by the loyal and vagrant comment in each pair.\footnote{We use pronoun and affect word counts from the standard LIWC lexicon \cite{tausczik_psychological_2010}.}
The full set of features is listed in Figure \ref{fig:comment_feats}.
We observe multiple stylistic markers of loyalty in the language of comments which manifest across subreddits, as seen in Figure \ref{fig:comment_feats}; strikingly, these effects emerge even after controlling for the choice of the post responded to. For instance, in 84\% of subreddits, loyals contribute more verbose comments.
We also note interesting contrasts in the personal pronouns that loyals and vagrants tend to use. After normalizing for length, we find that in 87\% of subreddits, comments authored by vagrants tend to contain more {\em I} pronouns, while loyal users tend to comment with more {\em you} pronouns and more {\em we} pronouns, in 85\% and 79\% of subreddits, respectively. Such preferences echo findings from sociolinguistics and could be attributed to loyal users more strongly identifying with the community \cite{chung2007psychological,sherblom1990organization}.
\subsection{Predicting loyalty from first contributions}\label{sec:future_classification}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{future_prediction_hist_100.png}
\caption{\textbf{Predicting loyalty from first contributions.} Histograms depict test accuracies per subreddit, and average accuracy, for predicting future loyalty given a small window of 3 comments at the start of a user's activity in a community. Shaded regions show bootstrapped 95\% confidence intervals around the mean.\label{fig:future-classification}}
\end{figure}
We now consider the prediction task of determining whether a user will become loyal to a community based on their first comments to that community.
The goal of this prediction task is demonstrate that loyalty can be inferred from a user's initial contributions to a community.
As features we use the score of the posts that the user comments on (Section \ref{sec:post_selection}) as well as the linguistic features defined in Section \ref{sec:user_language}, which we apply to both the text of the user's comments and the posts they reply to.
We balance between a positive class of users who become loyal within 2 months of arrival, and users who never become loyal beyond their initial activity. To focus on evaluating the predictive power of these small snapshots, we train one classifier {\em per community} on the initial $k=3$ comments of users who make their first contribution in January to June of 2014, and predict on users arriving to that community in July to October.
We average feature values over the comments by each user, and enforce that users in both classes must have at least $k$ comments.
We use random forest classifiers from the scikit-learn package \cite{pedregosa_scikit_2011} with ensembles of size 100, setting the minimum number of samples required to split a node to 10.
Several groups of features are significantly predictive of future loyalty in many subreddits (Figure \ref{fig:future-classification}). In particular, using all features, 86\% of subreddits have accuracies significantly above the random baseline (averaging 63.6\% accuracy). We note that the relatively strong performance of a classifier that just considers post score suggests that loyal users already seek out unpopular posts early in their lifespan. We also see that linguistic features can predict better than random in 58\% of subreddits (averaging 57.4\% accuracy). This indicates that in many communities, loyal users have intrinsic affinities for particular elements of linguistic style that manifest very early in their relationship with the community.
Importantly, all the above markers of loyalty are present in users' first few contributions, meaning that these markers are not simply explained by differences in activity levels. In fact, using these features we can still predict better than random in a majority of communities even when using only the first contribution (k=1).
\subsection{Generalizing across communities}\label{indivdual_classification}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{present_prediction_hist_100.png}
\caption{
\textbf{Generalizing across communities.}
Histograms depict cross-validation accuracies per subreddit, and average accuracy, in a leave-one-community-out setting classifying loyal and vagrant-authored comments. Shaded regions depict bootstrapped 95\% confidence intervals.\label{fig:user-classification}}
\end{figure}
We have seen a number of features that distinguish loyal users, and that loyalty can be detected from users first contributions to a community.
In this task, we investigate the degree to which these features of loyalty generalize across distinct communities.
To this end, we consider a {\em leave one community out} prediction setting,
where the task is determining whether a single comment was written by a vagrant or by a loyal, based on the same features and classifier set-up as in Section \ref{sec:future_classification}.
In this setting, for each cross-validation fold, we train random forest classifier on all but one community and then predict whether comments in the unseen community were made by loyal or vagrant users.
This setup thus explicitly tests how well the different features of loyalty generalize across communities.
We construct a balanced dataset by sampling an equal number (250) of loyal and vagrant comments from each of the subreddits considered above. In this section, we do not restrict to first contributions.
We observe that all features generalize well across the vast majority of communities (Figure \ref{fig:user-classification}). Notably, when using all features, 96\% of the subreddits have accuracies significantly above the random baseline ($p <.05$ by a binomial test) with an average accuracy of 66.1\% over all subreddits. This shows that there are consistent behavioral patterns among loyals, enabling us to infer signals of loyalty over many communities. In addition to these general features, there are also likely to be indicators of loyalty that are highly specific to particular communities. Understanding how these community-specific markers systematically vary across a multi-community space is an interesting avenue for future work \cite{zhang2017typology}.
\section{Community-level Loyalty}\label{sec:communities}
We begin by analyzing the types of communities that tend to foster high rates of loyalty.
We find that loyal communities exhibit consistent structural features in their user-user interaction networks, and that these structural features are predictive of loyalty,
across communities with vastly different topical interests.
\subsection{Basic features of loyal communities}
Loyal communities are significantly smaller than non-loyal\ communities ($p<10^{-5}$, U Test); the median loyal community is 39\% smaller than the median non-loyal\ one.
For example, many communities that are highly successful at retaining loyal users are small fan-fiction or role-playing communities, such as {/r/HarryPotterRP} or {/r/randomsuperpowers} (a community where users construct individualized superhero identities).
Loyal communities are also more active, where activity is measured as the average number of comments\footnote{All comments; not only top-level comments.} made per user ($p<10^{-5}$, U Test, $4.13\times$ increase).
However, loyal communities are not necessarily growing.
If we measure the logarithmic growth rate in subscriber counts\footnote{Subscribers see a subreddit's content on their home page.} for all communities, this value exhibits only a mild positive correlation with loyalty-rates (Spearman's $\rho=0.13, p<10^{-6}$).
The user-community relation of loyalty is also reflected in some basic properties of user-user interactions.
In particular, the dynamics of conversation threads in loyal communities are noticeably distinct: they tend to be longer ($p<10^{-7}$, U Test, $7.6\%$ median increase) while containing fewer unique contributors ($p<10^{-5}$, U Test, $2.5\%$ median decrease).
\subsection{Topics of loyal communities}\label{topical}
Certain topics, such as sports, tend to engender high rates of loyalty, while other topical categories do not contain many loyal communities.
Figure \ref{fig:categories} shows the distribution of loyalty-rates by topical category.\footnote{Note that this categorization is far from exhaustive; we obtained topic categories for 20\% of the communities in our dataset.}
Subreddits about sports (e.g., {/r/Cricket}) or specific sports teams (e.g., {/r/Browns}) are by far the most loyal.
``Default'' subreddits---topically broad communities, like {/r/pics}, that new users are automatically subscribed to---generally fail to retain loyal users, as do subreddits that are dedicated to sharing images (e.g., {/r/EarthPorn}).
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{categories.pdf}
\vspace{-20pt}
\caption{{\bf Loyalty rates by community category.} Most categories were scraped from /r/ListOfSubreddits, while the category labels containing ``*'' were generated by matching on subreddit names fitting the specified pattern. Note that ``*porn'' are image-sharing communities like {/r/EarthPorn}, not pornography; the ``nsfw'' category contains pornography and other explicit content. 99\% bootstrapped CIs are shown.}
\label{fig:categories}
\end{figure}
Together these results suggest that loyal communities tend to have specific, focused
interests, such as a favorite sports team.
In contrast, large topically-diffuse communities, like /r/news or /r/pics, generally fail to retain loyal users.
The existence of such consistently loyal topics suggests that external identity-based attachment (e.g., to a strong common interest, such as a sports team) may be an important driver of loyalty.
\subsection{Loyalty in interaction networks}\label{sec:networks}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{network_small.png}
\vspace{-15pt}
\caption{\textbf{Loyalty reflected in community interaction networks.} Networks of user interactions reveal how loyalty manifests at the collective, community level. \textbf{A}, Example loyal and unloyal networks built from interactions in March, 2014 in two war-related video game communities. \textbf{B-D}, Differences in network statistics for the empirical networks. \textbf{E}, Difference in activity inequality (measured using the Gini coefficient). \textbf{F-G}, Network statistics relative to a null configuration model baseline. Bootstrapped 99.9\% confidence intervals are shown.}
\label{fig:network}
\vspace{-10pt}
\end{figure*}
We find that loyalty is strongly reflected in the patterns of user-user interactions and that these structural markers are predictive of loyalty even after conditioning on a community's topical focus.
In particular, we show that loyal communities have denser interaction networks, less local clustering, and are less assortative by activity level, indicating that loyal communities tend to be more tight-knit and cohesive (i.e., less fragmentation into sub-groups).
For each community, we construct monthly interaction networks where users are connected if they comment in the same linear comment chain within three comments of each other (i.e., separated by at most two comments).\footnote{Networks and details available at: \url{http://snap.stanford.edu/data/web-RedditNetworks.html}. For computational reasons, we only consider users who made at least 50 comments in 2014 when constructing these networks (roughly the top-20\% of users).
We also replicated key results with direct-reply networks, where users are only connected if one user replied to the other's comment.}
We can reasonably assume that two users who comment in such proximity interacted with each other, or at least directly with the same material.
\xhdr{Analysis of the empirical networks}
Figure \ref{fig:network}.A-D shows two example networks along with some important statistics highlighting how loyalty is reflected in user-user interactions.
Note that the two communities in Figure \ref{fig:network}.A are both dedicated to particular video games, suggesting that differences in structural markers of loyalty exist between communities with similar topics (a point that we return to below).
Loyal networks have significantly higher edge density (Fig.\@ \ref{fig:network}.B), even after controlling for activity levels, meaning that the average user in a loyal community interacts with a greater number of other users.
To test differences in density while controlling for activity, we compare matched pairs of communities that are closest in their activity levels (i.e., have similar fractions of comments per user)
and discarded pairs that differ by more than one-tenth of a standard deviation.
In this activity-matched setting, we find a significant disparity in edge density between loyal and unloyal communities ($p<10^{-4}$, Wilcoxon Test).
We did not, however, find any significant difference in the average clustering coefficient for the empirical networks (Fig.\@ \ref{fig:network}.C).
The most salient signal in the empirical networks is a difference in activity assortativity (Fig.\@ \ref{fig:network}.D; $p < 10^{-5}$, U test).
In communities that foster loyalty, highly active users tend to engage with others who have a wide variety of activity levels, while in non-loyal communities users tend to comment near other users of similar activity levels.
Loyal communities also exhibit far higher rates of inequality in their activity levels, measured by the standard Gini coefficient (Fig. \ref{fig:network}.E, $p<10^{-7}$, U test).
Thus, loyal communities have skewed activity distributions, but they are still \emph{inclusive} in that their highly active ``leaders'' engage with the entire community.
\xhdr{Comparison with a null model}
The raw differences observed in the empirical networks highlight important ways in which loyalty is reflected in user-user interactions.
However, these raw contrasts alone do not reveal whether these differences are simply emergent properties of the underlying community structure (e.g., the degree distribution), or whether users in these communities are actually interacting with each other in fundamentally different ways.
Clustering coefficients, for example, are known to be correlated with node degree in real-world networks \cite{soffer2005network}.
Thus, we compare our networks to suitable null models to control for such confounds.
In particular, we address this issue by comparing the interaction networks to randomly generated networks that have the same degree distribution.
These random networks are generated by randomly rewiring edges while maintaining node degrees, with the number of rewiring iterations set at $10^{4}\times$ the edge count in the empirical network.
For each community, we compute statistics by taking the relative difference of the median monthly empirical statistic compared to the median monthly null statistic.
We find that after this control, communities that foster loyalty are significantly less clustered than non-loyal ones (Fig. \ref{fig:network}.F).
Thus, despite the fact that loyal communities have exceptionally dense interactions, they contain fewer closed triads than one would expect.
Closer inspection reveals that this result is primarily driven by large, sparsely-connected unloyal communities, like {/r/Games} or {/r/aww}. Such communities tend to have extremely high relative clustering, indicating that users in these communities tend to fragment into local clusters.
Interestingly, we also find that after comparing against a baseline random network, the significant difference in assortativity disappears:
loyal communities do not have significantly different assortativity levels compared to their random counterparts (Fig. \ref{fig:network}.G, $p=0.15$, U test).
This implies that users in loyal communities do not actually seek out dissimilar others; rather, they tend to interact with dissimilar others as a consequence of the community's underlying activity and their own activity.
\xhdr{Community structure versus topic}
A key question is how important these structural network features are, relative to community topic, in determining loyalty; it could be that communities that focus on loyal topics, like sports, also just happen to exhibit the structural features described above.
Since we have topical categorizations for only a small subset of communities (from /r/ListOfSubreddits), we lack the statistical power necessary to directly control for topic.
However, we can show that for an individual community the structure of its interaction network at particular point of time is predictive of its {\em future} loyalty, even after controlling for the community's current loyalty rate.
If the correlations between community structure and loyalty discussed above were simply the consequence of community topic, this predictive relationship would not exist (since the community's topic, or purpose, is assumed to be stable over time).
We operationalize this idea using a linear mixed model analysis \cite{mcculloch_generalized_2001}, where we regress a community's loyalty rate at time $t+1$ against its current loyalty rate at time $t$ and other relevant community-level features.
We use a mixed model with random intercepts per community to account for correlated errors and include fixed effects for each month to control for seasonality.
We run this analysis independently for the two key network features discussed above: network assortativity (raw values) and network clustering (relative to a random model).
This analysis shows that both network features are significant predictors ($p < 10^{-5}$, Holm-Bonferroni corrected Wald's Z-tests).
After controlling for current loyalty rates, a one
standard deviation decrease in relative clustering is associated with an absolute future loyalty rate increase of $1.6\%$, while an analogous decrease in assortativity is associated with a $2.6\%$ increase.
This means that changes in community structure predict---though not necessarily cause---changes in loyalty, which is strong evidence suggesting that community structure is related to loyalty, independent of topic.
\section{Discussion}
In this work we operationalized loyalty as a user-community relation.
By doing so, we were able to reveal how loyalty is reflected in the structural properties of user-user interactions and how it manifests in consistent user behaviors across a diverse range of communities.
We exploited this consistency to predict future user loyalty, using only static snapshots of user activity.
\xhdr{Implications for community maintenance}
Our results highlight the important role loyalty plays in community dynamics.
We found consistent behavioral differences between loyal and vagrant users, in terms of both content they generate and the content they engage with, and revealed that these differences emerge very early in a user's interaction with a community.
Community maintainers may want to convert vagrant users into loyal ones, but our results suggest that this will require carefully designed entry points; simply optimizing for content that engages loyal users will not convert vagrant users, since they are engaging with fundamentally distinct content.
More generally, this divide in user interests and engagement patterns suggests that maintainers may need to explicitly balance or optimize the distribution of content that appeals to core, loyal users, compared to content that is attractive to outsiders.
\xhdr{Limitations and future work}
One important limitation of our work is that we are not privy to individual-level motivations for why users join, and become loyal to, certain communities. In particular, we cannot completely account for the role of extrinsic factors such as reward systems that might contribute towards encouraging ostensibly loyal behavior. For example, we cannot fully disentangle the behavioral markers of loyalty from social dynamics related to the Q\&A-nature of many discussion boards. Even in communities that are not explicitly Q\&A-forums, novice users tend to ask for advice, while long-term users tend to provide it \cite{wang2016learning}; loyal behavior may be positively reinforced by the social capital gained from answering novices’ questions. A promising avenue for future work is to combine large-scale computational analyses with focused surveys of user motivation, in order to more comprehensively understand the psychological motivations behind loyal behavior.
Further work on a wider variety of platforms is also needed to fully understand the extent to which our results generalize beyond Reddit. Other platforms like Wikia and StackExchange also offer users the opportunity to engage with a variety of communities and possibly establish loyal relationships with some of them. Many such sites also have richer sets of platform-wide affordances such as reward and reputation mechanisms, and further analyses could explore the influence of these various mechanisms in driving and shaping the nature of loyalty.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors thank Lillian Lee, Tianze Shi, Skyler Seto, David Jurgens, and Vinod Prabhakaran for their helpful comments.
This research has been supported in part by a Discovery and Innovation Research Seed Award from the Office of the Vice Provost for Research at Cornell, NSF
CNS-1010921,
IIS-1149837, IIS-1514268
NIH BD2K,
ARO MURI, DARPA XDATA,
DARPA SIMPLEX, DARPA NGS2,
Stanford Data Science Initiative,
SAP Stanford Graduate Fellowship, NSERC PGS-D,
Boeing,
Lightspeed,
and Volkswagen.
\bibliographystyle{aaai}
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
Active galactic nuclei (AGN) are among the most energetic phenomena in the universe, powered by accretion of gas onto supermassive black holes in the centers of distant galaxies. The total energy output of an AGN is a fundamental quantity of significant interest. However, because they emit their substantial energy over the entire electromagnetic spectrum, quantifying the bolometric luminosity is a particularly expensive task in terms of telescope time and is fraught with many pitfalls \citep[for a discussion, see][]{Runnoe12a}. Fortunately, the spectral energy distributions \citep[SEDs, e.g.,][]{wilkes04} of AGN are roughly similar in shape and a bolometric correction, which sets the normalization of an average SED, will yield a reasonably accurate measure of the bolometric luminosity based on observations in a limited wavelength regime.
Recently, we presented bolometric corrections based on monochromatic luminosities in the optical/ultraviolet (UV), X-ray \citep{Runnoe12a}, and infrared \citep[IR,][]{Runnoe12b} based on the SED sample of \citet{Shang11}. These are appropriate for estimating bolometric luminosity in Type 1 objects, where the continuum and broad emission lines are evident in the object's spectrum. However, for Type 2 objects observed in the optical another approach is needed. In Type 2 objects, the optical/UV continuum from the AGN is hidden from view, which may be caused by an obscuring torus \citep[e.g.,][]{Antonucci93} or by material farther out in the host galaxy \citep[e.g.,][]{DiPompeo15a,Malkan98}. As a result, bolometric corrections which rely on the observation of an optical continuum luminosity are not indicative of the bolometric luminosity of the AGN. Instead, bolometric corrections in Type 2 objects are typically based on observations of the luminosity of the narrow emissions lines, which are thought to be emitted from gas at larger size scales and appear in the spectra of both Type 1 and 2 AGN.
The forbidden $[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]~\lambda5007$ line is the most common narrow-line bolometric luminosity indicator. The utility of this line lies in its strength and low contamination due to emission from photoionized gas in star forming regions (e.g., compared the $[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{ii}]~\lambda3727$ line). ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$-based bolometric corrections have been derived by many authors \citep[see][for a review]{Heckman14} and are widely used. The most commonly adopted ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric correction in the literature, derived by \citet{Heckman04}, is $\textrm{L}_\textrm{iso}/\textrm{L}_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]} = 3500$. This was derived for a sample of Type 1 sources using the observed (i.e. not extinction corrected) ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ luminosities. Bolometric luminosities were not measured for the sample, so they determined the ratio between the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ luminosity and the continuum at 5100~\AA, and then adopted the \citet{Marconi04} bolometric correction. \citet{Kauffmann09} suggest that the \citet{Heckman04} ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric correction should be adjusted for extinction in the narrow-line region (NLR). They argue that Seyfert galaxy NLRs suffer $1.5-2$~mag extinction based on the Balmer decrement \citep{Kewley06}, and thus the bolometric correction for extinction corrected ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ luminosity should be in the range $600-800$. \citet{LaMassa09} measure a bolometric correction of $\textrm{L}_\textrm{iso}/\textrm{L}_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]} = 700$ in a sample of Type 2 sources with ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ luminosities corrected for extinction based on the Balmer decrement and a Milky Way extinction curve. In this sample, bolometric luminosity was determined by comparing the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ to the mid-IR continuum luminosity and then adopting the bolometric correction determined from the clumpy torus models of \citet{Nenkova08}. Additionally, ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric corrections are luminosity dependent \citep{Netzer06}, and \citet{Netzer09} further demonstrates that they depend on the ionization state of the gas, which can be estimated by including a measure of the $[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{i}]~\lambda6363$ line. This adjustment is physically motivated, but in practice requires a wider wavelength range and brighter sources, since $[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{i}]$ is a weak line.
Notably, the strength of the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ emission line is not uniquely determined by the bolometric luminosity of an AGN. That is, at a given bolometric luminosity there is a spread in the strength of the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ line primarily due to what is known as ``Eigenvector 1" \citep[EV1,][]{Boroson92}. EV1 is an empirical description of the spectral properties of AGN, and ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ is a key player where the range of EV1 properties is often characterized by the anti-correlation between the equivalent widths (EW) of ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ and optical Fe~\textsc{ii}. The physical driver behind EV1 is not completely known, although the Eddington fraction ($\textrm{L}/\textrm{L}_{\textrm{Edd}}$) correlates strongly with EV1 indicators \citep[][but see also \citealt{Runnoe13b}]{Boroson02,Marziani96,Shen14}.
The goal of this work is to derive a new set of ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric corrections as an addition to the IR, optical, UV, and X-ray suite already in the literature for the \citet{Shang11} SEDs. This sample is unique because the optical-UV data were taken quasi-simultaneously, which permits the construction of some of the most reliable big blue bump shapes in the quasar literature and makes the sample ideal for this work. The main contributions of this work are to present ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric corrections based on measured bolometric luminosities (none of the works described above have measured $L_{\textrm{iso}}$) and to demonstrate their dependence on EV1. We describe the sample and data used for this work, including the details of the relevant spectral properties, in Section~\ref{sec:sample}. In Section~\ref{sec:analysis} we present the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric corrections and correct them for the effect of EV1. We compare our results to previous work in Section~\ref{sec:discussion} and summarize them in Section~\ref{sec:summary}.
We adopt a cosmology with $\textrm{H}_\textrm{0} = 70$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega_{\Lambda} = 0.7$, and $\Omega_{m} = 0.3$. Note that we also differentiate between the bolometric luminosity calculated under the assumption of isotropy $(L_{\textrm{iso}})$ and true bolometric luminosity ($L_{\textrm{bol}}$), which likely differ.
\section{THE SAMPLE}
\label{sec:sample}
For this work we used the SED atlas of optically bright Type~1 quasars from \citet{Shang11}. Out of the 85 objects in the catalog, 63 have complete wavelength coverage suitable for calculating bolometric luminosity. Of these, 53 (32 of which are radio loud and 21 of which are radio quiet) also have coverage of the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ doublet allowing the derivation of an ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric correction. The redshifts of this subset of objects span the range $0.0345<z<1.0002$.
The optical/UV data that facilitate this analysis were taken quasi-simultaneously with the {\it Hubble Space Telescope} and McDonald or Kitt Peak National Observatories. \citet{Shang11} applied two corrections to these data before incorporating them in the SEDs. The first was an extinction correction to remove the effects of dust in the Milky Way using the empirical mean extinction law of \citet{Cardelli89} and the dust maps of \citet{Schlegel98}. The optical/UV spectra can also be affected by contamination from the quasar host galaxy light. Because these are luminous quasars the contamination is typically weak, but a correction is still applied when extracting the spectra.
\citet{Runnoe12a} calculated the bolometric luminosities for the 63 objects that have complete wavelength coverage. The SEDs were integrated from \SI{1}{\micro\metre} to 8~keV to obtain $L_\textrm{{iso}}$, the bolometric luminosity derived under the assumption of isotropy. The gaps in the near-IR and extreme UV portions of the SEDs were handled by interpolating a log-log power-law spectrum between the data points on either side. The final bolometric luminosities for the 53 sources with ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ coverage are in the range log$(\textrm{L}_{\textrm{iso}}/\textrm{erg s}^{-1}) = 45.1-47.3$, with full details of the calculation given in \citet{Runnoe12a}. Uncertainties on the bolometric luminosities are potentially large, but difficult to quantify because they depend on the unobserved emission in the extreme UV. \citet{Runnoe12a} determined that the choice of model to interpolate over this region can introduce an uncertainty of 30\%, or 0.1303 when propagated into log$(\textrm{L}_{\textrm{iso}}/\textrm{erg s}^{-1})$, on average and we adopt this value.
The ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ luminosities and \RFeII\ were calculated based on the spectral decompositions from \citet{Tang12}. They used the IRAF package \citep{Kriss94} to perform a $\chi^2$
\include{table}
\noindent minimization that simultaneously fits all components in a model to the spectrum in the H$\beta$\ region. The model spectrum included a power law to characterize the quasar continuum emission, an optical Fe~\textsc{ii}\ template \citep{Boroson92}, and multiple Gaussians (to which no physical meaning is attributed) to characterize the emission lines. The narrow H$\beta$\ and ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ were represented by one Gaussian each, and an additional two were allotted to characterize the broad H$\beta$\ emission, which may be asymmetric.
The measured spectral properties were determined from the best-fitting model components of the spectral decomposition. The ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ luminosities were calculated from the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ fluxes listed in table~4 of \citet{Tang12} and are in the range log$(\textrm{L}_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}/\textrm{erg s}^{-1}) = 41.1 - 43.8$. These are not corrected for intrinsic reddening. In many cases we do have coverage of the H$\alpha$ and H$\beta$\ narrow emission lines that should allow us to measure the Balmer decrement and estimate reddening in the NLR. However, we find that the narrow Balmer lines are usually too blended or too weak to yield a confident estimate of the extinction. These are bright, blue quasars with strong Big Blue Bumps, so this it is unlikely that a large reddening correction is needed, but we revisit this issue and its implications in Section~\ref{sec:discussion}. The optical Fe~\textsc{ii}\ equivalent width, which goes into \RFeII$\equiv \textrm{EW}_{\textrm{Fe~\textsc{ii}}}/\textrm{EW}_{\textrm{H}\beta}$, was calculated from the best-fitting Fe~\textsc{ii}\ template between 4478 and 5640~\AA\ using the local continuum at 4861~\AA. The formal uncertainties on the spectral decomposition were determined by \citet{Tang12} and we propagate these into uncertainties on log$(\textrm{L}_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}/\textrm{erg s}^{-1})$ and \RFeII. The final measured properties for the sample are presented in Table~\ref{tab:prop}.
\section{DERIVING [O III] BOLOMETRIC CORRECTIONS}
\label{sec:analysis}
We determined several versions of the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric correction, which we describe in this section. Traditionally, bolometric corrections are characterized as $\textrm{$L_{\textrm{iso}}$}=A\,\textrm{$L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$}$, so we determined this correction first for comparison with values in the literature. This approach assumes that all SEDs are intrinsically the same shape and differ only by normalization. We later relaxed this assumption and explored bolometric corrections of the form $\textrm{log($L_{\textrm{iso}}$)}=B+C\,\textrm{log($L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$)}$, as a potential avenue to better describe the data. Finally, we also derived a bolometric correction that predicts the bolometric luminosity based on $L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ and \RFeII, thereby accounting for the fact that EV1 may introduce scatter into the relationship between $L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ and $L_{\textrm{iso}}$. We investigated the applicability of separate corrections for radio-loud and radio-quiet sources. However, the luminosity overlap was insufficient to characterize any differences or similarities, so we treated them together.
All fits in this paper were determined by analytic chi-squared minimization. An ordinary least squares Y on X fit was appropriate in this case because our goal was to predict bolometric luminosity rather than determine the best-fitting underlying relationship \citep{Isobe90}. Effectively, this means that only the uncertainties in bolometric luminosity entered into the fits because it was always the predicted quantity. As described in Section~\ref{sec:sample}, these are potentially substantial and not well characterized. \citet{Runnoe12a} determined that the interpolation over the gap in the extreme UV can introduce 30\% uncertainty on average, which we adopted as the uncertainty in $L_{\textrm{iso}}$. We note that in comparison, uncertainties in $L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ and \RFeII\ are negligible because the monochromatic fluxes are well known and the spectra have high signal-to-noise. Uncertainties on the fit parameters were taken to be the standard deviation of the distribution for each coefficient determined by bootstrap sampling the bolometric luminosities, and re-calculating the fit $10^5$ times. In all cases, we display equations for our best-fitting relationships with enough significant figures in order to reproduce the figures.
\subsection{Traditional bolometric corrections}
In keeping with convention, we found the ratio between $L_{\textrm{iso}}$\ and $L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ by fitting a line with slope unity through log($L_{\textrm{iso}}$) versus log($L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$). This fit yielded the bolometric correction
\begin{equation}
\textrm{log}\left(\frac{\textrm{L}_{\textrm{iso}}}{\textrm{erg~s}^{-1}}\right) = \textrm{log}\left(\frac{\textrm{L}_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}}{\textrm{erg~s}^{-1}}\right)+(3.532\pm 0.059),
\end{equation}
\noindent which is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:zerobc}. The histogram of residuals, shown in the bottom right panel of Figure~\ref{fig:zerobc}, has a median of $-0.07$~dex and standard deviation of 0.47~dex. We noted that the lower-luminosity objects tend to be scattered above the best-fitting line, whereas most of the higher-luminosity objects lie below the line. Visually, it is evident that this fit does not completely capture these data. Nevertheless, in linear space this can easily be compared to values in the literature:
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:zerobc}
{L_{\textrm{iso}}}/L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]} = 3400.
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale = .45]{lbol_vs_oiii_fitzero.eps}
\caption {{\it Top}: log($L_{\textrm{iso}}$) versus log($L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$). The red line represents a bolometric correction of the form $\textrm{$L_{\textrm{iso}}$} = A\,\textrm{$L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$}$ and dashed lines indicate the 95\% confidence intervals. Blue squares indicate radio-loud objects and open circles indicate radio-quiet objects. A characteristic error bar for the data points is shown in the top left. The uncertainty in $L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ is small compared to $L_{\textrm{iso}}$\ and is not used in the fit, so we do not show it. {\it Bottom left}: Residuals from the fit with a dashed line indicating where the predicted and observed bolometric luminosities are equal. There is a clear trend in the residuals as a function of luminosity. {\it Bottom right}: The distribution of the residuals derived from the scatter plot has a median of $-0.07$~dex and standard deviation $0.47$~dex. \label{fig:zerobc}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{An improved [O\,{\sc iii}] bolometric correction}
\citet{Nemmen10} showed, and \citet{Runnoe12a} confirmed, that bolometric corrections to the optical and UV continuum luminosities are better characterized by an expression with non-unity slope in logarithmic space. Motivated by the trend in the residuals seen in the bottom panel of Figure~\ref{fig:zerobc} and the knowledge that there is significant diversity in the shape of quasar SEDs \citep{Shang05}, we explored this possibility for ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$. We derived the bolometric correction:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn:nzerobc}
\nonumber \textrm{log}\left(\frac{\textrm{L}_{\textrm{iso}}}{\textrm{erg~s}^{-1}}\right) &=& (0.5617\pm 0.0978)\,\textrm{log}\left(\frac{\textrm{L}_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}}{\textrm{erg~s}^{-1}}\right) \\
&+&(22.186\pm 4.164),
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent shown in Figure~\ref{fig:nzerobc}. The measurements now appear evenly distributed around the best-fitting line and the residuals are more well-behaved. The distribution of residuals has median $0.02$~dex and standard deviation $0.39$~dex, a moderate improvement.
Visually, it appears that the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric correction may depend on radio loudness or luminosity. Specifically, in Figures~\ref{fig:zerobc} and \ref{fig:nzerobc}, the high-luminosity radio-loud and low-luminosity radio-quiet sources appear to follow trends with slightly different slopes. Because there are so few radio-loud and radio-quiet sources with similar luminosities, we were unable to determine whether there are differences due to radio loudness at a given luminosity. That is, we could not separate the effects of radio loudness from potential luminosity effects. Because there is no evidence that directly indicates radio-loud and radio-quiet sources should be treated differently and a luminosity dependence is expected from the literature \citep[e.g.,][]{Netzer06}, we chose to address the latter. We therefore explored the possibility that higher orders in log($L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$) might better predict log($L_{\textrm{iso}}$) by fitting the data with a function of the form $\textrm{log($L_{\textrm{iso}}$)}=B+C\,\textrm{log($L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$)}+D\,\textrm{log($L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$)}^2$. To balance the fact that a function with more free parameters will always perform better in a chi-squared test, we used the Bayesian Information Criterion \citep{Schwartz78} to compare the performance of this fit compared to the one in Equation~\ref{eqn:nzerobc}. We found that the improvement in the fit was not sufficient to warrant the addition of more free parameters, indicating that the data do not support the derivation of a luminosity-dependent bolometric correction. Taken together, this indicates that the bolometric correction in Equation~\ref{eqn:nzerobc} is the best narrow-line predictor of $L_{\textrm{iso}}$\ that we can derive for this sample.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale = .45]{lbol_vs_oiii.eps}
\caption {{\it Top}: log($L_{\textrm{iso}}$) versus log($L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$). The red line represents a bolometric correction of the form $L_{\textrm{iso}}$ = B + C $L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$ and dashed lines indicate the 95\% confidence intervals. Blue squares indicate radio-loud objects and open circles indicate radio-quiet objects. A characteristic error bar for the data points is shown in the top left. The uncertainty in $L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ is small compared to $L_{\textrm{iso}}$\ and is not used in the fit, so we do not show it. {\it Bottom left}: Residuals from the fit with a dashed line indicating where the predicted and observed bolometric luminosities are equal. There is a slight trend in the residuals as a function of luminosity. {\it Bottom right}: The distribution of the residuals derived from the scatter plot has a median of $0.02$~dex and standard deviation $0.39$~dex. \label{fig:nzerobc}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Accounting for the diversity of quasar spectra}
Because the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ line in quasar spectra is not solely determined by the source luminosity, we expected that we could improve our ability to predict $L_{\textrm{iso}}$\ by including some indication of an object's position along EV1. To explore this possibility, we looked at the residuals between the observed $L_{\textrm{iso}}$\ and those calculated from Equation~\ref{eqn:nzerobc} versus \RFeII, as shown in the left panels of Figure~\ref{fig:ev1resid}. The Spearman Rank correlation coefficient and associated probability of finding the observed distribution of points by chance are 0.259 and 0.061, respectively. This confirms that there is a weak but marginally significant correlation between the bolometric luminosity residuals and our EV1 indicator of choice, \RFeII. We calculated a new bolometric correction with ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ and \RFeII\ by applying a multiple linear regression model to both proxies. This gave:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn:ev1bc}
\nonumber \textrm{log}\left(\frac{L_{\textrm{iso}}}{\textrm{erg~s}^{-1}}\right) &=& (0.7144\pm 0.1170)\,\textrm{log}\left(\frac{L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}}{\textrm{erg~s}^{-1}}\right) \\
\nonumber &+& (0.4838 \pm 0.2007)\,\textrm{log}(R_{\textrm{Fe}\,\textsc{ii}}) \\
&+& (15.702\pm 4.975).
\end{eqnarray}
We found that the inclusion of the \RFeII\ term in predicting $L_{\textrm{iso}}$\ is significant at nearly the 3$\sigma$ level. In order to determine the effects of including \RFeII, we first revisited the residuals between log($L_{\textrm{iso}}$) and the luminosities predicted by Equation~\ref{eqn:ev1bc} versus \RFeII\ (right panels of Figure~\ref{fig:ev1resid}). The Spearman Rank correlation coefficient drops down to 0.005, and the probability of finding this distribution of points by chance is high at 0.970. The distribution of residuals has median 0.047~dex and standard deviation 0.36~dex.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{subfigure}[!b]{8cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{lbol_residuals_vs_RFeII_scatter.eps}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\begin{subfigure}[!b]{8cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{trend_disappeared_scatter.eps}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\begin{subfigure}[!b]{8cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{lbol_residuals_vs_RFeII_histogram.eps}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\begin{subfigure}[!b]{8cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{trend_disappeared_histogram.eps}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{{\it Left}: The residuals between the measured bolometric luminosity and the calculated values from Equation~\ref{eqn:nzerobc}. The top panel shows the residuals versus log(\RFeII) and the bottom panel shows their distribution. The trend in the bolometric luminosity residuals versus \RFeII\ has a Spearman Rank correlation coefficient of 0.259 and associated probability of 0.061. The distribution of luminosity residuals has median 0.02~dex and standard deviation 0.39~dex.
{\it Right}: Same as the left panels, but the bolometric luminosity residuals are calculated using Equation~\ref{eqn:ev1bc} and accounting for EV1. There is no longer a significant correlation with \RFeII\ and the distribution of residuals is centered near zero with reduced width. The distribution of residuals has median 0.047~dex and standard deviation 0.36~dex. Blue squares indicate radio-loud objects and open circles indicate radio-quiet objects. \label{fig:ev1resid}}
\end{figure*}
To further visualize the improvement associated with adopting the \RFeII\ correction, in Figure~\ref{fig:ev1bc} we show the measured $L_{\textrm{iso}}$\ values against the predicted luminosities from Equation~\ref{eqn:ev1bc}. The modest reduction in scatter is visually evident, as the data appear more centered around the one-to-one line.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{subfigure}[!b]{8cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{lbol_compare_oiii.eps}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\begin{subfigure}[!b]{8cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{lbol_compare__oiiiRFeII.eps}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{{\it Left}: The observed luminosities compared to those predicted based on ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ alone by Equation~\ref{eqn:nzerobc}. {\it Right}: The observed luminosities now compared to those predicted by Equation~\ref{eqn:ev1bc}, which accounts for EV1. The dashed lines in each panel show where the luminosities are equal. Including a term for \RFeII\ in order to account for EV1 improves the agreement with the measured luminosities. \label{fig:ev1bc}}
\end{figure*}
\section{DISCUSSION}
\label{sec:discussion}
We find good agreement between our bolometric correction described in Equation~\ref{eqn:zerobc} and those in the literature, which we show in Figure~\ref{fig:bccomp}. The agreement with the commonly used correction from \citet{Heckman04} is particularly good, but perhaps not surprising, as both corrections were measured for Type 1 sources with ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ luminosities uncorrected for extinction. Compared to the sample of \citet{Heckman04}, our SED sample has higher luminosity with substantial overlap ($41.1<\textrm{log($L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$/erg s}^{-1})< 43.8$ versus $40.1 <\textrm{log($L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$/erg s}^{-1})< 42.6$). The \citet{Heckman04} value is anchored to the \citet{Marconi04} bolometric correction to the optical continuum luminosity, rather than based on measured bolometric luminosities in their sample. The \citet{Marconi04} corrections are determined from a model SED that matches the \citet{elvis94} observed SEDs well in the optical/UV but is moderately weaker in X-rays. As we do, they exclude the reprocessed IR emission when integrating the SED so as not to double count photons, although they have a slightly higher upper limit of integration.
If the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ luminosity is attenuated due to dust, as some authors have suggested, these ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric corrections will need to be adjusted. There is evidence to suggest that Type 2 sources may suffer more dust extinction (by $1-2$~mag) than Type 1s \citep{Diamond-Stanic09}, but that the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ line can be corrected to within a factor of 3 for this effect \citep{Wild11}. Physically, the NLR is likely stratified and, depending on the density profile, there can be compact emitting regions that may be preferentially obscured by a dusty torus in Type 2 sources. An extinction correction appears to be necessary in Type 2 sources, and may be required independent of optical spectral classification (i.e. Type 1 versus Type 2) because dust extinction in the NLR would occur on large scales exterior to a dusty obscuring structure. If we were to assume, as \citet{Kauffmann09} do, that the Balmer decrements measured by \citet{Kewley06} for emission-line galaxies with AGN-like line ratios imply $1.5-2$~mag of extinction in the NLR, we would obtain smaller bolometric corrections consistent with \citet{LaMassa09}. While we do have H$\alpha$ coverage in many of our sources, the narrow lines are often not visually distinguishable and the spectral decomposition is not sufficiently detailed to characterize them accurately. Furthermore, since measuring the amount of extinction and recovering the intrinsic ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ luminosity includes many uncertainties in practice and so we do not apply any extinction corrections to the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ luminosity here.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale = .4]{all_fits_lbol_vs_oiii.eps}
\caption {log($L_{\textrm{iso}}$) versus log($L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$). The red line represents our best ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$-only correction from Equation~\ref{eqn:nzerobc}. The light gray shaded area represents the range of other bolometric corrections found in the literature of the form $\textrm{$L_{\textrm{iso}}$} = A \textrm{$L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$}$ for observed $L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$. With a value of 3400, our correction falls near the top of this range. Radio-loud points are displayed as blue squares and radio-quiet points are open circles. A characteristic error bar for the data points is shown in the top left. The uncertainty in $L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ is small compared to $L_{\textrm{iso}}$\ and is not used in the fit, so we do not show it. \label{fig:bccomp}}
\end{figure}
We can also compare our ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric corrections to the 1450~\AA\ and \SI{3}{\micro\metre} continuum corrections derived from this SED sample by \citet{Runnoe12a} and \citet{Runnoe12b}, respectively. The left column of Figure~\ref{fig:contcomp} shows this comparison for luminosities derived from our Equation~\ref{eqn:nzerobc}. For the UV, we include in the comparison 14 objects from the \citet{Shang11} atlas that were not used to determine the bolometric corrections because they did not have appropriate data coverage. The agreement is reasonably good, with scatter of 0.44 and 0.32 dex for the UV and IR, respectively. However, visual inspection shows a systematic trend between luminosities calculated from the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ and UV bolometric corrections. This is the effect of ignoring EV1. The right column of Figure~\ref{fig:contcomp} shows the comparison with luminosities derived from our Equation~\ref{eqn:ev1bc}; the scatter is reduced to 0.40 and 0.29~dex for the UV and IR, respectively, and the systematic trend is resolved.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{subfigure}[!b]{8cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{1450_optical_vs_oiii.eps}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\begin{subfigure}[!b]{8cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{1450_optical_vs_oiiiRFeII.eps}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\begin{subfigure}[!b]{8cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{infrared3_vs_oiii.eps}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\begin{subfigure}[!b]{8cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{infrared3_vs_oiiiRFeII.eps}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{{\it Left}: Comparison between the bolometric luminosities calculated from the quasar continuum emission at 1450~\AA\ \citep[top panel,][]{Runnoe12a} and \SI{3}{\micro\metre} \citep[bottom panel,][]{Runnoe12b} to those calculated from Equation~\ref{eqn:nzerobc}. The dashed line shows where the luminosities are equal and the open triangles indicate objects that were not used to derive the bolometric corrections. The scatter is 0.44 and 0.32~dex for the 1450~\AA\ and \SI{3}{\micro\metre} corrections, respectively. {\it Right}: Same as the left column, but compared to luminosities calculated from our Equation~\ref{eqn:ev1bc} and thus accounting for the EV1 contribution to ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$. The scatter is reduced compared to the left panel at 0.40 and 0.29~dex for the 1450~\AA\ and \SI{3}{\micro\metre} corrections, respectively. Additionally, the systematic trend that was apparent in the comparison with UV-based luminosities disappears. \label{fig:contcomp}}
\end{figure*}
The morphology of the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ emitting region is known to vary among AGN and will play a role in the applicability of ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric corrections. Because the size of the NLR as measured by ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ emission scales with the source luminosity \citep{Bennert02,Hainline13}, this suggests that the corrections derived here should be applied only to sources of similar luminosity. Indeed, ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric corrections are known to be luminosity dependent \citep{Netzer06,LaMassa10,Hainline13,Heckman14}, although the data in this work were insufficient to demonstrate this behavior. At low luminosity the NLR is smaller and a bigger fraction of the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ luminosity may be blocked by a dusty torus. Consistent with this idea, \citet{Kauffmann09} consider high and low-luminosity sources separately and identify a smaller bolometric correction ($300-600$ for extinction corrected ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$) for low-luminosity AGN. At very high luminosity the NLR becomes very large \citep[e.g.,][]{Hainline13,Zakamska16}. In these conditions, the NLR size-luminosity relationship flattens out \citep{Hainline13,Hainline14}, and the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ luminosities may become saturated as the AGN photoionizes the entire interstellar medium of the host galaxy \citep[e.g.,][]{Hainline13}.
The primary utility of ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric corrections is to determine the bolometric luminosity of Type 2 objects, so we must examine the assumption that Type 1 and Type 2 sources require the same bolometric correction. Bolometric luminosity is obscured in Type 2 sources and therefore cannot be measured, so the only possible approach here is to compare the SEDs of Type 1 and Type 2 sources in wavelength regions that are not prone to extinction (i.e. the radio, IR, and hard X-rays). As \citet{Heckman04} review in detail, no differences are found in these regimes based on optical spectral classification, suggesting that it is fair to apply bolometric corrections derived from Type 1 samples to Type 2 sources.
A further consideration relevant for the inclusion of an \RFeII\ term in an ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric correction is that the spectra of Type 2 sources lack the characteristic broad emission lines and non-stellar continuum of their Type 1 counterparts. This means that the \RFeII\ quantity cannot be measured in such sources because it is an equivalent width ratio between the broad H$\beta$\ and broad optical Fe~\textsc{ii}\ emission. An EV1 indicator that relies only on spectral features observed in Type 2 sources would certainly be very useful for this and similar applications and we sought to identify one. Our approach was to generate composite spectra binned by \RFeII\ and visually inspect them to look for optical narrow line ratios that tracked the broad-line EV1 proxy. We specifically targeted emission lines in the $3700-4700$~\AA\ range (e.g., [O\,{\sc ii}]~$\lambda\lambda$3726, 3729, [Ne\,{\sc iii}]~$\lambda\lambda$3869, 3967, [S\,{\sc ii}]~$\lambda$4072) that were likely to be covered along with the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ emission line in an optical spectrum and therefore useful for our bolometric corrections. Unfortunately, the composites did not reveal any strong trends with a dynamic range suitable for our purposes. The main issues are that, with the exception of ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$, the optical narrow lines in quasars are typically weak and difficult to measure reliably. In Type 1 sources, the very nature of EV1 works against us in identifying a narrow-line EV1 indicator because on one end of EV1 the broad Fe~\textsc{ii}\ emission is strong and the narrow lines are weak, making the measurements even more difficult. While there may be narrow-line ratios that scale with EV1, careful sample selection will be required to tease them out and it is unlikely that they will have the dynamic range needed to adjust ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric corrections. As a result of all this, while we have shown that EV1 introduces scatter into the $L_{\textrm{iso}}$\ versus $L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ relationship, the correction for this effect cannot be calculated in Type 2 objects and a systematic offset and increased scatter will be unavoidable. The best that can be done in these cases is to be aware of the effect and, luckily, the size of this effect is relatively modest.
\section{SUMMARY}
\label{sec:summary}
In this work we presented ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric corrections based on 53 optical bright, Type 1 quasars with $0.0345 < z < 1.0002$ and log$(\textrm{L}_{\textrm{iso}}/\textrm{erg s}^{-1}) = 45.1-47.3$, of which 32 are radio loud and 21 are radio quiet. These constitute an improvement to the existing suite of IR, optical, UV, and X-ray bolometric corrections derived from the \citet{Shang11} SEDs. We derived the following three corrections:
\begin{itemize}
\item A correction for comparison with the literature, equivalent to ${\textrm{L}_{\textrm{iso}}}/\textrm{L}_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]} = 3400$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\textrm{log}(L_{\textrm{iso}}) &=& \textrm{log}(L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]})+(3.532\pm 0.059).
\end{eqnarray}
\item An improved bolometric correction that reduces the offset in comparison to measured bolometric luminosities:
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber\textrm{log}(L_{\textrm{iso}}) &=& (0.5617\pm 0.0978)\,\textrm{log}(L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}) \\
&+&(22.186\pm 4.164).
\end{eqnarray}
\item A bolometric correction that accounts for the EV1 contribution to the ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ line:
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber \textrm{log}(L_{\textrm{iso}}) &=& (0.7144\pm 0.1170)\,\textrm{log}(L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}) \\
\nonumber &+& (0.4838 \pm 0.2007)\,\textrm{log}(R_{\textrm{Fe}\,\textsc{ii}}) \\
&+& (15.702\pm 4.975).
\end{eqnarray}
\end{itemize}
The main contributions of this work, compared to existing ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric corrections in the literature, are the use of measured bolometric luminosities and the derivation of the correction in Equation~\ref{eqn:nzerobc} (second in the list above), which we recommend for use on Type 2 objects. We additionally demonstrated the EV1 bias in ${[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$\ bolometric corrections, significant at nearly the $3\sigma$ level, which introduces scatter into the $L_{[\textrm{O}\,\textsc{iii}]}$--$L_{\textrm{iso}}$\ relationship. The size of the effect is as much as a factor of 3 in bolometric luminosity for extreme values of \RFeII\ (our chosen EV1 indicator), and correcting for it improves agreement with corrections derived at other wavelengths. We were unable to identify an optical EV1 indicator that can be measured in Type 2 sources, so this effect may only be acknowledged but not corrected at this time.
\section*{ACKNOWLEDGMENTS}
AP would like to thank Stephanie Brown for a careful reading of the manuscript and JCR acknowledges Mike Eracleous for comments on the manuscript and helpful discussions during the preparation of this work. The authors thank the anonymous referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and constructive comments.
\bibliographystyle{mnras}
|
\section{Acknowledgments}
The authors would like to express their gratitude to Prof. Gerrit E.W. Bauer and Dr. Joe Barker for valuable discussions and the Institute for Materials Research at Tohoku University for the hospitality during a visiting professor stay (MK).
Furthermore, they would like to thank Prof. Kathrin Dörr for the help in sample preparation.
This work was supported by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) SPP 1538 “Spin Caloric Transport,” the Graduate School of Excellence Materials Science in Mainz (MAINZ), and the EU projects (IFOX, NMP3-LA-2012246102, INSPIN FP7-ICT-2013-X 612759).
|
\section{Introduction}
Computational methods based on mathematical optimization have started gaining attention from breeding researchers,
since the optimization methods provide efficient approaches and give theoretical aspects for
the optimality of the obtained solutions.
For example, optimal selection problems that determine the contributions of genotypes
are studied for clonal seed orchards
and dairy cattle~\cite[etc]{bomosssoul1993optimal, hallander2009optimum, hinrichs2006algorithm, lindgren1989deployment, MEUWISSEN97, mullin2014opsel}.
A main objective in optimal selection problems is to attain the highest response from a genotype selection.
Lindgren et al.~\cite{lindgren1989deployment} proposed a linear deployment in which the genotype contributions
are basically proportional to their breeding values. This deployment was derived from a concept that the genotypes with
higher breeding values should appear more frequently than those with lower values.
An advantage of the linear deployment was the extremely low computation cost,
since it could be computed by a greedy algorithm.
However, the linear deployment worked well only when the pedigree situation was simple,
that is, the candidate genotypes were unrelated.
If the selected genotypes do not embrace enough diversity,
the response will critically diminish through inbreeding depression~\cite{charlesworth1987inbreeding, williams1996inbreeding}
due to accumulated kinship.
Meuwissen~\cite{MEUWISSEN97} introduced a quadratic constraint to control
a group coancestry under an appropriate level.
He developed the Lagrangian multiplier method to maximize the genetic response
with the quadratic constraints.
This method was implemented in a software package GENCONT~\cite{MEUWISSEN97},
and it has been widely accepted among breeding researchers. A serious drawback of the Lagrangian multiplier method is that
this method does not always generate optimal solutions.
In contrast, Pong-Wong et al.~\cite{PONG-WONG07} employed an SDP approach.
This approach is based on mathematical optimization, and
they demonstrated that this approach gave the optimal contributions exactly.
This approach was extended in~\cite{ahlinder2014using}, but their SDP approach required long computation time
even when they used parallel computing with the help of
SDPA (a high-performance solver for SDPs)~\cite{SDP-HANDBOOK, SDPA6}.
Recently, Yamashita et al.~\cite{yamashita2015efficient} proposed
an SOCP (second-order cone programming) approach
and successfully reduced the computation time of the SDP approach
attaining the same optimal solution.
The problems solved by the SDP approach~\cite{PONG-WONG07} and
the SOCP approach~\cite{yamashita2015efficient}
are unequal deployment (UD) problems of form
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lcl}
\max &:& \g^T \x \\
\mbox{subject to} &:& \x^T \A \x \le 2 \theta, \\
& & \e^T \x = 1, \\
& & \l \le \x \le \u.
\end{array} \label{eq:UD}
\end{eqnarray}
Throughout this paper, we use $Z$ to denote the number of candidate genotypes. In the UD problem, the variable is the vector $\x \in \Real^Z$, and $x_i$ indicates the contribution
of the $i$th genotype.
We use a superscript $T$ to denote the transpose of a vector or a matrix.
The cost vector $\g \in \Real^Z$ in the objective function is
the estimated breeding value (EBV)~\cite{LYNCH98}.
Since this vector is computed separately, we regard $\g$ as a constant vector.
The matrix $\A \in \Real^{Z \times Z}$ is the Wright numerator matrix~\cite{WRIGHT22}.
The elements of this matrix are given from the information of heredity diagram.
We should emphasize that the matrix $\A$ is always symmetric and positive definite.
Hence, with a given constant $\theta > 0$, the constraint
$\x^T \A \x \le 2 \theta$ is a convex constraint,
and this quadratic constraint ensures that the group coancestry $\frac{\x^T \A \x}{2}$ in the selected group
is kept under a permissible range $\theta$.
We use $\e \in \Real^n$ to denote the vector of all ones,
therefore, the constraint $\e^T \x = 1$ indicates that the total contribution of
all the candidates is unity.
In addition, the vectors $\l \in \Real^Z$ and $\u \in \Real^Z$ are the lower and upper bounds
of the variable $\x$, respectively.
The name an \textit{unequal} deployment indicates that
the contributions need not to be equal.
Since the variable $\x$ is a continuous variable and the constraints are linear or convex-quadratic,
the UD problem can be cast a type of SOCP problems, as pointed in \cite{yamashita2015efficient}.
Therefore, the UD problem can be solved in a polynomial time algorithm,
for example, interior-point methods for SOCP~\cite{ALIZADEH03, DOMAHIDI13, TSUCHIYA99}.
This paper is concerned with the special-case problem of \textit{equal} deployment (ED) form
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lclcl}
OPT_{ED} &:=& \max &:& \g^T \x \\
& & \mbox{subject to} &:& \x^T \A \x \le 2 \theta, \\
& & & & \e^T \x = 1, \\
& & & & \l \le \x \le \u, \\
& & & & x_1, \ldots, x_n \in \left\{0, \frac{1}{N}\right\}.
\end{array} \label{eq:ED}
\end{eqnarray}
We use $OPT_{ED}$ to denote the optimal value of this problem.
The crucial difference from the UD problem is that the ED problem has the binary constraints
$x_1, \ldots, x_n \in \left\{0, \frac{1}{N}\right\}$.
We choose exactly $N$ genotypes from $Z$ candidates, and the
selected $N$ genotypes must contribute their genes equally.
The ED problems fit breeding populations, where we consider
the selected genotypes should contribute with the same amount
and therefore we
require a fixed-size population.
Weng et al.~\cite{weng2012unequal} solved the ED problem
only with the linear constraints and the binary constraints using the ``Solver'' tool in Microsoft Excel. Meuwisen extended GENCONT to the ED problems incorporating some heuristic methods
so that GENCONT generated approximate solutions that satisfy the binary constraints.
The heuristic methods implemented in GENCONT
are partially discussed in \cite{woolliams2015genetic}.
From the viewpoint of mathematical optimization, the most difficult constraint
$\x^T \A \x \le 2 \theta$ is a quadratic convex constraint. An ED problem (\ref{eq:ED}) can thus be viewed as a mixed-integer second-order cone
programing (MI-SOCP) problem.
Many approaches have been explored to solve MI-SOCP efficiently.
Ben-tal and Nemirovski~\cite{ben2001polyhedral} proposed a polyhedral relaxation that approximates
a second-order cone with a polyhedron so that the resulting problem can be handled
with software packages for mixed-integer linear programming.
Drewes applied an outer approximation method and a branch-and-cut method~\cite{drewes2012subgradient}.
For other approaches, a survey paper due to
Benson and Saglam~\cite{benson2013mixed} is a good reference.
Theoretically speaking,
MI-SOCP is an SOCP problem with integer constraints, hence,
we can obtain an exact optimal solution if we rely on
the branch-and-bound framework.
However, we suffer from a long computation time if we pursue the exact solution.
For example, CPLEX can directly handle MI-SOCP problems, but fails to complete the computation of a small case $Z = 1050$ and $N = 50$
(it tried to choose $N = 50$ genotypes from $Z = 1050$ candidates) in one week.
Mullin and Belotti~\cite{mullin2016using} combined the outer approximation
method and the branch-and-bound method and reduced the computation time.
However, it also requires half a day for the small case $Z = 200$ to attain
the gap $0.5\%$, so it is still hard to say
that this approach is practical for larger instances $Z \ge 5000$.
To manage ED problems in a practical time, it is desirable that we find
a high-quality approximate solution instead of the exact solution.
In this paper, we propose an integration of conic relaxation approaches
and a steep-ascent method originally developed for discrete convex functions
to derive a suitable solution for practical usage in a reasonable computation time.
An epoch-making paper on conic relaxation approach was the application of SDP problem to the max-cut problems
by Goemans and Williamson~\cite{GOEMANS95}. They converted a feasible set of
the max-cut problems into the space of positive semidefinite matrices with the rank-one constraint on the matrix variable,
and they derived an SDP problem by ignoring this rank-one constraint. They showed that
a solution generated with a randomized algorithm from an optimal solution of the resulting SDP problem
gave very good approximation to the original max-cut problem.
Following this achievement, the SDP relaxation approach has widely been applied to combinatorial optimization problems,
see \cite{wolkowicz2012handbook} and the references therein.
Theoretical evaluation of the quality of the approximate solution were discussed in
\cite[etc]{he2008semidefinite, hsia2015improved, nesterov1998semidefinite, tseng2003further, ye1999approximating}.
Conic relaxation approaches are the relaxation approaches that employs linear programming (LP),
SOCP or SDP problems. A remarkable points of the three conic programming problems (LP, SOCP, and SDP)
is that they can be analyzed in the framework of Euclidean Jordan
algebras~\cite{faybusovich1997euclidean, schmieta2001associative}. Hence,
the resulting relaxation problems can be solved in polynomial time by interior-point methods~\cite{nesterov1994interior}
and many software packages are available~\cite{sturm1999using, TODD99, SDP-HANDBOOK}.
Kim and Kojima~\cite{kim2001second} reported a numerical evaluation on the relaxation approaches using LP, SOCP, and SDP for some quadratic optimization problems.
On the other hand, discrete convex optimization has another abundant research direction. We might consider that a convex function in continuous space is a discrete convex function if we restrict the variable space to the integer points, although this naive intuition is not appropriate because such a function does not always have useful properties of convex functions, and some deep combinatorial or discrete-mathematical considerations are needed for discrete convexity. In the theory of discrete convex analysis~\cite{murota2003discrete}, two convexity concepts, called L-convexity and M-convexity, play primary roles. L-convex functions and M-convex functions are convex functions with additional combinatorial properties distinguished by "L" and "M", which are conjugate to each other through a discrete version of the Legendre-Fenchel transformation. If a function is an M-convex function, a step-descent method proposed in~\cite{murota2004steepest} can find its global minimum.
In this paper, we first introduce conic relaxation problems for the ED problems,
and discuss the relations between the relaxation problems.
We analyze the theoretical bounds of the randomized algorithm starting from
the solution of the SDP relaxation problem.
However, when we numerically evaluate these bounds using tree-breeding datasets,
we learn that these bounds are not so sharp.
Instead of pursuing an exact solution by branch-and-bound frameworks
that impose heavy computation costs,
our focus is to acquire a favorable solution that is available in a practical
computation time.
To obtain such a solution,
we develop a steep-ascent method that employs the solution obtained from
the conic relaxation problems as a starting point.
The usual steep-descent method~\cite{murota2004steepest} minimizes an objective function
on a particular feasible set. Since the ED problem
is a maximization problem, we consider a steep-ascent method instead of
a steep-descent method.
We embed the quadratic constraint $\x^T \A \x \le 2 \theta$
into the objective function as a penalty term with a weight computed from
the Lagrange multiplier.
This new objective function is not an M-concave function,
therefore, we cannot guarantee that the solution obtained by
the steep-ascent method is a global solution of the ED problem.
However, through numerical experiments,
we observe that the steep-ascent method generates qualified solutions
for the ED problem.
In particular, the steep-ascent method starting with the SOCP relaxation problem
attains the best performance among the LP, SOCP, and SDP relaxation problems.
Actually, we verify from numerical experiments that
this approach performs better than existing methods like GENCONT in the viewpoints of both
solution quality and computation time.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows.
In Section~2, we introduce LP, SOCP, and SDP relaxation problems for the ED problems,
and we discuss the strength of these conic relaxations.
In Section~3, we analyze the approximation rate of the SDP relaxation
based on the work of Tseng~\cite{tseng2003further}.
Section~4 gives the details of the steep-ascent method
specialized for the ED problems.
In Section~5, we present numerical results to compare the conic relaxations
and to evaluate the solution acquired by the steep-ascent method.
We also compare this result with existing methods.
In Section~6, we will give a conclusion and discuss future directions.
\subsection{Notation}
We use $|S|$ to denote the cardinality of a set $S$.
The vector $\e_S$ is the vector of all ones of the lengths $|S|$.
In contrast, we denote by $\e_i$ the vector of all zeros except one in the $i$th position.
The symbol $\SMAT^n$ is used to denote the space of $n \times n$ symmetric matrices,
and $\X \succeq \O$ indicates that a symmetric matrix $\X$ is positive semidefinite.
The inner-product between $\A \in \SMAT^n$ and $\X \in \SMAT^n$
is defined by $\A \bullet \X := \sum_{i=1}^n \sum_{j=1}^n A_{ij} X_{ij}$.
The trace of a matrix $\A \in \SMAT^n$ is given by $\mbox{Trace}(\A) := \sum_{i=1}^n A_{ii}$. For a vector $\x \in \Real^n$, $\x \ge \0$ indicates the element-wise non-negativity of
$\x$, that is, $x_1, \ldots, x_n \ge 0$.
\section{Conic relaxations for equally deployment problems}
In this section, we first derive an SDP relaxation problem of an ED problem.
Then, by a further relaxation
of the positive semidefinite condition using a relaxation
technique proposed in \cite{kim2001second},
we obtain an LP relaxation problem.
Finally, we apply a continuous relaxation technique to the ED problem to obtain
an SOCP relaxation problem. The reason we employ a different relaxation approach
for only the SOCP relaxation is that we can exploit a structural sparsity
in the Wright numerator matrix $\A$.
A standard form of SDP problems can be given as follow:
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lcl}
\min &:& \C \bullet \X \\
\mbox{subject to} &:& \F_i \bullet \X = b_i \ (i=1,\ldots,m),\\
& & \X \succeq \O.
\end{array}\label{eq:SDP}
\end{eqnarray}
In this standard form, the variable matrix is $\X \in S^n$.
The input matrices in (\ref{eq:SDP}) are $\C, $ $\F_1, \ldots,\F_m \in \SMAT^n$,
while the vector $\b \in \Real^n$ is an input vector.
Shortly speaking, a standard SDP form
minimizes a linear objective function
over linear constraints and a positive semidefinite condition on $\X$.
As a first step to derive an SDP relaxation from the ED problem (\ref{eq:ED}),
we remove the variables that can be fixed from the box constraints.
More precisely, if $l_i > 0$, we fix $x_i = \frac{1}{N}$. Similarly, we fix $x_i = 0$
if $u_i < \frac{1}{N}$. We ignore the cases $l_i > \frac{1}{N}$,
$u_i < 0$ or $l_i > u_i$,
since we can immediately detect the infeasibility of the ED problem.
Then, we define two sets $F$ and $V$
so that the two sets separate the set $\{1, \ldots, Z\}$ disjointly
and $x_i$ is fixed to $c_i \in \left\{0,\frac{1}{N}\right\}$ for $i \in F$
while $x_i$ remains as a decision variable for $i \in V$.
Without loss of generality, we assume that $V = \{1, 2, \ldots, |V|\}$,
$F = \{ |V| + 1, |V| + 2, \ldots, Z\}$, and $g_1 \ge g_2 \ge \ldots \ge g_{|V|}$.
Along with these $V$ and $F$, we introduce the vectors $\x_V$ and $\c_F$
that divide $\x \in \Real^Z$ into the two parts
$\x = \left(\begin{array}{cc} \x_V \\ \c_F \end{array}\right)$.
We also divide the Wright numerator matrix $\A$ into the four parts;
$\A = \left(\begin{array}{cc} \A_{VV} & \A_{VF} \\
\A_{FV} & \A_{FF} \end{array}\right)$.
The sizes of $\A_{VV}$, $\A_{FV}( = \A_{VF}^T)$, and $\A_{FF}$ are $|V| \times |V|$,
$|F| \times |V|$, and $|F| \times |F|$, respectively.
We further partition the vectors and the matrices that appear in the ED problem
into the corresponding parts;
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lclcl}
OPT_{ED} & = & \max &:& \g_V^T \x_V + \g_F^T \c_F\\
& & \mbox{subject to} &:& \x_V^T \A_{VV} \x_V + 2 \c_F^T \A_{FV} \x_V
+ \c_F^T \A_{FF} \c_F
\le 2 \theta ,\\
& & & & \e_V^T \x_V + \e_F^T \c_F = 1, \\
& & & & x_i \in \left\{0, \frac{1}{N}\right\} \mbox{ for } i \in V.
\end{array} \label{eq:ED2}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that we also removed the box constraints $\l \le \x \le \u$ from the ED problem
by fixing the variables in $\x_F$ to $\c_F$.
We count the number of $x_i$ that is fixed to $c_i$
by $p:= \left| \left\{ i \in F : x_i = \frac{1}{N} \right\} \right|$.
Therefore, we will choose $N-p$ genotypes from $|V|$ candidates in (\ref{eq:ED2}), while
we choose $N$ genotypes from $Z$ candidates in the original ED problem~(\ref{eq:ED}).
\begin{REMA}\label{re:remarkPN}
We can assume $p \le N$ and $|V| \ge 2$ without loss of generality.
In the case $p > N$, we can detect the infeasibility of the problem~(\ref{eq:ED}).
If $|V| = 1$, we have $F = \{2, \ldots, Z\}$. Therefore, $x_1$ is also fixed with $x_1 = 1-\sum_{i=2}^Z c_i$,
and all the variables can be fixed without solving~(\ref{eq:ED2}).
\end{REMA}
We change
the decision variables by $\y_V := 2 N \x_V - \e_V \in \Real^{|V|}$
and we use $y_i$ to denote the $i$th element of $\y_V$.
Then, the binary constraints
$x_1, \ldots, x_{|V|} \in \left\{0, \frac{1}{N}\right\}$
are mapped to $y_1, \ldots, y_{|V|} \in \left\{-1, 1 \right\}$.
Even without employing this variable change,
we can also directly apply the SDP relaxation method in a similar way to \cite{gorge2012semidefinite}.
The reason we employed this variable change
is for the later discussion in Section~4 so that
most of the matrices $\B^k$ there will be diagonal matrices.
We will denote the $i$th element of $\y_V$ by $y_i$.
We define $g_{\min} := \min \{g_i : i = 1, \ldots, Z\}$,
$\bar{\g}_V: = \frac{1}{4N} (\g_V - g_{\min} \e_V)$,
$\bar{g} := \frac{1}{2N} (\g_V - g_{\min} \e_V)^T \e_V
+ (\g_F - g_{\min} \e_F)^T \c_F + g_{\min}$,
$\bar{\c}_F := \A_{VV} \e_V + 2 N \A_{VF} \c_F$,
$\bar{\theta} := 2N^2(2\theta - \c_F^T \A_{FF} \c_F)
- \frac{1}{2}\e_V^T \A_{VV} \e_V - 2N \c_F^T \A_{FV} \e_V$,
and $\bar{N} := 2N(1-\e_F^T \c_F) - |V| = 2(N - p) - |V|$.
From these definitions, it is easy to check $\bar{\g}_V \ge \0$
and $\g^T \x = 2 \bar{\g}_V^T \y_V + \bar{g}$ using $\e^T \x = 1$.
We now have another expression of the ED problem;
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lclcl}
OPT_{ED} &=& \max &:& 2 \bar{\g}_V^T \y_V
+ \bar{g} \\
& & \mbox{subject to} &:& \y_V^T \A_{VV} \y_V + 2 \bar{\c}_F^T \y_V
\le 2 \bar{\theta},\\
& & & & \e_V^T \y_V = \bar{N},\\
& & & & y_i \in \left\{-1, 1\right\} \mbox{ for } i \in V.
\end{array} \label{eq:ED3}
\end{eqnarray}
By introducing a variable matrix $\Y_{VV} \in \SMAT^{|V|}$,
we apply the lift-and-project method of Lov{\'a}sz and
Schrijver~\cite{lovasz1991cones}. As a result,
we obtain one more equivalent form;
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lclcl}
OPT_{ED} &=& \max &:&
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 0 & \bar{\g}_V^T \\ \bar{\g}_V & \O \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
+ \bar{g} \\
& & \mbox{subject to} &:& \left(\begin{array}{cc} -2\bar{\theta} & \bar{\c}_F^T \\ \bar{\c}_F & \A_{VV} \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
\le 0,\\
& & & & \left(\begin{array}{cc} -2\bar{N} & \e_V^T \\ \e_V & \O \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
= 0,\\
& & & & \left(\begin{array}{cc} -\bar{N^2} & \0^T \\ \0 & \e_V \e_V^T \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
= 0,\\
& & & & \left(\begin{array}{cc} -1 & \0^T \\ \0 & \e_i \e_i^T \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
= 0 \mbox{ for } i \in V,\\
& & & & \left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
\succeq \O, \quad
\mbox{rank}
\left( \left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right) \right)
= 1.
\end{array} \label{eq:ED4}
\end{eqnarray}
The key property for the equivalence between (\ref{eq:ED3}) and \ref{eq:ED4}
is $\Y_{VV} = \y_V \y_V^ T$ from the rank-1 constraint on the matrix $
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)$.
We will denote the $(i,j)$th element of $\Y_{VV}$ by $Y_{ij}$.
The equality $Y_{ii} = y_i^2$ for $i = 1, \ldots, |V|$ should holds
for feasible solution of (\ref{eq:ED4}),
hence
$ \left(\begin{array}{cc} -1 & \0^T \\ \0 & \e_i \e_i^T \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
= 0$ leads to the binary constraint $y_i \in \{-1, 1\}$.
In (\ref{eq:ED4}),
we introduced a redundant constraint $(\e_V\e_V^T) \bullet \Y_{VV} = \bar{N}^2$
that was derived from $(\e_V^T \y_V)^2 = \bar{N}^2$ and $\Y_{VV} = \y_V \y_V^T$.
It is known that redundant constraints of this type make the SDP relaxation tighter,
and we can often obtain better approximate solution.
The hardest constraint in (\ref{eq:ED4}) is the rank-1 constraint.
This constraint embraces a nature of combinatorial optimization.
By removing this hardest constraint,
we build an SDP relaxation problem and we denote its optimal value by
$OPT_{SDP}$.
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lclcl}
OPT_{SDP} &:=& \max &:&
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 0 & \bar{\g}_V^T \\ \bar{\g}_V & \O \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
+ \bar{g} \\
& & \mbox{subject to} &:& \left(\begin{array}{cc} -2\bar{\theta} & \bar{\c}_F^T \\ \bar{\c}_F & \A_{VV} \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
\le 0,\\
& & & & \left(\begin{array}{cc} -2\bar{N} & \e_V^T \\ \e_V & \O \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
= 0 ,\\
& & & & \left(\begin{array}{cc} -\bar{N^2} & \0^T \\ \0 & \e_V \e_V^T \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
= 0,\\
& & & & \left(\begin{array}{cc} -1 & \0^T \\ \0 & \e_i \e_i^T \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
= 0 \mbox{ for } i \in V,\\
& & & & \left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
\succeq \O.
\end{array} \label{eq:SDP-R}
\end{eqnarray}
When we further relax the positive semidefinite constraint
$\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
\succeq \O$,
we can obtain an LP relaxation problem.
In general, a matrix $\X \in \SMAT^{n}$ is positive semidefinite if and only if
$\u^T \X \u \ge 0$ for $\forall \u \in \Real^n$.
For the positive semidefinite constraint of (\ref{eq:SDP-R}),
we choose a set of vectors
$\u_{ij} = \e_i - \e_j \in \Real^{1+|V|}$ for $i = 1,\ldots, |V|$ and $j = i+1, \ldots, |V|+1$
as a subset of $\Real^{1+|V|}$.
We use $\hat{W}$ to denote
the non-diagonal upper-triangular position of $\Y_{VV}$, that is
$\hat{W}:= \{(i,j) \in V \times V : i < j\}$.
The key step to derive an LP relaxation problem is the following step:
\begin{eqnarray*}
& & \left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right) \succeq \O \\
&\Leftrightarrow &
\u^T \left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right) \u \ge 0
\mbox{ for } \forall \u \in \Real^{1+|V|} \\
&\overset{\mbox{(relaxation)}}\Rightarrow &
\u_{ij}^T \left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right) \u_{ij} \ge 0
\mbox{ for } i = 1, \ldots, |V| \mbox{ and } j = i+1, \ldots, |V|+1 \\
& \Leftrightarrow &
\left\{\begin{array}{lll}
Y_{ii} \ge y_i^2 & \mbox{for} & i \in V, \\
Y_{ii} Y_{jj} \ge Y_{ij}^2 & \mbox{for} & (i,j) \in \hat{W}.
\end{array}\right.
\end{eqnarray*}
From the constraints
$Y_{ii} = 1$ for $ i \in V$
in (\ref{eq:SDP-R}), the constraints
$Y_{ii} \ge y_i^2$ and $Y_{ii} Y_{jj} \ge Y_{ij}^2$
are linear constraints in nature.
Consequently, we reach an LP relaxation problem, whose optimal value
is denoted as $OPT_{LP}$.
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lclcl}
OPT_{LP} &=& \max &:&
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 0 & \bar{\g}_V^T \\ \bar{\g}_V & \O \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
+ \bar{g} \\
& & \mbox{subject to} &:& \left(\begin{array}{cc} -2\bar{\theta} & \bar{\c}_F^T \\ \bar{\c}_F & \A_{VV} \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
\le 0,\\
& & & & \left(\begin{array}{cc} -2\bar{N} & \e_V^T \\ \e_V & \O \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
= 0 ,\\
& & & & \left(\begin{array}{cc} -\bar{N^2} & \0^T \\ \0 & \e_V \e_V^T \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
= 0,\\
& & & & \left(\begin{array}{cc} -1 & \0^T \\ \0 & \e_i \e_i^T \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
= 0 \mbox{ for } i \in V,\\
& & & & \begin{array}{lcl}
-1 \le y_i \le 1 &\mbox{ for }& i \in V,\\
-1 \le Y_{ij} \le 1 &\mbox{ for }& (i,j) \in \hat{W},
\end{array}\\
& & & & \Y_{VV} \in \SMAT^{|V|}.
\end{array} \label{eq:LP-R}
\end{eqnarray}
We now move our focus to an SOCP relaxation problem.
In a similar way to the above step that derives (\ref{eq:LP-R}) from (\ref{eq:SDP-R}),
it may be possible to apply an SOCP relaxation technique developed in~\cite{kim2001second} to (\ref{eq:SDP-R}).
In contrast, we utilize a continuous relaxation technique
that converts the binary constraint $x_i \in \left\{0, \frac{1}{N}\right\}$ into a continuous constraint
$0 \le x_i \le \frac{1}{N}$.
The main reason of this continuous relaxation is
that we can keep the efficient SOCP formula
of~\cite{yamashita2015efficient} that
extensively exploits a structural sparsity of the Wright numerator matrix $\A$.
A second-order cone of dimension $q$ is defined by
$\KC^q :=\left \{ \x \in \Real^q : x_1 \ge \sqrt{\sum_{i = 2}^n x_i^2} \right\}$.
A standard form of second-order cone programming (SOCP) problem in this paper is given as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lcl}
\max &:& \c^T \x \\
\mbox{subject to} &:& \F \x = \b,\\
& & \h - \H \x \in \KC^{q}.
\end{array}\label{eq:SOCP}
\end{eqnarray}
The decision variable here is $\x \in \Real^n$ and the objective function is a linear function
with a constant vector $\c \in \Real^n$.
The linear constraints are encoded with a matrix $\F \in \Real^{m \times n}$ and a vector $\b \in \Real^m$.
The second-oder cone constraint is given with a vector $\h \in \Real^{q}$ and a matrix $\H \in \Real^{q \times n}$.
A more general SOCP formulation often includes a Cartesian product of second-order cones.
However, only one second-order cone is enough for the discussions in this paper.
Yamashita et al.~\cite{yamashita2015efficient} introduced a new vector $\z := \A \x \in \Real^Z$,
and converted the quadratic constraint $\x^T \A \x \le 2 \theta$
into $||\B \z|| \le \sqrt{2 \theta}$ with a matrix $\B \in \Real^{Z \times Z}$ that satisfies $\B^T \B = \A^{-1}$.
Though the Wright numerator matrix $\A$ itself is not a sparse matrix,
the matrices $\A^{-1}$ and $\B$ possess favorable sparsity.
The computation time reduction reported in~\cite{yamashita2015efficient} was mainly derived from these sparsity.
Using these new vector $\z$ and matrix $\B$, we transformed the ED problem (\ref{eq:ED})
into the following SOCP problem with integer constraints;
\begin{eqnarray*}
\begin{array}{lcl}
\max &:& (\A^{-1}\g)^T \z \\
\mbox{subject to} &:& (\A^{-1}\e)^T \z = 1,\\
& & \left(\begin{array}{c} \sqrt{2 \theta} \\ \B \z \end{array}\right) \in \KC^{1+Z},\\
& & \begin{array}{lcl}
[\A^{-1} \z]_i \in \left\{0, \frac{1}{N}\right\} & \mbox{for} & i \in V,\\
{} [\A^{-1} \z]_i = c_i & \mbox{for} & i \in F.
\end{array}
\end{array}\label{eq:MI-ED}
\end{eqnarray*}
Here, we use the notation $[\A^{-1} \z]_i$ to denote the $i$th element of $\A^{-1} \z$.
It may seem that we would remove $\x_F$ from this formulation by fixing $\x_F = \c_F$
and reduce the sizes the problem.
However, such elimination would strongly diminish the efficiency of the SOCP problem,
since it completely destroys the favorable
sparsity that appear in $\A^{-1}$ and $\B$.
By applying the continuous relaxation to the binary constraints,
we obtain an SOCP relaxation problem of the ED problem;
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lclcl}
OPT_{SOCP} &:=& \max &:& (\A^{-1}\g)^T \z\\
& & \mbox{subject to} &:& (\A^{-1}\e)^T \z = 1,\\
& & & & \left(\begin{array}{c} \sqrt{2 \theta} \\ \B \z \end{array}\right) \in \KC^{1+Z},\\
& & & & \begin{array}{lcl}
0 \le [\A^{-1} \z]_i \le \frac{1}{N} & \mbox{for} & i \in V,\\
{} [\A^{-1} \z]_i = c_i & \mbox{for} & i \in F.
\end{array}
\end{array}\label{eq:SOCP-R}
\end{eqnarray}
$OPT_{ED}$, $OPT_{SDP}$, $OPT_{LP}$ and $OPT_{SOCP}$, respectively.
From the derivation of the LP relaxation problem~(\ref{eq:LP-R}),
it is natural that
the SDP relaxation problem~(\ref{eq:SDP-R}) gives closer an optimal value
than the LP relaxation problem, that is, we know $OPT_{SDP} \le OPT_{LP}$.
In contrast, the relation of the SOCP relaxation~(\ref{eq:SOCP-R}) is not so explicit,
since the SOCP relaxation was derived
by a continuous relaxation independently from the SDP or LP relaxation.
The strength of these relaxation problems can be summarized in Lemma~\ref{le:relaxation}.
For the discussion there, we prepare some notation and introduce an assumption.
We use $\SC_m(\v)$ to denote the sum of the $m$ smallest elements of $\v \in \Real^n$.
More precisely, when $\hat{v}_{1} \le \hat{v}_2 \le \ldots \le \hat{v}_n$ is the sorted vector of $\v$ in the ascending order,
the definition of $\SC_m(\v)$ is given by $\SC_m(\v) := \sum_{i=1}^m \hat{v}_i$.
The symbol $\hat{A}_{\hat{W}}$ indicates the set of the collection of $\A_{VV}$ with respect to $\hat{W}$,
that is, $\hat{A}_{\hat{W}} := \left\{A_{ij} : (i,j) \in \hat{W}\right\}$.
We define a vector $\hat{\y}_V \in \Real^{|V|}$ by $[\hat{y}_V]_i := 1$ for $i = 1, \ldots, N-p$
and $[\hat{y}_V]_i := -1$ for $i = N-p+1, \ldots, |V|$.
This vector satisfies $\e_V^T \hat{\y}_V = \bar{N}$.
In the following this discussion, we make the following assumption on the input data
of the ED problem~(\ref{eq:ED}).
From preliminary numerical tests,
we verified that this assumption holds for practical datasets of pine orchards
and datasets generated by simulations. The details of these dataset will be described
in Section~5.
\begin{ASSUM}\label{as:A}
The input data of (\ref{eq:ED}) satisfies
\begin{eqnarray*}
\SC_{\hat{N}}(\hat{A}_{\hat{W}}) \le \frac{2 \bar{\theta} - 2\mbox{Trace}(\A_{VV}) + \e_V^T \A_{VV} \e_V - 2 \bar{\c}_F^T \hat{\y}}{4},
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\hat{N} := \frac{\bar{N}^2 + |V|^2 - 2|V|}{4}$.
\end{ASSUM}
We should ensure that $\hat{N}$ is a positive integer, otherwise we need to manage
a fractional number in the definition of $\SC$.
The positiveness is derived from
$\bar{N}^2 + |V|^2 - 2|V| \ge \bar{N}^2 + 1 \ge 1$
by $|V| \ge 2$ of Remark~\ref{re:remarkPN},
and $\hat{N}$ is integer by
\begin{eqnarray*}
\bar{N}^2 + |V|^2 - 2|V| &=& \left\{2N (1- \e_F^T \c_F) - |V| \right\}^2 + |V|^2 - 2|V| \\
&=& \left\{2N (1- \frac{p}{N}) - |V| \right\}^2 + |V|^2 - 2|V| \\
&=& 4 \left\{(N-p)^2 - |V| (N-p) + \frac{|V| (|V| -1)}{2}\right\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
We are now prepared to examine the relation between the relaxation problems.
\begin{LEMM}\label{le:relaxation}
It holds for the optimal values of the relaxation problems that
\begin{eqnarray*}
OPT_{ED} \le OPT_{SDP} \le OPT_{SOCP}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Furthermore, if Assumption~\ref{as:A} holds, then
\begin{eqnarray*}
OPT_{ED} \le OPT_{SDP} \le OPT_{SOCP} \le OPT_{LP}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{LEMM}
\noindent \textbf{Proof:}
[$OPT_{ED} \le OPT_{SDP}$]
When we derived (\ref{eq:SDP-R}), we ignored the rank-1 constraint in (\ref{eq:ED4}).
From this derivation, for any feasible solution $\x \in \Real^Z$ of (\ref{eq:ED}),
the corresponding vector $\y_V \in \Real^{|V|}$
through the connections $\x = \left(\begin{array}{cc} \x_V \\ \c_F \end{array}\right)$, then
$\y_V = 2 N \x_{V} - \e_{V}$
is also a feasible solution of (\ref{eq:SDP-R}).
Furthermore, from these connections hold, it holds that
$\g^T \x = \bar{\g}^T \y_V + \bar{g}$.
The objective functions
of (\ref{eq:ED4}) and (\ref{eq:SDP-R}) are same and
the feasible region of (\ref{eq:SDP-R}) is wider than that of
(\ref{eq:ED4}) substantially, hence, we have $OPT_{ED} \le OPT_{SDP}$.
[$OPT_{SDP} \le OPT_{SOCP}$] We take any feasible solution
$\y_V \in \Real^{|V|}$ and $\Y_{VV} \in \SMAT^{|V|}$ of (\ref{eq:SDP-R}).
It is enough to check that
$\z = \A \left(\begin{array}{c} \frac{\y_V + \e_V}{2N} \\ \c_F \end{array}\right)$
is a feasible solution of (\ref{eq:SOCP-R}).
From
$\left(\begin{array}{cc} -2\bar{N} & \e_V^T \\ \e_V & \O \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
= 0$, we obtain $\e_V^T \y_V = \bar{N} = 2N (1-\e_F^T \c_F) - |V|$, hence,
\begin{eqnarray*}
(\A^{-1} \e)^T \z =
\left(\begin{array}{c}\e_V \\ \e_F \end{array}\right)^T
\left(\begin{array}{c} \frac{\y_V + \e_V}{2N} \\ \c_F \end{array}\right)
= \frac{\e_V^T \y_V + |V|}{2N} + \e_F^T \c_F = 1.
\end{eqnarray*}
By applying the Schur complement to the positive semidefinite condition
$\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
\succeq \O$, it holds $\Y_{VV} - \y_V \y_V^T \succeq \O$.
Since $\A \bullet \X \ge 0$ holds for any two positive semidefinite matrices of the same dimension
$\A$ and $\X$~\cite{TODD01} and the Wright numerator matrix is always positive definite,
it holds $\A_{VV} \bullet (\Y_{VV} - \y_V \y_V^T) \ge 0$, therefore,
$\A_{VV} \bullet \Y_{VV} \ge \y_V^T \A_{VV} \y_V$.
Using the relation
$\left(\begin{array}{cc} -2\bar{\theta} & \bar{\c}_F^T \\ \bar{\c}_F & \A_{VV} \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
\le 0$,
we obtain $\y_V^T \A_{VV} \y_V + 2 \bar{\c}_F^T \y_V \le 2 \bar{\theta}$.
From the definitions of $\y_V, \bar{\c}_F, \bar{\theta}, \B$ and $\z$,
we can derive $\z \B^T \B \z \le 2 \theta$, therefore,
$\left(\begin{array}{c} \sqrt{2 \theta} \\ \B \z \end{array}\right) \in \KC^{1+Z}$.
From $\Y_{VV} - \y_V \y_V^T \succeq \O$, we also have
$Y_{ii} \ge y_i^2$ for $ i = 1, \ldots, |V|$.
Furthermore, due to the constraint
$\left(\begin{array}{cc} -1 & \0^T \\ \0 & \e_i \e_i^T \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
= 0$, it holds $Y_{ii} = 1$ for $i = 1, \ldots, |V|$,
consequently $-\e_V \le \y_V \le \e_V$.
From $\A^{-1} \z = \left(\begin{array}{c} \frac{\y_V + \e_V}{2N} \\ \c_F \end{array}\right)$, it is now clear that
$0 \le [\A^{-1} \z]_i \le \frac{1}{N}$ for $i \in V$
and that $[\A^{-1} \z]_i = c_i$ for $i \in F$.
Furthermore, the objective value of (\ref{eq:SDP-R}) at $\y_V$ is same as
that of (\ref{eq:SOCP-R}) at $\z$ if
$\z = \A \left(\begin{array}{c} \frac{\y_V + \e_V}{2N} \\ \c_F \end{array}\right)$.
Hence, we obtain $OPT_{SDP} \le OPT_{SOCP}$.
[$OPT_{SOCP} \le OPT_{LP}$]
We first consider an LP problem
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lcl}
\min &:& \c^T \futoji{\eta}\\
\mbox{subject to} &:& \sum_{i=1}^n \eta_i = K,\\
& &
0 \le \eta_i \le 1 \mbox{ for } i = 1, \ldots, n,
\end{array}\label{eq:simple-lp}
\end{eqnarray}
where the decision variable is $\futoji{\eta} \in \Real^n$ and the input vector is $\c\in \Real^n$ and $K$ is a positive integer.
The optimal value of this LP problem is $\SC_K(\c)$ and this value can be attained
at $\hat{\futoji{\eta}} \in \Real^n$ such that $\hat{\eta}_i = 1$ for $i = 1, \ldots, K$ and $\hat{\eta}_i = 0$ for $i = K+1, \ldots, n$.
If we ignore the quadratic constraint of (\ref{eq:SOCP-R}) and we reverse the variable into $\x = \A^{-1} \z$,
we obtain an optimization problem of form
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lcl}
\max &:& \g_V^T \x_V + \g_F^T \c_F,\\
\mbox{subject to} &:& \e_V^T \x_V = 1 - \frac{p}{N},\\
& & \begin{array}{lcl}
0 \le x_i \le \frac{1}{N} & \mbox{for} & i \in V.
\end{array}
\end{array}\label{eq:SOCP-R2}
\end{eqnarray}
Since $g_1 \ge g_2 \ge \ldots g_{|V|}$,
the optimal value of (\ref{eq:SOCP-R2}) is given by $-\frac{\SC_{N-p}(-\g_V)}{N} + \g_F^T \c_F$
in a similar way to (\ref{eq:simple-lp})
and an optimal solution is $\hat{\x}_V := \frac{\hat{\y}_V + \e_V}{2N}$.
Therefore, it holds that $OPT_{SOCP} \le \g_V^T \hat{\x}_V + \g_F^T \c_F$.
Next, we define $\rho_{LP}$ to denote
the optimal value of the following LP problem;
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lclcl}
\rho_{LP} &:=& \min &:& \A_{VV} \bullet \Y_{VV} \\
& & \mbox{subject to} &:& (\e_V \e_V^T) \bullet \Y_{VV} = \bar{N}^2, \\
& & & & Y_{ii} = 1 \mbox{ for } i \in V,\\
& & & & -1 \le Y_{ij} \le 1 \mbox{ for } (i,j) \in \hat{W},\\
& & & & \Y_{VV} \in \SMAT^{|V|}.
\end{array}\label{eq:LP-Feas}
\end{eqnarray}
We convert this problem introducing $\bar{X}_{ij} := \frac{Y_{ij} + 1}{2}$
for $(i,j) \in \hat{W}$.
The following LP problem is equivalent to (\ref{eq:LP-Feas}), therefore,
its optimal value must be $\rho_{LP}$.
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lclcl}
\rho_{LP} &=& \min &:& 4 \sum_{(i,j) \in \hat{W}} A_{ij} \bar{X}_{ij}
- 2 \sum_{(i,j) \in \hat{W}} A_{ij} + \mbox{Trace}(\A_{VV})\\
& & \mbox{subject to} &:& \sum_{(i,j) \in \hat{W}}\bar{X}_{ij} = \hat{N},\\
& & & & 0 \le \bar{X}_{ij} \le 1 \mbox{ for } (i,j) \in \hat{W}. \\
\end{array}\label{eq:LP-Feas2}
\end{eqnarray}
The structure of this problem is same as (\ref{eq:simple-lp}), hence,
it holds that
$\rho_{LP} = 4 \SC_{\hat{N}}(\hat{A}_{\hat{N}})
- \e_V^T \A_{VV} \e_V+ 2 \mbox{Trace}(\A_{VV})$.
Let $\hat{\Y}_{VV}$ be a part of an optimal solution of (\ref{eq:LP-Feas}).
From Assumption~\ref{as:A}, it holds that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\A_{VV} \bullet \hat{\Y}_{VV} + 2 \bar{\c}_F^T \hat{\y}_V
= \rho_{LP} + 2 \bar{\c}_F^T \hat{\y}_V
= 4 \SC_{\hat{N}}(\hat{A}_{\hat{N}})
- \e_V^T \A_{VV} \e_V+ 2 \mbox{Trace}(\A) + 2 \bar{\c}_F^T \hat{\y}_V
\le 2 \bar{\theta}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Furthermore, $\hat{\y}_V$ satisfies $-1 \le \hat{y}_i \le 1$ for $i \in V$ and $\e_V^T \hat{\y}_V = \bar{N}$ by its definition and
$\hat{\Y}_{VV}$ satisfies all the constraints of (\ref{eq:LP-Feas}).
Consequently, the pair $\hat{\y}_V$ and $\hat{\Y}_{VV}$
is a feasible solution of (\ref{eq:LP-R})
and this leads to the inequality we wanted to obtain.
\begin{eqnarray*}
OPT_{LP} \ge \left(\begin{array}{cc} 0 & \bar{\g}_V^T \\ \bar{\g}_V & \O \end{array}\right)
\bullet
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \hat{\y}_V^T \\ \hat{\y}_V & \hat{\Y}_{VV} \end{array}\right)
+ \bar{g} = 2 \bar{\g}_V ^T \hat{\y}_V + \bar{g} = \g_V^T \hat{\x}_V + \g_F^T \c_F \ge OPT_{SOCP}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\qed
\begin{REMA}\label{re:LP}
Since an optimal solution of a further relaxation problem of (\ref{eq:LP-R})
\begin{eqnarray*}
\begin{array}{lcl}
\max &:& 2 \bar{\g}_V^T \y_V + \bar{g} \\
\mbox{subject to} &:& \e_V^T \y_V = \bar{N}, \\
& & -1 \le y_i \le 1 \mbox{ for } i \in V
\end{array}\label{eq:LP-R2}
\end{eqnarray*}
is $\hat{\y}_V$, its optimal value
$2 \bar{\g}_V^T \hat{\y}_V + \bar{\g}$ must be an upper bound
of $OPT_{LP}$.
On the other hand, from the proof of Lemma~\ref{le:relaxation},
when Assumption~\ref{as:A} holds, there exists some
$\hat{\Y}_{VV} \in \SMAT^{|V|}$
such that the pair of $\hat{\y}_V$ and $\hat{\Y}_{VV}$ is a feasible
solution of (\ref{eq:LP-R}) with the objective value
$2 \bar{\g}_V^T \hat{\y}_V + \bar{\g}$.
Therefore, $\hat{\y}_V$ is also an optimal solution of (\ref{eq:LP-R}).
This indicates that we can obtain the solution of
(\ref{eq:LP-R}) at the computation cost for sorting $\g_V$
instead of solving (\ref{eq:LP-R}) as an LP problem, when Assumption~\ref{as:A} holds.
\end{REMA}
This remark implies that the LP relaxation (\ref{eq:LP-R}) is not so tight
against the original ED problem (\ref{eq:ED}).
In contrast, we observed through preliminary numerical tests that
the vector $\left(\begin{array}{c} \hat{\x}_V \\ \c_F \end{array}\right)$ defined with
an optimal solution $\hat{\x}_V$ of (\ref{eq:SOCP-R2}),
is not always a feasible solution of (\ref{eq:SOCP-R}) even if Assumption~\ref{as:A} holds.
Therefore, the feasible region of the SOCP relaxation problem is strictly narrower than that of the LP relaxation problem,
and the SOCP relaxation gives a tighter approximation than the LP relaxation in general,
even though the relaxation were derived independently.
\begin{REMA}\label{re:SDP}
The SDP relaxation problem (\ref{eq:SDP-R}) has no interior-feasible point.
\end{REMA}
If a pair $\y_V \in \Real^{|V|}$ and $\Y_{VV} \in \SMAT^{|V|}$ satisfies all the constraint of (\ref{eq:SDP-R}),
the pair is a feasible point. When
the matrix $\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)$
is a positive definite matrix for some feasible point $\y_V \in \Real^{|V|}$ and $\Y_{VV} \in \SMAT^{|V|}$,
we say that (\ref{eq:SDP-R}) has an interior-feasible point.
We can show that $\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)$ is not positive definite
for any feasible point of (\ref{eq:SDP-R}).
To show this, we take a feasible point
$\y_V \in \Real^{|V|}$ and $\Y_{VV} \in \SMAT^{|V|}$. Then, we have $\e_V^T \y_V = \bar{N}$ and
$(\e_V \e_V^T) \bullet \Y_{VV} = \bar{N}^2$.
If $\bar{N} \ne 0$, it holds
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left(\begin{array}{c} 1 \\ -\e_V/\bar{N} \end{array}\right)^T
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
\left(\begin{array}{c} 1 \\ -\e_V/\bar{N} \end{array}\right)
= 1 - 2 \e_V^T \y_V / \bar{N} + \e_V^T \Y_{VV} \e_V / \bar{N}^2 = 0.
\end{eqnarray*}
In addition, for the case $\bar{N} = 0$, it holds
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left(\begin{array}{c} 0 \\ \e_V \end{array}\right)^T
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV} \end{array}\right)
\left(\begin{array}{c} 0 \\ \bar{N} \end{array}\right)
= \e_V^T \Y_{VV} \e_V = \bar{N}^2 = 0.
\end{eqnarray*}
In either case, there exists a nonzero vector that makes the quadratic from zero,
the matrix is not positive definite, therefore,
(\ref{eq:SDP-R}) has no interior-feasible point.
\section{Theoretical evaluation of the SDP relaxation problems with a randomized algorithm}
The solutions obtained from the conic relaxation problem~(\ref{eq:SDP-R}), (\ref{eq:LP-R}) and (\ref{eq:SOCP-R})
are not always a feasible solution of the ED problem~(\ref{eq:ED}),
since we ignored some constraints of the NP-hard problem
to derive the conic relaxation problems that are solvable in polynomial time.
When SDP relaxation approaches are used, examine randomized algorithms often follow
to generate feasible solutions.
A randomized algorithm using the solutions obtained through SDP relaxation problems
was first introduced for max-cut problems
in~\cite{GOEMANS95}. They showed that the expectation objective value
obtained by their randomized algorithm on average was at least 0.878 of that of
an SDP relaxation problem.
Since the optimal value of a max cut problem exists between an objective value
of any feasible solution and the value obtained from the SDP relaxation problem,
their algorithm have an expected approximation
factor of 0.878.
Many researches followed~\cite{GOEMANS95} to extend its results to more general
quadratic-constraint problems using the framework of SDP relaxation methods.
Among them, Tseng~\cite{tseng2003further} discussed one of the most general cases
and gave its probabilistic analysis.
Wu et al.~\cite{wu2013new} also analyzed the expectation values using a different
randomized algorithm.
In this section,
we employ the result of~\cite{tseng2003further} to give
theoretical bounds on
the expected objective value of a randomized algorithm.
Tseng~\cite{tseng2003further} applied the SDP relaxation methods
to a quadratically-constrained quadratic programming (QCQP) problem:
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lclcl}
\overline{OPT}_{QCQP} &:= & \max &:& \y^T \A^0 \y + (\b^0)^T \y + c^0 \\
& & \mbox{subject to} &:& \y^T \A^k \y + (\b^k)^T \y + c^k \le 0 \mbox{ for } k=1,\ldots, m.
\end{array}
\label{eq:QCQP}
\end{eqnarray}
Here, the variable is $\y \in \Real^n$, while the input data are
$\A^0, \ldots, \A^m \in \SMAT^n$, $\b^0, \ldots, \b^m \in \Real^n$
and $c^0, c^1 \ldots, c^m \in \Real$. For simplicity, the constant in the objective function is fixed to $c^0 = 0$.
The QCQP originally discussed in \cite{tseng2003further} is a minimization problem, but
we consider a maximization problem since the ED problem (\ref{eq:ED}) is a maximization problem.
When we apply the lift-and-project method of Lov{\'a}sz and
Schrijver~\cite{lovasz1991cones}
to (\ref{eq:QCQP}), the resultant SDP relaxation problem
is given as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lclcl}
\overline{OPT}_{SDP} &:=& \max &:& \B^0 \bullet \Y \\
& & \mbox{subject to} &:& \B^k \bullet \Y \le 0 \mbox{ for } k=1,\ldots, m,\\
& & & & \B^{m+1} \bullet \Y = 1 , \quad \Y \succeq \O
\end{array}
\label{eq:QCQP-SDP}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\B^k := \left(\begin{array}{cc}
c^k & (\b^k)^T \\ \b^k & \A^k
\end{array}\right)$ for $k = 0, \ldots, m$ and
$\B^{m+1} := \left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & \0^T \\ \0 & \O
\end{array}\right)$,
and
the decision variable is $\Y \in \SMAT^{1+n}$.
In the following discussions, we start the row or column index of $\Y$ from zero,
therefore, the elements of $\Y$ are denoted by $Y_{00}, Y_{01}, \ldots, Y_{nn}$.
It is known that if we add the rank-1 constraint $\mbox{rank}(\Y) = 1$ to
(\ref{eq:QCQP-SDP}),
the two problems (\ref{eq:QCQP}) and (\ref{eq:QCQP-SDP})
are equivalent.
In other words, we ignored the rank-1 constraint from (\ref{eq:QCQP})
to derive (\ref{eq:QCQP-SDP}), hence,
$\overline{OPT}_{QCQP} \le \overline{OPT}_{SDP}$.
The randomized algorithm of~\cite{tseng2003further} can be summarized
as follow.
We assume that (\ref{eq:QCQP}) and (\ref{eq:QCQP-SDP})
are feasible and that (\ref{eq:QCQP-SDP}) has an optimal solution, denoted as $\Y^*$.
This solution $\Y^*$ is factorzied
with a matrix
$\V \in \Real^{(1+n) \times (1+n)}$ such that $\Y^* = \V^T \V$.
Such $\V$ is available, for example, by
the Cholesky factorization or the eigenvalue decomposition.
We use $\v^0, \v^1, \ldots, \v^{n} \in \Real^{1+n}$ to denote the columns of $\V$.
Then, a vector $\v \in \Real^{1+n}$ is chosen randomly
from the unit sphere in $\Real^{1+n}$ based on uniform distribution.
Finally, the randomized algorithm outputs a solution $\tilde{\y} \in \Real^{1+n}$
defined by
\begin{eqnarray*}
\tilde{y}_i := \sqrt{Y^*_{ii}} \mbox{sign}(\v^T \v^0) \mbox{sign}(\v^T \v^i)
\mbox{ for } i = 0, \ldots, n
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\mbox{sign}(a) = 1$ if $a \ge 0$ and $\mbox{sign}(a) = -1$ if $a < 0$.
We remark that from the definition of $\B^{m+1}$,
it always holds that $Y_{00}^* = 1$, hence,
$\tilde{y}_0 = \sqrt{1} (\mbox{sign}(\v^T \v^0))^2 = 1$.
The set $\IC$ is introduced to indicate diagonal-matrix constraints of (\ref{eq:QCQP});
\begin{eqnarray*}
\IC := \left\{ k \in \{1, 2, \ldots, m\} :
\A^k \mbox{ is a diagonal matrix and } \b^k = \0 \right\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
To measure
a shift in the objective function,
$\rho_{SDP}^0$ is defined as the optimal value of
the following SDP problem
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lclcl}
\rho_{SDP}^0 &:=& \min &:& \B^0 \bullet \Y \\
& & \mbox{subject to} &:& \B^k \bullet \Y =\B^k \bullet \Y^*
\mbox{ for } k \in \IC, \\
& & & & \B^{m+1} \bullet \Y = 1 , \quad \Y \succeq \O.
\end{array}\label{eq:SDP-bound}
\end{eqnarray}
Tseng~\cite{tseng2003further} showed a relation
between the expected objective value
of the generated solution $\tilde{\y}$ and
the optimal values of the SDP problems.
\begin{THEO}\label{th:Tseng}
{\upshape\cite[Theorem 2]{tseng2003further}}
If the SDP relaxation problem~(\ref{eq:QCQP-SDP})
has an optimal solution $\Y^*$ and a set
$\left\{\y \in \Real^n : \y^T \A^k \y + (\b^k)^T \y + c^k \le 0, k \in \IC\right\}$
is bounded, then
\begin{eqnarray*}
E[ \tilde{\y}^T \A^0 \tilde{\y} + (\b^0)^T \y]
\ge \frac{2}{\pi} \overline{OPT}_{SDP}
+ \left(1-\frac{2}{\pi}\right) \rho_{SDP}^0.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{THEO}
Let us return to the ED problem~(\ref{eq:ED}).
We analyze the performance
of the output solution $\tilde{\y}_V$ that is generated
by the above randomized algorithm using
the optimal solution $\Y^*$ of
the SDP relaxation problem~(\ref{eq:SDP-R}).
From the form of (\ref{eq:SDP-R}),
the objective value at $\tilde{\y}_V$ is $2 \g_V^T \tilde{\y} + \bar{g}$.
The following lemma provides a theoretical aspects on the expected value
of this objective function.
\begin{LEMM}\label{le:SDP-R}
For the ED problem (\ref{eq:ED}),
the expected objective value obtained through the randomized algorithm
is bounded by
\begin{eqnarray*}
\frac{2}{\pi} OPT_{SDP}
+ \left( 1- \frac{2}{\pi} \right) (-2 \bar{\g}_V^T \e_V + \bar{g})
\le E[2\bar{\g}_V^T \tilde{\y}_V + \bar{g}] \le
\alpha OPT_{SDP} + (1-\alpha) (2 \bar{\g}_V^T \e_V + \bar{g}),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\alpha := \min\left\{\frac{2}{\pi} \frac{\theta}{1-\cos \theta}
: 0 \le \theta \le \pi \right\} \approx 0.878$.
\end{LEMM}
\textbf{Proof:}
First, we derive the lower bound of the objective function by use of
Theorem~\ref{th:Tseng}.
To embed the SDP relaxation problem~(\ref{eq:SDP-R}) arising from the ED problem
into the framework developed in~\cite{tseng2003further},
we embed the variable vector $\y_V$ and matrix $\Y_{VV}$ into the matrix $\Y \in \SMAT^{1+|V|}$ as
\Y = \left(\begin{array}{cc}
Y_{00} & \y_V^T \\ \y_V & \Y_{VV}
\end{array}\right).$
In particular, we identify $y_i = Y_{0i} = Y_{i0}$ for $i = 1, \ldots, |V|$.
For the input matrices $\B^0, \ldots, \B^{2|V|+5}$,
we prepare
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left\{
\begin{array}{lllll}
c^0 = 0, & \b^0 = \bar{\g}_V, & \A^0 = \O, \\
c^1 = -2 \bar{\theta}, & \b^1 = \bar{\c}_F, & \A^1 = \A_{VV}, \\
c^2 = -2\bar{N}, & \b^2 = \e_V, & \A^2 = \O, \\
c^3 = 2\bar{N}, & \b^3 = -\e_V, & \A^3 = \O, \\
c^4 = -\bar{N^2}, & \b^4 = \0, & \A^4 = \e_V \e_V^T, \\
c^5 = \bar{N^2}, & \b^5 = \0, & \A^5 = -\e_V \e_V^T, \\
c^{5+i} = -1, & \b^{5+i} = \0, & \A^{5+i} = \e_i \e_i^T \mbox{ for } i \in V,\\
c^{5+|V| + i} = 1, & \b^{5+|V| + i} = \0, & \A^{5+|V|+i} = -\e_i \e_i^T \mbox{ for } i \in V. \\
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray*}
The number of input matrices in the form of (\ref{eq:QCQP-SDP}) is $m = 2|V|+5$.
For example, $\B^{5+i} \bullet \Y \le 0$ and $\B^{5+|V|+i} \bullet \Y \le 0$ lead to
$Y_{ii} = 1$ for $i \in V$. In addition, $Y_{00} = 1$ is guaranteed by $\B^{m+1} \bullet \Y = 1$.
The set of diagonal constraints is $\IC = \{ 5+i : i \in V\} \cup
\{ 5 + |V| + i : i \in V\}$.
From this $\IC$, the feasible set of (\ref{eq:SDP-bound}) is given by
$\FC := \left\{\Y \in \SMAT^{1+|V|} : Y_{ii} = 1 \mbox{ for } i = 0, 1, \ldots, |V|
\mbox{ and } \Y \succeq \O\right\}$.
Hence, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\rho_{SDP}^0 = \min \left\{ \B^0 \bullet \Y : \Y \in \FC \right\}
= \min \left\{ 2 \sum_{i \in V} \bar{g}_i Y_{0,i} : \Y \in \FC \right\}
= - 2 \bar{g}_V^T \e_V.
\end{eqnarray*}
Here,
a combination of
the matrix-completion method~\cite{FUKUDA00, NAKATA03, yamashita2015fast}
with a property $\bar{\g}_V \ge \0$ ensures that
an optimal solution of this minimization problem is given as
$\Y = \left(\begin{array}{cc} 1 & -\e_V^T \\
-\e_V & \e_V \e_V^T \end{array}\right)$.
We should note that the SDP relaxation problem~(\ref{eq:SDP-R}) has a constant term
$\bar{g}$ in the objective function, but we have to set $c^0 = 0$ to employ
Theorem~\ref{th:Tseng}.
By taking the shift of $\bar{g}$ into account, Theorem~\ref{th:Tseng} gives a lower bound;
\begin{eqnarray*}
E[2\bar{\g}_V^T \tilde{\y}_V + \bar{g}] &=&
E[2\bar{\g}_V^T \tilde{\y}_V] + \bar{g} \\
&\ge &
\frac{2}{\pi} (\overline{OPT}_{SDP})
- \left( 1- \frac{2}{\pi} \right) 2 \bar{\g}_V^T \e_V + \bar{g}\\
&=&
\frac{2}{\pi} (OPT_{SDP} - \bar{g})
- \left( 1- \frac{2}{\pi} \right) 2 \bar{\g}_V^T \e_V + \bar{g}\\
&=& \frac{2}{\pi} OPT_{SDP}
+ \left( 1- \frac{2}{\pi} \right) (-2 \bar{\g}_V^T \e_V + \bar{g}).
\end{eqnarray*}
To consider an upper bound, we first evaluate $E[\tilde{y}_i]$ for $i \in V$.
From $Y_{ii}^*= 1$ for $i \in \{0\} \cup V$ in (\ref{eq:SDP-R})
and the definition of $\tilde{\y}_V$,
and it holds that
$\tilde{y}_i = 1$ if $\mbox{sign}(\v^T \v^0) = \mbox{sign}(\v^T \v^i)$,
and $\tilde{y}_i = -1$ if $\mbox{sign}(\v^T \v^0) = -\mbox{sign}(\v^T \v^i)$.
The discussion in \cite{GOEMANS95} indicates that the probability
of the event $\mbox{sign}(\v^T \v^0) = \mbox{sign}(\v^T \v^0)$
is given as $1 - \frac{1}{\pi} \mbox{arccos} (Y_{0i}^*)$.
Therefore, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
E[\tilde{y}_i] &= &
1 \cdot \left(1 - \frac{1}{\pi} \mbox{arccos} (Y_{0i}^*)\right)
+ (-1) \cdot \left\{1-\left(1 - \frac{1}{\pi} \mbox{arccos} (Y_{0i}^*)\right)\right\} \\
&=& 1-\frac{2}{\pi} \mbox{arccos} (Y_{0i}^*)
\le \alpha (Y_{0i}^* - 1) + 1.
\end{eqnarray*}
The last inequality was derived from
the
inequality
$\frac{\mbox{arccos}(y)}{\pi} \ge \alpha \frac{1-y}{2}$
for $-1 \le y \le 1$
(Lemma~3.4 of~\cite{GOEMANS95})
and
$-1 \le Y_{0i}^* \le 1$
due to $\Y^* \succeq \O$ and $Y_{00}^* = Y_{ii}^* = 1$.
As a result, we obtain an inequality
\begin{eqnarray*}
E[2\bar{\g}_V^T \tilde{\y}_V] + \bar{g}
&=& 2 \sum_{i \in V} \bar{g}_i E[\tilde{y}_i] + \bar{g} \\
&\le& 2 \alpha \sum_{i \in V} \bar{g}_i Y_{0i}^* + 2 (1-\alpha) \g_V^T \e_V
+ \bar{g} \\
&=& 2 \alpha \bar{\g}_V \y_V^* + 2 (1-\alpha) \g_V^T \e_V
+ \bar{g} \\
&=& \alpha (OPT_{SDP} - \bar{g}) + 2 (1-\alpha) \bar{\g}_V^T \e_V + \bar{g} \\
&=& \alpha OPT_{SDP} + (1-\alpha) (2 \bar{\g}_V^T \e_V + \bar{g}).
\end{eqnarray*}
\qed
From a theoretical viewpoint, Lemma~\ref{le:SDP-R} gives the bounds on the expected objective value $E[2 \bar{\g}_V^T \tilde{\y}_V + \bar{g}]$
of the randomized algorithm. When we executed preliminary experiments, we observed that the interval between the lower and upper bounds
are not so sharp.
Table~\ref{table:bounds} presents the lower and upper bounds
and the expected objective value. The dataset we used here is a subset
of datasets in Section~5.
The first column shows $Z$, the number of genotype candidates. We fix the number of chosen candidates to $N=50$.
The third and fourth columns are the lower and the upper bounds in Lemma~\ref{le:SDP-R}, respectively.
The expected objective value is shown in the third column, and it is obtained by generating the random vector $\v$
thousand times and taking the average of the thousand trials.
The fifth column is the optimal value of the SDP relaxation problem~\ref{eq:SDP-R}.
\begin{table}[tbp]
\begin{center}
\caption{Theoretical bounds on the expected values by the randomized algorithm}
\label{table:bounds}
\begin{tabular}{r|r|rrr|r}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{Z} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{$2\theta$} & lower bound & expected value & upper bound & $OPT_{SDP}$ \\
\hline
200 & 0.0334 & 16.161 & 25.812 & 30.340 & 25.386 \\
1050 & 0.0627 & 5.075 & 32.305 & 112.600 & 24.938 \\
2045 & 0.0711 & 279.259 & 446.089 & 2007.212 & 438.659 \\
5050 & 0.1081 & 5.775 & 284.965 & 806.205 & 42.786 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
For the smallest size $Z = 200$, the gap between the lower and the upper bound was not so large.
However, when we tried the larger problems, the gap was getting worse.
In particular, the ratio of the upper bound to the expected objective value
for the case $Z = 5255$
goes beyond 5.34.
Another aspect in the randomized algorithm is that
the expected objective value is always larger than $OPT_{SDP}$.
A reason of this unfavorable aspect is that the generated solution $\tilde{\y}_V$
is not guaranteed to satisfy the constraint $\y_V^T \A_{VV} \y_V + 2 \bar{\c}_F^T \y_V \le 2 \bar{\theta}$
that corresponds to $\x^T \A \x \le 2 \theta$ of (\ref{eq:ED}).
Though Theorem~4 of \cite{tseng2003further} estimates the number of randomly generated solutions
required for approximate feasible solutions with high probability,
this cannot be applied to the discussion in this paper,
since the current discussion does not fully satisfy the assumption of the theorem.
Due to this weaker bounds reported in Table~\ref{table:bounds},
we are determined to seek an optimization method
that can obtain a reasonable solution for practical use.
This motivated us to develop a local search method based on the steep-descent method for discrete convex functions.
\section{Steepest-ascent method}
In contrast to mixed-integer linear programming problems for which
many solvers have been developed,
a principal difficulty in the ED problem (\ref{eq:ED}) arises from
the nonlinear constraint $\x^T \A \x \le 2 \theta$.
To obtain a sensible solution in a short time,
we embed the violation against this constraint into the objective function as a penalty term
using a penalty weight $\lambda \ge 0$ and focus the following optimization problem
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lcl}
\max &:& f_{\lambda}(\x) := \g^T \x - \lambda \max\{\x^T \A \x - 2 \theta, 0\} \\
\mbox{subject to} &:& \x \in \hat{\FC}
\end{array} \label{eq:penalty}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\hat{\FC} := \left\{ \x \in \Real^Z: \e^T \x = 1, \l \le \x \le \u, x_1, \ldots, x_Z \in \left\{0, \frac{1}{N}\right\} \right\}$.
We give a validity of (\ref{eq:penalty}) by the next lemma
which shows that if we take a large $\lambda$,
this optimization problem with a penalty term (\ref{eq:penalty})
is equivalent to the original problem (\ref{eq:ED}) .
\begin{LEMM}\label{le:penalty}
Let $\x(\lambda) \in \Real^Z $ be an optimal solution of (\ref{eq:penalty}).
There exists a $\hat{\lambda} > 0$ such that $\x(\lambda)$ is an optimal solution
of (\ref{eq:ED}) for $\forall \lambda \ge \hat{\lambda}$.
\end{LEMM}
\textbf{Proof:}
Let $\hat{\phi}$ be the optimal value of the following optimization problem;
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lclcl}
\hat{\phi} &:=& \min &:& \max\{\x^T \A \x - 2 \theta, 0\} \\
&& \mbox{subject to} &:& \x \in \hat{\FC}.
\end{array} \label{eq:phi}
\end{eqnarray}
From this definition, $\phi$ can take either zero or a positive number.
If $\hat{\phi} = 0$, the quadratic constraint $\x^T \A \x \le 2 \theta$ holds for $\forall \x \in \hat{\FC}$.
Therefore, this constraint vanishes from (\ref{eq:ED}) and the penalty term
in (\ref{eq:penalty}) has no effect.
Hence, the two problems (\ref{eq:ED}) and (\ref{eq:penalty}) are equivalent
for any $\lambda \ge 0$.
For the case $\hat{\phi} > 0$,
since $\hat{\FC}$ is composed of a finite number of points,
the reciprocal number of $\hat{\phi}$ is a finite number.
Therefore, we can take
$\hat{\lambda} = \frac{ \max\{ g_i : i = 1, \ldots, Z\} - \min\{ g_i : i = 1, \ldots, Z\} + 1}{\hat{\phi}}$.
To show this by a contradiction, we assume that
$\x(\lambda)^T \A \x(\lambda) \le 2 \theta$ does not hold for $\lambda \ge \hat{\lambda}$. Then, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\g^T \x(\lambda) - \lambda \left( \x(\lambda)^T \A \x(\lambda) - 2\theta \right)
\le \max\{ g_i : i = 1, \ldots, Z\} - \hat{\lambda} \hat{\phi}
< \min\{ g_i : i = 1, \ldots, Z\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Here, we used $\e^T \x(\lambda) = 1$ and $\x(\lambda) \ge \0$ since $\x(\lambda) \in \hat{\FC}$.
On the contrary, from the assumption that (\ref{eq:ED}) has a feasible point, the objective value of (\ref{eq:penalty}) at this feasible point
is at least $\min\{ g_i : i = 1, \ldots, Z\}$. This indicates that $\x(\lambda)$ can not be an optimal solution of
(\ref{eq:penalty}) if $\x(\lambda)^T \A \x(\lambda) > 2 \theta$.
Therefore, we can restrict the feasible region of
(\ref{eq:penalty}) to the set $\{\x \in \Real^Z : \x^T \A \x \le 2 \theta\} \cap \hat{\FC}$,
and the objective function of (\ref{eq:penalty}) is reduced to $\g^T \x$.
Consequently, the optimal solution of (\ref{eq:penalty}) is also optimal
for (\ref{eq:ED}).
\qed
Since the computation for $\hat{\phi}$ is almost as hard as the original ED problem,
it is not practical to compute $\hat{\phi}$. In addition, when we maximize
$f_{\lambda}(\x)$, extremely large $\lambda$ makes the computation numerically unstable.
As an appropriate value for the penalty weight $\lambda$, we make the use of
the Lagrangian multiplier $\lambda_0$ developed in Meuwissen~\cite{MEUWISSEN97};
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lambda_0 := \sqrt{\frac{(\g^T \A^{-1} \g) (\e^T \A^{-1} \e)
- (\g^T \A^{-1} \e)^2}
{8\theta (\e^T \A^{-1} \e) - 4}}.
\end{eqnarray*}
This $\lambda_0$ corresponds to the Lagrangian multiplier
of the constraint $\x^T \A \x = 2 \theta$ in the following optimization problem.
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{array}{lcl}
\max &:& \g^T \x \\
\mbox{subject to} &:& \x^T \A \x = 2\theta,\\
& & \e^T \x = 1.
\end{array}\label{eq:Meuwissen}
\end{eqnarray}
The approach of~\cite{MEUWISSEN97} first solves (\ref{eq:Meuwissen}),
then applies some heuristic method to obtain a solution of (\ref{eq:ED}).
Therefore, a maximization of $\g^T\x - \lambda_0 (\x^T \A \x - 2 \theta)$
over $\e^T\x = 1$ is a natural derivation when we consider (\ref{eq:Meuwissen}).
For $f_{\lambda}(\x)$, we often employ $\lambda$ such that $ \lambda \ge \lambda_0$,
since we put a strong emphasis on the violation with respect to
$\max\{\x^T \A \x - 2 \theta, 0\}$.
We now discuss (\ref{eq:penalty}) from the viewpoint of convex functions.
The function $-f_{\lambda}(\x)$ is a convex function
in the continuous space $\Real^Z$, since $\A \succeq \O$
and $\lambda \ge 0$. Hence, the problem (\ref{eq:penalty})
can be cast as a minimization of a convex function over a discrete feasible set.
An M-convex function~\cite{murota2003discrete} is a discrete convex function
defined on a set in which the sum of the elements of
a feasible point is constant.
A steepest-descent method for M-convex functions
was developed in~\cite{murota2004steepest}.
When
an M-convex function $f^M (\x)$ with a feasible set $\FC^M$ is given,
the steepest-descent method starts from an initial point $\x^0 \in \FC^M$,
and finds the next point $\x^1$ from a neighborhood $\NC(\x^0) \subset \FC^M$
that decreases the objective function $f^M (\x)$ with the largest margin. Here,
$\NC(\x^0) := \{\x + \e_i - \e_j \in \FC^M : i, j = 1, \ldots, n\}$.
In other words, $\x^1$ is chosen so that
$f^M(\x_1) \le f^M(\x)$ for any $\x \in \NC(\x^0)$.
The steepest-descent method continues the search in neighbors,
and it eventually can find a global minimizer
since any local minimizer is a global minimizer when the objective function $f^M$
is an M-convex function.
Though $-f_{\lambda}(\x)$ is not an M-convex function since it can encompass
multiple local minimizers that are not always global minimizers,
the optimization problem with the penalty term (\ref{eq:penalty})
has resemblances to a minimization of an M-convex function.
In particular, the feasible set $\hat{\FC}$ satisfies $\sum_{i=1}^Z x_i = 1$
and the function $-f_{\lambda}(\x)$ is a convex function
in the continuous space $\Real^Z$.
Therefore, we can expect that the steepest-descent method for M-convex functions
will give good direction to solve~(\ref{eq:penalty}).
Furthermore, we can exploit the solution obtained by the conic relaxation problems
in Section~3 to generate a starting point $\x^0$.
When we adjust the steepest-descent method implemented in the software package ODICON~\footnote{\url{http://ist.ksc.kwansei.ac.jp/~tutimura/odicon/index.en.html}}~\cite{TSUCHIMURA} to solve (\ref{eq:penalty}),
we obtain Algorithm~\ref{al:steep}.
Since (\ref{eq:penalty}) is a maximization problem,
Algorithm~\ref{al:steep} is a steepest-ascent method.
\begin{ALGO}\label{al:steep}
A steep-ascent method with a conic relaxation problem for the optimization problem
with the penalty term arising from the ED problem
\begin{adjustwidth}{1.5em}{}
\begin{enumerate}
\item[Step 1:] Solve a conic relaxation problem
(\ref{eq:SDP-R}), (\ref{eq:LP-R}) or (\ref{eq:SOCP-R}).
If (\ref{eq:SOCP-R}) is solved, let $\x^*$ be its optimal solution.
For (\ref{eq:LP-R}) and (\ref{eq:SDP-R}), let $\y_V^*$ be its optimal solution
and set $\x^*$ by $\x_V^* := \y_V^*$ and $\x_F^* := \c_F$.
\item[Step 2:] By sorting $\x^*$,
separate $V$ into the two disjoint set $V_{\frac{1}{N}}$ and $V_0$
such that $x_i^* \ge x_j^*$ for $i \in V_{\frac{1}{N}}$, $j \in V_0$
and that $|V_{\frac{1}{N}}| = N-p$
(ties are broken arbitrary).
Set the initial point $\x^0 \in \Real^Z$ by
$x_i^0 := \frac{1}{N}$ for $i \in V_{\frac{1}{N}}$,
$x_j^0 := 0$ for $j \in V_0$, and $\x_F^0 := \c_F$.
Set the iteration counter $h:=0$.
\item[Step 3:]
Select the steepest swap $i^h \in V_{\frac{1}{N}}$ and $j^h \in V_0$ such that
\begin{eqnarray*}
f_{\lambda}(\x^h - \frac{1}{N}\e_{i^h} + \frac{1}{N}\e_{j^h})
\ge f_{\lambda}(\x^h - \frac{1}{N}\e_i + \frac{1}{N}\e_j) \mbox{ for }
i \in V_{\frac{1}{N}}, j \in V_0.
\end{eqnarray*}
\item [Step 4:]
If there is no improvement, that is $f_{\lambda}(\x^h - \frac{1}{N}\e_{i^h} +\frac{1}{N}\e_{j^h}) \le f_{\lambda}(\x^h)$,
output $\x^h$ as a solution and stop.
\item [Step 5:]
Set $\x^{h+1} := \x^h - \frac{1}{N}\e_{i^h} + \frac{1}{N}\e_{j^h}$.
Swap $i^h$ and $j^h$ by
$V_{\frac{1}{N}} := V_{\frac{1}{N}} \cup \{j^h\} \backslash \{i^h\}$
and $V_0 := V_0 \cup \{i^h\} \backslash \{j^h\}$.
Set $h:= h+1$ and return to Step 3.
\end{enumerate}
\end{adjustwidth}
\end{ALGO}
In Step~2, the number of $\frac{1}{N}$ in $\x^0$ is exactly $N$.
Due to Step~5, this property is kept through the iterations in the algorithm, hence,
the number of $\frac{1}{N}$ in $\x^h$ is also exactly $N$
for any $h \ge 1$.
When no improvement can be found, the algorithm stops by Step~4.
Most computation cost of each iteration in Algorithm~\ref{al:steep}
is consumed at the evaluations of $f_{\lambda}$ in Step~3.
The number of the evaluations is determined by
the size of neighbor around $\x^h$, that is,
$|V_{\frac{1}{N}}| \times |V_0| = (N-p) \times (|V| - (N-p))$.
Therefore, the case $N-p = \frac{|V|}{2}$ requires the heaviest computation cost.
Furthermore, to reduce the computation cost, we focus the evaluation of
$(\x^h - \frac{1}{N} \e_{i^h} + \frac{1}{N} \e_{j^h})^T \A
(\x^h - \frac{1}{N} \e_{i^h} + \frac{1}{N} \e_{j^h})$.
Since ODICON was designed to handle general functions,
it accessed all the elements of $\A$ for each $i^h$ and $j^h$.
By expanding the part as
$(\x^h)^T \A (\x^h)
+ \frac{2}{N} \left( - \e_{i^h} + \e_{j^h} \right)^T (\A \x^h)
+ \frac{1}{N^2} \left(A_{i^hi^h} + A_{j^hj^h} - 2 A_{i^hj^h}\right)$,
we evaluate $(\x^h)^T \A (\x^h)$ and $(\A \x^h)$ only once for each iteration
of Algorithm~\ref{al:steep}.
This saves 95\% of the computation time for Step 3 compared to ODICON.
\section{Numerical results}
In this section, we report numerical results to verify the performance
of the proposed algorithm, Algorithm~\ref{al:steep}.
We implemented Algorithm~\ref{al:steep} with Matlab~R2014b.
We compared the proposed algorithm with GENCONT ~\cite{MEUWISSEN97},
the branch-and-bound method implemented in OPSEL~2.0~\cite{mullin2014opsel, mullin2016using}, and IBM CPLEX~12.62.
We used an Windows PC with Core i7 3770K (3.5 GHz) and 32 GB memory space for cases.
Only when the 32 GB memory space was not enough, we used a Linux server
with Opteron 4386 (3.10 GHz) and 128 GB memory space.
To solve the LP problem~(\ref{eq:LP-R}), the SOCP problem~(\ref{eq:SOCP-R}), and the SDP problem~(\ref{eq:SDP-R}),
we employed CPLEX, ECOS~\cite{DOMAHIDI13}, and SDPT-3~\cite{TODD99}, respectively.
For the steepest-ascent method, we set $\lambda = 2\lambda_0$ as the penalty weight in
the function $f_{\lambda}(\x)$ of ~(\ref{eq:penalty}).
The data tested in the numerical experiments of this paper
are
practical datasets of pine orchards available at
the Dryad Digital Repository\footnote{\url{http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.9pn5m}}
and datasets generated by a simulation software package~\cite{mullin2010using}.
Tables~\ref{table:result50} and \ref{table:result100} present the comparison of
the three conic relaxation approaches.
The number $N$ of chosen genotype is set 50 and 150 in
Table~\ref{table:result50} and Table~\ref{table:result100}, respectively.
The first column in the tables shows the name of algorithms;
for example, CR (LP) is the result of conic relaxation problem (in this case, an LP problem) and
SA (LP) is the result after the application of Algorithm~\ref{al:steep} starting from the solution of CR (LP).
The names for SOCP and SDP are indicated with the same rule.
For CR (LP)-s and SA (LP)-s, we applied Remark~\ref{re:LP} to (\ref{eq:LP-R})
and obtain its solution by sorting $\g_V$.
The second column is $Z$, the number of genotype candidates,
while the third column is $2 \theta$.
The fourth and fifth columns are the objective value $\g^T \x$ and the value $\x^T \A \x$
of each algorithm. For the CR rows, these two values were evaluated at $\x^*$,
the solution at Step~1 of Algorithm~\ref{al:steep}, and for the SA rows,
they were computed with the output solution $\x^h$ at Step~4.
The sixth column is the iteration number of Algorithm~\ref{al:steep}.
The seventh column is the value of $f_{\lambda}(\x^h)$,
where $h$ is the iteration number indicated in the sixth column.
For the CR row, note that $\x^*$ must satisfy the quadratic
constraint $\x^T \A \x \le 2 \theta$,
but $\x^0$ does not always satisfy it.
In contrast, for the SA rows, $f_{\lambda}(\x^h)$ is given at the final solution of Step~4.
The last column is the computation time in seconds.
Since SA (LP) uses the result of CR (LP), the computation time of SA (LP) is the sum of
the computation time of CR (LP) and the steep-ascent method.
In a similar way, SA (SOCP) and SA (SDP) are also the sums.
\begin{table}[tbp]
\begin{center}
\caption{The comparison of the convex relaxation approaches ($N = 50$)}\label{table:result50}
{\small
\
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c|c|c|r|r|r}
\hline
Algorithm & $Z$ & $2 \theta$ & $\g^T \x$ & $\x^T \A \x$ & iter & \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{$f_{\lambda}(\x)$} & time (s) \\
\hline
CR (LP) & \multirow{8}{*}{200} & \multirow{8}{*}{0.0334} & 28.068 & 0.0574 & 0 & -133.895 & 0.07 \\
SA (LP) & & & 25.029 & 0.0334 & 21 & 25.029 & 0.10 \\
CR (LP)-s & & & 28.068 & 0.0574 & 0 & -133.895 & 0.01 \\
SA (LP)-s & & & 25.029 & 0.0334 & 21 & 25.029 & 0.04 \\
CR (SOCP) & & & 26.156 & 0.0334 & 0 & -41.484 & 0.02 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 25.090 & 0.0334 & 13 & 25.090 & 0.06 \\
CR (SDP) & & & 25.386 & 0.0321 & 0 & 18.978 & 1.29 \\
SA (SDP) & & & 25.207 & 0.0334 & 4 & 25.207 & 1.30 \\
\hline
CR (LP) & \multirow{8}{*}{1050} & \multirow{8}{*}{0.0627} & 30.754 & 0.1362 & 0 & -198.235 & 0.37 \\
SA (LP) & & & 22.707 & 0.0627 & 23 & 22.707 & 0.51 \\
CR (LP)-s & & & 30.754 & 0.1362 & 0 & -198.235 & 0.01 \\
SA (LP)-s & & & 22.707 & 0.0627 & 23 & 22.707 & 0.15 \\
CR (SOCP) & & & 25.284 & 0.0627 & 0 & 19.621 & 0.08 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 24.831 & 0.0627 & 2 & 24.831 & 0.09 \\
CR (SDP) & & & 24.938 & 0.0617 & 0 & 24.721 & 27.94 \\
SA (SDP) & & & 24.846 & 0.0627 & 2 & 24.846 & 27.96 \\
\hline
CR (LP) & \multirow{8}{*}{2045} & \multirow{8}{*}{0.0711} & 504.217 & 0.4566 & 0 & -26197.137 & 1.16 \\
SA (LP) & & & 414.591 & 0.0710 & 32 & 414.591 & 1.47 \\
CR (LP)-s & & & 504.217 & 0.4566 & 0 & -26197.137 & 0.01 \\
SA (LP)-s & & & 414.591 & 0.0710 & 32 & 414.591 & 0.32 \\
CR (SOCP) & & & 439.353 & 0.0711 & 0 & 293.122 & 0.06 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 438.386 & 0.0710 & 2 & 438.386 & 0.09 \\
CR (SDP) & & & 438.659 & 0.0706 & 0 & 438.457 & 145.57 \\
SA (SDP) & & & 438.457 & 0.0710 & 1 & 438.457 & 145.59 \\
\hline
CR (LP) & \multirow{8}{*}{5050} & \multirow{8}{*}{0.1081} & 57.630 & 0.3672 & 0 & -1185.866 & 10.17 \\
SA (LP) & & & 38.696 & 0.1080 & 23 & 38.696 & 11.17 \\
CR (LP)-s & & & 57.630 & 0.3672 & 0 & -1185.866 & 0.01 \\
SA (LP)-s & & & 38.696 & 0.1080 & 23 & 38.696 & 0.98 \\
CR (SOCP) & & & 43.036 & 0.1081 & 0 & 42.456 & 0.21 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 42.691 & 0.1080 & 3 & 42.691 & 0.37 \\
CR (SDP) & & & 42.786 & 0.0980 & 0 & 41.327 & 2221.22 \\
SA (SDP) & & & 42.431 & 0.1080 & 3 & 42.431 & 2221.40 \\
\hline
CR (LP) & \multirow{8}{*}{10100} & \multirow{8}{*}{0.0701} & 62.377 & 0.2368 & 0 & -1305.4682 & 46.84 \\
SA (LP) & & & 41.284 & 0.0701 & 32 & 41.284 & 49.87 \\
CR (LP)-s & & & 62.377 & 0.2368 & 0 & -1305.468 & 0.01 \\
SA (LP)-s & & & 41.284 & 0.0701 & 32 & 41.284 & 3.29 \\
CR (SOCP) & & & 47.445 & 0.0701 & 0 & 21.094 & 0.54 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 46.568 & 0.0701 & 2 & 46.568 & 0.87 \\
CR (SDP) & & & 21.265 & 0.0545 & 0 & 13.369 & 5577.80$\dagger$ \\
SA (SDP) & & & 44.662 & 0.0701 & 45 & 44.662 & 5582.46$\dagger$ \\
\hline
CR (LP) & \multirow{8}{*}{15222} & \multirow{8}{*}{0.0388} & 603.783 & 0.4568 & 0 & -67047.589 & 129.55 \\
SA (LP) & && 438.791 & 0.0388 & 42 & 438.791 & 139.03 \\
CR (LP)-s & & & 603.783 & 0.4568 & 0 & -67047.589 & 0.01 \\
SA (LP)-s & & & 438.791 & 0.0388 & 42 & 438.791 & 6.45 \\
CR (SOCP) & & & 468.367 & 0.0388 & 0 & -1042.485 & 0.99 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 460.769 & 0.0388 & 9 & 460.769 & 2.56 \\
CR (SDP) & & & 288.739 & 0.0195 & 0 & 314.493 & 17433.38$\dagger$ \\
SA (SDP) & & & 460.409 & 0.0388 & 43 & 460.409 & 17441.93$\dagger$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
$\dagger$ indicates numerical instability
\end{table}
\begin{table}[tbp]
\begin{center}
\caption{The comparison of the convex relaxation approaches ($N = 100$)}\label{table:result100}
{\small
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c|c|c|r|r|r}
\hline
Algorithm & $Z$ & $2 \theta$ & $\g^T \x$ & $\x^T \A \x$ & iter & \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{$f_{\lambda}(\x)$} & time (s) \\
\hline
CR (LP) & \multirow{8}{*}{200} & \multirow{8}{*}{0.0258} & 24.654 & 0.0304 & 0 & -22.392 & 0.01 \\
SA (LP) & & & 23.355 & 0.0258 & 18 & 23.355 & 0.07 \\
CR (LP)-s & & & 24.654 & 0.0304 & 0 & -22.392 & 0.01 \\
SA (LP)-s & & & 23.355 & 0.0258 & 18 & 23.355 & 0.06 \\
CR (SOCP) & & & 24.015 & 0.0258 & 0 & 0.950 & 0.01 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 23.412 & 0.0258 & 13 & 23.412 & 0.08 \\
CR (SDP) & & & 23.640 & 0.0255 & 0 & 21.783 & 0.82 \\
SA (SDP) & & & 23.521 & 0.0258 & 5 & 23.521 & 0.84 \\
\hline
CR (LP) & \multirow{8}{*}{1050} & \multirow{8}{*}{0.0539} & 27.637 & 0.1214 & 0 & -208.680 & 0.39 \\
SA (LP) & & & 19.805 & 0.0539 & 42 & 19.805 & 0.98 \\
CR (LP)-s & & & 27.637 & 0.1214 & 0 & -208.680 & 0.01 \\
SA (LP)-s & & & 19.805 & 0.0539 & 42 & 19.805 & 0.590 \\
CR (SOCP) & & & 22.432 & 0.0539 & 0 & 18.537 & 0.08 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 22.321 & 0.0539 & 5 & 22.321 & 0.15 \\
CR (SDP) & & & 22.358 & 0.0537 & 0 & 22.242 & 30.49 \\
SA (SDP) & & & 22.324 & 0.0539 & 3 & 22.324 & 30.54 \\
\hline
CR (LP) & \multirow{8}{*}{2045} & \multirow{8}{*}{0.0628} & 478.114 & 0.4219 & 0 & -26349.725 & 1.17 \\
SA (LP) & & & 406.348 & 0.0628 & 65 & 406.348 & 5.00 \\
CR (LP)-s & & & 478.114 & 0.4219 & 0 & -26349.725 & 0.01 \\
SA (LP)-s & & & 406.348 & 0.0628 & 65 & 406.348 & 3.78 \\
CR (SOCP) & & & 421.696 & 0.0628 & 0 & 197.423 & 0.07 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 421.113 & 0.0627 & 3 & 421.113 & 0.25 \\
CR (SDP) & & & 421.497 & 0.0627 & 0 & 364.014 & 165.33 \\
SA (SDP) & & & 421.425 & 0.0628 & 2 & 421.425 & 165.46 \\
\hline
CR (LP) & \multirow{8}{*}{5050} & \multirow{8}{*}{0.0994} & 54.903 & 0.3355 & 0 & -1137.701 & 10.35 \\
SA (LP) & & & 36.509 & 0.0994 & 50 & 36.509 & 17.44 \\
CR (LP)-s & & & 54.903 & 0.3355 & 0 & -1137.701 & 0.01 \\
SA (LP)-s & & & 36.509 & 0.0994 & 50 & 36.509 & 7.03 \\
CR (SOCP) & & & 40.769 & 0.0995 & 0 & 15.408 & 0.25 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 40.629 & 0.0995 & 3 & 40.629 & 0.71 \\
CR (SDP) & & & 40.711 & 0.0992 & 0 & 31.447 & 2164.49 \\
SA (SDP) & & & 40.690 & 0.0994 & 2 & 40.690 & 2164.85 \\
\hline
CR (LP) & \multirow{8}{*}{10100} & \multirow{8}{*}{0.0610} & 60.347 & 0.2245 & 0 & -1395.786 & 46.71 \\
SA (LP) & & & 39.911 & 0.0610 & 62 & 39.911 & 68.54 \\
CR (LP)-s & & & 60.347 & 0.2245 & 0 & -1395.786 & 0.01 \\
SA (LP)-s & & & 39.911 & 0.0610 & 62 & 39.911 & 21.51 \\
CR (SOCP) & & & 44.819 & 0.0610 & 0 & 10.608 & 0.70 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 44.522 & 0.0610 & 7 & 44.522 & 3.12 \\
CR (SDP) & & & 21.374 & 0.0532 & 0 & 18.463 & 6750.06$\dagger$ \\
SA (SDP) & & & 42.810 & 0.0610 & 66 & 42.810 & 6773.05$\dagger$ \\
\hline
CR (LP) & \multirow{8}{*}{15222} & \multirow{8}{*}{0.0300} &575.227 & 0.4318 & 0 & -74482.507 & 128.21 \\
SA (LP) & & & 408.725 & 0.0300 & 90 & 408.725 & 185.33 \\
CR (LP)-s & & & 575.227 & 0.4318 & 0 & -74482.507 & 0.02 \\
SA (LP)-s & & & 408.725 & 0.0300 & 90 & 408.725 & 49.14 \\
CR (SOCP) & & & 444.730 & 0.0300 & 0 & -11.0395 & 1.05 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 441.438 & 0.0300 & 6 & 441.438 & 4.72 \\
CR (SDP) & & & 309.173 & 0.0228 & 0 & -65291.694 & 19467.30$\dagger$ \\
SA (SDP) & & & 406.266 & 0.0300 & 92 & 406.266 & 19525.52$\dagger$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
$\dagger$ indicates numerical instability
\end{table}
For the smallest case
$Z = 200$ and $N = 50$, the SDP relaxation problem attains a remarkable result.
Since the solution in SA (SDP) satisfies the constraint $\x^T \A \x \le 2 \theta$,
this solution is a feasible solution of the original ED problem~(\ref{eq:ED}).
In addition, it holds that $OPT_{ED} \le OPT_{SDP}$ from Lemma~\ref{le:relaxation}.
Therefore, we know $25.207 \le OPT_{ED} \le 25.386$
and we obtain the optimal value of the ED problem
up to an error $0.710\%$.
Since this error is much better than the theoretical bounds discussed in Lemma~\ref{le:SDP-R},
the combination of the SDP relaxation and the steepest-ascent method performs
very well in this case.
In addition, we can make sure that the objective values of CR (LP)
and CR (LP)-s are same, and
this indicates that Assumption~\ref{as:A} holds in the numerical tests.
As a result, we can obtain the solution of
the LP relaxation problem~(\ref{eq:LP-R}) without solving it as an LP problem,
as noted in Remark~\ref{re:LP}.
From Tables~\ref{table:result50} and \ref{table:result100},
we observe in the cases $Z \le 5050$ that
$OPT_{SDP} \le OPT_{SOCP} \le OPT_{LP}$ from the values of $\g^T\x$
in the CR~(LP), CR~(SOCP), and CR~(SDP) rows.
This result supports the validity of Lemma~\ref{le:relaxation}.
However, we also observe for large instances $Z \ge 10100$
that $\g^T \x$ of CR (SDP) is lower than that of CR (SOCP).
A principal reason of this inconsistent phenomenon is a premature termination of SDPT-3.
These inaccurate values of CR (SDP) were mainly caused by
the lack of interior-feasible points in~(\ref{eq:SDP-R}); see Remark~\ref{re:SDP}.
The SOCP relaxation problem~(\ref{eq:SOCP-R}) provides
highly numerical stability compared to the SDP relaxation
problem~(\ref{eq:SDP-R}). This can be regarded as an advantage
of the SOCP relaxation approach.
As a next viewpoints,
the violations of the solution generated
by the steep-ascent method against $\x^T \A \x \le 2 \theta$ are remarkably small.
This is mainly because we set $\lambda$ large enough
based on the Lagrangian multiplier $\lambda_0$.
Therefore, the maximization of the function with the penalty term (\ref{eq:penalty})
can provide a suitable solution for the ED problem~(\ref{eq:ED}).
A comparison of the results of the steepest-ascent methods that starts
from the three conic relaxation indicates that
if SDPT-3 obtained sensible solutions ($Z \le 5050$),
the output objective values $\g^T \x$ of SA~(SDP) and SA~(SOCP)
were close to each other, but much higher than that of SA~(LP).
This implies that the SOCP relaxation problem
and the SDP relaxation problem provided good starting points
for the steepest-ascent method.
This point is also indicated in the iteration number of the steepest-ascent methods.
The iteration numbers of SA~(SDP) and SA~(SOCP)
are much less than that of SA~(LP).
For example, when $Z = 2045$ and $N = 100$,
SA~(SDP) and SA~(SOCP) required only two and three iterations, respectively,
while SA~(LP) required 65 iterations.
Therefore, we can infer that the solutions of
the SDP relaxation problem
and the SOCP relaxation problem are close to local maximizer of $f_{\lambda}(\x)$.
When we move our focus from the solution quality to the computation time,
the computation of SA~(SOCP) is much shorter than SA~(SDP).
This was mainly because we can aggressively exploit the structure of
the Wright numerator matrix $\A$
through the SOCP approach discussed in \cite{yamashita2015efficient}.
Since the objective values $\g^T \x$ of SA~(SOCP) and SA~(SDP) are competitive,
SA~(SOCP) can be considered as the most efficient approach
among the three SA~(LP), SA~(SOCP), and SA~(SDP).
Judging from these results, we chose the SOCP relaxation problem for generating the starting point
when we compare Algorithm~\ref{al:steep}
against the existing approaches, GENCONT, OPSEL, and CPLEX.
Since OPSEL and CPLEX utilized the brand-and-bound framework,
we can expect their solution are close to the real optimal solution of
the ED problem~(\ref{eq:ED}).
Tables~\ref{table:compare50} and \ref{table:compare100} present the comparison of
Algorithm~\ref{al:steep}, GENCONT and OPSEL (Version 2.0), CPLEX (Version 12.62)
for the numbers of selected genotypes $N = 50$ and $N = 100$.
We tried to execute GENCONT2, a new version of GENCONT,
but its binary file did not work on our computational environment. Therefore, we used GENCONT1 for the comparison.
In the tables, we evaluate $f_{\lambda}(\x)$ in seventh column at the solution obtained
from each algorithm
and the eighth column reports
the number of chosen genotypes $|\{ i : x_i > 0\}|$.
For OPSEL and CPLEX, we set the time limit as three hours and
the tolerance gap as $1\%$.
When OPSEL and CPLEX reached the time limit,
we obtained a feasible solution from OPSEL,
but we could not extract sensible solutions from CPLEX.
GENCONT could not solve large instances ($Z = 10100$ and $Z = 15222$)
due to out of memory.
\begin{table}[tbp]
\begin{center}
\caption{The comparison of GENCONT, OPSEL, CPLEX, and the proposed algorithm ($N = 50$)}\label{table:compare50}
{\small
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c|c|c|c|c|r}
\hline
Algorithm & $Z$ & $2{\theta}$ & $ \g^T \x$ & $\x^T \A \x$ & $f_{\lambda}(\x)$ & \#chosen & time (s) \\
\hline
GENCONT & \multirow{4}{*}{200} & \multirow{4}{*}{0.0334} & 25.290 & 0.0342 & 20.087 & 50 & 0.06 \\
OPSEL & & & 25.191 & 0.0334 & 25.191 & 50 & 1779.13 \\
CPLEX & & & 25.190 & 0.0334 & 25.190 & 50 & 4270.77 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 25.090 & 0.0334 & 25.090 & 50 & 0.06 \\
\hline
GENCONT & \multirow{4}{*}{1050} & \multirow{4}{*}{0.0627} & 24.983 & 0.0627 & 24.983 & 48 & 7.91 \\
OPSEL && & 24.858 & 0.0627 & 24.858 & 50 & $>$ 10800 \\
CPLEX & & & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{Cannot obtain a sensible solution in 3 hours} & $>$ 10800 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 24.831 & 0.0627 & 24.831 & 50 & 0.09 \\
\hline
GENCONT & \multirow{4}{*}{2045} & \multirow{4}{*}{0.0711} & 437.049 & 0.0694 & 437.049 & 50 & 88.46 \\
OPSEL & & & 435.826 & 0.0692 & 435.826 & 50 & 16.08 \\
CPLEX & & & 436.213 & 0.0680 &436.212 & 50 & 0.37 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 438.386 & 0.0710 & 438.386 & 50 & 0.09 \\
\hline
GENCONT & \multirow{4}{*}{5050} & \multirow{4}{*}{0.1081} & 42.780 & 0.1089 & -306.701 & 50 & 1769.72 \\
OPSEL & & & 42.702 & 0.1081 & 42.702 & 50 & $>$ 10800 \\
CPLEX & & & 42.456 & 0.1066 & 42.456 & 50 & 2.02 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 42.691 & 0.1080 & 42.691 & 50 & 0.37 \\
\hline
GENCONT & \multirow{4}{*}{10100} & \multirow{4}{*}{0.0701} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{Out of memory} \\
OPSEL & & & 46.252 & 0.0700 & 46.252 & 50 & $>$ 10800 \\
CPLEX & & & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{Cannot obtain a sensible solution in 3 hours} & $>$ 10800 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 46.568 & 0.0701 & 46.568 & 50 & 0.87 \\
\hline
GENCONT & \multirow{4}{*}{15222} & \multirow{4}{*}{0.0388} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{Out of memory} \\
OPSEL & & & 459.040 & 0.0388 & 459.040 & 50 & $>$ 10800 \\
CPLEX & & & 459.135 & 0.0386 & 459.135 & 50 & 39.20 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 460.769 & 0.0388 & 460.769 & 50 & 2.56 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[tbp]
\begin{center}
\caption{The comparison of GENCONT, OPSEL, CPLEX, and the proposed algorithm ($N = 100$)}\label{table:compare100}
{\small
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c|c|c|c|c|r}
\hline
Algorithm & $Z$ & $2{\theta}$ & $ \g^T \x$ & $\x^T \A \x$ & $f_{\lambda}(\x)$ & \#chosen & time (s) \\
\hline
GENCONT & \multirow{4}{*}{200} & \multirow{4}{*}{0.0258} & 23.640 & 0.0261 & 21.253 & 100 & 0.07 \\
OPSEL & & & 23.551 & 0.0258 & 23.551 & 100 & $>$ 10800 \\
CPLEX & & & 23.508 & 0.0258 & 23.508& 100 & 1.42 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 23.412 & 0.0258 & 23.412 & 100 & 0.08 \\
\hline
GENCONT & \multirow{4}{*}{1050} & \multirow{4}{*}{0.0539} & 22.749 & 0.0539 & 22.749 & 91 & 9.63 \\
OPSEL & & & 22.275 & 0.0539 & 22.275 & 100 & 304.89 \\
CPLEX & & & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{Cannot obtain a sensible solution in 3 hours} & $>$ 10800 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 22.321 & 0.0539 & 22.321 & 100 & 0.15 \\
\hline
GENCONT & \multirow{4}{*}{2045} & \multirow{4}{*}{0.0628} & 421.005 & 0.0632 & 392.893 & 100 & 105.40 \\
OPSEL & & & 419.600 & 0.0613 & 419.600 & 100 & 6.85 \\
CPLEX & & & 420.748 & 0.0619 & 420.748 & 100 & 0.41 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 421.113 & 0.0627 & 421.113 & 100 & 0.25 \\
\hline
GENCONT & \multirow{4}{*}{5050} & \multirow{4}{*}{0.0995} & 40.692 & 0.0997 & 40.692 & 100 & 1940.43 \\
OPSEL & & & 40.468 & 0.0994 & 40.468 & 100 & 50.46 \\
CPLEX & & & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{Cannot obtain a sensible solution in 3 hours} & $>$ 10800 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 40.629 & 0.0995 & 40.629 & 100 & 0.71 \\
\hline
GENCONT & \multirow{4}{*}{10100} & \multirow{4}{*}{0.0610} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{Out of memory} \\
OPSEL & & & 44.467 & 0.0696 & 44.467 & 100 & $>$ 10800 \\
CPLEX & & & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{Cannot obtain a sensible solution in 3 hours} & $>$ 10800 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 44.522 & 0.0610 & 44.522 & 100 & 3.12 \\
\hline
GENCONT & \multirow{4}{*}{15222} & \multirow{4}{*}{0.0300} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{Out of memory} \\
OPSEL & & & 441.770 & 0.0300 & 441.770 & 100 & $>$ 10800\\
CPLEX & & & 440.996 & 0.0290 & 440.99640 & 100 & 7.45 \\
SA (SOCP) & & & 441.438 & 0.0300 & 441.438 & 100 & 4.72 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\end{table}
From the numerical results in Tables~\ref{table:compare50} and \ref{table:compare100},
the objective values of SA~(SOCP) are close to those of GENCONT, OPSEL,
and CPLEX. Since the cost vector $\g$ in the objective function is usually generated
from a statistical procedure, the discrepancy in the objective values
make a little difference for practical use.
However, GENCONT sometimes failed to satisfy the constraints;
the quadratic constraint $\x^T \A \x \le 2 \theta$ was violated
in the $Z = 200$ or $Z = 5050$ cases, and
the number of the chosen genotypes did not match the input $N$.
Therefore, the quality of SA (SOCP) was superior to that of GENCONT.
From the viewpoint of the computation time, of SA~(SOCP) is much faster than GENCONT.
In particular, for the case $Z = 5050$,
SA~(SOCP) used less than one seconds, while GENCONT required 1700 seconds.
The computation times of the branch-and-bound framework were
unpredictable. In $N = 50$, OPSEL and CPLEX required longer computation
for a small problem $Z = 200$ than for a large problem $Z = 2045$.
It is very difficult to estimate the computation time required by
OPSEL and CPLEX in advance due to a nature of the branch-and-bound framework.
In contrast, SA~(SOCP) consumed longer computation time for larger problems
and this property is favorable for practical use.
\section{Conclusion and Future Directions}
In this paper, we introduced the conic relaxation approach based on
LP, SOCP, and SDP for the special-case ED selection problem that is commonly encountered in tree breeding.
We discussed the strength of the three conic relaxation problems,
and gave the theoretical bounds of the randomized algorithm that uses the SDP relaxation problem.
The fact that the theoretical bounds are not so sharp motivated us to implement
the steep-ascent method so that we can acquire a suitable solution for practical usage.
From the numerical results, we found that the steep-ascent method
with the SOCP relaxation was the most effective among the three conic
relaxation approaches, and that this outperformed the existing methods,
in particular, from the viewpoint of computation time.
One of further directions is to find a better theoretical bounds for the
conic relaxation problems. In the discussions of this paper,
we mainly relied on the positive semidefiniteness of and non-negativity of
the Wright numerator matrix $\A$. Since the specific values of the elements
in this matrix strongly relate to the pedigree of the candidate pool,
there is a possibility that we exploit such structures
to tighten the theoretical bounds discussed in Lemma~\ref{le:SDP-R}.
However, we also need to reduce the computation time of the SDP relaxation problem
to make the SDP approach effective.
Another research direction is to minimize inbreeding depression~\cite{lindgren2009unequal}.
The objective function there is of form $(1- (\mbox{ID}) \x^T \A \x) \g^T \x$, where
ID is a constant that represents a regression slope.
Since the function is a cubic function with respect to the contribution $\x$,
this function is not even a convex function.
From the numerical results in this paper,
we expect that a similar method to the steep-ascent method may perform well
for solving such a problem.
The minimization of the inbreeding depression will be an interesting problem
to researchers in the optimization field.
\setlength\baselineskip{1pt
\setlength{\itemsep}{0cm}
\setlength{\parskip}{0cm}
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
|
\section{Introduction}
In this paper, we propose a new linear algebraic approach to the
computation of Tarskian semantics, i.e., the standard semantics for
first-order logic. Tarskian semantics determines the truth value
$\denote{F}$ of first-order formulas $F$ in a model ${\bf M}$ based on
a relational structure comprised of a non-empty domain ${\cal D}$ and
relations over ${\cal D}$, using an interpretation associated with
${\bf M}$ that maps constants to entities in ${\cal D}$ and predicate
symbols to the relations. $\denote{F}$ is step-by-step determined in
${\bf M}$ along the syntactic structure of $F$. What we propose here
is to carry out this evaluation in another model isomorphically copied
to the $N$-dimensional Euclidean space $\mathds{R}^N$, when the
first-order language ${\cal L}$ we use has only $N$ constants and
correspondingly ${\cal D}$ contains $N$ entities.
More precisely, given a finite model ${\bf M}$, we first encode
entities in ${\cal D}$ into vectors in $\mathds{R}^N$ where $N$ is the
cardinality of ${\cal D}$ and also encode $k$-ary relations in ${\bf
M}$ to order-$k$ adjacency tensors in multi-linear algebra. Then to
evaluate a logical formula $F$ in prenex normal form, starting from
atoms, we inductively derive a set $\Sigma_F$ of algebraic formulas in
multi-linear algebra augmented with a nonlinear operation. Evaluating
$\Sigma_F$ in $\mathds{R}^N$ gives the truth value $\denote{F}$ in
{\bf M}, that is, $\denote{F} =1$ if ${\bf M} \models F$ else
$\denote{F}=0$.\\
Our proposal is motivated by recent work on logical inference
concerning knowledge graphs(KGs). KGs are graphs encoding RDF triples
of the form $({\rm subject}:s,\, {\rm predicate}:p,\, {\rm object}:o)$
and can be considered as a set of ground atoms of the form $p(s,o)$.
There are huge KGs available such as Freebase\cite{Bollacker08}.
The problem is that although they are good resources of the real world
information and logically simple, they are huge, containing tens of
millions of nodes and furthermore incomplete; there are lots of
inconsistent data and also lots of missing data. To carry out various
KG tasks such as computing the truth value (or more generally
probability) of $p(s,o)$ while coping with the sheer amount of data
and incompleteness, three major approaches are developed
\cite{Nickel15}; one that is based on probabilistic models, one that
uses explicit features sampled from the graph and one that learns
latent feature vectors from the graph. The last approach, latent
feature approach, compiles entities and predicates in the domain into
vectors and tensors\cite{Kolda09} respectively and apply various
linear algebraic operations, with dimension reduction, to compute the
probability of ${p(s,o)}$.
In the development of these approaches, formulas beyond ground atoms
are introduced and investigated such as existentially quantified
conjunctions as queries and definite clauses as constraints on KGs
\cite{Grefenstette13,Rocktaschel15b,Krompass14,Guu15,Yang15}.
However, from a logical point of view, their treatment was confined to
propositional logic level and the evaluation of general first-order
formulas is left untouched except for the work done by Grefenstette
\cite{Grefenstette13}. Regrettably, while he succeeded in completely
embedding the fragment of model theory, model theory of
quantifier-free first-order logic, in tensor spaces, quantified
formulas were excluded and had to be treated separately by another
framework. Nested quantification was not allowed either. So how to
evaluate arbitrarily quantified formulas in a vector space still
remains open.
We solve this problem by introducing specific tensors for existential
quantifiers together with a nonlinear operation. Our contribution is
two-fold. First we introduce a single framework for the evaluation of
quantified first-order formulas in a vector space, assuming the domain
is finite, thus solving the remaining problem.
The second contribution is to present a concrete method, based on our
framework, to compute the least model of Datalog programs in a vector
space, which opens up a completely new way of evaluating recursive
programs, though we have to skip details due to page limitations and
only sketch experimental result.
At this point it would be beneficial to ask why evaluating logical
formulas in a vector space is an interesting idea. First, there are a
rich family of algebraic operations available in a vector space such
as inner product, outer product, projection, PCA, SVD and so on that
helps analyzing and manipulating vector data. Second, basically they
are of polynomial time complexities, so we can expect efficient
computation. Last but not least, approximation through various matrix
and tensor decomposition potentially leads to logical inference for
Web scale symbolic data.
We assume the reader is familiar with basics of logic and linear
algebra including matrices and tensors\cite{Kolda09,Cichocki09}.
\section{Preliminaries}
We first review some terminology in logic. We assume our first order
language ${\cal L}$ contains $N$ constants $\{e_1,\ldots,e_N \}$ and
no function symbols.
A model $\mathbf M=({\cal D},I)$ is a pair of domain, a nonempty set
${\cal D}$ and an interpretation $I$ that maps constants ${e_i}$ to
elements (entities, individuals) $I(e_i) \in {\cal D}$ and k-ary
predicate symbols $r$ to k-ary relations $I(r) \subseteq {\cal
D}\overbrace{\times\cdots\times}^{k\;{\rm times}}{\cal D}$. An
assignment $a$ is a mapping from variables $x$ to an element $a(x) \in
{\cal D}$. It provides a way of evaluating formulas containing free
variables. Syntactically terms mean variables and/or constants and
atomic formulas or atoms $r(t_1,\ldots,t_k)$ are comprised of a
$k$-ary predicate symbol $r$ and $k$ terms $t_1,\ldots,t_k$ some of
which may be variables. Formulas $F$ in ${\cal L}$ are inductively
constructed as usual from atoms using logical connectives (negation
$\neg$, conjunction $\wedge$, disjunction $\vee$) and quantifiers
($\exists$,$\forall$).
Now we define free/bound occurrences of variables in $F$. When $F$ is
an atom, all variables in $F$ occur free in $F$. When $F$ is a
negation $\neg F_1$, disjunction $F_1 \vee F_2$ or conjunction $F_1
\wedge F_2$, free variables in $F_1$ and those in $F_2$ both occur
free in $F$ and vice versa. When $F$ is an existentially quantified
formula $\exists x F_1$, free variables in $F_1$ except $x$ occur free
in $F$ and vice versa. Variables in $F$ that do not occur free in $F$
are said to be bound. A formula is closed if it has no free variable
whereas it is open if it has no quantification.
Given a model $\mathbf M=({\cal D},I)$ and an assignment $a$, the
denotation $\denote{E}_{I,a}$ in $\mathbf{M}$ of an expression $E$ is
inductively defined for terms $t$ and formulas $F$ as follows.
$\denote{t}_{I,a} =I(t) \;\mbox{if $t$ is a constant, else}\; a(t)$.
When $r$ is a $k$-ary relation symbol,
$\denote{r(t_1,\ldots,t_k)}_{I,a} = 1({\rm true})$ {if}
$(\denote{t_1}_{I,a},\ldots,\denote{t_k}_{I,a}) \in I(r)$, else
0(false). Let $F_1,F_2$ be formulas. For a negation ${\neg F_1}$, we
define $\denote{\neg F_1}_{I,a} =1 - \denote{F_1}_{I,a}$.
$\denote{F_1 \vee F_2}_{I,a} =1$ if $\denote{F_1}_{I,a}=1$ or
$\denote{F_2}_{I,a}=1$, else 0. $\denote{\exists x F_1}_{I,a} =1$ if
there exists some $d \in {\cal D}$ such that
$\denote{F_1}_{I,a[x\leftarrow d]}=1$, else 0. Here $a[x\leftarrow
d]$ is a new assignment that is the same as $a$ except that it
assigns $d$ to the variable $x$. Finally $\denote{A \wedge B}_{I,a} =
\denote{\neg (\neg A \vee \neg B)}_{I,a}$ and $\denote{\forall x
F_1}_{I,a} = \denote{\neg \exists x \neg F_1}_{I,a}$. For any
formula $F$, $\denote{F}_{I,a} \in \{1,0\}$ and when $\denote{F}_{I,a}
= 1$, we write ${\mathbf M} \models_a F$. However when $F$ is closed,
since $\denote{F}_{I,a}$ does not depend on the assignment $a$, we
just write $\denote{F}$ and ${\mathbf M} \models F$ if $F$ is true in
$\mathbf M$. For formulas $F,G$, we say $F$ and $G$ are equivalent and
write $F \equiv G$ if $\denote{F}_{I,a} = \denote{G}_{I,a}$ for any
model ${\mathbf M}$, any interpretation $I$ and any assignment $a$.
In what follows, $I,a$ are omitted when they are clear from the
context.
Then recall that a literal is an atom (positive literal) or its
negation (negative literal). Suppose $F$ is an open formula. $F$ has
an equivalent formula in disjunctive normal form (DNF)
$A_1\vee\cdots\vee A_k$ such that each disjunct $A_i$ is a monomial,
i.e., conjunction of literals. Dually $F$ has an equivalent formula
in conjunctive normal form (CNF) $A_1\wedge\cdots\wedge A_k$ such that
each conjunct $A_i$ is a clause, i.e., disjunction of literals.
It is known that every formula has an equivalent formula in prenex
normal form $Q_1x_1\cdots Q_mx_m G$ where $Q_1,\ldots,Q_m$ are
quantifiers $\exists, \forall$ and $G$ is open. So to evaluate the
truth value $\denote{F}$ of a given $F$ in $\mathbf M$, since $G$ is
equivalent to DNF or CNF, we have only to evaluate a prenex normal
form $Q_1x_1\cdots Q_mx_m G$ where $G$ is an open DNF or CNF.
Note the subformula $Q_mx_m G$. Since DNF and CNF are convertible to
each other, it is equivalent to $\exists$-DNF or $\forall$-CNF where
$\exists$-DNF is a class of formulas $F$ such that $F$ is a
disjunction of disjuncts $\exists\,x(L_1\wedge\dots\wedge L_M)$
comprised of literals $L_1,\ldots,L_M$, whereas $\forall$-CNF is a
class of formulas $F$ such that $F$ is a conjunction of conjuncts
$\forall\,x(L_1\vee\dots\vee L_M)$. Suppose $F = Q_1x_1\cdots Q_mx_m
G$ is given. We may assume, without loss of generality, that if $Q_m =
\exists$, $Q_mx_m G$ is in $\exists$-DNF. Otherwise $Q_mx_m G$ is in
$\forall$-CNF.
Now we turn to vector spaces. We consider tensors as multi-linear
maps as mathematical objects and multi-way arrays as data structure
depending on the context\cite{Kolda09,Cichocki09}. Although tensors
are a generalization of vectors and matrices, we specifically say
vectors and matrices when their shape needs to be distinguished.
In what follows, scalars are denoted by lower case letters like $a$.
Vectors mean column vectors and we denote them by boldface lower case
letters like $\mbf{a}$ and $\mbf{a}$'s components by $a_i$. ${\cal
D}'= \{ \mathbf{e}_1,\ldots,\mathbf{e}_N \}$ stands for the standard
basis of $N$-dimensional Euclidean space $\mathds{R}^N$ where
$\mathbf{e}_i = (0\cdots,1,\cdots,0)^T$ is a vector that has one at
the $i$-th position and zeros elsewhere. Such vectors are called
one-hot vectors. $\mathbf{1}$ is a vector of all ones.
$(\mathbf{a}\bullet \mathbf{b}) = \mathbf{a}^T\mathbf{b}$ is the inner
product of $\mathbf{a}$ and $\mathbf{b}$ whereas $\mathbf{a} \circ
\mathbf{b} = \mathbf{a}\mathbf{b}^T$ is their outer product.
Matrices are assumed to be square and written by boldface upper case
letters like $\mbf{A}$. In particular $\mbf{I}$ is an identity
matrix. $\mathds{1} = \mbf{1}\circ \mbf{1}$ is a matrix of all
ones. ${\rm tr}(\mbf{A})$ stands for the trace of $\mbf{A}$.
Order-$p$ tensors $\in \mathds{R}^{\overbrace{N\times\cdots\times N}^p}$
are denoted by underlined matrices like
${\underline{\mbf A}}$ or $\{a_{i_1,\ldots,i_p}\}$
($1 \leq i_1,\ldots,i_p \leq N$).
${\underline{\mbf A}}$'s component $a_{i_1,\ldots,i_p}$
is also written as $(\underline{\mbf A})_{i_1,\ldots,i_p}$.
Let $\underline{\mbf A}=\{ a_{i_1,\ldots,i_p} \}$ and
$\underline{\mbf B}=\{ b_{k_1,\ldots,k_q} \}$ be tensors.
The mode-($n$,$m$) contracted product
$\underline{\mbf A} \times_{n,m} \underline{\mbf B}$ of
$\underline{\mbf A}$ and $\underline{\mbf B}$
is defined by
$(\underline{\mbf A} \times_{n,m}
\underline{\mbf B})_{i_1,\dots,i_{n-1},i_{n+1},\ldots,i_p,k_1,\ldots,k_{m-1},k_{m+1},\ldots,k_q}
$
$=\sum_{j} a_{i_1,\dots,i_{n-1},j,\ldots,i_p}b_{k_1,\ldots,k_{m-1},j,\ldots,k_q}$
with the convention that the association is to the left, i.e.,
$\underline{\mbf A} \times_{n,m} \underline{\mbf B}
\times_{p,q} \underline{\mbf C} =
(\underline{\mbf A} \times_{n,m} \underline{\mbf B})
\times_{p,q} \underline{\mbf C}$.
So $\underline{\mbf A} \bullet_n {\mbf u}$,
the contracted product of $\underline{\mbf A}$ and vector
${\mbf u}$, which is computed by
$(\underline{\mbf A} \bullet_n {\mbf u})_{i_1,\dots,i_{n-1},i_{n+1},\ldots,i_p}
= \sum_{j} a_{i_1,\dots,i_{n-1},j,\ldots,i_p}u_{j}$
is equal to $\underline{\mbf A} \times_{n,1} {\mbf u}$
and the usual $n$-mode product
${\underline {\mbf A}} \times_n {\mbf U}$
of $\underline {\mbf A}$ and matrix ${\mbf U}$
is equal to $\underline{\mbf A} \times_{n,2} {\mbf U}$.
Tensors can be constructed by outer products;
$(\mbf{a} \circ \mbf{b} \circ \mbf{c})_{ijk} = a_ib_jc_k$
is an order-3 tensor and
$(\underline{\mbf A} \circ {\mbf B})_{i_1,\ldots,i_p,k_1,\ldots,k_q}$
$=a_{i_1,\ldots,i_p}b_{k_1,\ldots,k_q}$
is the outer product of
$\underline{\mbf A} = \{ a_{i_1,\ldots,i_p} \}$
and
$\underline{\mbf B} = \{ b_{k_1,\ldots,k_q} \}$.
\section{Embedding a model into a vector space}
Let $\{e_1,\ldots,e_N\}$ be the set of constants in ${\cal L}$ and
$\mbf{M}=({\cal D},I)$ a model where ${\cal D} = \{e_1,\ldots,e_N\}$
(we here identify $I(e_i)$ and $I(r)$ in $\mbf{M}$ with $e_i$ and $r$
respectively to avoid notational complications). We show how to
replace the evaluation $\denote{F}$ of a prenex formula $F$ in ${\mbf
M}$ with the evaluation of $\Sigma_F$, a set of tensors compiled
from $F$, in $N$-dimensional Euclidean space $\mathds{R}^N$. The
compilation of $F$ into $\Sigma_F$ starts from literals then proceeds
to compound formulas and quantifications.
\subsection{Entities, literals, logical connectives and existential
quantifier}
\label{subsec:model}
First we isomorphically map ${\bf M}$ to a model ${\bf M}'$ in
$\mathds{R}^N$. We map entities $e_i \in {\cal D}$ to one-hot vectors
${\mbf e}_i$. So ${\cal D}$ is mapped to
${\cal D}'= \{{\mbf e}_1,\ldots,{\mbf e}_N\}$, the basis of $\mathds{R}^N$.
We next map a $k$-ary relation $r$ in ${\mbf M}$ to a $k$-ary relation $r'$
over ${\cal D}'$ which is computed by an order-$k$ tensor
$\underline{\mbf R}= \{ r_{i_1,\ldots,i_k} \}$.
$\underline{\mbf R}$ is designed to retain the truth value
$\denote{r(e_{i_1},\ldots,e_{i_k})}$ in {\bf M}
and given by the equation
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{ \denote{r(e_{i_1},\ldots,e_{i_k})} } \nonumber \\
& = & \underline{\mbf R}({\mbf e}_{i_1},\ldots,{\mbf e}_{i_k})
\quad \mbox{as multi-linear map} \nonumber \\
& = & \underline{\mbf R} \times_{1,1}{\mbf e}_{i_1}
\times_{1,2}\cdots\times_{1,i_k} {\mbf e}_{i_k} \nonumber \\
& = & r_{i_1,\ldots,i_k} \in \{1,0\}\;\;
(\forall i_1,\ldots,i_k \in \{1,\ldots,N\}). \label{tensor:atom}
\end{eqnarray}
We identity $r'$ with $\underline{\mbf R}$ for simplicity
and say $\underline{\mbf R}$ encodes the {\bf M}-relation $r$. Let
${\bf M}'$ be a model $({\cal D}',I'$) in $\mathds{R}^N$ such that
$I'$ interprets entities by $I'(e_i) = {\mbf e}_{i}$ $(1\leq i\leq
N)$ and relations $r$ by $I'(r) = \underline{\mbf R}$
introduced by (\ref{tensor:atom}).
We next inductively define the evaluation $\denote{F}'_{I',a'}$ of a
formula $F$ in ${\bf M}'$. Let $a$ be an assignment in ${\bf M}$
and $a'$ the corresponding assignment in ${\bf M}'$, i.e., $a(x)= e_i$
if-and-only-if $a'(x) = {\mbf e}_i$. For a ground atom
$r(e_{i_1},\ldots,e_{i_k})$, we define
\begin{equation}
\denote{r(e_{i_1},\ldots,e_{i_k})}'
= \underline{\mbf R}({\mbf e}_{i_1},\ldots,{\mbf e}_{i_k})
\;(\forall i_1,\ldots,i_k \in \{1,\ldots,N\})
\label{tensor:atom2}
\end{equation}
where
$\underline{\mbf R} = \{r_{i_1,\ldots,i_k}\}$ is the tensor
that encodes the {\bf M}-relation $r$ in {\bf M} (see (\ref{tensor:atom})).
By definition $\denote{F}'_{I',a'} = \denote{F}_{I,a}$ holds for any atom $F$.
Negative literals are evaluated specifically in ${\bf M}'$
using tensors $\neg\underline{\mbf R}$ introduced by
\begin{eqnarray}
\denote{\neg r(e_{i_1},\ldots,e_{i_k})}'
& = & \neg\underline{\mbf R}({\mbf e}_{i_1},\ldots,{\mbf e}_{i_k})
\nonumber \\
& = & 1 - r_{i_1,\ldots,i_k} \nonumber \\
\mbox{where}\;\; \neg\underline{\mbf R}
& \stackrel{\rm def}{=} & \overbrace{\mbf{1}\circ\cdots\circ\mbf{1}}^k
- \underline{\mbf R}
\label{tensor:negatom}
\end{eqnarray}
We say $\neg\underline{\mbf R}$ encodes an {\bf M}-relation $\neg r$\footnote{
$\mbf{1}\circ\cdots\circ\mbf{1}$ is an order-$k$ tensor.
$\mbf{1}\circ\cdots\circ\mbf{1}({\mbf e}_{i_1},\ldots,{\mbf e}_{i_k})$
$=(\mbf{1}\bullet {\mbf e}_{i_1})\cdots (\mbf{1}\bullet {\mbf e}_{i_k})
= 1$ holds.
}. Negation other than negative literals and
conjunction and disjunction are evaluated
in ${\bf M}'$ as follows.
\begin{eqnarray}
\denote{\neg F}'_{I',a'}
& = & 1 - \denote{F}'_{I',a'} \label{tensor:negation} \\
\denote{F_1 \wedge\cdots\wedge F_h}'_{I',a'}
& = & \denote{F_1}'\cdots \denote{F_h}'_{I',a'} \label{tensor:and} \\
\denote{F_1 \vee\cdots\vee F_h}'_{I',a'}
& = & {\rm min}_1(\denote{F_1}'_{I',a'}+\cdots+\denote{F_h}'_{I',a'}) \label{tensor:or} \\
\denote{\exists y F}'_{I',a'}
& = & {\rm min}_1
(\sum_{i=1}^N \denote{{F}_{y\leftarrow e_i}}'_{I',a'}) \label{tensor:exists}
\end{eqnarray}
Here ${\rm min}_1(x) = {\rm min}(x,1) = \mbox{$x$ if $x<1$ else $1$}$
and when applied to tensors, it means componentwise application.
${F}_{y\leftarrow e_i}$ is a formula obtained from $F$
by replacing every free occurrence of $y$ in $F$ with $e_i$.
Universal quantification is treated as $\forall x F = \neg \exists x \neg F$.
It is straightforward to check that the evaluation
$\denote{F}'_{I',a'}$ of a formula $F$ in ${\bf M}'$ by
(\ref{tensor:atom2}), (\ref{tensor:negatom}), (\ref{tensor:negation}),
(\ref{tensor:and}), (\ref{tensor:or}) and (\ref{tensor:exists})
coincides with $\denote{F}_{I,a}$ in ${\bf M}$. However, although
this evaluation is carried out in a vector space, i.e. $\mathds{R}^N$,
it is based on the reduction of quantification to the ground level as
(\ref{tensor:exists}) indicates and contains a lot of redundancy. We
next show how to do the same thing without grounding quantifications.
\subsection{$\exists$-DNF and $\forall$-CNF as tensors}
Now we come to the crucial point of our proposal, evaluating
quantified formulas without grounding. Consider a prenex formula $F =
Q_1x_1\cdots Q_m x_m G$. For the moment we assume the inner most
quantified subformula $Q_m x_m G$ is in $\exists$-DNF.
Let $\exists\,y (L_1 \wedge\cdots\wedge L_M)$ be an arbitrary disjunct
of $Q_m x_m G$ where $L_1,\ldots,L_M$ are literals. We further assume
the {\em variable condition\/} that $y$ occurs once in each
literal $L_m = r_m^{\circ}(x^m_1,\ldots,x^m_{N_m})$ ($1\leq m\leq M$).
Here $r_m^{\circ} = r_m$ if $L_m$ is a positive literal else
$r_m^{\circ} = \neg r_m$. $r_m^{\circ}$ in {\bf M} is called the {\bf
M}-relation contained in $L_m$.
Let $\underline{\mbf R}_m^{\circ}$($1\leq m \leq M$)
be a tensor encoding the {\bf M}-relation $r_m^{\circ}$ defined respectively by
(\ref{tensor:atom}) or (\ref{tensor:negatom}).
So $\underline{\mbf R}_m^{\circ}(\mbf{x}^m_1,\ldots,\mbf{x}^m_{N_m})
= \denote{L_m[x^m_1,\ldots,x^m_{N_m}]}$ holds where
$x^m_i$ ($1\leq i \leq N_m$)
range over the domain of constants ${\cal D}= \{ e_1,\ldots,e_N \}$
while $\mbf{x}^m_i$ correspondingly range over the domain of the standard basis
${\cal D}'= \{ \mbf{e}_1,\ldots,\mbf{e}_N \}$.
The notation $L_m[x^m_1,\ldots,x^m_{N_m}]$ emphasizes that
$x^m_1,\ldots,x^m_{N_m}$ occur in $L_m$.
Suppose $L_m= r_m^{\circ}(x^m_1,\ldots,x^m_{N_m})$ ($1\leq m \leq M$)
has $y$ as the $j_m$-th argument.
Remove $y$, the $j_m$-th argument, from $(x^m_1,\ldots,x^m_{N_m})$.
Write the remaining arguments (with order preserved) collectively as $x^{(m)}_{-y}$ and
consider $ \denote{L_m} = \denote{L_m[x^{(m)}_{-y}]} =
\underline{\mbf R}_m^{\circ}(\mbf{x}^{(m)}_{-y}) $
as a function of $x^{(m)}_{-y}$
or a function of the corresponding arguments $\mbf{x}^{(m)}_{-y}$
over ${\cal D}'^{N_m-1}$ parameterized with $y$.
Then consider $\denote{\exists\,y (L_1 \wedge\cdots\wedge L_M)} \in \{1,0\}$
as a relation combined with arguments (free variables, possibly duplicate)
$(x^{(1)}_{-y},\ldots,x^{(M)}_{-y})$ over ${\cal D}^{\sum_m (N_m-1)}$,
or equivalently, a function applied to $(\mbf{x}^{(1)}_{-y},\ldots,\mbf{x}^{(M)}_{-y})$
over ${\cal D}'^{\sum_m (N_m-1)}$.
We seek a tensor $\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}$ that encodes this function,
i.e., $\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}$ such that
$\denote{\exists\,y (L_1 \wedge\cdots\wedge L_M)}
= \underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}(\mbf{x}^{(1)}_{-y},\ldots,\mbf{x}^{(M)}_{-y})$
holds.
Look at
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{\denote{\exists\,y (L_1 \wedge\cdots\wedge L_M)}} \nonumber\\
& = & \denote{\exists\,y (r_1^\circ(x^{(1)}) \wedge\cdots\wedge r_M^\circ(x^{(M)}))} \nonumber\\
& = & {\rm min}_1 \Big(
\sum_{k=1}^N \prod_{m=1}^M
\underline{\mbf{R}}_m^{\circ}(\mbf{x}^{(m)})_{y\leftarrow \mbf{e}_k}
\Big) \nonumber\\
& = & {\rm min}_1 \Big(
\sum_{k=1}^N \prod_{m=1}^M (\underline{\mbf{R}}_m^{\circ} \bullet_{j_m} \mbf{e}_k)
(\mbf{x}^{(m)}_{-y}) \Big) \nonumber\\
& = & {\rm min}_1 \Big(
\sum_{k=1}^N
\left\{ \big( (\underline{\mbf{R}}_1^{\circ} \bullet_{j_1} \mbf{e}_k)
\circ\cdots\circ (\underline{\mbf{R}}_M^{\circ} \bullet_{j_M} \mbf{e}_k) \big)
(\mbf{x}^{(1)}_{-y},\ldots,\mbf{x}^{(M)}_{-y})
\right\} \Big) \nonumber\\
& = & {\rm min}_1 \Big(
\sum_{k=1}^N
\big( (\overbrace{\mbf{e}_k\circ\cdots\circ\mbf{e}_k}^{M})
\times_{1,j_1} \underline{\mbf{R}}_1^{\circ}
\times_{1,j_2}\cdots \times_{1,j_M} \underline{\mbf{R}}_M^{\circ}
\big) \Big) \nonumber\\
& & \quad\quad (\mbf{x}^{(1)}_{-y},\ldots,\mbf{x}^{(M)}_{-y}) \nonumber\\
& = & {\rm min}_1
\big( \underline{\mbf{Q}}^{\exists,M}
\times_{1,j_1} \underline{\mbf{R}}_1^{\circ} \times_{1,j_2} \cdots \times_{1,j_M}
\underline{\mbf{R}}_M^{\circ}
\big) (\mbf{x}^{(1)}_{-y},\ldots,\mbf{x}^{(M)}_{-y}) \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Here
\begin{eqnarray}
\underline{\mbf{Q}}^{\exists,M} & \stackrel{\rm def}{=} &
\sum_{k=1}^N \overbrace{\mbf{e}_k\circ\cdots\circ\mbf{e}_k}^{M}
\label{quant:exists}
\end{eqnarray}
is a tensor representing the existential quantifier $\exists\,y$.
Summing up, the {\bf M}-relation extracted from $\exists\,y (L_1 \wedge\cdots\wedge L_M)$,
which solely depends on the free variables in it, is encoded by
\begin{equation}
\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}
=
{\rm min}_1
\big( \underline{\mbf{Q}}^{\exists,M}
\times_{1,j_1} \underline{\mbf{R}}_1^{\circ} \times_{1,j_2} \cdots \times_{1,j_M}
\underline{\mbf{R}}_M^{\circ}
\big)
\label{tensor:existsand}
\end{equation}
where $\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\circ}_m$ encodes the {\bf M}-relation contained in
$L_m$ ($1\leq m\leq M$) and the existential quantifier $\exists\,y$
that quantifies $M$ free occurrences of $y$
in $L_1 \wedge\cdots\wedge L_M$
is encoded by an order-$M$ tensor $\underline{\mbf{Q}}^{\exists,M}$
introduced by (\ref{quant:exists}).
We call the equation (\ref{tensor:existsand})
a definition for $\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}$.
Similarly, if $Q_m x_m G$ is
a $\forall$-CNF formula $\forall\,y (L_1 \vee\cdots\vee L_M)$,
the relation in {\bf M} extracted from
$\forall\,y (L_1 \vee\cdots\vee L_M)$ is encoded by
\begin{equation}
\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}
=
\overbrace{\mbf{1}\circ\cdots\circ\mbf{1}}^{\Sigma_m N_m-1} -
{\rm min}_1
\big( \underline{\mbf{Q}}^{\exists,M}
\times_{1,j_1} \underline{\mbf{R}}_1^{\circ} \times_{1,j_2} \cdots \times_{1,j_M}
\underline{\mbf{R}}_M^{\circ}
\big)
\label{tensor:forallor}
\end{equation}
where $\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\circ}_m$ encodes the {\bf M}-relation contained in
$\neg L_m$ ($1\leq m\leq M$) (details omitted).
\subsection{Compiling prenex formulas}
We now compile a prenex formula $F = Q_1x_1\cdots Q_m x_m G$, using
(\ref{tensor:existsand}) and (\ref{tensor:forallor}), into an
associated set $\Sigma_F$ of tensor definitions which computes
$\denote{F}$ without grounding. However there is one problem to solve
before compilation; (\ref{tensor:existsand}), for example, is derived
from $\exists\,y (L_1 \wedge\cdots\wedge L_M)$ under the the variable
condition. When this condition is violated, we need to somehow
recover it.
\begin{figure}[hb]
\rule{0.5\textwidth}{0.25mm}\\ [-1em]
\begin{center}
\begin{description}
\item[{\bf Input:}]
A model {\bf M} for a first-order language ${\cal L}$ with finitely many constants
and a first-order closed formula $F = Q_1x_1\cdots Q_m x_m G$ in ${\cal L}$
in prenex normal form such that no atom has duplicate variables
and G is an open DNF or CNF \\
\mbox{}\\
\item[{\bf Procedure:}]
\item[{\bf [Step 1]}] Set $\Sigma_F = \{ \}$, $G_m = G$ and $F_m = Q_m x_m G_m$;
\item[{\bf [Step 2]}]\mbox{}\\
{\bf For} i = m {\bf down-to} 1 {\bf Do} \\
Write $F_i = Q_i x_i G_i$; \\
If $Q_i = \forall$ then goto {\bf [Step 2-B]}; \\
{\bf [Step 2-A]} \\
Convert $Q_i x_i G_i$ to $\exists$-DNF $G^*_i$; \\
{\bf For each} disjunct $D$ {\bf in} $G^*_i$ {\bf Do} \\
\quad Write $D = \exists\,y (L_1 \wedge\cdots\wedge L_M) \wedge D'$
where $y$ occurs once \\
\quad\quad in each $L_i$ ($1 \leq i \leq M$) and has no occurrence in $D'$; \\
\quad Let ${x}_{\rm free}$ be an enumeration without duplication of \\
\quad\quad free variables in
$D'' = \exists\,y (L_1 \wedge\cdots\wedge L_M) $; \\
\quad Define a new atom by $r^{\rm new}({x}_{\rm free}) \Leftrightarrow D''$; \\
\quad Replace $D$ in $G^*_i$ with $r^{\rm new}({x}_{\rm free})\wedge D'$; \\
\quad Introduce a new tensor $\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}$
by (\ref{tensor:existsand}) encoding \\
\quad\quad the new relation $r^{\rm new}$ in {\bf M}; \\
\quad Add to $\Sigma_F$ the tensor definition for $\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}$; \\
\quad {\bf endDo} \\
Set $F_{i-1} = Q_{i-1} x_{i-1} G^*_i$; \\
{\bf [Step 2-B]} \\
Convert $Q_i x_i G_i$ to $\forall$-CNF $C^*_i$;\\
\quad (the rest is dual to {\bf [Step 2-A]} and omitted) \\
{\bf endDo} \\
\item[{\bf [Step 3]}]
If $F_0 = r_1 \wedge\cdots\wedge r_h$
then put $F^{\rm tensor} = r_1 \cdots r_h$; \\
Else $F_0 = r_1 \vee\cdots\vee r_h$ and
put $F^{\rm tensor} = {\rm min}_1(r_1 +\cdots+ r_h)$; \\
\quad ($r_i$'s are atoms with no arguments, equated with \\
\quad\quad true or false, and hence with $\{1,0\}$) \\
\mbox{}\\
\item[{\bf Output:}]
$F^{\rm tensor}$ with a set $\Sigma_F$ of tensor definitions.
$\Sigma_F$
$\Sigma_F$ encodes new {\bf M}-relations appearing in $S$
and $F_0$ gives $\denote{F}$ in {\bf M}.
\end{description}
\end{center}
\rule{0.5\textwidth}{0.25mm} \\[-1em]
\caption{Compilation procedure of prenex formulas \label{eval:tensor}}
\end{figure}
There are two cases where the condition is violated. The first case
is that some atom $r_m(x^{(m)})$ in $G$ has duplicate occurrences of
variables in the arguments $x^{(m)}$. In this case, let
$\mbf{R}_m$ be a tensor encoding the {\bf M}-relation $r_m$ which
is given by (\ref{tensor:atom}). Let $r^{\rm new}_m(x'^{(m)})$ be a
new atom defined by $r^{\rm new}_m(x'^{(m)}) \Leftrightarrow
r_m(x^{(m)})$ where $x'^{(m)}$ is an enumeration of $x^{(m)}$ without
duplication. It is apparent that a new relation $r^{\rm new}_m$
stands for in {\bf M} is encoded by a tensor
$\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}_m$ such that
$\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}_m(\mbf{x}'^{(m)}) =
\underline{\mbf{R}}_m(\mbf{x}^{(m)})$ where variables
$\mbf{x}'^{(m)}$ and $\mbf{x}^{(m)}$ run over ${\cal D}'$.
We replace every atom in $G$ that violates the variable condition
with a new atom $r^{\rm new}_m(x'^{(m)})$ described above
so that $\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}_m$
encodes the new {\bf M}-relation $r^{\rm new}_m$.
Let the result be $G^*$ and consider $F^* = Q_1x_1\cdots Q_m x_m
G^*$. Obviously when evaluated in ${\bf M}'$, $F^*$ and $F$ give the
same result, i.e., $\denote{F^*}' = \denote{F}' (=\denote{F})$ holds.
So in the first case, we compile $F^*$ instead of $F$.
The second case is that, for example, some $L_i$s in $D = \exists\,y
(L_1 \wedge\cdots\wedge L_M)$ have no occurrence of $y$. In this case,
we just shrink the scope of $\exists\,y$ and rewrite $D$ like $D =
\exists\,y (L_1 \wedge\cdots\wedge L_h) \wedge
L_{h+1}\wedge\cdots\wedge L_M$.
Taking these modifications into account, we summarize our compilation
procedure in Figure~\ref{eval:tensor}. When a model ${\bf M}$ and a
closed prenex formula $F$ are given, the compilation procedure returns
an algebraic formula $F^{\rm tensor}$ and a set $\Sigma_F$ of tensor
definitions. Evaluating $F^{\rm tensor}$ using $\Sigma_F$ gives
$\denote{F}$, the truth value of $F$ in {\bf M}.
\subsection{A compilation example}
Let $F_{ABCD} = \forall x \exists y ((A(x,y) \wedge B(x)) \vee (C(x,y)\wedge D(y))$.
We compile $F_{ABCD}$ into a set $\Sigma_{F_{ABCD}}$ of tensor definitions
along the compilation procedure in Figure~\ref{eval:tensor}.
Let $\underline{\mbf{A}}$, $\underline{\mbf{B}}$, $\underline{\mbf{C}}$
and $\underline{\mbf{D}}$ respectively be tensors encoding
${\bf M}$-relations $A$, $B$, $C$ and $D$.
Set $\Sigma_{F_{ABCD}} = \{ \}$.
First we convert $F_{ABCD}$'s innermost subformula $F_2$ into $\exists$-DNF:
\begin{eqnarray*}
F_2
& = & \exists y ((A(x,y) \wedge B(x)) \vee (C(x,y)\wedge D(y))) \\
& = & \exists y (A(x,y) \wedge B(x)) \vee \exists y (C(x,y)\wedge D(y)) \\
& = & (\exists y A(x,y) \wedge B(x)) \vee \exists y (C(x,y)\wedge D(y)).
\end{eqnarray*}
Next we introduce new atoms and rewrite $F_2$ to $G^*_2$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
r^{\rm new}_{A}(x) & \Leftrightarrow & \exists y A(x,y) \\
r^{\rm new}_{CD}(x) & \Leftrightarrow & \exists y (C(x,y)\wedge D(y)) \\
G^*_2 & = & (r^{\rm new}_{A}(x) \wedge B(x)) \vee r^{\rm new}_{CD}(x).
\end{eqnarray*}
Correspondingly to these new atoms, we construct tensors below
which encode the corresponding relations in {\bf M}
and add them to $\Sigma_F$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}_{A}
& = & {\rm min}_1( \underline{\mbf{Q}}^{\exists,1} \times_{1,2}
\underline{\mbf{A}})
\label{newten:A} \\
\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}_{CD}
& = & {\rm min}_1( \underline{\mbf{Q}}^{\exists,2} \times_{1,2}
\underline{\mbf{C}} \times_{1,1} \underline{\mbf{D}}).
\label{newten:CD}
\end{eqnarray}
We put $F_1 = \forall x F_2 = \forall x G^*_2$ and continue compilation.
We convert $F_1$ to $\forall$-CNF:
\begin{eqnarray*}
F_1 & = & \forall x ((r^{\rm new}_{A}(x) \wedge B(x)) \vee r^{\rm new}_{CD}(x)) \\
& = & \forall x (r^{\rm new}_{A}(x)\vee r^{\rm new}_{CD}(x)) \wedge
\forall x (B(x) \vee r^{\rm new}_{CD}(x)).
\end{eqnarray*}
We introduce new atoms and rewrite $F_1$ to $G^*_1$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
r^{\rm new}_{ACD} & \Leftrightarrow & \forall x\, r^{\rm new}_{A}(x) \vee r^{\rm new}_{CD}(x) \\
r^{\rm new}_{BCD} & \Leftrightarrow & \forall x\, r_{B}(x) \vee r^{\rm new}_{CD}(x) \\
G^*_1 & = & r^{\rm new}_{ACD} \wedge r^{\rm new}_{BCD}.
\end{eqnarray*}
We construct tensors (scalars) for $r^{\rm new}_{ACD}$ and $r^{\rm new}_{BCD}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}_{ACD}
& = & 1 - {\rm min}_1( \underline{\mbf{Q}}^{\exists,2} \times_{1,1}
\neg\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}_{A} \times_{1,1}
\neg\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}_{CD})
\label{newten:ACD} \\
\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}_{BCD}
& = & 1 - {\rm min}_1 ( \underline{\mbf{Q}}^{\exists,2} \times_{1,1}
\neg\underline{\mbf{B}} \times_{1,1}
\neg\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}_{CD} )
\label{newten:BCD}
\end{eqnarray}
and add them to $\Sigma_{F_{ABCD}}$.
Now $\Sigma_{F_{ABCD}} = \{(\ref{newten:A}), (\ref{newten:CD}),
(\ref{newten:ACD}),(\ref{newten:BCD}) \}$.
Finally we put
\begin{eqnarray*}
F_0 & = & G^*_1 \;=\; r^{\rm new}_{ACD} \wedge r^{\rm new}_{BCD}. \\
F_{ABCD}^{\rm tensor}
& = & \underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}_{ACD} \cdot
\underline{\mbf{R}}^{\rm new}_{BCD}.
\end{eqnarray*}
So $\denote{F_{ABCD}}$ in {\bf M} is evaluated without grounding by
computing $F_{ABCD}^{\rm tensor}$ using $\Sigma_{F_{ABCD}} =
\{(\ref{newten:A}), (\ref{newten:CD}),
(\ref{newten:ACD}),(\ref{newten:BCD}) \}$.
\subsection{Binary predicates: matrix compilation}
The compilation procedure in Figure~\ref{eval:tensor} is general. It
works for arbitrary prenex formulas $F$ with arbitrary predicates.
However when $r$ is a binary predicate, the corresponding tensor
$\underline{\mbf R}$ is a bilinear map and represented by an
adjacency matrix ${\mbf R}$ as follows.
\begin{eqnarray}
\denote{r(e_i,e_j)}
& = & ({\mbf e}_i \bullet {\mbf R}{\mbf e}_j)
\;=\; {\mbf e}_i^T {\mbf R}{\mbf e}_j
\;=\; r_{ij} \in \{1,0\} \label{tensor:biatom}
\end{eqnarray}
In such binary cases, we can often ``optimize'' compilation by
directly compiling $F$ using matrices without introducing $\Sigma_F$.
This is quite important in processing KGs logically as they are a set
of ground atoms with binary predicates. Hence we here derive some
useful compilation patterns using matrices defined by
(\ref{tensor:biatom}) for formulas with binary predicates. We
specifically adopt
$\denote{F}_{\bf Mat}$ to denote the result of compilation
using matrices that faithfully follows
(\ref{tensor:atom2}), (\ref{tensor:negatom}), (\ref{tensor:negation}),
(\ref{tensor:and}), (\ref{tensor:or}) and (\ref{tensor:exists})
in Subsection~\ref{subsec:model}.
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{
\denote{\exists y\, r_1(x,y)\wedge r_2(y,z)}_{\bf Mat} } \nonumber\\
& = & \denote{ (r_1(x,e_1)\wedge r_2(e_1,z))\vee\dots\vee
(r_1(x,e_N)\wedge r_2(e_N,z)) }_{\bf Mat} \nonumber\\
& = & {\rm min}_1\Big(\sum_{j=1}^N
\denote{ r_1(x,e_j)\wedge r_2(e_j,z) }_{\bf Mat}\Big) \nonumber\\
& = & {\rm min}_1\Big( \sum_{j=1}^N
{{\mbf x}}^T{\mbf R}_1{\mbf e}_{j}
{{\mbf e}_{j}}^T{\mbf R}_2{\mbf z} \Big) \nonumber\\
& = & {\mbf x}^T
{\rm min}_1\Big( {\mbf R}_1
\big( \sum_{j=1}^N{\mbf e}_{j}{{\mbf e}_{j}}^T \big){\mbf R}_2 \Big)
{\mbf z} \nonumber \\
& = & {{\mbf x}}^T
{\rm min}_1\big( {\mbf R}_1{\mbf R}_2 \big){\mbf z} \label{matrix:ex24}
\end{eqnarray}
Here ${\mbf x}$ and ${\mbf z}$ run over
${\cal D}'= \{ {\mbf e}_1,\ldots, {\mbf e}_N \}$.
Hence the synthesized relation $r_{12}(x,y) \stackrel{\rm def}{=} \exists y\, r_1(x,y)\wedge r_2(y,z)$
is encoded by a matrix ${\mbf R}_{12} = {\rm min}_1\big( {\mbf R}_1{\mbf R}_2 \big)$.
What is important with this example, or with binary predicates in general, is the fact that
$\mbf{Q}^{\exists,2} = \sum_{j=1}^N{\mbf e}_{j}{{\mbf e}_{j}}^T = I$,
an identity matrix, holds.
Similarly by applying (\ref{matrix:ex24}), we can compile
a doubly quantified formula $\exists x\,\exists y\, r_1(x,y)\wedge r_2(x,y)$
as follows\footnote{
When $r(x,y)$ is encoded by $\mbf{R}$ as $(\mbf{x} \bullet \mbf{R}\mbf{y})$,
$r(y,x)$ is encoded by $\mbf{R}^T$ because
$(\mbf{y} \bullet \mbf{R}\mbf{x}) = (\mbf{x} \bullet \mbf{R}^T\mbf{y})$
holds.
}.
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{
\denote{\exists x\,\exists y\, r_1(x,y)\wedge r_2(x,y)}_{\bf Mat} } \nonumber\\
& = & \denote{ \left(\exists y\,r_1(e_{1},y)\wedge r_2(e_1,y)\right)\vee\dots\vee
\left(\exists y\,r_1(e_{N},y)\wedge r_2(e_N,y)\right) }_{\bf Mat} \nonumber\\
& = & {\rm min}_1 \big( \sum_{i=1}^N
{{\mbf e}_{i}}^T
{\rm min}_1( {\mbf R}_1{\mbf R}_2^T ) {\mbf e}_{i} \big) \nonumber\\
& = & {\rm min}_1({\rm tr}({\mbf R}_1{\mbf R}_2^T)) \label{matrix:ex2}
\end{eqnarray}
Hence, a Horn formula $\forall x\,\forall y\, r_1(x,y)\Rightarrow r_2(x,y)$
is compiled into
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{ \denote{\forall x\,\forall y\, r_1(x,y)\Rightarrow r_2(x,y)}_{\bf Mat} } \\
& = & \denote{ \neg\, \exists x\,\exists y\, r_1(x,y)\wedge \neg r_2(x,y) }_{\bf Mat} \nonumber\\
& = & 1 - {\rm min}_1 ({\rm tr}({\mbf R}_1{\neg{\mbf R}_2}^T)). \label{matrix:horn1}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that ${\rm tr}({\mbf R}_1{\neg{\mbf R}_2}^T)$ gives
the number of pairs $(x,y)$ that do not satisfy $r_1(x,y)\Rightarrow r_2(x,y)$.
Consequently ${\rm tr}({\mbf R}_1{\neg{\mbf R}_2}^T)=0$
implies every pair $(x,y)$ satisfies $r_1(x,y)\Rightarrow r_2(x,y)$
and vice versa. Our compilation is thus confirmed correct.
Another, typical, Horn formula $\exists\,y\,r_1(x,y)\wedge r_2(y,z)\Rightarrow r_3(x,z)$
is compiled into
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{
\denote{ \forall x\,\forall z\,
\big( \exists\,y\,r_1(x,y)\wedge r_2(y,z)\Rightarrow r_3(x,z) \big) }_{\bf Mat} } \nonumber \\
& = & 1 - {\rm min}_1\big(
{\rm tr}( {\rm min}_1({\mbf R}_1{{\mbf R}_2}){\neg{\mbf R}_3}^T )
\big). \label{matrix:horn2}
\end{eqnarray}
Again ${\rm tr}\big({\rm min}_1( {\mbf R}_1{{\mbf R}_2}){\neg{\mbf R}_3}^T \big)$
is the total number of $(x,z)$s that do not satisfy
$\exists\,y\, r_1(x,y)\wedge r_2(y,z)\Rightarrow r_3(x,z)$.
So our compilation is correct.
\subsection{Recursive matrix equations}
Our non-grounding linear-algebraic approach yields tensor equations
from logical equivalence, and this property provides a new approach to
the evaluation of Datalog programs. We sketch it using a small
example. Consider the following Datalog program that computes the
transitive closure {\tt r2} of a binary relation {\tt r1}.\\
\begin{tabular}{l}
\qquad {\tt r2(X,Z):- r1(X,Z).} \\
\qquad {\tt r2(X,Z):- r1(X,Y),r2(Y,Z).}
\end{tabular}\\
\noindent
This program defines the least Hearbrand model ${\bf M}$ where {\tt
r1} is interpreted as $r_1$ and {\tt r2} as $r_1$. $r_2(x_1,x_h)$
holds true if-and-only-if there is a chain $x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_h \in
{\bf M}$ ($ h\geq 1$) such that
$r_1(x_1,x_2),r_1(x_2,x_3),\ldots,r_1(x_{h-1},x_h)$ are all true in
{\bf M}. Then we see the logical equivalence
\begin{eqnarray}
r_2(x,z) & \Leftrightarrow & r_1(x,z) \vee \exists y ( r_1(x,y) \wedge r_2(y,z) )
\label{trcl:equiv}
\end{eqnarray}
holds for all $x,z$ in {\bf M}. That means
\begin{eqnarray}
\denote{r_2(x,z)}
& = & \denote{ r_1(x,z) \vee \exists y ( r_1(x,y) \wedge r_2(y,z) ) }
\label{trcl:semeq}
\end{eqnarray}
also holds for any $x,z$. Let $\mbf{R}_1$ and $\mbf{R}_2$ be adjacency
matrices encoding $r_1$ and $r_2$ in {\bf M} respectively. We
translate (\ref{trcl:semeq}) in terms of $\mbf{R}_1$ and $\mbf{R}_2$
as follows.
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mbf{x}^T\mbf{R}_2 \mbf{z}
& = & \denote{ r_2(x,z) } \\
& = & \denote{ r_1(x,z) \vee \exists y ( r_1(x,y) \wedge r_2(y,z) } \\
& = & {\rm min}_1(\mbf{x}^T\mbf{R}_1 \mbf{z}
+ \mbf{x}^T{\rm min}_1(\mbf{R}_1\mbf{R}_2) \mbf{z}) \\
& = & \mbf{x}^T{\rm min}_1(\mbf{R}_1 + \mbf{R}_1\mbf{R}_2) \mbf{z}
\end{eqnarray*}
Since $\mbf{x}, \mbf{z} \in {\cal D}'$ are arbitrary,
we reach a recursive equation
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbf{R}_2 & = & {\rm min}_1(\mbf{R}_1 + \mbf{R}_1\mbf{R}_2).
\label{trcl:mateq}
\end{eqnarray}
It is to be noted that when considered an equation for
unknown $\mbf{R}_2$, (\ref{trcl:mateq}) may have more than
one solution\footnote{
For example, $\mbf{R}_2 = \mbf{1} \circ \mbf{1}$ is a solution.
} but we can prove that the transitive closure is the ``least'' solution
of (\ref{trcl:mateq}) in the sense of matrix ordering\footnote{
Matrices $\mbf{A}=\{ a_{ij} \}$ and $\mbf{B}=\{ b_{ij} \}$ are ordered
by $\mbf{A} \leq \mbf{B}$: $\mbf{A} \leq \mbf{B}$ if-and-only-if
$a_{ij} \leq b_{ij}$ for all $i,j$.
}(proof omitted).
Since (\ref{trcl:mateq}) is a nonlinear equation due to ${\rm min}_1$
operation, it looks impossible to apply a matrix inverse to obtain
$\mbf{R}_2$. However we found a way to circumvent this difficulty and
proved that it is possible to obtain $\mbf{R}_2$ by computing
(\ref{trcl:mateq_sol_1}) and (\ref{trcl:mateq_sol_2}) as follows.
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbf{R}_2 & = & (\mbf{R}_2^{\dagger})>0 \label{trcl:mateq_sol_1} \\
\mbf{R}_2^{\dagger}
& = &
(\mbf{I}-\epsilon\mbf{R}_1)^{-1} \epsilon\mbf{R}_1 \label{trcl:mateq_sol_2} \\
& & {\rm where}\; \epsilon = (1+\| \mbf{R}_1 \|_{\infty})^{-1} \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent
Here $(\mbf{R}_2^{\dagger})>0$ means to threshold all elements in
$\mbf{R}_2$ at $0$, i.e, positive ones are set to 1, o.w. to
0\footnote{
The proof and details are stated in an accompanying paper submitted
for publication.
}.
\section{Experiment with transitive closure computation}
We compared our linear algebraic approach to Datalog evaluation with
state-of-the-art symbolic approaches using two tabled Prolog systems
(B-Prolog \cite{Zhou10} and XSB \cite{Swift12}) and two ASP systems
(DLV \cite{Alviano10} and Clingo \cite{Gebser14}). Although we
conducted a number of experiments computing various programs with
artificial and real data, due to space limitations, we here pick up
one example that computes the transitive closure of random matrices.
In the experiment\footnote{
All experiments are carried out on a PC with Intel(R) Core(TM)
[email protected] CPU, 28GB memory.
}, we generate random adjacency matrices by specifying the number of
dimension $N$ and the probability $p_e$ of each entry being 1 and
compute their transitive closure matrices using
(\ref{trcl:mateq_sol_1}) and (\ref{trcl:mateq_sol_2}).
We set $N=1000$ and vary $p_e$ from $0.0001$
to $1.0$ and measure the average computation time over five runs
(details omitted).
\begin{table}[h]
{\small
\begin{tabular}{rrrrrr}\\\hline
$p_e$ & Matrix & B-Prolog & XSB & DLV & Clingo \\ \hline\hline
0.0001 & 0.096 & 0.000 & 0.000 & 0.000 & 0.000 \\
0.001 & 0.094 & 0.004 & 0.003 & 0.293 & 0.038 \\
0.01 & 0.117 & 2.520 & 1.746 & 10.657 & 14.618 \\
0.1 & 0.105 & 18.382 & 16.296 & 75.544 & 125.993 \\
1.0 & 0.100 & 188.280 & 137.903 & 483.380 & 1,073.301 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Average computation time for transitive closure computation (sec)}
\label{tab:trcl}
\end{table}
Table~\ref{tab:trcl} shows the result. Our approach is termed
``Matrix'' in the table. Two observations are clear. First the
computation time of our approach, Matrix, is almost constant while
others seem linear w.r.t. $p_e$. Second, when $p_e$ is small, $p_e =
0.0001 \sim 0.001$ and matrices are sparse, the Matrix method takes
more time than existing systems but when $p_e$ gets bigger, it runs
orders of magnitude faster than them. The same observation is made
with other programs (details omitted).
\section{Related work}
There is not much literature concerning first-order logic embedded in
vector spaces. The most related work to ours is a formalization of
first-order logic in tensor spaces by
Grefenstette\cite{Grefenstette13}. He actually proposed two
formalizations. The first one represents entities by one-hot vectors,
predicates by adjacency tensors and truth values by two-dimensional
vectors (true by $\top = [1,0]^T$ false by $\bot = [0,1]^T$). AND and
OR are order-3 order tensors whereas NOT is a $2 \times 2$ matrix that
maps $\top$ to $\bot$ and vice versa. The first formalization can
completely formalize a quantifier-free fragment of first-order logic
in finite domains. The second formalization represents a finite set
by a vector of multiple ones (and zeros) and can deal with single
quantification by $\exists$ and $\forall$, but nested quantification
is out of scope. The unification of the first and second
formalizations remains an open problem to his tensor approach.
Krompass et al.~\cite{Krompass14} proposed a way of answering
existential queries of the form $\exists x\, Q_1 \wedge Q_2$ in the
context of low-dimensional embeddings.
Their approach however does
not assign an independent representation to existential quantifiers
and is limited to a narrow class of the form $\exists x\, Q_1 \wedge
Q_2$.
We found no literature on computing the least model of Datalog
programs via solving recursive matrix equations. So the transitive
closure computation presented in this paper is possibly the first
example of this kind.
\section{Conclusion}
We proposed a general approach to evaluate first-order formulas $F$ in
prenex normal form in vector spaces. Given a finite model {\bf M} with
$N$ entities, we compile $F$ into a set $\Sigma_F$ of hierarchical
tensor definitions (equations) with a nonlinear operation. Computing
$\Sigma_F$ in $\mathds{R}^N$ yields the truth value $\denote{F}$ in
{\bf M}. In this compilation process, tensor representation
$\underline{\mbf{Q}}^{\exists,M}$ is introduced to existential
quantifiers themselves for the first time as far as we know. Since
our approach does not rely on propositionalization of first-order
formulas, it can derive tensor equations from logical equivalences.
We exploited this property to derive recursive matrix equations to
evaluated Datalog programs. We empirically demonstrated the
effectiveness of our linear algebraic approach by showing that it runs
orders of magnitude faster than existing symbolic approaches when
matrices are not too sparse.
|
\section{Introduction}
The arithmetics of quadratic forms has a colorful history, and we will be interested in one of its important aspects, \emph{universality}:
a totally positive definite quadratic form with coefficients in the ring of integers $\mathcal O_K$ of a totally real number field $K$
is universal if it represents all totally positive integers.
To slightly simplify our discussion, let us denote by $m(K)$ the minimal arity of such a form.
Starting with the classical fact that $m(\mathbb Q)=4$ (e.g., the sum of 4 squares is universal), the theory of universal forms over $\mathbb Z$ was essentially completed by the 15- and 290- theorems \cite{Bh}, \cite{BH}.
This was followed by a number of results concerning forms over real quadratic fields: besides from some interesting theorems over specific fields of small discriminant obtained by various authors \cite{CKR}, \cite{De}, \cite{Sa},
Kim \cite{Ki}, \cite{Ki2} showed that $\mathbb Q(\sqrt {n^2-1})$ always has an 8-ary universal form and also proved that there are only finitely many values of $D$ such that $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt D)$ has a {diagonal} 7-ary universal quadratic form.
Blomer and Kala \cite{BK}, \cite{Ka} recently used continued fractions to construct, for each $N$, infinite families of real quadratic fields such that $m(\mathbb Q(\sqrt D))\geq N$ in these families.
In general, already in 1945 Siegel \cite{Si} proved that $\mathbb Q$ and $\mathbb Q(\sqrt 5)$ are the only number fields (of any degree) over which the sum of any number of squares is universal (over $\mathcal O_K$). This changes dramatically when one enlarges $\mathcal O_K$: recently Collinet \cite{Co} showed that the sum of five squares is universal over $\mathcal O_K\left[\frac 12\right ]$ for any number field $K$.
Otherwise, not much is known beyond the quadratic case. One of the reasons why the higher degree case is harder is that the theory of continued fractions
and their convergents is not available, and hence we do not understand the arithmetics of $\mathcal O_K$ well enough.
Nevertheless, the goal of this short note is to generalize the aforementioned result of Blomer and Kala to the case of multiquadratic fields, i.e., number fields of the form $K=\mathbb Q(\sqrt {p_1}, \sqrt {p_2}, \dots, \sqrt{p_k})$ with $k\geq 1$ and $p_1, p_2, \dots, p_k\in\mathbb N$.
\begin{theorem}\label{main thm}
For all pairs of positive integers $k$, $N$ there are infinitely many totally real multiquadratic fields $K$ of degree $2^k$ over $\mathbb{Q}$ such that
$m(K)\geq N$.
\end{theorem}
As far as we know, this is the first general result over number fields of degree greater than two. Our general approach is the same as in \cite{Ka}, where
one produces sufficiently many additively indecomposable integers (with suitable additional properties, see Proposition \ref{promen} below).
We proceed by induction on $k$, starting with a quadratic subfield $\mathbb Q(\sqrt {p_1})$ of $K$ in which we can find the desired elements $a_i$. Then we inductively choose sufficiently large integers $p_2, \dots, p_k$ and show that our elements $a_i$ retain their necessary properties. For this we need some
basic results on the arithmetics of totally positive integers in $K$, which we collect in Section \ref{sec 2}.
We first review them in the biquadratic case which is notationally simpler and only then give the general statements.
An interesting question is whether it is possible
to generalize our arguments to other number fields $K$.
One could perhaps hope to push them as far as general totally real fields of even degree over $\mathbb Q$, but this seems not to be easy.
Anyway, as we rely on the existence of a quadratic subfield of $K$, the situation of odd degree fields will certainly require significant new ideas.
\section{Totally positive integers}\label{sec 2}
For the study of universal quadratic forms, we first need to recall some basics about number fields, mostly concerning totally positive integers and indecomposables.
Let $K$ be a totally real number field of degree $d$ over $\mathbb Q$, i.e., $K$ has exactly $d$ real embeddings $\sigma: K\hookrightarrow\mathbb R$.
An element $\alpha\in K$ is \emph{totally positive} if $\sigma(\alpha)>0$ for all $\sigma$. We'll write $\alpha\succ\beta$ if $\alpha-\beta$ is totally positive, and $\alpha\succeq\beta$ if $\alpha=\beta$ or $\alpha\succ\beta$; the semiring of all totally positive algebraic integers is denoted by $\mathcal{O}_K^+$.
Finally, a totally positive integer $\alpha\in\mathcal O_K^+$ is \emph{(additively) indecomposable} if it can't be decomposed as the sum of two totally positive integers.
Let's also make precise our definitions concerning quadratic forms over $K$.
Such an $N$-ary form is defined as $Q(x_1, \dots, x_N)=\sum_{1\leq i\leq j\leq N} a_{ij}x_ix_j$ with coefficients $a_{ij}\in\mathcal O_K$.
We say that $Q$ is \emph{totally positive definite} if $\sigma(Q)(x_1, \dots, x_N):=\sum_{1\leq i\leq j\leq N}\sigma(a_{ij})x_ix_j$ is a positive definite quadratic form for each $\sigma: K\hookrightarrow\mathbb R$. And a form $Q$ is \emph{universal} if it represents all totally positive integers, i.e.,
for each $\alpha\in\mathcal O_K^+$ there are $x_1, \dots, x_N\in\mathcal O_K$ with $Q(x_1, \dots, x_N)=\alpha$.
\subsection{Biquadratic fields}\label{subsec biquad}
In the case of biquadratic fields, the notation and results are clearer, so we'll start with it as an example.
Hence in this subsection, let $K=\mathbb Q(\sqrt p, \sqrt q)$ be a totally real biquadratic number field, i.e., $p$ and $q$ are squarefree positive integers such that $K$ has degree 4 over $\mathbb Q$. Define $$r:=\frac{pq}{\gcd(p,q)^2};$$ for an element $\alpha=a+ b\sqrt p+c\sqrt q+d\sqrt r\in K$ with $a, b, c, d\in\mathbb{Q}$ we order its conjugates as
$\alpha^{(1)}=a+ b\sqrt p+c\sqrt q+d\sqrt r,$
$\alpha^{(2)}=a+ b\sqrt p-c\sqrt q-d\sqrt r,$
$\alpha^{(3)}=a- b\sqrt p+c\sqrt q-d\sqrt r,$
$\alpha^{(4)}=a- b\sqrt p-c\sqrt q+d\sqrt r.$
The ring of integers $\mathcal O_K$ can be explicitly described in terms of the values of $p,q,r$ modulo 4. The precise description is a little technical; we will only need to know that if $\alpha\in\mathcal O_K$, then its coefficients always lie in $\frac{1}{4}\mathbb Z$.
\begin{example}\label{baze}
In the case $p\equiv 3\pmod 4, q\equiv r\equiv 2\pmod 4$, an integral basis for $\mathcal O_K$ can be chosen of the form
$1, \sqrt p, \sqrt q, \frac{\sqrt q+\sqrt r}2$; when $p\equiv q\equiv r\equiv 1\pmod 4$, one can take
$1, \frac{1+\sqrt p}2, \frac{1+\sqrt q}2, \frac{(1+\sqrt p)(1+\sqrt q)}4$ as a basis -- see, e.g., \cite[Proposition 8.22]{Jarvis}.
\end{example}
We will later need to know that the trace of a totally positive integer can't be too small:
\begin{lemma}\label{stopa}
Suppose that $\alpha = a+b\sqrt{p}+c\sqrt{q}+d\sqrt{r} \in \mathcal{O}_K^+$ (with $a, b, c, d\in\mathbb{Q}$). Let $\mathrm{Tr}$ denote the trace from $K$ to $\mathbb{Q}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $b \neq 0$, then
$\mathrm{Tr}(\alpha) > \sqrt{p}$.
\item If $c \neq 0$, then
$\mathrm{Tr}(\alpha) > \sqrt{q}$.
\item If $d \neq 0$, then
$\mathrm{Tr}(\alpha) > \sqrt{r}$.
\end{enumerate}
Finally, if $\alpha \notin \mathbb{Z}$, then $\mathrm{Tr}(\alpha)> \min(\sqrt{p},\sqrt{q},\sqrt{r}).$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
All the cases are analogous, so let's prove only the one when $b \neq 0$. Since $\alpha \in \mathcal{O}_K$, the coefficients $a, b, c, d$ are quarter-integers. The~element $\alpha$ is totally positive, and so $\alpha^{(1)}+\alpha^{(2)}>0$. Hence $a>-b\sqrt{p}$. Similarly, from $\alpha^{(3)}+\alpha^{(4)}>0$ it follows that $a>b\sqrt{p}$.
Since $b$ is a~nonzero quarter-integer, the~inequality $a>|b\sqrt{p}|$ implies that $a>\frac{\sqrt{p}}{4}$, and hence $\mathrm{Tr}(\alpha)=4a >\sqrt{p}.$
\end{proof}
Since we know integral bases explicitly, we can sometimes sharpen the estimates (although we won't need this in the paper). E.g., in the first case from Example \ref{baze}, we have $\mathrm{Tr}(\alpha)> \min(4\sqrt{p},2\sqrt{q},2\sqrt{r})$ if $\alpha\neq 0$.
Similarly as in the quadratic case \cite[Lemma 3]{BK}, the previous lemma implies that all elements of sufficiently small norm are indecomposable:
\begin{prop} \label{normab}
Assume that $\alpha \in \mathcal{O}_K^+$ satisfies $N(\alpha)<2\min(\sqrt{p},\sqrt{q},\sqrt{r})$ and $n \nmid \alpha$ for~every $n \in \mathbb{N}, n>1$. Then $\alpha$ is indecomposable.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Denote by $\delta:=\min(\sqrt{p},\sqrt{q},\sqrt{r})$. For~contradiction, suppose that $\alpha=\beta+\gamma$ where $\beta$, $\gamma \in \mathcal{O}_K^+$. Then we have
\begin{align}
2\delta &> N(\alpha) = \left(\beta^{(1)}+\gamma^{(1)}\right)\left(\beta^{(2)}+\gamma^{(2)}\right)\left(\beta^{(3)}+\gamma^{(3)}\right)\left(\beta^{(4)}+\gamma^{(4)}\right)> \nonumber \\
&>
\mathrm{Tr}\left(\beta^{(1)}\gamma^{(2)}\gamma^{(3)}\gamma^{(4)}\right)+
\mathrm{Tr}\left(\beta^{(1)}\beta^{(2)}\beta^{(3)}\gamma^{(4)}\right) + \text{other (positive) summands}. \nonumber
\end{align}
\noindent The final part of Lemma \ref{stopa} implies that $\beta^{(1)}\gamma^{(2)}\gamma^{(3)}\gamma^{(4)}$ or $\beta^{(1)}\beta^{(2)}\beta^{(3)}\gamma^{(4)}$ must be a (positive) integer.
Without loss of generality, suppose that it is the former. This element then equals each of its conjugates and we have
$$\beta^{(1)}\gamma^{(2)}\gamma^{(3)}\gamma^{(4)}=\beta^{(2)}\gamma^{(1)}\gamma^{(4)}\gamma^{(3)} \in \mathbb{N}.$$
\noindent If we divide the~equality by~the~norm of~$\gamma$ and multiply it by $\gamma^{(1)}$, we get
$$\beta=\beta^{(1)}=\frac{\beta^{(2)}\gamma^{(1)}\gamma^{(4)}\gamma^{(3)}}{N(\gamma)} \gamma^{(1)} =\frac{u}{v} \gamma,$$
where $u$ and $v$ are coprime natural numbers. Then we have $\beta=u\mu$ and $\gamma = v\mu$ for $\mu:=\gamma/v \in \mathcal{O}_K$, so $\alpha = (u+v)\mu$
is divisible by the integer $u+v\geq 2$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
Let us briefly remark that much more is known about the sizes of norms of indecomposables in the quadratic case (thanks to their description in terms of continued fractions) -- see, e.g., \cite{JK}, \cite{Ka2}.
\subsection{Multiquadratic fields}
Let us now turn our attention to general multiquadratic fields. In this subsection, take $k\in\mathbb{N}$ and let $p_1, \dots, p_k$ be squarefree positive integers such that $K:=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt {p_1}, \dots, \sqrt {p_k})$
has degree $2^k$ over $\mathbb{Q}$.
To describe the Galois group of $K$ and its ring of integers $\mathcal O_K$, for $I\subset\{1, \dots, k\}$ we denote by $p_I$ the squarefree part of $\prod_{i\in I}p_i$, i.e., $p_I=\frac 1{\ell^2}\prod_{i\in I}p_i$, where $\ell$ is the largest integer such that the right hand side is an integer.
Clearly, $\{\sqrt{p_I}| I\subset\{1, \dots, k\}\}$ is a $\mathbb{Q}$-vector space basis of $K$ and $\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{p_I} | I\subset\{1, \dots, k\}]\subset\mathcal O_K$.
Let $\sigma_i:K\rightarrow K$ be the automorphism of $K$ defined by $\sigma_i(p_j)=(-1)^{\delta_{ij}}p_j$, where $\delta_{ij}$ is the Kronecker delta.
For $I\subset\{1, \dots, k\}$ let $\sigma_I:=\prod_{i\in I}\sigma_i$, so that $\mathrm{Gal}(K/\mathbb{Q})=\{\sigma_I|I\subset\{1, \dots, k\}\}$.
Note that in the notation of Subsection \ref{subsec biquad}, we have $\alpha^{(1)}=\sigma_{\emptyset}(\alpha)$,
$\alpha^{(2)}=\sigma_{2}(\alpha)$, $\alpha^{(3)}=\sigma_{1}(\alpha)$, and $\alpha^{(4)}=\sigma_{12}(\alpha)$.
\medskip
It is possible to describe a $\mathbb{Z}$-basis for $\mathcal O_K$ explicitly \cite{Sch}; we will only need to know that
\begin{equation}\label{eq ok}
\mathcal O_K\subset \frac 1{2^k}\mathbb{Z}\left[\sqrt{p_I} | I\subset\{1, \dots, k\}\right].
\end{equation}
This follows from the proof of Satz 3.2 in \cite{Sch},
but one can also prove it easily by induction on $k$ in the case when $p_i$ are pairwise coprime (so that $p_I=\prod_{i\in I}p_i$), as we now sketch:
First, at most one of $p_i$ is even, and so we can reorder them so that $p_2, \dots, p_k$ are odd.
Denote by $K_i:=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt {p_1}, \dots, \sqrt {p_i})$. We'll prove the claim by induction on $i$; for the quadratic field $K_1$ it's well-known. Hence it remains to show that $\mathcal O_{K_i}\subset \frac 12 \mathcal O_{K_{i-1}}[\sqrt{p_i}]$ for $i\geq 2$.
Let $\frac a2+\frac b2\sqrt {p_i}\in \mathcal O_{K_i}$ with $a, b\in K_{i-1}$.
Its relative trace from $K_i$ to $K_{i-1}$ is $a$, and so $a\in \mathcal O_{K_{i-1}}$.
Considering its relative norm then implies that $b^2p_i\in \mathcal O_{K_{i-1}}$. By our assumptions on $p_i$, none of its prime factors ramifies in $K_{i-1}$, and so the prime ideal factorization of $b^2p_i\mathcal O_{K_{i-1}}$ implies that $b\in \mathcal O_{K_{i-1}}$, as required.
\medskip
Finally, we will need a generalization of Lemma \ref{stopa}.
\begin{lemma}\label{trace}
Suppose that $\alpha=\sum_{I\subset\{1, \dots, k\}}a_I\sqrt{p_I}\in\mathcal O_K^+$ (with $a_I\in\mathbb{Q}$).
If $a_I\neq 0$, then $\mathrm{Tr}_{K/\mathbb{Q}}(\alpha)>\sqrt {p_I}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We have
$$\sum_{J,\ \# I\cap J\mathrm{\ is\ even}}\sigma_J(\alpha)=2^{k-1}(a_\emptyset+a_I\sqrt{p_I})>0,$$
because $\alpha$ is totally positive, and similarly
$$\sum_{J,\ \# I\cap J\mathrm{\ is\ odd}}\sigma_J(\alpha)=2^{k-1}(a_\emptyset-a_I\sqrt{p_I})>0.$$
Putting these two inequalities together, we see that $a_\emptyset>|a_I|\sqrt{p_I}\geq\frac 1{2^k}\sqrt{p_I}$,
as $0\neq a_I\in\frac 1{2^k}\mathbb{Z}$.
This implies that $\mathrm{Tr}_{K/\mathbb{Q}}(\alpha)=2^ka_\emptyset>\sqrt {p_I}$.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem 1}\label{sec 3}
We are now ready to prove Theorem \ref{main thm}. As in the quadratic case, our approach is based on the following proposition:
\begin{prop}[\cite{Ka}, Proposition 2.1]\label{promen}
Assume that $K$ is a totally real number field such that there are elements $a_1,a_2,\dots,a_N\in\mathcal O_K^+$ such~that for~all $1 \leq i< j \leq N$ we have: if $c \in \mathcal{O}_K$ and $4a_ia_j \succeq c^2$, then $c=0.$ Then there are no universal totally positive $(N-1)$-ary quadratic forms over~$\mathcal{O}_K$.
\end{prop}
We shall not repeat its proof here, but the rough idea is that the inequalities (essentially) force each universal form over $K$ to contain the diagonal subform $a_1x_1^2+\dots+a_Nx_N^2$.
Note that the proposition covers arbitrary integral forms without assuming that they are classical (in the sense of having all cross-coefficients divisible by 2).
Blomer and Kala then used convergents to the continued fraction for $\sqrt D$ to construct the elements $a_1,a_2,\dots,a_N$, and hence to prove the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{BK}, Theorem 1, and \cite{Ka}, Theorem 1.1]\label{forms}
For every $N$ there exist infinitely many squarefree positive integers $D$ such that $K=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt D)$ contains elements $a_1,a_2,\dots a_N$ from~Proposition \ref{promen}. Consequently,
every universal (totally positive) quadratic form over $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{D})$ has at least $N$ variables, i.e., $m(\mathbb Q(\sqrt D))\geq N$.
\end{theorem}
As we already indicated in the introduction, we will now use these results to prove Theorem \ref{main thm}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{main thm}.]
To prove the theorem for a multiquadratic field $\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt {p_1}, \dots, \sqrt {p_k})$, we will proceed by induction on $k$. Theorem \ref{forms} gives the desired result in the quadratic case when $k=1$.
For the induction step, assume that $p_1, \dots, p_{k}$ are pairwise coprime squarefree positive integers, so that $K:=\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt {p_1}, \dots, \sqrt {p_{k}})$ has degree $2^{k}$ and satisfies the assumptions of Proposition \ref{promen}, i.e., there are elements $a_1,a_2,\dots a_N\in \mathcal{O}_{K}^+$
such~that for~all $1 \leq i< j \leq N$ we have that if $c \in \mathcal{O}_{K}$ and $4a_ia_j \succeq c^2$, then $c=0.$
The idea of~our proof is to find some squarefree $q=p_{k+1}$, coprime to all $p_i$, such that in~$L:=K(\sqrt q)$, the~elements $a_i$ still satisfy the~condition of~Proposition \ref{promen}. We will use our knowledge (\ref{eq ok}) about the rings of integers,
combined with Lemma \ref{stopa} which gives a lower bound on the trace of positive integers. In the proof, $\mathrm{Tr}_K$ denotes the trace from $K$ to $\mathbb{Q}$ and
$\mathrm{Tr}_L$ is the trace from $L$ to $\mathbb{Q}$ (note that if $\alpha\in K\subset L$, then $\mathrm{Tr}_L(\alpha)=2\mathrm{Tr}_K(\alpha)$).
Namely, choose a~squarefree~positive integer $q=p_{k+1}$ such that
\begin{itemize}
\item $\sqrt{q}>2^{k+1}$,
\item $\sqrt{q} >8\mathrm{Tr}_K(a_ia_j)$ for~every $1 \leq i <j\leq N$, and
\item $\gcd(p_i,q)=1$ for each $i=1, \dots, k$.
\end{itemize}
To verify the assumptions of Proposition \ref{promen} for $a_1,a_2,\dots a_N\in L=K(\sqrt q)$, suppose that $4a_ia_j \succeq c^2$ for~some indices $1\leq i< j\leq N$ and $c \in \mathcal{O}_L$. This in particular implies that $4\mathrm{Tr}_L(a_ia_j)\geq\mathrm{Tr}_L(c^2)$.
Let $c=u +v\sqrt{q}$ where $u,v \in K$, and let's distinguish three cases:
a) $v=0$. Then $c\in K$, and in fact $c\in\mathcal O_K=K\cap\mathcal O_L$.
Then our assumption on the elements $a_i$ implies that $c=0$.
b) $u=0, v\neq 0$. Then $c^2 = v^2q$ and we have
$$\mathrm{Tr}_L(c^2)=q \mathrm{Tr}_L(v^2)=2q\mathrm{Tr}_K(v^2) \geq \frac 1{2^{k+1}} q > \sqrt{q}.$$
Here the last inequality holds by the first assumption on $q$, and
the inequality $\mathrm{Tr}_K(v^2)\geq \frac 1{2^{k+2}}$ holds since by (\ref{eq ok}), $v\sqrt q\in\mathcal O_L$ implies that $v\in \frac 1{2^{k+1}}\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{p_I} | I\subset\{1, \dots, k\}]$, and then
$v^2\in \frac 1{2^{2k+2}}\mathbb{Z}[\sqrt{p_I} | I\subset\{1, \dots, k\}]$, and is totally positive.
But then we have contradiction with $\sqrt{q} > 8\mathrm{Tr}_K(a_ia_j)=4\mathrm{Tr}_L(a_ia_j)\geq\mathrm{Tr}_L(c^2)$.
c) $u, v\neq 0$. Then $$c^2=u^2+v^2q+2uv\sqrt{q}=:\sum_{I\subset\{1, \dots, k+1\}}a_I\sqrt{p_I}\in\mathcal O_L^+.$$
Since $2uv$ is nonzero, at least one of the coefficients $a_I$ with $k+1\in I$ is nonzero, and so Lemma \ref{trace} implies that
$\mathrm{Tr}_L(c^2)>\min(\sqrt{p_I}|k+1\in I)=\sqrt{q}$ (this equality holds because $p_I=\prod_{i\in I} p_i$ and $p_{k+1}=q$).
But then we have
$$8\mathrm{Tr}_K(a_ia_j)= 4\mathrm{Tr}_L(a_ia_j) \geq \mathrm{Tr}_L(c^2) > \sqrt{q},$$ which contradicts the second condition of the definition of $q$.
We have proved that $c=0$, and so the~elements $a_i$ satisfy the~condition of Proposition \ref{promen} (over $L$),
concluding the proof.
\end{proof}
|
\section*{Introduction}
Let $R$ be a commutative ring, a contraction of cochain complexes of $R$-modules is a diagram
\begin{equation}\label{equ.contraction}
\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi\ar@(ul,ur)[]^h}
\end{equation}
where $M,N$ are (unbounded) cochain complexes of $R$-modules,
$\imath,\pi$ are morphisms of cochain complexes and $h$ is an $R$-linear map of degree $-1$ such that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item (deformation retraction) $\;\pi\imath=\operatorname{Id}_{M}$,
$\;\imath\pi-\operatorname{Id}_{N}=d_{N}h+hd_{N}$;
\item (side conditions) $\;\pi h=h\imath=hh=0$.
\end{enumerate}
The notion of contraction was introduced by Eilenberg and Mac Lane \cite{eilmactw} and plays a central role in homological perturbation theory \cite{gug72,HK,LS} and homotopy transfer of infinity structures
\cite{FMcone,getzler04,HK,perturbation}. A morphism of contractions is defined in the obvious way as a morphism of diagrams, and the category of contractions is denoted by $\mathbf{Contr}(R)$.
The category $\mathbf{coCh}(R)$ of cochain complex can be interpreted as the full subcategory of $\mathbf{Contr}(R)$
consisting of contractions with $\imath=\pi=\operatorname{Id}$ and $h=0$, and there exists a
faithful functor
\[ \Phi\colon \mathbf{Contr}(R)\to \mathbf{coCh}(R),\qquad
\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi\ar@(ul,ur)[]^h}\;\mapsto\; N\,.\]
Since the explicit formulas of homotopy transfer, see e.g. \cite{HK}, commute with morphisms of contractions,
it is natural to ask for a homotopy theory of contractions, and more specifically whether a given model structure on the category of cochain complexes extends to the category of contractions. In this paper we study this problem for the projective model structure, and we prove that there exists a model structure on $\mathbf{Contr}(R)$, where
a morphism $f$ is a weak equivalence, fibration, cofibration if and only if $\Phi(f)$ is.
For simplicity of exposition we restrict to unbounded complexes, although the same ideas can be applied, with minor modification, also to complexes in nonpositive degrees, as well as other model structures on $\mathbf{coCh}(R)$.
As a byproduct of our proof we also prove that also the category of acyclic retractions carries a natural model structure, where an acyclic retraction is defined as a diagram
$\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}$, with both $\imath,\pi$ quasi-isomorphisms of complexes and $\pi\imath=\operatorname{Id}_M$.
The proof that we give is completely elementary and relies essentially on three algebraic results, called ``basic tricks'' on contractions and acyclic retraction: the first two tricks are well known and widely present in literature, see e.g. \cite{LS}, while the third appears new, at least to our knowledge.
\bigskip
\section{A short review of model categories}
\label{sec.modelcategories}
For the benefit of the reader and for fixing notation, in this section we briefly recall the notion of model category and the definition of the projective model structure in the category of cochain complexes over a commutative unitary ring. The main reference is Hovey's book \cite{Hov99}.
For every category $\mathbf{C}$ we shall write $A\in \mathbf{C}$ if $A$ is an object of $\mathbf{C}$ and we denote by $\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathbf{C}}(A,B)$ the set of morphisms $A\to B$. We denote by
$\operatorname{Map}(\mathbf{C})$ the category whose objects are morphism in $\mathbf{C}$ and whose morphisms are the commutative squares.
The following definition gives the basic terminology involved in the notion of model category.
\begin{definition} In the above notation:
\begin{enumerate}
\item A morphism $f$ is a called a \emph{retract} of a morphism $g$ if there exists a commutative diagram of the form
\[ \begin{matrix}\xymatrix{
A \ar[r] \ar@/^1pc/[rr]^{\operatorname{Id}_A} \ar[d]_{f} & C \ar[r] \ar[d]^g & A \ar[d]^f\\
B \ar[r] \ar@/_1pc/[rr]_{\operatorname{Id}_B} & D \ar[r] &B
}\end{matrix}\;.\]
\item A \emph{functorial factorization} is an ordered pair $(H,K)$ of functors
$\operatorname{Map}(\mathbf{C}) \to \operatorname{Map}(\mathbf{C})$ such that $f=K(f)\,H(f)$ for every $f \in
\operatorname{Map}(\mathbf{C})$.
\item Let $i \in \operatorname{Hom}_{\mathbf{C}}(A,B)$ and $p \in \operatorname{Hom}_{\mathbf{C}}(X,Y)$. We shall say that $i$ has the \emph{left lifting property (LLP) with respect to p} and $p$ has the
\emph{right lifting property (RLP) with respect to i} if for every commutative diagram of solid arrow
\[ \xymatrix{ A \ar[r]^f \ar[d]_i & X \ar[d]^p \\ B \ar[r]_g \ar@{.>}[ru]^h & Y}\]
there exists a morphism $h \colon B \to X$ such that $hi=f$ and $ph=g$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}\label{def.ModelStructure}
A \emph{model structure} on a category $\mathbf{C}$ is the data of three classes of morphisms
called weak equivalences, cofibrations, and fibrations, and two functorial factorizations
$(C,FW)$ and $(CW,F)$ satisfying the following properties:
\begin{description}
\item[MC1] (2-out-of-3) If $f$ and $g$ are morphisms of $\mathbf{C}$ such that $gf$ is defined and two of $f$, $g$ and $gf$ are weak equivalences, then so is the third.
\item[MC2] (Retracts) If $f$ and $g$ are morphisms of $\mathbf{C}$ such that $f$ is a retract of $g$ and $g$ is a weak equivalence, cofibration, or fibration, then so is $f$.
\item[MC3] (Lifting) Define a map to be a trivial cofibration if it is both a cofibration and a weak equivalence. Similarly, define a map to be a trivial fibration if it is both a fibration and a weak equivalence. Then trivial cofibrations have the left lifting property with respect to fibrations, and cofibrations have the left lifting property with respect to trivial fibrations.
\item[MC4] (Factorization) For any morphism $f$, $C(f)$ is a cofibration, $FW(f)$ is a trivial fibration, $CW(f)$ is a trivial cofibration, and $F(f)$ is a fibration.
\end{description}
A \emph{model category} is a complete and cocomplete category $\mathbf{C}$ equipped with a model structure.
\end{definition}
It is easy to see that in every model category we have, see e.g. \cite{Hov99}:
\begin{itemize}
\item every isomorphism is both a trivial fibration and a trivial cofibration;
\item the classes of weak equivalences, cofibrations and fibrations are closed by composition;
\item the pull-back of a fibration (resp.: trivial fibration) under any morphism is a fibration (resp.: trivial fibration);
\item the push-out of a cofibration (resp.: trivial cofibration) under any morphism is a cofibration (resp.: trivial cofibration).
\end{itemize}
\bigskip
For every commutative unitary ring $R$ we shall denote by $\operatorname{\textbf{coCh}}(R)$ the category of cochain complexes of $R$-modules. Every object is the data of a collection of $R$-modules $X=\{X^n\}_{n\in \mathbb{Z}}$ and a differential $d=\{d_n \colon X^n \to X^{n+1}\}_{n\in \mathbb{Z}}$, where each $d_n$ is an $R$-module map and $d_{n+1} d_n =0 $ for all $n \in \mathbb{Z}$.
A morphism of cochain complexes $f \colon X \to Y$ is a collection of
morphisms of $R$-module $f_n \colon X^n \to Y^n$ such that $d_n f_n = f_{n+1} d_n$.
A quasi-isomorphism of cochain complexes is a morphism that induces isomorphisms on all cohomology groups.
The category $\operatorname{\textbf{coCh}}(R)$ has all small limits and colimits, which are taken degreewise. The initial and terminal object is the trivial complex, which is $0$ in each degree.
This category carries several different model structures, \cite{sixmodel,Hov99}: in this paper we only deal with the so called projective model structure on unbounded complexes, although our results can be easily extended also to other model structures and to bounded complexes.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm.ModelcoCh} There is a model category structure on the category of chain complexes $\operatorname{\textbf{coCh}}(R)$ whose
\begin{itemize}
\item weak equivalences are quasi-isomorphisms;
\item fibrations are the morphisms that are degreewise epimorphisms;
\item cofibrations are the morphisms having the left lifting property with respect every trivial fibration;
\end{itemize}
called the \emph{projective model structure.}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} See e.g. either \cite[Thm. 2.3.11]{Hov99} or \cite[Thm. 1.4]{sixmodel}.\end{proof}
\begin{remark} There exists a more concrete description of cofibrations as retracts of
semifree extensions, see Appendix~\ref{sec.semifree}. If $X\to Y$ is a cofibration then every map
$X^i\to Y^i$ is injective with projective cokernel; the converse is true if there exists an integer $n$ such that $X^i\to Y^i$ is an isomorphism for every $i\ge n$.
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\section{Contractions and acyclic retractions}
Every cochain complex is intended over a fixed unitary commutative ring $R$.
If $N,M$ are cochain complexes and $n$ is an integer we shall denote by $\operatorname{Hom}_R^n(N,M)$ the $R$-module of sequences $\{f_i\}_{i\in \mathbb{Z}}$, where every $f_i\colon N^i\to M^{n+i}$ is a morphism of $R$-modules.
\begin{definition}\label{def.ARdata
An \emph{acyclic retraction} (AR-data) is a diagram
\[ \xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}\]
where $M,N$ are cochain complexes of $R$-modules and $\imath,\pi$ are quasi-isomorphisms of
cochain complexes such that $\;\pi\imath=\operatorname{Id}_{M}$.
A \emph{morphism} of acyclic retractions
\[ f\colon
(\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi})\to
(\xymatrix{A\ar@<.4ex>[r]^i&B\ar@<.4ex>[l]^p})\]
is a morphism of cochain complexes $f\colon N\to B$ such that $f\imath\pi= i pf$.
\end{definition}
Given a morphism of acyclic retractions as in Definition~\ref{def.ARdata}, we have a commutative diagram
\[\xymatrix{M\ar[r]^{\imath}\ar[d]^{\hat{f}}&N\ar[r]^{\pi}\ar[d]^f&M\ar[d]^{\hat{f}}\\
A\ar[r]^i&B\ar[r]^p&A}\]
where $\hat{f}=pf\imath$:
in fact
$i\hat{f}=ipf\imath=f\imath\pi\imath=f\imath$,
$\hat{f}\pi=pf\imath p=pipf=pf$.
\begin{definition}\label{def.contraction}
A \emph{contraction} of cochain complexes is a pair
$(\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi},h)$, where $\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}$ is an acyclic retraction and an element $h\in\operatorname{Hom}^{-1}_R(N,N)$, called homotopy, that satisfies the following conditions:
\begin{description}
\item[C1] $\imath\pi-\operatorname{Id}_{N}=d_{N}h+hd_{N}$;
\item[C2] $\pi h=h\imath=0$;
\item[C3] $h^2=0$.
\end{description}
A morphism of contraction $f\colon
(\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}, h)\to
(\xymatrix{A\ar@<.4ex>[r]^i&B\ar@<.4ex>[l]^p}, k)$ is
a morphism of cochain complexes $f\colon N\to B$ such that $fh=kf$.
\end{definition}
For later use, we point out that
if $(\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}, h)$ is a contraction, then $hdh=-h$, since
\[ h+hdh=h+(\imath\pi-\operatorname{Id}_N-dh)h=h-h=0\,.\]
Every morphism of contractions is in particular a morphism of acyclic retractions: in the notation of Definition~\ref{def.contraction} we have
\[ ipf=(\operatorname{Id}_B+kd+dk)f=f(\operatorname{Id}_N+kd+dk)=f\imath\pi\,.\]
Thus, denoting by $\mathbf{AR}(R)$ and $\mathbf{Contr}(R)$ the categories of acyclic retractions and
contractions, we have two forgetful functors
\[
\mathbf{Contr}(R)\xrightarrow{\;\alpha\;} \mathbf{AR}(R)\xrightarrow{\;\beta\;}\mathbf{coCh}(R),\]
\[ (\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi},h)\;\mapsto\;
\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}\;\mapsto\; N\,.\]
It is straightforward to check that the categories $\mathbf{AR}(R)$ and $\mathbf{Contr}(R)$ are complete and cocomplete. We are now ready to state the main results of this paper.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm.modelstructureAR}
There exists a model structure on the category $\mathbf{AR}(R)$ where a morphism $f$ is a weak equivalence, cofibration, fibration if and only if $\beta(f)$ is, and
the factorizations depends functorially on the factorizations in $\mathbf{coCh}(R)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm.modelstructureContr} There exists a model structure on the category $\mathbf{Contr}(R)$ where a morphism $f$ is a weak equivalence, cofibration, fibration if and only if $\beta\alpha(f)$ is, and
the factorizations depends functorially on the factorizations in $\mathbf{coCh}(R)$.
\end{theorem}
The proofs will be given in next sections after some preparatory algebraic results about contractions.
\bigskip
\section{The basic tricks}
\label{sec.basictrick}
This section is devoted some algebraic properties about contractions and acyclic retractions that will used in the proof of the main theorems.
\begin{lemma}[First basic trick]\label{lem.trick2} Let
$\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}$ and $\xymatrix{A\ar@<.4ex>[r]^i&B\ar@<.4ex>[l]^p}$ be acyclic retractions and let $f\colon N\to B$ be a morphism of cochain complexes. Then
\[ \hat{f}:=f-ipf-f\imath\pi+2ipf\imath\pi\colon N\to B\]
is a morphism of acyclic retractions.
Moreover:
\begin{enumerate}
\item the morphism $f-\hat{f}=ipf(\operatorname{Id}-\imath\pi)+(\operatorname{Id}-ip)f\imath\pi$ induces the trivial morphism in cohomology,
\item $\hat{f}=f$ whenever $f$ is a morphism of acyclic retractions,
\item if $g$ is a morphism of acyclic retractions and $gf$ (resp.: $fg$) is defined, then
$\widehat{gf}=g\hat{f}$ (resp.: $\widehat{fg}=\hat{f}g$).
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Easy and straightforward.\end{proof}
There exists in literature the the notion of strong deformation data, which lies in an intermediate position with respect to acyclic retractions and contractions.
\begin{definition}\label{def.morfismoSDR}
A \emph{strong deformation retraction} (SDR-data) of cochain complexes is a pair
$(\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi},h)$, where $\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}$ is an acyclic retraction and $h\in\operatorname{Hom}^{-1}_R(N,N)$ satisfy
$\imath\pi-\operatorname{Id}_{N}=d_{N}h+hd_{N}$.
A morphism of strong deformation retractions $f\colon
(\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}, h)\to
(\xymatrix{A\ar@<.4ex>[r]^i&B\ar@<.4ex>[l]^p}, k)$ is
a morphism of cochain complexes $f\colon N\to B$ such that $fh=kf$.
\end{definition}
Thus, if $\mathbf{SDR}(R)$ denotes the category of strong deformation retractions, we have that
$\mathbf{Contr}(R)$ is a full subcategory of $\mathbf{SDR}(R)$. Every morphism of strong deformation retractions is also a morphism a acyclic retractions.
\begin{lemma}[Second basic trick]\label{lem.trick1}
Let $(\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}, h)$ be a strong deformation retraction and denote
\[D(h):=hd+dh=\imath\pi-\operatorname{Id}_N\colon N\to N.\]
Then the pair
\[ (\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}, \tilde{h}),\quad\text{where}\quad
\tilde{h}=-D(h)hD(h)dD(h)hD(h),\]
is a contraction. If $(\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}, h)$ is already a contraction, then $h=\tilde{h}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} This is well known \cite{LS} and we write the proof only for completeness. We have the equalities
\[dD(h)=D(h)d=dhd,\qquad D(h)^2=(\imath\pi-\operatorname{Id}_N)^2=\operatorname{Id}_N-\imath\pi=-D(h),\]
\[D(h)\imath=(\imath\pi-\operatorname{Id}_N)\imath=0,\qquad
\pi D(h)=\pi(\imath\pi-\operatorname{Id}_N)=0\,.\]
Therefore, setting $k=D(h)hD(h)$, we get $k\imath=\pi k=0$ and
\[ dk+kd=dD(h)hD(h)+D(h)hD(h)d=D(h)(dh+hd)D(h)=D(h)^3=D(h).\]
By definition $\tilde{h}=-kdk$, therefore $\tilde{h}\imath=\pi\tilde{h}=0$,
\[ \tilde{h}=-kdk=k(\operatorname{Id}_N-\imath\pi+kd)=k+k^2d,\qquad \tilde{h}=(\operatorname{Id}_N-\imath\pi+dk)k=k+dk^2\,,\]
and then $k^2d=dk^2$. Finally
\[d\tilde{h}+\tilde{h}d=d(k+dk^2)+(k+k^2d)d=dk+kd=\imath\pi-\operatorname{Id}_N\,,\]
\[ \tilde{h}^2=kdkkdk=kd(k^2d)k=kd(dk^2)k=0\,.\]
If $\pi h=h\imath=h^2=0$ then $D(h)h=hD(h)=-h$ and therefore $k=D(h)hD(h)=h$, $k^2=h^2=0$,
$\tilde{h}=k+dk^2=k=h$.
\end{proof}
It is plain that the second basic trick is functorial in the following sense:
given a morphism of strong deformation retractions
\[ f\colon
(\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}, h)\to
(\xymatrix{A\ar@<.4ex>[r]^i&B\ar@<.4ex>[l]^p}, k),\]
then $\tilde{k}f=f\tilde{h}$.
\begin{lemma}[Third basic trick]\label{lem.trick3}
Let $(\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}, h)$, $(\xymatrix{A\ar@<.4ex>[r]^i&B\ar@<.4ex>[l]^p}, k)$ be contractions and let $f\colon N\to B$ be a morphism of acyclic retractions. Then
$\tilde{f}=f-dkfhd$
is a morphism of contractions. Moreover:
\begin{enumerate}
\item the morphism $f-\tilde{f}$ is homotopic to $0$,
\item $\tilde{f}=f$ whenever $f$ is a morphism of contractions,
\item the transformation $f\mapsto \tilde{f}$ commutes with compositions.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} We first notice that, since $dkd=dip-d$ we have
\[ dkfhd=dkf(\imath\pi-Id-dh)=dkipf-dkf-dkdfh=-dkf-dipfh+dfh=fdh-dkf,\]
and then $\tilde{f}=f-dkfhd=f+dkf-fdh$. In particular $\tilde{f}=f$ whenever $f$ is already a morphism of contractions.
It is clear that $d\tilde{f}=\tilde{f}d$, i.e., $\tilde{f}$ is a morphism of complexes, and that the morphism $f-\tilde{f}=dkfhd=d(kfhd)+(kfhd)d$ is homotopic to $0$. Since $hdh=-h$ and $kdk=-k$ we have
\[ k\tilde{f}-\tilde{f}h=kf-fh-kdkfhd+dkfhdh=kf-fh+kfhd-dkfh\,.\]
Denoting $\gamma=kf-fh$, since $h\imath\pi=0$ and $kip=0$ we have $\gamma \imath\pi=kf\imath\pi=kip f=0$ and
\[\begin{split}
d\gamma+\gamma d&=dkf+kfd-dfh-fhd=(dk+kd)f-f(dh+hd)\\
&=(ip-I)f-f(\imath\pi-I)=0\,.\end{split}\]
This implies that $\tilde{f}$ is a morphism of contractions since
\[\begin{split} k\tilde{f}-\tilde{f}h&=\gamma+kfhd-dkfh=\gamma+(\gamma+fh)hd-d(\gamma+fh)h=\gamma+\gamma hd-d\gamma h\\
&=\gamma (I+hd+dh)=\gamma \imath\pi=0\,.\end{split}\]
If $(\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}, h)$, $(\xymatrix{A\ar@<.4ex>[r]^i&B\ar@<.4ex>[l]^p}, k)$ and $(\xymatrix{P\ar@<.4ex>[r]^j&Q\ar@<.4ex>[l]^q}, l)$ are contractions and $f\colon N\to B$, $g\colon B\to Q$ are morphisms of acyclic retractions we have
\[ \begin{split}\tilde{g}\tilde{f}&=(g+dlg-gdk)(f+dkf-fdh)=
gf-gdkfhd-dlgkdf\\
&=gf-g(fdh-dkf)-(gdk-dlg)f=
gf-gfdh+dlgf=\widetilde{gf}\,.\end{split}\]
\end{proof}
\bigskip
\section{The projective model structure on acyclic retractions}
In this section we provide the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm.modelstructureAR}.
We first observe that the properties MC1 and MC2 of Definition~\ref{def.ModelStructure} follow immediately from the model structure on $\mathbf{coCh}(R)$.
As regards MC3, denote every acyclic retraction $\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}$ by
the quadruple $(M,N,\imath,\pi)$, and
consider a commutative diagram of solid arrows in $\operatorname{\textbf{AR}}(R)$:
\[ \xymatrix{
(M_1,N_1,\imath_1,\pi_1) \ar[r]^f \ar[d]_i & (M_3,N_3,\imath_3,\pi_3)\ar[d]^p \\
(M_2,N_2,\imath_2,\pi_2) \ar[r]_g \ar@{.>}[ru]^h & (M_4,N_4,\imath_4,\pi_4)
}\]
where $i$ is a cofibration (resp.: trivial cofibration) and $p$ is a trivial fibration (resp.: fibration). The model structure on $\mathbf{coCh}(R)$ ensures the existence of a morphism of cochain complexes $h \colon N_2 \to N_3$ such that $hi=f$ and $ph=g$.
Denoting
\[\hat{h}=h-\imath_3\pi_3h-h\imath_2\pi_2+2\imath_3\pi_3h\imath_2\pi_2 \colon
(M_2,N_2,\imath_2,\pi_2) \to (M_3,N_3,\imath_3,\pi_3),\]
by the first basic trick~\ref{lem.trick2},
the map $\hat{h}$ is a morphism in $\operatorname{\textbf{AR}}(R)$.
Moreover, since $i,p,f,g$ are morphisms or acyclic retractions, again by Lemma~\ref{lem.trick2}
we have $\hat{h}i=\widehat{hi}=\hat{f}=f$ and $p\hat{h}=\widehat{ph}=\hat{g}=g$.
and then $\hat{h}$ is the required lifting in the category $\operatorname{\textbf{AR}}(R)$.
Finally, properties MC4 follows from the following two propositions.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop.factorizationAR}
There exists a functorial factorization
\[(C,FW)\colon \operatorname{Map}(\operatorname{\textbf{AR}}(R)) \to \operatorname{Map}(\operatorname{\textbf{AR}}(R))\times \operatorname{Map}(\operatorname{\textbf{AR}}(R))\]
such that $C(f)$ is a cofibration and $FW(f)$ is a trivial fibration for every morphism $f$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} Consider a morphism $f$ in $\operatorname{\textbf{AR}}(R)$ represented by the commutative diagram
\[
\xymatrix{
A \ar@/^1.2pc/[rr]^{\operatorname{Id}_A} \ar[r]^{\imath} \ar[d]_{\hat{f}}&B\ar[r]^{\pi} \ar[d]^f & A \ar[d]^{\hat{f}}\\
M \ar@/_1.2pc/[rr]_{\operatorname{Id}_M}\ar[r]_i & N \ar[r]_p & M
}\]
and let $A \xrightarrow{g} P \xrightarrow{h} M$ be the functorial factorization of
$\hat{f}\colon A \to M$ in the model category $\mathbf{coCh}(R)$, with $g$ a cofibration and
$h$ a trivial fibration. Consider now the pushout $P \amalg_A B$ of $P\xleftarrow{g} A \xrightarrow{\imath}B$ and the pullback $N \times_MP$ of $N \xrightarrow{\;p\;} M \xleftarrow{\;h\;} P$. Then we have a commutative diagram
\[\xymatrix{
A \ar@/^1pc/[rrr]^{\operatorname{Id}_A} \ar[r]_{\imath} \ar@/_1pc/[ddd]_{\hat{f}}\ar[d]^{g} & B \ar[dddr]|{\hole }^(.35){f} \ar[rr]_{\pi}\ar[d]_{\overline{g}} & & A \ar@/^1pc/[ddd]^{\hat{f}} \ar[dd]_{g} \\
P\ar[dd]^{h} \ar[rrrd]|{\ }_(.35){\operatorname{Id}_P} \ar[r]^{\overline{\imath}} & P \amalg_A B & && &\\
& & N\times_M P \ar[r]_{\overline{p}} \ar[d]^{\overline{h}} & P \ar[d]_{h}& \\
M \ar@/_1pc/[rrr]_{\operatorname{Id}_M} \ar[rr]^i & & N \ar[r]^p & M&}\]
where $\bar{g}$ is a cofibration and $\bar{h}$ is a trivial fibration.
By the universal property of coproducts, there exists a unique morphism
$\psi_1\colon P \amalg_A B \to P$ such that $g \pi =\psi_1 \overline{g}$ and $\psi_1 \overline{\imath} = \operatorname{Id}_P$. Similarly, there exists a unique morphism $\psi_2\colon P\amalg_A B \to N$ such that $\psi_2 \overline{g} = f$ and $\psi_2 \overline{\imath} =i h$.
By the universal property of products, there exists a unique morphism $\phi\colon P \amalg_A B \to N\times_MP$ such that $\overline{p} \phi = \psi_1$ and $\overline{h} \phi = \psi_2$. The above diagram becomes:
\[\xymatrix{
A \ar@/^1pc/[rrr]^{\operatorname{Id}_A} \ar[r]_{\imath} \ar@/_1pc/[ddd]_{\hat{f}}\ar[d]^{g} & B \ar[rr]_{\pi}\ar[d]_{\overline{g}} & & A \ar@/^1pc/[ddd]^{\hat{f}} \ar[dd]_{g} \\
P\ar[dd]^{h} \ar[r]^{\overline{\imath}} & P \amalg_A B \ar@{-->}[rd]_{\phi} \ar@/^/@{.>}[rrd]^{\psi_1} \ar@/_/@{.>}[ddr]_{\psi_2}& &\\
& &N\times_M P \ar[r]_{\overline{p}} \ar[d]^{\overline{h}} & P \ar[d]_{h}& \\
M \ar@/_1pc/[rrr]_{\operatorname{Id}_M} \ar[rr]^i && N \ar[r]^p & M&}\]
Let $P\amalg_A B \xrightarrow{\gamma} Q \xrightarrow{\delta} N\times_M P$ be the functorial factorization of
$\phi$, with $\gamma$ a cofibration and and $\delta$ a trivial fibration. Thus we have a commutative diagram
\[\xymatrix{
A \ar@/^1pc/[rrrr]^{\operatorname{Id}_A} \ar[r]_{\imath} \ar@/_1pc/[dddd]_{\hat{f}}\ar[d]^{g} & B\ar@/^/@{.>}[rdd]^{\gamma \overline{g}} \ar[rrr]_{\pi}\ar[d]_{\overline{g}} & & & A \ar@/^1pc/[dddd]^{\hat{f}} \ar[ddd]_{g} \\
P\ar@/_/@{-->}[rrd]_{\gamma \overline{\imath}}\ar[ddd]^{h} \ar[r]^{\overline{\imath}} & P \amalg_A B \ar[rd]^{\gamma}& & &\\
& & Q \ar[rd]^{\delta} \ar@/_/@{.>}[rdd]_{\overline{h} \delta} \ar@/^/@{-->}[rrd]^{\overline{p}\delta}&& & \\
& & &N\times_M P \ar[r]_{\overline{p}} \ar[d]^{\overline{h}} & P \ar[d]_{h}& \\
M \ar@/_1pc/[rrrr]_{\operatorname{Id}_M} \ar[rrr]^i & && N \ar[r]^p & M&}\]
which reduces to
\begin{equation}\label{equ.diagrammatondo}
\begin{matrix}
\xymatrix{ A \ar@/_1.2pc/[dd]_{\hat{f}} \ar[d]^{g} \ar[r]_{\imath} \ar@/^1.2pc/[rr]^{\operatorname{Id}_A} & B \ar[d]|{\gamma \overline{g}} \ar[r]_{\pi} & A \ar[d]_{g} \ar@/^1.2pc/[dd]^{\hat{f}} \\
P\ar[r]|{\ \gamma \overline{\imath}\ } \ar[d]^{h} & Q \ar[r]|{\ \overline{p} \delta\ } \ar[d]|{\overline{h} \delta} & P \ar[d]_{h}\\
M\ar@/_1.2pc/[rr]_{\operatorname{Id}_M}\ar[r]^{i} & N \ar[r]^p & M}\end{matrix}\quad.
\end{equation}
Since the construction of Diagram~\eqref{equ.diagrammatondo} is clearly functorial in $\operatorname{Map}(\operatorname{\textbf{AR}}(R))$, in order to conclude the proof it is sufficient to prove that the middle row
is an acyclic retraction and the middle column is a factorization of $f$ with $\gamma\bar{g}$ a cofibration and $\bar{h}\delta$ a trivial fibration. All of these properties are true because:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\overline{p}\delta \gamma \overline{\imath}= \operatorname{Id}_P$ by construction.
\item $\delta$ is a trivial fibration by construction and $\bar{p},\bar{h}$ are the pull-backs of the trivial fibrations $p,h$. Hence $\overline{p} \delta, \bar{h}\delta$, are trivial fibrations and
$\gamma \overline{\imath}$ is a weak equivalence by the 2 of 3 property.
\item $\gamma$ is a cofibration by construction and $\bar{g}$ is the push-out of the cofibration $g$.
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}
There exists a functorial factorization
\[(CW,F)\colon \operatorname{Map}(\operatorname{\textbf{AR}}(R)) \to \operatorname{Map}(\operatorname{\textbf{AR}}(R))\times \operatorname{Map}(\operatorname{\textbf{AR}}(R))\]
such that $CW(f)$ is a trivial cofibration and $F(f)$ is a fibration for every morphism $f$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} Same proof, mutatis mutandis, of Proposition~\ref{prop.factorizationAR}.\end{proof}
\bigskip
\section{The projective model structure on contractions}
In this section we provide the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm.modelstructureContr}: as in the previous section we notice that the properties MC1 and MC2 of Definition~\ref{def.ModelStructure} follow immediately from the model structure on $\mathbf{coCh}(R)$.
In order to prove the lifting property MC3 we shall denote every contraction as a pair $(X,h)$, where
$X$ is an acyclic retraction and $h$ is a homotopy related to $X$ as in Definition~\ref{def.contraction}.
Consider the following commutative diagram of solid arrow in $\operatorname{\textbf{Contr}}(R)$:
\[ \xymatrix{
(A, \alpha ) \ar[r]^f \ar[d]_i & (C, \gamma )\ar[d]^p \\ (B, \beta) \ar[r]_g \ar@{.>}[ru]^h & (E, \delta )
}\]
where $i$ is a cofibration (resp.: trivial cofibration) and $p$ is a trivial fibration (resp.: fibration). According to Theorem~\ref{thm.modelstructureAR} there exists a morphism $h \colon B \to C$ of acyclic retractions such that $hi=f$ and $ph=g$. By Lemma~\ref{lem.trick3} the morphism
$\tilde{h}=h-d\gamma h \beta d \colon (B,\beta) \to (C,\gamma)$ is a morphism of contractions and
$\tilde{h}i=\widetilde{hi}=\widetilde{f}=f$ and
$p\tilde{h}=\widetilde{ph}=\tilde{g}=g$. This proves property MC3 and the remaining part of this section is devoted to the proof of the factorization property MC4.
\begin{definition}\label{def.PathObject} The \emph{path object} functor $P\colon\mathbf{coCh}(R)\to \mathbf{coCh}(R)$ is defined in the following way: for every cochain complex $B=\{B^i\}$ we have
$P(B)^i=B^i\oplus B^i\oplus B^{i-1}$ and the differential is defined by the formula
\[\delta\colon P(B)^i\to P(B)^{i+1},\qquad \delta(a,b,c)=(da,db,a-b-dc)\,.\]
\end{definition}
Given $A,B\in \operatorname{\textbf{coCh}}(R)$, $f,g\in \operatorname{Hom}^0_R(A,B)$ and
$h\in \operatorname{Hom}^{-1}_R(A,B)$, the linear map
\[ A\to P(B),\qquad a\mapsto (f(a),g(a),h(a)),\]
is a morphism of complexes if and only if $f$ and $g$ are morphisms of complexes and
$f-g=dh+hd$. It follows that the datum $(\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}, h)$
is a strong deformation retraction if and only if $\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}$ is an acyclic retraction and
\[ N\to P(N),\qquad x\mapsto (\imath\pi(x),x,h(x))\]
is a morphism of cochain complexes.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem.PathObject}
For every cochain complex $B$, the natural projection $P(B)\to B\oplus B$ is surjective and the inclusion
\[ B\to P(B),\qquad b\mapsto (b,b,0),\]
is a quasi-isomorphism.
Moreover if $0\to C\to Q\to N\to 0$ is a short exact sequence of cochain complexes, then
\[ 0\to C[-1]\to P(Q)\to (Q\oplus Q)\times_{N\oplus N}P(N)\to 0\]
is an exact sequence, where $C[-1]$ is the cochain complex $C$ with the degrees shifted by $1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Easy and straightforward.\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem.factorizationSDR}
Let $f\colon (\xymatrix{A\ar@<.4ex>[r]^i&B\ar@<.4ex>[l]^p}, k)\to (\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi}, h)$ be a morphism of contractions and let
\[ (\xymatrix{A\ar@<.4ex>[r]^i&B\ar@<.4ex>[l]^p})\xrightarrow{\;\alpha\;}
(\xymatrix{P\ar@<.4ex>[r]^j&Q\ar@<.4ex>[l]^q})\xrightarrow{\;\beta\;}
(\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi})\]
a factorization of $f$ in the model category $\operatorname{\textbf{AR}}(R)$ such that $\alpha$ is a cofibration and $\beta$ is a fibration. If either $\alpha$ or $\beta$ is a weak equivalence, then there exists a homotopy $l\in \operatorname{Hom}_R^{-1}(Q,Q)$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{equ.factorizationdebole}
(\xymatrix{A\ar@<.4ex>[r]^i&B\ar@<.4ex>[l]^p},k)\xrightarrow{\;\alpha\;}
(\xymatrix{P\ar@<.4ex>[r]^j&Q\ar@<.4ex>[l]^q},l)\xrightarrow{\;\beta\;}
(\xymatrix{M\ar@<.4ex>[r]^\imath&N\ar@<.4ex>[l]^\pi},h)\end{equation}
is a factorization in $\mathbf{Contr}(R)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} By the second basic trick it is sufficient to prove that there exists $l$ such that
\eqref{equ.factorizationdebole} is a factorization of $f$ in the category of strong deformation retractions.
In the model category $\operatorname{\textbf{coCh}}(R)$ we have a commutative diagram of solid arrows
\[\xymatrix{
B \ar[d]_{\alpha} \ar[rr]_{(ip,\operatorname{Id}_B)} \ar@/^1.5pc/[rrr]^{(ip,\operatorname{Id}_B,k)} & & B\oplus B
\ar[d]^(.3){\alpha^{\oplus 2}} & P(B) \ar[d]^{P(\alpha)} \ar[l] \\
Q \ar[d]_{\beta} \ar[rr]_{(jq,\operatorname{Id}_Q)}\ar@{..>}@(ur,ul)[rrr] & & Q\oplus Q \ar[d]^{\beta^{\oplus 2}} & P(Q)\ar[l]\ar[d]^{P(\beta)} \\
N \ar[rr]^{(\imath\pi,\operatorname{Id}_N)} \ar@/_1.5pc/[rrr]_{(\imath\pi,\operatorname{Id}_N,h)} & & N\oplus N & P(N)\ar[l]}\]
and we want to prove that this diagram can be filled with the dotted arrow. This is equivalent to fill with a dotted arrow the solid commutative diagram
\[ \begin{matrix} \xymatrix{
B \ar@/_2pc/[dddd] \ar[rr]_{(ip,\operatorname{Id}_B)} \ar@/^1pc/[rrr]^{(ip,\operatorname{Id}_B,k)}\ar[dd]_{\alpha} && B \oplus B \ar[dd]^(0.4){\alpha^{\oplus 2}} & P(B) \ar@/^2pc/[dddd]|(.72){\hole}|(.74){\hole}|(.76){\hole} \ar[l] \ar[d]_{P(\alpha)} \\
& & & P(Q)\ar[dl] \ar[dd]^{\gamma} \\
Q \ar[rr]^{(jq,\operatorname{Id}_Q)} \ar@/^1.5pc/@{.>}[rrru]^(0.3){\psi} \ar@/_1.5pc/[rrrd]_(0.3){(\phi_1,\phi_2)} \ar[dd]_{\beta} & & Q \oplus Q \ar[dd]^(0.6){\beta^{\oplus 2}} & \\
& & & P(N) \times_{N \oplus N} Q \oplus Q \ar[d] \ar[lu]\\
N \ar@/_1pc/[rrr]_{(\imath\pi,\operatorname{Id}_N,h)}\ar[rr]^{(\imath\pi,\operatorname{Id}_N)} & & N \oplus N & P(N) \ar[l]}
\end{matrix}\qquad
\begin{matrix}\psi=(jq,\operatorname{Id}_Q,l)\\
\\
\phi_1=(\imath\pi,\operatorname{Id}_N,h)\beta\\
\\
\phi_2=(jq,\operatorname{Id}_Q)\end{matrix}.
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem.PathObject} the morphism $\gamma$ is a fibration that is trivial if and only if $\beta$ is a trivial fibration. Therefore the dotted lifting $\psi$ exists either when $\alpha$ is a cofibration and $\beta$ a trivial fibration, or when $\alpha$ is a trivial cofibration and $\beta$ a fibration.
\end{proof}
Finally, properties MC4 follows from the following two propositions.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop.factorizationContr}
There exists a functorial factorization
\[(C,FW)\colon \operatorname{Map}(\mathbf{Contr}(R)) \to \operatorname{Map}(\mathbf{Contr}(R))\times \operatorname{Map}(\mathbf{Contr}(R))\]
such that $C(f)$ is a cofibration and $FW(f)$ is a trivial fibration for every morphism $f$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} For every morphism of contractions $f\colon (K,k)\to (H,h)$, $K,H\in \operatorname{\textbf{AR}}(R)$, consider the functorial (C,FW)-factorization $K\xrightarrow{\alpha}L\xrightarrow{\beta}H$ in the model category $\operatorname{\textbf{AR}}(R)$ and chose a homotopy $l$ such that $(K,k)\xrightarrow{\alpha}(L,l)\xrightarrow{\beta}(H,h)$
is a (C,FW)-factorization: the existence of $l$ is provided by Lemma~\ref{lem.factorizationSDR}.
This defines two functions $C,FW$ on the objects of $\operatorname{Map}(\mathbf{Contr}(R))$, namely
$C(f)=\alpha$, $FW(f)=\beta$. Now every morphism $\phi$ in $\operatorname{Map}(\mathbf{Contr}(R))$ is given by a commutative square of contractions
\[ \xymatrix{(K_1,k_1)\ar[d]_{f_1}\ar[r]^{\phi_1}&(K_2,k_2)\ar[d]^{f_2}\\
(H_1,h_1)\ar[r]^{\phi_2}&(H_2,k_2)}\]
which extends to a commutative diagram of acyclic retractions
\[ \xymatrix{(K_1,k_1)\ar[d]_{C(f_1)}\ar[r]^{\phi_1}&(K_2,k_2)\ar[d]^{C(f_2)}\\
(L_1,l_1)\ar[d]_{FW(f_1)}\ar[r]^{\psi}&(L_2,l_2)\ar[d]^{FW(f_2)}\\
(H_1,h_1)\ar[r]^{\phi_2}&(H_2,k_2)}\]
and it is sufficient to consider the morphism of contractions $\tilde{\psi}=\psi-dl_2\psi l_1d$, provided by Lemma~\ref{lem.trick3}, in order to have a functorial factorization in the category $\mathbf{Contr}(R)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}
There exists a functorial factorization
\[(CW,F)\colon \operatorname{Map}(\mathbf{Contr}(R)) \to \operatorname{Map}(\mathbf{Contr}(R))\times \operatorname{Map}(\mathbf{Contr}(R))\]
such that $CW(f)$ is a trivial cofibration and $F(f)$ is a fibration for every morphism $f$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} Same proof, mutatis mutandis, of Proposition~\ref{prop.factorizationContr}.\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
Several interesting excesses in semileptonic $B$ decays have been determined in experiments such as: (i) the angular observable $P'_5$ of $B\to K^* \mu^+ \mu^-$~\cite{DescotesGenon:2012zf}, where a $3.4\sigma$ deviation due to the integrated luminosity of 3.0 fb$^{-1}$ was found at the LHCb~\cite{Aaij:2015oid,Aaij:2013qta}, and the same measurement with a $2.6\sigma$ deviation was also reported by Belle~\cite{Wehle:2016yoi}; and (ii) the branching fraction ratios $R_{D,D^*}$, which are defined and measured as:
\begin{align}
R_{D} = \frac{ \bar B\to D \tau \nu}{\bar B\to D \ell \nu} & = \left\{
\begin{tabular}{cc}
$0.375 \pm 0.064 \pm 0.026$ & \text{Belle~\cite{Huschle:2015rga} }\,, \\
$0.440\pm 0.058\pm 0.042$ & \quad ~ \text{BaBar~\cite{Lees:2012xj, Lees:2013uzd} }\,,
\end{tabular} \right. \nonumber \\
R_{D^*} = \frac{\bar B\to D^* \tau \nu}{\bar B\to D^* \ell \nu} & =\left\{
\begin{tabular}{cc}
$0.302\pm 0.030 \pm 0.011$ & \text{Belle~\cite{Abdesselam:2016cgx} }\,, \\
$0.270 \pm 0.035 \pm^{+0.028}_{-0.025}$ & \text{Belle}~\cite{Hirose:2016wfn}\,, \\
$0.332 \pm 0.024 \pm 0.018$ & \quad ~\text{BaBar~\cite{Lees:2012xj, Lees:2013uzd} }\,, \\
$0.336 \pm 0.027 \pm 0.030$ & \text{LHCb~\cite{Aaij:2015yra}}\,,
\end{tabular} \right.
\end{align}
where $\ell=(e,\, \mu)$, and these measurements can test the violation of lepton-flavor universality.
The averaged results from the heavy flavor averaging group are $R_D=0.403\pm 0.040 \pm 0.024$ and $R_{D^*} =0.310\pm 0.015\pm 0.008$~\cite{Amhis:2016xyh}, and the standard model (SM) predictions are around $R_D \approx 0.3$~\cite{Lattice:2015rga,Na:2015kha} and $R_{D^*} \approx 0.25$, respectively.
Further tests of lepton-flavor universality can be made using the branching fraction ratios $R_{K^{(*)}} = BR(B\to K^{(*)}\mu^+\mu^-)/BR(B\to K^{(*)} e^+e^-)$. The current LHCb measurements are $R_K = 0.745^{+0.090}_{-0.074}\pm 0.036$~\cite{Aaij:2014ora} and $R_{K^*} = 0.69^{+0.11}_{-0.07} \pm 0.05$~\cite{Aaij:2017vbb}, which indicate a more than $2.5\sigma$ deviation from the SM results. In addition, a known anomaly is the muon anomalous magnetic dipole moment (muon $g-2$), where its latest measurement is $\Delta a_\mu = a^{\rm exp}_\mu - a^{\rm SM}_\mu =(28.8\pm 8.0)\times 10^{-10}$~\cite{PDG}. If we assume that these results are correct, we need to extend the SM to explain these excesses. Inspired by these experimental observations, various solutions to the anomalies have been proposed~\cite{Fajfer:2012vx,Matias:2012xw,Descotes-Genon:2013wba,Sakaki:2013bfa,Gauld:2013qja,Datta:2013kja,Hurth:2013ssa,Duraisamy:2014sna,Descotes-Genon:2014uoa,Altmannshofer:2014rta,Descotes-Genon:2015uva,Crivellin:2015era,Lee:2015qra,Alonso:2015sja,Sahoo:2015qha,Sahoo:2015pzk,Chiang:2016qov,Dorsner:2016wpm,Boucenna:2016wpr,Hiller:2016kry,Crivellin:2015mga,Sahoo:2015wya,Straub:2015ica,Becirevic:2015asa,Hiller:2014yaa,Hurth:2014vma,Glashow:2014iga,Gripaios:2014tna,Sahoo:2015fla,Bauer:2015knc,Das:2016vkr,Li:2016vvp,Chen:2016dip,Becirevic:2016oho,Becirevic:2016yqi,Sahoo:2016pet,Bhattacharya:2016mcc,Duraisamy:2016gsd,Fajfer:2012jt,Crivellin:2012ye,Datta:2012qk,Deshpande:2012rr,Tanaka:2012nw,Ko:2012sv,Dorsner:2013tla,Abada:2013aba,Freytsis:2015qca,Crivellin:2015hha,Wei:2017ago,Cvetic:2017gkt,Ko:2017quv,Ko:2017yrd,Cheung:2016fjo,He:2012zp,Fajfer:2015ycq,Cheung:2017efc,Wang:2016ggf,Cheung:2016frv,Ivanov:2016qtw,Ivanov:2017mrj,Bardhan:2016uhr,ColuccioLeskow:2016dox}.
In the SM, the $b\to c \ell' \bar\nu_{\ell'}$ decays $(\ell'=e, \mu, \tau)$ arise from the $W$-mediated tree diagram, whereas the $b\to s \ell'^+ \ell'^-$ decays are generated by $W$-mediated box and $Z$-mediated penguin diagrams.
In the present study, based on our earlier study of muon $g-2$ and $R_K$ anomalies~\cite{Chen:2016dip}, we attempt to establish a specific model that simultaneously explains the muon $g-2$, $R_{K^{(*)}}$, and $R_{D^{(*)}}$ anomalies when the experimental bounds involved are satisfied. The serious constraints include $\ell_i \to \ell_j \gamma$, $\Delta F=2$, $B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$, $B\to K \nu \bar \nu$, etc. To clarify the effects introduced, we do not scan all of the parameters involved, but instead we retain the relevant couplings that can satisfy or escape from the experimental bounds, whereas we directly neglect the constrained and smaller couplings.
To obtain the non-universal lepton-flavor effects, we consider the extension of the SM by including scalar leptoquarks (LQs), where the LQs are colored scalar particles that are coupled to a lepton and a quark at the same vertex, and the couplings to the quarks and leptons are flavor-dependent free parameters. LQs can couple to fermions and charge-conjugation of them at the same time, so in addition to the $SU(2)$ singlet, doublet, and triplet representations, the hypercharge of each representation may also have different choices depending on what quarks (leptons) or charge-conjugated quarks (leptons) couple to the LQs. Hence, in order to explain all of the excesses mentioned earlier in an actual model, we must decide what LQs are needed.
It is known that the effective interactions for the muon $g-2$ can be expressed as $\bar \mu \sigma_{\alpha \beta} P_\chi \mu F^{\alpha\beta}$, where $P_\chi = P_{R(L)}$ is the chiral projection operator and $F^{\alpha\beta}$ is the electromagnetic field strength tensor. The initial and final muons carry different chirality, so in order to enhance the $\Delta a_\mu$ and avoid suppression by the lepton mass, the introduced LQ must interact with the left-handed and right-handed leptons. Due to the gauge invariance, the LQ can be an $SU(2)$ doublet, and its hypercharge can be determined as $Y=7/6$.
In addition to the muon $g-2$, the doublet LQ can also contribute to $b\to s \ell'^+ \ell'^-$; thus, this LQ may help resolve the excesses in $B\to K^{(*)} \mu^+ \mu^-$. Unfortunately, the corrections to the Wilson coefficients of $C_9$ and $C_{10}$ for the $b\to s \ell^+ \ell^-$ decays have the same sign, whereas we need an opposite sign to explain the measurements of the $R_{K^{(*)}}$, $P'_5$, and $B_s\to \mu^+ \mu^-$ decays. Moreover, when combined with the experimental limits, the Yukawa couplings involved are too small to explain the $R_D$ and $R_{D^*}$ anomalies. Thus, we have to introduce more LQs.
Due to the SM neutrinos being left-handed particles, the extra LQs for the $b\to c \ell' \bar\nu_{\ell'}$ processes must couple to the doublet leptons. According to the gauge invariance, these LQs can be singlet, doublet, or triplet. The $b\to c$ transition involves up- and down-type quarks, so the doublet
LQ is excluded as a candidate. A triplet LQ is a good candidate for the $b\to s \ell'^+ \ell'^-$ processes because the associated values for $C_9$ and $C_{10}$ have opposite signs. The triplet LQ can contribute to both $b\to s \ell'^+ \ell'^-$ and $b\to c \ell' \bar\nu_{\ell'}$ decays at the tree level, but it can be shown that both processes share the same LQ couplings. Therefore, by considering the constraints on the $b\to s \ell^+ \ell^-$ decays and $\Delta B=2$ process, the $R_{D}$ and $R_{D^*}$ cannot be enhanced significantly. Thus, in addition to the triplet LQ, it is necessary to consider a singlet LQ~\cite{Sakaki:2013bfa, Bauer:2015knc}. Intriguingly, we show that such a singlet LQ can contribute to $b\to c \ell' \bar\nu_{\ell'}$ but not to $b\to s \ell'^+ \ell'^-$ at the tree level, i.e., the couplings of the singlet LQ are not affected by the $b\to s \ell^+ \ell^-$ constraints.
The singlet LQ can induce $b\to s \mu^+ \mu^-$ according to one-loop diagrams~\cite{Bauer:2015knc}, but a previous analysis by~\cite{Becirevic:2016yqi} showed that it is not a viable approach when using a singlet scalar LQ to simultaneously explain $R_{D^{(*)}}$ and $R_{K^{(*)}}$. Hence, more LQs are necessary to explain the anomalies.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section II, we introduce our model and derive formulae for the numerical analysis.
In Section III, we present the numerical analysis to show the parameter regions that correspond with anomalies in semileptonic $B$ decays. A summary is given in Section IV.
\section{Model and formulae}
In this section, we begin by formulating the model, before studying the relevant phenomena of interest. The three LQs introduced are $\Phi_{7/6}=(2, 7/6)$, $\Delta_{1/3}=(3, 1/3)$, and $S^{1/3}=(1,1/3)$ under $(SU(2)_L, {U(1)_Y})$ SM gauge symmetry, where the doublet and triplet representations can be taken as:
\begin{align}
\Phi_{7/6} = \begin{pmatrix} \phi^{5/3} \\ \phi^{2/3} \end{pmatrix}\,, \
\Delta_{1/3} = \begin{pmatrix} \delta^{1/3}/\sqrt{2} & \delta^{4/3} \\ \delta^{-2/3} & - \delta^{1/3}/\sqrt{2} \end{pmatrix}\,,
\end{align}
where the superscripts are the electric charges of the particles. Accordingly, the LQ Yukawa couplings to the SM fermions are expressed as:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:lang_lq}
-L_{LQ} &= \left[ \bar u \,{\bf V k} P_R \ell \phi^{5/3} + \bar d\, {\bf k} P_R \ell \phi^{2/3} \right] + \left[ -\bar
\ell\, {\bf \tilde{k}} P_R u \phi^{-5/3} + \bar \nu \, {\bf \tilde{k}} P_R u \phi^{-2/3} \right] \nonumber \\
& + \left[ \overline{u^c} \, {\bf V^*y} P_L \nu \delta^{-2/3} - \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \overline{ u^c} \, {\bf V^* y} P_L \ell \delta^{1/3} - \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \overline{d^c} \, {\bf y} P_L \nu \delta^{1/3} - \overline{ d^c} \, {\bf y} P_L \ell \delta^{4/3} \right] \,, \nonumber \\
& + \left( \overline{u^c} \, {\bf V^* \tilde y } P_L \ell - \overline{ d^c} \, {\bf \tilde{y}} P_L \nu + \overline{u^c} {\bf w} P_R \ell \right) S^{1/3} +
h.c.\,,
\end{align}
where the flavor indices are suppressed, ${\bf V}\equiv U^u_L U^{d\dagger}_{L}$ denotes the Cabibbo--Kobayashi--Maskawa (CKM) matrix, $U^{u,d}_L$ are the unitary matrices used to diagonalize the quark mass matrices, and $U^d_L$ and $U^u_R$ have been absorbed into ${\bf k}$, ${\bf \tilde{k}}$, ${\bf y}$, ${\bf \tilde{y}}$, and ${\bf w}$. In the model, we cannot generate the neutrino masses. Therefore, we treat the neutrinos as massless particles and their flavor mixing effects are rotated away.
There is no evidence for any new CP violation, so in the following, we treat the Yukawa couplings as real numbers.
The scalar LQs can also couple to the SM Higgs via the scalar potential, and the cross section for the Higgs to diphoton can be modified in principle. However, the couplings of the LQs to the Higgs are different parameters and irrelevant to the flavors, so by taking proper values for the parameters, the signal strength parameter for the Higgs to diphoton can fit the LHC data. Hence, we do not discuss this issue in the present study, but a detailed analysis was given by~\cite{Chen:2016dip}.
\subsection{Effective interactions for semileptonic $B$-decay}
According to the interactions in Eq.~(\ref{eq:lang_lq}), we first derive the four-Fermi interactions for the $b\to c \ell' \bar\nu_{\ell'}$ and $b\to s \ell'^+ \ell'^-$ decays. For the $b\to c \ell' \bar\nu_{\ell'}$ processes, the induced current-current interactions from $k_{3j}\tilde{k}_{i2}$ and $\tilde{y}_{3i} w_{2j}$ are $(S-P)\times (S-P)$ and those from $y_{3i} y_{2j}$ and $\tilde{y}_{3i}\tilde{y}_{2j}$ are $(S-P)\times (S+P)$, where $S$ and $P$ denote the scalar and pseudoscalar currents, respectively. After taking the Fierz transformations, the Hamiltonian for the $b\to c \ell' \bar\nu_{\ell'}$ decays can be expressed as:
\begin{align}
{\cal H}_{b\to c} &= \left( -\frac{ \tilde{y}_{3i} w_{2 j}}{2m^2_{S}}+\frac{ k_{3j} \tilde{k}_{i 2}}{2m^2_{\Phi}} \right) \bar c P_L b \, \bar\ell_j P_L \nu_i + \left( \frac{ \tilde{y}_{3i} w_{2 j}}{2m^2_{S}}+\frac{ k_{3j} \tilde{k}_{i 2}}{2m^2_{\Phi}} \right) \frac{1}{4} \bar c \sigma_{\mu\nu} P_L b \, \bar \ell_j \sigma^{\mu \nu} P_L \nu_i \nonumber \\
& - \sum_a V_{2a} \frac{ y_{aj}y_{3i} }{4m^2_{\Delta}} \bar c \gamma_\mu P_L b\, \bar\ell_j \gamma^\mu P_L \nu_i + \sum_a V_{2a} \frac{\tilde{y}_{aj}\tilde{y}_{3i} }{2m^2_{S}} \bar c \gamma_\mu P_L b\, \bar\ell_j \gamma^\mu P_L \nu_i \,, \label{eq:Hbc}
\end{align}
where the indices $i,\,j$ are the lepton flavors, and the LQs in the same representation are taken as degenerate particles. It can be seen that the interaction structure obtained from the triplet LQ is the same as that from the $W$-boson. The doublet LQ generates an $(S-P)\times (S-P)$ structure, but also a tensor structure. However, the singlet LQ can produce $(V-A)\times (V-A)$, $(S-P)\times (S-P)$, and tensor structures. Nevertheless, we show later that the singlet LQ makes the main contribution to the $R_D$ and $R_{D^*}$ excesses. It is difficult to explain $R_{D, D^*}$ by only using the doublet or/and triplet LQs when the $R_K$ excess and other strict constraints are satisfied.
Using the Yukawa couplings in Eq.~(\ref{eq:lang_lq}), the effective Hamiltonian for the $b\to s \ell'^+ \ell'^-$ decays mediated by $\phi^{2/3}$ and $\delta^{4/3}$ at the tree level can be expressed as:
\begin{align}
{\cal H}_{b\to s} & = \frac{k_{3j} k_{2j}}{2 m^2_{\Phi}} (\bar{s}\gamma^\mu P_L b)(\bar{\ell}_j \gamma_\mu P_R \ell_j)\,, \nonumber \\
& -\frac{y_{3j} y_{2 j}}{2 m^2_{\Delta}} (\bar{s}\gamma^\mu P_L b)(\bar{\ell}_j \gamma_\mu P_L \ell_j)\,, \label{eq:H_bs}
\end{align}
where the Fierz transformations have been applied. By Eq.~(\ref{eq:H_bs}), we can see clearly that the quark currents from both the doublet and triplet LQs are left-handed, whereas the lepton current from the doublet (triplet) LQ is right(left)-handed. When we include Eq.~(\ref{eq:H_bs}) in the SM contributions, the effective Hamiltonian for the $b\to s \ell'^+ \ell'^-$ decays is written as:
\begin{equation}
{\cal H}_{b\to s } = \frac{G_F \alpha_{\rm em} V_{tb} V^*_{ts}}{\sqrt{2}\pi} \left[ H_{1\mu} L^\mu + H_{2\mu} L^{5\mu} \right]\,, \label{eq:Hbsll}
\end{equation}
where the leptonic currents are denoted by $L^{(5)}_\mu= \bar \ell \gamma_\mu (\gamma_5) \ell$, and the related hadronic currents are defined as:
\begin{align}
H_{1\mu} &= C^\ell_9 \bar s \gamma_\mu P_L b - \frac{2m_b}{q^2} C_7 \bar s i \sigma_{\mu \nu} q^\nu P_R b\,, \nonumber \\
%
H_{2\mu} & = C^{\ell}_{10} \bar s \gamma_\mu P_L b\,.
\end{align}
The effective Wilson coefficients with LQ contributions are expressed as:
\begin{align}
C^\ell_{9(10)} & = C^{\rm SM}_{9(10)} + C^{\rm LQ, \ell'}_{9(10)}\,, \nonumber \\
%
C^{LQ,\ell_j}_{9} &= -\frac{1}{4 c_{\rm SM}}\left( \frac{k_{3j} k_{2j}}{m^2_\Phi} - \frac{y_{3j} y_{2j}}{m^2_\Delta}\right)\,, \nonumber \\
C^{LQ,\ell_j}_{10} & =- \frac{1}{4 c_{\rm SM}}\left( \frac{k_{3j} k_{2j}}{m^2_\Phi} + \frac{y_{3j} y_{2j}}{m^2_\Delta}\right)\,, \label{eq:Wilsons}
\end{align}
where
$c_{\rm SM} = V_{tb} V^*_{ts} \alpha_{\rm em} G_F/(\sqrt{2} \pi)$, and $V_{ij}$ is the CKM matrix element.
From Eq.~(\ref{eq:Wilsons}), we can see that when the magnitude of $C^{LQ,\ell_j}_{10}$ is decreased, $C^{LQ,\ell_j}_{9}$ can be enhanced, i.e., the synchrony of the increasing/decreasing Wilson coefficients of $C^{\rm NP}_{9}$ and $C^{\rm NP}_{10}$ from new physics is diminished in this model. In addition, the sign of $C^{LQ,\ell'}_9$ can be different from that of $C^{\rm LQ,\ell'}_{10}$. Therefore, when the constraint from $B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$ decay is satisfied, we can obtain sizable values for $C^{LQ,\mu}_{9}$ to fit the anomalies of $R_{K^{(*)}}$ and angular observable in $B\to K^* \mu^+ \mu^-$. The LQs can contribute to the electromagnetic dipole operators, but since the effects occur through one-loop diagrams and they are also small, the associated Wilson coefficient $C_7$ comes mainly from the SM contributions.
As mentioned earlier, the singlet LQ $S^{1/3}$ can also contribute to $C_{9,10}$ through box diagrams~\cite{Bauer:2015knc}. Using our notations, the results can be expressed as~\cite{Bauer:2015knc}:
\begin{align}
C^{{\rm box}, \ell}_{LL} & = \frac{m^2_t}{8\pi \alpha_{\rm em} m^2_S}|V_{3j} \tilde y_{j \ell }|^2 - \frac{\sqrt{2}}{64 C_{\rm SM} m^2_S } \left( \sum_i \tilde y_{2i} \tilde y_{3i} \right) \sum_j |V_{jj'} \tilde y_{j' \ell }|^2 \,, \nonumber \\
%
C^{{\rm box}, \ell}_{LR} & = \frac{m^2_t}{8\pi \alpha_{\rm em} m^2_S} \left( \ln\frac{m^2_S}{m^2_t} - f\left(\frac{m^2_t}{m^2_W}\right)\right) |w_{3 \ell }|^2 - \frac{\sqrt{2}}{64 C_{\rm SM} m^2_S } \left( \sum_i \tilde y_{2i} \tilde y_{3i} \right) \sum_j |w_{ j \ell }|^2 \,, \label{eq:C910LQ}
\end{align}
where the Wilsons coefficients $C^{\rm box,\ell}_{9,10}=(C^{{\rm box},\ell}_{LR} \pm C^{{\rm box},\ell}_{LL})/2$ and $f(x)=1 - 3/(x-1) + 3\ln(x)/(x-1)^2$. If we take $V_{3j} \tilde y_{j \ell} \sim V_{33} \tilde y_{3 \ell}$ and $\sum_j |V_{jj'} \tilde y_{j' \ell}|^2\sim |\tilde y_{2 \ell}|^2 + |\tilde y_{3 \ell}|^2$ by neglecting the small CKM matrix elements, then we obtain $C^{\rm box, \ell}_{LL} \approx 0.16 |\tilde y_{3\ell}|^2 -0.18 (|\tilde y_{2\ell}|^2 +|\tilde y_{3\ell}|^2)$ and $C^{\rm box, \ell}_{LR} \approx 0.46 |w_{3\ell}|^2 -0.18 \sum_j |w_{j\ell}|^2$, where $m_S\approx 1000$ GeV, $V_{ts}\approx -0.04$, and $\sum_i \tilde y_{2i} \tilde y_{3i} \sim 0.09$ from the $B^+ \to K^+ \nu \bar \nu$ constraint (see below) are used.
To obtain $C^{\rm box,\mu}_9 \sim -1$, we need $\tilde y_{32},w_{32} \ll 1$ and $\tilde y_{22}, w_{22} \sim 5$, i.e., when we explain $R_{K^{(*)}}$ anomalies by using the $S^{1/3}$ LQ, the same effect will enhance the $b\to c \mu \bar\nu$ process such that $R_{D^{(*)}}$ is still lower than the experimental data. A detailed analysis was given by~\cite{Becirevic:2016oho}. In order to avoid enhancing the $b\to c \mu \bar \nu$ channel, we assume that the loop effects of Eq.~(\ref{eq:C910LQ}) are small, and the resolution to $R_{K^{(*)}}$ comes from other LQ contributions in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Wilsons}).
\subsection{ Constraints from $\Delta F=2$, radiative lepton-flavor violating, $B ^+\to K^+ \nu \bar \nu$, $B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$, and $B_c \to \tau \nu$ processes }
Before we analyze the muon $g-2$, $R_{D^{(*)}}$, $R_{K^{(*)}}$ problems, we examine the possible constraints due to rare decays. First, we discuss the strict limits from the $\Delta F=2$ processes, such as $F-\bar F$ oscillation, where $F$ denotes the neutral pseudoscalar meson. Since $K-\bar K$, $D-\bar D$, and $B_d-\bar B_d$ mixings are involved, the first generation quarks and the anomalies mentioned earlier are associated with the second and third generation quarks. Therefore, we can avoid the constraints by assuming that $k_{1\ell'}\approx \tilde{k}_{\ell' 1} \approx y_{1\ell'} \approx \tilde{y}_{1\ell'} \approx w_{1i} \approx 0$ without affecting the analyses of $R_{D^{(*)}}$ and $R_{K^{(*)}}$. Thus, the relevant $\Delta F=2$ process is $B_s-\bar B_s$ mixing, where $\Delta m_{B_s} = 2|\langle \bar B_s | {\cal H}| B_s \rangle| $ is induced from box diagrams and the LQ contributions can be formulated as:
\begin{align}
\Delta m_{B_s}& \approx
\frac{C_{\rm box}}{(4\pi)^2}
\left[ \frac{5}{4} \left( \frac{\sum^3_{i=1}y_{3i} y_{2i} }{m_\Delta}\right)^2 + \left(\frac{\sum^3_{i=1} k_{3i} k_{2i}}{m_\Phi} \right)^2 \right] \nonumber \\
&+
\frac{C_{\rm box}}{(4\pi)^2}
\left[ \left( \frac{\sum^3_{i=1}\tilde{y}_{3i} \tilde{y}_{2i} }{m_S}\right)^2
+ 2 \frac{\left( \sum^3_{i=1} y_{3i} \tilde y_{2i} \right)\left( \sum^3_{i=1}\tilde{y}_{3i} {y}_{2i} \right)
}{m_S^2-m_\Delta^2}
\ln\left[\frac{m_S}{m_\Delta}\right] \right] \,,
\end{align}
where $C_{\rm box}= m_{B_s} f_{B_s}^2/3$, $f_{B_s}\approx 0.224$ GeV is the decay constant of $B_s$-meson~\cite{Dowdall:2013tga}, and the current measurement is $\Delta m^{\rm exp}_{B_s} = 1.17\times 10^{-11}$ GeV~\cite{PDG}. To satisfy the $R_{K^{(*)}}$ excess, the rough magnitude of LQ couplings is $|y_{3i} y_{2i}|\sim | k_{3i} k_{2i} |\sim 5\times 10^{-3}$. Using these parameter values, it can be shown that the resulting $\Delta m_{B_s}$ agree with the current data. However, $\Delta m_{B_s}$ can indeed constrain the parameters involved in the $b\to c \ell' \bar\nu_{\ell'}$ decays. Later, we discuss how this constraint can be satisfied.
In addition to the muon $g-2$, the introduced LQs can also contribute to the lepton-flavor violating processes $\ell' \to \ell \gamma$, where the current upper bounds are $BR(\mu \to e \gamma) < 4.2\times10^{-13}$ and
$BR(\tau \to e (\mu) \gamma) < 3.3 (4.4)\times10^{-8}$~\cite{PDG}, and they can strictly constrain the LQ couplings. To understand the constraints due to the $\ell' \to \ell \gamma$ decays, we express their branching ratios (BRs) as:
\begin{equation}
BR(\ell_b \to \ell_a \gamma) = \frac{48 \pi^3 \alpha_{\rm em} C_{ba} }{G_F^2 m_{\ell_b}^2} \left( \left| (a_R)_{ab} \right|^2 + \left| (a_L)_{ab} \right|^2 \right)
\end{equation}
with
$C_{\mu e} \approx 1$, $C_{\tau e} \approx 0.1784$, and $C_{\tau \mu} \approx 0.1736$.
$(a_{R})_{ab}$ is written as:
\begin{align}
(a_R)_{ab} \approx & \frac{3}{(4 \pi)^2} \int d[X]~ m_{t}\, (F_{k \tilde k} -F_{ w \tilde{y} })_{ab} \,, \label{eq:aRL}
\end{align}
where $\int [dX] \equiv \int dx dy dz \delta(1-x-y-z)$, $(a_L)_{ab}$ can be obtained from $(a_R)_{ab}$ by using $(F_{\alpha \beta }^\dagger)_{ab}$ instead of $(F_{\alpha \beta})_{ab}$, and the function $F_{k \tilde k}$ is given by:
\begin{align}
(F_{k \tilde k})_{ab} &= ({\bf V k})_{3 b} \tilde k_{a 3} \left( \frac{5}{3} \frac{ x}{\Delta(m_{t}, m_\Phi)_{ab}} + \frac{2}{3} \frac{1-x}{\Delta(m_\Phi, m_{t})_{ab} }\right)\,, \nonumber \\
(F_{w \tilde{y}})_{ab} &= w_{3b} ({\bf V \tilde{y}})_{3 a} \left( \frac{1}{3} \frac{ x}{\Delta(m_{t}, m_S)_{ab}} + \frac{2}{3} \frac{1-x}{\Delta(m_S, m_{t})_{ab} }\right)\,, \nonumber \\
\Delta(m_1,m_2)_{ab} &\approx x m_1^2 +(y+z) m_2^2 \,.
\end{align}
We note that ${\bf V k}_{3b} \approx k_{3b}$ and ${\bf V \tilde{y}}_{3a} \approx \tilde{y}_{3a}$ due to $V_{ub, cb} \ll V_{tb} \approx 1$. From Eq.~(\ref{eq:lang_lq}), we can see that the doublet and singlet LQs can simultaneously couple to both left- and right-handed charged leptons, and the results are enhanced by $m_t$. Other LQ contributions are suppressed by $m_\ell$ due to the chirality flip in the external lepton legs, and thus they are ignored. Based on Eq.~(\ref{eq:aRL}), the muon $g-2$ can be obtained as:
\begin{equation}
\Delta a_\mu \simeq - {m_\mu} (a_L + a_R)_{a=b=\mu}\,. \label{eq:muong-2}
\end{equation}
As mentioned earlier, the singlet LQ does not contribute to $b \to s \ell'^+ \ell^- $ at the tree level, but it will induce the $b\to s \nu \bar \nu$ process, where the current upper bound is $B^+ \to K^{+} \nu \bar \nu < 1.6 \times 10^{-5}$, and the SM result is around $4\times 10^{-6}$. Therefore, $B^+\to K^+ \nu \bar\nu$ can bound the parameters of $\tilde{y}_{3i}\tilde{y}_{2i}$. The four-Fermi interaction structure, which is induced by the LQ, is the same as that induced by the $W$-boson, so we can formulate the BR for $B^+ \to K^+ \nu \bar\nu$ as:
\begin{align}
& BR(B^+ \to K^+ \nu \bar \nu) \approx \frac{1}{3} \left(\sum_{\ell'} |1- r_{\ell'}|^2 \right) BR^{\rm SM}(B^+ \to K^+ \nu \bar \nu)\,, \\
%
& r_{\ell'} = \frac{1}{C^\nu_{SM}}\left( \frac{\tilde{y}_{3\ell'} \tilde{y}_{2\ell'}}{2m^2_S} + \frac{y_{3\ell'} y_{2\ell'}}{4m^2_\Delta} \right)\,, \quad C^{\nu}_{\rm SM} = \frac{G_F V_{tb} V^*_{ts} }{\sqrt{2}} \frac{\alpha_{\rm em}}{2\pi \sin^2\theta_W}X(x_t) \,,
\end{align}
where $x_t =m^2_t/m^2_W$ and $X(x_t)$ can be parameterized as $X(x_t) \approx 0.65 x^{0.575}_t$~\cite{Buchalla:1995vs}. According to Eq.~(\ref{eq:H_bs}), the LQs also contribute to $B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$, where the BRs measured by LHCb~\cite{Aaij:2017vad}
and predicted by the SM~\cite{Bobeth:2013uxa} are $BR(B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-)^{\rm exp} = (3.0\pm 0.6^{+0.3}_{-0.2}) \times 10^{-9}$ and $BR(B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-)^{\rm SM} = (3.65 \pm 0.23) \times 10^{-9}$, respectively. The experimental data are consistent with the SM prediction, so in order to consider the constraint due to $B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$, we use the expression for the BR as~\cite{Hiller:2014yaa}:
\begin{equation}
\frac{\text{BR}(B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-)}{\text{BR}(B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-)^{\text SM}} = \left|1-0.24 C^{LQ,\mu}_{10} \right|^2.
\end{equation}
In addition to the $B^-\to D^{(*)} \tau \bar\nu$ decay, the induced effective Hamiltonian in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Hbc}) also contributes to the $B_c \to \tau \bar \nu$ process, where the allowed upper limit is $BR(B_c^- \to \tau \bar\nu ) < 30 \%$~\cite{Alonso:2016oyd}.
According to a previous given by~\cite{Alonso:2016oyd}, we express the BR for $B_c \to \tau \bar\nu$ as~\cite{Alonso:2016oyd}:
\begin{align}
BR(B_c \to \tau \bar \nu_\tau) = \tau_{B_c} \frac{m_{Bc} m^2_\tau f^2_{B_c} G_F^2 |V_{cb}|^2}{8 \pi} \left( 1 - \frac{m_\tau^2}{m_{B_c}^2} \right)^2
\left| 1 + \epsilon_L + \frac{m^2_{B_c}}{m_\tau (m_b + m_c)} \epsilon_P \right|^2,
\label{eq:BRBc}
\end{align}
where $f_{B_c} $ is the $B_c$ decay constant and
the $\epsilon_{L,P}$ in our model are given as:
\begin{align}
\epsilon_L &= \frac{\sqrt{2}}{4 G_F V_{cb}} \left[- \sum_a V_{2a} \frac{ y_{a3}y_{33} }{4m^2_{\Delta}} + \sum_a V_{2a} \frac{\tilde{y}_{a3}\tilde{y}_{33} }{2m^2_{S}} \right]\,, \nonumber \\
\epsilon_P &= \frac{\sqrt{2}}{4 G_F V_{cb}} \left[ \frac{ \tilde{y}_{33} w_{2 3}}{2m^2_{S}} - \frac{ k_{33} \tilde{k}_{3 2}}{2m^2_{\Phi}} \right]\,. \nonumber
\end{align}
Using $\tau_{B_c}\approx 0.507 \times 10^{-12}$s, $m_{B_c}\approx 6.275$ GeV, $f_{B_c}\approx 0.434$ GeV~\cite{Colquhoun:2015oha}, and $V_{cb}\approx 0.04$, the SM result is $BR^{\rm SM}(B_c \to \tau \bar \nu_\tau)\approx 2.1\%$. We can see that the effects of the new physics can enhance the $B_c\to \tau \bar \nu_\tau$ decay by a few factors at most in our analysis given in the following.
\subsection{ Observables: $R_{D^{(*)}}$ and $R_{K^{(*)}}$}
The observables of $R_{D^{(*)}}$ and $R_{K^{(*)}}$ are the branching fraction ratios that are insensitive to the hadronic effects, but the associated BRs still depend on the transition form factors. In order to calculate the BR for each semileptonic decay, we parameterize the transition form factors for $\bar B \to P$ as:
\begin{align}
\langle P(p_2) | q \gamma^\mu b | \bar B(p_1) \rangle &= F_{+}(q^2) \left( (p_1 + p_2)^\mu -\frac{m^2_B -m^2_P}{q^2 } q^\mu \right)+ \frac{m^2_B - m^2_P}{q^2} q^\mu F_0(q^2)\,, \nonumber \\
\langle P(p_2) | q \sigma_{\mu\nu} b | \bar B(p_1) \rangle &= - i (p_{1\mu} p_{2\nu} - p_{1\nu} p_{2\mu} ) \frac{2F_T(q^2) }{m_B + m_P}\,, \label{eq:ffP}
\end{align}
where $P$ can be the $D(q=c)$ or $K(q=s)$ meson, and the momentum transfer is given by $q=p_1 - p_2$.
For the $B\to V$ decay where $V$ is a vector meson, the transition form factors associated with the weak currents are parameterized as:
\begin{align}
\langle V(p_2, \epsilon)| \bar q \gamma_\mu b|\bar B(p_1)\rangle & = i \varepsilon_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma} \epsilon^{\nu*} p^\rho_1 p^\sigma_2 \frac{2V(q^2) }{m_B + m_V}\,, \nonumber \\
%
\langle V(p_2, \epsilon)| \bar q \gamma_\mu \gamma_5 b|\bar B(p_1)\rangle & = 2m_V A_{0}(q^2) \frac{\epsilon^*\cdot q}{q^2}q_\mu +
(m_B + m_V)A_1(q^2) \left( \epsilon^*_\mu - \frac{\epsilon^* \cdot q}{q^2}q_\mu \right) \nonumber \\
& - A_2(q^2) \frac{\epsilon^* \cdot q}{m_B + m_V} \left( (p_1 + p_2)_\mu - \frac{m^2_B -m^2_V}{q^2} q_\mu \right)\,, \nonumber \\
\langle V(p_2, \epsilon)| \bar q \sigma_{\mu \nu} b|\bar B(p_1)\rangle & = \varepsilon_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma} \left[
\epsilon^{\rho *} (p_1 + p_2)^\sigma T_1(q^2) + \epsilon^{\rho *} q^\sigma \frac{m^2_B -m^2_V}{q^2}(T_2(q^2) - T_1(q^2)) \right. \nonumber \\
&\left. + 2 \frac{\epsilon^* \cdot q}{q^2} p^\rho_1 p^\sigma_2 \left( T_2 (q^2) - T_1(q^2) + \frac{q^2}{m^2_B -m^2_V} T_3(q^2) \right) \right]\,, \label{eq:ffV}
\end{align}
where $V=D^*(K^*)$ when $q=c(s)$, $\epsilon^{0123}=1$, $\sigma_{\mu \nu} \gamma_5 =( i/2 )\epsilon_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma} \sigma^{\rho \sigma}$, and $\epsilon^\mu$ is the polarization vector of the vector meson. We note that the form factors associated with the weak scalar/pseudoscalar currents can be obtained through the equations of motion, i.e., $i\partial_\mu \bar q \gamma^\mu b = (m_b - m_q) \bar q b$ and $i\partial_\mu (\bar q \gamma^\mu \gamma_5 b) = - (m_b + m_q) \bar q \gamma_5 b$. For numerical estimations, the $q^2$-dependent form factors $F_+$, $F_T$, $V$, $A^0$, and $T_1$ are taken as~\cite{Melikhov:2000yu}:
\begin{align}
f(q^2) & = \frac{f(0)}{(1-q^2/M^2)(1-\sigma_1 q^2/M^2 + \sigma_2 q^4/M^4)} \,, \label{eq:FF1}
\end{align}
and the other form factors are taken as:
\begin{align}
f(q^2) & = \frac{f(0)}{1-\sigma_1 q^2/M^2 + \sigma_2 q^4/M^4} \,. \label{eq:FF2}
\end{align}
The values of $f(0)$, $\sigma_1$, and $\sigma_2$ for each form factor are shown in Table~\ref{tab:FF}. A detailed discussion of the form factors was given by~\cite{Melikhov:2000yu}. The NNL effects obtained with the LCQCD approach for the $B\to D$ form factors were described by~\cite{Wang:2017jow}.
\begin{table}[hpbt]
\caption{ $B\to P, V$ transition form factors, as parameterized in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:FF1}) and (\ref{eq:FF2}). }
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular} {|c||ccc||ccccccc|} %
& \multicolumn{3} {c||}{$B\to D$} & \multicolumn{7} {c|}{$B\to D^*$} \\ \hline
& $F_+$ & $F_0 $& $F_T$ & $V$ & $A_0$ & $A_1$ & $A_2$ & $T_1$ & $T_2$ & $T_3$ \\ \hline
f(0) & 0.67 & 0.67 & 0.69 & 0.76 & 0.69 & 0.66 & 0.62 & 0.68 & 0.68 & 0.33 \\ \hline
$\sigma_1$ & 0.57 & 0.78 & 0.56 & 0.57 & 0.58 & 0.78 & 1.40 & 0.57 & 0.64 & 1.46 \\ \hline
$\sigma_2$ & & & & & & & 0.41 & & & \\ \hline \hline
& \multicolumn{3} {c||}{$B\to K$} & \multicolumn{7} {c|}{$B\to K^*$} \\ \hline
f(0) & 0.36 & 0.36 & 0.35 & 0.44 & 0.45 & 0.36 & 0.32 & 0.39 & 0.39 & 0.27 \\ \hline
$\sigma_1$ & 0.43 & 0.70 & 0.43 & 0.45 & 0.46 & 0.64 & 1.23 & 0.45 & 0.72 & 1.31 \\ \hline
$\sigma_2$ & & 0.27 & & & & 0.36 & 0.38 & & 0.62 & 0.41 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\label{tab:FF}
\end{table}
According to the form factors in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:ffP}) and (\ref{eq:ffV}), and the interactions in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:Hbc}) and (\ref{eq:Hbsll}), we briefly summarize the differential decay rates for the semileptonic $B$ decays, which we use for estimating $R_{D^{(*)}}$ and $R_K$. For the $\bar B \to D \ell' \bar \nu_{\ell'}$ decay, the differential decay rate as a function of the invariant mass $q^2$ can be formulated as:
\begin{align}
\frac{d\Gamma^{\ell'}_D}{dq^2} & = \frac{G^2_F |V_{cb}|^2 \sqrt{\lambda_D}}{256 \pi^3 m^3_B} \left( 1- \frac{m^2_{\ell'}}{q^2}\right)^2 \left[ \frac{2}{3} \left( 2+ \frac{m^2_{\ell'}}{q^2}\right) |X^{\ell'}_+|^2 + \frac{2 m^2_{\ell'}}{q^2} \left|X^{\ell'}_0 + \frac{\sqrt{q^2}}{m_{\ell'}} X^{\ell'}_S \right|^2 \right. \nonumber \\
& \left.
+ 16 \left(\frac{2}{3}\left( 1+ \frac{2 m^2_{\ell'}}{q^2}\right) |X^{\ell'}_T|^2-\frac{m_{\ell'}}{\sqrt{q^2}} X^{\ell'}_T X^{\ell'}_0 \right) \right]\,, \label{eq:diffD}
\end{align}
where the $\{X^{\ell'}_\alpha \}$ functions and LQ contributions are given by:
\begin{align}
X^{\ell'}_+ & = \sqrt{\lambda_D} (1 + C^{\ell'}_V) F_{+}(q^2) \,, \quad X^{\ell'}_0 = (m^2_B -m^2_D) (1+C^{\ell'}_V) F_0 (q^2) \nonumber \\
%
X^{\ell'}_S & = \frac{m^2_B -m^2_D}{m_b - m_c} C^{\ell'}_S \sqrt{q^2} F_0(q^2)\,, \quad X^{\ell'}_T= - \frac{\sqrt{q^2 \lambda_D}}{m_B + m_D} C^{\ell'}_T F_T(q^2) \nonumber \\
%
C^{\ell'}_V & = \frac{\sqrt{2}}{8 G_F V_{cb} } \sum_a V_{2a}\left(\frac{\tilde{y}_{3\ell'} \tilde{y}_{a\ell' }}{ m^2_S} - \frac{y_{3\ell'} y_{a\ell' }}{2 m^2_\Delta} \right) \,, \nonumber \\
%
C^{\ell'}_S & = - \frac{\sqrt{2} }{4 G_F V_{cb} } \left(\frac{\tilde{y}_{3\ell'} w_{2\ell'}}{2m^2_S}-\frac{k_{3\ell'} \tilde{k}_{\ell' 2 }}{2 m^2_\Phi }\right) \,, \quad
C^{\ell'}_T = \frac{\sqrt{2} }{16 G_F V_{cb} } \left(\frac{\tilde{y}_{3\ell'} w_{2\ell'}}{2m^2_S}+\frac{k_{3\ell'} \tilde{k}_{\ell' 2 }}{2 m^2_\Phi }\right)\,, \nonumber \\
%
\lambda_H & = m^4_B + m^4_H + q^4 -2(m^2_B m^2_H + m^2_H q^2 + q^2 m^2_B) \,. \label{eq:Hfunc}
\end{align}
We note that the effective couplings $C_S^{\ell'}$ and $C_T^{\ell'}$ at the $m_b$ scale can be obtained from the LQ mass scale via the renormalization group (RG) equation. Our numerical analysis considers the RG running effects with $(C_S^{\ell'}/C_T^{\ell'})_{\mu=m_{b}}/(C_S^{\ell'}/C_T^{\ell'})_{\mu = \mathcal{O}({\rm TeV}) } \sim 2.0$ at the $m_b$ scale~\cite{Sakaki:2013bfa}.
The $\bar B \to D^* \ell' \bar\nu_{\ell'}$ decays involve $D^*$ polarizations and more complicated transition form factors, so the differential decay rate determined by summing all of the $D^*$ helicities can be written as:
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\Gamma^{\ell'}_{D^*}}{dq^2} = \sum_{h=L,+,-} \frac{d\Gamma^{\ell' h}_{D^*}}{dq^2} = \frac{G^2_F |V_{cb}|^2 \sqrt{\lambda_{D^*}}}{256 \pi^3 m^3_B} \left( 1- \frac{m^2_{\ell'}}{q^2}\right)^2 \sum_{h=L,+,-} V^{\ell' h}_{D^*}(q^2)\,, \label{eq:diffD*}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_{D^*}$ is found in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Hfunc}) and the detailed $\{ V^{\ell' h}_{D^*}\}$ functions are shown in the appendix. According to Eqs.~(\ref{eq:diffD}) and (\ref{eq:diffD*}), $R_{M}$ ($M=D,D^*$) can be calculated by:
\begin{equation}
R_M = \frac{\int^{q^2_{\rm max}}_{m^2_\tau }dq^2 \left(d\Gamma^{\tau}_M/dq^2 \right)}{ \int^{q^2_{\rm max}}_{m^2_{\ell}} dq^2 \left( d\Gamma^\ell_M/dq^2 \right)} \label{eq:R_M}
\end{equation}
where $q^2_{\rm max}=(m_B -m_M)^2$ and $\Gamma^{\ell}_M = (\Gamma^e_M + \Gamma^\mu_M)/2$.
For the $B \to K \ell^+ \ell^-$ decays, the differential decay rate can be expressed as~\cite{Chen:2002zk}:
\begin{align}
\frac{d\Gamma_{K\ell \ell}(q^2)}{dq^2} & \approx \frac{ |c_{\rm SM} |^2 m^3_B}{3\cdot 2^8 \pi^3} \left(1- \frac{q^2}{m^2_B}\right)^{3/2} \nonumber \\
& \times \left[\left| C^\ell_9 F_+(q^2) + \frac{2 m_b C_7 }{m_B + m_K} F_T(q^2) \right|^2 + \left| C^\ell_{10} F_+(q^2) \right|^2 \right]\,. \label{eq:diffBKll}
\end{align}
From Eq.~(\ref{eq:diffBKll}), the measured ratio $R_K$ in the range $q^2=[q^2_{\rm min}, q^2_{\rm max}]=[1,6]$ GeV$^2$ can be estimated by:
\begin{equation}
R_K = \frac{\int^{q^2_{\rm max}}_{q^2_{\rm min}} dq^2 d\Gamma_{K\mu \mu}/dq^2 } {\int^{q^2_{\rm max}}_{q^2_{\rm min}}dq^2
d\Gamma_{Kee}/dq^2 }\,. \label{eq:RK}
\end{equation}
$R_{K^*}$ is similar to $R_K$, and thus we only show the result for $R_K$.
\section{Numerical analysis}
After discussing the possible constraints and observables of interest, we now present the numerical analysis to determine the common parameter region where the $R_{D^{(*)}}$ and $R_{K^{(*)}}$ anomalies can fit the experimental data.
Before presenting the numerical analysis, we summarize the parameters involved, which are related to the specific measurements as follows:
\begin{align}
\text{muon}\ g-2 &: k_{32} \tilde{k}_{23}\,, \tilde{y}_{32} w_{32}\,;\quad R_{K} : k_{3\ell} k_{2\ell}\,,~ y_{3\ell} y_{2\ell} \,; \nonumber \\
R_{D^{(*)}} &: k_{3\ell'} \tilde{k}_{\ell' 2}\,,~ \sum_a V_{2a} \left( y_{3\ell' } y_{a\ell' }\,,~ \tilde{y}_{3\ell'} \tilde{y}_{a \ell'}\right)\,,~\tilde{y}_{3\ell'} w_{2\ell'}\,. \label{eq:pre}
\end{align}
The parameters related to the radiative LFV, $\Delta B=2$, and $B^+\to K^+ \nu \bar\nu $ processes are defined as:
\begin{align}
\mu \to e \gamma &: k_{32} \tilde{k}_{13}\,, \tilde{k}_{23} k_{31}\,, \tilde{y}_{32} w_{31}\,, w_{32} \tilde{y}_{31}\,; \nonumber \\
\tau \to \ell_a \gamma &: k_{33} \tilde{k}_{a 3}\,,\tilde{k}_{33} k_{3a}\,, \tilde{y}_{33} w_{3a}, w_{33}\tilde{y}_{3a}\,; \nonumber \\
B^+ \to K^+ \nu \bar \nu &: \tilde{y}_{3i} \tilde{y}_{2i}\,, y_{3i} y_{2i} \,; \quad B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^- : k_{32} k_{22}\,,~y_{32}y_{22} \,;\nonumber \\
%
\Delta m_{B_s} &: \left(\sum_i z_{3 i} z_{2i}\right)^2 \,,~
\left( \sum_i y_{3i} \tilde{y}_{2i} \right) \left(\sum_i \tilde{y}_{3i} y_{2i} \right) \,, \label{eq:con}
%
\end{align}
where $z_{3i}z_{2i} = k_{3i}k_{2i}, y_{3i} y_{2i}, \tilde{y}_{3i} \tilde{y}_{2i}$. From Eqs.~(\ref{eq:pre}) and (\ref{eq:con}), we can see that in order to avoid the $\mu \to e \gamma$ and $\tau \to \ell \gamma$ constraints and obtain a sizable and positive $\Delta a_\mu$, we can set ($\tilde{k}_{13,33}$, $k_{31,33}$, $w_{3i}$) as a small value. From the limit of $B^+ \to K^+ \nu \bar\nu$, we obtain $\tilde{y}_{3i} \tilde{y}_{2i}<0.03$, and thus the resulting $\Delta m_{B_s}$ is smaller than the current data. In order to further reduce the number of free parameters and avoid large fine-tuning couplings, we employ the scheme with $k_{ij} \approx \tilde{k}_{ji} \approx | y_{ij}|$, where the sign of $y_{ij}$ can be selected to obtain the correct sign for $C^{LQ,\ell_j}_{9}$ and to decrease the value of $C^{LQ, \mu}_{10}$ such that $B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$ can fit the experimental data. As mentioned earlier, to avoid the bounds from the $K$, $B_d$, and $D$ systems, we also use $k_{1\ell'} \approx \tilde{k}_{\ell' 1} \approx y_{1i} \approx \tilde{y}_{1i} \approx w_{1i} \sim 0$. When we omit these small couplings, the correlations of the parameters in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:pre}) and (\ref{eq:con}) can be simplified further as:
\begin{align}
\text{muon}\ g-2 &: k_{32}\tilde{k}_{23} \,; ~~R_{K} : k_{32} k_{22}\,,~ ~y_{32} y_{22} \,;~ R_{D^{(*)}} : k_{32} k_{22}, ~y_{32} y_{22},~ \tilde{y}_{3 \ell'} w_{2\ell'}\,; \nonumber \\
%
B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^- &: k_{32} k_{22}\,,~y_{32} y_{22}\,; ~~\Delta m_{B_s} : (k_{3 2} k_{22})^2 \,, ~(y_{32} y_{22})^2\,,
\label{eq:pre2}
\end{align}
where $\tilde{y}_{3i} \tilde{y}_{2i}$ are ignored due to the constraint from $B^+ \to K^+ \nu \bar\nu$.
The typical values of these parameters for fitting the anomalies in the $b\to s \mu^+ \mu^-$ decay are $y_{32}(k_{32}), y_{22}(k_{22}) \sim 0.07$, so the resulting $\Delta m_{B_s}$ is smaller than the current data, but these parameters are too small to explain $R_{D^{(*)}}$. Thus, we must depend on the singlet LQ to resolve the $R_{D}$ and $R_{D^*}$ excesses, where the main free parameters are now $\tilde{y}_{3\ell'} w_{2\ell'}$.
After discussing the constraints and the correlations among various processes, we present the numerical analysis in the following. There are several LQs in the model, but we use $m_{LQ}$ to denote the mass of a LQ. From Eqs.~(\ref{eq:aRL}), (\ref{eq:muong-2}), and (\ref{eq:pre2}), we can see that the muon $g-2$ depends only on $k_{32}\tilde{k}_{23}$ and $m_\Phi$.
We illustrate $\Delta a_\mu$ as a function of $k_{32} \tilde{k}_{23}$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:gm2_RK}(a), where the solid, dashed, and dotted lines denote the results for $m_\Phi=1.5$, $5$, and $10$ TeV, respectively, and the band is the experimental value with $1\sigma$ errors. Due to the $m_t$ enhancement, $k_{32}\tilde{k}_{23} \sim 0.05$ with $m_\Phi \sim$ 1 TeV can explain the muon $g-2$ anomaly.
\begin{figure}[hptb]
\includegraphics[width=70mm]{gm2.eps}
\includegraphics[width=70mm]{RK.eps}
\caption{(a) $\Delta a_\mu$ as a function of $k_{32} \tilde{k}_{23}$ with $m_\Phi=1.5,\, 5,\, 10$ TeV, where the band denotes the experimental data with $1\sigma$ errors. (b) Contours for $R_K$, $B_s\to \mu^+ \mu^-$, $\Delta m_{B_s}$, and $C^{LQ,\mu}_9$ as a function of $k_{32}k_{22}$ and $y_{32}y_{22}$, where the ranges of $R_K$ and $B_s\to \mu^+ \mu^-$ are the experimental values with $1\sigma$ errors and $m_{LQ} = 1.5$ TeV. For $C^{LQ,\mu}_9$, we show the range for $C^{LQ,\mu}=[-1.5, -0.5]$. }
\label{fig:gm2_RK}
\end{figure}
According to the relationships shown in Eq.~(\ref{eq:pre2}), $R_K$, $B_s\to \mu^+ \mu^-$, and $\Delta m_{B_s}$ depend on the same parameters, i.e., $k_{32}k_{22}$ and $y_{32} y_{22}$. We show the contours for these observables as a function of $k_{32}k_{22}$ and $y_{32}y_{22}$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:gm2_RK}(b), where the data with $1\sigma$ errors and $m_{LQ}=1.5$ TeV are taken for all LQ masses. Based on these results, we see clearly that $\Delta m_{B_s} < \Delta m^{\rm exp}_{B_s}$ in the range of $|k_{32}k_{22}|$, $|y_{32}y_{22}| < 0.05$, where $R_K$ and $BR(B_s\to \mu^+ \mu^-)$ can both fit the experimental data simultaneously. In addition, we show $C^{LQ,\mu}_{9}=[-1.5,-0.5]$ in the same plot. We can see that $C^{LQ,\mu}_9 \sim -1$, which is used to explain the angular observable $P'_5$, can also be achieved in the same common region. According to Fig.~\ref{fig:gm2_RK}(b), the preferred values of $k_{32}k_{22}$ and $y_{32}y_{22}$ where the observed $R_K$ and $B_s\to \mu^+ \mu^-$ and the $C^{LQ,\mu}_9=[-1.5, -0.5]$ overlap are around $( k_{32}k_{22}, y_{32}y_{22} ) \sim ( -0.001,\, 0.004 )$ and $\sim ( 0.025,\, 0.03 )$. The latter values are at the percentage level but they are still not sufficiently large to explain the tree-dominated $R_D$ and $R_{D^*}$ anomalies.
\begin{figure}[hptb]
\includegraphics[width=70mm]{RD.eps}
\includegraphics[width=70mm]{RDv.eps}
\includegraphics[width=70mm]{RD2.eps}
\includegraphics[width=70mm]{RDv2.eps}
\caption{ Contours for (a) $R_{D}$ and (b) $R_{D^*}$, where the solid lines denote the data with $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ errors, respectively. The horizontal dashed lines in both plots denote the $BR^{\rm exp}(B^+ \to D^{(*)} \ell \nu_\ell)$ whereas the vertical dotted lines are the $BR^{\rm exp}(B^+\to D^{(*)} \tau \nu_\tau)$.
Contours for (c) $R_{D}$ and (d) $R_{D^*}$, where the solid and dashed lines denote the situations with and without tensor operator contributions, respectively. In this case, we take $m_{LQ} = 1.5$ TeV. }
\label{fig:RD_RDv}
\end{figure}
After studying the muon $g-2$ and $R_K$ anomalies, we numerically analyze the ratio of $BR(\bar B\to D^{(*)} \tau \bar\nu_\tau)$ to $BR(\bar B \to D^{(*)} \ell \bar \nu_\ell)$, i.e., $R_{D^(*)}$. The introduced doublet and triplet LQs cannot efficiently enhance $R_{D^{(*)}}$, so in the following estimations, we only focus on the singlet LQ contributions, where the four-Fermi interactions shown in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Hbc}) come mainly from the scalar- and tensor-type interaction structures. Based on Eqs.~(\ref{eq:diffD}), (\ref{eq:diffD*}), and (\ref{eq:R_M}), we show the contours for $R_{D}$ and $R_{D^*}$ as a function of $\tilde{y}_{33} w_{23}$ and $\tilde{y}_{32} w_{22}(\tilde{y}_{31} w_{21})$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:RD_RDv}(a) and (b), where the horizontal dashed and vertical dotted lines in both plots denote $BR^{\rm exp}(B^- \to D [\ell \bar \nu_\ell, \tau \bar\nu_\tau])=[2.27 \pm 0.11,\, 0.77 \pm 0.25]\%$ and $BR^{\rm exp}(B^- \to D^{*} [\ell \nu_\ell,\, \tau \bar\nu_\tau])=[5.69\pm 0.19, \, 1.88\pm 0.20]\%$, respectively, and $m_{LQ} = 1.5$ TeV is used, and the data with $2\sigma$ errors are taken. For simplicity, we take $\tilde{y}_{31} w_{21}\approx \tilde{y}_{32} w_{22}$. When considering the limits from $BR(\bar B\to D^{(*)} \ell' \bar\nu_{\ell'})$, we obtain the limits $|\tilde{y}_{3\ell}w_{2\ell}| \leq 1.5$ and $\tilde{y}_{33} w_{23} > 0$. In order to clearly demonstrate the influence of tensor-type interactions, we also calculate the situation by setting $C^{\ell'}_T=0$. The contours obtained for $R_D$ and $R_{D^*}$ are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:RD_RDv}(c) and (d), where the solid and dashed lines denote the cases with and without $C^{\ell'}_{T}$, respectively. According to these plots, we can see that $R_D$ and $R_{D^*}$ have different responses to the tensor operators, where the latter is more sensitive to the tensor interactions. $R_D$ and $R_{D^*}$ can be explained simultaneously with the tensor couplings.
In order to understand the correlation between $BR(B_c \to \tau \bar \nu_\tau)$ and $R_{D^{(*)}}$, we show the contours for $BR(B_c \to \tau \bar \nu_\tau)$ and $R_{D^{(*)}}$ as a function of $w_{23} \tilde y_{33}$ and $m_{S}$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:Bc}, where $\tilde y_{32} w_{22} \approx \tilde y_{31} w_{21}\approx 0$ are used, and the gray area is excluded by $BR(B_c^- \to \tau \nu ) < 0.3$. We can see that the predicted $BR(B_c \to \tau \bar \nu_\tau)$ is much smaller than the experimental bound.
\begin{figure}[tbph]
\includegraphics[width=85mm]{BRBc.eps}
\caption{ Contours for $BR(B_c \to \tau \bar \nu_\tau)$ and $R_{D^{(*)}}$ as a function of $w_{23} \tilde y_{23}$ and $m_S$. }
\label{fig:Bc}
\end{figure}
Finally, we make some remarks regarding the constraint due to the LQ search at the LHC. Due to the flavor physics constraints, only the $S^{1/3}$ Yukawa couplings $\tilde y_{t \tau }$, $\tilde y_{b\nu_{\tau}}$, and $w_{c\tau}$ can be of ${\cal O}(1)$. These couplings affect the $S^{1/3}$ decays but also their production. Therefore, in addition to the $S^{1/3}$-pair production, based on the $O(1)$ Yukawa couplings, the single $S^{1/3}$ production becomes interesting. In the $pp$ collisions, the single $S^{1/3}$ production can be generated via the $g b \to S^{-1/3} \bar \nu_\tau$ and $gc \to S^{-1/3} \tau^+$ channels. Using CalcHEP 3.6~\cite{Belyaev:2012qa,Belyaev:2005ew} with the CTEQ6 parton distribution functions~\cite{Nadolsky:2008zw}, their production cross sections with $|w_{23}|\sim |\tilde y_{b\nu_\tau}| \sim \sqrt{2}$ and $m_{LQ}=1000$ GeV at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV can be obtained as 3.9 fb and 2.9 fb, respectively, whereas the $S^{1/3}$-pair production cross section is $\sigma(pp\to S^{-1/3} S^{1/3})\approx 2.4$ fb. If we assume that $S^{-1/3}$ predominantly decays into $ t \tau$, $b \nu_\tau$, and $ c \tau$ with similar BRs, i.e. $BR(S^{-1/3}\to f)\sim 1/3$, then the single $S^{1/3}$ production cross section $\sigma( S^{-1/3} X)$ times $BR(S^{-1/3}\to f)$ with $X$ and $f$ as the possible final states can be estimated as around $1$ fb. The LQ coupling $w_{23}$ involves different generations, so the constraints due to the collider measurements may not be applied directly. However, if we compare this with the CMS experiment~\cite{Khachatryan:2015qda} based on a single production of the second-generation scalar LQ, we find that the values of $\sigma \times BR$ at $m_{LQ} \sim 1000$ GeV are still lower than the CMS upper limit with few fb. The significance of this discovery depends on the kinematic cuts and event selection conditions, but this discussion is beyond the scope of this study and we leave the detailed analysis for future research.
\section{Summary}
In this study, we considered the muon $g-2$, $R_{K^{(*)}}$, and $R_{D^{(*)}}$ anomalies in a specific model with one doublet, triplet, and singlet LQ. We demonstrated that the muon $g-2$ can be explained only by the doublet LQ due to the $m_t$ enhancement. The combined effects of the doublet and triplet LQs can lead to $C^{LQ,\mu}_9 \sim -1$, which can resolve the $R_{K^{(*)}}$ anomaly and the excess of the angular observable $P'_5$ in the $B\to K^* \mu^+ \mu^-$ decays. When we considered the constraints due to $\ell' \to \ell \gamma$, $\Delta m_{B_s}$, $BR(B^+\to K^+ \nu \bar\nu)$, $BR(\bar B\to D^{(*)} \ell' \bar\nu_{\ell'})$, and $BR(B_c \to \tau \bar \nu_\tau)$, we found that the singlet LQ contributions can enhance $R_{D}$ and $R_{D^*}$ would be consistent with the current measurements obtained through the scalar and tensor four-Fermi interactions. We also found that $R_{D^*}$ is not sensitive to scalar interactions but it is sensitive to the tensor interactions, although the influence on $R_{D}$ is reversed. Using the LQ Yukawa couplings of $O(1)$, we estimated the single production cross section of the scalar LQ and its decaying BRs, where the results are still under the CMS upper limit. The significance of this discovery requires validation in a detailed event simulation, which is beyond the scope of the present study.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This study was partially supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan under grant MOST-103-2112-M-006-004-MY3 (CHC).
|
\section{Preliminary lemmas}\label{app:aux}
\input{assumptionsandlemmas.tex}
\section{Proofs}\label{app:proofs}
\subsection{Proof of Lemma \ref{theorem:biasvanish}}\label{app:prooftheorembiasvanish}
Under Assumption~A\ref{ass:regressor} and the decomposition \eqref{eq:svd2} in Appendix \ref{A: propA1},
\begin{equation}\label{eq:app1a}
X'(XX')^{-1}X = \Sigma^{1/2}_2 U_{n}(U_{n}'\Sigma_2 U_{n})^{-1}U_{n}'\Sigma^{1/2}_2.
\end{equation}
By Lemma~\ref{lem:reduction} in Appendix \ref{app:aux}, we can write $U_{n} = W(W'W)^{-1/2}$
with the elements of $W$ standard normal and independently distributed. Substituting into \eqref{eq:app1a} gives
\begin{equation}\label{eq:defH}
X'(XX')^{-1}X = \Sigma^{1/2}_2 W(W'\Sigma_2 W)^{-1} W' \Sigma_2^{1/2} =HH',
\end{equation}
where $H = \Sigma^{1/2}_2W(W'\Sigma_2 W)^{-1/2}$.
We separately bound the diagonal and off-diagonal elements of $HH'$. The proof extends the approach by \citet{wang2015high}.
\paragraph{Diagonal terms of $HH'$}
The diagonal elements of $HH'$ are themselves not of particular interest, as we choose the diagonal matrix $D$ such that the diagonal elements of $MX$ are all equal to one. However, to bound the off-diagonal elements, we require a bound on the diagonal elements of $HH'$. We first construct bounds under the assumption that $\Sigma = I_{p}$, and then connect these to the case where $\Sigma_2 \neq I_{p}$.
When $\Sigma_2=I_{p}$, we can invoke Lemma~\ref{lem:JL} in Appendix \ref{app:aux} to show that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:alltime}
P\left(e_{1}'U_{n}U_{n}'e_{1} > c_{\epsilon}\frac{n}{p},\quad e_{1}'U_{n}U_{n}'e_{1} < \frac{1}{c_{\epsilon}}\frac{n}{p}\right)\leq 2\exp\left(-\frac{c}{4c_{s}^2}\epsilon^2 n\right),
\end{equation}
with $c,c_{s}>0$, and $c_{\epsilon} = \frac{1+\epsilon}{1-\epsilon}>1$ is introduced to reduce notation.
We will now use these results to establish a bound when $\Sigma_2\neq I$. The diagonal terms can be bounded by noting that for any vector $v$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
v'HH'v&= v'\Sigma_{2}^{\frac{1}{2}}U_n(U_n'\Sigma_2 U_n)^{-1}U_n'\Sigma_2^{\frac{1}{2}}v\\
&\leq \kappa v'U_{n}U_{n}'v,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where the condition number $\kappa = \frac{\lambda_{\max}(\Sigma_2)}{\lambda_{\min}(\Sigma_2)}<\infty$ by Assumption~A\ref{ass:condnumb}. Similarly
\begin{equation}
v'HH'v \geq\frac{1}{\kappa}v'U_{n}U_{n}'v.
\end{equation}
Since $U_{n} \overset{(d)}{=} QU_{n}$ with $Q\in \mathcal{O}(p)$, upon choosing $Q$ such that $Qv = e_{1}$, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq: diagbound}
P\left(e_{1}'HH'e_{1} > c_{\epsilon}\kappa \frac{n}{p},\quad e_{1}'HH'e_{1} < \frac{1}{c_{\epsilon}\kappa}\frac{n}{p}\right)\leq 2\exp\left(-\frac{c}{4c_{s}^2}\epsilon^2 n\right).
\end{equation}
\paragraph{Off-diagonal elements}
The proof for the off-diagonal elements is more involved. For $i=1$ and $j=2$, we bound with high probability the ratio $\frac{|e_{i}'HH'e_{j}|}{e_{i}'HH'e_{i}}$. A union bound is used to extend the results to arbitrary $i$ and $j$.
We separate three cases: (a) $e_{1}'HHe_{1}\geq c_{\epsilon}\kappa\frac{n}{p}$, (b) $c_{\epsilon}\kappa\frac{n}{p}>e_{1}'HH'e_{1}> \frac{1}{c_{\epsilon}\kappa}\frac{n}{p}$, and (c) $e_{1}'HHe_{1}\leq c_{\epsilon}\kappa\frac{n}{p}$. Conditioning on these three cases and using the trivial fact that for any probability $P(\cdot)\leq 1$, it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:long}
\begin{split}
&P\left(\frac{|e_{1}'HH'e_{2}|}{e_{1}'HH'e_{1}}\geq t\right)\leq P\left(e_{1}'HH'e_{1}\geq c_{\epsilon}\kappa\frac{n}{p}\right) + P\left(e_{1}'HH'e_{1}\leq \frac{1}{c_{\epsilon}\kappa}\frac{n}{p}\right) \\
&\quad + \int_{\frac{1}{c_{\epsilon}\kappa}\frac{n}{p}}^{c_{\epsilon}\kappa\frac{n}{p}}P\left(\left.\frac{|e_{1}'HH'e_{2}|}{e_{1}'HH'e_{1}}\geq t\right| e_{1}'HH'e_{1} = t_{1}^2\right)P\left(e_{1}'HH'e_{1} = t_{1}^2\right)dt_{1}^2\\
& \leq P\left(e_{1}'HH'e_{1}\geq c_{\epsilon}\kappa\frac{n}{p}\right) + P\left(e_{1}'HH'e_{1}\leq \frac{1}{c_{\epsilon}\kappa}\frac{n}{p}\right) \\
&\quad + P\left(\left.\frac{|e_{1}'HH'e_{2}|}{e_{1}'HH'e_{1}}\geq t\right| e_{1}'HH'e_{1} = t_{*}^2\right).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $t_{*}$ is the value of $t_{1}$ that maximizes $P\left(\left.\frac{|e_{1}'HH'e_{2}|}{e_{1}'HH'e_{1}}\geq t\right| e_{1}'HH'e_{1} = t_{1}^2\right)$.
The first two terms of \eqref{eq:long} are bounded by \eqref{eq: diagbound}, so we focus on the final term of \eqref{eq:long}. Denote the $i,j$-th element of $H$ by $h_{ij}$. Lemma \ref{lem:off} in Appendix \ref{app:aux} states that
\begin{equation}
\left.e_{1}'HH'e_{2} \overset{(d)}{=} h_{11}h_{21}\right.|\left\{h_{11}^2 = e_{1}'HH'e_{1}\right\},
\end{equation}
from which it follows that
\begin{equation}
\left. e_{1}'HH'e_{2}\right|\left\{e_{1}'HH'e_{1} = t_{1}^2\right\} \overset{(d)}{=} \left. h_{11}h_{21}\right|\left\{h_{11}^2=t_{1}^2\right\}.
\end{equation}
We decompose $H = [h_{1},H_{2}]$, with $h_{1}$ a $p\times 1$ vector, and $H_{2}$ a $p\times n-1$ matrix. As in Lemma~\ref{lem:conddist}, $h_{1} = G(H_{2})T$ with $G(H_{2})$ such that $[H_{2},G(H_{2})]\in \mathcal{O}(p)$. Then by Lemma~\ref{lem:conddist} in Appendix \ref{app:aux}, $h_{1}|H_{2} \overset{(d)}{=}\frac{y}{\sqrt{y_{1}^2 +\ldots + y_{p}^2}}$,
where $y = (y_1,\ldots,y_p) \sim N(0,\tilde{\Sigma})$ with $\tilde{\Sigma} = G(H_{2})G(H_{2})'\Sigma G(H_{2})G(H_{2})'$.
Using the above results, $h_{11}h_{21}|\left\{h_{11}^2 = t_{1}^2\right\} \overset{(d)}{=}\frac{y_{1}y_{2}}{y_{1}^2 +\ldots+ y_{p}^2}$. Since $\frac{y_{1}^2}{y_{1}^2 +\ldots+ y_{p}^2}=t_{1}^2$, we have $y_{1}^2 = \frac{t_{1}^2}{1-t_{1}^2}\left(y_{2}^2 + \ldots+y_{p}^2\right)$. Then
\begin{equation}
\frac{|y_{1}y_{2}|}{y_{1}^2 +\ldots + y_{p}^2} = \frac{(1-t_{1}^2)|y_{1}y_{2}|}{y_{2}^2 +\ldots + y_{p}^2} \leq \frac{\sqrt{1-t_{1}^2}|t_{1}||y_{2}|}{\sqrt{y_{2}^2 + \ldots + y_{p}^2}}.
\end{equation}
Now we establish the following upper bound
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
P\left(\left.\frac{|e_{1}'HH'e_{2}|}{e_{1}'HH'e_{1}}\geq t\right| h_{11}^2 = t_{1}^2\right)& = P\left(\left.\frac{|h_{11}h_{21}|}{h_{11}^2}\geq t\right| h_{11}^2 = t_{1}^2\right)\\
&\leq P\left(\frac{\sqrt{1-t_{1}^2}|y_{2}|}{\sqrt{y_{2}^2+\ldots+y_{p}^2}}\geq |t_{1}|t\right)\\
&=P\left(\frac{|y_{2}|}{\sqrt{y_{2}^2+\ldots+y_{p}^2}}\geq t\sqrt{\frac{t_{1}^2}{1-t_{1}^2}}\right)\\
&\leq P\left(\frac{|y_{2}|}{\sqrt{y_{2}^2+\ldots+y_{p}^2}}\geq t\sqrt{\frac{1}{c_{\epsilon}\kappa}\frac{n}{p}}\right) .\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we use that $t_{1}^2/(1-t_{1}^2)$ is a monotonically increasing function in $t_{1}^2$, and the minimum value of $t_{1}^2$ that we need to consider equals $\frac{1}{c_{\epsilon}\kappa}\frac{n}{p}$. This is then our choice for $t_{*}$ in \eqref{eq:long}.
Since by definition, $G(H_{2})'G(H_{2}) = I_{p-n+1}$, $\lambda_{\max}(\tilde{\Sigma})\leq \lambda_{\max}(\Sigma)$. Similarly, we have $\lambda_{\min}(\tilde{\Sigma})\geq \lambda_{\min}(\Sigma)$. Then by Lemma~\ref{lem:bernstein} in Appendix~\ref{app:aux},
\begin{equation}\label{eq:applybern}
\begin{split}
P\left(|y_{2}|\geq \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(\Sigma)}\sqrt{1+\epsilon_{1}} \right)&\leq 2e^{-\frac{c}{2c_{s}}\epsilon_{1}}\\
P\left(\sqrt{y_{2}^2 + \ldots + y_{p}^2}\leq \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(\Sigma)(p-n)(1+\epsilon_{2})}\right)&\leq 2e^{-\frac{c}{4c_{s}^2}\epsilon_2^2(p-n)},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we assumed that $\epsilon_{1}$ is such that $\epsilon_{1}/(2c_{s})<\epsilon_{1}^2/(4c_{s}^2)$, which will be justified below, and $\epsilon_{2}$ such that $\epsilon_{2}^2/(4c_{s}^2)\leq \epsilon_{2}/(2c_{s})$.
Using Bonferonni's inequality, \eqref{eq:applybern} implies
\begin{equation}
P\left(\frac{|y_{2}|}{\sqrt{y_{2}^2 + \ldots+y_{p}^2}}\geq \sqrt{\kappa\frac{1+\epsilon_{1}}{1+\epsilon_{2}}\frac{1}{p-n}}\right)\leq 2e^{-\frac{c}{2c_{s}}\epsilon_{1}}+2e^{-\frac{c}{4c_{s}^2}\epsilon_{2}^2(p-n)}.
\end{equation}
Take $c_{p}$ a constant such that $p/n\geq c_{p}>1$, then also
\begin{equation}\label{eq:rhs}
P\left(\frac{|y_{2}|}{\sqrt{y_{2}^2 + \ldots+y_{p}^2}}\geq \sqrt{\frac{\kappa}{(1-c_{p}^{-1})}\frac{1+\epsilon_{1}}{1+\epsilon_{2}}\frac{1}{p}}\right)\leq 2e^{-\frac{c}{2c_{s}}\epsilon_{1}}+2e^{-\frac{c}{4c_{s}^2}\epsilon_{2}^2(p-n)}.
\end{equation}
We are interested in the case where $\sqrt{\frac{\kappa}{(1-c_{p}^{-1})}\frac{1+\epsilon_{1}}{1+\epsilon_{2}}\frac{1}{p}} = t\sqrt{\frac{1}{c_{\epsilon}\kappa}\frac{n}{p}}$, which holds for
\begin{equation}
t = \kappa\sqrt{\frac{c_{p}c_{\epsilon}}{c_{p}-1}\frac{1+\epsilon_{1}}{1+\epsilon_{2}}\frac{1}{n}}.
\end{equation}
Since $\kappa^2 c_{\epsilon}c_{p}/(c_{p}-1)>1$, we can take $\epsilon_{2} = \kappa^2 c_{\epsilon}c_{p}/(c_{p}-1)-1$. Then choosing $\epsilon_{1} = a^2 \log p - 1$, we have
\begin{equation}
P\left(\frac{|e_{1}'HH'e_{2}|}{e_{1}'HH'e_{1}}> a\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}\right)\leq 2e^{-\frac{c}{2c_{s}}a^2\log p} + 2e^{-\frac{c}{4c_{s}^2}[\kappa^2 c_{\epsilon}c_{p}/(c_{p}-1)-1]^2 (p-n)}.
\end{equation}
Note that for this choice of $\epsilon_{1}$, for $p$ sufficiently large $\epsilon_{1}/(2c_{s})<\epsilon_{1}^2/(4c_{s}^2)$, which was used in \eqref{eq:applybern}.
Finally, taking the union bound over all pairs $e_{i},e_{j}$ we have that
\begin{equation}
P\left(\frac{|e_{i}'HH'e_{j}|}{e_{i}'HH'e_{i}}> a\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}\right)= O\left(p^{-\tilde{c}}\right)\qquad \forall i,j\in \{1,\ldots,p\}
\end{equation}
with $\tilde{c} = \frac{c}{2c_{s}}a^2-2$.\hfill $\blacksquare$
\subsection{Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:acclasso}}\label{proof:compcond}
The bound in Lemma~\ref{lem:acclasso} is shown by \citet{buhlmann2011statistics} to hold under the following compatibility condition
\begin{definition}[Compatibility condition]\label{def:compatibility}
Denote by $S_{0}$ the true set of $s_{0} =||S_{0}||_{0}$ non-zero coefficients, then the compatibility condition is satisfied for this set if
\begin{equation}\label{eq: comp}
||\beta_{S_{0}}||_{1}\leq \frac{\sqrt{s_{0}}||X\beta||_{2}}{\sqrt{n}\phi_{0}},
\end{equation}
for all $\beta$ for which $||\beta_{S_{0}^{c}}||_{1}\leq 3||\beta_{S_{0}}||_{1}$ and $\phi_{0}>0$.
\end{definition}
This condition is satisfied under Assumption~A\ref{ass:regressor}. Note that $||\beta_{S_{0}}||_{1}\leq \sqrt{s_{0}}||\beta_{S_{0}}||_{2}$, so it is sufficient if
\begin{equation}
||\beta||_{2}^2\leq \frac{\beta'\frac{1}{n}X'X\beta}{\phi_{0}}.
\end{equation}
Using Assumption~A\ref{ass:regressor}, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\beta'\frac{1}{n}X'X\beta &= \beta'\Sigma^{1/2}\frac{1}{n}US'SU'\Sigma^{1/2}\beta\\
&\geq \frac{1}{c_{Z}}\frac{p}{n}v'U_{n}U_{n}'v,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $v = \Sigma^{1/2}\beta$, and the last line holds since the non-zero eigenvalues $S'S$ are the same as the eigenvalues of $ZZ'$ which are bounded by Assumption~A\ref{ass:regressor}. Now we can invoke Lemma~\ref{lem:JL}, such that with probability at least $1-2\exp(-\frac{c}{4c_{s}^2}\epsilon^2n)$, we have that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\beta'\frac{1}{n}X'X\beta &\geq \frac{1}{c_{Z}c_{\epsilon}}\beta'\Sigma\beta \\
&\geq \frac{1}{c_{Z}c_{\epsilon}}\lambda_{\min}(\Sigma)||\beta||_{2}^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Choosing $\phi_{0}\leq \frac{1}{c_{Z}c_{\epsilon}}\lambda_{\min}(\Sigma)$ yields the desired result. \hfill $\blacksquare$
\subsection{Proof of Lemma \ref{theorem:finitevar}}\label{app:prooftheoremfinitevar}
Building on \citet{wang2015high}, we rewrite the noise term of $\hat{\beta}^{c}_{i}$ as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:noise}
Z_{i} = \sqrt{n}d_i x_i'(XX')^{-1}\varepsilon
\overset{(d)}{=} \sqrt{n}d_i ||x_i'(XX')^{-1}||_{2}\frac{\sigma x_i'(XX')^{-1}u}{||x_i'(XX')^{-1}||_{2}},\\
\end{equation}
where $u\sim N(0,I_{n})$.
We first bound the norm term
\begin{equation}
\sqrt{n}d_i||x_i'(XX')^{-1}||_{2} =\sqrt{n} \frac{||x_i'(XX')^{-1}||_{2}}{x_i'(XX')^{-1}x_i}.
\end{equation}
Using standard norm inequalities, we have
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{\lambda_{\max}(XX')}x_i'(XX')^{-1}x_i\leq ||x_i'(XX')^{-1}||_{2}^{2} \leq \frac{1}{\lambda_{\min}(XX')}x_i'(XX')^{-1}x_i.
\end{equation}
The eigenvalues of $XX'=\Sigma_{1}^{1/2}Z\Sigma_{2} Z'\Sigma_{1}^{1/2}$ satisfy
\begin{equation}\label{eq:eigenvalues}
\begin{split}
\lambda_{\max}(\Sigma_{1}^{1/2}Z\Sigma_{2} Z'\Sigma_{1}^{1/2})&\leq \lambda_{\max}(\Sigma_{1})\lambda_{\max}(\Sigma_{2})\lambda_{\max}(ZZ'),\\
\lambda_{\min}(\Sigma_{1}^{1/2}Z\Sigma_{2} Z'\Sigma_{1}^{1/2})&\geq \lambda_{\min}(\Sigma_{1})\lambda_{\min}(\Sigma_{2})\lambda_{\min}(ZZ').
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The eigenvalues of $ZZ'$ are bounded by Assumption~A\ref{ass:regressor}, and using \eqref{eq: diagbound},
it follows that with probability exceeding $1-2e^{-c\epsilon^2 n} -2e^{-C_{Z}n}$ we have that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:boundMP}
\begin{split}
\left(\frac{1}{\lambda_{\max}(\Sigma_{1})\lambda_{\max}(\Sigma_{2})}{\frac{n}{p}}\frac{1}{{c_{\epsilon}\kappa \frac{n}{p}}}\right)^{1/2}&\leq \sqrt{n}d_i||x_i'(XX')^{-1}||_{2}\\
&\leq \left(\frac{1}{\lambda_{\min}(\Sigma_{1})\lambda_{\min}(\Sigma_{2})}\frac{n}{p}\frac{1}{{\frac{1}{c_{\epsilon}\kappa} \frac{n}{p}}}\right)^{1/2},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By Assumption~A\ref{ass:condnumb}, the eigenvalues of $\Sigma_{1}$ and $\Sigma_{2}$ are finite. Then
\begin{equation}
\sqrt{n}d_i||x_i'(XX')^{-1}||_{2} = O_{p}(1).
\end{equation}
We now turn to the second term of \eqref{eq:noise}
\begin{equation}
\frac{ \sigma x_i'(XX')^{-1}u}{||x_i'(XX')^{-1}||_{2}}=\frac{ \sigma \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}x_i'\left(\frac{1}{p}XX'\right)^{-1}u}{\left|\left|\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}x_i'\left(\frac{1}{p}XX'\right)^{-1}\right|\right|_{2}}.
\end{equation}
When $u\sim N(0,I_{n})$, it is clear that
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}X'\left(\frac{1}{p}XX'\right)^{-1}u\sim N\left[0,\frac{1}{n}X'\left(\frac{1}{p}XX'\right)^{-2}X\right].
\end{equation}
and hence $Z_{i} \sim N(0,\sigma^2\Omega_{ii})$ with $\Omega_{ii} = n\frac{x_{i}'(XX')^{-2}x_{i}}{(x_{i}'(XX')^{-1}x_{i})^2}=O_{p}(1)$.\hfill$\blacksquare$
\subsection{Proof of Lemma \ref{theorem:finitevar} for non-gaussian errors}\label{app:nongaus}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:nongauss}
Suppose assumptions A\ref{ass:regressor} and A\ref{ass:condnumb} hold. The errors $\varepsilon_{i}$ are independent and identically distributed with variance $\sigma^2$, and satisfy
\begin{equation}
\text{E}\left[|\varepsilon_{i}|^{2+\delta}\right]\leq c< \infty
\end{equation}
for $i=1,\ldots,n$. Then as $n\rightarrow\infty$,
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}e_{i}'M\varepsilon \overset{(d)}{\rightarrow} N(0,\sigma^2 e_{i}'MM'e_{i}/n).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
Proof: When $u_{i}\sim i.i.d(0,1)$, we will show that Lyupanov's condition is satisfied, and therefore a central limit theorem applies ensuring that, as $n\rightarrow\infty$,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\sigma x_{i}'\left(XX'\right)^{-1}u}{\left|\left|x_{i}'\left(XX'\right)^{-1}\right|\right|_{2}}\overset{(d)}{\rightarrow} N(0,\sigma^2).
\end{equation}
Define
\begin{equation}
r_{ik} = \frac{\left[\left(XX'\right)^{-1}x_{i}\right]_{k}}{||\left(XX'\right)^{-1}x_{i}||_{2}}
\end{equation}
where the numerator denotes the $k$-th component of the $n$-dimensional vector $\left(XX'\right)^{-1}x_{i}$.
Furthermore, we have $
\text{E}[r_{ik}u_{k}] = 0$, $\text{Var}[r_{ik}u_{k}] = \left(||\left(XX'\right)^{-1}x_{i}||_{2}^{-1}\left[\left(XX'\right)^{-1}x_{i}\right]_{k}\right)^2$, $s_{n}^2 = \sum_{k=1}^{n}\text{Var}[r_{ik}u_{k}] = 1$.
To prove that a central limit theorem applies to $\sum_{k=1}^{n}r_{ik}u_{k}$ we prove that Lyapunov's condition,
\begin{equation}
LC = \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{k=1}^{n}|r_{ik}u_{k}|^{2+\delta} = 0,
\end{equation}
holds. By assumption we have
\begin{equation}
LC\leq c \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{k=1}^{n}|r_{ik}|^{2+\delta}.
\end{equation}
By Assumption~\ref{ass:regressor} the summand satisfies with probability exceeding $1-\exp(-C_{Z}n)$
\begin{equation}
|r_{ik}| \leq c_{Z}^2 \frac{||x_{i}||_{\infty}}{||x_{i}||_{2}}.
\end{equation}
By the results in Appendix~\ref{proof:compcond}, we have that, again with high probability, $||x_{i}||_{2}\geq \frac{\lambda_{\min}(\Sigma_{1})\lambda_{\min}(\Sigma_{2})}{c_{Z}}c_{\epsilon}^{-1}n$. We can then continue our string of inequalities as
\begin{equation}
|r_{ik}| \leq c_{Z}^3 c_{\kappa,1}c_{\kappa_{2}}c_{\epsilon}\frac{||z_{i}||_{\infty}}{n},
\end{equation}
where $z_{i}$ denotes the $i$-th row of the matrix $Z$ defined in Assumption~\ref{ass:regressor}.
Since by assumption each element of $Z$ is independent and identically distributed with variance 1, following Chebyshev's inequality
\begin{equation}\label{eq:chebyshev}
P(|z_{ik}|\geq a)\leq a^{-2}.
\end{equation}
Then applying a union bound over $k\in\{1,\ldots,n\}$ gives
\begin{equation}
P(||z_{i}||_{\infty}\geq a)\leq na^{-2}.
\end{equation}
Choosing $a = c_{a}n^{1/2(1+ \alpha)}$, the right-hand side tends to zero, and uniformly over $k$,
\begin{equation}
|z_{ik}|\leq c_{Z}^3 c_{\kappa,1}c_{\kappa_{2}} c_{\epsilon}n^{-1/2(1-\alpha)}.
\end{equation}
In this case
\begin{equation}
LC \leq c_{Z}^3 c_{\kappa,1}c_{\kappa_{2}}c_{\epsilon}n^{\alpha -\delta/2+\alpha\delta/2},
\end{equation}
which tends to zero as $n\rightarrow\infty$ if
\begin{equation}
\alpha-\delta/2+\alpha\delta/2 < 0\Rightarrow \alpha \leq \frac{\delta}{2+\delta}.
\end{equation}
This shows that for an individual parameter $\beta_{i}$,
\begin{equation}
\sum_{k=1}^{n}r_{ik}u_{k}\overset{d}{\rightarrow} N(0,1)
\end{equation}
which completes the proof. The extension to a fixed subset of $\beta$ follows from a union bound of the size of the subset. \hfill $\blacksquare$
We can extend the results of Lemma~\ref{lem:nongauss} to hold uniformly over $i\in \{1,\ldots,p\}$, by making the additional assumption that the rows of $Z$ are subgaussian and the number of variables does not increase too fast with the number of observations.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:nongauss2}
Suppose assumptions A\ref{ass:regressor} and A\ref{ass:condnumb} hold, but strenghten Assumption A\ref{ass:regressor} such that the rows of $Z$ are also subgaussian. As in Lemma~\ref{lem:nongauss}, suppose that the errors $\varepsilon_{i}$ are independent and identically distributed with variance $\sigma^2$, and satisfy $\text{E}\left[|\varepsilon_{i}|^{2+\delta}\right]\leq c< \infty
$
for $i=1,\ldots,n$. In addition, the number of regressors grows at a rate
\begin{equation}
\log p = o\left(n^{1-\frac{1}{2+\delta}}\right).
\end{equation}
Then, as $n\rightarrow\infty$
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}e_{i}'M\varepsilon \overset{(d)}{\rightarrow} N(0,\sigma^2 e_{i}'MM'e_{i}/n).
\end{equation}
and this result holds uniformly over $i\in\{1,\ldots,p\}$.
\end{lemma}
Proof:
In this case, instead of Chebyshev's inequality \eqref{eq:chebyshev} we use
\begin{equation}
P(|z_{ik}|\geq a)\leq 2\exp\left(-a^2/2\right).
\end{equation}
Applying again a union bound over all $k \in\{1,\ldots,n\}$ and $i\in\{1,\ldots,p\}$ gives uniformly over $i$
\begin{equation}
P(||Z||_{\max}\geq a)\leq 2\exp\left(-a^2/2+\log p + \log n\right)
\end{equation}
The right-hand side now goes to zero if $a>\sqrt{2(\log p + \log n)}$. In this case, we have
\begin{equation}
LC\leq c\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\left(\frac{\log p + \log n}{n^{1-\frac{1}{2+\delta}}}\right)^{2+\delta}
\end{equation}
Ignoring the lower order term $\log n$, we see that
$LC\rightarrow 0$ uniformly over $i\in\{1,\ldots,p\}$, when $n\rightarrow\infty$ and $\log p = o\left(n^{1-\frac{1}{2+\delta}}\right)$. This completes the proof.\hfill $\blacksquare$
\subsection{Proof of Lemma \ref{theorem:RLS}: random least squares}\label{app:prooftheoremRLS}
\paragraph{Size of the bias}
Consider the eigenvalue decomposition
\begin{equation}\label{eq:svddecomp}
\frac{1}{n}X'X = \hat{U}_{n}\hat{\Lambda}\hat{U}_{n}'.
\end{equation}
where $\hat{U}_{n}$ is a $p\times n$ matrix, and $\hat{\Lambda}$ an $n\times n$ diagonal matrix of eigenvalues. We list three properties of the expectation $\text{E}[R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R']X'X$ established in \citet{marzetta2011random}.
First, using the eigenvalue decomposition \eqref{eq:svddecomp} and the fact that only $n$ eigenvalues are non-zero,
\begin{equation}
\text{E}[R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R']X'X
\overset{(d)}{=} \hat{U}_{n}\text{E}[\Phi(\Phi'\hat{\Lambda}\Phi)^{-1}\Phi']\hat{\Lambda}\hat{U}_{n}',
\end{equation}
with $\Phi$ an $n\times k$ matrix of independent standard normal random variables. The proof relies on the fact that for any orthogonal matrix $\hat{U}$ independent of $R$, we have that $\hat{U}'R\overset{(d)}{=}\Phi$.
Second, $\text{E}[\Phi(\Phi'\hat{\Lambda}\Phi)^{-1}\Phi']\hat{\Lambda}$ is a diagonal matrix. This follows since a matrix $A$ is diagonal if and only if for all diagonal unitary matrices $\Omega$, we have that $\Omega A\Omega^{*}=A$ with $\Omega^{*}$ the complex conjugate of $\Omega$. Indeed,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\Omega\text{E}[\Phi(\Phi'\hat{\Lambda}\Phi)^{-1}\Phi']\hat{\Lambda}\Omega^{*}&=\Omega\text{E}[\Phi(\Phi'\hat{\Lambda}\Phi)^{-1}\Phi']\Omega^{*}\hat{\Lambda}\\
& =\Omega\text{E}[\Phi(\Phi'\Omega^{*}\Omega\hat{\Lambda}\Omega^{*}\Omega\Phi)^{-1}\Phi']\Omega^{*}\hat{\Lambda}\\
& \overset{(d)}{=} \text{E}[\Psi(\Psi'\hat{\Lambda}\Psi)^{-1}\Psi']\hat{\Lambda},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\Psi$ is again an $n\times k$ matrix of standard normals, and using as above that $\Omega \Phi \overset{(d)}{=}\Psi$ for any unitary matrix $\Omega$.
The final property is that we can rewrite
\begin{equation}\label{eq:marzettaid}
\text{E}[\Psi(\Psi'\hat{\Lambda}\Psi)^{-1}\Psi']\hat{\Lambda} = I - V,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sm}
V = \text{E}[\Xi(\Xi'\hat{\Lambda}^{-1}\Xi)^{-1}\Xi']\hat{\Lambda}^{-1}
\end{equation}
is an $n\times n$ diagonal matrix with $\Xi$ is a $n\times (n-k)$ matrix with independent standard normal entries.
Using \eqref{eq:marzettaid}, it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:minusV}
\text{E}_R[R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R']X'X = \hat{U}(I- V)\hat{U}'.
\end{equation}
Now, $\hat{U}\hat{U}'$ is the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse post-multiplied by $X$, which is identical to \eqref{eq:defH} in Appendix~\ref{app:prooftheorembiasvanish}, so that we have
\begin{equation}
\hat{U}\hat{U}' = X'(XX')^{-1}X = HH'.
\end{equation}
Therefore, one expects that if the entries of $\hat{U}V\hat{U}'$ are sufficiently small compared to $\hat{U}\hat{U}'$, then the results obtained under the Moore-Penrose inverse will continue to hold.
Denote by $\hat{u}_{i} = \hat{U}'e_{i}$. We can use the following string of inequalities
\begin{equation}\label{eq:string}
\begin{split}
P\left(\frac{|\hat{u}_{i}'(I-V)\hat{u}_{j}|}{\hat{u}_{i}'(I-V)\hat{u}_{i}}\geq t\right)&\leq P\left(\frac{|\hat{u}_{i}'(I-V)\hat{u}_{j}|}{\hat{u}_{i}'\hat{u}_{i}(1-||V||_{2})}\geq t\right)\\
&\leq P\left(\frac{|\hat{u}_{i}'\hat{u}_{j}|}{\hat{u}_{i}'\hat{u}_{i}} + \frac{|\hat{u}_{i}'V\hat{u}_{j}|}{\hat{u}_{i}'\hat{u_{i}}}\geq t(1-||V||_{2})\right)\\
&\leq P\left(\frac{|\hat{u}_{i}'\hat{u}_{j}|}{\hat{u}_{i}'\hat{u}_{i}} + ||V||_{2} \sqrt{\frac{\hat{u}_{j}' \hat{u}_j}{\hat{u}_{i}'\hat{u_{i}}}}\geq t(1-||V||_{2})\right).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
For $\hat{u}_{i}' \hat{u}_i=e_{i}'HH'e_{i}$ and $\hat{u}_{j}' \hat{u}_j=e_{j}'HH'e_{j}$, we can apply the bounds established in \eqref{eq: diagbound} in Appendix~\ref{app:prooftheorembiasvanish}. Denote by $\mathcal{E}$ the event that $e_{j}'HH'e_{j}\leq c_{\epsilon}\kappa\frac{n}{p}$, $e_{j}'HH'e_{j}\geq\left(c_{\epsilon}\kappa\right)^{-1}\frac{n}{p}$, then the string of inequalities \eqref{eq:string} proceeds as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:V2}
\begin{split}
&\leq P\left(\left.\frac{|e_{i}'HH'e_{j}|}{e_{i}'HH'e_{i}} + ||V||_{2}c_{\epsilon}\kappa\geq t(1-||V||_{2})\right|\mathcal{E}\right)\left(1-2e^{-\frac{c}{4c_{s}^2}\epsilon^2 n}\right)+2e^{-\frac{c}{4c_{s}^2}\epsilon^2 n} \\
& = P\left(\frac{|e_{i}'HH'e_{j}|}{e_{i}'HH'e_{i}}\geq t - ||V||_{2}\left(t + c_{\epsilon}\kappa\right)\right)\left(1-2e^{-\frac{c}{4c_{s}^2}\epsilon^2 n}\right)+ 2e^{-\frac{c}{4c_{s}^2}\epsilon^2 n}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We now need to find a choice of the projection dimension $k$ such that $t(1-||V||_{2}) - ||V||_{2}c_{\epsilon}\kappa=\tilde{a}\sqrt{\log p/n}$. This will then allow us to apply the previously derived bounds on $|e_{i}'HH'e_{j}|/e_{i}'HH'e_{i}$.
We first analyze the $l_2$ norm $||V||_{2}$ is more detail. Denote by $\hat{\lambda}_i$ the $i$-th diagonal element of the diagonal matrix of empirical eigenvalues $\hat{\Lambda}$, $\xi_i$ the $i$-th row of $\Xi$ defined in \eqref{eq:sm}, and $A_{-i} \equiv \sum_{j\neq i}\hat{\lambda}_{j}^{-1}\xi_{j}\xi_{j}'$. It holds that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sherman}
\begin{split}
[V]_{ii} &= \hat{\lambda}_{i}^{-1}\xi_{i}'(\Xi'\hat{\Lambda}^{-1}\Xi)^{-1}\xi_{i} \\
& = \hat{\lambda}_{i}^{-1}\xi_{i}'\left(A_{-i}+ \hat{\lambda}_{i}^{-1}\xi_{i}\xi_{i}'\right)^{-1}\xi_{i}\\
& = \frac{\hat{\lambda}_{i}^{-1}\nu_{i}}{1+\hat{\lambda}_{i}^{-1}\nu_{i}},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\nu_{i} = \xi_{i}'A_{-i}^{-1}\xi_{i} =\xi_{i}'\left(\Xi_{-i}\hat{\Lambda}^{-1}_{-i}\Xi_{-i}\right)^{-1}\xi_{i}>0,
\end{equation}
and the Sherman-Morrison formula is used to obtain the last line of \eqref{eq:sherman}.
This shows that random least squares performs a type of generalized ridge regression, where the penalty is different for each eigenvalue. By Jensen's inequality and the fact that $x/(1+x)$ with $x>0$ is a concave function,
\begin{equation}
[V]_{ii}\leq \frac{\hat{\lambda}_{i}^{-1}\text{E}[\nu_{i}]}{1+\hat{\lambda}_{i}^{-1}\text{E}[\nu_{i}]}
\leq \frac{\hat{\kappa}\frac{n-k-1}{k}}{1+\hat{\kappa}\frac{n-k-1}{k}},
\end{equation}
where $\hat{\kappa} = \max_{i}\hat{\lambda}_{i}/\min_{i}\hat{\lambda}_{i}\leq c_{\kappa}$ by \eqref{eq:eigenvalues}.
We can now solve for which $k$ we have that $t(1-||V||_{2}) - ||V||_{2}c_{\epsilon}\kappa=\tilde{a}\sqrt{\log p/n}$. In order for the bias of the estimator to vanish compared to the noise, we require $t = a\sqrt{\log p/n}$. After some rewriting, we then find that $k$ should satisfy
\begin{equation}
k = \left(1+\frac{a-\tilde{a}}{\tilde{a}c_{\kappa}}\frac{\tilde{a}(c_{\epsilon}\kappa)^{-1}\sqrt{\log p/n}}{1+\tilde{a}(c_{\epsilon}\kappa)^{-1}\sqrt{\log p/n}}\right)^{-1}(n-1).
\end{equation}
Assuming $\tilde{a}(c_{\epsilon}\kappa)^{-1}\sqrt{\log p/n}$ to be sufficiently small, we have
\begin{equation}
k = \left(1-c_{k}\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}\right)(n-1),
\end{equation}
with $c_{k} = (a-\tilde{a})/(\kappa c_{\epsilon} c_{\kappa})$ a positive constant. Under this choice of $k$, the approximate inverse obtained by random least squares satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{eq:finalstep}
\begin{split}
P\left(\frac{|\hat{u}_{i}'(I-V)\hat{u}_{j}|}{\hat{u}_{i}'(I-V)\hat{u}_{i}}\geq a\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}\right)&\leq P\left(\frac{|e_{i}'HH'e_{j}|}{e_{i}'HH'e_{i}}\geq \tilde{a}\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}\right)\\
& = O\left(p^{-\tilde{c}}\right)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
with $\tilde{c}$ as in Lemma~\ref{theorem:biasvanish} with $a$ replaced by $\tilde{a}<a$.
\paragraph{Order of the variance term}
What remains to be shown is that the variance of the noise term satisfies
\begin{equation}
||\sqrt{n} d_{i}^{\text{RLS}}e_{i}\text{E}\left[ R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R'\right]X'||_{2}= O_{p}(1).
\end{equation}
We rewrite this as
\begin{equation}
\left(\sqrt{n} d_{i}^{\text{RLS}}||e_{i}\text{E}\left[ R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R'\right]X'||_{2}\right)^2 = n\frac{e_{i}'\hat{U}_{n}(I-V)\hat{\Lambda}^{-1}(I-V)\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i}}{(e_{i}'\hat{U}_{n}(I-V)\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i})^2},
\end{equation}
which can be lower and upper bounded as
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{\lambda_{\max}(\hat{\Lambda})}n\frac{e_{i}'\hat{U}_{n}(I-V)^2\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i}}{(e_{i}'\hat{U}_{n}(I-V)\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i})^2}&\leq n\frac{e_{i}'\hat{U}_{n}(I-V)\hat{\Lambda}^{-1}(I-V)\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i}}{(e_{i}'\hat{U}_{n}(I-V)\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i})^2}\\
&\qquad\leq \frac{1}{\lambda_{\min}(\hat{\Lambda})}n\frac{e_{i}'\hat{U}_{n}(I-V)^2\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i}}{(e_{i}'\hat{U}_{n}(I-V)\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i})^2}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Under stated assumptions, the eigenvalues satisfy $c_{1}p\leq \lambda_{\min}(\hat{\Lambda})\leq \lambda_{\max}(\hat{\Lambda})\leq c_{2}p$ for $0\leq c_{1}\leq c_{2}$. Also, from the previous paragraph we know that the elements of $V$ satisfy $0\leq [V]_{ii}\leq c_{V}\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}\leq 1$ for some $c_{V}>0$. Then,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{c_{2}}\left[\frac{n}{p}\left(1-c_{V}\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}\right)^2\frac{1}{e_{i}'\hat{U}_{n}\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i}}\right]&\leq n\frac{e_{i}'\hat{U}_{n}(I-V)\hat{\Lambda}^{-1}(I-V)\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i}}{(e_{i}'\hat{U}_{n}(I-V)\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i})^2}\\
&\qquad\leq \frac{1}{c_{1}}\left[\frac{n}{p}\left(1-c_{V}\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}\right)^{-2}\frac{1}{e_{i}'\hat{U}_{n}\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i}}\right].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Finally, \eqref{eq:alltime} in Appendix~\ref{app:aux} and the fact that $e_{i}'\hat{U}_{n}\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i} = e_{i}HH'e_{i}$ shows that
\begin{equation}
n\frac{e_{i}'\hat{U}_{n}(I-V)\hat{\Lambda}^{-1}(I-V)\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i}}{(e_{i}'\hat{U}_{n}(I-V)\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i})^2}=O_{p}(1).
\end{equation}
This completes the proof.\hfill$\blacksquare$
\subsection{Proof of Lemma~\ref{theorem:ridge}: ridge regression}\label{app:prooftheoremridge}
\paragraph{Order of bias term}
The proof largely follows the strategy under random least squares. We first show that $(X'X+\gamma I_{p})^{-1}X'X$ also satisfies the right-hand side of \eqref{eq:minusV} in Appendix~\ref{app:prooftheoremRLS}.
By substituting $X = \hat{V}\hat{S}\hat{U}$ and defining $\hat{\Lambda} = \hat{S}'\hat{S}$, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
(X'X + \gamma I_{p})^{-1}X'X & = (\hat{U}\hat{\Lambda}\hat{U}'+\gamma I_{p})^{-1}\hat{U}\hat{\Lambda}\hat{U}'\\
& = \hat{U}_{n}(I_n-V)\hat{U}_{n}',
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\hat{\Lambda}_{n}$ is a diagonal matrix with on the diagonal the nonzero eigenvalues of $X'X$, $U_{n}$ consists of the first $n$ rows of $\hat{U}$ and $V = (\hat{\Lambda}_{n}+\gamma I_{n})^{-1}\gamma I_{n}$.
Now following \eqref{eq:V2}, $V$ should be such that $t(1-||V||_{2}) - ||V||_{2}c_{\epsilon}\kappa=\tilde{a}\sqrt{\log p/n}$ for $t = a\sqrt{\log p/n}$. This implies $||V||_2 = \frac{(a-\tilde{a})\sqrt{\log p/n}}{a\sqrt{\log p/n} + c_{\epsilon}\kappa}$. Since $V$ is diagonal, and the non-zero eigenvalues satisfy $c_{1}p\leq \lambda_{\min}(\hat{\Lambda})\leq \lambda_{\max}(\hat{\Lambda})\leq c_{2}p$ for $0\leq c_{1}\leq c_{2}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:equate2}
||V||_{2} = \max_{i=1,\ldots,n}\frac{\gamma}{\hat{\lambda}_{i} + \gamma} \leq \frac{\gamma}{c_{1}p + \gamma}.
\end{equation}
It follows that we need to set
\begin{equation}
\gamma\leq c_{1}p\frac{||V||_{2}}{1-||V||_{2}},
\end{equation}
Using the expression for $||V||_{2}$ and assuming $\tilde{a}\sqrt{\log p/n}/(c_{\epsilon}\kappa)$ sufficiently small, we have
\begin{equation}
\gamma = c_{\gamma}\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}p,
\end{equation}
with $c_\gamma = c_{1}(a-\tilde{a})/(c_{\epsilon}\kappa)$. \hfill$\blacksquare$
\paragraph{Order of the variance}
What remains to be shown is
\begin{equation}
||\sqrt{n} d_{i}^{\text{RI}}e_{i}'(X'X+\gamma I_p)^{-1}X'||_{2} = O_{p}(1).
\end{equation}
This follows from the same argument as made for random least squares.
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{theorem:power}}\label{app:prooftheorempower}
Define the diagonal matrix $A = \text{E}[R(R'\hat{\Lambda}R)^{-1}R']\hat{\Lambda}$, then
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
||e_{i}\hat{U}\text{E}[R(R'\hat{\Lambda}R)^{-1}R'X'||_{2}^2 &= e_{i}\hat{U}A\hat{\Lambda}^{-1}A\hat{U}'e_{i}\\
&=e_{i}\hat{U}\hat{\Lambda}^{-1/2}A_{\text{RLS}}^2\hat{\Lambda}^{-1/2}\hat{U}'e_{i},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $A_{\text{RLS}}^2$ is a diagonal matrix with diagonal elements $0\leq A_{ii}^2\leq 1$.
Similarly, for the ridge regularized inverse, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
||e_{i}(X'X + \gamma I_{p})^{-1}X'||_{2}^2 & = e_{i}(X'X+ \gamma I_{p})^{-1}X'X(X'X+\gamma I_{p})^{-1}e_{i}\\
& = e_{i}\hat{U}_{n}(\hat{\Lambda} + \gamma I_{p})^{-2}\hat{\Lambda}\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i}\\
&= e_{i}\hat{U}_{n}\hat{\Lambda}^{-1/2}A_{\text{RID}}^{2}\hat{\Lambda}^{-1/2}\hat{U}_{n}'e_{i},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
with $A_{\text{RID}}^2$ is a diagonal matrix with the diagonal elements satisfying $0\leq A_{ii}^2\leq 1$.
For the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
||e_{i}X'(XX')^{-1}||_{2}^2 & = e_{i}X'(XX')^{-2}Xe_{i}\\
& = e_{i}\hat{U}\hat{\Lambda}^{-1}\hat{U}'e_{i}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Since for both RLS and RID $A^2$ is a diagonal matrix with diagonal elements satisfying $0\leq A_{ii}^2\leq 1$, the claim in Theorem~\ref{theorem:power} follows. \hfill$\blacksquare$
\section{Estimation of the noise level}\label{A: noise}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\caption{Estimates noise level Monte Carlo experiments}
\includegraphics*[width=\textwidth,trim=50 20 50 20]{MCsigma.eps}
\fnote{Note: this figure shows for each Monte Carlo experiment a box plot for the estimates of the noise level $\sigma^2$ in each replication. The first panel shows these plots for the estimator based on lasso, as defined in \eqref{eq: lassosigma}, and the second panel for the estimator based on scaled lasso as in \citet{scaledlassoSun}. The red horizontal line indicates the value of $\sigma^2=1$ in the data generating process. Settings are indicated by (covmat,$b$,$s$), where the covariance matrix covmat varies between equicorrelated (E) and Toeplitz (T), the signal strength ($b=2,5$) and sparsity ($s=3,15$). For additional information, see the note following Table \ref{tab: MCequi}.}
\label{fig: MCsigma}
\end{figure}
\section{Variable descriptions}\label{A: vardescr}
\begin{table}[H]
\caption{Variable Descriptions Table \ref{tab: APPgdp}}
\centering
\scriptsize
\begin{threeparttable}
\begin{tabular}{llp{5cm}}
\toprule
variable & FRED mnemonic & Description \\
\midrule
industrial production & IPFINAL & Industrial Production: Final Products (Market Group) (Index 2012=100) \\
employees wholesale trade & USWTRADE & All Employees: Wholesale Trade (Thousands of Persons) \\
hours worked business & HOABS & Business Sector: Hours of All Persons (Index 2009=100) \\
hours worked nonfarm & HOANBS & Nonfarm Business Sector: Hours of All Persons (Index 2009=100) \\
housing starts & HOUSTS & Housing Starts in South Census Region (Thousand of Units) \\
retail sales & RSAFSx & Real Retail and Food Services Sales (Millions of Chained 2009 Dollars), deflated by Core PCE \\
manufacturing inventories & NAPMII & ISM Manufacturing: Inventories Index \\
GDP deflator & GDPCTPI & Gross Domestic Product: Chain-type Price Index (Index 2009=100) \\
productivity nonfarm & OPHNFB & Nonfarm Business Sector: Real Output Per Hour of All Persons (Index 2009=100) \\
productivity business & OPHPBS & Business Sector: Real Output Per Hour of All Persons (Index 2009=100) \\
labour costs & ULCBS & Business Sector: Unit Labor Cost (index 2009=100) \\
rate commercial paper & CPF3MTB3Mx & 3-Month Commercial Paper Minus 3-Month Treasury Bill, secondary market (Percent) \\
rate Eurodollar deposit & MED3TB3Mx & 3-Month Eurodollar Deposit Minus 3-Month Treasury Bill, secondary market (Percent) \\
real money stock & MZMREALx & Real MZM (money of zero maturity) Money Stock (Billions of 1982-84 Dollars), deflated by CPI \\
consumer sentiment & UMCSENTx & University of Michigan: Consumer Sentiment (Index 1st Quarter 1966=100) \\
stock price volatility & VXOCLSX & CBOE S\&P 100 Volatility Index: VXO \\
Federal debt & GFDEGDQ188S & Federal Debt: Total Public Debt as Percent of GDP (Percent) \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}%
\begin{tablenotes}
\footnotesize
\item Note: this table reports the variable descriptions and FRED mnemonics corresponding to the variables in Table \ref{tab: APPgdp}.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\label{tab: APPgdpdescr}
\end{table}
\section{Empirical Application}\label{sec: application}
This section applies the proposed estimators to a macroeconomic dataset. We examine the relation between the real gross domestic product of the U.S. economy and a large number of macroeconomic and financial indicators.
\subsection{Data}
We use the FRED-QD database consisting of 254 quarterly macroeconomic and financial series running from the second quarter of 1987 through the third quarter of 2015. Less variables are available before this time period and because records of the variables with FRED mnemonic SPCS20RSA, ACOGNOx, and EXUSEU have a later starting point, we exclude these variables from our analysis. The data can be grouped in fourteen different categories: national income and product accounts (1), industrial production (2), employment and unemployment (3), housing (4), inventories, orders, and sales (5), prices (6), earnings and productivity (7), interest rates (8), money and credit (9), household balance sheets (10), exchange rates (11), other (12), stock markets (13) and non-household balance sheets (14). The data is available from the website of the Federal Reserve Bank of St.\ Louis, together with code for transforming the series to render them stationary and to remove severe outliers. The data and transformations are described in detail by \citet{mccracken2015fred}. After transformation, we find a small number of missing values, which are recursively replaced by the value in the previous time period of that variable. Finally, we subtract the mean of each variable and divide the variables by their standard deviation.
\subsection{Estimation}
The coefficients $\beta$ are estimated in the regression equation
\begin{align}\label{eq: regrapp}
y = Z \delta + X \beta + \varepsilon, \quad \varepsilon \sim \mathcal{N}(0,\sigma^2 I_{n})
\end{align}
where $y$ equals the real gross domestic product of the U.S. economy (FRED mnemonic GDPC96), $Z$ includes an intercept along with four lags of the quarterly dependent variable $y$, and $X$ consists of the remaining variables in the database which are not in the same group as $y$. Since we are only interested in the macroeconomic relations in $\beta$, we partial out the variables in $Z$ using the Frisch-Waugh theorem before estimating $\beta$. We note that Assumption~A\ref{ass:regressor} and Assumption~A\ref{ass:condnumb} are now imposed on $M_{Z}X$ with $M_{Z}$ the projection matrix orthogonal to the columns of $Z$. The proof for Theorem~\ref{theorem:main} carries through with $n$ replaced by $n-n_{z}$ with $n_{z}$ the number of columns of $Z$. After initialization and the loss in degrees of freedom by partialling out $Z$, we are left with a $110\times 231$ matrix $X^{*}=M_{Z}X$ which has rank $n-n_{z}=105$.
The high-dimensional regression theory in Section \ref{sec: theory} allows both the rows and the columns of $X^{*}$ to be correlated. The assumption that the rows of $X^{*}$ are generated from the class of elliptical distributions only excludes very erratic behavior, for which we account by the data transformations described in \citet{mccracken2015fred}. Finally, a sparsity assumption on $\beta$ imposes that not all variables in $X$ influence $y$.
When estimating by random least squares, we choose the subspace dimension $k=95$ and $N=1000$ realizations of the regularized covariance matrix. The penalty parameter in the lasso estimator for the lasso correction corresponds to the lowest mean squared error over a grid of one hundred values, and the penalty parameter in ridge regression is set to $\gamma =1$ as in \citet{buhlmann2013statistical}.
\begin{table}[t!]
\caption{Significant effects on Real Gross Domestic Product}
\small
\centering
\begin{threeparttable}
\begin{tabular}{p{0.2cm}lrrrrrr}
\toprule \toprule
& & \multicolumn{2}{c}{MPI} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{RLS} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{RID} \\
\cmidrule(lr){3-4} \cmidrule(lr){5-6} \cmidrule(lr){7-8}
gr. & variable & coef. & SE & coef. & SE & coef. & SE \\
\midrule
2 & industrial production & 0.087 & 0.042 & 0.055 & 0.028 & 0.074 & 0.034 \\
3 & employees wholesale trade & & & -0.047 & 0.022 & & \\
3 & hours worked business & 0.752 & 0.036 & 0.750 & 0.025 & 0.750 & 0.030 \\
3 & hours worked nonfarm & 0.152 & 0.037 & 0.134 & 0.025 & 0.144 & 0.031 \\
4 & housing starts & & & 0.029 & 0.014 & & \\
5 & retail sales & 0.042 & 0.019 & 0.037 & 0.016 & 0.040 & 0.018 \\
5 & manufacturing inventories & & & 0.038 & 0.018 & 0.044 & 0.022 \\
6 & GDP deflator & -0.038 & 0.018 & -0.028 & 0.013 & -0.033 & 0.016 \\
7 & productivity nonfarm & 0.050 & 0.023 & 0.051 & 0.016 & 0.051 & 0.019 \\
7 & productivity business & 0.776 & 0.023 & 0.763 & 0.016 & 0.771 & 0.019 \\
7 & labour costs & & & -0.042 & 0.020 & -0.045 & 0.023 \\
8 & rate commercial paper & 0.050 & 0.024 & 0.051 & 0.020 & 0.048 & 0.021 \\
8 & rate Eurodollar deposit & 0.069 & 0.030 & 0.055 & 0.021 & 0.062 & 0.025 \\
9 & real money stock & -0.044 & 0.022 & -0.039 & 0.017 & -0.042 & 0.019 \\
12 & consumer sentiment & 0.070 & 0.032 & 0.055 & 0.023 & 0.065 & 0.028 \\
13 & stock price volatility & 0.058 & 0.027 & 0.043 & 0.018 & 0.049 & 0.022 \\
14 & federal debt & -0.046 & 0.022 & -0.038 & 0.017 & -0.043 & 0.020 \\
\bottomrule \bottomrule
\end{tabular}%
\begin{tablenotes}
\footnotesize
\item Note: this table reports the estimated coefficients (coef.) and standard errors (SE) which are significantly different from zero on a five percent significance level, estimated by the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse estimator (MPI), random least squares (RLS), and ridge regularization (RID). The group numbers (gr.) correspond to the FRED-QD variable categories. The fred mnemonics and variable descriptions corresponding to the variable names are given in Appendix \ref{A: vardescr}.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\label{tab: APPgdp}
\end{table}
\subsection{Empirical Results}
Table \ref{tab: APPgdp} shows the estimated coefficients and standard errors which are significantly different from zero on a five percent significance level in the regression of the economic indicators on the real gross domestic product. In general, random least squares yields lower standard errors compared to the benchmark methods. Ridge regression finds 15 out of the 231 coefficients to be significant, which is slightly higher for random least squares with 17 coefficients. The Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse regression estimates 13 coefficients to be significant, which corresponds to the theoretical finding that the random least squares and ridge estimators yield higher statistical power compared to the Moore-Penrose estimator.
We find that employment and productivity have the largest effect on real gross domestic product. Hours of all persons worked in the business sector (hours worked business), real output per hour of all persons in the business sector (productivity business), and hours of all persons worked in the nonfarm business sector (hours worked nonfarm) have large positive coefficients of respectively 0.750, 0.134, and 0.763 for random least squares. More elaborate descriptions of the remaining variables can be found in Appendix \ref{A: vardescr}. Figure \ref{fig: appGDP} shows that the remaining coefficients are close to zero. We do not find any significant effect of variables in the categories household balance sheets (10), and exchange rates (11). Random least squares finds five significant negative effects on the real gross domestic product; all employees in wholesale trade (employees wholesale trade), gross domestic product: chain-type price index (GDP deflator), unit labor cost in the business sector (labour costs), real MZM (money-zero-maturity) money stock (real money stock), and the total public debt as percentage of GDP (Federal debt). Ridge regression does not find a significantly negative effect of all employees in wholesade trade. The negative effect assigned to the number of employees in wholesale trade found by random least squares is remarkable, but note that employment also effects GDP positively via hours worked in the business and nonfarm sector, which makes the net effect of employment on real GDP positive.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\caption{Confidence Intervals Coefficients Regression GDP}
\includegraphics*[width=\textwidth,trim=50 10 50 20]{appGDP.eps}
\fnote{Note: this figure shows the 95\% confidence intervals together with the estimated coefficients in the regression of the FRED-QD variables on real GDP. Boldfaced coefficients are significantly different from zero on a five percent significance level. The numbers on the x-axis indicate the FRED categories associated with the effects. }
\label{fig: appGDP}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Concentration bounds}\label{app:concbnd}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:bernstein} Let $z_{1}^2, \ldots, z_{p}^2$ be independent subexponential variables with $E[z_{i}^2]=1$. Define by $c_{s}>0$ a constant such that $\sup_{l\geq 1}l^{-1/2}\left(\text{E}[|z_{i}|^l]\right)^{1/l}\leq c_{s}$. Then for every $\epsilon\geq 0$,
\begin{equation}
P\left(\left|\frac{1}{p}\sum_{i=1}^{p}z_{i}^2-1\right|\geq \epsilon\right)\leq 2\exp\left[-cp\min\left(\frac{\epsilon^2}{4c_{s}^2},\frac{\epsilon}{2c_{s}}\right)\right]
\end{equation}
with $c>0$ an absolute constant.
\end{lemma}
Proof: see \citet{vershynin2010introduction}, Proposition 5.16.
\begin{lemma}[Variant \citet{johnson1984extensions} lemma]\label{lem:JL} Let $v$ be a fixed $p\times 1 $ vector, and $U_{n}$ a $p\times n$ matrix that is distributed uniformly over the Stiefel manifold $V_{n,p}$. Then for $c_{s}$ as in Lemma~\ref{lem:bernstein} and $0\leq\epsilon\leq 2c_{s}$,
\begin{equation}
P\left(\frac{v'U_{n}U_{n}'v}{v'v} \geq (1+\epsilon)\frac{n}{p},\quad \frac{v'U_{n}U_{n}'v}{v'v} \leq (1-\epsilon)\frac{n}{p}\right) \leq 2\exp\left(-\frac{c}{4c_{s}^2}\epsilon^2 n\right)
\end{equation}
for $c,c_{s}>0$.
\end{lemma}
\noindent Proof: Since $U_{n}\in V_{n,p}$, we have that $U_{n}'U_{n} = I_{n}$. Then $v'U_{n}U_{n}'v = ||P_{U_{n}}v||_{2}^2$, with the orthogonal projection matrix $P_{U_{n}} = U_{n}(U_{n}'U_{n})^{-1}U_{n}'$. As $U_{n}$ is uniformly distributed on $V_{n,p}$, $P_{U_{n}}$ is uniformly distributed on the Grassmannian manifold $G_{n,p}$ (\citet{chikuse2012statistics}, theorem 2.2.2).
Instead of taking $P_{U_{n}}$ random and $v$ fixed, we can take the projection fixed and consider a random $v$. This holds as for any fixed $n\times n$ matrix $P\in G_{n,p}$ and $Q$ uniformly distributed in $\mathcal{O}(p)$, the product $QPQ'$ is uniformly distributed on the Grassmannian $G_{n,p}$ (\citet{chikuse2012statistics}, theorem 2.2.2). Then, for uniformly random $P_{U_{n}}$, $v'P_{U_{n}}'v \overset{(d)}{=}v'QPQv$ where $P$ is fixed.
Since $Q$ is uniformly distributed on $\mathcal{O}(p)$, $Qv \overset{(d)}{=} z$ with $z$ uniformly on the unit sphere $S^{p-1}$. Without loss of generality, assume that the fixed projection matrix $P$ projects $z$ on its first $n$ coordinates. Then
\begin{equation}\label{eq:zz}
\text{E}\left[||Pz||_{2}^2\right] = \text{E}\left[\sum_{i=1}^{n}z_{i}^2\right] = \sum_{i=1}^{n}\text{E}\left[z_{i}^2\right]
\end{equation}
Since $z$ is uniformly distributed $S^{p-1}$, $E[z'z] = \text{E}\left[\sum_{i=1}^{p}z_{i}^2\right] = pE[z_{1}^2] = 1$.
Then it follows from \eqref{eq:zz} that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:expectation}
\text{E}[||Pz||_{2}^2] = \frac{n}{p}
\end{equation}
To prove Lemma~\ref{lem:JL}, we need a concentration result around this expectation. Since $z$ is uniformly distributed on the unit sphere, $z$ is subgaussian. The subvector consisting of the first $m$ coordinates is also subgaussian, as this is simply a linear transformation of $z$. The product of two subgaussian random variables is subexponential \citep{vershynin2010introduction}, and hence, we can invoke Lemma~\ref{lem:bernstein}. We have $E[z_{i}^2] = \frac{1}{p}$, such that
\begin{equation}
P\left(\left|\frac{p}{n}\sum_{i=1}^{n}z_{i}^2 - 1\right|\geq \epsilon\right)\leq 2\exp\left(-\frac{c}{4c_{s}^2}\epsilon^2n\right),
\end{equation}
for $\epsilon,c,c_{s}>0$. Note that we assume that $\epsilon^2/(4c_{s}^2)\leq \epsilon/(2c_{s})$, which is satisfied for sufficiently small $\epsilon$.\hfill$\blacksquare$
\subsection{Properties of elliptical distributions}\label{A: propA1}
Under Assumption~A\ref{ass:regressor}, the concentration results from Appendix~\ref{app:concbnd} bound the elements of the diagonally scaled Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse. To show this, we first introduce properties of matrices generated from elliptical and spherically symmetric distributions.
For $Z$ an $n\times p$ matrix with rows generated from a spherically symmetric distribution, $Z \overset{(d)}{=} ZT$ for $T \in \mathcal{O}(p)$. The matrix $Z$ can be decomposed by a singular value decomposition as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:svd}
Z = VSU',
\end{equation}
where $V\in \mathcal{O}(n)$, $S$ the $n\times p$ matrix of singular values, and $U\in\mathcal{O}(p)$. Since $Z$ is invariant under right multiplication with an orthogonal matrix, $U$ is uniformly distributed on $\mathcal{O}(p)$. When $n<p$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:svd2}
Z = VS_{n}U_{n}',
\end{equation}
where $S_{n}$ is an $n\times n$ matrix with the non-zero singular values on its diagonal, and $U_{n}$ is a $p\times n$ matrix that satisfies $
U_{n}' = [I_{n}, O_{n,p-n}]U'$.
Since $U$ is uniformly distributed over $\mathcal{O}(p)$, $U_{n}$ is uniformly distributed over the Stiefel manifold $V_{n,p}$ defined as $
V_{n,p} = \left\{A\in R^{p\times n}: A'A = I_{n}\right\}$.
\begin{definition}[Matrix Angular Central Gaussian distribution, \citet{chikuse1990matrix}]\label{def:MACG}
Suppose the entries of a $p\times n$ matrix $W$ are independent standard normally distributed, and $\Sigma$ an invertible $p\times p$ matrix. Define $H = \Sigma^{1/2} W(W'\Sigma W)^{-1/2}$. Then $H$ has the density function
\begin{equation}
f_{H} = |\Sigma|^{-n/2}|H'\Sigma^{-1}H|^{-p/2},
\end{equation}
and is generated from the Matrix Angular Central Gaussian distribution with parameter $\Sigma$, denoted as $\text{MACG}(\Sigma)$, and defined on the Stiefel manifold $V_{n,p}$. For $n=1$, this reduces to the Angular Central Gaussian distribution $\text{ACG}(\Sigma)$ on the unit sphere $S^{p-1}$.
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}[\citet{chikuse2012statistics}]\label{lem:reduction}
Define $W$ as a $p\times n$ matrix with independent standard normal entries. For any matrix $U_{n}$ that is distributed uniformly over $V_{n,p}$, we have that
\begin{equation}
U_{n} = W(W'W)^{-1/2}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}[\citet{chikuse2012statistics}]\label{lem:decomp}
Let $H$ be a $p\times n$ random matrix on the Stiefel manifold $V_{n,p}$, which is decomposed as
\begin{equation}
H = [h_{1},H_{2}],
\end{equation}
where $h_{1}$ is a $p\times 1$ vector and $H_{2}$ is a $p\times n-1$ matrix. Then we can write
\begin{equation}\label{eq:toproduct}
h_{1} = G(H_{2})T,
\end{equation}
where $G(H_{2})$ is any $p\times p-n+1$ matrix chosen so that $[H_{2}, G(H_{2})]\in \mathcal{O}(p)$, and $T$ a $(p-n+1)\times 1$ vector. As $H_{2}$ takes values in $V_{n-1,p}$, $T$ takes values in $V_{1,p-n+1}$ and the relationship is one-to-one.
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}[\citet{wang2015high}]\label{lem:conddist}
Let $H$ be a $p\times n$ random matrix on the Stiefel manifold $V_{n,p}$. Suppose $H\sim \text{MACG}(\Sigma)$. Decompose the Stiefel manifold $H=(G(H_2)T,H_2)$ as in Lemma~\ref{lem:decomp}, with $T$ a $(p-n+1)\times 1$ and $H_2$ a $p\times (n-1)$ matrix. Then,
\begin{align}
T|H_2 \sim ACG(G(H_{2})'\Sigma G(H_{2})).
\end{align}
Since $h_{1} = G(H_{2})T$, which is a linear transformation of $T$,
\begin{equation}
h_{1}|H_{2}\sim ACG(\tilde{\Sigma}).
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{\Sigma} = G(H_{2})G(H_{2})'\Sigma G(H_{2})G(H_{2})'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}[\citet{fan2008sure,wang2015high}]\label{lem:off}
Denote the first row of $H$ by $h_{1}' =[h_{11}, h']$. We then have
\begin{equation}
\left.e_{1}HH'e_{2}\overset{(d)}{=} h_{11}h_{21}\right|\left\{e_{1}HHe_{1} = h_{11}^2\right\}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\noindent Proof: For $ Q\in\mathcal{O}(n)$
\begin{equation}
e_{1}'HH'e_{2} = e_{1}'HQQ'H'e_{2}.
\end{equation}
Now define $\tilde{Q}\in \mathcal{O}(n-1)$ and $Q = \left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0_{1\times n-1}\\
0_{n-1\times 1} & \tilde{Q}
\end{array}\right)$. Choose $Q$ such that it rotates $H$ into a frame where $e_{1}'\tilde{H} = \left[\tilde{h}_{11},0_{1\times n-1}\right]$. In terms of the rotated frame, we have
\begin{equation}
e_{1}'HH'e_{2} = e_{1}'\tilde{H}\tilde{H}e_{2} = \tilde{h}_{11}\tilde{h}_{21},
\end{equation}
implying that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cond1}
\left.e_{1}'HH'e_{2}\overset{(d)}{=} h_{11}h_{21}\right|\left\{e_{1}'H = h_{11}\right\}.
\end{equation}
Denote the first row of $H$ by $h_{1}' =[h_{11}, h']$.
Then $e_{1}'HH'e_{1} = h_{11}^2 + h'h$ and thus $e_{1}'H = [h_{11}, 0_{1\times n-1}]$ if and only if $e_{1}'HH'e_{1} = h_{11}^2$. Substituting this into \eqref{eq:cond1} completes the proof. \hfill $\blacksquare$
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec: conclusion}
This paper proposes methods for constructing confidence intervals in high-dimensional linear regression models, where the number of unknown coefficients increases almost exponentially with the number of observations. We approximate the inverse of the singular empirical covariance matrix of the regressors by a diagonally scaled Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse. After a bias correction with the lasso this yields an asymptotically unbiased and normally distributed estimator. The covariance matrix of the estimates is available in closed form and free of tuning parameters. Confidence intervals can then be constructed using standard procedures.
We also consider two regularized estimators; random least squares, which relies on low-dimensional random projections of the data, and ridge regularization. These estimators are shown to have the same theoretical validity under suitable choices of the regularization parameters.
Monte Carlo experiments show that, even in small samples with a high dimensional regressor matrix, the proposed estimators provide valid confidence intervals with correct coverage rates. In a high-dimensional regression of macroeconomic and financial indicators on the real gross domestic product of the United States economy, we find a large positive effect from variables in the employment and productivity categories.
\section{Introduction}\label{sec: introduction}
The increasing number of economic indicators confronts researchers with data where the number of explanatory variables approaches, and often even exceeds, the number of available observations. This is commonly observed in cross-sectional data on economic growth such as \citet{barro1993international,sala1997just,fernandez2001model}, but also in macroeconomic time series data with a low measurement frequency as in \citet{stock2002forecasting} and \citet{mccracken2015fred}. The ratio of observations to parameters is even smaller in studies on the relation between the human genome and later in life outcomes such as educational attainment by \citet{rietveld2013gwas}.
Estimation of high-dimensional models has been intensively studied in recent years. Well-known estimators include ridge regression \citep{hoerl1970ridge}, lasso \citep{tibshirani1996regression}, adaptive lasso \citep{zou2006adaptive}, Dantzig selector \citep{candes2007dantzig}, and penalized likelihood methods by \citep{fan2004nonconcave}. An overview of theoretical results is provided by \citet{buhlmann2011statistics}. The adequacy of these estimators is argued through accuracy bounds measuring the difference between the true and estimated parameter vector. The distribution of these estimators is however intractable, and the construction of standard errors and valid confidence intervals remains a challenging problem.
In this paper, we develop an asymptotically unbiased estimator for the full high-dimensional parameter vector in a linear regression model where the number of variables $p$ greatly exceeds the number of observations $n$. The estimator is accompanied by a closed form expression for the covariance matrix of the estimated parameters which is free of tuning parameters. This enables the construction of uniformly valid confidence intervals, hypothesis testing, estimation of forecast uncertainty, and efficient adjustments for multiple testing which fully take the dependence between the estimates into account. Standard errors are shown to decrease at the familiar $n^{-1/2}$ rate.
The estimator uses a diagonally scaled Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse to obtain parameter estimates, and implements a bias correction based on the lasso. The scaled Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse approximates the inverse of the singular high-dimensional covariance matrix of the regressors, and the lasso corrects for the bias resulting from this approximation. The remaining bias can be factorized into a term which reflects the accuracy of the pseudoinverse, and a term measuring the lasso estimation error. The product of these two components is of lower order compared to the variance of the estimator, yielding an asymptotically unbiased estimator. The proof relies on several extensions of the results of \citet{fan2008sure} and \citet{wang2015high}, who use the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse to set up a variable screening technique.
Using the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse is especially effective when the number of variables is much larger than the number of observations. If $p$ is relatively close to $n$, regularization of the inverse can reduce the standard errors while the bias remains negligible. This motivates an extension to two regularized variants of the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse; random least squares and ridge regularization. For a suitable choice of the regularization parameters, these estimators yield smaller standard errors while maintaining the same theoretical validity.
Random least squares projects the columns of the regressor matrix onto a low-dimensional subspace by post-multiplying with a matrix with independently standard normally distributed elements. Repeatedly applying this procedure yields an estimate of the full parameter vector. Mean squared error properties of this estimator are studied by \citet{maillard2009compressed} based on the lemma by \citet{johnson1984extensions}, and refined by \citet{kaban2014new}. We show that random least squares results in a form of generalized ridge regularization on the empirical covariance matrix. The regularization strength is inversely related to the projection dimension, which for inferential procedures should be chosen close to the sample size.
The second regularization method we consider is ridge regularization. In order to show that the bias of the estimator remains sufficiently small, we exploit the relation of the ridge regularized estimator to the Moore-Penrose inverse when the regularization strength is small. This extends the results of \citet{buhlmann2013statistical}, who uses the ridge estimator to construct conservative p-values, and \citet{wang2015high} who focus on variable screening.
The results depend on a sparsity assumption with regard to the high\hyp{}dimensional parameter vector, and a mild restriction on the distributional class of the regressor matrix. We assume the sparsity of the parameter vector to be of the same order as in recent studies on high-dimensional inference by \citet{zhang2014confidence}, \citet{van2014asymptotically} and \citet{javanmard2014confidence}. Furthermore, we require the rows of the regressor matrix to be generated from the class of elliptical distributions. This class includes the multivariate normal, power exponential and Student's t-distribution. To facilitate applications to time series data or data with cross-sectional dependence, we allow for correlation between and within the regressors. Results are provided for both gaussian and non-gaussian regression errors.
Our approach to high-dimensional inference builds upon \citet{zhang2014confidence}, \citet{van2014asymptotically}, and \citet{javanmard2014confidence}. Under an additional sparsity assumption on the elements of the inverse covariance matrix, \citet{zhang2014confidence} and \citet{van2014asymptotically} use the lasso for each column of the regressor matrix to estimate the inverse covariance matrix. As an alternative, \citet{javanmard2014confidence} rely on direct numerical optimization to find an accurate approximate inverse. Both methods lead to standard errors which depend on one or more additional regularization parameters that potentially influence the results.
We consider situations where interest lies in performing inference on the full high-dimensional parameter vector. Alternatively, one can focus on a low\hyp{}dimensional subvector of the high-dimensional parameter vector. A sequence of papers \citep{belloni2009least,belloni2011inference,chernozhukov2015valid} introduces a multistage procedure that uses the lasso to select control variables in such a way that variable selection errors do not affect the distribution of the estimates of interest. This approach is effective when both the number of control variables related to the dependent variable, as well as the number of control variables related to the variables of interest, are limited. Strengthening this assumption such that every variable is correlated with only a small number of the remaining variables, \citet{lan2016testing} provide a method to construct confidence intervals for the full parameter vector.
In this paper, we do not limit inference to a low-dimensional subvector of the parameter vector.
The proposed method relaxes the assumption that only a small number of control variables is related to the variables of interest. This relaxation might come at the cost of a potential power loss, although this is not reflected in the rate at which the standard errors decrease as the sample size tends to infinity.
We confirm our theoretical results with a set of Monte Carlo experiments. We vary the specification of the covariance matrix, the amount of sparsity of the parameter vector, and the signal strength. In line with the theoretical results, we find that even in small samples where the number of regressors is twice the number of observations, coverage rates are close to the nominal rate of 95\%. Random least squares and ridge regression yield narrower confidence intervals compared to using a Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse, but this comes at the expense of a slight downward bias. Coverage rates are substantially closer to the nominal rate compared to existing methods.
We apply the methods to the FRED-QD, a quarterly data set consisting of 254 macroeconomic and financial series of the United States economy, available from the second quarter of 1987 onwards. We analyze the relation between the real gross domestic product and the other variables provided in this data set in a linear regression framework. Although the number of regressors exceeds the number of observations, our methods have enough power to distinguish significant effects, from which the largest relate to the productivity and the number of hours worked in the business sector.
The outline of this paper is as follows. Section \ref{sec: gf} introduces the estimation approach and the proposed estimators. The theoretical properties of the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse, random least squares, and ridge regression are presented in Section \ref{sec: theory}. Section \ref{sec: mc} illustrates these results through Monte Carlo simulations and Section \ref{sec: application} applies the methods on the FRED-QD dataset. Section \ref{sec: conclusion} concludes.
\section{High-dimensional linear regression}\label{sec: gf}
Consider the data generating process
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dgp}
y = X\beta + \varepsilon, \quad \varepsilon \sim N(0,\sigma^2 I_{n}),
\end{equation}
where $y$ is an $n \times 1$ response vector, $X$ an $n \times p$ regressor matrix, $\beta=(\beta_1,\dots,\beta_p)'$ a $p \times 1 $ vector of unknown regressor coefficients, and $\varepsilon$ an $n \times 1$ vector of errors which are independent and normally distributed with variance $\sigma^2$. The empirical covariance matrix of $X$ is denoted by $\hat{\Sigma} = \frac{1}{n}X'X$. We will show how the normality assumption on the errors can be relaxed.
\subsection{Approximate inverse and bias correction}\label{sec: approxinv}
Define $M$ as a $p\times n$ matrix for which $MX$ is close to the $p\times p$ identity matrix $I_{p}$, in a sense that will be made precise below. We refer to $M$ as an approximate inverse for $X$.
We start by considering estimators for $\beta$ of the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:start}
\begin{split}
\hat{\beta} &= My\\
&=MX\beta +M\varepsilon\\
& = \beta +\left(MX - I_{p}\right)\beta + M\varepsilon.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The second term of \eqref{eq:start} represents a bias which depends on the accuracy of the approximate inverse $M$. When $p\leq n$, ordinary least squares yields unbiased estimates by choosing $M = (X'X)^{-1}X'$. When $p>n$, the matrix $X'X$ is singular, and we have to resort to an expression for $M$ for which the bias is not equal to zero.
Suppose we have an accurate initial estimator $\hat{\beta}^{\text{init}}$, then we can reduce the bias in \eqref{eq:start} by applying a correction
\begin{equation}\label{eq:betac}
\begin{split}
\hat{\beta}^{c} &= My - \left(MX - I_{p}\right)\hat{\beta}^{\text{init}} \\
& = \beta +\left(MX - I_{p}\right)\left(\beta-\hat{\beta}^{\text{init}}\right) + M\varepsilon.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
For the initial estimator $\hat{\beta}^{\text{init}}$ we take the lasso estimator of \citet{tibshirani1996regression}. Alternative initial estimators can be used, as long as they satisfy a sufficiently tight accuracy bound on the $l_{1}$ norm of $\beta-\hat{\beta}^{\text{init}}$.
The goal of this paper is to introduce choices of $M$ such that the bias of the estimator $\hat{\beta}^{c}$ is of lower order than the variance. Anticipating the usual $\sqrt{n}$ rate of convergence, we rescale the estimator in \eqref{eq:betac} as
\begin{equation}\label{eq: corr}
\begin{split}
\sqrt{n}\left(\hat{\beta}^{c}-\beta\right) &= \Delta+Z\\
\Delta &= \sqrt{n}\left(MX-I_{p}\right)\left(\beta-\hat{\beta}^{\text{init}}\right)\\
Z&=\sqrt{n}M\varepsilon
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The term $\Delta$ reflects the bias of the corrected estimator. To ensure asymptotic unbiasedness, $\Delta$ should be of lower order than the noise term $Z$. We propose specifications for the approximate inverse $M$ for which $Z|X\sim N(0,\sigma^2\Omega)$ with $\Omega = nMM'$ and the variance $\Omega_{jj} = O_{p}(1)$. This shows that the standard errors of the estimator $\hat{\beta}^{c}$ decrease at the familiar $n^{-1/2}$ rate.
In order for the bias to vanish compared to the variance term, given that $\Omega_{jj}= O_{p}(1)$, we now need $||\Delta||_{\infty} = o_{p}(1)$. Under a sparsity assumption on $\beta$, we show that this is indeed the case, which implies that $\hat{\beta}^{c}$ is an asymptotically unbiased estimator. Combined with a closed-form expression for the covariance matrix $\Omega$, confidence intervals can be constructed for the $j$-th parameter as
\begin{equation}\label{eq: ci}
\left[\hat{\beta}_{j}^{c} - z_{\alpha/2}\sqrt{\sigma^2\Omega_{jj}},\quad\hat{\beta}_{j}^{c} + z_{\alpha/2}\sqrt{\sigma^2\Omega_{jj}}\right],
\end{equation}
where $z_{\alpha/2}$ is the $\alpha/2$ critical value for the standard normal distribution. We discuss estimation of $\sigma$ in Section~\ref{sec: noise}.
The estimator defined in \eqref{eq:betac} occurs in a different form in \citet{zhang2014confidence}, \citet{van2014asymptotically} and \citet{javanmard2014confidence}, who consider
$
\hat{\beta}^{c} = \hat{\beta}^{\text{lasso}} + \frac{1}{n}\bar{M}X'(y-X\hat{\beta}^{\text{lasso}}).
$
This leads to an interpretation of $\hat{\beta}^{c}$ as a `desparsified' version of the lasso estimator. An alternative to the standard lasso estimator is put forward by \citet{caner2014asymptotically}. The matrix $\bar{M}$ serves as an approximate inverse to the empirical covariance matrix $\frac{1}{n} X' X$, which is found by a series of lasso regressions in \citet{zhang2014confidence} and \citet{van2014asymptotically}, or direct numerical optimization in \citet{javanmard2014confidence}. As a consequence of the complex estimation procedures, standard errors are not available in closed form, and their validity depends on the appropriate selection of one or more tuning parameters.
\subsection{Choosing the approximate inverse $M$}\label{sec: chooseM}
This section proposes specifications of $M$ for which the bias $||\Delta||_{\infty}$ in \eqref{eq: corr} is small. We ensure that the diagonal terms of $MX - I_{p}$ are identically equal to zero by introducing a $p\times p$ diagonal matrix $D$, with diagonal elements $d_{j}$, and taking
\begin{equation}\label{eq:diagonalscaling}
M = D\tilde{M}, \qquad
d_{j} = (\tilde{m}_{j}'x_{j})^{-1},
\end{equation}
with $\tilde{m}_{j}'$ the $j$-th row of $\tilde{M}$. We first choose $M$ in the form defined in \eqref{eq:diagonalscaling}, with $\tilde{M}$ specified as the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse of $X$. Subsequently, we consider regularized alternatives obtained by random least squares and ridge regression.
\subsubsection{The Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse}
A tuning parameter free choice for $\tilde{M}$ in \eqref{eq:diagonalscaling} is the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse. When $p\leq n$, and the columns of $X$ are linearly independent, $\tilde{M} = (X'X)^{-1}X'$. In the high-dimensional setting where $p>n$, the matrix $X$ has linearly dependent columns by default. In this case the pseudoinverse equals $X'(XX')^{-1}$, and
\begin{align}\label{eq: mppi}
M^{\text{MPI}} = D^{\text{MPI}}X'(XX')^{-1}.
\end{align}
The diagonal elements $d_{j}^{\text{MPI}}$ of the diagonal scaling matrix $D^{\text{MPI}}$ equal
\begin{equation}
d_{j}^{\text{MPI}}= \left[x_{j}'(X X')^{-1}x_{j}\right]^{-1}.
\end{equation}
This provides a closed-form expression for the approximate inverse. In addition, since the bias term of the estimator is of lower order compared to the variance, the covariance of $\hat{\beta}^{c}$ is available in closed form as well,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:varbeta}
V(\hat{\beta}^{c}) = D^{\text{MPI}}X'(XX')^{-2}XD^{\text{MPI}}.
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Regularizing the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse}
The accuracy of the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse depends on the concentration of the eigenvalues of the matrix $XX'$, which can be weak when $p$ is close to $n$. Regularizing the approximate inverse can improve in accuracy, with smaller standard errors as a result. This section introduces two regularization techniques, for which Section \ref{sec: theory} shows the appropriate choice for the regularization strength.
\paragraph{Random Least Squares}
This method is based on projecting the high\hyp{}dimensional regressor matrix $X$ onto a $k<n$ dimensional subspace by post-multiplying with a $p\times k$ matrix $R$ with independently standard normally distributed elements,
\begin{equation}\label{eq: R}
R_{jl} \sim N(0,1),\quad j={1,\ldots p}, \quad l={1,\ldots ,k}.
\end{equation}
The multiplication yields a low-dimensional analogue to \eqref{eq:dgp},
\begin{equation}
y = XR\gamma_R + u.
\end{equation}
Least squares estimation of $\gamma_R$ is straightforward as
\begin{equation}
\hat{\gamma}_{R} = (R'X'XR)^{-1}R'X'y,
\end{equation}
from which an estimator for $\beta$ can be constructed by $\hat{\beta}_R = R\hat{\gamma}_{R}$. Since $R$ is random, Jensen's inequality can be used to show that the accuracy of this estimator can be improved by averaging over different realizations of $R$. We then arrive at the following estimator of $\beta$,
\begin{align}\label{eq:rls}
\hat{\beta}_{\bar{R}} = \text{E}_{R}[R\hat{\gamma}_{R}] = \text{E}_{R}[R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R']X'y.
\end{align}
From equation \eqref{eq:rls}, we recognize that random least squares yields an approximate inverse covariance matrix of $X$. Defining $\tilde{M}= \text{E}_{R}[R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R']X'$ in \eqref{eq:diagonalscaling} yields
\begin{align}\label{eq:randproj}
M^{\text{RLS}} = D^{\text{RLS}}\text{E}_{R}\left[R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R'\right]X',
\end{align}
with
\begin{equation}\label{eq: drls}
d^{\text{RLS}}_{j}=\left\{\text{E}_{R}[r_{j}'(R'X'XR)^{-1}R']X' x_{j}\right\}^{-1}.
\end{equation}
\paragraph{Ridge regression}
An alternative regularization strategy is to use a ridge adjustment,
\begin{align}\label{eq: ridge}
M^{\text{RID}} = D^{\text{RID}}(X'X+\gamma I_{p})^{-1}X',
\end{align}
where $\gamma$ denotes the ridge penalty and the elements of the diagonal scaling matrix $D^{\text{RID}}$ equal
\begin{equation}
d^{\text{RID}}_{j}=\left(v_{j}'X'x_{j}\right)^{-1},
\end{equation}
with $v_{j}$ the $j$-th row of $(X'X+\gamma I_{p})^{-1}$.
The regularization in \eqref{eq: ridge} can be related to the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse, since the latter is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ridgeMP}
\begin{split}
X'(XX')^{-1} &= \lim_{\gamma\rightarrow 0}\left(X'X + \gamma I_{p}\right)^{-1}X'\\
& = \lim_{\gamma\rightarrow 0}X'\left(XX' + \gamma I_{n}\right)^{-1}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
which can be shown using the singular value decomposition of $X$ as in \citet{albert1972regression}.
\subsection{Estimation of the noise level}\label{sec: noise}
A consistent estimator of the noise level $\sigma^2$ is crucial to construct valid confidence intervals. Existing methods, such as \citet{van2014asymptotically} and \citet{javanmard2014confidence} rely on the scaled lasso developed by \citet{scaledlassoSun}, for which holds that $\left|\frac{\hat{\sigma}}{\sigma}-1\right| = o_{p}(1)$ under Assumption A\ref{ass:sparsity} and Assumption A\ref{ass:regressor} discussed in Section \ref{sec: ass}.
However, in the Monte Carlo simulations in Section \ref{sec: mc}, and in line with findings by \citet{reid2013study}, we find the scaled lasso to be unreliable in many settings. An alternative is to use
\begin{equation}\label{eq: lassosigma}
\hat{\sigma}^{2}_{\text{lasso}} = \frac{1}{n-\hat{s}}\hat{\varepsilon}'\hat{\varepsilon},
\end{equation}
with $\hat{s}$ the number of non-zero coefficients retained by the lasso, and $\hat{\varepsilon}$ the $n\times 1$ vector of lasso regression errors. Corresponding to the results in \citet{reid2013study}, we find that this leads to more robust estimation of the noise level.
\section{Theoretical results}\label{sec: theory}
This section provides the main results of the paper. Proofs for the theorems in this section are given in Appendix~\ref{app:proofs}.
\subsection{Assumptions}\label{sec: ass}
Performing inference in a linear regression model with more variables than observations requires additional assumptions over its low-dimensional counterpart. Our assumptions parallel \citet{fan2008sure} and \citet{wang2015high}. We will provide a discussion below.
\begin{assumption}\label{ass:sparsity}
The sparsity $s_{0} = ||\beta||_{0}$ satisfies $s_{0} = o\left(\frac{\sqrt{n}}{\log p}\right)$.
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}\label{ass:regressor}
The regressor matrix $X$ is generated from an elliptical distribution, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{eq:svdofX}
X = \Sigma_{1}^{1/2}Z\Sigma_{2}^{1/2} = \Sigma_{1}^{1/2}VSU'\Sigma_{2}^{1/2},
\end{equation}
where the $n \times n$ population covariance matrix $\Sigma_1$ and the $p \times p$ population covariance matrix $\Sigma_2$ determine the dependence between the rows and columns of $X$, respectively. The elements of the $n \times p$ matrix $Z$ are generated independently from a spherically symmetric distribution, $V\in\mathcal{O}(n)$, $S$ is an $n\times p$ matrix of singular values, and $U\in\mathcal{O}(p)$.
Furthermore,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:subgaussian}
P\left(\lambda_{\max}(p^{-1}ZZ')\geq c_{Z}, \quad \lambda_{\min}(p^{-1}ZZ')\leq c_{Z}^{-1}\right)\leq e^{-C_{Z} n},
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_{\max}(.)$ and $\lambda_{\min}(.)$ are the largest and smallest eigenvalues of a matrix respectively, and $c_{Z},C_{Z}$ are positive constants.
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}\label{ass:condnumb}
For both the population covariance matrices $\Sigma_{1}$ and $\Sigma_{2}$, the eigenvalues are bounded by a constant, i.e. for $i = 1,2$,
\begin{equation}
0<c_{i,1}\leq \lambda_{\min}(\Sigma_{i})\leq \lambda_{\max}(\Sigma_{i})\leq c_{i,2}<\infty.
\end{equation}
\end{assumption}
Assumption A\ref{ass:sparsity} imposes a sparsity constraint which restricts the number of non-zero coefficients in $\beta$ by $ s_{0}=||\beta||_{0}$. For lasso consistency, it is required that $s_{0}^2 = o\left(n/\log p\right)$. As noted in \citet{van2014asymptotically} and \citet{javanmard2014confidence}, a slightly stronger assumption is needed when constructing confidence intervals.
In recent work, for example by \citet{chernozhukov2015valid}, assumption A\ref{ass:sparsity} is relaxed to allow for approximate sparsity, arguably a more realistic assumption in practical applications. This restricts only the number of large non-zero coefficients, and allows the remaining coefficients to be sufficiently small. Since our results only depend on the $l_{1}$ norm of the lasso estimation error, which does not change under approximate sparsity, they remain valid under approximate sparsity.
Assumption A\ref{ass:regressor} requires that the regressors are generated from an elliptical distribution. The class of elliptical distributions includes the multivariate normal distribution, but also allows for heavier tailed distributions such as the power exponential distribution and the multivariate $t$ distribution \citep{serfling2006multivariate,dasgupta2012concentration}. This class precludes $X$ to consist of binomial variables. However, our results rely on the distribution of the elements of $X'(XX')^{-1}X$, which consist of sums of binomial variables. It is possible that one can use the convergence of these sums towards a normal distribution to extend the results towards binomial regressors.
The matrices $\Sigma_{1}$ and $\Sigma_{2}$ in Assumption A\ref{ass:regressor} allows for dependence between the rows and the columns of $X$, respectively. Assumption A\ref{ass:condnumb} states that the eigenvalues of these population covariance matrices are finite and independent of the dimensions $n$ and $p$. This assumption can be relaxed by replacing $c_{i,2}$ with $c_{i,2}n^{\alpha}$. The standard errors then decrease at the rate of $1/\sqrt{n^{1-\alpha}}$ instead of $1/\sqrt{n}$.
\subsection{Asymptotic unbiasedness and normality using the \\Moore-Penrose~pseudoinverse}\label{sec: distrest}
To prove that $\hat{\beta}^{c}$ in \eqref{eq:betac} based on the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse is an asymptotically unbiased estimator, we show that with high probability the bias term in \eqref{eq: corr} is small and of lower order than the noise. Moreover, the construction of confidence intervals as in \eqref{eq: ci} requires $Z|X$ to follow a normal distribution. Efficiency of the estimator is ensured by showing that the standard errors decrease at the usual $n^{-1/2}$ rate.
The first requirement follows from bounding the bias term of the estimator in \eqref{eq: corr} by a norm inequality,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:splitbias}
||\Delta||_{\infty}\leq \sqrt{n}\left|\left|MX-I_{p}\right|\right|_{\max}||\beta-\hat{\beta}^{\text{init}}||_{1},
\end{equation}
which is an element-wise bound on $MX - I_{p}$ together with an $l_{1}$ accuracy bound on $\beta-\hat{\beta}^{\text{init}}$.
The following lemma bounds on the first term in probability.
\begin{lemma}\label{theorem:biasvanish} \sloppy Suppose Assumption~A\ref{ass:regressor} and A\ref{ass:condnumb} hold. Define $M^{MPI} = D^{MPI}X'(XX')^{-1}$ with $D^{MPI}$ a diagonal matrix with elements $d^{\text{MPI}}_{j}=(x_{j}'(XX')^{-1}x_{j})^{-1} $, then we have
\begin{equation}
P\left(\left|\left|M^{MPI}X-I_{p}\right|\right|_{\max}\geq a\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}\right) = O(p^{-\tilde{c}}),
\end{equation}
with $\tilde{c}=\frac{c}{2c_{s}}a^2-2$ where $a,c,c_{s}>0$.\vspace{0.25cm}
\end{lemma}
A proof is presented in Appendix~\ref{app:prooftheorembiasvanish}. Note that the diagonal elements of $M^{\text{MPI}}X-I_{p}$ are identically zero, due to the diagonal scaling with $D^{\text{MPI}}$. Lemma~\ref{theorem:biasvanish} is therefore a statement on the off-diagonal elements of $M^{\text{MPI}}X-I_{p}$.
Next we show that the $l_{1}$ norm of the initial estimation error, in the second term in the bound for $||\Delta||_{\infty}$ in \eqref{eq:splitbias}, is bounded with high probability. As the initial estimator we use the lasso estimator by \citet{tibshirani1996regression}, which is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:lasso}
\hat{\beta}^{\text{lasso}} = \arg\min_{b}\left[\frac{1}{n}(y-Xb)'(y-Xb) + \lambda||b||_{1}\right].
\end{equation}
The following bound applies to the $l_{1}$-error of the lasso estimator.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:acclasso}
Suppose Assumption A\ref{ass:sparsity} and Assumption A\ignorespaces\ref{ass:regressor} hold. Consider the lasso estimator \eqref{eq:lasso} with $\lambda\geq 8\sigma\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}$, then with probability exceeding $1-2p^{-1}$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:accguar}
\left|\left|\beta-\hat{\beta}^{\text{lasso}}\right|\right|_{1} =
O_{p}\left(s_{0}\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}\right).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
A proof is presented in Appendix~\ref{proof:compcond}. As shown in \citet{buhlmann2011statistics}, this bound applies under a so-called compatibility condition on $X$. The proof amounts to showing that the compatibility condition is indeed satisfied under Assumption A\ref{ass:sparsity} and Assumption A\ignorespaces\ref{ass:regressor}.
Combining Assumption A\ref{ass:sparsity}, Lemma~\ref{theorem:biasvanish}, and Lemma~\ref{lem:acclasso}, we see that the bias can be bounded by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:biasvanish2}
||\Delta||_{\infty} = O_{p}\left(s_{0}\frac{\log p}{\sqrt{n}}\right)
= o_{p}(1).
\end{equation}
In order for the estimator to be asymptotically unbiased, it is necessary that the bias in \eqref{eq:biasvanish2} is of lower order than the noise term of the estimator, given by $Z$ in \eqref{eq: corr}. The following lemma states that this is indeed the case.
\begin{lemma}\label{theorem:finitevar} Suppose Assumption~A\ref{ass:regressor} and A\ref{ass:condnumb} hold. For $j=1,\ldots,p$ we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
Z_{j} &= \sqrt{n}d^{\text{MPI}}_{j}x_{j}'(XX')^{-1}\varepsilon,\\
Z_{j}|X &\sim N(0,\sigma^2\Omega_{j}),\\
||\Omega_{jj}||_{2} &= O_{p}(1),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\Omega_{jj} = nm_{j}'m_{j}$ with $m_{j}'$ the $j$-th row of $M^{\text{MPI}} = D^{\text{MPI}}X'(XX')^{-1}$ and $D^{\text{MPI}}$ a diagonal matrix with $d_{j}^{\text{MPI}} = [x_{j}'(XX')^{-1}x_{j}]^{-1}$.
\end{lemma}
A proof is presented in Appendix~\ref{app:prooftheoremfinitevar}. Appendix~\ref{app:nongaus} shows that under additional assumptions this result also holds for independent and identically distributed errors $\varepsilon_{i}$.
Combining Lemma~\ref{theorem:finitevar} with \eqref{eq:biasvanish2} yields the central theorem of this paper.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:main}
Suppose A\ignorespaces\ref{ass:sparsity}-A\ignorespaces\ref{ass:condnumb} hold. Let $\hat{\beta}^{c}=My - \left(MX-I_p\right)\hat{\beta}^{\text{init}}$, with $\hat{\beta}^{\text{init}}$ such that $||\hat{\beta}^{\text{init}}-\beta||_{1} = O_{p}\left(s_{0}\sqrt{\log(p)/n}\right)$, and take $M$ as
\begin{equation*}
M^{\text{MPI}} = D^{\text{MPI}}X'(XX')^{-1},
\end{equation*}
where $D^{\text{MPI}}$ is a diagonal matrix with elements $d^{\text{MPI}}_{j}=n\left[x_{j}'(X X')^{-1}x_{j}\right]^{-1}$.
Then,
\begin{align*}
\sqrt{n}(\hat{\beta}^{c}-\beta) & = Z + o_{p}(1),\\
Z|X &\sim N\left(0,\sigma^2 \Omega\right),
\end{align*}
where $\Omega= nM^{MPI}M^{MPI'}$ and $\Omega_{jj} = O_{p}(1)$.
\end{theorem}
This theorem shows that the estimator $\hat{\beta}^{c}$ in \eqref{eq:betac} is asymptotically unbiased with covariance matrix $\Omega$, and standard errors that decrease at the usual $n^{-1/2}$ rate. Theorem~\ref{theorem:main} allows for the construction of confidence intervals that are uniformly valid over $j$. Uniformity is guaranteed since the bound on the lasso estimator given in Lemma~\ref{lem:acclasso} holds uniformly over all sets $S_{0}$ of size $s_{0} = o(\sqrt{n}/\log p)$, see \citet{van2014asymptotically} for a discussion.
Since the resulting covariance matrix of the estimator is available in closed form, efficient multiple testing procedures as in \citet{buhlmann2013statistical} can be employed, together with joint tests on estimated coefficients, as well as confidence intervals around predictions for future values of the dependent variable.
\subsection{Regularized approximate inverse}\label{sec: distrest_reg}
When the number of variables is of the same order as the number of observations, the concentration of the eigenvalues in Assumption~A\ref{ass:regressor} might not be very tight. In this case, regularization of the pseudoinverse can increase the accuracy. We therefore analyze two regularization approaches.
\paragraph{Random least squares}\label{sec: theoryrls}
The key to the behavior of the regularized covariance matrix in repeated least squares, is the projection dimension $k$. The following lemma parallels Lemma~\ref{theorem:biasvanish} and Lemma~\ref{theorem:finitevar} for an appropriate choice of the projection dimension.
\begin{lemma}\label{theorem:RLS} \sloppy Define $M^{\text{RLS}} = D^{\text{RLS}}\text{E}_{R}\left[R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R'\right]X'$
where $D^{\text{RLS}}$ is a diagonal matrix with diagonal elements
$
d^{\text{RLS}}_{j}=\left\{\text{E}_{R}[r_{j}'(R'X'XR)^{-1}R']X' x_{j}\right\}^{-1}
$, and $R$ a $p\times k$ matrix with normally and independently distributed entries. Choose the projection dimension $k$ as
\begin{equation}
k = \left(1-c_{\kappa}\sqrt{(\log p)/n}\right)(n-1),
\end{equation}
where $c_{k}$ is a positive constant.
Then we have
\begin{equation}
P\left(||M^{RLS}X-I_{p}||_{\max}\geq a\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}\right) = O\left(p^{-\tilde{c}}\right),
\end{equation}
with $\tilde{c}$ as in Lemma~\ref{theorem:biasvanish} with $a$ replaced by $\tilde{a}<a$. Furthermore, for $Z = \sqrt{n}d^{\text{RLS}}_{j}\text{E}[r_{j}(R'X'XR)^{-1}R']X'\varepsilon$, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
Z|X&\sim N(0,\sigma^2 \Omega^{RLS}),\\
\Omega^{RLS} &= nM^{RLS}M^{RLS'},\\
\Omega^{RLS}_{jj}& = O_{p}(1).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
The proof of Lemma \ref{theorem:RLS} given in Appendix~\ref{app:prooftheoremRLS} relies on showing that when $k$ is sufficiently close to $n$, the regularized inverse approximates the Moore-Penrose inverse. The results from Section \ref{sec: distrest} can then be used to show that regularizing using random least squares does not adversely affect the bias. The proof of Lemma~\ref{theorem:RLS} also elicits that random least squares is equivalent to a generalized form of ridge regression, where the regularization strength is dependent on the eigenvalues of the regressor matrix $X$. Details on the constant $c_{k}$ are provided in the proof.
\paragraph{Ridge regularization}
Because of the relation between the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse and ridge regularized covariance matrices displayed in \eqref{eq:ridgeMP}, intuition suggests that for a sufficiently small penalty parameter $\lambda$, the results under a Moore-Penrose inverse carry over to a ridge adjusted estimator. The following lemma formalizes this intuition.
\begin{lemma}\label{theorem:ridge}
Define $
M^{\text{RID}} = D^{\text{RID}}(X'X+\gamma I_{p})^{-1}X'$, with the elements of the diagonal scaling matrix $D^{\text{RID}}$ equal to $
d^{\text{RID}}_{j}=\left(e_{j}'(X'X + \gamma I_{p})^{-1}X'x_{j}\right)^{-1}
$. If the ridge penalty parameter satisfies $\gamma \leq c_{\gamma}p\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}$, where $c_{\gamma}$ is a positive constant, then we have
\begin{equation}
P\left(||M^{\text{RID}}X-I_{p}||_{\infty}\geq a\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}\right) = O\left(p^{-\tilde{c}}\right),
\end{equation}
with $\tilde{a}$ and $\tilde{c}$ as in Lemma~\ref{theorem:RLS}.
Furthermore, for $Z = \sqrt{n}d^{\text{RID}}_{j}(X'X + \gamma I_{p})^{-1}X'\varepsilon$, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
Z|X&\sim N(0,\sigma^2 \Omega^{RID}),\\
\Omega^{RID} &= nM^{RID}M^{RID'},\\
\Omega^{RID}_{jj}& = O_{p}(1).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
A proof is provided in Appendix~\ref{app:prooftheoremridge}, which also gives a more detailed description of the constant $c_{\gamma}$.
\paragraph{Inference using a regularized approximate inverse} Using Lemma~\ref{theorem:RLS} and Lemma~\ref{theorem:ridge}, we arrive at the following theorem for the regularized estimators.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:main2}
Suppose A\ignorespaces\ref{ass:sparsity}-A\ignorespaces\ref{ass:condnumb} hold. Let $\hat{\beta}^{c}=My - \left(MX-I_p\right)\hat{\beta}^{\text{init}}$, with $\hat{\beta}^{\text{init}}$ such that $||\hat{\beta}^{\text{init}}-\beta||_{1} = O_{p}\left(s_{0}\sqrt{\log(p)/n}\right)$, and take $M$ as either $
M^{\text{RLS}} = D^{\text{RLS}}\text{E}_R\left[R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R'\right]X'$ or $M^{\text{RID}} = D^{\text{RID}}(X'X+\gamma^{*} I_p)^{-1}X'$,
where the elements of the diagonal matrices $D$ are defined in Lemma~\ref{theorem:RLS} and Lemma~\ref{theorem:ridge}, $R$ is a $p\times k^{*}$ matrix with independent standard normal entries, $k^{*}=k$ as in Lemma~\ref{theorem:RLS}, and $\gamma^{*}=\gamma$ as in Lemma~\ref{theorem:ridge}.
Then,
\begin{align*}
\sqrt{n}(\hat{\beta}^{c}-\beta) & = Z + o_{p}(1),\\
Z|X &\sim N\left(0,\sigma^2 \Omega\right), \\ \Omega &= nMM',\\
\Omega_{jj}&= O_{p}(1).
\end{align*}
\end{theorem}
This theorem follows directly from Lemma~\ref{theorem:RLS} and Lemma~\ref{theorem:ridge}. It confirms that when $k$ is close to $n$ and $\gamma$ is sufficiently small, the estimator in \eqref{eq:betac} is asymptotically unbiased with covariance matrix $\Omega$, and standard errors that decrease at the usual $n^{-1/2}$ rate.
The reason one would opt for the regularized variants despite the additional tuning parameters is provided by the following theorem. Here we compare the variance of $Z$ in equation \eqref{eq: corr} for the different estimators.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:power} Denote the variance of the estimator $\hat{\beta}^{c}_{j}$ under a diagonal scaling matrix $D$ by $\Omega_{jj}(D)$. For the choice of $k$ as in Lemma~\ref{theorem:RLS}, or $\gamma$ as in Lemma~\ref{theorem:ridge}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:th4}
\Omega_{jj}(D)^{RLS} - \Omega_{jj}(D)^{MPI}\leq 0, \qquad
\Omega_{jj}(D)^{RID}-\Omega_{jj}(D)^{MPI}\leq 0.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
The proof is given in Appendix~\ref{app:prooftheorempower}.
Note that Theorem~\ref{theorem:power} requires the regularized estimator and the estimator based on the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse to use the same diagonal scaling matrix. Using $D^{\text{MPI}}$ for the Moore-Penrose inverse, $D^{\text{RLS}}$ for the repeated least squares estimator, and $D^{\text{RID}}$ for the ridge regularized inverse, does not yield an ordering in terms of power. However, in all cases we have encountered, the inequality in Theorem~\ref{theorem:power} is satisfied when using the diagonal matrix specific to the estimator under consideration. This is also evident from the Monte Carlo results in Section~\ref{sec: mc}.
\subsection{Consistency}\label{sec: consist}
Although our focus in this paper is on the construction of confidence intervals, the estimator $\hat{\beta}^{c}$ can be shown to be consistent when we restrict the growth rate of the number of variables relative to the number of observations.
\begin{assumption}\label{ass:consistency}
The number of variables grows near exponentially with the number of observations, i.e.
\begin{equation}
\frac{\log p}{n} = o(1).
\end{equation}
\end{assumption}
\sloppy Since $Z_{i}$ is (asymptotically) normal, we have that $\max_{i=1,\ldots,j}|Z_{i}| = O_{p}(\sqrt{\log p})$. Since $\hat{\beta}^{c} = \beta + \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}(\Delta + Z)$, Assumption~A\ref{ass:consistency} then guarantees that $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\hat{\beta}^c= \beta$.
If one is only interested in consistency, then Assumption~A\ref{ass:regressor} can potentially be relaxed. In that case the bias is not required to be of lower order compared to the variance.
\input{MC.tex}
\input{App.tex}
\input{Conclusion.tex}
\bibliographystyle{apalike}
\section{Monte Carlo Experiments}\label{sec: mc}
This section examines the finite sample behaviour of the proposed estimators in a Monte Carlo experiment.
\subsection{Monte Carlo set-up}
\paragraph{Data generating process} The data generating process takes the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq: dgpmc}
y = X\beta + \varepsilon, \quad \varepsilon \sim N(0,\sigma^2 I_n),
\end{equation}
where $y$ is an $n \times 1$ vector, $X$ an $n \times p$ regressor matrix, and $\beta$ a $p \times 1$ vector of unknown regressor coefficients. The rows of $X$ are fixed i.i.d. realizations from $\mathcal{N}_p(0,\Sigma)$. We specify two different covariance matrices $\Sigma$:
\begin{align}
\text{Equicorrelated: } \Sigma_{jk} &= 0.8, \quad \forall j \neq k, \quad \Sigma_{jj} = 1 \quad \forall j, \label{eq: equi}\\
\text{Toeplitz: } \Sigma_{jk} &= 0.9^{|j-k|}, \quad \forall j,k. \label{eq: toep}
\end{align}
The strength of the individual predictors is considered local-to-zero by setting $\beta = \sqrt{\sigma^2_{\varepsilon}/n}\cdot b\iota_{s}$ for a fixed constant $b$. The vector $\iota_{s}$ contains $s$ randomly chosen non-zero elements that are equal to one. We vary signal strength $b$, sparsity $s$, and covariance matrix $\Sigma$ across different Monte Carlo experiments.
To align the simulation experiment with the setting in the economic application of Section \ref{sec: application}, we set the number of predictors $p=200$ and the sample size $n=100$. In each replication the predictors in $X$ and the coefficients in $\beta$ are generated. We report average results for nonzero coefficients and zero coefficients, based on 1000 replications of the data generating process in \eqref{eq: dgpmc}.
\paragraph{Estimation} We use \eqref{eq:betac} to estimate the coefficients by the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse, random least squares, and ridge estimator. The lasso estimator uses a penalty term that minimizes the mean squared error under tenfold cross-validation. The random least squares estimator averages over $N=1000$ realizations of the regularized covariance matrix and projects onto a subspace dimension with $k=90$. The ridge regression based estimator sets its penalty parameter as $\gamma=1$, following \citet{buhlmann2013statistical}.
The proposed estimators are compared to three existing methods for constructing confidence intervals in high-dimensional regression for all coefficients. The method of \citet{van2014asymptotically} (GBRD) serves as the first benchmark, in which $M$ is constructed by performing lasso for each column in $X$ on the remaining columns in $X$. For each lasso estimation the penalty parameter is selected by tenfold cross-validation. The method of \citet{zhang2014confidence} is equivalent to this method for linear regression problems considered here. Second, \citet{javanmard2014confidence} (JM) construct $M$ by solving a convex program. We set the tuning parameter $\mu=2 \sqrt{n^{-1} \log p}$, which is equal to the value used in their simulation studies. Both benchmark methods also make use of a bias correction by an initial estimator, for which we again use the lasso estimator. Finally, we compare the performance against the recently developed Correlated Predictors Screening (CPS) method by \citet{lan2016testing}. In this method, for each regressor $x_{j}$ we find highly correlated regressors from the set of remaining columns in the regressor matrix. We then orthogonalize both $y$ and $x_{j}$ with respect to this set. Stopping rules for the size of the correlated set and estimation of the noise level can be found in \citet{lan2016testing}.
Both for our proposed methods and for JM and GBRD we estimate the noise level $\sigma^2$ using an estimator based on the lasso as defined in \eqref{eq: lassosigma}.
\paragraph{Evaluation}
The coverage rate is calculated as the percentage of cases in which the value of the coefficient in the data generating process falls inside the 95\% confidence interval. The statistical power is calculated as the percentage of Monte Carlo replications in which zero is not included in the confidence interval of nonzero coefficients.
\subsection{Simulation Results}
\subsubsection{Sparsity and signal strength}
Table \ref{tab: MCequi} shows the Monte Carlo simulation results for the set of experiments with an equicorrelated covariance matrix and Table \ref{tab: MCtoep} with a Toeplitz covariance matrix. The tables report the estimated coefficients, standard errors, coverage rates, and power of the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse, random least squares, and ridge regression. Settings vary over the number ($s=3,15$) and signal strength ($b=2,5$; corresponding to coefficients of size 0.2 and 0.5) of nonzero coefficients.
\begin{table}[t!]
\caption{Monte Carlo simulation: Equicorrelated Covariance Matrix}
\centering \smal
\begin{threeparttable}
\renewcommand{\TPTminimum}{\linewidth}
\makebox[\linewidth]{%
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccc}
\toprule \toprule
& & \multicolumn{4}{c}{$s=3$} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{$s=15$} \\
\cmidrule(lr){3-6} \cmidrule(lr){7-10}
method & $b$ & \multicolumn{1}{c}{coef.} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{SE} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{CR} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{power} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{coef.} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{SE} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{CR}& \multicolumn{1}{c}{power}\\
\midrule
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[0]{*}{MPI}} & 2 & 0.19 & 0.30 & 0.95 & 0.10 & 0.17 & 0.29 & 0.94 & 0.10 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.30 & 0.95 & & 0.00 & 0.29 & 0.95 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[0]{*}{RLS}} & 2 & 0.19 & 0.28 & 0.95 & 0.10 & 0.17 & 0.27 & 0.94 & 0.11 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.28 & 0.95 & & 0.00 & 0.27 & 0.95 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[0]{*}{RID}} & 2 & 0.19 & 0.29 & 0.95 & 0.10 & 0.17 & 0.28 & 0.94 & 0.11 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.29 & 0.95 & & 0.00 & 0.28 & 0.95 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[0]{*}{GBRD}} & 2 & 0.17 & 0.20 & 0.94 & 0.13 & 0.16 & 0.20 & 0.93 & 0.14 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.20 & 0.95 & & 0.01 & 0.20 & 0.96 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[1]{*}{JM}} & 2 & 0.06 & 0.05 & 0.15 & 0.14 & 0.09 & 0.05 & 0.21 & 0.27 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.02 & 0.05 & 0.96 & & 0.03 & 0.05 & 0.91 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[1]{*}{CPS}} & 2 & 0.26 & 0.23 & 0.94 & 0.21 & 0.68 & 0.28 & 0.58 & 0.70\\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.10 & 0.23 & 0.92 & & 0.52 & 0.28 & 0.55 &\\
\midrule
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[1]{*}{MPI}} & 5 & 0.47 & 0.30 & 0.94 & 0.35 & 0.44 & 0.34 & 0.94 & 0.27 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.30 & 0.95 & & 0.01 & 0.34 & 0.96 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[0]{*}{RLS}} & 5 & 0.46 & 0.28 & 0.93 & 0.40 & 0.43 & 0.31 & 0.93 & 0.30 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.28 & 0.95 & & 0.01 & 0.31 & 0.96 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[0]{*}{RID}} & 5 & 0.46 & 0.29 & 0.93 & 0.38 & 0.44 & 0.33 & 0.94 & 0.28 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.29 & 0.95 & & 0.01 & 0.33 & 0.96 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[0]{*}{GBRD}} & 5 & 0.43 & 0.20 & 0.89 & 0.53 & 0.42 & 0.23 & 0.87 & 0.44 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.01 & 0.20 & 0.96 & & 0.03 & 0.23 & 0.96 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[0]{*}{JM}} & 5 & 0.22 & 0.05 & 0.14 & 0.64 & 0.34 & 0.06 & 0.25 & 0.77 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.02 & 0.05 & 0.95 & & 0.11 & 0.94 & 0.70 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[1]{*}{CPS}} & 5 & 0.67 & 0.24 & 0.89 & 0.79 & 1.70 & 0.47 & 0.27 & 0.94 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} &0& 0.26 & 0.25 & 0.82 & & 1.30 & 0.50 & 0.26 & \\
\bottomrule \bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\begin{tablenotes}
\footnotesize
\item Note: this table reports the average over the estimated coefficients (coef.), standard errors (SE), coverage rates (CR) and statistical power of the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse (MPI), random least squares (RLS), ridge regression (RID), and the methods of \citet{van2014asymptotically} (GBRD), \citet{javanmard2014confidence} (JM) and \citet{lan2016testing} (CPS). Results are based on 1000 replications of the linear model \eqref{eq: dgpmc}, with equicorrelated regressors as in \eqref{eq: equi}. Results are provided separately for non-zero ($b\neq 0$) and zero ($b=0$) coefficients. The number of observations is $n=100$ and the number of regressors $p=200$. The subspace dimension in RLS is $k=0.9n$, we average over $N=1000$ low-dimensional projections, and the penalty parameter for ridge regression is $\gamma = 1$. We vary the number ($s=3,15$) and signal strength ($b=2,5$) of nonzero coefficients.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\label{tab: MCequi}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t!]
\caption{Monte Carlo simulation: Toeplitz Covariance Matrix}
\centering \small
\begin{threeparttable}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccc}
\toprule \toprule
& & \multicolumn{4}{c}{$s=3$} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{$s=15$} \\
\cmidrule(lr){3-6} \cmidrule(lr){7-10}
method & $b$ & \multicolumn{1}{c}{coef.} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{SE} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{CR} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{power} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{coef.} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{SE} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{CR}& \multicolumn{1}{c}{power}\\
\midrule
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[0]{*}{MPI}} & 2 & 0.19 & 0.35 & 0.95 & 0.08 & 0.17 & 0.34 & 0.94 & 0.09 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.35 & 0.95 & & 0.00 & 0.34 & 0.95 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[0]{*}{RLS}} & 2 & 0.19 & 0.30 & 0.95 & 0.09 & 0.17 & 0.29 & 0.94 & 0.10 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.30 & 0.95 & & 0.01 & 0.29 & 0.95 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[0]{*}{RID}} & 2 & 0.19 & 0.32 & 0.95 & 0.09 & 0.17 & 0.31 & 0.94 & 0.10 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.32 & 0.95 & & 0.01 & 0.31 & 0.95 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[0]{*}{GBRD}} & 2 & 0.18 & 0.21 & 0.94 & 0.15 & 0.15 & 0.20 & 0.94 & 0.13 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.01 & 0.20 & 0.95 & & 0.02 & 0.20 & 0.96 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[1]{*}{JM}} & 2 & 0.10 & 0.05 & 0.41 & 0.31 & 0.10 & 0.05 & 0.28 & 0.32 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.01 & 0.05 & 0.95 & & 0.03 & 0.95 & 0.92 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[1]{*}{CPS}} & 2 & 0.19 & 0.31 & 0.95 & 0.10 & 0.19 & 0.44 & 0.95 & 0.08 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.32 & 0.95 & & 0.00 & 0.45 & 0.95 & \\
\midrule
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[1]{*}{MPI}} & 5 & 0.46 & 0.35 & 0.94 & 0.28 & 0.42 & 0.34 & 0.91 & 0.26 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.35 & 0.95 & & 0.01 & 0.66 & 0.95 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[0]{*}{RLS}} & 5 & 0.45 & 0.30 & 0.93 & 0.35 & 0.42 & 0.30 & 0.89 & 0.33 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.30 & 0.95 & & 0.01 & 0.70 & 0.95 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[0]{*}{RID}} & 5 & 0.46 & 0.32 & 0.93 & 0.32 & 0.42 & 0.31 & 0.90 & 0.30 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.32 & 0.95 & & 0.01 & 0.69 & 0.95 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[0]{*}{GBRD}} & 5 & 0.42 & 0.20 & 0.86 & 0.55 & 0.37 & 0.20 & 0.77 & 0.47 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.01 & 0.20 & 0.96 & & 0.02 & 0.80 & 0.96 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[0]{*}{JM}} & 5 & 0.29 & 0.05 & 0.25 & 0.82 & 0.29 & 0.05 & 0.22 & 0.73 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.01 & 0.05 & 0.95 & & 0.03 & 0.95 & 0.89 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[1]{*}{CPS}} & 5 & 0.50 & 0.37 & 0.95 & 0.28 & 0.48 & 0.84 & 0.95 & 0.09 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.41 & 0.95 & & -0.01 & 0.88 & 0.95 & \\
\bottomrule \bottomrule
\end{tabular}%
\begin{tablenotes}
\footnotesize
\item Note: this table reports the results for different Monte Carlo experiments where the regressors have a Toeplitz covariance as specified in \eqref{eq: toep}. For additional information, see the note following Table \ref{tab: MCequi}.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\label{tab: MCtoep}
\end{table}
The proposed methods obtain a coverage rate close to the nominal rate of 95\%. The coverage rates are most precise in case of an equicorrelated covariance matrix in a sparse setting with a weak signal. We observe the largest deviations from the nominal rate for a Toeplitz covariance matrix in a non-sparse setting with a strong signal. In general, the quality of the results seem to be higher when an equicorrelated covariance matrix is used. Both the bias and the standard errors are smaller, and the coverage rate is very close to the nominal rate.
We find that ridge regularization results in an increase in power relative to the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse estimator, but both estimators are outperformed by random least squares in all considered settings. Even though the number of variables is twice as large as the number of observations, the proposed methods achieve nontrivial power, varying from 0.10 to 0.40. The highest power is achieved in a sparse setting with a strong signal strength. In almost all cases, power is larger in settings with equicorrelated covariance matrix instead of Toeplitz.
We find some downward bias for the nonzero coefficients for the proposed methods in this paper. The bias decreases in sparsity, which means that nonzero coefficients are more precisely estimated when there are relatively few of them. For all methods, the coefficients which are set to zero in the data generating process are estimated very close to zero.
Random least squares produces the most efficient estimates relative to ridge regression and Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse regression. Standard errors of the random least squares estimates are lower than these estimators in all experiments. Ridge is again a more efficient estimator relative to the pseudo-inverse, in line with Theorem~\ref{theorem:power}. Except for the non-sparse setting with a strong signal, standard errors are larger for a Toeplitz than an equicorrelated covariance matrix.
Compared to the benchmark models, the proposed models are less (downward) biased and obtain coverage rates substantially closer to the nominal rate. In all settings under consideration, the methods proposed in this paper produce coverage rates that are closer to the nominal rates than the method of \citet{van2014asymptotically}. This can be explained by the large bias of the GBRD estimator in combination with small standard errors. The JM method produces coefficient estimates and standard errors that are both close to zero, which results in low coverage rates for the nonzero coefficients. \citet{javanmard2014confidence} present better results under the same choice for the tuning parameter. However, their simulation study considers a low-dimensional setting, where the number of variables does not exceed the number of observations. The method developed by \citet{lan2016testing} performs well for Toeplitz designs. We see only a minor bias in the coefficient estimates, but substantially larger standard errors compared to the methods proposed in this paper when the signal strength and/or the number of nonzero coefficients increase. For the equicorrelated design the coverage rates deteriorate and bias increases severely. Clearly this design does not satisfy the necessary conditions underlying the validity of CPS.
\subsubsection{Varying signal strength}
Since many economic processes can be characterized by a small number of large effects and a large number of small effects on the variable of interest, we now consider a setting in which the signal strength varies over the nonzero coefficients in the data generating process. Table \ref{tab: MCdiff} shows the Monte Carlo simulation results for this set of experiments for an equicorrelated and Toeplitz covariance matrix. The sparsity $s$ equals 15 and we randomly assign $b=10$ to three nonzero coefficients and $b=2$ to the 12 remaining nonzero coefficients.
\begin{table}[t!]
\caption{Monte Carlo simulation: Varying signal strength}
\centering \small
\begin{threeparttable}
\begin{tabular}{clcccccccc}
\toprule \toprule
& & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Equicorrelated} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Toeplitz} \\
\cmidrule(lr){3-6} \cmidrule(lr){7-10}
method & $b$ & \multicolumn{1}{c}{coef.} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{SE} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{CR} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{power} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{coef.} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{SE} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{CR} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{power} \\
\midrule
\multicolumn{1}{c}{MPI} & 10 & 0.94 & 0.31 & 0.93 & 0.84 & 0.92 & 0.34 & 0.91 & 0.75 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 2 & 0.18 & 0.31 & 0.95 & 0.09 & 0.17 & 0.34 & 0.94 & 0.09 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.31 & 0.95 & & 0.01 & 0.34 & 0.95 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{RLS} & 10 & 0.93 & 0.28 & 0.93 & 0.89 & 0.91 & 0.29 & 0.89 & 0.85 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 2 & 0.18 & 0.28 & 0.95 & 0.10 & 0.17 & 0.29 & 0.94 & 0.10 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.28 & 0.96 & & 0.01 & 0.29 & 0.95 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{RID} & 10 & 0.94 & 0.29 & 0.93 & 0.86 & 0.91 & 0.31 & 0.90 & 0.81 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 2 & 0.18 & 0.29 & 0.95 & 0.09 & 0.17 & 0.31 & 0.94 & 0.09 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.00 & 0.29 & 0.96 & & 0.01 & 0.31 & 0.95 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{3}[0]{*}{GBRD}} & 10 & 0.90 & 0.21 & 0.85 & 0.97 & 0.87 & 0.20 & 0.81 & 0.95 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 2 & 0.16 & 0.21 & 0.94 & 0.13 & 0.15 & 0.20 & 0.93 & 0.13 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.02 & 0.21 & 0.96 & & 0.02 & 0.20 & 0.96 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{3}[1]{*}{JM}} & 10 & 0.75 & 0.05 & 0.20 & 0.99 & 0.77 & 0.05 & 0.25 & 0.99 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 2 & 0.11 & 0.05 & 0.24 & 0.34 & 0.10 & 0.05 & 0.26 & 0.31 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.84 & & 0.03 & 0.05 & 0.92 & \\[+1mm]
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\multirow{2}[1]{*}{CPS}} & 10 & 1.76 & 0.36 & 0.43 & 1.00 & 0.98 & 0.65 & 0.95 & 0.34 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 2 & 1.09 & 0.40 & 0.39 & 0.78 & 0.19 & 0.74 & 0.95 & 0.06 \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & 0 & 0.93 & 0.41 & 0.37 & & -0.01 & 0.75 & 0.95 & 0.00 \\
\bottomrule \bottomrule
\end{tabular}%
\begin{tablenotes}
\footnotesize
\item Note: this table reports the results for Monte Carlo experiments with an equicorrelated and Toeplitz covariance matrix, where the nonzero coefficients of the regressors have different signal strengths. Three randomly chosen coefficients out of the 15 nonzero coefficients have signal strength $b=10$ and the remaining 12 coefficients $b=2$. For additional information, see the note following Table \ref{tab: MCequi}.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\label{tab: MCdiff}
\end{table}
In general, the findings for the proposed methods are similar to the settings discussed in the previous paragraph. The nonzero coefficients are estimated with some downward bias, which is larger in the Toeplitz setting relative to the equicorrelated covariance matrix. Estimates of coefficients that are zero in the data generating process are again estimated very close to zero. Although there is a large variation in signal strength, the standard errors are almost the same for coefficients of different strength and we find the same ranking in efficiency; random least squares produces the smallest standard errors, followed by the ridge regularized estimator.
The coverage rates for the zero coefficients are close to the nominal rate. The coverage rates for coefficients with a weak and moderately strong signal are slightly too low. The decrease in coverage rates holds especially for the Toeplitz setting, where standard errors are relatively larger, but also the bias increases relative to data generated from an equicorrelated covariance matrix.
We find that the power for coefficients with intermediate signal strength ($b=2$) is comparable to settings with a constant signal strength in Table \ref{tab: MCequi} and \ref{tab: MCtoep}. As expected, the power for the strong signals is much larger, varying between 0.75 and 0.86. In general, power increases for data generated from an equicorrelated covariance matrix relative to a Toeplitz.
Compared to the benchmark estimators, the proposed estimators show also superior performance in the settings with varying signal strength. The distance between the nominal coverage rate and the coverage rate attained by the methods GBRD and JM is in any case larger than for MPI, RLS, and RID. For the Toeplitz design, the coverage rate of CPS is excellent, but the standard errors are almost two times as large as for the competing methods.
\paragraph{Estimation of the noise level}
The validity of confidence intervals depends on a consistent estimator of the noise level $\sigma^2$. Appendix \ref{A: noise} shows for each setting of the Monte Carlo experiments a box plot of the estimated $\sigma^2$ in each replication. We find that the noise level estimated by scaled lasso can be strongly biased, especially in settings where the data is generated from a Toeplitz covariance matrix, where the lasso estimator results in estimates that are always within one standard deviation from the true value. Therefore, the results in Table \ref{tab: MCequi} and \ref{tab: MCtoep} are based on the estimator for the noise level $\sigma^2$ as defined in \eqref{eq: lassosigma}.
\subsubsection{Diagonally scaled Moore-Penrose inverse}
We are interested in the bounding the elements of $\frac{1}{n}MX-I$. In this section we start by taking $M = D^{MP} X'(XX')^{-1}$, which is the Moore-Penrose pseudo-inverse of $X$ scaled by a diagonal matrix
\begin{equation}
[D^{MP}]_{ii} = \left(\frac{1}{n}[X'(XX')^{-1}X]_{ii}\right)^{-1}
\end{equation}
The diagonal scaling ensures that the diagonal elements of $\frac{1}{n}MX-I$ are exactly zero. The Moore-Penrose pseudo-inverse has previously been used, without the diagonal scaling matrix, in \citet{wang2015high} to construct a variable screening technique, where $\beta$ is estimated as $\hat{\beta} = X'(XX')^{-1}X$. However, if $\Sigma\neq I$, the bounds on the diagonal elements established in \citet{wang2015high} can not be made sufficiently tight to ensure that the diagonal elements of $\frac{1}{n}X'\left(p^{-1}XX'\right)^{-1}X-I = O\left(\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}\right)$.
To circumvent the above problem, we apply the rescaling matrix $D^{MP}$ in order to ensure that the diagonal elements of $\frac{1}{n}MX -I$ are exactly zero, in which case we can prove the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:biasvanish} Define $D^{MP}_{ii} = \left(\left[\frac{1}{n}X'(XX')^{-1}X\right]_{ii}\right)^{-1}$ for $i=1,\ldots, n$, then we have
\begin{equation}
P\left(\left|\left[\frac{1}{n}D^{MP}X'(XX')^{-1}X - I\right]_{ij}\right|>a\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}\right) = O(p^{-\tilde{c}})
\end{equation}
with $\tilde{c}=a^2\frac{\frac{c_{p}}{c}-1}{c_{p}-\kappa}-2$ where $c = \frac{1+\epsilon}{1-\epsilon}$, $\kappa = \frac{\lambda_{\max}(\Sigma)}{\lambda_{\min}(\Sigma)}$ and $c_{p}<\frac{p}{n}$
\end{theorem}
This theorem ensure that the bias is small with high probability. In addition, we now need to show that the bias vanishes compared to the variance of the estimator for $\beta$. The following theorem guarantees that this is indeed the case under a wide class of distributions of the error term
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:finitevar} The variance of each estimated coefficient satisfies
\begin{equation}
\left[\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}D^{MP}X'(XX')\varepsilon\right]_{i} = O(1)
\end{equation}
Furthermore, if the errors $\varepsilon_{1},\ldots,\varepsilon_{n}$ are i.i.d$(0,\sigma^2)$ distributed with a subexponential norm of $K<\infty$, then as $n\rightarrow\infty$
\begin{equation}
\left[\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}DX'(XX')\varepsilon\right]_{i} \sim N\left(0,\sigma^2\frac{d_{i}^2}{n}e_{i}X'(XX')^{-2}Xe_{i}\right)
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\subsubsection{Diagonally scaled random least squares}
It is well known that the Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse can be a noisy estimator. Perhaps ironically, this is most problematic when $p$ approaches $n$, as the eigenvalues of $XX'$ do not concentrate as strongly, see section 5.5 of \citet{vershynin2010introduction}. In this case a regularization procedure can help to reduce the size of the confidence intervals.
We propose a new regularization procedure that is based on projecting the large regressor matrix $X$ onto a $k<p$ dimensional subspace by post-multiplying with a $p\times k$ matrix $R$ with normally and independently distributed elements. Alternatively, one could use ridge regression which provides similar guarantees under proper selection of the penalty parameter.
The idea behind the low-dimensional random projection is the following. Instead of considering the full DGP, we take
\begin{equation}
y^{*} = XR\gamma + u
\end{equation}
Least squares estimation of $\gamma$ conditional on $R$ yields
\begin{equation}
\hat{\gamma}_{R} = (R'X'XR)^{-1}R'X'y
\end{equation}
The vector $R\hat{\gamma}$ can considered as an estimator for $\beta$, which satisfies
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\hat{\beta} &= R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R'X'X\beta + R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R'X'\epsilon\\
&= \beta + [R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R'X'X-I]\beta + R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R'X'\epsilon\\
& = \beta + \left(\frac{1}{n}MX - I\right)\beta + \frac{1}{n}M\epsilon
\end{split}
\end{equation}
To minimize the bias, we again consider a diagonally scaled version of $M$ and use the lasso estimator to minimize the bias. Also, it is not optimal to rely on a single realization of $R$, so that we consider an ensemble average
\begin{equation}\label{eq:randproj}
\frac{1}{n}MX = D^{RLS}\text{E}_{R}[R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R'X'X]
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
[D^{RLS}]_{ii} = \left(\frac{1}{n}\left[\text{E}_{R}\left[R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R'X'X\right]\right]_{ii}\right)^{-1}
\end{equation}
The key to the behavior of the regularized inverse covariance matrix is the projection dimension $k$. We will show that if $k$ is sufficiently close to $n$, then the regularized inverse approximates the Moore-Penrose inverse. The results from the previous section can then be invoked to show that the bias of the estimator for $\beta$ remains small. However, to reduce the variance, we want to choose $k$ as small as possible. The following theorem suggests a choice of $k$.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:RLS} Define $\hat{\kappa} = \frac{{\lambda}_{\max}(\hat{\Lambda})}{{\lambda}_{\min\neq 0}(\hat{\Lambda})}$ If we choose
\begin{equation}
k = \left(1-\frac{a}{\hat{\kappa}}\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}\right)(n-1)
\end{equation}
then
\begin{equation}
P\left(\left|\left[\frac{1}{n}D^{RLS}\text{E}[R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R']X'X - I\right]_{ij}\right|>a\sqrt{\frac{\log p}{n}}\right) \leq p^{-\tilde{c}}
\end{equation}
with $\tilde{c}$ as in Theorem 1. Furthermore
\begin{equation}
\left[\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}D^{RLS}\text{E}[R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R']X'\varepsilon\right]_{i} = O(1)
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\paragraph{Approximate orthgonality of $R$} By drawing the entries of $R$ from a standard normal distribution, the columns and rows of $R$ are orthogonal with high probability. One might wonder if the lack of exact orthogonality in the columns of $R$ poses a problem. This is not the case. Consider the QR decomposition $R = QT$ where the columns of $Q$ is a $p\times k$ matrix with orthogonal columns, and $T$ is an invertible $k\times k$ matrix. Since $T$ is invertible, we have the following equality
\begin{equation}
\text{E}_{R}[R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R'X'X] = \text{E}_{Q}[Q(Q'X'XQ)^{-1}Q'X'X]
\end{equation}
From now on we therefore implicitly assume the columns of $R$ to be orthogonal.
\subsubsection{Power increase by regularization}
The following theorem indicates that the width of the confidence intervals for Random Least Squares is at most as large as the width of the confidence intervals under the Moore-Penrose inverse.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:power} For the choice of $k$ as in Theorem 3, we have for $d_{i} = D^{MP}_{ii}$ or $d_{i} = D^{RLS}_{ii}$
\begin{equation}\label{eq:th4}
\frac{d_{i}}{\sqrt{n}}\left|\left|e_{i}\text{E}\left[R(R'X'XR)^{-1}R'\right]X'\right|\right|_{2} - \frac{d_{i}}{\sqrt{n}}\left|\left|e_{i} X' (XX')^{-1} \right|\right|_{2} \leq 0
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
Note that using $D^{MP}$ for the Moore-Penrose inverse and $D^{RLS}$ for the random least squares estimator yields valid confidence intervals, but no ordering in terms of power can be analytically obtained. However, in most cases we have encountered, the inequality in Theorem 4 is satisfied in the majority of cases when using the diagonal matrix specific to the estimator under consideration.
\subsubsection{Diagonally scaled ridge adjustment}
Because of the well known relation between the generalized inverse and ridge adjusted covariance matrices displayed in \eqref{eq:ridgeMP}, intuition suggests that for a sufficiently small penalty parameter, the results under a Moore-Penrose inverse carry over to a ridge adjusted estimator. This is indeed the case under the penalty parameter as in Theorem~\ref{theorem:main}. A proof is provided in the Appendix.
|
\section{Introduction and Results}
Let $d\ge2$ be an integer. We consider a sequence of polynomials $(G_n)_{n=0}^{\infty}$ in $\C[x]$ satisfying the $d$-th order linear recurrence relation
\begin{equation}\label{relation}
G_{n+d}(x)=A_{d-1}(x)G_{n+d-1}(x)+\cdots+A_0(x)G_n(x), \quad n\in\N,
\end{equation}
\noindent determined by $A_0,A_1,\ldots,A_{d-1}\in \C[x]$ and initial terms $G_0,G_1,\ldots,G_{d-1}\in \C[x]$.
Let $\mathcal{G}\in \C(x)[T]$ be the characteristic polynomial of the sequence and let $\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_t$ be its distinct roots in the splitting field $L/\C(x)$ of $\mathcal{G}$, that is
\[
\mathcal{G}(T)=T^d-A_{d-1}T^{d-1}-\cdots - A_0=(T-\alpha_1)^{k_1}(T-\alpha_2)^{k_2}\cdots(T-\alpha_t)^{k_t},
\]
where $k_1,\ldots,k_t\in\NN$.
Then $G_n$ admits a representation of the form
\begin{align}
G_n(x)=\pi_1\alpha_1^n+\pi_2\alpha_2^n+\cdots+\pi_d\alpha_d^n,\label{binet}
\end{align}
where $\pi_i\in L[n]$ for $i=1, 2, \ldots, n$.
We say that the recurrence relation \eqref{relation} is \emph{minimal} if $(G_n)_{n=0}^{\infty}$ does not satisfy a recurrence relation with smaller $d$ and coefficients in $\C[x]$. We say that \eqref{relation} is \emph{non-degenerate} if $\alpha_i/\alpha_j\not\in \C^*$ for all $i\neq j$. Finally, we say that \eqref{relation} is \emph{simple} if $k_1=\cdots=k_t=1$; in this case the $\pi_i$'s lie in $L$. We also call the corresponding sequence $(G_n)_{n=0}^{\infty}$ minimal, non-degenerate and simple, respectively. In this paper, we will be concerned with second-order minimal non-degenerate simple linear recurrences.
Many Diophantine problems involving linear recurrence sequences have been studied in the literature. For example, a famous problem is to estimate the number of zeros appearing in such a sequence, and more generally, to bound the number of solutions $n\in\N$ of the equation $G_n(x)=a$, where $a\in L$ is given (cf. \cite{fp} and the papers cited therein). Also, several authors studied the problem of giving bounds on $m$ and $n$ such that $G_n(x)=cG_m(P(x))$, $c=c(n, m)$, where $(G_n)_{n=0}^\infty$ is a linear recurrence sequence and $P$ a fixed polynomial (cf. \cite{f04,fpt02,fpt,fpt08}).
In this paper, we focus on \emph{decomposable} polynomials in second order linear recurrence sequences. A polynomial $f\in \C[x]$ with $\deg f>1$ is said to be decomposable
if it can be written as the composition $f(x)=g(h(x))$ with $g,h\in \C[x]$ and $\deg g, \deg h>1$, and \emph{indecomposable} otherwise.
The possible ways of writing a polynomial as a composition of polynomials were studied by several authors, starting with Ritt in the 1920's in his classical paper~\cite{R22}.
Results in this area of mathematics have applications to various other fields, e.g.\@ number theory, complex analysis, arithmetic dynamics, finite geometries, etc.\@ For example, there are applications to Diophantine equations of type $f(x)=g(y)$. In 2000, Bilu and Tichy~\cite{BT00}, by building on the work of Siegel, Ritt, Fried and Schinzel,
classified the polynomials $f, g$ for which the equation $f(x)=g(y)$ has infinitely many solutions in $S$-integers $x, y$. It turns out that such $f$ and $g$ must be representable as a composition of polynomials in a certain prescribed way.
In this paper we show that if $(G_n)_{n=0}^{\infty}$ satisfies \eqref{relation} with $d=2$, under certain assumptions on $G_0, G_1, A_0$ and $A_1$, if $G_n(x)=g(h(x))$ and $h(x)$ is not of particular type, then $\deg g$ may be bounded by a constant independent of $n$, depending only on the sequence (more precisely, it depends only on the degrees of $G_0, G_1, A_0, A_1$).
To describe what we mean by $h$ being of particular type and to state our results, we introduce the following notions. We say that $f,g\in \C[x]$ are {\it equivalent} if there are linear $\ell_1, \ell_2\in \C[x]$ such that $f(x)=\ell_1(x)\circ g(x)\circ \ell_2(x)$. For $f \in \C[x]$, we say that $f$ is {\it cyclic} if it is equivalent to a polynomial $g$ with $g(x)=x^n$ for some $n>1$, and we say that $f$ is {\it dihedral} if it is equivalent to $T_n$ for some $n>2$, where $T_n$ is a Chebychev polynomial, defined by the functional equation $T_n(x+1/x)=x^n+1/x^n$. Cyclic and dihedral polynomials play an important role in Ritt's theory of polynomial decomposition, as will be explained in Section \ref{sec2}.
To see that at least some exceptional cases have to be taken into account, consider e.g.\@ the well-known family of Fibonacci polynomials $F_n$, defined by
\begin{equation}\label{fibo}
F_0(x)=0, \quad F_1(x)=1, \quad F_{n+2}(x)=x F_{n+1}(x)+F_{n}(x)\mbox{ for } n\in\N.
\end{equation}
It is easy to see that for all odd $n\ge 3$, $F_n$ is an even polynomial of degree $n-1$, and hence if $n\ge5$ is odd, $F_n(x)$ can be written as $F_n(x)=g(h(x))$,
where $h(x)=x^2$ and $\deg g=(n-1)/2$. Clearly, here the degree of $g$ cannot be bounded independently of $n$. In this case, $h$ is cyclic.
Also, for Chebyshev polynomials $T_n$, which satisfy the second order linear recurrence
\[
T_0(x)=1,\quad T_1(x)=x, \quad T_{n+2}(x)=2xT_{n+1}(x)-T_{n}(x)\mbox{ for } n\in\N,
\]
it is well-known that $T_{mn}=T_m\circ T_n$ for any $m, n\in \N$. Since $\deg T_n=n$, clearly one cannot bound $\deg g$ independently of $n$ assuming $T_n(x)=g(h(x))$ and $\deg h>1$. In this case, $h$ is dihedral.
There is a third, trivial situation where it is clearly not possible to bound the degree of $g$ independently of $n$ assuming $G_n=g\circ h$, namely when $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for every $m\in\N$. Consider for example the sequence $(F_n(h(x)))_{n=0}^\infty$, where $F_n$ is defined by \eqref{fibo} and $h\in \C[x]$. This sequence satisfies a second order linear recurrence relation and we clearly cannot bound $\deg F_n$ independently of $n$. It will be shown later that $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for all $m\in\N$ if and only if $G_0,G_1,A_0,A_1\in\C[h(x)]$, see Lemma \ref{newl}.
We now describe our strategy and results in detail. Let $(G_n)_{n=0}^\infty$ be a minimal non-degenerate simple second order linear recurrence sequence given by \eqref{relation} (with $d=2$). Assume that $G_n$ is decomposable for some $n\in \N$ and write $G_n(x)=g(h(x))$, where $h$ is indecomposable, and thus $\deg h\geq 2$. By Gauss's lemma it follows that the polynomial $h(X)-h(x)\in\C(h(x))[X]$ is irreducible and since $h'(X)\neq 0$, it is also separable (find details in Section~\ref{sec2}). Since $\deg h\geq 2$, there exists a root $y\neq x$ in its splitting field over $\C(h(x))$. Clearly, $h(x)=h(y)$.
As in \eqref{binet}, we have
\[
G_n(x)=\pi_1\alpha_1^n+\pi_2\alpha_2^n,
\]
where $\alpha_1, \alpha_2$ are distinct roots of the characteristic polynomial $\mathcal{G}_1(T)=T^2-A_{1}(x)T-A_0(x)$ in its splitting field $L_1/\C(x)$, and $\pi_1, \pi_2\in L_1$. Indeed, there is a representation of this form since by assumption the characteristic polynomial has no multiple roots. Observe that $\pi_i\alpha_i^n\neq0$ for all $n\in \N$ and $i=1,2$ by minimality.
Conjugating (in some fixed algebraic closure of $\C(x)$ containing $\alpha_1,\alpha_2$) over $\C(h(x))$ via $x\mapsto y$, we get a sequence $(G_n(y))_{n=0}^\infty$ with $G_n(y)\in\C[y]$, which satisfies the same minimal non-degenerate simple recurrence relation as $(G_n(x))_{n=0}^\infty$ with $x$ replaced by $y$. We conclude that
\[
G_n(y)=\rho_1\beta_1^n+\rho_2\beta_2^n,
\]
where $\beta_1, \beta_2$ are distinct roots of the characteristic polynomial $\mathcal{G}_2(T)=T^2-A_{1}(y)T^{d-1}-A_0(y)$ in its splitting field $L_2/\C(y)$, and $\rho_1,\rho_2\in L_2$. Again we have that $\rho_i\beta_i^n\neq 0$ for all $n\in\N$ and $i=1,2$. Since $h(x)=h(y)$, we get $G_n(x)=G_n(y)$, that is
\begin{equation}\label{sum}
\pi_1\alpha_1^n + \pi_2\alpha_2^n=\rho_1\beta_1^n+\rho_2\beta_2^n.
\end{equation}
We view this last equation as an $S$-unit equation in function fields and seek to apply a result of Brownawell and Masser (see Theorem \ref{bm} below) to bound the height of $G_n$ and consequently the degree of $g$. However, this theorem can be applied directly only to equations in which no proper subsum vanishes.
We will show in Section~\ref{sec5} that if $h$ is not cyclic, then equation \eqref{sum} has a proper vanishing subsum if and only if
\[
\pi_1\pi_2A_0(x)^n\in \C(h(x)).
\]
In particular, the existence of a proper vanishing subsum of \eqref{sum} does not depend on the choice of the conjugate $y$ of $x$ over $\C(h(x))$. Note that if $h$ is not cyclic and $A_0(x)=a_0\in \C$, $\pi_1\pi_2=\pi\in \C$, then there exists a vanishing subsum of \eqref{sum} and one cannot apply the theorem in question; for example, this is the case for Chebyshev polynomials $T_n$.
We now state our main result.
\begin{Th}\label{thm1}
Let $A_0, A_1, G_0, G_1\in \C[x]$ and $(G_n)_{n=0}^\infty$ be a sequence of polynomials defined by the minimal non-degenerate simple linear recurrence
\begin{equation}\label{equat}
G_{n+2}(x)=A_{1}(x)G_{n+1}(x)+A_0(x)G_n(x), \quad n\in\N.
\end{equation}
There is a positive real constant $C=C(\{A_i, G_i : i=1,2\})$ with the following property. If for some $n$ we have $G_n(x)=g(h(x))$, where $h$ is indecomposable and neither dihedral nor cyclic, and if \eqref{sum} has no proper vanishing subsum, then it holds that $\deg g\leq C$.
\end{Th}
We mention that the constant $C$ in Theorem~\ref{thm1} can be effectively computed; this is done in the proof of the theorem. Since the bound is not very illuminating, we have not stated it above. Also note that in the theorem the situation that $G_m(x)\in \C[h(x)]$ for all $m$ is not excluded explicitly. It will be shown (see Lemma~\ref{third}) that in this case either $h$ is cyclic or equation \eqref{sum} has a proper vanishing subsum.
Theorem~\ref{thm1} resembles a result of Zannier~\cite{Z07}, who showed that if $f$ is a polynomial with $\ell$ non-constant terms and $f(x)=g(h(x))$, where $h$ is not of type $ax^k+b$, $a\neq 0$, then $\deg g\leq 2\ell(\ell-1)$. Our proof, like Zannier's proof, involves applying Brownawell and Masser's theorem~\cite{BM86}. The application of this theorem in our proof requires a different approach and the technical details are more challenging. We remark that Zannier's result was one of the main ingredients of the proof of a conjecture of Schinzel ~\cite{Z08} by the same author, which states that for $f\in \C[x]$ with $\ell$ non-constant terms, satisfying $f=g\circ h$ for some $g, h\in \C[x]$, the number of terms of $h$ is bounded above by $B(\ell)$, where $B$ is an explicitly computable function. Zannier's result was then used in \cite{K15+, K15} to study Diophantine equations of type $f(x)=g(y)$, where $f$ and $g$ are arbitrary polynomials with a fixed number of non-constant terms, via the criterion of Bilu and Tichy. We remark that likewise, using our results, one may study Diophantine equations of this type where $f$ and/or $g$ are elements of a second order linear recurrence sequence of polynomials. We further mention that some special cases of the latter problem have already been studied in the literature, see \cite{DT01, kp}.
To detect cases when there does not exist a vanishing subsum of \eqref{sum}, we apply several tools. We follow a Galois-theoretic approach to decomposition questions, which originated in Ritt's work~\cite{R22}, and apply some recent results on polynomial decomposition from \cite{BWZ09} and \cite{ZM}. We show that the following holds.
\begin{Th}\label{main}
Let $A_0, A_1, G_0, G_1\in \C[x]$ and $(G_n)_{n=0}^\infty$ be a sequence of polynomials defined by the minimal non-degenerate simple linear recurrence
$$G_{n+2}(x)=A_{1}(x)G_{n+1}(x)+A_0(x)G_n(x), \quad n\in\N.$$
Assume that for some $n$ we have $G_n(x)=g(h(x))$, where $h$ is indecomposable.
If $h$ is neither dihedral nor cyclic, and it does not hold that $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for all $m\in\N$, then \eqref{sum} has no proper vanishing subsum if $A_0(x)$ is constant and any of the following holds:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[i)] $2G_1(x)=G_0(x)A_1(x)$, \textnormal{i.e}.\@ $\pi_1=\pi_2$,
\item[ii)] $G_1(x)=2A_0(x)+G_0(x)^2$, $G_0(x)=A_1(x)$,
\item[iii)] $G_1(x)=-2A_0(x)$, $G_0(x)=A_1(x)$.
\end{enumerate}
If $h$ is not cyclic, and it does not hold that $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for all $m\in\N$, then \eqref{sum} has no proper vanishing subsum if any of the following holds:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[i)] $\pi_1\pi_2=\pi A_0(x)^m$, for some $\pi \in \C$, $m\geq 0$ and $\deg A_0=1$,
\item[ii)] $\pi_1=\pi_2=\pi\in\C$ and either $\sqrt{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}\in \C[x]$ or \\$\deg A_0=1$,
\item[iii)] $G_1(x)=2A_0(x)+G_0(x)^2$, $G_0(x)=A_1(x)$ and \\either $\sqrt{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}\in \C[x]$ or $\deg A_0=1$,
\item[iv)] $G_1(x)=-2A_0(x)$, $G_0(x)=A_1(x)$ and \\either $\sqrt{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}\in\C[x]$ or $\deg A_0=1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{Th}
We mention that the condition $\sqrt{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}\in \C[x]$ means that the roots $\alpha_1,\alpha_2$ of the corresponding characteristic polynomial are in $\C[x]$. As clarified in the theorem, the condition $2G_1(x)=G_0(x)A_1(x)$ is equivalent to the condition $\pi_1=\pi_2$. Furthermore, we mention that if $G_0(x)=A_1(x)$, and either $G_1(x)=2A_0(x)+G_0(x)^2$ or $G_1(x)=-2A_0(x)$, then either $\pi_1=\alpha_1$ and $\pi_2=\alpha_2$, or $\pi_1=\alpha_2$ and $\pi_2=\alpha_1$ (see Lemma~\ref{lem1} and Lemma~\ref{lem2} for more details).
The paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{sec2} we shall collect some facts about polynomial decomposition; here Galois-theoretic arguments play an important role. In Section \ref{sec3} we collect auxiliary results concerning heights in function fields, state some well-known theorems from the literature, and prove three lemmas which will be used to prove our main results. In Section \ref{sec5} we give a proof of Theorem \ref{main} using results from the previous two sections. In Section \ref{sec4} we give a proof of Theorem \ref{thm1}. As already mentioned above, our proof of Theorem \ref{thm1} involves applying the theory of $S$-unit equations over function fields.
\section{Polynomial decomposition via Galois theory}\label{sec2}
Recall that a polynomial $f\in \C[x]$ with $\deg f>1$ is called \emph{indecomposable}
if it cannot be written as the composition $f(x)=g(h(x))$ with $g,h\in \C[x]$, $\deg g>1$ and $\deg h>1$. Otherwise, $f$ is said to be \emph{decomposable}. Any representation of $f$ as a functional composition of polynomials of degree $>1$ is said to be a \emph{decomposition} of $f$. A decomposition $f=f_1\circ f_2\circ \cdots\circ f_m$ of $f$ is said to be \emph{complete} if each $f_i$ is an indecomposable polynomial.
Note that if $\mu \in \C[x]$ is linear, then there exists $\mu^{\langle-1\rangle}\in \C[x]$ such that $(\mu \circ \mu^{\langle-1\rangle})(x)=(\mu^{\langle-1\rangle}\circ \mu)(x)=x$. Thus, $g\circ h=g\circ \mu \circ \mu^{\langle-1\rangle}\circ h$. By comparison of degrees one sees that no such polynomial exists when $\deg \mu>1$.
\begin{Def}\label{mon}
Given $f\in \C[X]$ with $\deg f>1$, the \emph{monodromy group} $\Mon(f)$ of $f$ is the Galois group of $f(X)-t$ over the field $\C(t)$, where $t$ is transcendental, viewed as a group of permutations of the roots of $f(X)-t$.
\end{Def}
A lot of information about the polynomial $f$ is encoded into its mono-dromy group. By Gauss's lemma it follows that $f(X)-t$ is irreducible over $\C(t)$, so $\Mon(f)$ is a transitive permutation group. Since $f'(X)\neq 0$, it follows that $f(X)-t$ is also separable. Let $x$ be a root of $f(X)-t$ in its splitting field $L$ over $\C(t)$. Then $t=f(x)$ and $\Mon(f)=\Gal(L/\C(f(x)))$ is viewed as a permutation group on the conjugates of $x$ over $\C(f(x))$.
L\"uroth's theorem (see \cite[p.\@~13]{S00}) states that for a field $K$ satisfying $\C\subset K\subseteq \C(x)$ we have $K=\C(h(x))$ for some $h\in \C(x)$. This theorem provides a dictionary between decompositions of $f\in \C[x]$ and fields between $\C(f(x))$ and $\C(x)$. Namely, if $f(x)=g(h(x))$, then $\C(f(x))\subseteq \C(h(x))\subseteq \C(x)$. On the other hand, if $K$ is a field between $\C(f(x))$ and $\C(x)$, by L\"uroth's theorem it follows that $K=\C(h(x))$ for some $h\in \C(x)$. Since $f$ is a polynomial, $h$ can be chosen to be a polynomial by \cite[p.~16]{S00}. Then $f=g(h(x))$ for some $g\in \C[x]$.
The fields between $\C(f(x))$ and $\C(x)$ clearly correspond to groups between the two associated Galois groups -- $\Gal(L/\C(f(x)))=\Mon(f)=:G$ and $\Gal(L/\C(x))=:H$ (the stabilizer of $x$ in $\Mon(f)$). In this way, the study of ways to represent a polynomial $f$ as a composition of lower degree polynomials reduces to a study of subgroups of the monodromy group of $f$, and more precisely to the study of groups between $H$ and $G$. Furthermore, it can be shown that $G$ has a transitive cyclic subgroup, that is that $G=HI$ for some cyclic group $I$ ($I$ can be chosen to be the inertia group at any place of the splitting field of $f(x)-t$ which lies over the infinite place of $\C(t)$); see also \cite[Lemma~3.4]{KZ14} or \cite[Lemma~3.3]{T95}. In this way, the study of ways to represent a complex polynomial $f$ as a composition of lower degree polynomials reduces to a study of subgroups of the cyclic group $I$.
The interested reader is referred to \cite{KZ14} and \cite{ZM} to find out more about the Galois-theoretic setup for addressing decomposition questions which originated in Ritt's work~\cite{R22}. Ritt~\cite{R22} showed that any complete decomposition of a complex polynomial $f$ can be obtained from any other through a sequence of steps, each of which involves replacing two adjacent indecomposables by two others with the same composition. He then solved the equation $a\circ b=c\circ d$ in indecomposable complex polynomials, showing that the only solutions, up to composing with linear polynomials, are the trivial one $a\circ b=a\circ b$ and the non-trivial solutions
\[
x^n\circ x^kh(x^n)=x^kh(x)^n\circ x^n \ \textnormal{ and }\
T_m(x)\circ T_n(x)=T_n(x)\circ T_m(x),
\]
where $h\in \C[x]$, $n, k, m\in \N$ and $T_n$ is the $n$-th Chebyshew polynomial defined in the introduction.
We now record two results on the topic that we will repeatedely use in the sequel.
\begin{Pro}\label{invar}
Pick $f\in \C[x]$ of degree $\deg f > 1$. For any two complete decompositions $f=f_1 \circ f_{2} \circ \cdots \circ f_m=g_1\circ \ g_{2} \circ \cdots \circ g_{n}$ of $f$,
we have that $m=n$ and $\textnormal{Mon} (f_i)\cong\textnormal{Mon} ( g_{\sigma(i)})$
for some permutation $\sigma$ of the set $\{1, 2, \ldots, m\}$ and for all $i=1, 2, \ldots, m$.
\end{Pro}
\begin{Pro}\label{cydih}
Pick $f\in \C[x]$ of degree $n > 1$. Then $ \Mon(f)$ is cyclic if and only if $f$ is cyclic, in which case $\abs{\Mon(f)}=n$. Likewise, if $n > 2$, then $ \Mon(f)$ is dihedral if and only if $f$ is dihedral, in which case $\abs{\Mon(f)} = 2n$.
\end{Pro}
Recall that for $f \in \C[x]$, we say that $f$ is cyclic if it is equivalent to $x^n$ for some $n>1$, and we say that $f$ is dihedral if it is equivalent to $T_n$ for some $n>2$. Proposition~\ref{invar} is Theorem~1.3 in \cite{ZM}. See also \cite[Thm.~5.1]{KZ14}. Proposition~\ref{cydih} is Lemma~3.6 in \cite{ZM}. See also Theorem~3.8 in \cite{B99}. We record the following corollary.
\begin{Le}\label{sequen}
Pick $f\in \C[x]$ with $\deg f>1$. If $f$ is dihedral, then for any complete decomposition of $f$ the collection of monodromy groups of the
indecomposable polynomials consists only of dihedral groups. Furthermore, if $f$ is cyclic, then for any complete decomposition of $f$ the collection of monodromy groups of the
indecomposable polynomials consists only of cyclic groups.
\end{Le}
\begin{proof}
By Proposition \ref{cydih}, it suffices to prove the statement in the cases $f(x)=T_m(x)$ and $f(x)=x^m$ for $m\in\N$, respectively.
Note that since $T_{mn}(x)=T_m(T_n(x))$ for any $m, n\in \N$ and $\Mon(f)$ is dihedral if and only if $f$ is dihedral, for any $m\in \N$ there exists a complete decomposition of $T_m(x)$ such that the collection of monodromy groups of the
indecomposable polynomials consists only of dihedral groups. By Proposition~\ref{invar}, for any complete decomposition of $T_m(x)$ the collection of monodromy groups of the
indecomposable polynomials consists only of dihedral groups. By the same argument, for any complete decomposition of $x^m$ the collection of monodromy groups of the
indecomposable polynomials consists only of cyclic groups.
\end{proof}
In the literature, quite often Ritt's and related results are expressed in terms of Dickson polynomials $D_n(x, a)$ (with parameter $a$), as they satisfy
\begin{equation}\label{dick}
D_n(2ax, a^2)=2a^nT_n(x),\ a\neq 0, \quad D_n(x, 0)=x^n.
\end{equation}
We refer to Turnwald's paper~\cite{T95} for various properties of Chebyshev and Dickson polynomials. We now list some that will be of importance to us in this paper.
\begin{Pro}\label{propd}
All of the following holds:
\begin{itemize}
\item $T_0(x)=1$, $T_1(x)=x$, $T_n(x)=2xT_{n-1}(x)-T_{n-2}(x)$, $n\geq 2$.
\item $D_0(x, a)=2$, $D_1(x, a)=x$, $D_n(x, a)=xD_{n-1}(x, a)-aD_{n-2}(x, a)$, $n\geq 2$.
\item $T_{mn}(x)=T_m(T_n(x))$ for any $m, n\in \N$.
\item $D_{mn}(x, a)=D_m(D_n(x, a), a^n)$ for any $m, n\in \N$.
\item $D_n(x, 0)=x^n$.
\item $D_n(x+a/x,a)=x^n+(a/x)^n$.
\item $D_n(x+y, xy)=x^n+y^n$.
\item Let $n\geq 2$ and let $\zeta_n\in \C$ be a primitive $n$-th root of unity. Put $\gamma_k=\zeta_n^k+\zeta_n^{-k}$ and $\delta_k=\zeta_n^k-\zeta_n^{-k}$ \textup{(}so that $\gamma_k^2-4=\delta_k^2$\textup{)}. Then
\end{itemize}
\[
D_n(x, a)-D_n(y,a)=(x-y) \prod_{k=1}^{(n-1)/2} (x^2-\gamma_kxy +y^2+\delta_k^2a),
\]
when $n$ is odd and
\[
D_n(x, a)-D_n(y,a)=(x-y)(x+y) \prod_{k=1}^{(n-2)/2} (x^2-\gamma_kxy +y^2+\delta_k^2a),
\]
when $n$ is even.
\end{Pro}
For the proof of Theorem \ref{main} we will also need the following result about polynomials with a common composite, which can be deduced from a result of Beals, Wetherell and Zieve~\cite[Thm.~5.1]{BWZ09}.
If $f_1, f_2\in \C[x]$ are non-constant polynomials for which there exist non-constant $u, v\in \C[x]$ such that $u(f_1(x))=v(f_2(x))$, then $f_1$ and $f_2$ are said to have a \emph{common composite}. `Most' pairs of complex polynomials have no common composite (this follows to the most part already from Ritt's results, see \cite{BWZ09} for the details). The following fact will be repeatedy used in our proof of Theorem~\ref{main}.
\begin{Pro}\label{indcor}
Suppose $f_1, f_2\in \C[x]$ satisfy $\deg f_1>1, \deg f_2>1$ and $f_2$ is indecomposable. Then $f_1$ and $f_2$ have a common composite if and only if there are linear polynomials $\ell_1, \ell_2, \ell_3\in \C[x]$ such that one of the following holds:
\begin{itemize}
\item $f_1(x)=\ell_1(x)\circ x^rP(x^n)\circ \ell_3(x)$ and $f_2(x)=\ell_2(x)\circ x^n\circ \ell_3(x)$, where $r, n>0$, $P\in \C[x]$, $\gcd(\deg f_1, \deg f_2)=1$ and $n$ is prime.
\item $f_1(x)=\ell_1(x)\circ x^n\circ \ell_3(x)$ and $f_2(x)=\ell_2(x)\circ x^rP(x^n)\circ \ell_3(x)$, where $r, n>0$, $P\in \C[x]$, $\gcd(\deg f_1, \deg f_2)=1$ and $x^rP(x^n)$ is indecomposable, so in particular $\gcd(r, n)=1$.
\item $f_1(x)=\ell_1(x)\circ D_m(x, \alpha) \circ \ell_3(x)$, $f_2(x)=\ell_2(x)\circ D_n(x, \alpha) \circ \ell_3(x)$, where $m, n>1$, $\alpha\in \C$, $\gcd(\deg f_1, \deg f_2)=1$ and $n$ is prime.
\item $f_1(x)\in \C[f_2(x)]$.
\end{itemize}
\end{Pro}
\section{Preliminaries and auxiliary results}\label{sec3}
Our strategy involves the use of height functions in function fields. In what follows, let $L$ be a finite extension of the rational function field $\C(x)$.
For $a\in \C$ define the valuation $\nu_a$ as follows. For $q(x)\in \C(x)$ let $q(x)=(x-a)^{\nu_a(q)}A(x)/B(x)$, where $A, B\in \C[x]$ and $A(a)B(a)\neq0$. Furthermore, denote by $\nu_{\infty}$ the (only) infinite valuation which is defined by $\nu_{\infty}(Q):=\deg B-\deg A$ for $Q(x)=A(x)/B(x)$, where $A, B\in \C[x]$. These are all (normalized) discrete valuations on $\C(x)$. All of them can be extended in at most $\left[L:\C(x)\right]$ ways to a discrete valuation on $L$ and again in this way one obtains all discrete valuations on $L$. Furthermore, for $f\in L^*$ the sum formula $\sum\limits{\nu(f)}=0$ holds, where the sum is taken over all discrete valuations on $L$. We just mention that there are different equivalent descriptions of the notion of discrete valuations as e.g. places or the rational points on a(ny) nonsingular complete curve over $\C$ with function field $L$.
Now, define the {\it projective height} $\mathcal{H}$ of $u_1,\ldots,u_n\in L/\C(x)$, where $n\ge 2$ and not all $u_i$ zero, via
\begin{align}
\mathcal{H}(u_1,\ldots,u_n)=-\sum\limits_{\nu}\min(\nu(u_1),\ldots,\nu(u_n)).
\end{align}
Also, for a single element $f\in L^*$, we set
\begin{align}
\mathcal{H}(f)=-\sum\limits_{\nu}\min(0,\nu(f)).
\end{align}
In both cases the sum is taken over all discrete valuations $\nu$ on $L$. Note that $\nu(f)\neq0$ only for a finite number of valuations $\nu$ and that $\HH(f)=\sum_{\nu}\max (0,\nu(f))$ if $f\in L^*$, by the sum formula. For $f=0$, we define $\HH(f)=\infty$. We call $a$ a {\it zero} of $f$ if $\nu_a(f)>0$ and a {\it pole} of $f$ if $\nu_a(f)<0$. We state some basic properties of the projective height.
\begin{Le} \label{propert}
Denote as above by $\mathcal{H}$ the projective height on $L/\C(x)$. Then for $f,g\in L^*$ the following properties hold:
\begin{center}
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\HH(f)\ge 0$ and $\HH(f)=\HH(1/f)$,
\item $\HH(f)-\HH(g)\le\mathcal{H}(f+g)\le \HH(f)+\HH(g)$,\label{plus}
\item $\HH(f)-\HH(g)\le\HH(fg)\le \HH(f)+\HH(g)$,\label{mult}
\item $\HH(f^n)=|n|\cdot\HH(f)$,
\item $\HH(f)=0\Leftrightarrow f\in \C^*$
\item $\HH(A(f))=\deg A\cdot \HH(f)$ for any $A\in \C[T]\backslash\left\{0\right\}$.\label{last}
\end{enumerate}
\end{center}
\end{Le}
\begin{proof}
$\HH(f)\ge 0$ clearly holds by definition.
To show that $\mathcal{H}(f+g)\le \HH(f)+\HH(g)$, note that $\min(0,\nu(f+g))\ge\min(0,\nu(f))+\min(0,\nu(g))$. Namely, if $\min(0,\nu(f+g))=0$, this clearly holds. Otherwise, by the definition of discrete valuations we have $\nu(f+g)\ge\min(\nu(f),\nu(g))$ and it follows that $\min(0,\nu(f+g))=\nu(f+g)\ge\min(0,\nu(f))+\min(0,\nu(g))$. Hence, $\HH(f+g)=-\sum_{\nu}\min(0,\nu(f+g))\le-\sum_{\nu}\min(0,\nu(f))-\sum_{\nu}\min(0,\nu(g))=\HH(f)+\HH(g)$.
Similarly, $\HH(fg)\le\HH(f)+\HH(g)$ follows from $\nu(fg)=\nu(f)+\nu(g)$.
We now show that $\HH(f)=\HH(1/f)$. Since $f\neq0$, clearly $\nu(f^{-1})=-\nu(f)$ and therefore we have $\min(0,\nu(f))=-\max(0,\nu(f^{-1}))$. By the sum formula it follows that $\HH(f)=-\sum_\nu{\min(0,\nu(f))}=\sum_\nu{\max(0,\nu(f^{-1}))}=-\sum_\nu{\min(0,\nu(f^{-1}))}=\HH(f^{-1})$.
Next we show that $\HH(f)-\HH(g)\le\mathcal{H}(fg)$. We have $\HH(f)=\HH(fgg^{-1})\le\HH(fg)+\HH(g^{-1})=\HH(fg)+\HH(g)$, so $\HH(fg)\ge \HH(f)-\HH(g)$. Analogously, one concludes $\HH(f+g)\ge\HH(f)-\HH(g)$.
For $n\in\NN_0$, the identity $\HH(f^n)=|n|\cdot\HH(f)$ follows immediately from the definition of discrete valuations. Since $\HH(f^n)=\HH(f^{-n})$, the statement also holds for negative integers $n$.
By \cite[Cor.~I.1.19, p.~8]{st}, any transcendental element $f\in L$ has at least one zero and one pole. So if $f$ is transcendental, there is a valuation $\nu$ on $L$ such that $\nu(f)<0$ and consequently $\HH(f)>0$. On the other hand, $\HH(f)=0$ for any $f\in \C^*$.
To see that ~\eqref{last} holds, observe that
by (\ref{plus}) and (\ref{mult}), it follows that if $a\in \C$, then $\HH(af)=\HH(f+a)=\HH(f)$. We argue by induction on $n=\deg A$. The statement holds for $n=0$ since in this case $\HH(A(f))=0=\deg A\cdot\HH(f)$. Also, if $n=1$, and say $A(T)=aT+b$ where $a,b\in \C$, then $\HH(A(f))=\HH(af+b)=\HH(f)=\deg A\cdot\HH(f)$.
Let us now assume that $\deg A=n+1$ and that the statement is true for lower-degree polynomials.
If $A(T)=aT^{n+1}+b$, with $a,b\in \C$, the claimed equality clearly holds. Otherwise, let $m>0$ be the unique integer such that $A(T)-A(0)=T^mA_1(T)$ and $A_1(T)\in \C[T]$ is such that $A_1(0)\neq 0$. Note that $\deg A_1=n+1-m$, so that we can apply the induction hypothesis to $A_1$. We claim that
\begin{align*}
\max(0,\nu(f^m)+\nu(A_1(f)))=\max(0,\nu(f^m))+\max(0,\nu(A_1(f))).
\end{align*}
Indeed, if $\nu(f^m)>0$ then $\nu(f)>0$, and by the strict triangle inequality for valuations it follows that $\nu(A_1(f))=0$ for $A_1(0)\neq 0$. On the other hand, if $\nu(f^m)<0$, and consequently $\nu(f)<0$, then (again by the strict triangle inequality) we have $\nu(A_1(f))<0$. So the claimed equality holds in any case. We conclude
\begin{align*}
\HH(A(f))&=\HH(A(f)-A(0))=\HH(f^mA_1(f))=\sum_\nu\max(0,\nu(f^mA_1(f)))\\
&=\sum_\nu\max(0,\nu(f^m)+\nu(A_1(f)))\\
&=\sum_\nu\left[\max(0,\nu(f^m))+\max(0,\nu(A_1(f)))\right]\\
&=\HH(f^m)+\HH(A_1(f))=m\cdot\HH(f)+(n+1-m)\cdot\HH(f)\\
&=\deg A\cdot\HH(f).
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
We use the following result due to Brownawell and Masser taken from \cite{fz} (more precisely, this is a direct consequence of \cite[Thm.~B and Cor.~1]{BM86}), which gives an upper bound for the height of $S$-units, which arise as a solution of certain $S$-unit-equations. Recall that for a set $S$ of discrete valuations, we call an element of $L$ an $S${\it-unit}, if it has poles and zeros only at places in $S$, or equivalently, the set of $S$-units in $L$ is
\[
\mathcal{O}_S^*=\{f\in L: \nu(f)=0\mbox{ for all }\nu\notin S\}.
\]
\begin{Th}[Brownawell-Masser] \label{bm}
Let $F/\C$ be a function field of one variable of genus $\g$. Moreover, let $u_1,\ldots, u_n$ be not all constant $S$-units for a finite set $S$ of discrete valuations, and
$$1+u_1+u_2+\ldots +u_n=0,$$
where no proper subsum of the left side vanishes. Then it holds
\begin{align}
\max\limits_{i=1,\ldots,n}\HH(u_i)\le\frac{1}{2}(n-1)(n-2)(|S|+2\g-2).
\end{align}
\end{Th}
Furthermore, we use the following classical estimates for the genus of a compositum of function fields, which are taken from \cite[p.~130, p.~132]{st}.
\begin{Th}[Castelnuovo's Inequality]\label{castelnuovo}
Let $F/\C$ be a function field of one variable of genus $\g$. Suppose there are given two subfields $F_1/\C$ and $F_2/\C$ of $F/\C$ satisfying
\begin{enumerate}
\item $F=F_1F_2$ is the compositum of $F_1$ and $F_2$.
\item $\left[F:F_i\right]=n_i$, and $F_i/\C$ has genus $\g_i$ \textup{(}$i=1,2$\textup{)}.
\end{enumerate}
Then we have
\[
\g\le n_1\g_1+n_2\g_2+(n_1-1)(n_2-1).
\]
\end{Th}
\begin{Th}[Riemann's Inequality]\label{riemann}
Suppose that $F=\C(x,y)$. Then we have the following estimate for the genus $\g$ of $F/\C$:
\[
\g\le([F:\C(x)]-1)([F:\C(y)]-1).
\]
\end{Th}
\begin{comment}
Fried~\cite{F70} showed the following theorem.
\begin{Th}\label{Fried1}
Let $h\in \C[x]$ be a polynomial with $\deg h\geq 3$. The following assertions are equivalent.
\begin{itemize}
\item[i)] $H(x, y)=(h(x)-h(y))/(x-y)$ is reducible over $\C$.
\item[ii)] Either $h(x)$ is decomposable, or $h(x)=e_1 D_n(c_1x+c_0, \alpha)+e_0$, $n>3$ is a prime and $e_i, c_i,\alpha\in \C$, or $h(x)=e_1 D_3(c_1x+c_0,0)+e_0=e_1(c_1x+c_0)^3+e_0$ and $e_i, c_i\in \C$, where $D_n(x, a)$ is the Dickson polynomial of degree $n$ with parameter $a$, defined by \eqref{dick}.
\end{itemize}
\end{Th}
\end{comment}
We now prove three lemmas that we will need in the proofs of our main results.
\begin{Le}\label{extdeg}
Let $h\in \C[x]$ be indecomposable and let $y\neq x$ be a root of $h(X)-h(x)\in\C(x)[X]$. If $h$ is neither cyclic nor dihedral, then \[[\C(x,y):\C(x)]\ge\frac{1}{2}\deg h.\]
\end{Le}
\begin{proof}
We set $d=[\C(x,y):\C(x)]$. Then $d$ is the degree of a minimal polynomial $\tilde{H}(Y)\in \C(x)[Y]$ of $y$ over $\C(x)$. Let $H(X,Y)=(h(X)-h(Y))/(X-Y)\in \C[X,Y]$. Then $H(x,Y)\in \C(x)[Y]$ is a polynomial in $Y$ for which $H(x,y)=0$ holds. It follows that $\tilde{H}(Y)$ divides $H(x,Y)$.
If $H_1(X,Y)\in \C[X,Y]$ is any irreducible polynomial such that $H_1(x,y)=0$, then $H_1(X,Y)|H(X,Y)$. Then the highest homogeneous part of $H_1(X,Y)$ divides the highest homogeneous part of $H(X,Y)$, which is a constant multiple of
\[
\frac{X^{\deg h}-Y^{\deg h}}{X-Y}=X^{\deg h-1}+X^{\deg h-2}Y+\cdots+XY^{\deg h-2}+Y^{\deg h-1}.
\]
Therefore, it follows $\deg H_1=\deg_X H_1=\deg_YH_1=d$. This argument can be found in the proof of \cite[Lemma\@~3]{Z07}.
Since $h$ is neither cyclic nor dihedral, if $\deg h\ge 3$, according to Fried~\cite{F70} it follows that $H(X,Y)=(h(X)-h(Y))/(X-Y)\in \C[X,Y]$ is irreducible. (See also Turnwald's paper~\cite[Thm.~4.5]{T95} for a detailed exposition of Fried's proof.) Then $H$ is a constant multiple of $H_1$ and we conclude
\[
\deg h-1=\deg H=\deg H_1=\deg_{Y}H_1=d.
\]
Thus, $[\C(x,y):\C(x)]=\deg h-1\ge\deg h/2$. If $\deg h=2$, we clearly have $[\C(x,y):\C(x)]\ge 1=\deg h/2$.
\end{proof}
\begin{Le}\label{either}
Let $h\in \C[x]$ be indecomposable and let $y\neq x$ be a root of $h(X)-h(x)\in\C(x)[X]$. Then either $\C(x)\cap\C(y)=\C(x)$ and $h$ is cyclic or $\C(x)\cap\C(y)=\C(h(x))$.
\end{Le}
\begin{proof}
By assumption, $h(x)=h(y)$.
Note that thus $\C(h(x))\subseteq \C(x)\cap \C(y)\subseteq \C(x)$.
By L\"uroth's theorem (see \cite[p.\@~13]{S00}) it follows that $\C(x)\cap \C(y)=\C(r(x))$ for some $r\in \C(x)$. Moreover, since $h$ is a polynomial, $r$ can be chosen to be a polynomial as well by \cite[p.~16]{S00}. Assume henceforth $r\in \C[x]$. Then $h(x)\in \C[r(x)]$. Since $h$ is indecomposable, it follows that either $\deg r=\deg h$ or $\deg r=1$, i.e.\@ that either $\C(x)\cap \C(y)=\C(h(x))$ or $\C(x)\cap \C(y)=\C(x)$. Note that if $\C(x)\cap \C(y)=\C(x)$, then $\nu(y)=x$ for some $\nu\in \C(x)$. Furthermore, clearly $h(\nu(y))=h(x)=h(y)$. We deduce that $\nu\in \C[x]$.
Let $\Aut(h)$ denote the group of linear polynomials $\ell\in \C[x]$ such that $h\circ \ell=h$.
It follows that $\nu\in \Aut(h)$ and since $\nu(y)=x \neq y$, it follows that $\Aut(h)$ is a non-trivial group. Recall that $h$ is by assumption indecomposable. We now show that $\Mon(h)$ is cyclic, and hence that $h$ is cyclic. This has been shown in Remark 2.14 in \cite{ZM}, as well as in Corollary 6.6 in \cite{KZ14}. For the sake of completeness we recall the proof.
First recall from Section~\ref{sec2} that if $L$ is the splitting field of $h(X)-t$ over $\C(t)$ and $x$ is such that $h(x)=t$, then $G:=\Mon(h)=\Gal(L/\C(h(x)))$, and if we set $H=\Gal(L/\C(x))$, then $G=HI$ for some cyclic group $I$. Now note that $\Aut(h)\cong N_G(H)/H$. Since $h$ is indecomposable, there are no intermediate fields between $\C(h(x))$ and $\C(x)$, and thus no proper subgroups between $H$ and $G$, so either $N_G(H) = G$ or $N_G(H) = H$. In the latter case, $\Aut(h)$ is trivial, a contradiction. Thus $H\unlhd G$. Since $H$ contains no nontrivial normal
subgroups of $G$ (because $L$ is the normal closure of $\C(x)/\C(h(x))$), we must
have $H = 1$, and $G=HI=I$, so $G$ is cyclic. By Proposition~\ref{cydih} it follows that $h$ is cyclic.
\end{proof}
\begin{Le}\label{ours}
Let $h\in \C[x]$ be indecomposable and let $y\neq x$ be a root of \mbox{$h(X)-h(x)$}$\in\C(x)[X]$. Then the following hold.
\begin{enumerate}
\item For $q\in \C[h(x)]$ we have $q(x)=q(y)$. Furthermore, if $h$ is not cyclic and $q(x)=q(y)$ for some $q\in \C[x]$, then $q\in \C[h(x)]$.
\item Let $d:=\left[\C(x,y):\C(x)\right]$. Then $d\le\deg h-1$.
\item The genus of the function field $\C(x,y)$ \textup{(}over $\C$\textup{)} is not greater than $(d-1)(d-2)/2$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{Le}
Zannier~\cite[Lemma~3]{Z07} showed that for an arbitrary $h\in \C[x]$ with $\deg h\ge1$, there exists a conjugate $y$ of $x$ over $\C(h(x))$ with the above properties: (1) then states that for $q\in \C[x]$, we have $q(x)=q(y)$ if and only if $q\in \C[h(x)]$, while (2) and (3) are the same as above. Note that in Lemma~\ref{ours}, we put some conditions on $h$, but $y$ is an arbitrary conjugate of $x$ (such that $y\neq x$).
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma~\ref{ours}] The first statement follows from $h(x)=h(y)$.
Assume now that $h$ is not cyclic and that $q(x)=q(y)$ for some $q\in \C[x]$. By Lemma~\ref{either} it follows that $\C(x)\cap\C(y)=\C(h(x))$. Since $q(x)=q(y)$, it follows that $q(x)\in \C(x)\cap\C(y)=\C(h(x))$. Furthermore, since $h, q\in \C[x]$, we have $q(x)\in \C[h(x)]$. This completes the proof of (1). We prove the other two statements completely analogously to the proof of Lemma~3 from \cite{Z07}. By setting $H(X, Y):=(h(X)-h(Y)/(X-Y)$ we have $H(x, y)=0$. Then (2) follows from $\deg_Y H\leq \deg H=\deg h-1$. If $H_1(X,Y)\in \C[X,Y]$ is any irreducible polynomial such that $H_1(x,y)=0$, then one shows by the same argument as in the proof of Lemma~\ref{extdeg} that $\deg H_1=\deg_X H_1=\deg_YH_1=d$. Then (3) is a consequence of the fact that the genus of a plane curve of degree $\leq d$ is bounded by $(d-1)(d-2)/2$.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{main}}\label{sec5}
In this section we prove Theorem \ref{main} using results from the previous two sections. Recall that $A_0, A_1, G_0, G_1\in \C[x]$ and $(G_n)_{n=0}^\infty$ is a sequence of polynomials defined by the minimal non-degenerate simple linear recurrence
$$G_{n+2}(x)=A_{1}(x)G_{n+1}(x)+A_0(x)G_n(x), \quad n\in\N.$$
We are assuming that for some $n$ we have $G_n=g\circ h$, where $h$ is indecomposable, and that $x$ and $y$, which define equation~\ref{sum}, are such that $h(x)=h(y)$ and $x\neq y$. We will use this notation throughout this section. In this notation, we have the following characterization of the existence of a proper vanishing subsum of \eqref{sum} in the case when $\C(x)\cap \C(y)=\C(h(x))$. Note that by Lemma~\ref{either}, either this holds or $h$ is cyclic.
\begin{Le}\label{lemma}
If $\C(x)\cap \C(y)=\C(h(x))$, then there exists a proper vanishing subsum of \eqref{sum} if and only if $\pi_1\pi_2A_0(x)^n\in \C(h(x))$.
\end{Le}
Note that we have $\alpha_1+\alpha_2=A_1(x)$ and $\alpha_1\alpha_2=-A_0(x)$ by Vieta's formulae. Clearly, $G_0(x)=\pi_1+\pi_2$ and $G_1(x)=\pi_1\alpha_1+\pi_2\alpha_2$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{pis}
\pi_1=\frac{G_1(x)-\alpha_2G_0(x)}{\alpha_1-\alpha_2}, \quad \pi_2=-\frac{G_1(x)-\alpha_1G_0(x)}{\alpha_1-\alpha_2},
\end{equation}
and hence
\begin{equation}\label{productpi}
\pi_1\pi_2=-\frac{G_1(x)^2-G_0(x)G_1(x)A_1(x)-A_0(x)G_0(x)^2}{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}\in \C(x).
\end{equation}
Analogously,
\begin{equation}\label{productrho}
\rho_1\rho_2=-\frac{G_1(y)^2-G_0(y)G_1(y)A_1(y)-A_0(y)G_0(y)^2}{A_1(y)^2+4A_0(y)}\in \C(y).
\end{equation}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma}]
There exists a proper vanishing subsum of \eqref{sum} if and only if there exists a permutation $\sigma$ of the set $\{1, 2\}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{perm}
\pi_i\alpha_i^n=\rho_{\sigma(i)}\beta_{\sigma(i)}^n
\end{equation}
for $i=1, 2$. If there exists such a permutation, then in particular we have $\pi_1\pi_2 A_0(x)^n=\rho_1\rho_2A_0(y)^n$,
by Vieta's formulae.
Since $\pi_1\pi_2\in \C(x)$ and $A_0(x)\in \C(x)$ we have that $\pi_1\pi_2A_0(x)^n\in \C(x)$. Analogously $\rho_1\rho_2A_0(y)^n\in \C(y)$, so
$\pi_1\pi_2A_0(x)^n\in \C(x)\cap \C(y)=\C(h(x))$.
Assume now that $\pi_1\pi_2A_0(x)^n\in \C(h(x))$, so that $\pi_1\pi_2A_0(x)^n=p(h(x))$ for some $p\in \C(x)$. Then analogously $\rho_1\rho_2A_0(y)^n=p(h(y))$ and since $h(x)=h(y)$ we get $\pi_1\pi_2A_0(x)^n=\rho_1\rho_2A_0(y)^n$.
Since $G_n(x)=G_n(y)$ it follows that
\[
G_n(x)^2-4\pi_1\pi_2(-A_0(x))^n=G_n(y)^2-4\rho_1\rho_2(-A_0(y))^n,
\]
and hence
\[
\pi_1\alpha_1^n-\pi_2\alpha_2^n=\pm(\rho_1\beta_1^n-\rho_2\beta_2^n).
\]
Thus, there exists a proper vanishing subsum of \eqref{sum}.
\end{proof}
Note that by Lemma~\ref{either} and Lemma~\ref{lemma} it follows that if $A_0(x)=a_0\in \C$ and
\[
\pi_1\pi_2=-\frac{G_1(x)^2-G_0(x)G_1(x)A_1(x)-A_0(x)G_0(x)^2}{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}=\pi\in \C,
\]
then either $h$ is cyclic or there exists a proper vanishing subsum of \eqref{sum}. On the other hand, we have the following.
\begin{Le}\label{lem0}
If $\pi_1\pi_2=\pi A_0(x)^m$ for some $m\geq 0$, $\pi\in \C$ and $\deg A_0=1$, then either $h$ is cyclic or there does not exist a proper vanishing subsum of \eqref{sum}.
\end{Le}
\begin{proof}
By $\pi_1\pi_2=\pi A_0(x)^m$ and by Lemma~\ref{either} and Lemma~\ref{lemma}, it follows that if there exists a proper vanishing subsum of \eqref{sum}, then either $h$ is cyclic or $A_0(x)^{m+n}\in \C[h(x)]$. Assuming the latter, by Lemma~\ref{ours} we have $A_0(x)=\zeta A_0(y)$ for some $(m+n)$-th root of unity $\zeta$. Then $A_0(x)\in \C(x)\cap \C(y)=\C(h(x))$. Since $\deg A_0=1$ and $\deg h\geq 2$, we have a contradiction.
\end{proof}
In Theorem~\ref{main} we are assuming that we do not have $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for all $m\in\N$. We have the following characterization of this situation.
\begin{Le}\label{newl}
We have that $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for all $m\in\N$ if and only if $G_0,G_1,A_0,A_1\in \C[h(x)]$.
\end{Le}
\begin{proof}
Note that if $G_0,G_1,A_0,A_1\in \C[h(x)]$ for some polynomial $h\in\C[x]$, then by the recurrence relation it follows that $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for every $m\in\N$.
Conversely, assume that $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for all $m\in\N$. If $G_0,G_1,G_2,G_3$ (or any four consecutive elements of the sequence) satisfy $G_1^2-G_0G_2\neq 0$, then the linear system $G_2=A_1G_1+A_0G_0,G_3=A_1G_2+A_0G_1$ shows that
\[
A_0=\frac{G_1G_3-G_2^2}{G_1^2-G_0G_2},\quad A_1=\frac{G_1G_2-G_0G_3}{G_1^2-G_0G_2}
\]
and hence $A_0(x),A_1(x)$ are in $\C(h(x))\cap\C[x]=\C[h(x)]$ (the last equality follows immediately by integrality).
Since $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for all $m\in\N$ it cannot always hold that $G_{m+1}^2=G_mG_{m+2}$ because in this case a short calculation shows that
\[
G_{m+1}=\left(A_1\pm\sqrt{A_1^2+4A_0}\right)G_m/2,
\]
contradicting the assumption that $(G_n)_{n=0}^\infty$ is a second order linear recurrence (observe that in this case necessarily $\sqrt{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}\in\C[x]$).
\end{proof}
\begin{Le}\label{third}If $h$ is not cyclic and if $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for all $m\in\N$, then \eqref{sum} has a proper vanishing subsum.
\end{Le}
\begin{proof}
Since $h$ is not cyclic, by Lemma \ref{either} it follows that $C(x)\cap\C(y)=\C(h(x))$. Assume that $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for all $m\in\N$. Then by Lemma~\ref{newl} it follows that $G_0(x), G_1(x), A_0(x), A_1(x)\in\C[h(x)]$. From \eqref{productpi} we conclude that $\pi_1\pi_2\in\C(h(x))$ and hence $\pi_1\pi_2A_0(x)^n\in\C(h(x))$. By Lemma \ref{lemma} it follows that \eqref{sum} has a proper vanishing subsum.
\end{proof}
We complete a proof of Theorem~\ref{main} with the help of two lemmas. First note that by \eqref{pis} it follows that $\pi_1=\pi_2$ if and only if $2G_1(x)=G_0(x)A_1(x)$.
\begin{Le}\label{lem1}
If $h$ is neither dihedral nor cyclic, and it does not hold that $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for all $m$,
then \eqref{sum} has no proper vanishing subsum if $A_0(x)$ is constant and $2G_1(x)=G_0(x)A_1(x)$, i.e.\@ $\pi_1=\pi_2$.
Furthermore, if $h$ is not cyclic, and it does not hold that $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for all $m$, then \eqref{sum} has no proper vanishing subsum if $\pi_1=\pi_2=\pi\in \C$ and either $\deg A_0=1$ or $\sqrt{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}\in \C[x]$.
\end{Le}
\begin{proof}
Assume that $h$ is not cyclic, and it does not hold that $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for all $m$, and that there exists a proper vanishing subsum of \eqref{sum}. Recall that by Lemma~\ref{either} and Lemma~\ref{lemma} it follows that $\pi_1\pi_2A_0(x)^n\in \C(h(x))$.
Assume first that $A_0(x)=a_0\in \C$ and $\pi_1=\pi_2=:\pi$. Then $G_0(x)=2\pi$ and since $A_0(x)=a_0\in \C$, it follows that
\[
\pi_1\pi_2A_0(x)^n=\frac{a_0^nG_0(x)^2}{4}\in \C(h(x)),
\]
and hence $G_0(x)^2\in \C(h(x))$. Then $G_0(x)^2=G_0(y)^2$ by Lemma~\ref{ours}, so $G_0(x)= \pm G_0(y)$. Thus, $G_0(x)\in \C(x)\cap \C(y)=\C(h(x))$. Moreover, $G_0(x)\in \C(h(x))\cap\C[x]=\C[h(x)]$.
Furthermore, by Proposition~\ref{propd} we have
\[
\quad G_n(x)=\pi (\alpha_1^n+\alpha_2^n) =\frac{1}{2}G_0(x)D_n(A_1(x), -a_0)\in \C[h(x)].
\]
Since $G_0(x)\in \C[h(x)]$,
it follows that $D_n(A_1(x), -a_0)\in \C[h(x)]$.
Observe that $\deg A_1>1$. Namely, if $A_1(x)=a_1\in\C$, since $G_0(x)\in \C[h(x)]$ it follows that for any $m\in\N$ we have that
\[
G_m(x)=\frac{1}{2}G_0(x)D_m(a_1,-a_0)\in\C[h(x)],
\]
a contradiction with the assumption. If $\deg A_1=1$, we have
\[G_n(x)=\frac{1}{2}G_0(x)D_n(A_1(x),-a_0).\]
Since $G_n(x),\ G_0(x)\in\C[h(x)]$, it follows that
\[
D_n(A_1(x),-a_0)\in\C(h(x))\cap\C[x]=\C[h(x)].
\]
Obviously, $D_n(A_1(x),-a_0)$ is equivalent to $D_n(x,-a_0)$, which is either cyclic or dihedral. By Lemma \ref{sequen}, Proposition \ref{invar} and Proposition \ref{cydih} it follows that $h$ is either cyclic or dihedral, a contradiction with the assumption.
We conclude that $\deg A_1,\deg h>1$ and $A_1$ and $h$ have a common composite.
We now use Proposition \ref{indcor}. If $A_1(x)\in \C[h(x)]$, since $G_0(x)\in \C[h(x)]$ it follows that for any $m\in \N$ we have
\[
G_m(x)=\frac{1}{2}G_0(x)D_m(A_1(x), -a_0)\in \C[h(x)],
\]
a contradiction with the assumption.
Assume thus that $A_1(x)\notin \C[h(x)]$. By Proposition \ref{indcor}, since $h$ is neither cyclic nor dihedral it follows that
\[
h(x)=\ell_2(x)\circ x^rP(x^s)\circ \ell_3(x), \quad A_1(x)=\ell_1(x)\circ x^s\circ \ell_3(x)
\]
for some linear polynomials $\ell_1, \ell_2, \ell_3\in \C[x]$ and $s, r\in \N$, $s\ge2$. In particular, $A_1$ is cyclic. By Proposition~\ref{invar} and Lemma~\ref{sequen} it follows that the collection of monodromy groups in any complete decomposition of $D_n(A_1(x), -a_0)$ consists only of cyclic or dihedral groups. Since $D_n(A_1(x), -a_0)\in \C[h(x)]$, by Proposition~\ref{cydih} it follows that $h$ is either cyclic or dihedral, a contradiction.
We now prove the second statement. Assume that $\pi_1=\pi_2=\pi\in \C$ and either $\deg A_0=1$ or $\sqrt{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}\in \C[x]$. Then
\[
G_0(x)=2\pi, \quad G_{m}(x)=\pi D_{m}(A_1(x), -A_0(x))\quad\text{for }m\in\N.
\]
Recall that by Lemma~\ref{either} and Lemma~\ref{lemma} it again follows that
\[
\pi_1\pi_2A_0(x)^n=\pi^2A_0(x)^n\in \C(h(x))\cap \C[x]=\C[h(x)].
\]
It follows that $A_0(x)^n\in \C[h(x)]$ and thus $A_0(x)^n=A_0(y)^n$ by Lemma~\ref{ours}. Then $A_0(x)=\zeta A_0(y)$ for some $n$-th root of unity $\zeta$, so $A_0(x)\in \C(x)\cap \C(y)=\C(h(x))$, and moreover $A_0(x)\in \C[h(x)]$. In particular, $A_0(x)=A_0(y)$. If $\deg A_0=1$ we have a contradiction since $\deg h\geq 2$.
Thus
$\sqrt{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}\in \C[x]$.
Since
\[
D_n(A_1(x), -A_0(x))=\frac{1}{\pi}G_n(x)\in \C[h(x)],
\]
by Lemma~\ref{ours} we have
\[
D_n(A_1(x), -A_0(x))=D_n(A_1(y), -A_0(y)).
\]
Since $A_0(x)=A_0(y)$ we further get
\[
D_n(A_1(x), -A_0(x))=D_n(A_1(y), -A_0(x)).
\]
Using Proposition \ref{propd} we get that either $A_1(x)=\pm A_1(y)$ or
\begin{equation}\label{gamdel}
A_1(x)^2-\gamma_kA_1(x)A_1(y)+A_1(y)^2-\delta_k^2A_0(x)=0,
\end{equation}
for $\gamma_k,\delta_k\in \C$ given in the proposition.
If $A_1(x)=\pm A_1(y)$, then we have $A_1(x)\in \C(x)\cap \C(y)=\C(h(x))$. Then clearly $A_1(x)\in \C[(h(x)]$. Since also $A_0(x)\in \C[h(x)]$ we have that for any $m$
\[
G_m(x)=\pi D_{m}(A_1(x), -A_0(x))\in \C[h(x)],
\]
a contradiction with the assumption.
Thus we get that \eqref{gamdel} holds. A short calculation shows that
\[
A_1(x)=\frac{\gamma_kA_1(y)\pm \delta_k\sqrt{A_1(y)^2+4A_0(y)}}{2}.
\]
Since $\sqrt{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}\in \C[x]$, we have that $A_1(x)\in \C(x)\cap \C(y)=\C(h(x))$. Moreover, $A_1(x)\in \C[h(x)]$. Then $A_1(x)=A_1(y)$, a contradiction with the assumption
\end{proof}
\begin{Le}\label{lem2}
If $h$ is neither dihedral nor cyclic, and it does not hold that $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for all $m$, then \eqref{sum} has no proper vanishing subsum if $A_0(x)$ is constant, $G_0(x)=A_1(x)$, and either $G_1(x)=2A_0(x)+G_0(x)^2$ or $G_1(x)=-2A_0(x)$.
Furthermore, if $h$ is not cyclic, and it does not hold that $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for all $m$, then \eqref{sum} has no proper vanishing subsum if $G_0(x)=A_1(x)$ and any of the following holds:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[i)] $G_1(x)=2A_0(x)+G_0(x)^2$, and \\ either $\sqrt{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}\in \C[x]$ or $\deg A_0=1$,
\item[ii)] $G_1(x)=-2A_0(x)$, and \\ either $\sqrt{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}\in\C[x]$ or $\deg A_0=1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{Le}
\begin{proof}
Assume that $h$ is not cyclic, and it does not hold that $G_m(x)\in\C[h(x)]$ for all $m$, and that there exists a proper vanishing subsum of \eqref{sum}. Recall that by Lemma~\ref{either} and Lemma~\ref{lemma} it follows that $\pi_1\pi_2A_0(x)^n\in \C(h(x))$.
Assume further that $G_0(x)=A_1(x)$, and either $G_1(x)=2A_0(x)+G_0(x)^2$ or $G_1(x)=-2A_0(x)$. Then
\begin{align*}
\pi_1+\pi_2&=G_0(x)=A_1(x)=\alpha_1+\alpha_2\\
\pi_1\pi_2&=-\frac{G_1(x)^2-G_0(x)G_1(x)A_1(x)-A_0(x)G_0(x)^2}{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}=-A_0(x)=\alpha_1\alpha_2.
\end{align*}
Thus, either $\pi_1=\alpha_1$ and $\pi_2=\alpha_2$, or $\pi_1=\alpha_2$ and $\pi_2=\alpha_1$. In both cases,
\[
\pi_1\pi_2A_0(x)^n=-A_0(x)^{n+1}\in \C(h(x)).
\]
Then $A_0(x)^{n+1}\in \C(h(x))\cap \C(x)=\C[h(x)]$.
By Lemma~\ref{ours} it follows that $A_0(x)^{n+1}=A_0(y)^{n+1}$. Then $A_0(x)=\zeta A_0(y)$ for some $(n+1)$-st root of unity $\zeta$, so $A_0(x)\in \C(x)\cap \C(y)=\C(h(x))$, and moreover $A_0(x)\in \C[h(x)]$. In particular, $A_0(x)=A_0(y)$.
Since either $\pi_1=\alpha_1$ and $\pi_2=\alpha_2$, or $\pi_1=\alpha_2$ and $\pi_2=\alpha_1$, by Proposition~\ref{propd} we have
\begin{equation}\label{G_m}
G_m(x)=
\begin{cases}
D_{m+1}(A_1(x), -A_0(x)), & \text{if}\ \pi_1=\alpha_1, \ \pi_2=\alpha_2\\
-A_0(x)D_{m-1}(A_1(x), -A_0(x)), & \text{if}\ \pi_1=\alpha_2, \ \pi_2=\alpha_1.\\
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
for any $m$. Since $A_0(x)\in \C[h(x)]$ and $G_n(x)\in \C[h(x)]$ it follows that for some $i\in \{n-1, n+1\}$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{concl}
D_{i}(A_1(x), -A_0(x))\in \C[h(x)],
\end{equation}
and consequently by Lemma~\ref{ours} that
\[
D_{i}(A_1(x), -A_0(x))=D_{i}(A_1(y), -A_0(x)).
\]
Then either $A_1(x)=\pm A_1(y)$ or
\[
A_1(x)^2-\gamma_kA_1(x)A_1(y)+A_1(y)^2-\delta_k^2A_0(x)=0,
\]
for some of $\gamma_k,\delta_k$ given in Proposition \ref{propd}.
If $A_1(x)=\pm A_1(y)$, then $A_1(x)\in \C(x)\cap \C(y)=\C(h(x))$. Then clearly $A_1(x)\in \C[(h(x)]$. Since also $A_0(x)\in \C[h(x)]$, by \eqref{G_m} we have that $G_m(x)\in \C[h(x)]$ for any $m$, a contradiction with the assumption. Thus we get that \eqref{gamdel} holds. A short calculation shows that
\[
A_1(x)=\frac{\gamma_kA_1(y)\pm \delta_k\sqrt{A_1(y)^2+4A_0(y)}}{2}.
\]
If $\sqrt{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}\in \C[x]$, we have that $A_1(x)\in \C(x)\cap \C(y)=\C(h(x))$. Moreover, $A_1(x)\in \C[h(x)]$. Then $A_1(x)=A_1(y)$, a contradiction with the assumption.
If $\deg A_0=1$ we have a contradiction with $A_0(x)\in \C[h(x)]$ since $\deg h\geq 2$.
It remains to examine the case when in addition to the assumptions stated at the beginning of the proof we have $A_0(x)=a_0\in \C$ and $h$ is not dihedral.
By \eqref{concl} we have $D_{i}(A_1(x), -a_0)\in \C[h(x)]$. If $A_1(x)\in \C[h(x)]$, by \eqref{G_m} it follows that $G_m(x)\in \C[h(x)]$ for any $m\in \N$,
a contradiction with the assumption.
Assume thus that $A_1(x)\notin \C[h(x)]$.
As in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem1}, we conclude $\deg A_1>1$.
By Proposition \ref{indcor}, since $h$ is neither cyclic nor dihedral it follows that
\[
h(x)=\ell_2(x)\circ x^rP(x^s)\circ \ell_3(x), \quad A_1(x)=\ell_1(x)\circ x^s\circ \ell_3(x)
\]
for some linear polynomials $\ell_1, \ell_2, \ell_3\in \C[x]$ and $s, r\in \N$, $s\ge2$. In particular, $A_1$ is cyclic. By Proposition~\ref{invar} and Lemma~\ref{sequen} it follows that the collection of monodromy groups in any complete decomposition of $D_i(A_1(x), -a_0)$ consists only of cyclic or dihedral groups. Since $D_i(A_1(x), -a_0)\in \C[h(x)]$, by Proposition~\ref{cydih} it follows that $h$ is either cyclic or dihedral, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{main}]
By Lemma~\ref{lem0}, Lemma~\ref{lem1} and Lemma~\ref{lem2} we conclude the proof of Theorem~\ref{main}.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm1}}\label{sec4}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm1}]
Assume that $G_n(x)=g(h(x))$, where $h$ is indecomposable and neither cyclic nor dihedral. Recall that $x$ and $y$, which define \eqref{sum}, are such that $h(x)=h(y)$ and $x\neq y$. From Lemma~\ref{either} it follows that $\C(x)\cap \C(y)=\C(h(x))$. Assume further that there is no proper vanishing subsum of \eqref{sum} and write it as
\begin{align}
\label{equ2}
1-\frac{\pi_1\alpha_1^n}{\rho_2\beta_2^n}+\frac{\rho_1\beta_1^n}{\rho_2\beta_2^n}-\frac{\pi_2\alpha_2^n}{\rho_2\beta_2^n}=0.
\end{align}
Define
\[
u_1=-\frac{\pi_1\alpha_1^n}{\rho_2\beta_2^n}, \quad u_2=\frac{\rho_1\beta_1^n}{\rho_2\beta_2^n}, \quad u_3=-\frac{\pi_2\alpha_2^n}{\rho_2\beta_2^n},
\]
and also
\[
v_1=\frac{\alpha_1}{\beta_2}, \quad v_2=\frac{\beta_1}{\beta_2}, \quad v_3=\frac{\alpha_2}{\beta_2},
\]
\[
w_1=\frac{\pi_1}{\rho_2}, \quad w_2=\frac{\rho_1}{\rho_2}, \quad w_3=\frac{\pi_2}{\rho_2}.
\]
Let $F=\C(x,y,\alpha_1,\alpha_2, \beta_1, \beta_2)$ and let $\HH$ be the projective height on $F/\C(x)$, defined as in Section~\ref{sec3}.
By Lemma \ref{propert}, we find the estimate
\begin{align*}
\HH\left(\frac{\pi_i\alpha_i^n}{\rho_2\beta_2^n}\right)\ge n\cdot\HH\left(\frac{\alpha_i}{\beta_2}\right)-\HH\left(\frac{\pi_i}{\rho_2}\right),\quad i=1,2,
\end{align*}
and similarly we argue for $u_2$.
So, for $i=1,2,3$, we have
\[
\HH(u_i)\ge n\HH(v_i)-\HH(w_i).
\]
Note that if for some $i$ we have $\HH\left(v_i\right)\neq0$, then
\[
n\le\left(\HH(u_i)+\HH(w_i)\right)\cdot\HH(v_i)^{-1}.
\]
Since $(G_n(x))_{n=0}^\infty$ is non-degenerate, the same holds for the sequence $(G_n(y))_{n=0}^\infty$, i.e. $\beta_1/\beta_2\notin \C$. It follows that $\HH(v_2)=\HH(\beta_1/\beta_2)\neq 0$ and thus
\begin{align}\label{Hu_2}
n \leq (\HH(u_2)+\HH(w_2))\cdot \HH(v_2)^{-1}.
\end{align}
On the other hand, we find the following upper bound for the height of $G_n(x)$:
\begin{align*}
\HH(G_n(x))&=\HH(\pi_1\alpha_1^n+\pi_2\alpha_2^n)\\
&\le \HH(\pi_1)+n\HH(\alpha_1)+\HH(\pi_2)+n\HH(\alpha_2)\\
&\le n(\HH(\alpha_1)+\HH(\alpha_2)+\HH(\pi_1)+\HH(\pi_2)).
\end{align*}
Using \eqref{Hu_2}, we conclude that
\begin{align}\label{equ3}
\HH(G_n(x)) \le\left(\HH(u_2)+\HH(w_2)\right)\HH(v_2)^{-1}(\HH(\alpha_1)+\HH(\alpha_2)+\HH(\pi_1)+\HH(\pi_2)).
\end{align}
Now consider equation (\ref{equ2}), which by assumption has no proper vanishing subsum.
Let $A=\{\alpha_i,\pi_i,\beta_i,\rho_i,i=1,2\}$ and put
\[
S:=\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(f)\neq0 \text{ for some } f\in A\}\cup S_\infty,
\]
where $S_0$ denotes the set of finite valuations and $S_\infty$ denotes the set of infinite valuations on $F$.
Then by Theorem \ref{bm} it follows that
\begin{align}\label{bm2}
\HH(u_2)\le|S|+2\g-2,
\end{align}
where $\g$ is the genus of $F/\C$. We now estimate the genus and $|S|$ in terms of $\deg h$.
We start with the genus. In order to use Castelnuovo's inequality (Theorem \ref{castelnuovo}), we define
\begin{align*}
F_1=\C(x,\alpha_1,\alpha_2), \quad F_2=\C(y,\beta_1,\beta_2).
\end{align*}
Note that $\C$ is the field of constants of $F_1,F_2$ and that $F=F_1F_2$. Let $n_i:=\left[F:F_i\right]$, $i=1,2$. Recall that the $\alpha_i$'s and $\beta_i$'s are roots of a monic quadratic polynomial and that $[\C(x, y):\C(x)]< \deg h$ by Lemma~\ref{ours}. Thus $n_i< 2\deg h$. For $i=1,2$ let $\g_i$ be the genus of $F_i/\C$.
Note that since
\begin{equation}\label{alpha}
\alpha_1=\frac{A_1(x)-\sqrt{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}}{2}, \quad\alpha_2=\frac{A_1(x)+\sqrt{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)}}{2},
\end{equation}
we have that $\C(x,\alpha_1,\alpha_2)=\C(x,\sqrt{\Delta(x)})$, where $\Delta(x)=A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)$. Now Riemann's inequality (Theorem \ref{riemann}) yields
\begin{align*}
\g_1\le([F_1:\C(x)]-1)([F_1:\C(\sqrt{\Delta(x)})]-1).
\end{align*}
Since $\sqrt{\Delta(x)}$ is a root of $T^2-\Delta(x)\in\C(x)[T]$ and $x$ is a root of $\Delta(T)-\sqrt{\Delta(x)}^2\in\C(\sqrt{\Delta(x)})[T]$, we conclude that
\[
\g_1\le(2-1)\cdot(\deg \Delta -1)=\deg \Delta -1 \leq C_1-1,
\]
where $C_1:=\max\{\deg A_0,2\deg A_1\}$ (it will be shown later that indeed $C_1\ge 1$, by the non-degeneracy of the sequence).
Since $F_1$ and $F_2$ are isomorphic function fields, they have the same genus and hence the same bound holds for $\g_2$. Therefore we find that $\g_i\le C_1-1,\ i=1,2$.
By Castelnuovo's inequality (Theorem \ref{castelnuovo}) we get
\begin{align*}
\g&\le n_1\g_1+n_2\g_2+(n_1-1)(n_2-1)\\
&<4\deg h (C_1-1)+(2\deg h-1)^2<4C_1 \deg h^2.
\end{align*}
To estimate $|S|$, let
\begin{align*}
S_1&=\left\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(\alpha_1)\neq0\text{ or }\nu(\alpha_2)\neq0\right\},\\
S_2&=\left\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(\pi_1)\neq0\text{ or }\nu(\pi_2)\neq0\right\},\\
S_3&=\left\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(\beta_1)\neq0\text{ or } \nu(\beta_2)\neq0\right\},\\
S_4&=\left\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(\rho_1)\neq0\text{ or } \nu(\rho_2)\neq0\right\}.
\end{align*}
Clearly, $|S|\le|S_1|+|S_2|+|S_3|+|S_4|+|S_{\infty}|$. Since $[F:\C(x)]< 4\deg h$ we have $|S_\infty|<4\deg h$. For the other sets, we argue as follows.
Note that the $\alpha_i$'s are integral over $\C(x)$ (they are the roots of $\mathcal{G}(T)$) and therefore $\nu(\alpha_i)\ge0$ for every finite valuation $\nu$. Note that thus $\nu(\alpha_1\alpha_2)>0$ if and only if either $\nu(\alpha_1)>0 \text{ or } \nu(\alpha_2)>0$. Also, by Vieta's formulae we have $\alpha_1\alpha_2=-A_0(x)$. Further recall that by Lemma~\ref{propert} we have $\HH(A_0(x))=\deg A_0\cdot\HH(x)$ and that $\sum_{\nu}\max(0,\nu(A_0(x)))=\HH(A_0(x))$ by the sum formula. Thus,
\begin{align*}
|S_1|&=|\left\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(\alpha_1)>0 \text{ or } \nu(\alpha_2)>0\right\}|\\
&=|\left\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(\alpha_1\alpha_2)>0\right\}|=|\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(A_0(x))>0\}|\\
&\textstyle\le\sum'1\le \sum\limits_{\nu}\max(0,\nu(A_0(x)))=\HH(A_0(x))\\
&=\deg A_0\cdot\HH(x)=\deg A_0\cdot [F:\C(x)]< \deg A_0\cdot4\deg h,
\end{align*}
where the sum $\sum'$ runs over all valuations $\nu$ for which $\nu(A_0(x))>0$ holds.
In order to bound $|S_3|$ we argue similarly. We have that $\beta_1,\beta_2$ are the roots of the characteristic polynomial of $(G_n(y))_{n=0}^\infty$, and are hence integral over $\C(y)$. Since $y$ is integral over $\C(x)$, we have that $\beta_1, \beta_2$ are integral over $\C(x)$. Therefore, as in the the case of $S_1$ we conclude that $\nu(\beta_i)\ge0$ for every finite valuation $\nu$. By Vieta's formulae we have $\beta_1\beta_2=-A_0(y)$. Furthermore, since $h(x)=h(y)$ we have
\[
\deg h\cdot\HH(y)=\HH(h(y))=\HH(h(x))=\deg h\cdot\HH(x),
\]
and thus
\[
\HH(y)=\HH(x)=[F:\C(x)].
\]
Therefore,
\begin{align*}
|S_3|&=|\left\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(\beta_1)>0 \text{ or } \nu(\beta_2)>0\right\}|\\
&=|\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(\beta_1\beta_2)>0\}|=|\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(A_0(y))>0\}|\\
&\le\deg A_0\cdot\HH(y)=\deg A_0\cdot\HH(x)<\deg A_0\cdot4\deg h.
\end{align*}
For $|S_2|$, note that
\begin{align*}
|S_2|&\le|\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(\pi_1)>0\text{ or }\nu(\pi_2)>0\}|\\
&\phantom{\ \le}+|\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(\pi_1)<0\text{ or }\nu(\pi_2)<0\}|.
\end{align*}
Recall that $G_0(x),G_1(x),\alpha_1,\alpha_2$ are integral over $\C(x)$, and thus also $G_1(x)-\alpha_2G_0(x)$, $G_1(x)-\alpha_1G_0(x)$ and $\alpha_1-\alpha_2$. Therefore, for any $\nu\in S_0$ we have $\nu(G_1(x)-\alpha_2G_0(x))\geq 0$, $\nu(G_1(x)-\alpha_1G_0(x))\geq 0$ and $\nu(\alpha_1-\alpha_2)\geq 0$. Thus
\begin{align*}
\nu(\pi_1)&=\nu\left(\frac{G_1(x)-\alpha_2G_0(x)}{\alpha_1-\alpha_2}\right)\\
&=\nu(G_1(x)-\alpha_2G_0(x))+\nu\left(\frac{1}{\alpha_1-\alpha_2}\right)\\
&=\underbrace{\nu(G_1(x)-\alpha_2G_0(x))}_{\ge0}-\underbrace{\nu(\alpha_1-\alpha_2)}_{\ge 0}.
\end{align*}
Hence for $\nu\in S_0$ it follows that
\begin{align*}
\nu(\pi_1)>0&\mbox{ implies }\nu(G_1(x)-\alpha_2G_0(x))>0,\\
\nu(\pi_1)<0&\mbox{ implies }\nu(\alpha_1-\alpha_2)>0.
\end{align*}
In the same manner we see that
\begin{align*}
\nu(\pi_2)>0&\mbox{ implies }\nu(G_1(x)-\alpha_1G_0(x))>0,\\
\nu(\pi_2)<0&\mbox{ implies }\nu(\alpha_1-\alpha_2)>0.
\end{align*}
Further note that since $\nu(G_1(x)-\alpha_2G_0(x))\geq 0$ and $\nu(G_1(x)-\alpha_1G_0(x))\geq 0$ for any $\nu \in S_0$ we have
that either $\nu(G_1(x)-\alpha_2G_0(x))>0$ or $\nu(G_1(x)-\alpha_1G_0(x))>0$ if and only if
\[
\nu((G_1(x)-\alpha_2G_0(x))(G_1(x)-\alpha_1G_0(x)))>0,
\]
that is
\[
\nu(G_1(x)^2-G_0(x)G_1(x)A_1(x)-A_0(x)G_0(x)^2)>0.
\]
In a similar manner we conclude that $\nu(\alpha_1-\alpha_2)>0$ if and only if $\nu((\alpha_1-\alpha_2)^2)>0$, that is
\[
\nu(A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x))>0.
\]
Therefore,
\begin{align*}
|S_2|\le\ &|\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(\pi_1)>0\text{ or }\nu(\pi_2)>0\}|\\
&+|\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(\pi_1)<0\text{ or }\nu(\pi_2)<0\}|\\
\leq\ & |\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(G_1(x)-\alpha_2G_0(x))>0\text{ or } \nu(G_1(x)-\alpha_1G_0(x))>0\}|\\
&+ |\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(\alpha_1-\alpha_2)>0\}|\\
=\ &|\{\nu\in S_0: \nu(G_1(x)^2-G_0(x)G_1(x)A_1(x)-A_0(x)G_0(x)^2)>0\}|\\
&+|\{\nu\in S_0: \nu(A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x))>0\}|,\\
\intertext{and then arguing similarly as for $S_1$ we get}
|S_2|\le& \HH((G_1^2-G_0G_1A_1-G_0^2A_0)(x))+\HH((A_1^2+4A_0)(x))\\
\le&(C_2+C_1) \HH(x)<(C_1+C_2)4\deg h ,
\end{align*}
where
\[C_2:=\max\{2\deg G_1,\deg G_0+\deg G_1+\deg A_1,2\deg G_0+\deg A_0\}.\]
We argue similarly for $|S_4|$:
\begin{align*}
|S_4|&\le|\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(\rho_1)>0\text{ or }\nu(\rho_2)>0\}|+|\{\nu\in S_0:\ \nu(\rho_1)<0\text{ or }\nu(\rho_2)<0\}|\\
& \leq |\{\nu\in S_0: \nu(G_1(y)^2-G_0(y)G_1(y)A_1(y)-A_0(y)G_0(y)^2)>0\}|\\
&\phantom{\ge}+|\{\nu\in S_0: \nu(A_1(y)^2+4A_0(y))>0\}|\\
&\le \HH((G_1^2-G_0G_1A_1-G_0^2A_0)(y))+\HH((A_1^2+4A_0)(y))\\
&\le(C_1+C_2) \HH(y)=(C_1+C_2) \HH(x)<(C_1+C_2)4\deg h .
\end{align*}
This gives
\begin{align*}
|S|&\le|S_1|+|S_2|+|S_3|+|S_4|+|S_{\infty}|\\
&< 8\deg A_0\deg h+8\deg h(C_1+C_2)+4\deg h\\
&=(8(\deg A_0+C_1+C_2)+4)\deg h.
\end{align*}
Finally we get
\begin{align*}
\HH(u_2)&\le 2\g-2+|S|\notag\\
&< 8C_1\deg h^2+(8(\deg A_0+C_1+C_2)+4)\deg h - 2\notag\\
&< \left(8C_1+8(\deg A_0+C_1+C_2)+4\right)\deg h^2\notag\\
&=4(2\deg A_0+4C_1+2C_2+1)\deg h^2.\label{u}
\end{align*}
We continue to estimate the terms in ~\eqref{equ3}. To give an upper bound on $\HH(\alpha_i)$, note that for $\HH(\Delta(x))=\HH(\sqrt{\Delta(x)}^2)=2\HH(\sqrt{\Delta(x)})$ it follows that
\[
\HH(\sqrt{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)})=\frac{1}{2}\HH(A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)).
\]
Therefore, by \eqref{alpha} we get
\begin{align*}
\HH(\alpha_i)&\le \HH(A_1(x))+\HH(\sqrt{A_1(x)^2+4A_0(x)})\le \frac{3}{2}C_1\HH(x), \quad i=1, 2.
\end{align*}
Using $\HH(x)=\HH(y)$, we obtain the same upper bound for $\HH(\beta_1)$ and $\HH(\beta_2)$:
\[
\HH(\beta_i) \le \frac{3}{2}C_1\HH(x), \quad i=1, 2.
\]
Furthermore, we have
\begin{align*}
\HH(\pi_1)+\HH(\pi_2)&=\HH\left(\frac{G_1(x)-\alpha_2 G_0(x)}{\alpha_1-\alpha_2}\right)+\HH\left(-\frac{G_1(x)-\alpha_1 G_0(x)}{\alpha_1-\alpha_2}\right)\\
&\le\HH(G_1(x))+\HH(\alpha_2)+\HH(G_0(x))+\HH(\alpha_1)+\HH(\alpha_2)+\\
&\phantom{\ge}+\HH(G_1(x))+\HH(\alpha_1)+\HH(G_0(x))+\HH(\alpha_1)+\HH(\alpha_2)\\
&=2(\HH(G_0(x))+\HH(G_1(x)))+3(\HH(\alpha_1)+\HH(\alpha_2))\\
&\leq (2(\deg G_0+\deg G_1)+9C_1)\HH(x).
\end{align*}
It therefore follows that
\begin{equation}\label{aapp}
\HH(\alpha_1)+\HH(\alpha_2)+\HH(\pi_1)+\HH(\pi_2)\le(2(\deg G_0+\deg G_1)+12C_1)\HH(x).
\end{equation}
Next, we estimate the height of $w_2$ in a similar way:
\begin{align}
\HH(w_2)=\HH\left(\frac{\rho_1}{\rho_2}\right)&=\HH\left(-\frac{G_1(y)-\beta_2 G_0(y)}{G_1(y)-\beta_1 G_0(y)}\right)\notag \\
&\le2(\HH(G_1(y))+\HH( G_0(y)))+\HH(\beta_1)+\HH(\beta_2)\notag \\
&\le 2(\deg G_1+\deg G_0)\HH(y)+3C_1\HH(y)\notag \\
&<(2(\deg G_0+\deg G_1)+3C_1)4\deg h\notag \\
&<(2(\deg G_0+\deg G_1)+3C_1)4\deg h^2\notag.
\end{align}
Thus
\begin{align}\label{rr}
H(u_2)+\HH(w_2)< 4\deg h^2 \left(2(\deg A_0+\deg G_0+\deg G_1)+7C_1+2C_2+1\right).
\end{align}
We now find a lower bound for $\HH(v_2)$ in terms of $\HH(x)$:
\begin{align*}
\HH(v_2)&=\HH\left(\frac{\beta_1}{\beta_2}\right)=\HH\left(\frac{A_1(y)-\sqrt{A_1(y)^2+4A_0(y)}}{A_1(y)+\sqrt{A_1(y)^2+4A_0(y)}}\right)\\
&=\HH\left(1-2\cdot\frac{\sqrt{A_1(y)^2+4A_0(y)}}{A_1(y)+\sqrt{A_1(y)^2+4A_0(y)}}\right)\\
&=\HH\left(\frac{\sqrt{A_1(y)^2+4A_0(y)}}{A_1(y)+\sqrt{A_1(y)^2+4A_0(y)}}\right)=\HH\left(\frac{A_1(y)}{\sqrt{A_1(y)^2+4A_0(y)}}+1\right)\\
&=\HH\left(\sqrt{\frac{A_1(y)^2}{A_1(y)^2+4A_0(y)}}\right)=\frac{1}{2}\HH\left(\frac{A_1(y)^2+4A_0(y)}{A_1(y)^2}\right)=\frac{1}{2}\HH\left(\frac{A_0(y)}{A_1(y)^2}\right).
\end{align*}
Note that
\begin{align*}
\HH\left(\frac{A_0(y)}{A_1(y)^2}\right)&\ge |\HH(A_0(y))-\HH(A_1(y)^2)|= |\deg A_0-2 \deg A_1|\cdot\HH(y).
\end{align*}
If $\deg A_0\neq2 \deg A_1$, then clearly
\[
\HH\left(\frac{A_0(y)}{A_1(y)^2}\right)\geq \HH(y).
\]
If on the other hand we have that $\deg A_0=2\deg A_1$, then by the polynomial remainder theorem we have that $A_0(y)=A_1(y)^2q(y)+r(y)$, where $q\in\C$ is constant and $\deg r<2\cdot\deg A_1$. Thus,
\begin{align*}
\HH\left(\frac{A_0(y)}{A_1(y)^2}\right)&=\HH\left(q(y)+\frac{r(y)}{A_1(y)^2}\right)=\HH\left(\frac{r(y)}{A_1(y)^2}\right)\\
&\ge\HH(A_1(y)^2)-\HH(r(y))=(2\deg A_1-\deg r)\cdot\HH(y)\ge \HH(y).
\end{align*}
Thus,
\begin{equation}\label{bb}
\HH(v_2))\ge\frac{1}{2}\HH(y)=\frac{1}{2}\HH(x).
\end{equation}
(Note that since $\HH(v_2)\neq0$, we cannot have $\deg A_0=\deg A_1=0$).
Considering again \eqref{equ3}, by \eqref{aapp}, \eqref{rr} and \eqref{bb} we find that
\begin{align*}
\HH(G_n(x))< C\deg h^2,
\end{align*}
where $C=16\left(2(\deg A_0+\deg G_0+\deg G_1)+7C_1+2C_2+1\right)\left(\deg G_0+\right.$ $\left.\deg G_1+6C_1\right).$
To give a suitable lower bound for $\HH(G_n(x))$, note that since $G_n=g\circ h$ we have
\[
\HH(G_n(x))=\deg g \deg h \cdot [F:\C(x)]=\deg g \deg h \cdot[F:\C(x,y)]\cdot[\C(x,y):\C(x)].
\]
By Lemma \ref{extdeg} it follows that $[\C(x,y):\C(x)]\ge\frac{1}{2}\deg h$. Therefore, we have
\begin{align*}
\HH(G_n(x))\geq \frac{1}{2}\deg g\deg h^2\cdot [F:\C(x,y)]\geq \frac{1}{2}\deg g\deg h^2.
\end{align*}
Finally, we conclude that
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{2}\deg g\deg h^2\le \HH(G_n(x))< C\deg h^2,
\end{align*}
and therefore that $\deg g< 2C$.
\end{proof}
\section{Acknowledgement} The work on this manuscript was supported by FWF (Austrian Science Fund) Grant No. P24574.
|
\section{Limitations and Future Work}
\label{conclusion}
In principle, the training and inference of the latent structure model can accommodate different types of graphical models. However, the exact procedure varies depending on the graph structure.
It would be interesting to find domains that can benefit from more general graphical models. Another possible direction is to develop fully end-to-end differentiable training methods that can accommodate our index-free policy learning formulation, especially deep learning-based method that could provide computational speed-up compared to traditional graphical model inference. One potential issue with the end-to-end approach is the need to depart from a learning-reductions style approach.
Although we addressed learning from demonstrations in this paper, the proposed framework can also be employed for generative modeling, or more efficient structured exploration for reinforcement learning. Along that line, our proposed method could serve as a useful component of general reinforcement learning, especially in multi-agent settings where traditional exploration-based approaches such as Q-learning prove computationally intractable.
\section{Variational Inference Derivation for Hidden Markov Models}
In this section, we provide the mathematical derivation for the structured variational inference procedure. We focus on the training for Bayesian Hidden Markov Model, in particular the Forward-Backward procedure to complete the description of Algorithm \ref{algo:structure_learning}. The mathematical details for other types of graphical models depend on the family of such models and should follow similar derivations. Further relevant details on stochastic variational inference can be found in \cite{hoffman2013stochastic, johnson2014stochastic, beal2003variational}. d
\textbf{Settings.} Given an arbitrarily ordered set of trajectories $U = \{U_1,\ldots,U_K,C \}$, let the coordination mechanism underlying each such $U$ be governed by a true unknown model $p$, with global parameters $\theta$. We suppress the agent/policy subscript and consider a generic featurized trajectory $x_{t} = [u_{t},c_t]\enskip \forall t$. Let the latent role sequence for the same agent be $z = z_{1:T}$.
At any time $t$, each agent is acting according to a latent role $z_t\sim \texttt{Categorical}\{ \bar{1},\bar{2},\ldots,\bar{K}\}$, which are the local parameters to the structured model.
Ideally, role and index asignment can be obtained by calculating the posterior $p(z|x,\theta)$, which is often intractable. One way to infer the role assignment is via approximating the intractable posterior $p(z|x,\theta)$ using Bayesian inference, typically via MCMC or mean-field variational methods. Since sampling-based MCMC methods are often slow, we instead aim to learn to approximate $p(z|x,\theta)$ by a simpler distribution $q$ via Bayesian inference. In particular, we employ techniques from stochastic variational inference \cite{hoffman2013stochastic}, which allows for efficient stochastic training on mini-batches that can naturally integrate with our imitation learning subroutine.
\textbf{Structured Variational Inference for Unsupervised Role Learning.} Consider a full probabilistic model:
\begin{equation*}
p(\theta, z, x) = p(\theta)\prod_{t=1}^T p(z_t|\theta)p(x_t|z_t,\theta)
\end{equation*}
with global latent variables $\theta$, local latent variables $z = \{ z_t\}_{t=1}^T$.
Posterior approximation is often cast as optimizing over a simpler model class $\mathcal{Q}$, via searching for global parameters $\theta$ and local latent variables $z$ that maximize the evidence lower bound (ELBO) $\mathcal{L}$:
\begin{align}
\log p(x) &\geq \mathbb{E}_q \left[ \log p(z,\theta,x)\right] - \mathbb{E}_q \left[ \log q(z,\theta)\right] \nonumber \\
&\triangleq \mathcal{L}\left(q(z,\theta) \right). \nonumber
\end{align}
Maximizing $\mathcal{L}$ is equivalent to finding $q\in\mathcal{Q}$ to minimize the KL divergence $\text{KL}\left( q(z,\theta |x) || p(z,\theta|x) \right)$.
For unsupervised structured prediction problem over a family of graphical model, we focus on the structured mean-field variational family, which factorizes $q$ as $q(z,\theta) = q(z)q(\theta)$ \cite{hoffman2014structured} and decomposes the ELBO objective:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L} &= \mathbb{E}_q[\log p(\theta]-\mathbb{E}_q[\log q(\theta] \nonumber \\
& \quad +\mathbb{E}_q[\log(p(z,x|\theta)]-\mathbb{E}_q[\log(q(z))].
\end{align}
This factorization breaks the dependency between $\theta$ and $z$, but not between single latent states $z_t$, unlike variational inference for i.i.d data \cite{kingma2013auto}.
Variational inference optimizes the objective $\mathcal{L}$ typically using natural gradient ascent over global factors $q(\theta)$ and local factors $q(z)$. (Under mean-field assumption, optimization typically proceeds via alternating updates of $\theta$ and $z$.) Stochastic variational inference performs such updates efficiently in mini-batches. For graphical models, structured stochastic variational inference optimizes $\mathcal{L}$ using \textit{natural gradient} ascent over global factors $q(\theta)$ and message-passing scheme over local factors $q(z)$. We assume the prior $p(\theta)$ and complete conditionals $p(z_t,x_t|\theta)$ are conjugate pairs of exponential family, which gives natural gradient of $\mathcal{L}$ with respect to $q(\theta)$ convenient forms \cite{johnson2014stochastic}. Denote the exponential family forms of $p(\theta)$ and $p(z_t,y_t | \theta)$ by:
\begin{align*}
\ln p(\theta) &= \langle\eta_\theta, t_{\theta}(\theta) \rangle - A_{\theta}(\eta_{\theta}) \\
\ln p(z_t,x_t | \theta) &= \langle \eta_{zx}(\theta), t_{zx}(z_t,x_t) \rangle - A_{zx}(\eta_{zx}(\theta))
\end{align*}
where $\eta_\theta$ and $\eta_{zx}$ are functions indicating natural parameters, $t_\theta$ and $t_{zx}$ are sufficient statistics and $A(\cdot)$ are log-normalizers (\cite{blei2017variational}). Note that in general, different subscripts corresponding to $\eta, t, A$ indicate different function parameterization (not simply a change in variable value assignment). Conjugacy in the exponential family yields that \cite{blei2017variational}:
\begin{equation*}
t_{\theta}(\theta) = \left[ \eta_{zx}(\theta), -A_{zx}(\eta_{zx}(\theta))\right]
\end{equation*}
and that
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:conjugacy_form}
p(\theta|z_t,x_t) \propto \exp \{ \langle \eta_{\theta}+\left[ t_{zx}(z_t,x_t),1 \right] , t_{\theta}(\theta) \rangle \}
\end{equation}
Conjugacy in the exponential family also implies that the optimal $q(\theta)$ is in the same family \cite{blei2017variational}, i.e.
\begin{equation*}
q(\theta) = \exp\{ \langle \widetilde{\eta}_{\theta}, t_{\theta}(\theta) \rangle - A_{\theta}(\widetilde{\eta}_{\theta}) \}
\end{equation*}
for some natural parameters $\widetilde{\eta}_{\theta}$ of $q(\theta)$.
To optimize over global parameters $q(\theta)$, conjugacy in the exponential family allows obtaining convenient expression for the gradient of $\mathcal{L}$ with respect to natural parameters $\widetilde{\eta}_{\theta}$. The derivation is shown similarly to \cite{johnson2014stochastic} and \cite{blei2017variational} - we use simplified notations $\widetilde{\eta}\triangleq \widetilde{\eta}_{\theta}, \eta \triangleq \eta_{\theta}, A \triangleq A_{\theta}$, and $t(z,x)\triangleq \sum_{t=1}^T \left[ t_{zx}(z_t,x_t),1 \right]$. Taking advantage of the exponential family identity $\mathbb{E}_{q(\theta)}[t_{\theta}(\theta)] = \nabla A(\widetilde{\eta})$, the objective $\mathcal{L}$ can be re-written as:
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{L} &= \mathbb{E}_{q(\theta)q(z)} \left[ \ln p(\theta |z,x) - \ln q(\theta) \right] \\
&= \langle\eta + \mathbb{E}_{q(z)}[t(z,x)], \nabla A(\widetilde{\eta}) \rangle- (\langle \widetilde{\eta},\nabla A(\widetilde{\eta} ) \rangle - A(\widetilde{\eta}))
\end{align*}
Differentiating with respect to $\widetilde{\eta}$, we have that
\begin{equation*}
\nabla_{\widetilde{\eta}} \mathcal{L} = \left(\nabla^2 A(\widetilde{\eta}) \right) \left(\eta + \mathbb{E}_{q(z)}[t(z,x)] - \widetilde{\eta} \right)
\end{equation*}
The \textit{natural gradient} of $\mathcal{L}$, denoted $\widetilde{\nabla}_{\widetilde{\eta}}$, is defined as $\widetilde{\nabla}_{\widetilde{\eta}} \triangleq \left(\nabla^2 A(\widetilde{\eta}) \right)^{-1} \nabla_{\widetilde{\eta}}$. And so the natural gradient of $\mathcal{L}$ can be compactly described as:
\begin{equation}
\label{natural_gradient_form}
\widetilde{\nabla}_{\widetilde{\eta}} \mathcal{L} = \eta + \sum_{t=1}^T \mathbb{E}_{q(z_t)}\{ [t_{zx}(z_t,x_t), 1] \} - \widetilde{\eta}
\end{equation}
Thus a stochastic natural descent update on the global parameters $\widetilde{\eta}_{\theta}$ proceeds at step $n$ by sampling a mini-batch $x_t$ and taking the global update with step size $\rho_n$:
\begin{equation}
\label{global_update}
\widetilde{\eta}_{\theta} \leftarrow (1-\rho_n)\widetilde{\eta}_{\theta} + \rho_n (\eta_\theta+b^\top \mathbb{E}_{q^*(z_t)}[t(z_t,x_t)] )
\end{equation}
where $b$ is a vector of scaling factors adjusting for the relative size of the mini-batches. Here the global update assumes optimal local update $q^*(z)$ has been computed. In each step however, the local factors $q^*(z_t)$ are computed with mean field updates and the current value of $q(\theta)$ (analogous to coordinate ascent). In what follows, we provide the derivation for the update rules for Hidden Markov Models, which are the particular instantiation of the graphical model we use to represent the role transition for our multi-agent settings.
\textbf{Variational factor updates via message passing for Hidden Markov Models.}
For HMMs, we can view global parameters $\theta$ as the parameters of the underlying HMMs such as transition matrix and emission probabilities, while local parameters $z$ govern hidden state assignment at each time step.
Fixing the global parameters, the local updates are based on message passing over the graphical model. The exact mathematical derivation depends on the specific graph structure. The simplest scenario is to assume independence among $z_t$'s, which resembles naive Bayes. We instead focus on Hidden Markov Models to capture first-order dependencies in role transitions over play sequences. In this case, global parameters $\theta = \left( p_0, P, \phi \right)$ where $P = \left[ P_{ij} \right]_{i,j=1}^K$ is the transition matrix with $P_{ij} = p(z_t = j|z_{t-1} = i)$, $\phi = \{ \phi_i\}_{i=1}^K$ are the emission parameters, and $p_0$ is the initial distribution.
Consider a Bayesian HMM on $K$ latent states. Priors on the model parameters include the initial state distribution $p_0$, transition matrix $P$ with rows denoted $p_1,\ldots, p_K$, and the emission parameters $\phi = \{ \phi_i \}_{i=1}^K$. In this case we have the global parameters $\theta = (p_0,P,\phi)$. For Hidden Markov Model with observation $x_{1:T}$ and latent sequence $z_{1:T}$, the generative model over the parameters is given by $\phi_i \sim p(\phi)$ (i.i.d from prior), $p_i \sim \text{Dir}(\alpha_i), z_1 \sim p_0, z_{t+1} \sim p_{z_t}$, and $x_t \sim p(x_t | \phi_{z_t})$ (conditional distribution given parameters $\phi$).
We can also write the transition matrix:
\[
P =
\begin{bmatrix}
p_1 \\ \vdots \\p_K
\end{bmatrix}
\]
The Bayesian hierarchical model over the parameters, hidden state sequence $z_{1:T}$, and observation sequence $y_{1:T}$ is
\begin{align*}
\phi_i &\overset{\text{iid}}{\sim} p(\phi), p_i \sim \text{Dir}(\alpha_{i}) \\
z_1 &\sim p_0, z_{t+1} \sim p_{z_t}, x_t \sim p(x_t | \phi_{z_t})
\end{align*}
For HMMs, we have a full probabilistic model: $p(z,x | \theta) = p_0(z_1)\prod_{t=1}^T p(z_t | z_{t-1}, P) p(x_t|z_t,\phi)$. Define the likelihood potential $L_{t,i} = p(x_t |\phi_i)$, the likelihood of the latent sequence, given observation and model parameters, is as follows:
\begin{align}
& p(z_{1:T} | x_{1:T}, P, \phi) = \nonumber \\
& \exp\left(\log p_0(z_1)+\sum_{t=2}^T \log P_{z_{t-1},z_t} + \sum_{t=1}^T\log L_{t, z_t} - Z\right) \label{eqn:likelihood_potential}
\end{align}
where $Z$ is the normalizing constant.
Following the notation and derivation from \cite{johnson2014stochastic}, we denote $p(z_{1:T |x_{1:T}, P, \phi}) = \text{HMM}(p_0, P, L)$. Under mean field assumption, we approximate the true posterior $p(P,\phi, z_{1:T} | x_{1:T})$ with a mean field variational family $q(P)q(\phi)q(z_{1:T})$ and update each variational factor in turn while fixing the others.
Fixing the global parameters $\theta$, taking expectation of log of (\ref{eqn:likelihood_potential}), we derive the update rule for $q(z)$ as $q(z_{1:T}) = \text{HMM}(\widetilde{P}, \widetilde{p}_0, \widetilde{L})$ where:
\begin{align*}
\widetilde{P}_{j,k} &= \exp \{ \mathbb{E}_{q(P)} \ln(P_{j,k}) \} \\
\widetilde{p}_{0,k} &= \exp\{ \ln \mathbb{E}_{q(p_0)}p_{0,k} \} \\
\widetilde{L}_{t,k} &= \exp\{ \mathbb{E}_{q(\phi_k)} \ln (p(x_t |z_t = k)) \}
\end{align*}
To calculate the expectation with respect to $q(z_{1:T})$, which is necessary for updating other factors, the $\texttt{Forward-Backward}$ recursion of HMMs is defined by forward messages $F$ and backward messages $B$:
\begin{align}
F_{t,i} &= \sum_{j=1}^K F_{t-1,j} \widetilde{P}_{j,i} \widetilde{L}_{t,i} \label{eqn:forward_pass} \\
B_{t,i} &= \sum_{j=1}^K \widetilde{P}_{i,j}\widetilde{L}_{t+1,j} B_{t+1,j} \label{eqn:backward_pass} \\
F_{1,i} &= p_0(i) \nonumber \\
B_{T,i} &= 1 \nonumber
\end{align}
As a summary, calculating the gradient w.r.t $z$ yields the following optimal variational distribution over the latent sequence:
\vspace{-0.1in}
\begin{align}
q^*(z) &\propto \exp \Big( \mathbb{E}_{q(P)}[\ln p_0(z_1)]+\sum_{t=2}^T\mathbb{E}_{q(P)}[\log P_{z_{t-1},z_t}] \nonumber \\
&+ \sum_{t=1}^{T} \mathbb{E}_{q(\phi)}\ln [p(x_t |z_t)] \Big),
\end{align}
which gives the local updates for $q^*(z)$, given current estimates of $P$ and $\phi$:
\begin{align}
\widetilde{P}_{j,k} &= \exp\left[ \mathbb{E}_{q(P)}\ln(P_{j,k})\right] \label{eqn:trans_matrix_update}\\
\widetilde{p}(x_t | z_t = k) &= \exp\left[ E_{q(\phi)}\ln p(x_t|x_t=k) \right], \label{eqn:emission_update}
\end{align}
for $k=1,\ldots,K$, $t=1,\ldots,T$, and then use $p_0,\widetilde{P},\widetilde{p}$ to run the forward-backward algorithm to compute the update $q^*(z_t = k)$ and $q^*(z_{t-1} = j, z_t=k)$. The forward-backward algorithm in the local update step takes $O(K^2T)$ time for a chain of length $T$ and $K$ hidden states.
\textbf{Training to learn model parameters for HMMs.} Combining \textit{natural gradient} step with message-passing scheme for HMMs yield specific update rules for learning the model parameters. Again for HMMs, the global parameters are $\theta = (p_0, P, \phi)$ and local variables $z = z_{1:T}$.
Assuming the priors on observation parameter $p(\phi_i)$ and likelihoods $p(x_t|\phi_i)$ are conjugate pairs of exponential family distribution for all $i$, the conditionals $p(\phi_i | x)$ have the form as seen from equation \ref{eqn:conjugacy_form}:
\begin{equation*}
p(\phi_i|x) \propto \exp\{\langle \eta_{\phi_i}+[t_{x,i}(x),1], t_{\phi_i}(\phi_i) \rangle \}
\end{equation*}
For structured mean field inference, the approximation $q(\theta)$ factorizes as $q(P)q(p_0)q(\phi)$. At each iteration, stochastic variational inference sample a sequence $x_{1:T}$ from the data set (e.g. trajectory from any randomly sampled player) and perform stochastic gradient step on $q(P)q(p_0)q(\phi)$. In order to compute the gradient, we need to calculate expected sufficient statistics w.r.t the optimal factor for $q(z_{1:T})$, which in turns depends on current value of $q(P)q(p_0)q(\phi)$.
Following the notation from \cite{johnson2014stochastic}, we write the prior and mean field factors as
\begin{align*}
p(p_i) &= \text{Dir}(\alpha_i), p(\phi_i) \propto \exp\{ \langle \eta_{\phi_i} , t_{\phi_i}(\phi_i) \rangle \} \\
q(p_i) &= \text{Dir}(\widetilde{\alpha}_i), q(\phi_i) \propto \exp\{ \langle \widetilde{\eta}_{\phi_i}, t_{\phi_i}(\phi_i) \rangle \}
\end{align*}
Using message passing scheme as per equations (\ref{eqn:forward_pass}) and (\ref{eqn:backward_pass}), we define the intermediate quantities:
\begin{align}
\widehat{t}_{x,i} &\triangleq \mathbb{E}_{q(z_{1:T})}\sum_{t=1}^T\mathbb{I}[z_t=i]t_{x,i}(x_t) \nonumber \\
&= \sum_{t=1}^T F_{t,i}B_{t,i} [t_{x,i}(x_t),1] / Z \\
(\widehat{t}_{trans,i})_j &\triangleq \mathbb{E}_{q(z_{1:T})}\sum_{t=1}^{T-1}\mathbb{I}[z_t = i, z_{t+1} = j] \nonumber \\
&= \sum_{t=1}^{T-1} F_{t,i}\widetilde{P}_{i,j}\widetilde{L}_{t+1,j}B_{t+1,j} /Z \\
(\widehat{t}_{init})_i &\triangleq \mathbb{E}_{q(z_{1:T})}\mathbb{I}[z_1=i]=\widetilde{p}_0 B_{1,i} /Z
\end{align}
where $Z\triangleq \sum_{i=1}^K F_{T,i}$ is the normalizing constant, and $\mathbb{I}$ is the indicator function.
Given these expected sufficient statistics, the specific update rules corresponding to the natural gradient step in the natural parameters of $q(P), q(p_0)$, and $q(\phi)$ become:
\begin{align}
\widetilde{\eta}_{\phi,i} &\leftarrow (1-\rho)\widetilde{\eta}_{\phi,i} + \rho (\eta_{\phi,i} + b^\top \widehat{t}_{x,i}) \label{eqn:phi_update}\\
\widetilde{\alpha}_{i} &\leftarrow (1-\rho)\widetilde{\alpha}_i+\rho(\alpha_i+b^\top \widehat{t}_{trans,i}) \label{eqn:trans_param_update} \\
\widetilde{\alpha}_0 &\leftarrow (1-\rho)\widetilde{\alpha}_0+\rho(\alpha_0 + b^\top \widehat{t}_{init,i}) \label{eqn:init_param_update}
\end{align}
\begin{algorithm}[tb]
\begin{small}
\caption{ Coordinated Structure Learning \\ \texttt{LearnStructure}
$\{U_{1},\ldots,U_{K},C,\theta,\rho \} \mapsto q(\theta,z)$}
\label{algo:structure_learning_detailed}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE Set of trajectories $U = \{ U_{k}\}_{k=1}^K$. Context $C$ \\
Previous parameters $\theta = (p_0,\theta^P, \theta^\phi)$, stepsize $\rho$
\STATE $X_k = \{x_{t,k}\}_{t=1}^T = \{[u_{t,k},c_t]\} \enskip \forall t,k. X = \{ X_k\}_{k=1}^K$
\STATE Local update: Compute $\widetilde{P}$ and $\widetilde{p}$ per equation \ref{eqn:trans_matrix_update} and \ref{eqn:emission_update} \\
and compute $q(z) = \texttt{Forward-Backward}(X,\widetilde{P},\widetilde{p})$
\STATE Global update of $\theta$, per equations \ref{eqn:phi_update}, \ref{eqn:trans_param_update}, and \ref{eqn:init_param_update}. \\
\OUTPUT Updated model $q(\theta,z) = q(\theta)q(z)$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{small}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Experimental Evaluation}
\subsection{Batch-Version of Algorithm \ref{algo:joint_imitation} for Predator-Prey}
\begin{algorithm}[h]
\caption{ Multi-Agent Data Aggregation Imitation Learning \\ \texttt{Learn}$(A_1,A_2,\ldots,A_K,C | D)$}
\label{algo:joint_dagger}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE Ordered actions $A_k = \{ a_{t,k} \}_{t=1}^T\enskip \forall k$, context $\{ c_t\}_{t=1}^T$
\REQUIRE Aggregating data set $D_1,..,D_K$ for each policy
\REQUIRE base routine $\texttt{Train}(S,A)$ mapping state to actions
\FOR{$t = 0,1,2,\ldots,T$}
\STATE Roll-out $\hat{a}_{t+1,k} = \pi_k(\hat{s}_{t,k})\quad \forall$ agent $k$ \\
\STATE Cross-update for each policy $k\in \{ 1,\ldots,K\}$ \\
$\hat{s}_{t+1,k} = \varphi_k \left( \left[\hat{a}_{t+1,1},\ldots, \hat{a}_{t+1,k},\ldots,\hat{a}_{t+1,K}, c_{t+1} \right] \right) $ \\
\STATE Collect expert action $a_{t+1,k}^*$ given state $\hat{s}_{t+1,k} \enskip \forall k$
\STATE Aggregate data set $D_k = D_k \cup \{\hat{s}_{t+1,k}, a_{t+1,k}^* \}_{t=0}^{T-1}$
\ENDFOR \\
\STATE $\pi_k \leftarrow \texttt{Train}(D_k) $
\OUTPUT $K$ new policies $\pi_1,\pi_2,\ldots,\pi_K$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Visualizing Role Assignment for Soccer}
The Gaussian components of latent structure in figure \ref{fig:role_components} give interesting insight about the latent structure of the demonstration data, which correspond to a popular formation arrangement in professional soccer. Unlike the predator-prey domain, however, the players are sometimes expected to switch and swap roles. Figure \ref{fig:role_frequency} displays the tendency that each learning policy $k$ would takes on other roles outside of its dominant mode.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{role_frequency.png}
\caption{\textit{Role frequency assigned to policy, according to the maximum likelihood estimate of the latent structured model}
\label{fig:role_frequency}}
\end{figure}
Policies indexed $0-3$ tend to stay most consistent with the prescribed latent roles. We observe that these also correspond to players with the least variance in their action trajectories. Imitation loss is generally higher for less consistent roles (e.g. policies indexed $8-9$). Intuitively, entropy regularization encourages a decomposition of roles that result in learning policies as decoupled as possible, in order to minimize the imitation loss.
\section{Experiments}
\label{experiment}
We present empirical results from two settings. The first is a synthetic setting based on predator-prey, where the goal is to imitate a coordinating team of predators. The second is a large-scale imitation learning setting from player trajectores in professional soccer games, where the goal is to imitate defensive team play.
\subsection{Predator-Prey Domain}
\textbf{Setting. }The predator-prey problem, also frequently called the Pursuit Domain \cite{benda1985optimal}, is a popular setting for multi-agent reinforcement learning. The traditional setup is with four predators and one prey, positioned on a grid board.
At each time step, each agent has five moves:
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{0.21\textwidth}
\vspace{-10pt}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.2]{pred_prey_interface.png}
\vspace{-0.3in}
\caption{
\label{fig:predprey_interface}}
\vspace{-10pt}
\end{wrapfigure}
N,S,E,W or no move. The world is toroidal: the agents can move off one end of the board and come back on the other end. Agents make move simultaneously, but two agents cannot occupy the same position, and collisions are avoided by assigning a random move priority to the agents at each time step. The predators can capture the prey only if the prey is surrounded by all four predators. The goal of the predators is to capture the prey as fast as possible, which necessarily requires coordination.
\textbf{Data. }The demonstration data is collected from 1000 game instances, where four experts, indexed $1$ to $4$, are prescribed the consistent and coordinated role as illustrated in the capture state of Figure \ref{fig:predprey_interface}. In other words, agent $1$ would attempt to capture the prey on the right hand side, which allows for one fixed role for each expert throughout the game. However, the particular role assignment is hidden from the imitation learning task.
Each expert is then exhaustively trained using Value Iteration \cite{sutton1998reinforcement} in the reinforcement learning setting, with the reward of $1$ if the agent is in the position next to the prey according to its defined role, and $0$ otherwise. A separate set of 100 games was collected for evaluation. A game is terminated after 50 time steps if the predators fail to capture the prey. In the test set, the experts fail to capture the prey in $2\%$ of the games, and on average take $18.3$ steps to capture the prey.
\textbf{Experiment Setup.} For this experiment, we use the batch version of Algorithm \ref{algo:main_algo} (see appendix) to learn to imitate the experts using only demonstrations. Each policy is represented by a random forest of $20$ trees, and were trained over 10 iterations. The expert correction for each rolled-out state is collected via Value Iteration. The experts thus act as dynamic oracles, which result in a multi-agent training setting analogous to DAgger \cite{dagger}. We compare two versions of multi-agent imitation learning:
\vspace{-0.1in}
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Coordinated Training.} We use our algorithm, with the latent structure model represented by a discrete Hidden Markov Model with binomial emission. We use Algorithm \ref{algo:assignment} to maximize the role consistency of the dynamic oracles across different games.
\vspace{-0.05in}
\item \textbf{Unstructured Training.} An arbitrary role is assigned to each dynamic oracle for each game, i.e., the agent index is meaningless.
\end{itemize}
\vspace{-0.1in}
In both versions, training was done using the same data aggregation scheme and batch training was conducted using the same random forests configuration.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{predator_prey.png}
\vspace{-0.3in}
\caption{\textit{Comparing performance in Predator-Prey between our approach and unstructured multi-agent imitation learning, as a function of the number of training rounds. Our approach demonstrates both significantly lower failure rates as well as lower average time to success (for successful trials).}
\label{fig:pred_prey}}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Results. } Figure \ref{fig:pred_prey} compares the test performance of our method versus unstructured multi-agent imitation learning.
Our method quickly approaches expert performance (average 22 steps with $8\%$ failure rate in the last iteration), whereas unstructured multi-agent imitation learning performance did not improve beyond the first iteration (average 42 steps with 70\% failure rate). Note that we even gave the unstructured baseline some advantage over our method, by forcing the prey to select the moves last after all predators make decisions (effectively making the prey slower). Without this advantage, the unstructured policies fail to capture the prey almost $100\%$ of the time. Also, if the same restriction is applied to the policies obtained from our method, performance would be on par with the experts ($100\%$ success rate, with similar number of steps taken).
\subsection{Multi-agent Imitation Learning for Soccer}
\textbf{Setting. } Soccer is a popular domain for multi-agent learning. RoboCup, the robotic and simulation soccer platform, is perhaps the most popular testbed for multi-agent reinforcement learning research to date \cite{AAAI16-WhatsHot}. The success of MARL has been limited, however, due to the extremely high dimensionality of the problem. In this experiment, we aim to learn multi-agent policies for team soccer defense, based on tracking data from real-life professional soccer \cite{formation}.
\textbf{Data. } We use the tracking data from 45 games of real professional soccer from a recent European league. The data was chunked into sequences with one team attacking and the other defending. Our goal is to learn up to 10 policies for team defense (11 players per team, minus the goal keeper). The training data consists of 7500 sets of trajectories $A = \{ A_1,\ldots,A_{10}\}$ , where $A_k = \{ a_{t,k} \}_{t=1}^T$ is the sequence of positions of one defensive player, and $C$ is the context consisting of opponents and the ball. Overall, there are about 1.3 million frames at 10 frames per second. The average sequence length is 176 steps, and the maximum is 1480.
\textbf{Experiment Setup. } Each policy is represented by a recurrent neural network structure (LSTM), with two hidden layers of $512$ units each. As LSTMs generally require fixed-length input sequences, we further chunk each trajectory into sub-sequences of length 50, with overlapping window of 25 time steps. The joint multi-agent imitation learning procedure follows Algorithm \ref{algo:joint_imitation} closely. In this set-up, without access to dynamic oracles for imitation learning in the style of SEARN \cite{daume2009search} and DAgger \cite{dagger}, we gradually increase the horizon of the rolled-out trajectories from 1 to $10$ steps look-ahead. Empirically, this has the effect of stabilizing the policy networks early in training, and limits the cascading errors caused by rolling-out to longer horizons.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.73]{performance_comparison2.png}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\caption{\textit{Experimental results on soccer domain. We see that using coordination substantially improves the imitation loss, and that the decentralized policy is comparable to the centralized.}
\label{fig:experiment_compare}}
\end{figure}
The structured model component is learned via stochastic variational inference on a continuous HMM, where the per-state emission distribution is a mixture of Gaussians. Training and inference operate on the same mini-batches used for joint policy learning.
We compare against two variations. The first employs centralized policy that aggregates the state vectors of all decentralized learner and produces the actions for all players, i.e., a multi-task policy. The centralized approach generally requires more model parameters, but is potentially much more accurate.
The second variation is to not employ joint multi-agent training: we modify Algorithm \ref{algo:joint_imitation} to not cross-update states between agents, and each role is trained conditioned on the ground truth of the other agents.
\textbf{Results.} Figure \ref{fig:experiment_compare} shows the results. Our coordinated learning approach substantially outperforms conventional imitation learning without structured coordination.
The imitation loss measures average distance of roll-outs and ground truth in meters (note the typical size of soccer field is $110\times70$ meters). As expected, average loss increases with longer sequences, due to cascading errors. However, this error scales sub-linearly with the length of the horizon, even though the policies were trained on sequences of length 50. Note also that the performance difference between decentralized and centralized policies is insignificant compared to the gap between coordinated and unstructured policies, further highlighting the benefits of structured coordination in multi-agent settings. The loss of a single network, non-joint training scheme is very large and thus omitted from Figure \ref{fig:experiment_compare} (see the appendix).
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{10Policy_v2.png}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\caption{\textit{Result of 10 coordinated imitation policies, corresponding with Figure \ref{fig:game_example}. White is the rolled-out imitation policies.}
\label{fig:ghost_trajectory}}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Visualizations.} Imitation loss, of course, is not a full reflection of the quality of the learned policies. Unlike predator-prey, the long-term reward signal is not available, so we rely on visual inspection as part of evaluation. Figure \ref{fig:ghost_trajectory} overlays policy prediction on top of the actual game sequence from Figure \ref{fig:game_example}. Additional test examples are included in our supplemental video \footnote{Watch video at \url{http://hoangminhle.github.io}}. We note that learned policies are qualitatively similar to the ground truth demonstrations, and can be useful for applications such as counterfactual replay analysis \cite{sloan2017}. Figure \ref{fig:role_components} displays the Gaussian components of the underlying HMM. The components correspond to the dominant modes of the roles assigned. Unlike the predator-prey domain, roles can be switched during a sequence of play. See the appendix for more details on role swap frequency.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{role_components.png}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\caption{\textit{Components of role distributions, corresponding to a popular formation arrangement in professional soccer}
\label{fig:role_components}}
\end{figure}
\section{Introduction}
\label{introduction}
The areas of multi-agent planning and control have witnessed a recent wave of strong interest due to the practical desire to deal with complex real-world problems, such as smart-grid control, autonomous vehicles planning, managing teams of robots for emergency response, among others.
From the learning perspective, (cooperative) multi-agent learning is not a new area of research \cite{stone2000multiagent,panait2005cooperative}. However, compared to the progress in conventional supervised learning and single-agent reinforcement learning, the successes of multi-agent learning have remained relatively modest. Most notably, multi-agent learning suffers from extremely high dimensionality of both the state and actions spaces, as well as relative lack of data sources and experimental testbeds.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{game_example.png}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\caption{\textit{Our motivating example of learning coordinating behavior policies for team sports from tracking data. Red is the attacking team, blue is the defending team, and yellow is the ball. }
\label{fig:game_example}}
\end{figure}
The growing availability of data sources for coordinated multi-agent behavior, such as sports tracking data \cite{formation}, now enables the possibility of learning multi-agent policies from demonstrations, also known as multi-agent imitation learning. One particularly interesting aspect of domains such as team sports is that the agents must coordinate. For example, in the professional soccer setting depicted in Figure \ref{fig:game_example}, different players must coordinate to assume different roles (e.g., defend left field). However, the roles and role assignment mechanism are unobserved from the demonstrations. Furthermore, the role for a player may change during the same play sequence. In the control community, this issue is known as ``index-free'' multi-agent control \cite{kingston2010index}.
Motivated by these challenges, we study the problem of imitation learning for multiple coordinating agents from demonstrations. Many realistic multi-agent settings require coordination among collaborative agents to achieve some common goal \cite{guestrin2002coordinated,kok2003multi}. Beyond team sports, other examples include learning policies for game AI, controlling teams of multiple robots, or modeling collective animal behavior. As discussed above, we are interested in settings where agents have access to the outcome of actions from other agents, but the coordination mechanism is neither clearly defined nor observed, which makes the full state only partially observable.
We propose a semi-supervised learning framework that integrates and builds upon conventional imitation learning and unsupervised, or latent, structure learning. The latent structure model encodes a coordination mechanism, which approximates the implicit coordination in the demonstration data.
In order to make learning tractable, we develop an alternating optimization method that enables integrated and efficient training of both individual policies and the latent structure model.
For learning individual policies, we extend reduction-based single-agent imitation learning approaches into multi-agent domain, utilizing powerful black-box supervised techniques such as deep learning as base routines.
For latent structure learning, we develop a stochastic variational inference approach.
We demonstrate the effectiveness of our method in two settings. The first is a synthetic experiment based on the popular predator-prey game. The second is a challenging task of learning multiple policies for team defense in professional soccer, using a large training set\footnote{Data at \url{http://www.stats.com/data-science/} and see video result at \url{http://hoangminhle.github.io}} of play sequences illustrated by Figure \ref{fig:game_example}. We show that learning a good latent structure to encode implicit coordination yields significantly superior imitation performance compared to conventional baselines.
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time an imitation learning approach has been applied to jointly learn cooperative multi-agent policies at large scale.
\section{Learning Approach}
\label{method}
Optimizing \eqref{eqn:objective} is challenging for two reasons. First, beyond the challenges inherited from single-agent settings, multi-agent imitation learning must account for multiple simultaneously learning agents, which is known to cause non-stationarity for multi-agent reinforcement learning \cite{busoniu2008comprehensive}. Second, the latent role assignment model, which forms the basis for coordination, depends on the actions of the learning policies, which in turn depend on the structured role assignment.
We propose an alternating optimization approach to solving \eqref{eqn:objective}, summarized in Figure \ref{fig:scheme}. The main idea is to integrate imitation learning with unsupervised structure learning by taking turns to (i) optimize for imitation policies while fixing a structured model (minimizing imitation loss), and (ii) re-train the latent structure model and reassign roles while fixing the learning policies (maximizing role assignment entropy). The alternating nature allows us to circumvent the circular dependency between policy learning and latent structure learning. Furthermore, for (i) we develop a stable multi-agent learning reduction approach.
\subsection{Approach Outline}
\label{subsec:combined_method}
Algorithm \ref{algo:main_algo} outlines our framework. We assume the latent structure model for computing role assignments is formulated as a graphical model. The multi-agent policy training procedure $\texttt{Learn}$ utilizes a reduction approach, and can leverage powerful off-the-shelf supervised learning tools such as deep neural networks \cite{hochreiter1997long}. The structure learning $\texttt{LearnStructure}$ and role assignment $\texttt{Assign}$ components are based on graphical model training and inference. For efficient training, we employ alternating stochastic optimization \cite{hoffman2013stochastic,johnson2014stochastic,beal2003variational} on the same mini-batches. Note that batch training can be deployed similarly, as illustrated by one of our experiments.
\begin{algorithm}[tb]
\begin{small}
\caption{ Coordinated Multi-Agent Imitation Learning}
\label{algo:main_algo}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE Multiple unstructured trajectory sets $U = \{ U_1,\ldots, U_K\}$ with $U_k = \{u_{t,k}\}_{t=1}^T$ and context $C = \{ c_t\}_{t=1}^T$.
\REQUIRE Graphical model $q$ with global/local parameters $\theta$ and $z$.
\REQUIRE Initialized policies $\pi_k, k=1,\ldots,K$
\REQUIRE Step size sequence $\rho_n, n=1,2,\ldots$
\REPEAT
\STATE $[A_1,\ldots,A_K] \leftarrow \texttt{Assign}\{U_1,\ldots,U_K \vert q(\theta,z)\}$ \\
\STATE $[\pi_1,\ldots,\pi_K] \leftarrow \texttt{Learn}\left[A_1,\ldots,A_K,C \right]$
\STATE Roll-out $\pi_1,\ldots, \pi_K$ to obtain $\widehat{A}_1,\ldots,\widehat{A}_K$
\STATE $A_k \leftarrow \widehat{A}_k \enskip \forall k$ \\
(Alternatively: $A_k \leftarrow \widehat{A}_k$ with prob $\eta$ for $\eta\rightarrow 1$)
\STATE $q(\theta,z) \leftarrow \texttt{LearnStructure}\{ A_1,\ldots,A_K,C,\theta,\rho_n\} $
\UNTIL No improvement on validation set
\OUTPUT $K$ policies $\pi_1,\pi_2,\ldots,\pi_K$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{small}
\end{algorithm}
We interleave the three components described above into a complete learning algorithm. Given an initially unstructured set of training data, an initialized set of policies, and prior parameters of the structure model, Algorithm \ref{algo:main_algo} performs alternating structure optimization on each mini-batch (size $1$ in Algorithm \ref{algo:main_algo}).
\vspace{-0.1in}
\begin{itemize}
\item Line 2: Role assignment is performed on trajectories $\{A_1,\ldots,A_K\}$ by running inference procedure (Algorithm \ref{algo:assignment}). The result is an ordered set $\left[ A_1,\ldots, A_K\right]$, where trajectory $A_k$ corresponds to policy $\pi_k$.
\vspace{-0.05in}
\item Line 3-5: Each policy $\pi_k$ is updated using joint multi-agent training on the ordered set $\left[A_1,\ldots,A_K,C\right]$ (Algorithm \ref{algo:joint_imitation}). The updated models are executed to yield a rolled-out set of trajectories, which replace the previous set of trajectories $\{ A_k\}$.
\vspace{-0.05in}
\item Line 6: Parameters of latent structured model are updated from the rolled-out trajectories (Algorithm \ref{algo:structure_learning}).
\end{itemize}
\vspace{-0.1in}
The algorithm optionally includes a mixing step on line 5, where the rolled-out trajectories may replace the training trajectories with increasing probability approaching 1, which is similar to scheduled sampling \cite{bengio2015scheduled}, and may help stabilize learning in the early phase of the algorithm. In our main experiment, we do not notice a performance gain using this option.
\subsection{Joint Multi-Agent Imitation Learning}
\label{subsec:imitation_learning}
In this section we describe the $\texttt{Learn}$ procedure for multi-agent imitation learning in Line 3 of Algorithm \ref{algo:main_algo}.
As background, for single agent imitation learning, reduction-based methods operate by iteratively collecting a new data set $\mathcal{D}_n$ at each round $n$ of training, consisting of state-action pairs $(s_t,a^*_t)$ where $a^*_t$ is some optimal or demonstrated action given state $s_t$. A new policy can be formed by (i) combining a new policy from this data set $\mathcal{D}_n$ with previously learned policy $\pi$ \cite{daume2009search} or (ii) learning a new policy $\pi$ directly from the data set formed by aggregating $\mathcal{D}_1,\ldots,\mathcal{D}_n$ \cite{dagger}. Other variants exist although we do not discuss them here.
The intuition behind the iterative reduction approach is to prevent a mismatch in training and prediction distributions due to sequential cascading errors (also called covariate-shift). The main idea is to use the learned policy's own predictions in the construction of subsequent states, thus simulating the test-time performance during training. This mechanism enables the agent to learn a policy that is robust to its own mistakes. Reduction-based methods also accommodate any black-box supervised training subroutine. We focus on using expressive function classes such as Long Short-Term Memory networks (LSTM) \citep{hochreiter1997long} as the policy class.\footnote{Note that conventional training of LSTMs does not address the cascading error problem. While LSTMs are very good at sequence-to-sequence prediction tasks, they cannot naturally deal with the drifting of input state distribution drift caused by action output feedback in dynamical systems \cite{bengio2015scheduled}.}
\begin{algorithm}[tb]
\begin{small}
\caption{ Joint Multi-Agent Imitation Learning \\ \texttt{Learn}$(A_1,A_2,\ldots,A_K,C)$}
\label{algo:joint_imitation}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE Ordered actions $A_k = \{ a_{t,k} \}_{t=1}^T\enskip \forall k$, context $\{ c_t\}_{t=1}^T$
\REQUIRE Initialized policies $\pi_1,\ldots, \pi_K$
\REQUIRE base routine $\texttt{Train}(S,A)$ mapping state to actions
\STATE Set increasing prediction horizon $j\in\{ 1,\ldots,T\}$
\FOR{$t = 0,j,2j,\ldots,T$}
\FOR{$i=0,1,\ldots,j-1$}
\STATE Roll-out $\hat{a}_{t+i,k} = \pi_k(\hat{s}_{t+i-1,k})\quad \forall$ agent $k$ \\
\STATE Cross-update for each policy $k\in \{ 1,\ldots,K\}$ \\
$\hat{s}_{t+i,k} = \varphi_k \left( \left[\hat{a}_{t+i,1},\ldots, \hat{a}_{t+i,k},\ldots,\hat{a}_{t+i,K}, c_{t+i} \right] \right) $ \\
\ENDFOR \\
\STATE Policy update for all agent $k$ \\
$\pi_k \leftarrow \texttt{Train}(\{\hat{s}_{t+i,k}, a_{t+i+1,k}^* \}_{i=0}^j) $
\ENDFOR \\
\OUTPUT $K$ updated policies $\pi_1,\pi_2,\ldots,\pi_K$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{small}
\end{algorithm}
Algorithm \ref{algo:joint_imitation} outlines the $\texttt{Learn}$ procedure for stable multi-agent imitation learning.
Assume we are given consistently indexed demonstrations $A = \left[ A_1,\ldots, A_K\right]$, where each $A_k = \{ a_{t,k}\}_{t=1}^T$ corresponds action of policy $\pi_k$.
Let the corresponding expert action be $a_{t,k}^*$.
To lighten the notation, we denote the per-agent state vector by $s_{t,k} = \varphi_k([a_{t,1},\ldots,a_{t,k},\ldots,a_{t,K},c_t]) \footnote{Generally, state vector $s_{t,k}$ of policy $\pi_k$ at time $t$ can be constructed as $s_{t,k}=\left[\phi_k([a_{1:t,1}, c_{1:t}]),\ldots,\phi_k([a_{1:t,K}, c_{1:t}]) \right]$}$
Algorithm \ref{algo:joint_imitation} employs a roll-out horizon $j$, which divides the entire trajectory into $T/j$ segments.
The following happens for every segment:
\vspace{-0.1in}
\begin{itemize}
\item Iteratively perform roll-out at each time step $i$ for all $K$ policies (line 4) to obtain actions $\{ \widehat{a}_{i,k}\}$.
\vspace{-0.05in}
\item Each policy simultaneously updates its state $\widehat{s}_{i,k}$, using the prediction from all other policies (line 5).
\vspace{-0.05in}
\item At the end of the current segment, all policies are updated using the error signal from the deviation between predicted $\widehat{a}_{i,k}$ versus expert action $a^*_{i,k}$, for all $i$ along the sub-segment (line 7).
\end{itemize}
\vspace{-0.1in}
After policy updates, the training moves on to the next $j$-length sub-segment, using the freshly updated policies for subsequent roll-outs. The iteration proceeds until the end of the sequence is reached. In the outer loop the roll-out horizon $j$ is incremented.
Two key insights behind our approach are:
\vspace{-0.1in}
\begin{itemize}
\item In addition to the training-prediction mismatch issue in single-agent learning, each agent's prediction must also be robust to imperfect predictions from other agents. This non-stationarity issue also arises in multi-agent reinforcement learning \cite{busoniu2008comprehensive} when agents learn simultaneously. We perform joint training by cross-updating each agent's state using previous predictions from other agents.
\vspace{-0.05in}
\item Many single-agent imitation learning algorithms assume the presence of a dynamic oracle to provide one-step corrections $a^*_t$ along the roll-out trajectories. In practice, dynamic oracle feedback is very expensive to obtain and some recent work have attempted to relax this requirement \cite{le2016smooth,ho2016generative}. Without dynamic oracles, the rolled-out trajectory can deviate significantly from demonstrated trajectories when the prediction horizon $j$ is large ($\approx T$), leading to training instability. Thus $j$ is gradually increased to allow for slowly learning to make good sequential predictions over longer horizons.
\end{itemize}
\vspace{-0.1in}
For efficient training, we focus on stochastic optimization, which can invoke base routine $\texttt{Train}$ multiple times and thus naturally accommodates varying $j$. Note that the batch-training alternatives to Algorithm \ref{algo:joint_imitation} can also employ similar training schemes, with similar theoretical guarantees lifted to the multi-agent case. The Appendix shows how to use DAgger \cite{dagger} for Algorithm \ref{algo:joint_imitation}, which we used for our synthetic experiment.
\subsection{Coordination Structure Learning}
\label{subsec:svi}
The coordination mechanism is based on a latent structured model that governs the role assignment. The training and inference procedures seek to address two main issues:
\vspace{-0.1in}
\begin{itemize}
\item $\texttt{LearnStructure}$: unsupervised learning a probabilistic role assignment model $q$.
\vspace{-0.05in}
\item $\texttt{Assign}$: how $q$ informs the indexing mechanism so that unstructured trajectories can be mapped to structured trajectories amenable to Algorithm \ref{algo:joint_imitation}.
\end{itemize}
\vspace{-0.1in}
Given an arbitrarily ordered set of trajectories $U = \{U_1,\ldots,U_K,C \}$, let the coordination mechanism underlying each such $U$ be governed by a true unknown model $p$, with global parameters $\theta$. We suppress the agent/policy subscript and consider a generic featurized trajectory $x_{t} = [u_{t},c_t]\enskip \forall t$. Let the latent role sequence for the same agent be $z = z_{1:T}$.
At any time $t$, each agent is acting according to a latent role $z_t\sim \texttt{Categorical}\{ \bar{1},\bar{2},\ldots,\bar{K}\}$, which are the local parameters to the structured model.
Ideally, role and index asignment can be obtained by calculating the true posterior $p(z|x,\theta)$, which is often intractable. We instead aim to approximate $p(z|x,\theta)$ by a simpler distribution $q$ via
techniques from stochastic variational inference \cite{hoffman2013stochastic}, which allows for efficient stochastic training on mini-batches that can naturally integrate with our imitation learning subroutine.
In variational inference, posterior approximation is often cast as optimizing over a simpler model class $\mathcal{Q}$, via searching for parameters $\theta$ and $z$ that maximize the evidence lower bound (ELBO) $\mathcal{L}$:
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{L}\left(q(z,\theta) \right) \triangleq \mathbb{E}_q \left[ \ln p(z,\theta,x)\right] - \mathbb{E}_q \left[ \ln q(z,\theta)\right] \leq \ln p(x)
\end{equation*}
Maximizing $\mathcal{L}$ is equivalent to finding $q\in\mathcal{Q}$ to minimize the KL divergence $\text{KL}\left( q(z,\theta |x) || p(z,\theta|x) \right)$. We focus on the structured mean-field variational family, which factorizes $q$ as $q(z,\theta) = q(z)q(\theta)$.
This factorization breaks the dependency between $\theta$ and $z$, but not between single latent states $z_t$, unlike variational inference for i.i.d data \cite{kingma2013auto}.
\subsubsection{Training to learn model parameters}
The procedure to learn the parameter of our structured model is summarized in Algorithm \ref{algo:structure_learning}. Parameter learning proceeds via alternating updates over the factors $q(\theta)$ and $q(z)$, while keeping other factor fixed. Stochastic variational inference performs such updates efficiently in mini-batches.
We slightly abuse notations and overload $\theta$ for the natural parameters of global parameter $\theta$ in the exponential family. Assuming the usual conjugacy in the exponential family, the stochastic \text{natural} gradient takes a convenient form (line 2 of Algo \ref{algo:structure_learning}, and derivation in Appendix), where $t(z,x)$ is the vector of sufficient statistics, $b$ is a vector of scaling factors adjusting for the relative size of the mini-batches. Here the global update assumes optimal local update $q(z)$ has been computed.
Fixing the global parameters, the local updates are based on message-passing over the underlying graphical model. The exact mathematical derivation depends on the specific graph structure. The simplest scenario is to assume independence among $z_t$'s, which resembles naive Bayes. In our experiments, we instead focus on Hidden Markov Models to capture first-order dependencies in role transitions over play sequences. In that case, line 1 of Algorithm \ref{algo:structure_learning} resembles running the forward-backward algorithm to compute the update $q(z)$. The forward-backward algorithm in the local update step takes $O(K^2T)$ time for a chain of length $T$ and $K$ hidden states. For completeness, derivation of parameter learning for HMMs is included in the Appendix.
\begin{algorithm}[tb]
\begin{small}
\caption{ Structure Learning \\ \texttt{LearnStructure}
$\{U_{1},\ldots,U_{K},C,\theta,\rho \} \mapsto q(\theta,z)$}
\label{algo:structure_learning}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE $X_k = \{x_{t,k}\}_{t=1}^T = \{[u_{t,k},c_t]\} \enskip \forall t,k. X = \{ X_k\}_{k=1}^K$ \\
Graphical model parameters $\theta$, stepsize $\rho$
\STATE Local update: compute $q(z)$ via message-passing while fixing $\theta$ (See Appendix for derivations)
\STATE Global parameter update: via natural gradient ascent \\
$\theta \leftarrow \theta (1-\rho)+\rho(\theta_{prior}+b^\top \mathbb{E}_{q(z)}\left[ t(z,x)\right]) $
\OUTPUT Updated model $q(\theta,z) = q(\theta)q(z)$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{small}
\end{algorithm}
\subsubsection{Inference for role and index assignment}
We can compute two types of inference on a learned $q$:
\textbf{Role inference.} Compute the most likely role sequence $\{ z_{t,k}\}_{t=1}^T\in \{ \bar{1},\ldots,\bar{K}\}^T$, e.g., using Viterbi (or dynamic programming-based forward message passing for graph structures). This most likely role sequence for agent $k$, which is the low-dimensional representation of the coordination mechanism, can be used to augment the contextual feature $\{ c_t\}_{t=1}^T$for each agent's policy training.
\textbf{Role-based Index Assignment} Transform the unstructured set $U$ into an ordered set of trajectories $A$ to facilitate the imitation learning step. This is the more important task for the overall approach.
The intuitive goal of an indexing mechanism is to facilitate consistent agent trajectory to policy mapping.
Assume for notational convenience that we want index $k$ assigned to an unique agent who is most likely assuming role $\bar{k}$. Our inference technique rests on the well-known Linear Assignment Problem \cite{papadimitriou1982combinatorial}, which is solved optimally via the Kuhn-Munkres algorithm. Specifically, construct the cost matrix $M$ as:
\vspace{-0.05in}
\begin{align}
M &= M_1\odot M_2 \label{eqn:cost_matrix} \\
M_1 &= \left[ q(\{ x_{t,k}\} \vert z_{t,k}= \bar{k}) \right] = \left[\prod_{t=1}^T q(x_{t,k}|z_{t,k} = \bar{k}) \right] \nonumber \\
M_2 &= \left[ \ln q(\{ x_{t,k}\} \vert z_{t,k} = \bar{k}) \right] = \left[ \sum_{t=1}^T \ln q(x_{t,k}|z_{t,k} = \bar{k}) \right] \nonumber
\end{align}
where $k=1,\ldots,K, \bar{k}=\bar{1},\ldots,\bar{K},\odot$ is the Hadamard product, and matrices $M_1, M_2$ take advantage of the Markov property of the graphical model.
Now solving the linear assignment problem for cost matrix $M$, we obtain the matching $\mathcal{A}$ from role $\bar{k}$ to index $k$, such that the total cost per agent is minimized. From here, we rearrange the unordered set $\{ U_1,\ldots, U_K\}$ to the ordered sequence $\left[ A_1,\ldots,A_K\right] \equiv [U_{\mathcal{A}(1)},\ldots,U_{\mathcal{A}(K)}]$ according to the minimum cost mapping.
To see why this index assignment procedure results in an increased entropy in the original objective \eqref{eqn:objective}, notice that:
\vspace{-0.1in}
\begin{align*}
H(\mathcal{A} |\mathcal{D}) &\approx -\sum_{\bar{k}=1}^K P(\bar{k})q(\mathcal{A}(A_k) = \bar{k})\log q(\mathcal{A}(A_k) = \bar{k}) \\
&=-\frac{1}{K}\sum_{\bar{k}=1}^K M(\bar{k},k),
\end{align*}
where we assume each latent role $\bar{k}$ has equal probability. The RHS increases from the linear assignment and consequent role assignment procedure.
Our inference procedure to perform role assignment is summarized in Algorithm \ref{algo:assignment}.
\begin{algorithm}[tb]
\begin{small}
\caption{ Multi-Agent Role Assignment \\ \texttt{Assign}
$\{U_{1},\ldots,U_{K}\vert q \} \mapsto [A_1,\ldots,A_K] $}
\label{algo:assignment}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE Approximate inference model $q$. Unordered trajectories $U = \{ U_{k}\}_{k=1}^K$. \\
\STATE Calculate cost matrix $M\in \mathbb{R}^{K\times K}$ per equation \ref{eqn:cost_matrix}
\STATE $\mathcal{A}\leftarrow\texttt{MinCostAssignment}(M)$ \\
\OUTPUT $A_k = U_{\mathcal{A}(k)}\quad \forall k=1,2,\ldots,K$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{small}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Problem Formulation}
\label{problem}
In coordinated multi-agent imitation learning, we have $K$ agents acting in coordination to achieve a common goal (or sequence of goals). Training data $\mathcal{D}$ consists of multiple demonstrations of $K$ agents. Importantly, we assume the identity (or indexing) of the $K$ experts may change from one demonstration to another. Each (unstructured) set of demonstrations is denoted by $U=\{U_{1},\ldots, U_{K}\}$, where $U_k = \{ u_{t,k}\}_{t=1}^T$ is the sequence of actions by agent $k$ at time $t$. Note that each set of demonstrations can have varying sequence length T. Let $C = \{ c_t\}_{t=1}^T$ be the context associated with each demonstration sequence.
\textbf{Policy Learning.} Our ultimate goal is to learn a (largely) decentralized policy, but for clarity we first present the problem of learning a fully centralized multi-agent policy. Following the notation of \cite{dagger}, let $\vec{\pi}(\vec{s}) := \vec{a}$ denote the joint policy that maps the joint state, $\vec{s} = [s_1,\ldots,s_K]$, of all $K$ agents into $K$ actions $\vec{a} = [a_1,\ldots,a_K]$. The goal is to minimize imitation loss:
\vspace{-3pt}
$$\mathcal{L}_{imitation} = \mathbb{E}_{\vec{s} \sim d_{\vec{\pi}}}\left[ \ell(\vec{\pi}(\vec{s})) \right],$$
where $d_{\vec{\pi}}$ denotes the distribution of states experienced by joint policy $\vec{\pi}$ and $\ell$ is the imitation loss defined over the demonstrations (e.g., squared loss for deterministic policies, or cross entropy for stochastic policies).
The decentralized setting decomposes the joint policy $\vec{\pi} = [\pi_1,\ldots,\pi_K]$ into $K$ policies, each tailored to a specific agent index or ``role''.\footnote{It is straightforward to extend our formulation to settings where multiple agents can occupy the same role, and where not all roles are occupied across all execution sequences.} The loss function is then:
\vspace{-3pt}
$$\mathcal{L}_{imitation} = \sum_{k=1}^K\mathbb{E}_{s \sim d_{\pi_k}}\left[ \ell(\pi_k(s_k)) \right].$$
\textbf{Black-Box Policy Classes.} In order to leverage powerful black-box policy classes such as random forests and deep learning, we take a learning reduction approach to training $\vec{\pi}$. One consequence is that the state space representation $s=[ s_1, \ldots, s_K]$ must be consistently indexed, e.g., agent $k$ in one instance must correspond to agent $k$ in another instance. This requirement applies for both centralized and decentralized policy learning, and is often implicitly assumed in prior work on multi-agent learning. A highly related issue arises in distributed control of index-free coordinating robots, e.g., to maintain a defined formation \cite{kloder2006path,kingston2010index}.
\textit{\textbf{Motivating example: Soccer Domain.}} Consider the task of imitating professional soccer players, where training data includes play sequences from different teams and games. Context $C$ corresponds to the behavior of the opposing team and the ball. The data includes multiple sequences of $K$-set of trajectories $U = \{ U_1,U_2,\ldots, U_K\}$, where the actual identity of player generating $U_k$ may change from one demonstration to the next.
One important challenge for black-box policy learning is constructing an indexing mechanism over the agents to yield a consistent state representation. For example, the same index should correspond to the ``left defender'' in all instances. Otherwise, the inputs to the policy will be inconsistent, making learning difficult if not impossible. Note that barring extensive annotations or some heuristic rule-based definitions, it is unnatural to quantitatively define what makes a player ``left defender''. In addition, even if we had a way to define who the ``left defender'' is, he may not stay in the same role during the same sequence.
\textbf{Role-based Indexing.} We address index-free policy learning via role learning and role-based index assignment. To motivate our notion of role, let's first consider the simplest indexing mechanism: one could equate role to agent identity. However, the data often comes from various sequences, with heterogeneous identities and teams of agents. Thus instead of learning identity-specific policies, it is more natural and data-efficient to learn a policy per role. However, a key challenge in learning policies directly is that \textit{the roles are undefined, unobserved, and could change dynamically within the same sequence.} We thus view learning the coordination, via role assignment, as an unsupervised structured prediction problem.
\textbf{Coordination via Structured Role Assignment.}
Instead of handcrafting the definition of roles, we learn the roles in an unsupervised fashion, without attaching any semantic labels to the roles. At the same time, role transition should obey certain structural regularity, due to coordination. This motivates using graphical models to represent the coordination structure.
\textbf{Coordinated Policy Learning.} We formulate the indexing mechanism as an assignment function $\mathcal{A}$ which maps the unstructured set $U$ and some probabilistic structured model $q$ to an indexed set of trajectory $A$ rearranged from $U$, i.e.,
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{A}:\{ U_1,..,U_K\}\times q\mapsto \left[ A_1,..,A_K\right],
\end{equation*}
where the set $\{ A_1,..,A_K\} \equiv \{ U_1,..,U_K\}$.
We view $q$ as a latent variable model that infers the role assignments for each set of demonstrations. Thus, $q$ drives the indexing mechanism $\mathcal{A}$ so that state vectors can be consistently constructed to facilitate optimizing for the imitation loss.
We employ entropy regularization, augmenting the imitation loss with some low entropy penalty \cite{grandvalet2004semi,dudik2004performance},
yielding our overall objective:
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:objective}
\min_{\pi_1,..,\pi_K, \mathcal{A}} \sum_{k=1}^K \mathbb{E}_{s_k \sim d_{\pi_k}} \left[ \ell(\pi_k(s_k)) | \mathcal{A}, \mathcal{D} \right] - \lambda H(\mathcal{A}|\mathcal{D})
\end{equation}
where both imitation loss and entropy are measured with respect to the state distribution induced by the policies, and $\mathcal{D}$ is training data. This objective can also be seen as maximizing the mutual information between latent structure and observed trajectories \cite{krause2010discriminative}.
\section{Other Related Work}
\label{related}
The problem of multi-agent imitation learning has not been widely considered, perhaps with the exception of \cite{chernova2007multiagent} which focused on very different applications and technical challenges (i.e., learning a model of a joint task by collecting samples from direct interaction with teleoperating human teachers). The actual learning algorithm there requires the learner to collect enough data points from human teachers for confident classification of task. It is not clear how well the proposed method would translate to other domains.
Index-free policy learning is generally difficult for black-box machine learning techniques. Some recent work has called attention to the importance of order to learning when input or output are sets \cite{vinyals2015order}, motivated by classic algorithmic and geometric problems such as learning to sort a set of numbers, or finding convex hull for a set of points, where no clear indexing mechanism exists.
Other permutation invariant approaches include those for standard classification \cite{shivaswamy2006permutation}.
|
\section*{Appendix}
In this appendix,
we present the technicalities of the calculations mentioned in the main text and additionally provide some further details about our methods.
The first section recalls generally known facts concerning fermionic linear optics.
The next three sections concern fidelity witnesses.
The next two are on sample complexities for evaluating the Gaussian fidelity witness with an estimate.
In the last section we provide details to robustness properties of the fidelity witness and the corresponding certification test.
\subsection{Methods of fermionic linear optics}
\label{app:FLO}
This section gives more details on results of fermionic linear optics used in the main text.
The first sub-subsection discusses unitary evolution in this formalism.
The second sub-subsection contains details on the Jordan-Wigner transformation, covariance matrices of spin product states and which spin operators need to be measured to measure the fermionic covariance matrix.
Finally we shortly comment on the numerical simulations.
\paragraph{Gaussian dynamics}
The Heisenberg evolution of Majorana operators is given as follows.
\begin{lemma}[Free fermion propagator]
Let
\begin{align}
\label{eq:H(A)}
H(\boldsymbol A) = \tfrac\i4 \sum_{j,k=1}^{2L}A_{j,k} m_jm_k\
\end{align}
with $\boldsymbol A=-\boldsymbol A^\t \in \mathbb R^{2L\times 2L}$. Then
\begin{align}
\label{eq:m(t)}
m_j(t) \equiv e^{\i t H(\boldsymbol A)}m_j e^{-\i t H(\boldsymbol A)} = \sum_{k=1}^{2L}Q_{j,k}(t) m_k
\end{align}
where $\boldsymbol Q(t)=e^{t\boldsymbol A}\in SO(2L)$.
\end{lemma}
Note that the propagator is manifestly real and there is no $\i$ in the exponent because $\boldsymbol A$ is antisymmetric.
\begin{proof}
We begin by noticing that $m_j(t)$ is differentiable and take a time-derivative obtaining
\begin{align}
\partial_t m_j(t)
&= \i H(\boldsymbol A) m_j(t) - m_j(t) H(\boldsymbol A)\\
&= \i [\ H(\boldsymbol A),\ m_j(t)\ ]
\end{align}
which is the Heisenberg equation of motion.
We further notice that
\begin{align}
\partial_t m_j(t) &= \i e^{\i t H(\boldsymbol{A})} [\ H(\boldsymbol{A}),\ m_j\ ] e^{-\i t H(\boldsymbol{A})}
\end{align}
which means that we need to evaluate the commutator at $t=0$.
Next we calculate the commutator
\begin{align}
[\ m_{j'}m_k,\ m_j\ ]=2m_{j'}\delta_{k,j}-2m_k\delta_{j',j}
\end{align}
which gives
\begin{align}
[\ H(\boldsymbol A),\ m_j\ ] &= \tfrac\i4 \sum_{j',k=1}^{2L}A_{j',k} [\ m_{j'}m_k,\ m_j\ ]\\
&= \tfrac\i2 \sum_{j',k=1}^{2L} ( A_{j',k} m_{j'}\delta_{k,j}-A_{j',k}m_{k} \delta_{j',j}) \\
&= \tfrac\i2 \sum_{k=1}^{2L} ( A_{k,j} m_{k}-A_{j,k}m_{k}) \\
&= - \i \sum_{k=1}^{2L} A_{j,k}m_{k} \ .
\end{align}
This allows us to write the above Heisenberg equation of motion explicitly as
\begin{align}
\partial_t m_j(t) = \sum_{k=1}^{2L} A_{j,k}m_{k}\ .
\end{align}
This linear system of $2L$ ordinary differential equations is solved by
\begin{align}
m_j(t) = \sum_{k=1}^{2L}Q_{j,k}(t) m_k\ ,
\end{align}
where $\boldsymbol Q=e^{t\boldsymbol A}\in SO(2L)$.
Indeed, this becomes apparent if one considers a vector $m = (m_1,\ldots,m_{2L})^\t$ then we get in vector notation
\begin{align}
\partial_t\ m(t) = \boldsymbol A\ m(t)\quad \Leftrightarrow\quad m(t) = e^{t\boldsymbol A}\ m\ .
\end{align}
\end{proof}
Given this we easily obtain the evolution equation for the covariance matrix $M(\varrho(t))_{j,k} = \frac{\i}{2}\mathrm{tr}\bigl([m_j,m_k]\,\varrho(t)\bigr) = \frac{\i}{2}\mathrm{tr}\bigl([m_j(t),m_k(t)]\,\varrho\bigr) = \sum_{j',k'=1}^{2L} Q_{j,j'}(t)Q_{k,k'}(t)M(\varrho(0))_{j',k'}$.
This in matrix notation gives $\boldsymbol M(\varrho(t)) = (\boldsymbol Q(t) \boldsymbol M(\varrho(0))\boldsymbol Q(t)^\t)_{j,k}$.
\paragraph{Using the Jordan-Wigner transformation}
This paragraph shows how to use the Jordan-Wigner transformation to translate between spins and fermions.
We first identify covariance matrices of simple states.
\begin{lemma}[Vacuum covariance matrix]
In the notation $\sigma^z\ket \uparrow = \ket\uparrow$ we have
\begin{align}
\boldsymbol{M}\big(\ketbra{\uparrow}{\uparrow}^{\otimes L}\big)\coloneqq\oplus_{j=1}^L\begin{psmallmatrix}
0 & -1 \\ 1 & 0
\end{psmallmatrix}.
\end{align}
In general if $\ket {\boldsymbol \omega}$ is a computational basis state with $\boldsymbol \omega\in\{0,1\}^{\times L}$ (identifying $\ket 0 = \ket \uparrow$ and $\ket 1 =\ket \downarrow$)
we have
\begin{align}
\boldsymbol{M}\big(\ketbra{\boldsymbol\omega}{\boldsymbol \omega}\big)\coloneqq\oplus_{j=1}^L\begin{psmallmatrix}
0 & -(-1)^{\omega_k} \\ (-1)^{\omega_k} & 0
\end{psmallmatrix}.
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The first statement follows directly from the second for $\omega_k=0$ for all $k$.
To show the latter, we first observe that $\sigma^z_k = -\i m_{2k-1}m_{2k}$.
Indeed using
\begin{align}
\label{eq:Pauli_rules}
\sigma^a\sigma^b = \delta_{a,b}\ensuremath\mathrm{id}_2 +\i \sum_{c=x,y,z}\varepsilon_{a,b,c} \sigma^c\
\end{align}
we get
\begin{align}
-\i m_{2k-1}m_{2k}
&= - \i \bigl(\prod_{k'<k}\sigma_{k'}^z\bigr) \sigma^x_k \bigl(\prod_{k''<k}\sigma_{k''}^z\bigr) \sigma^y_k\\
&= -\i \sigma^x_k\sigma^y_k= \sigma^z_k\ .
\end{align}
Next we observe that $\langle \sigma^x_k \rangle_{\boldsymbol{\omega}} = \langle \sigma^y_k\rangle_{\boldsymbol{\omega}} = 0$ and $\langle \sigma^z_k \rangle_{\boldsymbol{\omega}}=(-1)^{\omega_k}$ so the only non-vanishing elements are
\begin{align}
M_{2k-1,2k} = - M_{2k,2k-1} &= \i \langle m_{2k-1}m_{2k}\rangle_{\boldsymbol{\omega}}\\
&= - \langle \sigma^z_k \rangle_{\boldsymbol{\omega}} = -(-1)^{\omega_k}\ .
\end{align}
\end{proof}
In an experiment based on qubits the fermionic covariance matrix can be measured by making the following Pauli measurements.
\begin{lemma}[Fermion spin correlation dictionary]
For $j<k$ we have
\begin{itemize}
\item Odd-odd
\begin{align}
m_{2j-1}m_{2k-1}=-\i \sigma^y_j\bigl(\prod_{j<k'<k}\sigma_{k'}^z\bigr) \sigma^x_k
\end{align}
\item Odd-even
\begin{align}
m_{2j-1}m_{2k} = -\i \sigma^y_j\bigl(\prod_{j<k'<k}\sigma_{k'}^z\bigr) \sigma^y_k
\end{align}
\item Even-odd
\begin{align}
m_{2j}m_{2k-1} = \i \sigma^x_j\bigl(\prod_{j<k'<k}\sigma_{k'}^z\bigr) \sigma^x_k
\end{align}
\item Even-even
\begin{align}
m_{2j}m_{2k} = \i \sigma^x_j\bigl(\prod_{j<k'<k}\sigma_{k'}^z\bigr) \sigma^y_k\ .
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\begin{align}
m_{2j-1}m_{2k-1} &= \bigl(\prod_{j'<j}\sigma_{j'}^z\bigr) \sigma^x_j \bigl(\prod_{k'<k}\sigma_{k'}^z\bigr) \sigma^x_k\\
&= \sigma^x_j \sigma^z_j\bigl(\prod_{j<k'<k}\sigma_{k'}^z\bigr) \sigma^x_k\\
&= -\i \sigma^y_j\bigl(\prod_{j<k'<k}\sigma_{k'}^z\bigr) \sigma^x_k\;.
\end{align}
The remaining relations follow similarly and by again using \eqref{eq:Pauli_rules}.
\end{proof}
Considering the reversed direction of this dictionary, we find that the product of two spin operators is a product of again two Majorana operators only when the spins are neighboring in the Jordan-Wigner transformation from which we obtain the following corollary.
\begin{corollary}[XY models]
The Hamiltonian $H_\mathrm{spin}$ from main text maps to a quadratic fermionic Hamiltonian $H(\boldsymbol A)$ under the Jordan-Wigner transformation.
\end{corollary}
The translation invariant case is physically the most relevant case for which the following result first appeared in \cite{Pfeuty70} and we state it to make explicit which couplings we have used in our simulations.
\begin{lemma}[Transverse field Ising model]
The Hamiltonian of the transverse field Ising model
\begin{equation}
H_\mathrm{TFIM}
=
-J\,\sum_{k=1}^{L-1} \sigma^x_k\,\sigma^x_{k+1}- B\,\sum_{k=1}^L \sigma^z_k\,
\end{equation}
maps to free fermions under the Jordan-Wigner transformation and the couplings matrix read
\begin{align}
\boldsymbol{A}(J,B) = 2\left( \begin{array}{cccccc}
0&B&&&&\\
-B&0&J&&&\\
&-J&0&B&&\\
&&-B&0&J&\\
&&&-J&0&\\
&&&&&\ddots \end{array} \right) .
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
Note, that for compactness we write in the main text $\boldsymbol A(J) \equiv \boldsymbol A (J,0)$ and $\boldsymbol A(B) \equiv \boldsymbol A (0,B)$.
\begin{proof}
By the above dictionary lemma we have $\sigma^x_{k}\sigma^x_{k+1}=-\i m_{2k}m_{2k+1}$ and $\sigma^z_k= -\i m_{2k-1}m_{2k}$.
This gives
$H_\mathrm{TFIM} = \i \sum_{k=1}^{L-1}J m_{2k}m_{2k+1} + \i \sum_{k=1}^L B m_{2k-1}m_{2k}$
which can be put to the standard form $H(\boldsymbol A) = \tfrac\i 4 \sum_{j,k}^{2L} A_{j,k} m_j m_k$ by defining the matrix $\boldsymbol A$ as in the lemma statement.
\end{proof}
\paragraph{Comments on numerics}
The numerical code used to obtain Fig. 2 in main text is available at \cite{github}.
We use Wick's formula \cite{bravyi2004lagrangian} to calculate $|\langle \prod_{k=1}^n\sigma^z_k\rangle| = \mathrm{Pf}( \boldsymbol M_{1\ldots 2n})$ where $\mathrm{Pf}$ denotes the Pffafian which can be calculated using the package PFAPACK \cite{PFAPACK}.
\subsection{Proof that Eq.\ \eqref{eq:def_W} yields a fidelity witness and general witness construction}
\label{sec:Proof_general_wti_construction}
Here we first provide an expression for a fidelity witness of any arbitrary, totally generic pure target state, not restricted to the Gaussian fermionic setting.
\begin{proposition}[General witness construction]
\label{prop:witness_construction}
Let $\varrho_\text{t}$ be any pure target state, $0<\Delta=\lambda_1\le\ldots\le \lambda_N$, and $P_1$, $P_2$, $\hdots$, and $P_N$ positive-semidefinite operators such that $\varrho_\text{t}+ \sum_{l=1}^N P_l=\ensuremath\mathrm{id}$ and $\mathrm{tr}(\varrho_\text{t}\, P_l)=0$ for all $l=1, \ldots , N$.
Then,
\begin{align}
\mathcal{W}\coloneqq\ensuremath\mathrm{id} -\Delta^{-1}\sum_{l=1}^N \lambda_l \, P_l
\end{align}
is a fidelity witness for $\varrho_\text{t}$.
\end{proposition}
The fact that the observable $\mathcal{W}$ in Eq.\ \eqref{eq:def_W} defines a fidelity witness for the free-fermionic target state in Eq.\ \eqref{eq:taregt_state_def} follows from Proposition~\ref{prop:witness_construction} taking $N=2^L-1$, identifying $l$ with an $L$-bit string $\boldsymbol{\nu}\neq\boldsymbol{\omega}$, and taking
$\lambda_{\boldsymbol{\nu}}=\sum_{j=1}^L\left[ (1-\omega_j) \nu_j +\omega_j(1- \nu_j)\right]$ and $P_{\boldsymbol{\nu}}=U\ket{\boldsymbol{\nu}}\bra{\boldsymbol{\nu}}U^\dagger$.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{prop:witness_construction}]
We start with Property \ref{item:iff} in Def.\ \ref{def:witness}.
Let $\varrho_p$ be such that $\mathrm{tr}[\mathcal{W} \varrho_p]=1$.
Then $\Delta^{-1}\sum_{k=1}^N \lambda_l \mathrm{tr}[ P_k\varrho_p]=0$.
As all terms are non-negative, we have $\mathrm{tr}[ P_k\varrho_p]=0$.
From this we write $1=\mathrm{tr}[\varrho_p \ensuremath\mathrm{id}]=\mathrm{tr}[\varrho_p \varrho_\text{t}]+\sum_{k=1}^N \mathrm{tr}[ P_k\varrho_p]=\mathrm{tr}[\varrho_p \varrho_\text{t}]$, which means, since $\varrho_\text{t}$ is pure, that $\varrho_p=\varrho_\text{t}$.
The converse direction starting from $\varrho_p=\varrho_\text{t}$ follows from $\mathrm{tr}[\varrho_\text{t} P_k]=0$.
We now prove Property \ref{item:geq} in Def.\ \ref{def:witness}.
For any state vector $\ket \psi$ we have
\begin{align}
\sum_{k=1}^N \lambda_l \langle \psi| {P}_k| \psi \rangle
&\geq
\Delta \sum_{k=1}^N \langle \psi| {P}_k| \psi \rangle
\\
&= \Delta (1-\langle \psi|\varrho_\text{t}| \psi \rangle)
\, .
\end{align}
This means that
\begin{align}
\langle \psi| \varrho_\text{t}| \psi \rangle\geq \langle \psi| \mathcal{W}| \psi \rangle
\end{align}
which one may write
$\varrho_\text{t}\succeq \mathcal{W}=\ensuremath\mathrm{id} -\Delta^{-1} \sum_{k=1}^N \lambda_l P_l$, where $\succeq$ denotes semidefinite dominance.
This relation can be used in order to lower bound the fidelity.
If we write the preparation state in its eigenbasis $\varrho_{p}=\sum_k p_k |k\rangle\langle k|\succeq 0$, then we find the following
\begin{align}
\mathrm{tr}[(\varrho_\text{t} -\mathcal{W})\varrho_{p}]=\sum_k p_k \langle k|\varrho_\text{t} -\mathcal{W}|k\rangle\ge 0\;.
\end{align}
Thus we arrive at
\begin{align}
F=\mathrm{tr}[\varrho_\text{t}\, \varrho_{p}]\ge\mathrm{tr}[\mathcal{W}\, \varrho_{p}]\;.
\end{align}
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Eq.\ \texorpdfstring{\eqref{eq:def_Fgeq}}{(9)}: Fidelity-witness in terms of covariance matrices}
\label{sec:evaluation}
Before the proof, let us first provide useful facts from fermionic linear optics theory.
The covariance matrix of any Fock state vector $\ket{\boldsymbol{\omega}}$ is given, introducing the short-hand notation $\boldsymbol{M}_{\boldsymbol{\omega}}\coloneqq\boldsymbol{M}(\ketbra{\boldsymbol{\omega}}{\boldsymbol{\omega}})$ by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:def_Jw}
\boldsymbol{M}_{\boldsymbol{\omega}}=\bigoplus_{k=1}^L (1-2w_k)
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & -1 \\ 1 & 0
\end{pmatrix} \;.
\end{align}
This is readily seen from the fact that $\i [m_{2k-1},m_{2k}]/2=(f_k+f_k^\dagger)(f_k-f_k^\dagger)=2 n_k-\ensuremath\mathrm{id}$ which gives $M_{2k-1,2k}=\i\bra{\boldsymbol \omega} m_{2k-1}m_{2k}\ket{\boldsymbol \omega}=2w_k-1=-M_{2k,2k-1}$ and that all other covariance matrix entries are zero.
Put differently, fermionic Fock states are of the most simple product form.
In order to introduce coherences in the system one can rotate the state by a Gaussian unitary $U$ with mode action $\boldsymbol{Q}$ which then yields
\begin{align}
\boldsymbol{M}(U\ketbra{\boldsymbol{\omega}}{\boldsymbol{\omega}}U^\dagger)= \boldsymbol{Q} \, \boldsymbol{M}_{\boldsymbol{\omega}}\, \boldsymbol{Q}^\t .
\end{align}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Eq.\ \eqref{eq:def_Fgeq}]
In order to evaluate the witness we notice that the numbering operator of mode $k$ is
\begin{align}
n_k=\frac{\ensuremath\mathrm{id}}{2}+\frac{\i}{4}[m_{2k-1},m_{2k}]
\end{align}
and \begin{align}\ensuremath\mathrm{id} -n_k=\frac{\ensuremath\mathrm{id}}{2}-\frac{\i}{4}[m_{2k-1},m_{2k}]. \end{align}
This allows us to write the projector $n^{(\boldsymbol{\omega})}$ as
\begin{align}
n^{(\boldsymbol{\omega})}=\sum_{j=1}^L\left[\ensuremath\mathrm{id}/2+ \frac{\i}{4} (1-2\omega_j) [m_{2k-1},m_{2k}])\right ]
\,.
\end{align}
We therefore have
\begin{align}
\mathrm{tr}(\varrho_p \mathcal{W}) &=1-\frac{L}{2}
- \frac{\i}{4}
\sum_{k=1}^L (1-2w_k)\mathrm{tr}\bigl(U^\dagger\varrho_pU\bigl[ m_{2k-1} , m_{2k} \bigr] \bigr)
\\
&=
1-\frac{L}{2} - \frac{1}{2}
\sum_{k=1}^L(1-2w_k)M(U^\dagger\, \varrho_p\, U)_{2k-1,2k} \, ,
\end{align}
where the definition of the covariance matrix \eqref{eq:def_cm} has been used.
As $\tilde{\boldsymbol{M}} \coloneqq \boldsymbol{M}(U^\dagger\, \varrho_p\, U)=\boldsymbol{Q}^\t \, \boldsymbol{M}(\varrho_\text{p})\, \boldsymbol{Q}$ is anti-symmetric, we can write
$\tildeM_{2k-1,2k}$ as
\begin{equation}
\tilde M _{2k-1,2k}
=
\frac12\mathrm{tr}\Bigl[
\begin{pmatrix}
0&\tilde M _{2k-1,2k}\\
\tilde M _{2k,2k-1} &0
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & -1 \\ 1 & 0
\end{pmatrix}
\Bigr].
\end{equation}
We further notice that\ \eqref{eq:def_Jw} allows us to write
\begin{align}
\sum_{k=1}^L(1-2w_k)\tilde M_{2k-1,2k}=\frac12 \mathrm{tr}[\tilde{\boldsymbol{M}}\boldsymbol{M}_{\boldsymbol{\omega}}]\,.
\end{align}
From the definition of $\boldsymbol{M}(\varrho_\text{t})=\boldsymbol{Q} \, \boldsymbol{M}_{\boldsymbol{\omega}}\, \boldsymbol{Q}^\t$ we finally obtain
\begin{align}
\mathrm{tr}(\varrho_p \mathcal{W})
&=
1-\frac{L}{2} - \frac14 \mathrm{tr}[\boldsymbol{M}(\varrho_\text{p})\,\boldsymbol{M}(\varrho_\text{t})]\\
&=1+\frac14 \mathrm{tr}\bigl[(\boldsymbol{M}(\varrho_\text{p})-\boldsymbol{M}(\varrho_\text{t}))^\t \boldsymbol{M}(\varrho_\text{t}) \bigr]\,.
\end{align}
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~3 (Sample complexity of \texorpdfstring{$F_\W$}{F})}
\label{sec:single_shot_imp_sampling}
In this section, we compute the number of experimental runs required to get a finite-sample estimate $F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p})$ of $F_\W(\varrho_\text{p})$ satisfying Eq.\ \eqref{eq:large_dev_bound}
with the measurement scheme with single-shot importance sampling described in the main text. This sets the upper bound on $\mathcal N_{\epsilon,\delta}(\mathcal W)$ in Eq.\ \eqref{eq:unified_exp_sample_complex}, proving Theorem \ref{thm:main}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:main}]
We begin by noting that one can directly evaluate $F_\W(\varrho_\text{p})$ from the value of
\begin{align}
\mathcal X\coloneqq\mathrm{tr}\bigl[\boldsymbol{M}(\varrho_\text{p})^\t\,\boldsymbol{M}(\varrho_\text{t})\bigr]=4(F_\mathcal{W}+\frac L 2 -1).
\end{align}
Indeed, if $|\mathcal X^*-\mathcal X|\le 4\epsilon$, then $|F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p})-F_\W(\varrho_\text{p})|\le \epsilon$.
We define conditional probability
\begin{align}
P_{\beta\vert j,k}\coloneqq \mathrm{tr}\Big[\hat m^{(\beta)}_{j,k}\,\varrho_{p}\Big]
\end{align}
and the sampling distribution
\begin{align}
P_{j,k}=\frac{|M_{j,k}(\varrho_\text{t})|}{|\boldsymbol{M}(\varrho_\text{t})|}
\end{align}
for $(j,k) \in \Omega$ with $|\boldsymbol{M}(\varrho_\text{t})| = \sum_{(j,k) \in \Omega} |M_{j,k}(\varrho_\text{t})|\le 2L^2$.
By Bayes' theorem, we have that $P_{\beta,j,k}=P_{\beta\vert j,k} P_{j,k}$ is a well-defined probability distribution.
Additionally, we define the importance sampling variable
\begin{align}
X_{\beta, j,k}\coloneqq 2\, |\boldsymbol{M}(\varrho_\text{t})|\,\beta\,\text{sgn}\big[M_{j,k}(\varrho_\text{t})\big]
\end{align}
which is distributed over $P_{\beta,j,k}$.
With these definitions we check that the average of $X$ gives $\mathcal X$
\begin{align}
\label{eq:witness_non_const1}
\mathbb E[ X]
&=\sum_{(j,k)\in \Omega,\beta=\pm1} X_{\beta, j,k}P_{\beta,j,k}\\
&= 2\sum_{(j,k)\in\Omega} \text{sgn}\big[M_{j,k}(\varrho_\text{t})\big]
|M_{j,k}(\varrho_\text{t})|\sum_{\beta=\pm1} \beta \mathrm{tr}[ \hat m^{(\beta)}_{j,k}\,\varrho^{(p)}]
\label{eq:bernstein_eval}\\
&=\mathrm{tr}\bigl[\boldsymbol{M}(\varrho_\text{p})^\t\,\boldsymbol{M}(\varrho_\text{t})\bigr]\;.
\end{align}
We now use Hoeffding's inequality to see that this results in a $(\epsilon,\delta)$-evaluation promise.
We have
\begin{align}
\mathbb{P} \left [|\mathcal X -\frac{1}{\mathcal{N}}\sum_{m=1}^\mathcal{N} X_{\mu(m)}| > 4\epsilon\right] \leq 2\exp\left({-\frac{2\,\mathcal{N}\,\epsilon^2} {|\boldsymbol{M}(\varrho_\text{t})|^2}}\right).
\end{align}
We would like the RHS to be upper bounded by $\delta$ so we obtain
\begin{align}
\mathcal N_{\epsilon,\delta}(\mathcal{W})=\left\lceil\frac{\ln(2/\delta) |\boldsymbol{M}(\varrho_\text{t})| ^2}{2\,\epsilon^2}\right\rceil
\label{eq:final_complexity}
\end{align}
which is the sample complexity, i.e., yielding the inequality~\eqref{eq:unified_exp_sample_complex}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Sample complexity for entrywise evaluation}
\label{sec:entrywise_eval}
Here, we compute the number of experimental runs required to get a finite-sample estimate $F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p})$ of $F_\W(\varrho_\text{p})$ satisfying Eq.\ \eqref{eq:large_dev_bound} with a measurement scheme that does not exploit importance sampling, i.e., where all $|\Omega|$ observables are deterministically measured, but that exploits the fact that commuting observables with indices in $\Omega$ can be measured simultaneously in each run. As we show, the resulting bound is less tight than the one in Eq.\ \eqref{eq:unified_exp_sample_complex}.
More precisely, we consider a procedure where all $|\Omega|$ observables are measured the same number of times
\begin{align}
\eta=\epsilon^{-2}L^3 \ln(2 |\Omega|/\delta)
\end{align}
and we obtain the sample complexity $\mathcal N_{\epsilon,\delta}(\mathcal{W}) =4L \eta$.
We denote the estimator of $\boldsymbol{M}$ by $\boldsymbol{M}^\ast$.
The fact that the covariance matrix entries are bounded and lie in the interval $-1< M_\mu<1$ allows us to use Hoeffding's inequality.
Taking $b=
\ln(2|\Omega|/\delta)
$ and making a union bound we find
\begin{align}
\label{eq:exponential_bound}
\mathbb P\Bigl[
\forall \mu \in \Omega: \bigl| {M}_\mu -{M}_\mu^\ast \bigr|
\leq
\sqrt{2b/\eta}
\Bigr]&=\\
1-\mathbb P\Bigl[
\exists \mu \in \Omega: \bigl| {M}_\mu -{M}_\mu^\ast\bigr|
\geq
\sqrt{2b/\eta}
\Bigr]&\ge\\
1-|\Omega|\max_{\mu\in\Omega}\mathbb P\Bigl[
\bigl| {M}_\mu -{M}_\mu^\ast \bigr|
\geq
\sqrt{2b/\eta}
\Bigr]
&\geq 1-2|\Omega|\ensuremath\mathrm{e}^{-b},
\end{align}
where we have used that $\mathbb{P}[A\cup B]\le \mathbb P [A]+\mathbb P[B]$ for any probability measure $\mathbb P$.
We check that $2|\Omega|\ensuremath\mathrm{e}^{-b}=\delta$
and additionally
\begin{align}
\sqrt{2 b/\eta}=\sqrt{2\epsilon^2L^{-3}}=\sqrt 2 L^{-3/2}\epsilon
\end{align}
and therefore we have \begin{align}
\mathbb P\left[ 2^{-1/2}L^{3/2}\mnorm{\boldsymbol{M} -\boldsymbol{M}^\ast} \le \epsilon \right]\ge 1-\delta.
\end{align}
Eq.\ \eqref{eq:large_dev_bound} follows thanks to the following Lemma which tells us that one can efficiently estimate the fidelity lower bound from estimates of the covariance matrix of $\varrho_p$ with small errors.
\begin{lemma}[Stability]\label{prop:stability}
The fidelity lower bound $F_\W(\varrho_\text{p})$ is Lipschitz continuous with Lipschitz constant $L^{3/2}/\sqrt{2}$ with respect to the max-norm, i.e.,
for any two covariance matrices $\boldsymbol{M} $ and $\boldsymbol{M}^*$ we have for the respective values of the fidelity witnesses
\begin{align}
\label{eq:stability}
|F_\W(\varrho_\text{p})-F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p})|
\leq
2^{-1/2} L^{3/2} \mnorm{\boldsymbol{M} -\boldsymbol{M}^\ast} \, .
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
In the following proof, we denote the trace-norm by $\norm{{\,\cdot\,}}_1$,
the Schatten $2$-norm (or Frobenius norm) by $\norm{{\,\cdot\,}}_2$, and
the spectral norm by $\snorm{{\,\cdot\,}}$.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma~\ref{prop:stability}]
Let
\begin{align}
\boldsymbol{\mathcal{J}}_L=\oplus_{k=1}^L \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 \\ -1 & 0
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{align}
It is enough to show that the linear map $\boldsymbol{M} \mapsto \mathrm{tr}[\boldsymbol{Q}\,\boldsymbol{M}\, \boldsymbol{Q}^\t\, \boldsymbol{\mathcal{J}}_L]$ is Lipschitz continuous at the origin with Lipschitz constant $(2L)^{3/2}$.
By H\"olders inequality we have
\begin{align}
\bigl|\mathrm{tr}[\boldsymbol{Q}\,\boldsymbol{M}\, \boldsymbol{Q}^\t\, \boldsymbol{\mathcal{J}}_L]\bigr|
&=
\bigl|\mathrm{tr}[\boldsymbol{M}\, \boldsymbol{Q}^\t\, \boldsymbol{\mathcal{J}}_L \,\boldsymbol{Q}]\bigr|
\\
&\leq
\norm{\boldsymbol{M}}_1 \snorm{\boldsymbol{Q}^\t\, \boldsymbol{\mathcal{J}}_L \,\boldsymbol{Q}} = \norm{\boldsymbol{M}}_1 \, ,
\label{eq:bound_M_tr_norm}
\end{align}
where we have used that
$\norm{{\,\cdot\,}}_\infty$ unitarily invariant and that $\norm{\boldsymbol{\mathcal{J}}_L}_\infty =1$
in the last step.
It remains to show that $\norm{\boldsymbol{M}}_1\leq 2L$.
But for any $2L \times 2L$ matrix $\boldsymbol{M}$ it holds that
\begin{align}
\norm{\boldsymbol{M}}_1 \leq \sqrt{2L} \norm{\boldsymbol{M}}_2 \leq \sqrt{2L}\, 2L \mnorm{\boldsymbol{M}},
\label{eq:bound_M_max_norm}
\end{align}
where we have used
(i) a general norm inequality for the Schatten $1$- and $2$-norm,
(ii) that the Schatten $2$-norm is the same as the vector $2$-norm of the vectorized matrix,
(iii) a general norm inequality for the vector $2$-norm and the vector $\infty$-norm, and
(iv) that the vector $\infty$-norm of a vectorized matrix is the max-norm of the matrix.
Note that the bound \eqref{eq:bound_M_max_norm} is tight for general matrices, as can be seen by choosing $\boldsymbol{M}$ as the discrete Fourier transform matrix on $\mathbb{C}^{2L}$.
Inserting Eq.~\eqref{eq:bound_M_max_norm} into \eqref{eq:bound_M_tr_norm} completes the proof.
\end{proof}
Finally, in order to derive the sample complexity, we need to partition the set $[2L]\times[2L]$ such that the corresponding elements of the covariance matrix commute.
We do it by considering bands parallel to the diagonal of the covariance matrix.
Let us consider the non-trivial elements closest to the diagonal $\mu=(i,i+1)$.
We bi-partition this band into indices starting with an even or an odd number.
By construction, all associated covariance matrix observables will commute.
As there are in total $2L-1$ such off-diagonals, the total number of i.i.d. state preparations is bounded by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:l_variance}
\mathcal N_{\epsilon,\delta}(\mathcal{W}) =4L \eta=\frac{4 L^4 \ln(2 |\Omega|/\delta)}{\epsilon^2}\;.
\end{align}
Since $|\Omega|\le2L^2+L$, this scaling is logarithmically worse in $L$ than in Eq.\ \eqref{eq:unified_exp_sample_complex}.
\subsection{Robustness of the certification test}
\label{sec:robustness}
Ref.~\cite{aolita2015reliable} established a framework of certification where the notion of \emph{robust quantum state certification} has been defined.
In particular, in such a certification test, one desires to accept states above a threshold fidelity $F_{\th}$ and requires to reject states below $F_{\th}$.
But a realistic certification test cannot resolve fidelities $F$ very close to $F_{\th}$ and thus one needs to allow for a fidelity region that remains undetermined.
This idea leads to a robust certification test \cite{aolita2015reliable,Hangleiter16}, where one allows for a fidelity gap $\Delta<1-F_{\th}$.
A \emph{robust} test is guaranteed to accept a preparation $\varrho_p$ if $F\ge F_{\th}+\Delta$, to reject it if $F< F_{\th}$, and possibly accept it in the intermediate region.
These conditions for the test concern the exact fidelity and need to be translated to a statement concerning the estimate of the witness $F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p})$.
\def\mathcal S_\perp(\Delta, \epsilon){\mathcal S_\perp(\Delta, \epsilon)}
We will show that for all preparations $\varrho_p$ in a certain class of states $\mathcal S_\perp(\Delta, \epsilon)$ it suffices to compare the estimator $F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p})$ to the number $F_\text{T}+\epsilon$.
In other words, such test is robust
\begin{enumerate}[i)]
\item \label{item:reject}
if $\varrho_p$ is such that $F<F_{\th}$ then in the same time the witness will testify this i.e. $F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p})< F_{\th}+\epsilon$.
This means that whenever the test \emph{has to} reject a preparation, then it will.
\item \label{item:accept}
if $F\ge F_{\th}+\Delta$ then we have $F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p})\ge F_{\th}+\epsilon$.
That is, whenever the fidelity is larger then the threshold fidelity enlarged by the fidelity gap, then the preparation is accepted by the test.
\end{enumerate}
Note, that if $F\in[F_{\th}, F_{\th}+\Delta]$, then the certification test might accept or reject the preparation.
Specifically, the class $\mathcal S_\perp(\Delta, \epsilon)$ characterizes the set of preparations $\varrho_p$ where the witness behaves as a weak oracle separating $F\le F_\text{T}$ from $F\ge F_\text{T}+\Delta$.
We now construct this class.
With a given target state $U\ket{\boldsymbol{\omega}}$ and its corresponding fidelity witness in mind, we define a mismatch parameter of some preparation state $\varrho_p$ to be
\begin{align}\label{eq:def_mismatch}
n_\perp(\varrho_p)
\coloneqq
\mathrm{tr}[\hat n^{(\boldsymbol{\omega})}\,U^\dagger\, \varrho_p\, U]\ge0\;.
\end{align}
Let us note that the preparation $\varrho_p$ can be decomposed with the Hilbert-Schmidt inner product into the target state $\varrho_\text{t}$ and a orthogonal contribution $\varrho_\perp\coloneqq\varrho_\perp(\varrho_\text{t}, \varrho_p)$, that is $\varrho_p=F \varrho_\text{t} +(1-F)\varrho_\perp$ for $0\le F=\mathrm{tr}[\varrho_p\, \varrho_\text{t}] \le 1$ and $\mathrm{tr}[\varrho_\text{t}\,\varrho_\perp]=0$.
Using linearity of our witness for this decomposition yields
\begin{align}
F_\W(\varrho_\text{p})&=F+(1-F)(1- \mathrm{tr}[U\,\hat n^{(\boldsymbol{\omega})}\,U^\dagger\, \varrho_\perp])\nonumber\\
&=1-(1-F)n_\perp(\varrho_\perp)\;.\label{eq:FW_mismatch}
\end{align}
Therefore the mismatch content has the properties $n_\perp(\varrho_\text{t})=0$ and $n_\perp(\varrho_p)=(1-F)n_\perp(\varrho_\perp)$.
For a given maximum estimation error
$0<\epsilon<(1-F_\text{T})/2$, {fidelity gap} $\Delta>2\,\epsilon$ and {fidelity threshold} $F_\text{T}<1$ we define the \emph{mismatch content threshold}
\begin{align}\label{eq:def_n_perp_th}
n_{\perp,\th}(\Delta,\epsilon)\coloneqq\frac{1-F_\text{T}-2\,\epsilon}{1-F_{\th}-\Delta}\;.
\end{align}
This allows us to consider the following subset of all states $\mathcal S$
\begin{equation}\label{eq:low_mismatch_states}
\mathcal S_\perp(\Delta, \epsilon) (\Delta,\epsilon)
=
\{ \varrho \in \mathcal S \,|\, n_\perp(\varrho) \le n_{\perp,\th}(\Delta,\epsilon)\}\;.
\end{equation}
It is a convex set containing mixtures of states with possibly very large mismatch content $n_{\perp,\th}$ and which includes the target state $\varrho_\text{t}$ in its interior.
The following theorem states that our fidelity witness leads to a robust certification test.
\begin{theorem}[Robust certification of pure Gaussian states]
Let $F_\text{T}<1$ be a threshold fidelity, $\delta>0$ a maximal failure probability , $0<\epsilon<(1-F_\text{T})/2$ a maximal estimation error and $2\,\epsilon<\Delta<1-F_\text{T}$ a fidelity gap.
Let $\varrho_\text{t}$ be a pure Gaussian state and $\varrho_p$ a preparation state.
Let $F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p})$ be the estimator of the fidelity witness from Theorem~\ref{thm:main}.
The test accepting the preparation if $F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p})\ge F_\text{T}+\epsilon$ and rejecting if $F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p}) < F_\text{T}+\epsilon$ yields a robust certification of $\varrho_\text{t}$ if $\varrho_p\in \mathcal S_\perp(\Delta, \epsilon)$.
For states with high enough fidelity $F>1-L^{-2}$ the witness yields a non-trivial lower bound $F_\W(\varrho_\text{p})\ge 0$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The rejection Property \ref{item:reject}) follows by observing that according to Theorem~\ref{thm:main} we have with probability at least $1-\delta$ that
\begin{align}
|F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p})-F_\W(\varrho_\text{p})|\le\epsilon
\end{align}
from which it follows that
\begin{align}
F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p})-\epsilon
\le
F_\W(\varrho_\text{p})\;.
\end{align}
Next we use that the fidelity witness is a lower bound to the fidelity $F$ and that in case \ref{item:reject}) we have $ F < F_{\th}$ to get the chain
\begin{align}
F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p})-\epsilon \le F_\W(\varrho_\text{p}) \le F < F_\text{T}\;.
\end{align}
Therefore, if $ F < F_{\th}$ then $F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p}) < F_\text{T}+\epsilon$.
In this step we did not need to assume anything on the preparation $\varrho_p$.
Secondly, we show that the test has the acceptance Property \ref{item:accept}) as well.
We now use $F\geq F_\text{T} + \Delta$ and assume that $n_\perp(\varrho_p)\le n_{\perp,\th}$ to obtain from Eq.~\eqref{eq:FW_mismatch}
\begin{align}
F_\W(\varrho_\text{p}) &=1-(1-F) n_\perp \nonumber \\
&\ge 1-n_{\perp,\th}+Fn_{\perp,\th} \nonumber\\
&\ge 1-n_{\perp,\th}+(F_\text{T}+\Delta)n_{\perp,\th} \,
\end{align}
which with the definition of the mismatch content \eqref{eq:def_n_perp_th}
becomes
\begin{align}
F_\W(\varrho_\text{p}) &\ge 1-(1-F_\text{T}-\Delta)n_{\perp,\th} \\
&\ge 1-(1- F_{\th}-2\,\epsilon) \\
&\ge F_{\th}+2\,\epsilon \, .
\end{align}
Therefore, we find with probability at least $1-\delta$ the inequality for the estimator of the fidelity witness
\begin{align}
F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p})\ge F_\W(\varrho_\text{p})-\epsilon\ge F_{\th}+\epsilon\;.
\end{align}
These two steps show that the test is robust for $\varrho\in \mathcal S_\perp(\Delta, \epsilon)$.
Finally let us assume $F_\text{T}\ge1- L^{-2}$.
We need to show that if $F\ge F_\text{T}+\Delta$ then $F_\W^*(\varrho_\text{p})\ge F_\text{T}+\epsilon$.
By Fuchs-van der Graaf inequality we have $D(\varrho_p,\varrho_\text{t})\le \sqrt{1-F}\le\sqrt{1-F_\text{T}}=L^{-1}$.
From this bound it follows that
\begin{align}
\eta&=\sum_{k=1}^L\left[(1-w_k)\mathrm{tr}[n_kU^\dagger\varrho_pU]+w_k\mathrm{tr}[(\ensuremath\mathrm{id}-n_k)U^\dagger\varrho_pU]\right]\\
&\le\sum_{k=1}^L L^{-1} =1.
\end{align}
From this bound, we find
\begin{align}
F_\W(\varrho_\text{p}) =1-\eta \ge 0 \;.
\end{align}
\end{proof}
Note that the witness is exact $F_\W(\varrho_\text{p})=F$ for preparation state vectors supported on the Hilbert space subspace $\text{Span}(\{U\vacket, U f_1^\dagger\vacket,\ldots,U f_L^\dagger\vacket\})$.
Finally, Eq.\ \eqref{eq:FW_mismatch} allows to intuitively understand when exactly the witness fails to be an oracle, which we illustrate with one last example.
\subsection*{ Example: symmetry breaking}
Consider a scenario, where the system has initially a $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry between the vacuum $\vacket$ and the fully occupied state
vector $\ket{\overline 1}$, and then at some point \emph{spontaneous symmetry breaking}
occurs such that the system must choose one of the two states.
If the preparation is given by $ \varrho_p=U\left[(1-\lambda)\vac + \lambda | \overline 1 \rangle\langle \overline 1|\right]U^\dagger$ then the mismatch is a very good way of quantifying the fidelity of symmetry breaking, namely $n_\perp(\varrho_p)=\lambda\langle \overline 1|\hat N |\overline 1\rangle=\lambda L$ is a good order parameter.
The mismatch is low for $\lambda \ll 1/L$ which occurs for high values of our witness and it therefore allows to show that the system chose the vacuum in the $\mathbb Z_2$ symmetry breaking.
Note, that the mismatch parameter will be high for many-particle GHZ states, but those are expected to be unstable and will not occur for no reason e.g. due to incoherent noise.
In particular, low mismatch is also a natural assumption when certifying a digital simulation of the transverse field Ising Hamiltonian.
As a final corollary to this example, note that for an $L$-mode system we have $\| n^{(\boldsymbol{\omega})}\|=L$ and therefore for all states $\varrho$ in a ball defined by $\|\varrho-\varrho_\text{t}\|_1\le 1/L$ we will find $F_\W(\varrho_\text{p})\ge0$.
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
Weighted transition systems (WTSs) are used to model concurrent and distributed systems
in the case where some resources are involved, such as time, bandwidth, fuel, or energy consumption.
Recently, the concept of a cyber-physical system (CPS),
which considers the integration of computation and the physical world has become relevant in modeling various real-life situations.
In these models, sensor feedback affects computation, and through machinery, computation can further affect physical processes.
The quantitative nature of weighted transition systems is well-suited for the quantifiable inputs and sensor measurements of CPSs,
but their rigidity makes them less well-suited for the uncertainty inherent in CPSs.
In practice, there is often some uncertainty attached to the
resource cost, whereas weights in a WTS are precise.
Thus, the model may be too restrictive and unable to capture the uncertainties
inherent in the domain that is being modeled.
In this paper, we attempt to remedy this shortcoming by introducing
a modal logic for WTSs that allows for approximate
reasoning by speaking about upper and lower bounds for the weights of the transitions.
The logic has two types of modal operators that reason about the minimal and maximal weights on transitions, respectively.
This allows reasoning about models where the quantitative information may be imprecise
({\em e.g.}\ due to imprecisions introduced when gathering real data), but where we can establish a lower and upper bound for transitions.
In order to provide the semantics for this logic, we use the set of possible transition weights from
one state to a set of states as an abstraction of the actual transition weights.
The logic is expressive enough to characterize WTSs up to a relaxed notion of weighted bisimilarity,
where the classical conditions are replaced with conditions requiring that the minimal
and maximal weights on transitions are matched.
In \cite{esik2014}, Zolt\'{a}n \'{E}sik also considered the issue of bisimulation for weighted transition systems,
although in the more general setting of synchronization trees with weights in an arbitrary monoid or semiring.
Synchronization trees arise by unfolding the transitions of a weighted transition system starting in some state
which will become the root of the tree.
Both \'{E}sik's and our notion of bisimilarity bears some resemblance
to probabilistic bisimulation \cite{probabilistic_bisimulation},
by considering not only single transitions but transitions to equivalence classes of states.
However, while we require that the upper and lower bounds of these transitions should match,
the bisimilarity of \'{E}sik requires that the sum of the transitions should be the same.
This is motivated by the fact that the synchronization trees do not form a category
which respects the additive structure of a semiring.
However, as \'{E}sik proves, if one takes the quotient with respect to
his version of weighted bisimilarity,
then the category one obtains does respect the additive structure.
Thus, the semiring structure of the weights is of vital importance to \'{E}sik's work,
but is an aspect that we have not considered in our work.
Our main contribution is a complete axiomatization of our logic,
showing that any validity in this logic can be proved as a theorem from the axiomatic system.
Completeness allows us to transform any validity checking problem into a theorem proving one that can
be solved automatically by modern theorem provers,
thus bridging the gap to the theorem proving community.
The completeness proof adapts the classical filtration method,
which allows one to construct a (canonical) model using maximal consistent sets of formulae.
The main difficulty of adapting this method to our setting
is that we must establish both lower and upper bounds for the transitions in this model.
To achieve this result, we demonstrate that our logic enjoys the finite model property.
Our second significant contribution is a decision procedure for determining the satisfiability of formulae in our logic.
This decision procedure makes use of the tableau method to construct a tableau for a given formula.
If the constructed tableau is successful,
then the formula is satisfiable, and a finite model for the formula can be generated from the tableau.
\subsection*{Related Work.}
Several logics have been proposed in the past to express properties of quantified (weighted, probabilistic or stochastic) systems.
They typically use modalities indexed with real numbers to express properties such as \textit{``$\varphi$ holds with at least probability $b$''},
\textit{``we can reach a state satisfying $\varphi$ with a cost at least $r$''}, etc.
In the context of weighted automata, weighted monadic second order logic
has been introduced by Droste and Gastin \cite{droste2005}
to capture the behaviour of weighted automata for commutative semirings.
This work has been extended to many closely related systems \cite{babari2016}\cite{droste2006a}\cite{droste2006b}\cite{meinecke2006}\cite{fichtner2011}.
There has also been work on connecting weighted monadic second order logic with probabilistic CTL \cite{bollig2009}.
For weighted transition systems, weighted modal logic has been introduced by Larsen and Mardare \cite{larsen1}
to reason about the consumption of resources in such a system.
This logic has been extended to handle recursion \cite{larsen2014a}\cite{larsen2014b}
as well as parallel composition and concurrency \cite{LarsenMX15}.
For both the original weighted modal logic and its concurrent extension,
complete axiomatizations were developed.
A weighted extension of the $\mu$-calculus was introduced by Larsen et al. in \cite{larsen2015},
where a complete axiomatization for this extension was also given.
While our setting is that of weighted transition systems,
our logic and the development of its theory has more in common with Markovian logic
than with the previously mentioned work on weighted systems.
Markovian logic was introduced by Mardare et al. \cite{mardare2012}\cite{cardelli2011a}
building on previous work on probability logics \cite{Zhou09}\cite{Fagin}\cite{Heifetz200131}.
Markovian logic reasons about probabilistic and stochastic systems
using operators $L_r$ and $M_r$ which mean that a property hold with \emph{at least} probability $r$
or \emph{at most} probability $r$, respectively.
Much of the work on Markovian logic has focused on giving a complete axiomatization for the logic {\cite{KozenMP13},
culminating in a Stone duality for Markov processes \cite{6571564}.
However, compositional aspects have been considered in \cite{cardelli2011b},
where also an axiomatization was given for Markovian logic with an operator for parallel composition.
While our logical syntax resembles that of Markovian logic,
our semantics is different in the sense that we argue not about probabilities,
but about an interval of possible weights.
For instance, in the aforementioned logics we have a validity of type $\vdash\neg L_r\phi\to M_r\phi$
saying that the value of the transition from the current state to $\phi$ is either at least $r$ or at most $r$;
on the other hand, in our logic the formula $\neg L_r\phi\land \lnot M_r\phi$ might have a model since $L_r\phi$ and $M_r\phi$
express the fact that the lower cost of a transition to $\phi$ is at least $r$ and the highest cost is at most $r$ respectively.
Our completeness proof uses a technique similar to the one used for weighted modal logic \cite{larsen1} and Markovian logic \cite{KozenMP13}\cite{mardare2012}\cite{cardelli2011a}.
It is however different from these related constructions since our axiomatization is finitary, while the aforementioned ones require infinitary proof rules.
Our axiomatic systems are related to the ones mentioned above and the mathematical structures revealed by this work are also similar to the related ones.
This suggest a natural extension towards a Stone duality result along the lines of \cite{6571564}, which we will consider in a future work.
Decidability results regarding satisfiability have also been given for some related logics,
such as weighted modal logic \cite{Larsen2016} and probabilistic versions of CTL and the $\mu$-calculus \cite{katoen:sat}.
However, the satisfiability problem is known to be undecidable for
other related logics, in particular timed logics such as TCTL \cite{ALUR19932}
and timed modal logic \cite{DBLP:journals/entcs/JaziriLMX14}.
This fact suggests that our logic is an interesting one which, despite its expressivity, remains decidable.
Our approach of considering upper and lower bounds is related
to interval-based formalisms such as interval Markov chains (IMCs) \cite{JonssonL91}
and interval weighted modal transition systems (WMTSs) \cite{Juhl2012408}.
Much like our approach, IMCs consider upper and lower bounds on transitions
in the probabilistic case.
WMTSs add intervals of weights to individual transitions
of modal transition systems, in which there can be both may- and must-transitions.
A main focus of the work both on IMCs and WMTSs have been
a process of refinement, making the intervals progressively smaller
until an implementation is obtained.
However, none of these works have explored the logical perspective up to the level of axiomatization or satisfiability results,
which is the focus of our paper.
\section{Model}
The models addressed in this paper are weighted transition systems,
in which transitions are labeled with numbers to specify the cost of the corresponding transition.
In order to specify and reason about properties regarding imprecision, such as
``the maximum cost of going to a safe state is $10$''
and ``the minimum cost of going to a halting state is $5$'',
we will abstract away the individual transitions
and only consider the minimum and maximum costs from a state to another.
We will do this by constructing for any two states the set of weights that are allowed
from one to the other.
First we recap the definition of a weighted transition system.
Let $\mathcal{AP}$ be a countable set of atomic propositions.
A WTS is formally defined as follows:
\begin{defi}
A \emph{weighted transition system (WTS)} is a tuple $\mathcal{M} = (S, \rightarrow, \ell)$, where
\begin{itemize}
\item $S$ is a non-empty set of \emph{states},
\item $\rightarrow \subseteq S \times \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0} \times S$ is the \emph{transition relation}, and
\item $\ell : S \to 2^{\mathcal{AP}}$ is a \emph{labeling function} mapping to each state a set of atomic propositions.
\end{itemize}
\end{defi}
Note that we impose no restrictions on the state space $S$; it can be uncountable.
We write $s \xrightarrow{r} t$ to mean that $(s,r,t) \in \rightarrow$.
We will say that a WTS is \emph{image-finite} if for any $s \in S$
there are only finitely many $t \in S$ such that $s \xrightarrow{r} t$
for some $r \in \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}$.
When modeling cyber-physical systems,
it is often unreasonable to expect one to know the
exact weights for transitions.
However, it is often the case that one has some bounds
on the actual weights, {\em e.g.}\ one might know
that the cost of taking some transition is between $5$ and $25$.
In order to reason about these bounds, we abstract away
the individual transitions, and instead consider the set
of weights between a state and a set of states.
\begin{defi}\label{def:theta}
For an arbitrary WTS $\mathcal{M} = (S,\rightarrow,\ell)$, the function
$\theta_{\mathcal{M}} : S \to \left(2^S \to 2^{\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}}\right)$
is defined for any state $s \in S$ and set of states $T \subseteq S$ as
\[
\transm{s}{T}
=
\{r \in \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0} \mid \exists t \in T \;\mbox{such that}\; s \xrightarrow{r} t\}.
\]
\end{defi}
Thus $\transm{s}{T}$ is the set of all possible weights of going from $s$ to a state in $T$.
We will sometimes refer to $\trans{s}{T}$ as the \emph{image from $s$ to $T$}
or simply as an \emph{image set}.
In the rest of the paper, we will use the notation
\[\transl{s}{T} = \begin{cases} -\infty & \text{if } \trans{s}{T} = \emptyset \\ \inf\trans{s}{T} & \text{otherwise} \end{cases}\]
and
\[\transr{s}{T} = \begin{cases} \infty & \text{if } \trans{s}{T} = \emptyset \\ \sup\trans{s}{T} & \text{otherwise.} \end{cases}\]
Thus $\transl{s}{T}$ will be a lower bound on the weights from $s$ to $T$
and $\transr{s}{T}$ will be an upper bound.
\begin{exa}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[WTS, node distance=3cm]
\node[state, label=above left:{\{\tt waiting\}}] (0) {$s_1$};
\node[state, label=below:{\{\tt cleaning\}}] (1) [below left = of 0] {$s_2$};
\node[state, label=below:{\{\tt charging\}}] (2) [below right = of 0] {$s_3$};
\path[->] (0) edge [loop above] node {$1$} (0);
\path[->] (0) edge [bend left = 10, above] node [above, xshift=1.5mm] {$1$} (2);
\path[->] (0) edge [bend left = 40, above] node [above, xshift=1.5mm] {$2$} (2);
\path[->] (2) edge [bend left = 10, below] node [below, xshift=-2mm] {$60$} (0);
\path[->] (2) edge [bend left = 40, below] node [below left, xshift=2mm] {$100$} (0);
\path[->] (0) edge [bend left = 40, below] node [below, xshift=1mm] {$0$} (1);
\path[->] (1) edge [bend right = 10, below] node [below, xshift=1mm] {$5$} (0);
\path[->] (1) edge [bend left = 10, above] node [above, xshift=-2mm] {$10$} (0);
\path[->] (1) edge [bend left = 40, above] node [above, xshift=-2mm] {$15$} (0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{A simple model of a robot vacuum cleaner.}
\label{fig:wts-example}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:wts-example} shows a simple model of a robot vacuum cleaner that
can be in a waiting state, a cleaning state, or a charging state.
This is an example of a cyber-physical system where
the costs of transitions are necessarily imprecise.
The time it takes to recharge the batteries depends on the
condition of the batteries as well as that of the charger;
the time it takes to clean the room depends on how dirty the room is,
and how free the floor is from obstacles;
and the time it takes to reach the charger depends on where in the room
the robot is when it needs to be recharged.
By constructing the image sets, we can abstract away from the individual transitions.
For example, we have $\trans{s_2}{\{s_1\}} = \{5,10,15\}$,
so $\transl{s_2}{\{s_1\}} = 5$ and $\transr{s_2}{\{s_1\}} = 15$.
\end{exa}
We will now establish some useful properties of image sets.
In particular, the transition function is monotonic with respect to set inclusion,
and union distributes over image sets as one might expect.
\begin{lem}[Monotonicity of $\theta$]\label{lem:thetamono}
Let $\mathcal{M} = (S,\rightarrow,\ell)$ be a WTS
and let $T_1$ and $T_2$ be subsets of $S$.
If $T_1 \subseteq T_2$, then $\trans{s}{T_1} \subseteq \trans{s}{T_2}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:thetaunion}
Let $\mathcal{M} = (S,\rightarrow,\ell)$ be a WTS.
For any $s \in S$ and $T_1,T_2 \subseteq S$, it holds that
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\trans{s}{T_1 \cup T_2} = \trans{s}{T_1} \cup \trans{s}{T_2}$ and
\item $\trans{s}{T_1 \cap T_2} \subseteq \trans{s}{T_1} \cap \trans{s}{T_2}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
As usual we would like some way of relating model states with equivalent behavior.
To this end we define the notion of a bisimulation relation.
The classical notion of a bisimulation relation for weighted transition systems \cite{blackburn},
which we term weighted bisimulation, is defined as follows.
\begin{defi}
Given a WTS $\mathcal{M} = (S, \rightarrow, \ell)$,
an equivalence relation $\mathcal{R} \subseteq S \times S$ on $S$
is called a \emph{weighted bisimulation relation}
iff for all $s,t \in S$, $s \mathcal{R} t$ implies
\begin{itemize}
\item (Atomic harmony) $\ell(s) = \ell(t)$,
\item (Zig) if $s \xrightarrow{r} s'$ then there exists $t' \in S$ such that $t \xrightarrow{r} t'$ and $s' \mathcal{R} t'$, and
\item (Zag) if $t \xrightarrow{r} t'$ then there exists $s' \in S$ such that $s \xrightarrow{r} s'$ and $s' \mathcal{R} t'$.
\end{itemize}
\end{defi}
We say that $s,t \in S$ are weighted bisimilar, written $s \sim_W t$,
iff there exists a weighted bisimulation relation $\mathcal{R}$ such that $s \mathcal{R} t$.
Weighted bisimilarity, $\sim_W$, is the largest weighted bisimulation relation.
Since it is our goal to abstract away from the exact weights on the transitions,
the bisimulation that we will now introduce
does not impose the classical zig-zag conditions \cite{blackburn} of a bisimulation relation,
but instead require that bounds be matched for any bisimulation class.
\begin{defi}\label{def:bisim}
Given a WTS $\mathcal{M} = (S, \rightarrow, \ell)$,
an equivalence relation $\mathcal{R} \subseteq S \times S$ on $S$
is called a \emph{generalized weighted bisimulation relation}
iff for all $s,t \in S$, $s \mathcal{R} t$ implies
\begin{itemize}
\item (Atomic harmony) $\ell(s) = \ell(t)$,
\item (Lower bound) $\transl{s}{T} = \transl{t}{T}$, and
\item (Upper bound) $\transr{s}{T} = \transr{t}{T}$
\end{itemize}
for any $\mathcal{R}$-equivalence class $T \subseteq S$.
\end{defi}
Given $s,t \in S$ we say that $s$ and $t$
are generalized weighted bisimilar, written $s \sim t$,
iff there exists a generalized weighted bisimulation relation
$\mathcal{R}$ such that $s \mathcal{R} t$.
We let $\sim$ denote generalized weighted bisimilarity
which is defined as
\[
\mathord{\sim} = \bigcup \left\{\mathcal{R} \mid \mathcal{R} \text{ is a generalized weighted bisimulation relation} \right\}.
\]
We will now show that generalized weighted bisimilarity, $\sim$, is the largest generalized weighted bisimulation relation.
To this end, we first need to show that $\sim$ is an equivalence relation.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:simequiv}
Generalized weighted bisimilarity, $\sim$, is an equivalence relation.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
In order to prove that generalized weighted bisimilarity is an equivalence relation, we have to show that it is reflexive, symmetric and transitive.
\begin{description}
\item[Reflexivity] Consider the identity relation
\[
\mathcal{I} = \left\{(s,s) \mid s \in S \text{ for some WTS } \mathcal{M} = (S, \rightarrow, \ell) \right\}.
\]
It is trivial to verify that $\mathcal{I}$ is a generalized weighted bisimulation relation, and therefore $\mathcal{I} \subseteq \mathord{\sim}$.
\item[Symmetry] Let $\mathcal{M} = (S, \rightarrow, \ell)$ be a WTS and $s,t \in S$ states such that $s \sim t$.
Because $s \sim t$ there must exist a generalized weighted bisimulation relation $\mathcal{R}$ such that $s \mathcal{R} t$.
Since $\mathcal{R}$ is an equivalence relation, we immediately get $t \sim s$.
\item[Transitivity] Let $\mathcal{M} = (S, \rightarrow, \ell)$ be a WTS and $s,t,u \in S$ states such that $s \sim t$ and $t \sim u$.
There must exist generalized weighted bisimulation relations $\mathcal{R}$ and $\mathcal{R}'$ such that $s \mathcal{R} t$ and $t \mathcal{R}' u$.
Let $\mathcal{R}'' = (\mathcal{R} \cup \mathcal{R}')^{+}$ be the transitive closure of the union of $\mathcal{R}$ and $\mathcal{R}'$.
Since $\mathcal{R}$ and $\mathcal{R}'$ are both equivalence relations, $\mathcal{R} \cup \mathcal{R}'$ is reflexive and symmetric,
and since the transitive closure of a symmetric and reflexive relation is symmetric and reflexive,
we get that $\mathcal{R}''$ is an equivalence relation.
We need to show that $\mathcal{R}''$ is a generalized weighted bisimulation relation.
Atomic harmony is trivially satisfied.
Suppose that $\trans{u}{T''} \neq \emptyset$ for some $T'' \in S/\mathcal{R}''$ implying the existence of a state $u' \in T''$ such that $\trans{u}{\{u'\}} \neq \emptyset$,
further implying the existence of an equivalence class $T' \in S/\mathcal{R}'$ such that $u' \in T'$ and thus $\trans{u}{T'} \neq \emptyset$.
$t \mathcal{R}' u$ implies $\trans{t}{T'} \neq \emptyset$ which further implies the existence of a state $t' \in T'$ such that $\trans{t}{\{t'\}} \neq \emptyset$.
There must exist an equivalence class $T \in S/\mathcal{R}$ such that $t' \in T$ implying $\trans{t}{T} \neq \emptyset$.
Because $s \mathcal{R} t$ we must have $\trans{s}{T} \neq \emptyset$ implying the existence of a state $s' \in T$ such that $\trans{s}{\{s'\}} \neq \emptyset$.
$s',t' \in T$ implies $s' \mathcal{R} t'$, $t',u' \in T'$ implies $t' \mathcal{R}' u'$,
and therefore $s' \mathcal{R}'' u'$ implying $s' \in T''$ which further implies $\trans{s}{T''} \neq \emptyset$.
Therefore $\trans{u}{T''} \neq \emptyset$ implies $\trans{s}{T''} \neq \emptyset$ for all $T'' \in S/\mathcal{R}''$.
Symmetric arguments show that $\trans{s}{T''} \neq \emptyset$ implies $\trans{u}{T''} \neq \emptyset$ for all $T'' \in S/\mathcal{R}''$,
and therefore $\trans{s}{T''} = \emptyset$ if and only if $\trans{u}{T''} = \emptyset$ for all $T'' \in S/\mathcal{R}''$.
Suppose towards a contradiction that $\transl{s}{T''} \neq \transl{u}{T''}$ for some $T'' \in S/\mathcal{R}''$.
We have two cases to consider, namely $\transl{s}{T''} < \transl{u}{T''}$ and $\transl{s}{T''} > \transl{u}{T''}$.
If $\transl{s}{T''} < \transl{u}{T''}$ there must exist a rational number $q \in \mathbb{Q}$ such that $\transl{s}{T''} < q < \transl{u}{T''}$,
implying the existence of a state $s' \in T''$ such that $\transl{s}{T''} \leq \transl{s}{\{s'\}} < q$.
There must exist $T \in S/\mathcal{R}$ such that $s' \in T$ implying $\transl{s}{T} < q$.
Because $s \mathcal{R} t$ we must have $\transl{s}{T} = \transl{t}{T}$ implying the existence of a state $t' \in T$ such that $\transl{t}{\{t'\}} < q$.
There must exist $T' \in S/\mathcal{R}'$ such that $t' \in T'$ implying $\transl{t}{T'} < q$.
Because $t \mathcal{R}' u$ we must have $\transl{t}{T'} = \transl{u}{T'}$ implying the existence of a state $u' \in T'$ such that $\transl{u}{\{u'\}} < q$.
$s',t' \in T$ implies $s' \mathcal{R} t'$, $t',u' \in T'$ implies $t' \mathcal{R} u'$,
and therefore $s' \mathcal{R}'' u'$, implying $u' \in T''$ and therefore $\transl{u}{T''} < q$, leading to a contradiction.
Symmetric arguments show that also $\transl{s}{T''} > \transl{u}{T''}$ leads to a contradiction and therefore $\transl{s}{T} = \transl{u}{T}$ for any $T \in S/\mathcal{R}''$.
Similar arguments show that $\transr{s}{T} = \transr{u}{T}$ for any $T \in S/\mathcal{R}''$ thus showing that $\mathcal{R}''$
is a generalized weighted bisimulation relation implying $\mathcal{R}'' \subseteq \mathord{\sim}$ and therefore $s \sim t$ and $t \sim u$ implies $s \sim u$. \qedhere
\end{description}
\end{proof}
Having established that $\sim$ is an equivalence relation, we will now show that it is indeed the largest generalized weighted bisimulation relation.
\begin{thm}
Generalized weighted bisimilarity, $\sim$, is the largest generalized weighted bisimulation relation.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We first show that $\sim$ is a generalized weighted bisimulation relation.
By Lemma \ref{lem:simequiv} we know that $\sim$ is an equivalence relation.
Let $\mathcal{M} = (S, \rightarrow, \ell)$ be a WTS and $s,t \in S$ states such that $s \sim t$.
There must exist a generalized weighted bisimulation relation $\mathcal{R}$ such that $s \mathcal{R} t$,
which trivially verifies atomic harmony.
Suppose that $\trans{t}{T} \neq \emptyset$ for some $T \in S/\mathord{\sim}$, implying the existence of a state $t' \in T$ such that $\trans{t}{\{t'\}} \neq \emptyset$.
There must exist an equivalence class $T' \in S/\mathcal{R}$ such that $t' \in T'$, which implies that $\trans{t}{T'} \neq \emptyset$.
Because $s \mathcal{R} t$ we must have $\trans{s}{T'} \neq \emptyset$, implying the existence of a state $s' \in T'$ such that $\trans{s}{\{s'\}} \neq \emptyset$.
Because $s',t' \in T'$ we must have $s' \mathcal{R} t'$ and hence $s' \sim t'$,
so $s' \in T$ and thus $\trans{s}{T} \neq \emptyset$.
Symmetric arguments show that $\trans{s}{T} \neq \emptyset$ implies $\trans{t}{T} \neq \emptyset$
and therefore $\trans{s}{T} = \emptyset$ if and only if $\trans{t}{T} = \emptyset$ for all $T \in S/\mathord{\sim}$.
Suppose $\transl{s}{T} \neq \transl{t}{T}$ for some $T \in S/\mathord{\sim}$.
We have two cases to consider, namely $\transl{s}{T} < \transl{t}{T}$ and $\transl{s}{T} > \transl{t}{T}$.
If $\transl{s}{T} < \transl{t}{T}$ there must exist a rational number $q \in \mathbb{Q}$ such that $\transl{s}{T} < q < \transl{t}{T}$,
implying the existence of a state $s' \in T$ such that $\transl{s}{T} \leq \transl{s}{\{s'\}} < q$.
There must exist $T' \in S/\mathcal{R}$ such that $s' \in T'$ and hence $\transl{s}{T'} < q$.
Because $s \mathcal{R} t$ we have $\transl{s}{T'} = \transl{t}{T'}$, which means that there exists a state $t' \in T'$ such that $\transl{t}{\{t'\}} < q$.
$s',t' \in T'$ implies $s' \mathcal{R} t'$ which further implies $s' \sim t'$ and therefore $\transl{t}{T} < q$, leading to a contradiction.
Symmetric arguments show that also $\transl{s}{T} > \transl{t}{T}$ leads to a contradiction, and therefore $\transl{s}{T} = \transl{t}{T}$ for all $T \in S/\mathord{\sim}$.
Similar arguments show that $\transr{s}{T} = \transr{t}{T}$ for any $T \in S/\mathord{\sim}$, thus showing that $\sim$ is a generalized weighted bisimulation relation.
$\sim$ was defined as the union of all generalized weighted bisimulation relations,
so for any generalized weighted bisimulation relation $\mathcal{R}$
we must have $\mathcal{R} \subseteq \mathord{\sim}$,
and hence we conclude that $\sim$ is the largest generalized weighted bisimulation relation.
\end{proof}
In what follows, we will use bisimulation to mean generalized weighted bisimulation and bisimilarity to mean generalized weighted bisimilarity.
\begin{exa}\label{ex:sim_nwsim}
Consider the WTS depicted in Figure \ref{fig:ex_bisim_nwbisim}.
It is easy to see that $\{s',t'\}$ is a $\sim$-equivalence class,
and in fact it is the only $\sim$-equivalence class with in-going transitions.
Since $\transl{s}{\{s',t'\}} = \transl{t}{\{s',t'\}} = 1$
and $\transr{s}{\{s',t'\}} = \transr{t}{\{s',t'\}} = 3$ we must have $s \sim t$,
but because $s \xrightarrow{2} s'$ and $t \not \xrightarrow{2}$ it cannot be the case that $s \sim_W t$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}[WTS, node distance=2cm]
\node[state, label=left:{$\{a\}$}] (s0) {$s$};
\node[state, label=left:{$\{b\}$}] (s1) [below=of s0] {$s'$};
\node[state, label=right:{$\{a\}$}] (t0) [right=of s0] {$t$};
\node[state, label=right:{$\{b\}$}] (t1) [below=of t0] {$t'$};
\path (s0) edge[bend right=45] node[left] {$1$} (s1);
\path (s0) edge node[left] {$2$} (s1);
\path (s0) edge[bend left=45] node[left] {$3$} (s1);
\path (t0) edge[bend right=45] node[left] {$1$} (t1);
\path (t0) edge[bend left=45] node[left] {$3$} (t1);
\end{tikzpicture}
\captionof{figure}{$s \sim t$ but $s \not \sim_W t$.}
\label{fig:ex_bisim_nwbisim}
\end{figure}
\end{exa}
The following lemma shows that if two states are weighted bisimilar,
then their image sets match exactly for any weighted bisimulation class.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:bisim}
Let $\mathcal{M} = (S, \rightarrow, \ell)$ be a WTS and let $s,t \in S$.
$s \sim_W t$ implies that $\trans{s}{T} = \trans{t}{T}$
for any $\sim_W$-equivalence class $T \subseteq S$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Assume $s \sim_W t$ and let $T \subseteq S$ be a $\sim_W$-equivalence class.
If $r \in \trans{s}{T}$, then there exists some $s' \in T$ such that $s \xrightarrow{r} s'$.
Because $s \sim_W t$, there must exist some $t' \in T$ such that $t \xrightarrow{r} t'$
and $s' \sim_W t'$. Since $T$ is a $\sim_W$-equivalence class,
this means that $r \in \trans{t}{T}$.
A similar argument shows that if $r \in \trans{t}{T}$,
then $r \in \trans{s}{T}$.
\end{proof}
We can now show the following relationship between $\sim$ and $\sim_W$.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:bisimcoarse}
Generalized weighted bisimilarity is coarser than weighted bisimilarity, i.e.
\[
\sim_W \mathbin{\subseteq} \sim \quad\text{and}\quad \sim_W \mathbin{\neq} \sim.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof
Assume that $s \sim_W t$. We have that $\ell(s) = \ell(t)$,
and by Lemma \ref{lem:bisim}, we have that $\trans{s}{T} = \trans{t}{T}$
for any $\sim_W$-equivalence class $T \subseteq S$.
This implies in particular that
$\transl{s}{T} = \transl{t}{T}$ and $\transr{s}{T} = \transr{t}{T}$.
Hence $\sim_W$ is a bisimulation relation.
By Example \ref{ex:sim_nwsim}, the inclusion is strict.
\end{proof}
This result is not surprising,
as our bisimulation relation only looks at the extremes
of the transition weights, whereas weighted bisimulation
looks at all of the transition weights.
\section{Logic}\label{sec:logic}
In this section we introduce a modal logic which is inspired by Markovian logic \cite{mardare2012}.
Our aim is that our logic should be able to capture the notion of bisimilar states as presented in the previous section,
and as such it must be able to reason about the lower and upper bounds on transition weights.
\begin{defi}
The formulae of the logic $\mathcal{L}$ are induced by the abstract syntax
\[\mathcal{L}: \quad \varphi, \psi ::= p \mid \neg \varphi \mid \varphi \land \psi \mid L_r \varphi \mid M_r \varphi\]
where $r \in \mathbb{Q}_{\geq 0}$ is a non-negative rational number and $p \in \mathcal{AP}$ is an atomic proposition.
\end{defi}
$L_r$ and $M_r$ are modal operators. An illustration of how $L_r$ and $M_r$ are interpreted can be seen in Figure \ref{fig:semantics}.
Intuitively, $L_r \varphi$ means that the cost of transitions to where $\varphi$
holds is \emph{at least} $r$ (see Figure \ref{fig:Lsemantics}), and $M_r \varphi$ means that
the cost of transitions to where $\varphi$ holds is \emph{at most} $r$ (see Figure \ref{fig:Msemantics}).
We now give the precise semantics interpreted over WTSs.
\begin{defi}
Given a WTS $\mathcal{M} = (S, \rightarrow, \ell)$,
a state $s \in S$ and a formula $\varphi \in \mathcal{L}$,
the satisfiability relation $\models$ is defined inductively as
\[
\begin{array}{l l l}
\mathcal{M},s \models p & \mbox{ iff } & p \in \ell(s), \\
\mathcal{M},s \models \neg \varphi & \mbox{ iff } & \mathcal{M},s \not\models \varphi, \\
\mathcal{M},s \models \varphi \wedge \psi & \mbox{ iff } & \mathcal{M},s \models \varphi \;\text{and}\; \mathcal{M},s \models \psi, \\
\mathcal{M},s \models L_r \varphi & \mbox{ iff } & \transl{s}{\sat{\varphi}_{\mathcal{M}}} \geq r,\\
\mathcal{M},s \models M_r \varphi & \mbox{ iff } & \transr{s}{\sat{\varphi}_{\mathcal{M}}} \leq r,\\
\end{array}
\]
where $\sat{\varphi}_{\mathcal{M}} = \left\{s \in S \mid \mathcal{M},s \models \varphi \right\}$
is the set of all states of $\mathcal{M}$ having the property $\varphi$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.5]
\draw [->,thick] (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw [-,semithick] (6,0) arc (0:180:2cm) node[above, xshift=10mm, yshift=10mm] {$\trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}}$};
\draw[shift={(1,0)},-] (0pt,5pt) -- (0pt,-5pt) node[below] {$r$};
\draw[->] (2,0) ++ (0,-.5) -- (2,0) node[below,at start] {$\theta^{-}$};
\draw[->] (6,0) ++ (0,-.5) -- (6,0) node[below,at start] {$\theta^{+}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{$\mathcal{M},s \models L_r \varphi$}
\label{fig:Lsemantics}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.5]
\draw [->,thick] (0,0) -- (8,0);
\draw [-,semithick] (6,0) arc (0:180:2cm) node[above, xshift=10mm, yshift=10mm] {$\trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}}$};
\draw[shift={(7,0)},-] (0pt,5pt) -- (0pt,-5pt) node[below] {$r$};
\draw[->] (2,0) ++ (0,-.5) -- (2,0) node[below,at start] {$\theta^{-}$};
\draw[->] (6,0) ++ (0,-.5) -- (6,0) node[below,at start] {$\theta^{+}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{$\mathcal{M},s \models M_r \varphi$}
\label{fig:Msemantics}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{The semantics of $L_r$ and $M_r$. If $\mathcal{M},s \models L_r \varphi$,
then $r$ is to the left of $\transl{s}{\sat{\varphi}}$, and if $\mathcal{M},s \models M_r \varphi$,
then $r$ is to the right of $\transr{s}{\sat{\varphi}}$.}
\label{fig:semantics}
\end{figure}
\end{defi}
We will omit the subscript ${\mathcal{M}}$ from $\sat{\varphi}_{\mathcal{M}}$ whenever the model is clear from the context.
If $\mathcal{M},s \models \varphi$ we say that $\mathcal{M}$ is a model of $\varphi$.
A formula is said to be \emph{satisfiable} if it has at least one model.
We say that $\varphi$ is a \emph{validity} and write $\models \varphi$ if $\neg \varphi$ is not satisfiable.
In addition to the operators defined by the syntax of $\mathcal{L}$,
we also have the derived operators such as $\bot$, $\to$, etc.
defined in the usual way.
A \emph{literal} is a formula that is of the form $p$ or $\neg p$ where $p \in \mathcal{AP}$.
The formula $L_0 \varphi$ has special significance in our logic,
as this formula means that there exists some transition to where $\varphi$ holds.
In fact, it follows in a straightforward manner from the semantics that
$\mathcal{M}, s \models L_0 \varphi$ if and only if $\trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \neq \emptyset$.
We can therefore encode the usual box and diamond modalities in our logic in the following way.
\[\Diamond \varphi = L_0 \varphi \quad \Box \varphi = \neg \Diamond \neg \varphi.\]
Notice also that in general, the following schemes \emph{do not hold}.
\begin{align*}
L_r \varphi \land L_r \psi &\rightarrow L_r(\varphi \land \psi) \\
M_r \varphi \land M_r \psi &\rightarrow M_r(\varphi \land \psi)
\end{align*}
The reason that they do not hold in general is that there may be no transition to where $\varphi \land \psi$ holds,
i.e. $\neg L_0 (\varphi \land \psi)$. If we assume $L_0 (\varphi \land \psi)$,
then both schemes hold, as we show in Lemma \ref{lem:theorems}.
Another thing to note about the logic is that the formulae $L_r \varphi$ and $L_r \neg \varphi$
can both hold in the same model.
To see this, simply construct a state that
has two transitions with weight $x \geq r$
to two different states,
one where $\varphi$ holds and one where $\varphi$ does not hold.
\begin{exa}\label{ex:logic}
Consider again our model of a robot vacuum cleaner depicted in Figure \ref{fig:wts-example}.
Perhaps we want a guarantee that it takes no more than one time unit to go
from a waiting state to a charging state.
This can be expressed by the formula ${\tt waiting} \to M_1{\tt charging}$,
but since we know the only waiting state in our model is $s_1$
this can be simplified to simply checking whether
$\mathcal{M},s_1 \models M_1{\tt charging}$.
We thus have to check that $\transr{s_1}{\sat{{\tt charging}}} \leq 1$.
We do this by constructing the image set $\trans{s_1}{\sat{{\tt charging}}}$.
Since $\sat{{\tt charging}} = \{s_3\}$,
we have $\trans{s_1}{\{s_3\}} = \{1,2\}$.
Hence $\transr{s_1}{\sat{{\tt charging}}} = 2 \not\leq 1$,
so $\mathcal{M},s_1 \not\models M_1{\tt charging}$.
\end{exa}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:invariance}
Let $\mathcal{M} = (S, \rightarrow, \ell)$ be an image-finite WTS and $s \in S$.
Let $T \subseteq S$ be a set such that all elements of $T$ satisfy exactly the same formulae,
and furthermore for any $t \in T$ and $t' \notin T$,
there exists a formula $\varphi$ such that $t \models \varphi$ and $t' \not\models \varphi$.
Then there exists a formula $\varphi \in \mathcal{L}$ such that
$\trans{s}{T} = \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The idea of the proof is to repeatedly use the observation that if $t' \notin T$,
then there exists a formula $\varphi$ such that $t' \not\models \varphi$ and $t \models \varphi$ for all $t \in T$.
First pick some formula $\varphi_1$ such that $t \models \varphi_1$ for all $t \in T$.
Then $T \subseteq \sat{\varphi_1}$, so $\trans{s}{T} \subseteq \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi_1}}$.
If $\trans{s}{T} \subsetneq \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi_1}}$,
then there must exist some $t_1 \notin T$
such that $s \xrightarrow{r} t_1$ and $t_1 \models \varphi_1$.
Since $t_1 \notin T$, there must exist some formula $\varphi_2$
such that $t_1 \not \models \varphi_2$ and $t \models \varphi_2$ for all $t \in T$.
We then get $\trans{s}{T} \subseteq \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi_1 \land \varphi_2}}$.
Again, if $\trans{s}{T} \subsetneq \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi_1 \land \varphi_2}}$,
then there must exist some $t_2 \notin T$ such that
$s \xrightarrow{r} t_2$ and $t_2 \models \varphi_2$.
Since $t_2 \notin T$, there must exist some formula $\varphi_3$
such that $t_1 \not \models \varphi_3$ and $t \models \varphi_3$ for all $t \in T$.
Since $\mathcal{M}$ is image-finite, there can only be finitely many states $t_i \notin T$ with $s \xrightarrow{r} t_i$,
so continuing in the same way, we will eventually get a formula $\varphi_1 \land \dots \land \varphi_n$
such that $\trans{s}{T} = \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi_1 \land \dots \land \varphi_n}}$.
\end{proof}
Next we show that our logic $\mathcal{L}$ is invariant under bisimulation,
which is also known as the Hennessy-Milner property.
In order to prove this result, we have to restrict our models to only those that are image-finite, as shown by the following example.
\begin{exa}
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}[WTS, node distance=2cm]
\node[state] (omega) {$\omega$};
\node (dots1) [below = of omega] {\Huge $\vdots$};
\node[state] (n) [below = of dots1] {$n$};
\node (dots2) [below = of n] {\Huge $\vdots$};
\node[state] (2) [below = of dots2] {$2$};
\node[state] (1) [below = of 2] {$1$};
\node[state] (s) [left = 2cm of 2] {$s$};
\node[state] (t) [right = 2cm of 2] {$t$};
\coordinate (c1) at ($(s) + (1,0.8)$);
\coordinate (c2) at ($(s) + (1.7,-0.7)$);
\coordinate (c3) at ($(t) + (-1,0.8)$);
\coordinate (c4) at ($(t) + (-1.7,-0.7)$);
\node (dots3) at (c1) {\Huge $\vdots$};
\node (dots5) at (c3) {\Huge $\vdots$};
\path (omega) edge[loop above] node[above] {$0$} (omega);
\path (dots1) edge node[left] {$0$} (n);
\path (n) edge node[left] {$0$} (dots2);
\path (dots2) edge node[left] {$0$} (2);
\path (2) edge node[left] {$0$} (1);
\path (s) edge[bend left] node[left = 0.1cm] {$2$} (omega);
\path (s) edge[bend left = 10] node[left = 0.1cm] {$1$} (n);
\path (s) edge[bend right = 10] node[right = 0.1cm] {$4$} (n);
\path (s) edge[bend left = 10] node[above] {$1$} (2);
\path (s) edge[bend right = 10] node[below] {$4$} (2);
\path (s) edge[bend left = 10] node[right = 0.2cm] {$1$} (1);
\path (s) edge[bend right = 10] node[left = 0.2cm] {$4$} (1);
\path (t) edge[bend right] node[right = 0.1cm] {$3$} (omega);
\path (t) edge[bend right = 10] node[right = 0.1cm] {$1$} (n);
\path (t) edge[bend left = 10] node[left = 0.1cm] {$4$} (n);
\path (t) edge[bend right = 10] node[above] {$1$} (2);
\path (t) edge[bend left = 10] node[below] {$4$} (2);
\path (t) edge[bend right = 10] node[left = 0.2cm] {$1$} (1);
\path (t) edge[bend left = 10] node[right = 0.2cm] {$4$} (1);
\end{tikzpicture}
\captionof{figure}{$s$ and $t$ satisfy the same logical formulae, but $s \not\sim t$.}
\label{fig:ex_non_invariance}
\end{figure}
Consider the WTS depicted in Figure \ref{fig:ex_non_invariance}
with state space $S = \mathbb{N} \cup \{\omega, s, t\}$
and $\ell(s') = \emptyset$ for all $s' \in S$.
The transition relation is given by $\omega \xrightarrow{0} \omega$,
$s \xrightarrow{2} \omega$, $t \xrightarrow{3} \omega$,
and $n+1 \xrightarrow{0} n$, $s \xrightarrow{1} n$, and $t \xrightarrow{1} n$
for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$.
Then we have that $s_1 \sim s_2$ if and only if $s_1 = s_2$,
since any states in $\mathbb{N} \cup \{\omega\}$ can be distinguished by
the number of steps they can take,
and $s$ and $t$ can be distinguished by the fact that
$\transl{s}{\{\omega\}} = 2 \neq 3 = \transl{t}{\{\omega\}}$.
However, $s$ and $t$ satisfy all the same formulae,
since any formula that holds in $\omega$ will also hold in $n$ for some $n \in \mathbb{N}$,
and the weights on the transitions to $\omega$
will therefore be masked by the bounds $1$ and $4$,
and hence any formula can not distinguish between $s$ and $t$.
\end{exa}
The proof strategy follows a classical pattern: The left to right direction is shown by induction on $\varphi$ for $\varphi \in \mathcal{L}$.
The right to left direction is shown by constructing a relation $\mathcal{R}$ relating those states that satisfy the same formulae and showing that this relation is a bisimulation relation.
\begin{thm}[Bisimulation invariance]\label{thm:bisiminvariance}
For any WTS $\mathcal{M} = (S, \rightarrow, \ell)$ and states $s,t \in S$ it holds that
\[
s \sim t \quad\mbox{implies}\quad \left[\forall \varphi \in \mathcal{L}.\; \mathcal{M},s \models \varphi \;\;\mbox{iff}\;\; \mathcal{M},t \models \varphi\right].
\]
Furthermore, if $\mathcal{M}$ is image-finite, then it also holds that
\[
\left[\forall \varphi \in \mathcal{L}.\; \mathcal{M},s \models \varphi \;\;\mbox{iff}\;\; \mathcal{M},t \models \varphi\right] \quad\mbox{implies}\quad s \sim t.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof
We first show that $s \sim t$ implies $\mathcal{M},s \models \varphi$ if and only if
$\mathcal{M},t \models \varphi$ for all $\varphi \in \mathcal{L}$ by induction on $\varphi$.
The Boolean cases are trivial.
If $\varphi = L_r \psi$, then
we have $\transl{s}{\sat{\psi}} \geq r$,
which implies that $\transl{s}{\sat{\psi}} \neq - \infty$.
Assume towards a contradiction that $\transl{t}{\sat{\psi}} < r$.
It can not be the case that $\transl{t}{\sat{\psi}} = - \infty$,
hence it follows that $\sat{\psi}$ and $\trans{t}{\sat{\psi}}$ are non-empty,
so there must exist some element $t' \in \sat{\psi}$
such that $\transl{t}{\sat{\psi}} \leq \transl{t}{\{t'\}} < r$.
Since $\sim$ is an equivalence relation,
there must exists some $\sim$-equivalence class $T$ such that $t' \in T$.
This means that $\{t'\} \subseteq T$,
so that also $\transl{t}{T} \leq \transl{t}{\{t'\}} < r$.
By the induction hypothesis we have that $T \subseteq \sat{\psi}$.
Because $s \sim t$, we have that $\transl{s}{T} = \transl{t}{T} < r$,
so by monotonicity we get $\transl{s}{\sat{\psi}} \leq \transl{s}{T} < r$,
which is a contradiction.
The $M_r$ case is handled similarly.
For the reverse direction, assume that $\mathcal{M}$ is image-finite.
We have to show that if for all $\varphi \in \mathcal{L}$,
$\mathcal{M},s \models \varphi$ if and only if $\mathcal{M},t \models \varphi$ then $s \sim t$.
To this end, we define a relation $\mathcal{R}$ on $S$ as
\[
\mathcal{R} = \left\{(s,t) \in S \times S \mid \forall \varphi \in \mathcal{L}.\; \mathcal{M},s \models \varphi \;\mbox{iff}\; \mathcal{M},t \models \varphi \right\} .
\]
$\mathcal{R}$ is clearly an equivalence relation and $s \mathcal{R} t$.
It is clear that $\ell(s) = \ell(t)$.
Next we show that $\transl{s}{T} = \transl{t}{T}$ and $\transr{s}{T} = \transr{t}{T}$ for any $\mathcal{R}$-equivalence class $T$.
Let $T \subseteq S$ be an $\mathcal{R}$-equivalence class.
We first show that $\trans{s}{T} = \emptyset$ if and only if $\trans{t}{T} = \emptyset$.
Assume that $\trans{s}{T} = \emptyset$.
By Lemma \ref{lem:invariance} there exists a formula $\varphi$
such that $\trans{s}{T} = \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}} = \emptyset$,
and therefore $s \not \models L_0 \varphi$.
Now assume towards a contradiction that $\trans{t}{T} \neq \emptyset$.
Since $\mathcal{M}$ is image-finite,
there must be a finite subset $T' \subseteq T$ such that
$\trans{t}{T} = \trans{t}{T'}$.
By Lemma \ref{lem:thetaunion}, we then get
$\trans{t}{T} = \bigcup_{t' \in T'}\trans{t}{\{t'\}} \neq \emptyset$,
from which it follows that there must be some $t' \in T'$
such that $\trans{t}{\{t'\}} \neq \emptyset$.
Since $t' \in T$, we must have $t' \models \varphi$,
and therefore $t \models L_0 \varphi$,
which contradicts the fact that $s \mathcal{R} t$
and $s \not \models L_0 \varphi$.
Now assume that $\trans{s}{T} \neq \emptyset$ and $\trans{t}{T} \neq \emptyset$.
We need to show that $\transl{s}{T} = \transl{t}{T}$
and $\transr{s}{T} = \transr{t}{T}$.
We do this by contradiction, which gives us four cases to consider:
$\transl{s}{T} < \transl{t}{T}$, $\transl{s}{T} > \transl{t}{T}$,
$\transr{s}{T} < \transr{t}{T}$, and $\transr{s}{T} > \transr{t}{T}$.
For the case of $\transl{s}{T} < \transl{t}{T}$,
there exists $q \in \mathbb{Q}_{\geq 0}$ such that
\[
\transl{s}{T} < q < \transl{t}{T} .
\]
By Lemma \ref{lem:invariance}, there exists a formula $\varphi$
such that $\transl{t}{T} = \transl{t}{\sat{\varphi}}$.
Since $T \subseteq \sat{\varphi}$, we then obtain
\[
\transl{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \leq \transl{s}{T} < q < \transl{t}{T} = \transl{t}{\sat{\varphi}} ,
\]
which implies that $s \not \models L_q \varphi$ but $t \models L_q \varphi$,
and thus we get a contradiction.
The other cases are handled similarly.
\end{proof}
\section{Metatheory}
In this section we propose an axiomatization for our logic that we prove not only sound,
but also complete with respect to the proposed semantics.
\subsection{Axiomatic System}\label{sec:axioms}
Let $r,s \in \mathbb{Q}_{\geq 0}$.
Then the deducibility relation $\vdash \, \subseteq 2^{\mathcal{L}} \times \mathcal{L}$
is a classical conjunctive deducibility relation,
and is defined as the smallest relation which satisfies
the axioms of propositional logic in addition to the axioms given in Table \ref{tab:axioms}.
We will write $\vdash \varphi$ to mean $\emptyset \vdash \varphi$,
and we say that a formula or a set of formulae is \emph{consistent} if it can not derive $\bot$.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l l l}
\hline
(A$1$): & $\vdash \neg L_0 \bot$ & \\
(A$2$): & $\vdash L_{r + q}\varphi \rightarrow L_r \varphi$ & if $q > 0$ \\
(A$2'$): & $\vdash M_r\varphi \rightarrow M_{r + q} \varphi$ & if $q > 0$ \\
(A$3$): & $\vdash L_r \varphi \land L_q \psi \rightarrow L_{\min\{r,q\}}(\varphi \lor \psi)$ & \\
(A$3'$): & $\vdash M_r \varphi \land M_q \psi \rightarrow M_{\max\{r,q\}}(\varphi \lor \psi)$ & \\
(A$4$): & $\vdash L_r(\varphi \lor \psi) \rightarrow L_r \varphi \lor L_r \psi$ & \\
(A$5$): & $\vdash \neg L_0 \psi \rightarrow (L_r \varphi \rightarrow L_r(\varphi \lor \psi))$ & \\
(A$5'$): & $\vdash \neg L_0 \psi \rightarrow (M_r \varphi \rightarrow M_r(\varphi \lor \psi))$ & \\
(A$6$): & $\vdash L_{r + q}\varphi \rightarrow \neg M_r\varphi$ & if $q > 0$ \\
(A$7$): & $\vdash M_r \varphi \rightarrow L_0 \varphi$ & \\
(R$1$): & $\vdash \varphi \rightarrow \psi \implies \vdash (L_r \psi \land L_0 \varphi) \rightarrow L_r \varphi$ & \\
(R$1'$): & $\vdash \varphi \rightarrow \psi \implies \vdash (M_r \psi \land L_0 \varphi) \rightarrow M_r \varphi$ & \\
(R$2$): & $\vdash \varphi \rightarrow \psi \implies \vdash L_0 \varphi \rightarrow L_0 \psi$ & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The axioms for our axiomatic system, where $\varphi, \psi \in \mathcal{L}$ and $q,r \in \mathbb{Q}$.}
\label{tab:axioms}
\end{table}
The axioms presented in Table \ref{tab:axioms} bear some resemblance to the axiomatic systems of \cite{mardare2012} and \cite{cardelli2011a}.
Notably, our axiom A2 is almost identical to A2 of these works and capture similar properties about the systems being studied,
with the major difference being that we reason about transition weights whereas the aforementioned works reason about rates or probabilities of transitions.
Also worth noting here is the similarity between the rule R1 of these works and R1 of our axiomatic system.
A notable difference is that we do not have the additive properties of measures for disjoint sets (since we are not working with probability measures),
as is captured by the axioms A3 and A4 of these works.
Also, in one of the axiomatizations of \cite{mardare2012}, the axioms A2 and A2$'$
are not axioms, but can be derived from the axioms.
Rules R2 and R3 of \cite{mardare2012} and \cite{cardelli2011a} reflect the Archimedean property of rationals,
and while similar axioms can be proven sound in our setting,
these were not needed to show our completeness result.
We suspect, however, that if we were to pursue strong completeness,
infinitary axioms similar to these would be needed.
Axiom A1 captures the notion that since $\bot$ is never satisfied,
we can never take a transition to where $\bot$ holds.
Axiom A2 says that if we know some value is the lower bound for going to
where $\varphi$ holds, then any lower value is also a lower bound for going to where
$\varphi$ holds. Axiom A2$'$ is the analogue for upper bounds.
Axioms A3-A4 show how $L_r$ and $M_r$ distribute over conjunction and disjunction.
The version of axiom A4 where $L_r$ is replaced with $M_r$
is also sound, but as we show in Lemma \ref{lem:theorems},
it can be proven from the other axioms.
Axioms A5 and A5$'$ say that if it is not possible
to take a transition to where $\psi$ holds,
then including the states where $\psi$ holds does not change the bounds.
Axioms A6 and A7 show the relationship between $L_r$ and $M_r$.
In particular, A6 ensures that all bounds are well-formed.
Notice also that the contrapositive of axiom A2 and A7
together gives us that $\neg L_0 \varphi$
implies $\neg L_r \varphi$ and $\neg M_r \varphi$ for any $r \in \mathbb{Q}_{\geq 0}$.
The rules R1 and R1$'$ give a sort of monotonicity for $L_r$ and $M_r$,
and rule R2 says that if $\psi$ follows from $\varphi$,
then if it is possible to take a transition to where $\varphi$ holds,
it is also possible to take a transition to where $\psi$ holds.
We now show some of the theorems which can be deduced from the axioms.
T1, T1$'$, and T5 together complete the distributivity properties for conjunction and disjunction.
T2 and T2$'$ make precise the intuitively clear idea that if two formulae are equivalent,
then their upper and lower bounds should also be the same.
T3 extends axiom A1 to hold for any $r \geq 0$,
and T4 then extends this to any $\varphi$ which implies $\bot$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:theorems}
From the axioms listed in Table \ref{tab:axioms} we can derive the following theorems:\\
\begin{tabular}{l l}
\emph{(T1):} & $\vdash (L_r \varphi \land L_q \psi \land L_0(\varphi \land \psi)) \to L_{\max\{r,q\}}(\varphi \land \psi)$ \\
\emph{(T1$'$):} & $\vdash (M_r \varphi \land M_q \psi \land L_0(\varphi \land \psi)) \to M_{\min\{r,q\}}(\varphi \land \psi)$ \\
\emph{(T2):} & $\vdash \varphi \leftrightarrow \psi \implies \vdash L_r \varphi \leftrightarrow L_r \psi$ \\
\emph{(T2$'$):} & $\vdash \varphi \leftrightarrow \psi \implies \vdash M_r \varphi \leftrightarrow M_r \psi$ \\
\emph{(T3):} & $\vdash \neg L_r \bot, \quad r \geq 0$ \\
\emph{(T4):} & $\vdash \varphi \to \bot \implies \vdash \neg L_r \varphi,\quad r \geq 0$ \\
\emph{(T5):} & $\vdash M_r(\varphi \lor \psi) \rightarrow M_r \varphi \lor M_r \psi$
\end{tabular}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
\leavevmode
\begin{description}
\item[T1]
Rule R1 implies
\[
\vdash \neg L_q (\varphi \land \psi) \rightarrow (\neg L_q \varphi \lor \neg L_0 (\varphi \land \psi)) ,
\]
so also
\[
\vdash \neg L_q (\varphi \land \psi) \rightarrow (\neg L_q \varphi \lor \neg L_0 (\varphi \land \psi) \lor \neg L_r \psi) .
\]
This is equivalent to
\[
\vdash (L_r \varphi \land L_q \psi \land L_0 (\varphi \land \psi)) \rightarrow L_q (\varphi \land \psi) .
\]
\item[T1$'$]
Similar to T1.
\item[T2]
Suppose $\vdash \varphi \leftrightarrow \psi$.
We have that $\vdash L_r \varphi \rightarrow L_0 \varphi$ by A2
and $\vdash L_0 \varphi \rightarrow L_0 \psi$ by R2.
Hence $\vdash L_r \varphi \rightarrow (L_r \varphi \land L_0 \psi)$,
so $\vdash L_r \varphi \rightarrow L_r \psi$ by R1.
A similar argument shows that $\vdash L_r \psi \rightarrow L_r \varphi$,
so $\vdash L_r \varphi \leftrightarrow L_r \psi$.
\item[T2$'$]
Similar to T2.
\item[T3]
From axiom A1 we know that $\vdash \neg L_0 \bot$ which,
by the contrapositive of A2, implies $\vdash \neg L_r \bot$ for any $r > 0$.
\item[T4]
Suppose $\vdash \varphi \to \bot$.
We know for any $\psi \in \mathcal{L}$ that $\vdash \bot \to \psi$ and therefore $\vdash \varphi \to \bot \implies \vdash \varphi \leftrightarrow \bot$.
From A1 we know that $\vdash \neg L_0 \bot$ and from T3 that $\vdash \neg L_r \bot$ for any $r > 0$ implying, by T2, that $\vdash \neg L_r \varphi$ for any $r \geq 0$.
\item[T5]
By axiom A7 we get $\vdash M_r (\varphi \lor \psi) \rightarrow L_0(\varphi \lor \psi)$
and A4 gives $\vdash L_0(\varphi \lor \psi) \rightarrow L_0 \varphi \lor L_0 \psi$.
Hence we get $\vdash M_r(\varphi \lor \psi) \rightarrow (M_r(\varphi \lor \psi) \land L_0 \varphi) \lor (M_r(\varphi \lor \psi) \land L_0 \psi)$.
Since $\vdash \varphi \rightarrow (\varphi \lor \psi)$
and $\vdash \psi \rightarrow (\varphi \lor \psi)$,
rule R1$'$ then gives $\vdash M_r(\varphi \lor \psi) \rightarrow M_r \varphi \lor M_r \psi$. \qedhere
\end{description}
\end{proof}
Next we prove that our axioms are indeed sound.
\begin{thm}[Soundness]\label{thm:soundness}\hfill
\[
\vdash \varphi \quad\text{implies}\quad \models \varphi .
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof
The soundness of each axiom is easy to show,
and many of them use the distributive property from Lemma \ref{lem:thetaunion}.
Here we prove the soundness for a few of the more interesting axioms.
\begin{description}
\item[A3]
Suppose $\mathcal{M},s \models L_r \varphi \land L_q \psi$
implying that $\mathcal{M},s \models L_r \varphi$ and $\mathcal{M},s \models L_q \psi$,
implying further that $\transl{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \geq r$ and $\transl{s}{\sat{\psi}} \geq q$.
By Lemma \ref{lem:thetaunion} we must have that
\[
\trans{s}{\sat{\varphi \lor \psi}}
= \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi} \cup \sat{\psi}}
= \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \cup \trans{s}{\sat{\psi}}
\]
and because $\transl{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \geq r$ and $\transl{s}{\sat{\psi}} \geq q$
we must have
\[
\transl{s}{\sat{\varphi \lor \psi}} = \inf \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \cup \trans{s}{\sat{\psi}}\geq \min\left\{r,q\right\}
\]
implying $\mathcal{M},s \models L_{\min\{r,q\}} (\varphi \lor \psi)$.
\item[A4]
Suppose $\mathcal{M},s \models L_r (\varphi \lor \psi)$ implying that
\[
\transl{s}{\sat{\varphi \lor \psi}}
= \inf \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \cup \trans{s}{\sat{\psi}}
\geq r .
\]
This implies that at least one of $\trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}}$
and $\trans{s}{\sat{\psi}}$ is non-empty.
If $\trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \neq \emptyset$, then $\transl{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \geq r$,
and also if $\trans{s}{\sat{\psi}} \neq \emptyset$, then $\transl{s}{\sat{\psi}} \geq r$,
so at least one of $\mathcal{M},s \models L_r \varphi$
and $\mathcal{M},s \models L_r \psi$ must hold.
Hence $\mathcal{M},s \models L_r \varphi \lor L_r \psi$.
\item[A6]
Suppose $\mathcal{M},s \models L_{r+q} \varphi$ implying that
\[
\transl{s}{\sat{\varphi}} = \inf \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \geq r+q .
\]
It is clear that $\inf \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \leq \sup \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}}$, so
\[
\transr{s}{\sat{\varphi}} = \sup \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \geq \inf \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \geq r + q > r .
\]
Therefore, it cannot be the case that $\mathcal{M},s \models M_r \varphi$
and thus $\mathcal{M},s \models \neg M_r \varphi$.
\item[R1]
Suppose $\models \varphi \to \psi$ implying that $\sat{\varphi} \subseteq \sat{\psi}$,
implying further, by the monotonicity of $\theta$,
that $\trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \subseteq \trans{s}{\sat{\psi}}$.
Suppose further that $\mathcal{M},s \models L_r \psi \land L_0 \varphi$
implying $\mathcal{M},s \models L_r \psi$ and $\mathcal{M},s \models L_0 \varphi$,
implying further that
\[
\transl{s}{\sat{\psi}} = \inf \trans{s}{\sat{\psi}} \geq r \quad \mbox{and} \quad \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \neq \emptyset .
\]
Since $\trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}}$ is non-empty, we then get that
\[
\inf \trans{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \geq \inf \trans{s}{\sat{\psi}} \geq r ,
\]
which means that $\mathcal{M},s \models L_r \varphi$. \qedhere
\end{description}
\end{proof}
\subsection{Finite Model Property and Completeness}\label{sec:finitemodel-completeness}
With our axiomatization proven sound we are now ready to present our main results,
namely that our logic has the finite model property and that our axiomatization is complete.
To show the finite model property we will adapt
the classical filtration method to our setting.
Starting from an arbitrary formula $\rho$,
we define a finite fragment of our logic, $\mathcal{L}[\rho]$,
which we then use to construct a finite model for $\rho$.
The main difference from the classical filtration method
is that we must find an upper and a lower bound for the transitions
in the model.
For an arbitrary formula $\rho \in \mathcal{L}$ we define the following based on $\rho$:
\begin{itemize}
\item Let $Q_{\rho} \subseteq \mathbb{Q}_{\geq 0}$ be the set of all rational numbers
$r \in \mathbb{Q}_{\geq 0}$ such that $L_r$ or $M_r$ appears in the syntax of $\rho$.
\item Let $\Sigma_{\rho}$ be the set of all atomic propositions $p \in \mathcal{AP}$
such that $p$ appears in the syntax of $\rho$.
\item The \emph{granularity} of $\rho$, denoted as $gr(\rho)$,
is the least common denominator of all the elements in $Q_{\rho}$.
\item The \emph{range} of $\rho$, denoted as $R_{\rho}$, is defined as
\[R_{\rho} =
\begin{cases}
\emptyset & \mbox{if}\; Q_{\rho} = \emptyset\\
I_\rho \cup \{0\}
& \mbox{otherwise} ,
\end{cases}\]
where $I_\rho = \left\{
q \in \mathbb{Q}_{\geq 0} \mid
\exists j \in \mathbb{N}.\; q = \frac{j}{gr(\rho)} \;\mbox{and}\;
\min Q_{\rho} \leq q \leq \max Q_{\rho}
\right\}$.
Here the granularity is used to pick out finitely many numbers in the interval.
Note that we need to add $0$ to $R_{\rho}$
whether or not $\rho$ actually contains $0$ in any of its modalities.
This is because, as we have pointed out before, formulae involving $L_0$
have special significance in our logic.
\item The \emph{modal depth} of $\rho$, denoted as $md(\rho)$, is defined inductively as:
\[
md(\rho) =
\begin{cases}
0 &
\mbox{if}\; \rho = p \in \mathcal{AP}\\
md(\varphi) &
\mbox{if}\; \rho = \neg \varphi\\
\max\left\{md(\varphi_1),md(\varphi_2)\right\} &
\mbox{if}\; \rho = \varphi_1 \land \varphi_2\\
1 + md(\varphi) &
\mbox{if}\; \rho = L_r \varphi \;\text{or}\; \rho = M_r \varphi .
\end{cases}
\]
\end{itemize}
Since all formulae are finite, the modal depth is always a non-negative integer.
The \emph{language} of $\rho$, denoted by $\mathcal{L}[\rho]$, is defined as
\[
\mathcal{L}[\rho] = \{\varphi \in \mathcal{L} \mid R_\varphi \subseteq R_{\rho} , md(\varphi) \leq md(\rho) \;\text{and}\; \Sigma_\varphi \subseteq \Sigma_{\rho} \},
\]
and we take $\mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}[\rho]$ to be the Lindenbaum algebra
of $\mathcal{L}[\rho]$, i.e. the quotient with respect to logical equivalence.
The Lindenbaum algebra is a Boolean algebra with equivalence classes as elements.
Note that the quotient
$h : \mathcal{L}[\rho] \rightarrow \mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}[\rho]$
is a homomorphism between Boolean algebras,
and hence preserves the structure of $\mathcal{L}[\rho]$.
For each element $x \in \mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}[\rho]$,
we fix now a formula $\varphi \in x$ to be the representative of that equivalence class,
and we write $\hat{\varphi}$ for $x$.
The order $\leq$ in $\mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}[\rho]$
is then given by $\hat{\varphi} \leq \hat{\psi}$
if and only if $\vdash \varphi \rightarrow \psi$.
The join and meet in $\mathcal{L}_\leftrightarrow[\rho]$ are given by
\[\hat{\varphi} \lor \hat{\psi} = h(\varphi \lor \psi) \quad \hat{\varphi} \land \hat{\psi} = h(\varphi \land \psi),\]
and complement is given by
\[\neg \hat{\varphi} = h(\neg \varphi).\]
Note here the difference between $h(\varphi)$ and $\hat{\varphi}$.
The quotient $h$ sends $\varphi$ to its equivalence class $x \in \mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}[\rho]$.
However, it may be the case that $\varphi$ is not the representative for $x$,
but some other formula $\psi$ is. In that case we have $h(\varphi) = x = \hat{\psi}$.
On the other hand, $\hat{\varphi}$ denotes both that $\varphi \in \hat{\varphi}$,
and also that $\varphi$ is the chosen representative of its equivalence class,
which ensures that in this case we have $h(\varphi) = \hat{\varphi}$.
The idea is that $\Sigma_\rho$ ensures that only finitely many atomic propositions are used,
$R_\rho$ ensures that only finitely many weights on the modalities are used,
and $md(\rho)$ puts a bound on the modal depth of formulae.
The language $\mathcal{L}[\rho]$ itself is not finite,
but contains only finitely many logically non-equivalent formulae.
Hence $\mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}[\rho]$ must be finite,
and as we shall see, it contains all the information necessary to
construct a model for $\rho$.
\begin{prop}
The language $\mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}[\rho]$ is finite.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}^n[\rho]$ be the subset of $\mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}[\rho]$
which only contains formulae of modal depth $n$.
Then it is clear that
\[\mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}[\rho] = \bigcup_{i = 0}^{md(\rho)} \mathcal{L}^i_{\leftrightarrow}[\rho].\]
We will now prove by induction on the modal depth that for each $i$,
$\mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}^i[\rho]$ is finite.
$i = 0$: In this case, each element of $\mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}^0[\rho]$
is a Boolean combination of atomic propositions in $\Sigma_\rho$.
There are $2^{2^{|\Sigma_\rho|}}$ non-equivalent such formulae,
so this set is finite.
$i > 0$: Each element of $\mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}^i[\rho]$
is a Boolean combination of formulae of the form $L_r \varphi$ and $M_r \varphi$,
where $\varphi \in \mathcal{L}_\leftrightarrow^{j}[\rho]$ for some $j < i$ and $r \in R_\rho$.
By induction hypothesis, we know that there are only finitely many such $\varphi$.
We know from Lemma \ref{lem:theorems} that if $\varphi$ and $\psi$ are logically equivalent,
then $L_r \varphi$ and $L_r \psi$ as well as $M_r \varphi$ and $M_r \psi$ are also logically equivalent.
Since $R_\rho$ is finite, we conclude that $\mathcal{L}_\leftrightarrow^i[\rho]$ is finite.
\end{proof}
In order to define the model,
we need the standard notions of filters and ultrafilters on Boolean algebras \cite{halmos2009}.
A non-empty subset of a Boolean algebra $B$ is called a \emph{filter}
if it is upward-closed with respect to the order,
and closed under finite meets.
A filter $F$ is \emph{proper} if $F \neq B$.
An \emph{ultrafilter} is a proper filter which is maximal
in the sense of set inclusion.
The following property of ultrafilters is often useful.
\begin{lem}
For an ultrafilter $F$ of $\mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}[\rho]$ it holds that for any
$\varphi \in \mathcal{L}[\rho]$,
either $h(\varphi) \in F$ or $\neg h(\varphi) \in F$,
but not both.
\end{lem}
We let $\mathcal{U}[\rho]$ denote the set of all ultrafilters on $\mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}[\rho]$.
Since $\mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}[\rho]$ is finite, $\mathcal{U}[\rho]$
is also finite and consequently, any ultrafilter $u \in \mathcal{U}[\rho]$
must be a finite set.
For any set $\Phi \subseteq \mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}[\rho]$,
the characteristic formula of $\Phi$, denoted $\tas{\Phi}$,
is defined as
\[\tas{\Phi} = \bigwedge_{\hat{\varphi} \in \Phi} \varphi.\]
Note that $\tas{\Phi} \in \mathcal{L}[\rho]$ is a finite formula,
and that if $u \in \mathcal{U}[\rho]$, then $h(\tas{u}) \in u$.
We will now construct a (finite) model, $\mathcal{M}_{\rho}$,
for $\rho$ with state space $\mathcal{U}[\rho]$.
In order to define the transition relation
$\rightarrow_\rho \subseteq \mathcal{U}[\rho] \times \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0} \times \mathcal{U}[\rho]$,
we consider any two ultrafilters $u,v \in \mathcal{U}[\rho]$ and define two functions $L,M : \mathcal{U}[\rho] \times \mathcal{U}[\rho] \to 2^{R_{\rho}}$ as
\[
L(u,v) = \{r \mid h(L_r \tas{v}) \in u\}
\quad\mbox{and}\quad
M(u,v) = \{s \mid h(M_s \tas{v}) \in u\} .
\]
The following lemma establishes a relationship between $L$ and $M$,
that we will need to define the transition relation.
The lemma is a straightforward consequence of axiom $A7$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:emptynonempty}
Given any ultrafilters $u,v \in \mathcal{U}[\rho]$,
it can not be the case that $L(u,v) = \emptyset$ and $M(u,v) \neq \emptyset$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof
Assume towards a contradiction that $L(u,v) = \emptyset$
and $M(u,v) \neq \emptyset$. Then we have $h(\neg L_0 \tas{v}) \in u$
and there exists some $r \in Q_\rho$ such that $h(M_r \tas{v}) \in u$.
However, by axiom A7, this implies that $h(L_0 \tas{v}) \in u$,
which is a contradiction.
\end{proof}
We can now define the transition relation in terms of $L(u,v)$ and $M(u,v)$.
In Figure \ref{fig:finitemodel}, we have illustrated the different cases that we must consider.
Here, the area between $\min Q_\rho$ and $\max Q_\rho$
is the only part that the restricted language $\mathcal{L}[\rho]$ can speak about.
The arches represent the interval within which transitions with that weight are possible.
For any of the arches in the figure, we have the following correspondence with $L_r$ and $M_r$.
\begin{itemize}
\item If a number $r$ on the real line is contained within the arch,
then we have $h(\neg L_r \tas{v}) \in u$ and $h(\neg M_r \tas{v}) \in u$.
\item If a number $r$ on the real line is to the left of the arch,
then we have $h(L_r \tas{v}) \in u$ and $h(\neg M_r \tas{v}) \in u$.
\item If a number $r$ on the real line is to the right of the arch,
then we have $h(M_r \tas{v}) \in u$ and $h(\neg L_r \tas{v}) \in u$.
\end{itemize}
In case (a) in Figure \ref{fig:finitemodel},
we therefore have $L(u,v) \neq \emptyset$ and $M(u,v) \neq \emptyset$,
so we have all the information we need to define the transition.
In case (b) and (f), we have $L(u,v) \neq \emptyset$ and $M(u,v) = \emptyset$,
since there exist numbers within the interval $[\min Q_\rho, \max Q_\rho]$
that are to the left of these arches, but none that are to the right.
This means that we have enough information to define the minimum transition,
but we do not know what the maximum transition is.
Note that we can not simply say that the maximum transition is $\max Q_\rho$,
because that would imply $h(M_{\max Q_\rho} \tas{v}) \in u$,
but we know that $M(u,v) = \emptyset$.
Hence we need to pick a number that is to the right of $\max Q_\rho$ as the maximum.
In case (d), we have both $L(u,v) = \emptyset$ and $M(u,v) = \emptyset$.
This implies that $h(\neg L_0 \tas{v}) \in u$,
which means that there should be no transition from $u$ to $v$.
In case (c) and (e), we have $L(u,v) = \emptyset$ and $M(u,v) \neq \emptyset$,
but according to Lemma \ref{lem:emptynonempty} these cases can never occur.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw [->,thick] (-3,0) -- (11,0);
\draw[shift={(-3,0)}] (0pt,3pt) -- (0pt,-3pt);
\draw[shift={(-3,0)}] (0pt,3pt) -- (0pt,-3pt) node[below] {$0$};
\draw[semithick] (1.2, -0.5) node[below] {$\min Q_\rho$} |- (1, -0.5) -- (1, 2.5) |- (1.2, 2.5);
\draw[semithick] (6.8, -0.5) node[below] {$\max Q_\rho$} |- (7, -0.5) -- (7, 2.5) |- (6.8, 2.5);
\coordinate (1) at (3,0);
\coordinate (2) at (5,0);
\draw (1) to [bend left=60] node[above] {(a)} (2);
\coordinate (3) at (6,0);
\coordinate (4) at (7,0.5);
\coordinate (5) at (8,0);
\draw (3) to [bend left=25] node[above] {(b)} (4);
\draw[dashed] (4) to [bend left=25] (5);
\coordinate (6) at (0,0);
\coordinate (7) at (1,0.5);
\coordinate (8) at (2,0);
\draw[dashed] (6) to [bend left=25] (7);
\draw (7) to [bend left=25] node[above] {(c)} (8);
\coordinate (9) at (-0.5,0);
\coordinate (10) at (8.5,0);
\coordinate (15) at (1,1.5);
\coordinate (16) at (7,1.5);
\draw[dashed] (9) to [bend left=15] (15);
\draw (15) to [bend left=26] node[above] {(d)} (16);
\draw[dashed] (16) to [bend left=15] (10);
\coordinate (11) at (-2.7,0);
\coordinate (12) at (-0.7,0);
\draw[dashed] (11) to [bend left=60] node[above] {(e)} (12);
\coordinate (13) at (8.7,0);
\coordinate (14) at (10.7,0);
\draw[dashed] (13) to [bend left=60] node[above] {(f)} (14);
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\caption{When constructing a transition from $u$ to $v$, we will only have information about what happens in the region $Q_\rho$ and at $0$. The line represents the non-negative real line and the arches represent the transitions that would be possible in a full model (i.e. one not restricted to $\mathcal{L}[\rho]$). The dashed part of the arches represent the part of the transition that we do not have information about.}
\label{fig:finitemodel}
\end{figure}
We therefore distinguish the following three cases in order to define the transition relation:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $L(u,v) \neq \emptyset$ and $M(u,v) \neq \emptyset$,
then we add the two transitions $u \xrightarrow{r_1} v$ and $u \xrightarrow{r_2} v$
where $r_1 = \max L(u,v)$ and $r_2 = \min M(u,v)$. \label{item:trans1}
\item If $L(u,v) \neq \emptyset$ and $M(u,v) = \emptyset$,
then we add the two transitions $u \xrightarrow{r_1} v$ and $u \xrightarrow{r_2} v$
where $r_1 = \max L(u,v)$ and $r_2 = \max Q_\rho + \frac{1}{gr(\rho)}$. \label{item:trans2}
\item If $L(u,v) = \emptyset$ and $M(u,v) = \emptyset$,
then there is no transition from $u$ to $v$. \label{item:trans3}
\end{enumerate}
The following lemma tells us that these transitions are well-formed,
i.e. that the lower bound on transitions is less than or equal to the upper bound.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:leq}
For any ultrafilters $u,v \in \mathcal{U}[\rho]$,
if $L(u,v) \neq \emptyset$ and $M(u,v) \neq \emptyset$,
then $\max L(u,v) \leq \min M(u,v)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Assume towards a contradiction that $\max L(u,v) > \min M(u,v)$.
Then there exist $q,q' \in Q_\rho$ such that $q > q'$,
$h(L_q \tas{v}) \in u$ and $h(M_{q'} \tas{v}) \in u$.
Since $q > q'$, axiom A6 gives $h(\neg M_{q'} \tas{v}) \in u$,
which is a contradiction.
\end{proof}
Finally we define the labeling function $\ell_\rho : \mathcal{U}[\rho] \rightarrow 2^{\mathcal{AP}}$
for any $u \in \mathcal{U}[\rho]$ as $ \ell_\rho(u) = \{p \in \mathcal{AP} \mid p \in u\} $.
We then have a model $\mathcal{M}_\rho = (\mathcal{U}[\rho], \rightarrow_\rho, \ell_\rho)$, and it is not difficult to prove that $\mathcal{M}_\rho$ is a WTS.
Before we can prove the truth lemma,
we need the following technical lemma.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:filtration}
For any consistent formula $\varphi \in \mathcal{L}[\rho]$,
if $[\mathcal{M}_\rho,u \models \varphi$ iff $h(\varphi) \in u]$, then
\[
\bigvee_{v \in \sat{\varphi}} h(\tas{v}) \in u \quad \text{iff} \quad h(\varphi) \in u.
\]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $\bigvee_{v \in \sat{\varphi}} h(\tas{v}) \in u$.
Assume towards a contradiction that $h(\neg \tas{v}) \in u$ for all $v \in \sat{\varphi}$.
Then, since $u$ is an ultrafilter,
we must have $\bigwedge_{v \in \sat{\varphi}} h(\neg \tas{v}) \in u$,
which means that $\neg \bigvee_{v \in \sat{\varphi}} h(\tas{v}) \in u$,
which is a contradiction.
Hence there exists some $v' \in \sat{\varphi}$ such that $h(\tas{v'}) \in u$.
If $\hat{\psi} \in v'$, then $\vdash \tas{v'} \rightarrow \psi$,
so $\hat{\psi} \in u$ because $u$ is an ultrafilter.
Since $v' \in \sat{\varphi}$, we have by assumption that $h(\varphi) \in v'$,
so we get $h(\varphi) \in u$.
Suppose $h(\varphi) \in u$, which by assumption means that $u \in \sat{\varphi}$,
so $\vdash \tas{u} \rightarrow \bigvee_{v \in \sat{\varphi}} \tas{v}$.
Since $u$ is an ultrafilter, we have $h(\tas{u}) \in u$,
and hence $\bigvee_{v \in \sat{\varphi}} h(\tas{v}) \in u$.
\end{proof}
We are now in a position to state and prove the truth lemma,
which says that an ultrafilter satisfies a formula in our model
if and only if that formula is included in the ultrafilter.
\begin{lem}[Truth lemma]\label{lem:truth}
If $\rho \in \mathcal{L}$ is a consistent formula,
then for all $\varphi \in \mathcal{L}[\rho]$
and $u \in \mathcal{U}[\rho]$ we have
\[\mathcal{M}_\rho,u \models \varphi \quad \text{iff} \quad h(\varphi) \in u.\]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof
The proof is by induction on the structure of $\varphi$.
The Boolean cases are trivial.
For the case $\varphi = L_r \psi$, we proceed as follows.
($\implies$)
Assume $\mathcal{M}_\rho, u \models L_r \psi$,
meaning that $\transl{u}{\sat{\psi}} \geq r$.
It can not be the case that $\trans{u}{\sat{\psi}} = \emptyset$,
because otherwise $\transl{u}{\sat{\psi}} = - \infty$,
and we have assumed $\transl{u}{\sat{\psi}} \geq r$.
It also can not be the case that $\sat{\psi} = \emptyset$,
because otherwise $\trans{u}{\sat{\psi}} = \emptyset$.
We can partition all the ultrafilters $v \in \sat{\psi}$
as follows.
Let $E = \{v \in \sat{\psi} \mid L(u,v) = \emptyset\}$
and $N = \{v \in \sat{\psi} \mid L(u,v) \neq \emptyset\}$.
We then get that $E \cap N = \emptyset$, $E \cup N = \sat{\psi}$,
$h(\neg L_0 \tas{v}) \in u$ for all $v \in E$,
and $h(L_r \tas{v}) \in u$ for all $v \in N$.
Because $u$ is an ultrafilter, we then have
\[
h\left(\bigwedge_{v \in E} \neg L_0 \tas{v} \land \bigwedge_{v \in N} L_r \tas{v}\right) \in u .
\]
By axiom A3, this implies
\[
h\left(\bigwedge_{v \in E} \neg L_0 \tas{v} \land L_r \bigvee_{v \in N} \tas{v}\right) \in u .
\]
Then axiom A5 gives
\[
h\left(L_r \bigvee_{v \in \sat{\psi}} \tas{v}\right) \in u .
\]
By the induction hypothesis, T2, and Lemma \ref{lem:filtration},
we then get $h(L_r \psi) \in u$.
($\impliedby$)
Let $h(L_r \psi) \in u$. It follows from A1, A2, and R2 that $\psi$ is consistent.
Hence, by the induction hypothesis, $\sat{\psi}$ is non-empty.
We first show that $\trans{u}{\sat{\psi}} \neq \emptyset$.
Assume therefore towards a contradiction that $\trans{u}{\sat{\psi}} = \emptyset$.
Then for all $v \in \sat{\psi}$, we must have that case \ref{item:trans3} holds,
and hence $L(u,v) = \emptyset$,
meaning $h(\neg L_r \tas{v}) \in u$ for all $v \in \sat{\psi}$.
Since there are finitely many $v \in \sat{\psi}$,
we can enumerate them as $v_1,v_2,\dots,v_n$.
Then, since $u$ is an ultrafilter, we have
\[
h\left(\neg L_r \tas{v_1} \land \neg L_r \tas{v_2} \land \dots \land \neg L_r \tas{v_n}\right) \in u .
\]
By De Morgan's law, this is equivalent to
\[
h\left(\neg (L_r \tas{v_1} \lor L_r \tas{v_2} \lor \dots \lor L_r \tas{v_n})\right) \in u .
\]
The contrapositive of axiom A4 then gives that
\[
h\left(\neg L_r (\tas{v_1} \lor \tas{v_2} \lor \dots \lor \tas{v_n})\right) \in u ,
\]
and by the induction hypothesis, T2, and Lemma \ref{lem:filtration},
this is equivalent to $\neg h(L_r \psi) \in u$, which is a contradiction.
Now assume towards a contradiction that $\transl{u}{\sat{\psi}} < r$. Then
there exists some $v \in \sat{\psi}$ such that $\transl{u}{\{v\}} < r$ and
case \ref{item:trans1} or case \ref{item:trans2} holds.
In either case we have $\max L(u,v) < r$ and hence
there exists some $q \in Q_\rho$ such that
$h(L_q \tas{v}) \in u$, which implies $h(L_0 \tas{v}) \in u$ by axiom A2.
By the induction hypothesis, $h(\psi) \in v$,
which means that $\vdash \tas{v} \rightarrow \psi$.
rule R1 then gives $h(L_r \tas{v}) \in u$,
but this is a contradiction since $\max L(u,v) < r$.
The $M_r$ case is similar, using axiom A7 instead of A2 to derive $h(L_0 \psi) \in u$.
\end{proof}
Having established the truth lemma, we can now show that any consistent formula is satisfied by some finite model.
\begin{thm}[Finite model property]\label{thm:finitemodel}
For any consistent formula $\varphi \in \mathcal{L}$,
there exists a finite WTS $\mathcal{M} = (S, \rightarrow, \ell)$ and a state $s \in S$
such that $\mathcal{M},s \models \varphi$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof
Since $\varphi \in \mathcal{L}$ is consistent,
$h(\varphi) \neq h(\bot)$,
and since $\mathcal{L}_{\leftrightarrow}[\rho]$ is finite,
there must exist an ultrafilter $u \in \mathcal{U}[\rho]$ such that $h(\varphi) \in u$.
By the truth lemma, this means that $\mathcal{M}_\varphi, u \models \varphi$,
and by construction, $\mathcal{M}_\varphi$ is a finite model.
\end{proof}
We are now able to state and prove our main result, namely that our axiomatization is complete.
\begin{thm}[Completeness]\label{thm:completeness}
For any formula $\varphi \in \mathcal{L}$, it holds that
\[
\models \varphi \quad \text{implies} \quad \vdash \varphi .
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof
\[
\models \varphi \quad \text{implies} \quad \vdash \varphi
\]
is equivalent to
\[
\not \vdash \varphi \quad \text{implies} \quad \not \models \varphi ,
\]
which is equivalent to
\[
\mbox{the consistency of}\; \neg \varphi \;\mbox{implies the existence of a model for}\; \neg \varphi ,
\]
and this is guaranteed by the finite model property.
\end{proof}
We have thus established completeness for our logic.
There is also a stronger notion of completeness, often called strong completeness,
which asserts that $\Phi \models \varphi$ implies $\Phi \vdash \varphi$
for any set of formulae $\Phi \subseteq \mathcal{L}$.
Completeness is a special case of strong completeness where $\Phi = \emptyset$.
In the case of compact logics, strong completeness follows directly from completeness.
However, our logic is non-compact.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:noncompact}
Our logic is non-compact, meaning that there exists an infinite set $\Phi \subseteq \mathcal{L}$
such that each finite subset of $\Phi$ admits a model, but $\Phi$ does not.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Consider the set
$
\Phi = \{L_q \varphi \mid q < r \} \cup \{\neg L_r \varphi\}
$.
For any finite subset of $\Phi$, it is easy to construct a model.
However, if $\mathcal{M},s \models L_q \varphi$ for all $q < r$
where $q,r \in \mathbb{Q}_{\geq 0}$,
then by the Archimedean property of the rationals,
we also have $\mathcal{M},s \models L_r \varphi$.
Hence there can be no model for $\Phi$.
\end{proof}
\section{Satisfiability}\label{sec:sat}
The finite model property gives us a way of
deciding in general whether there exists a model which satisfies a given formula.
An algorithm would be to enumerate all finite models
and all theorems derivable from the axioms,
which can be done since there are countably many of each of these.
If $\varphi$ is satisfiable, it has a model,
and by the finite model property, it has a finite one.
So we can check one by one whether a finite model satisfies $\varphi$.
On the other hand, if $\varphi$ is not satisfiable,
then $\neg \varphi$ is a theorem,
so we can search through all theorems to see whether $\neg \varphi$ is one of them.
Since $\varphi$ is either satisfiable or its negation is a theorem,
one of these two algorithms must eventually halt.
By running these two algorithms in parallel,
we have shown that the problem of deciding satisfiability for a given formula is decidable.
In what follows we do more:
We propose an algorithm that constructs a tableau syntactically from a given formula.
By inspecting this tableau, we can decide whether or not the formula is satisfiable,
and if it is satisfiable, we can construct a model for the formula from the tableau.
As in the previous section, we impose an order on formulae
given by $\varphi \leq \psi$ if and only if $\models \varphi \rightarrow \psi$.
Given a finite set of formulae $\Gamma = \{\varphi_1, \dots, \varphi_n\}$,
we denote by $\min(\Gamma)$ the set of minimal elements of $\Gamma$, i.e.
\[\min(\Gamma) = \{\varphi_i \in \Gamma \mid \text{there is no } \varphi_j \text{ such that } \varphi_j \leq \varphi_i\},\]
and we let
\[\mathcal{L}(\Gamma) = \{\varphi_i \in \Gamma \mid \text{there is no } j < i \text{ such that } \models \varphi_j \leftrightarrow \varphi_i\}.\]
Furthermore, we let $\upw{\Gamma}(\varphi)$ be the upward closure of $\varphi$ in $\Gamma$, i.e.
\[\upw{\Gamma}(\varphi) = \{\varphi' \in \Gamma \mid \varphi \leq \varphi'\}.\]
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c}
\hline
& \\
{\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{\langle \Gamma \cup \{\varphi \land \psi\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\land$)}]1{\langle \Gamma \cup \{\varphi, \psi\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\end{prooftree}}
&
{\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{\langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg (\varphi \land \psi)\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\neg \land$)}]1{\langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg \varphi\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle \quad \langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg \psi\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\end{prooftree}} \\
& \\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{
{\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{\langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg \neg \varphi\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\neg\neg$)}]1{\langle \Gamma \cup \{\varphi\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\end{prooftree}}
} \\
& \\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{
{\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{\langle \Gamma \cup \{N^1_{r_1} \varphi_1, \dots, N^n_{r_n} \varphi_n\} \cup \{\neg O^1_{r_1'} \varphi_1', \dots, \neg O^{n'}_{r_{n'}'} \varphi_{n'}'\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {(mod)}]1{\langle \{\psi_1\}, \mathcal{I}^L_1, \mathcal{I}^M_1 \rangle \quad \cdots \quad \langle \{\psi_k\}, \mathcal{I}^L_k, \mathcal{I}^M_k \rangle}
\end{prooftree}}
} \\
& \\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{
\parbox{10cm}{
if $N^i \in \{L,M\}$ for all $1 \leq i \leq n$, $O^j \in \{L,M\}$ for all $1 \leq j \leq n'$,
and no formula in $\Gamma$ is of the form $N_r \varphi$ or $\neg N_r \varphi$ where $N \in \{L,M\}$.
}
} \\
& \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Tableau rules}
\label{tab:rules}
\end{table}
A \emph{tableau} is a tree with nodes of the form $\langle \Gamma, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle$
that is constructed from the rules of Table \ref{tab:rules},
where the (mod) rule may only be used when no other rule can be used.
For each node $\langle \Gamma, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle$,
$\Gamma$ is a set of formulae, and $\mathcal{I}^L$ and $\mathcal{I}^M$
are intervals of the form $\lbag a, b \rbag$ where
$a \in \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0} \cup \{-\infty\}$, $b \in \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0} \cup \{\infty\}$, $\lbag \in \{[,(\}$, and $\rbag \in \{], )\}$,
subject to the constraint that $\lbag = ($ if $a = -\infty$ and $\rbag = \; )$ if $b = \infty$.
We will say that an interval $\lbag a, b \rbag$ is \emph{consistent} if $a < b$ or $a = b$ and the interval is closed.
For the rule (mod), the objects $\psi_i$, $\mathcal{I}^L_i$ and $\mathcal{I}^M_i$ in the conclusion are constructed as follows.
The $\psi_i$ are given by
\[\{\psi_1, \dots, \psi_k\} = \min(\mathcal{L}(\{\varphi_1, \dots, \varphi_n\})).\]
We will show later how to actually compute $\{\psi_1, \dots, \psi_k\}$.
Let $\Gamma' = \{\varphi_1, \dots, \varphi_n\}$ and
\[\mathbb{L}^+_i = \{r \mid L_r \varphi_j = N^j_{r_j} \varphi_j \text{ for some } j \text{ and } \varphi_j \in \upw{\Gamma'}(\psi_i)\}\]
\[\mathbb{M}^+_i = \{r \mid M_r \varphi_j = N^j_{r_j} \varphi_j \text{ for some } j \text{ and } \varphi_j \in \upw{\Gamma'}(\psi_i)\}\]
as well as
\[\mathbb{L}^-_i = \{r \mid L_r \varphi_j' = O^j_{r_j} \varphi_j' \text{ for some } j \text{ and } \models \psi_i \rightarrow \varphi_j'\}\]
\[\mathbb{M}^-_i = \{r \mid M_r \varphi_j' = O^j_{r_j} \varphi_j' \text{ for some } j \text{ and } \models \psi_i \rightarrow \varphi_j'\}.\]
Then the intervals $\mathcal{I}^L_i$ and $\mathcal{I}^M_i$ are given by
\[\mathcal{I}^L_i = \begin{cases}
[ \max \mathbb{L}^+_i, \min \mathbb{L}^-_i ) & \text{if } \mathbb{L}^+_i \neq \emptyset \text{ and } \mathbb{L}^-_i \neq \emptyset \\
[0, \min \mathbb{L}^-_i) & \text{if } \mathbb{L}^+_i = \emptyset \text{ and } \mathbb{L}^-_i \neq \emptyset \\
[ \max \mathbb{L}^+_i, \infty) & \text{if } \mathbb{L}^+_i \neq \emptyset \text{ and } \mathbb{L}^-_i = \emptyset \\
[0, \infty) & \text{if } \mathbb{L}^+_i = \emptyset \text{ and } \mathbb{L}^-_i = \emptyset
\end{cases}\]
\[\mathcal{I}^M_i = \begin{cases}
( \max \mathbb{M}^-_i, \min \mathbb{M}^+_i ] & \text{if } \mathbb{M}^-_i \neq \emptyset \text{ and } \mathbb{M}^+_i \neq \emptyset \\
[0, \min \mathbb{M}^+_i ] & \text{if } \mathbb{M}^-_i = \emptyset \text{ and } \mathbb{M}^+_i \neq \emptyset \\
( \max \mathbb{M}^-_i, \infty) & \text{if } \mathbb{M}^-_i \neq \emptyset \text{ and } \mathbb{M}^+_i = \emptyset \\
[0, \infty) & \text{if } \mathbb{M}^-_i = \emptyset \text{ and } \mathbb{M}^+_i = \emptyset
\end{cases}\]
Informally, one should think of a node $m = \langle \Gamma, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle$ as satisfying all the formulas in $\Gamma$.
Moreover, the (mod)-rule signifies a state transition,
where the new states are given by the nodes in the conclusion,
and any transition to $m$ must have a minimum weight that lies in the interval $\mathcal{I}^L$,
and a maximum weight that lies in the interval $\mathcal{I}^M$.
\begin{exa}
We now illustrate the use of the (mod) rule through an example.
Consider the node $m = \langle \{p_1, p_2, L_2 p_1, L_4(p_1 \land p_2), L_0 p_3, \neg L_5 p_2, \neg M_6 p_3\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle$.
We group the formulas as
\[\Gamma = \{p_1, p_2\}, \Gamma' = \{L_2 p_1, L_4 (p_1 \land p_2), L_0 p_3\}, \text{ and } \Gamma'' = \{\neg L_5 p_2, \neg M_6 p_3\},\]
so that $m = \langle \Gamma \cup \Gamma' \cup \Gamma'', \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle$.
Since $\Gamma$ only includes literals, it is clear that we can use no other rules,
so we are allowed to use (mod) on $m$.
We see that $\models (p_1 \land p_2) \rightarrow p_1$,
and hence $\{\psi_1, \psi_2\} = \{p_1 \land p_2, p_3\}$,
so there are two children of $m$. For the first child, we find
\begin{align*}
&\mathbb{L}^+_1 = \{2,4\} &&\mathbb{M}^+_1 = \emptyset \\
&\mathbb{L}^-_1 = \{5\} &&\mathbb{M}^-_1 = \emptyset,
\end{align*}
and for the second child we find
\begin{align*}
&\mathbb{L}^+_2 = \{0\} &&\mathbb{M}^+_2 = \emptyset \\
&\mathbb{L}^-_2 = \emptyset &&\mathbb{M}^-_2 = \{6\}.
\end{align*}
Hence the intervals become
\begin{align*}
&\mathcal{I}^L_1 = [4,5) &&\mathcal{I}^M_1 = [0,\infty) \\
&\mathcal{I}^L_2 = [0,\infty) &&\mathcal{I}^M_2 = (6,\infty),
\end{align*}
and our application of the rule becomes
\[
\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{\langle \{p_1, p_2, L_2 p_1, L_4(p_1 \land p_2), L_0 p_3, \neg L_5 p_2, \neg M_6 p_3\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {(mod)}]1{\langle \{p_1 \land p_2\}, [4,5), [0,\infty) \rangle \quad \langle \{p_3\}, [0,\infty) (6,\infty) \rangle}
\end{prooftree}
\]
\end{exa}
Given a formula $\varphi$, we will say that a tableau $\mathcal{T}$ is a \emph{tableau for $\varphi$}
if $\langle \{\varphi\}, [0,0], [0,0] \rangle$ is the root of $\mathcal{T}$.
\begin{defi}
A node $m$ in a tableau is called
\begin{itemize}
\item a \emph{modal node} if the (mod)-rule was applied to $m$ and
\item a \emph{terminal node} if it is either a modal node or a leaf node.
\end{itemize}
\end{defi}
\begin{defi}\label{def:consistent}
A node $m = \langle \Gamma, \lbag_1 a,b \rbag_1, \lbag_2 c,d \rbag_2 \rangle$ is \emph{consistent} if
\begin{itemize}
\item for any $p \in \mathcal{AP}$ we do not have both $p \in \Gamma$ and $\neg p \in \Gamma$,
\item $\lbag_1 a,b \rbag_1$ and $\lbag_2 c,d \rbag_2$ are consistent, and
\item either $a < d$ or $a = d$, $\lbag_1 = [$, and $\rbag_2 = \; ]$.
\end{itemize}
\end{defi}
\begin{defi}\label{def:success}
A tableau $\mathcal{T}$ is \emph{successful} if there exists a subtree $\mathcal{T}'$ of $\mathcal{T}$ such that
\begin{itemize}
\item every leaf in $\mathcal{T}'$ is also a leaf in $\mathcal{T}$,
\item if a modal node $m$ is included in $\mathcal{T}'$,
then every child of $m$ is also included in $\mathcal{T}'$, and
\item every terminal node in $\mathcal{T}'$ is consistent.
\end{itemize}
\end{defi}
Given a successful tableau $\mathcal{T}$,
we construct the WTS $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T})$ with state $s_{\mathcal{T}}$
using Algorithm~\ref{alg:model}.
\begin{algorithm}
\SetAlgoLined
Let $\mathcal{T}'$ be a witness for the fact that $\mathcal{T}$ is successful \;
$S := \{s_\mathcal{T}\}, \rightarrow := \emptyset, \ell := \emptyset$ \;
Let $X$ be a stack and $X := \emptyset$ \;
$X.push((s_\mathcal{T},r))$ where $r$ is the root of $\mathcal{T}'$ \;
\While{$X \neq \emptyset$}{
$(s,m) := X.pop$ \;
Let $m = \langle \Gamma, \Delta, (a,b) \rangle$ \;
\If{$m$ is not a terminal node}{
Let $m'$ be the left-most child of $m$ in $\mathcal{T}'$ \;
$X.push((s,m'))$ \;
}
\If{$m$ is a leaf node}{
$\ell := \ell \cup \{(s,p) \mid p \in \mathcal{AP} \text{ and } p \in \Gamma\}$ \;
}
\If{$m$ is a modal node}{
$\ell := \ell \cup \{(s,p) \mid p \in \mathcal{AP} \text{ and } p \in \Gamma\}$ \;
Let $m_1 = \langle \Gamma_1, \mathcal{I}^L_1, \mathcal{I}^M_1 \rangle, \dots, m_n = \langle \Gamma_n, \mathcal{I}^L_n, \mathcal{I}^M_n \rangle$ be the children of $m$ in $\mathcal{T}'$ \;
\For{$i = 1, \dots, n$}{
Let $\mathcal{I}^L_i = \lbag a_i,b_i \rbag$ and $\mathcal{I}^M_i = \lbag c_i,d_i \rbag$ \;
$x_i := a_i$ \;
$y_i := \begin{cases} \max\{a_i, \frac{d_i - c_i}{2} + c_i\} & \text{if } d_i \neq \infty \\ \max\{a_i, c_i + 1\} & \text{if } d_i = \infty\end{cases}$ \;
$S := S \cup \{s_i\}$ \;
$\rightarrow := \rightarrow \cup \{(s,x_i,s_i), (s,y_i,s_i)\}$ \;
$X.push((s_i,m_i))$ \;
}
}
}
$\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}) := (S, \rightarrow, \ell)$ \;
\Return $(\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}), s_{\mathcal{T}})$ \;
\caption{Constructing the model $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T})$ for a successful tableau $\mathcal{T}$.}
\label{alg:model}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:tableaumodel}
If $\mathcal{T}$ is a successful tableau for $\varphi$, then $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s_{\mathcal{T}} \models \varphi$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $Y$ be the set of all pairs $(s,m)$ that are added to the stack $X$ by Algorithm \ref{alg:model} at some point during the construction of $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T})$.
We wish to prove that for any $(s,\langle \Gamma, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M\rangle) \in Y$
we have $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \Gamma$,
where we write $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \Gamma$ to mean $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \varphi$ for all $\varphi \in \Gamma$.
Note that if we can prove this, then it follows that $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s_\mathcal{T} \models \varphi$
since $(s_\mathcal{T}, \langle \{\varphi\}, \emptyset, (0,0) \rangle) \in Y$.
Let $(s, m)$ be an arbitrary element of $Y$ and let $l$ be the length of the longest path from $m$ to a leaf.
We will prove, by induction on $l$, that $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}), s \models \Gamma$ where $m = \langle \Gamma, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle$.
$l = 0$: In this case, $m$ is a leaf. Hence $\Gamma$ only contains literals,
and by construction we have $p \in \ell(s)$ if and only if $p \in \Gamma$.
Since $m$ is consistent, we thus get $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \Gamma$.
$l > 0$: In this case we consider the different rules that may be applied to $m$.
\begin{description}
\item[($\land$)] We have
\[
\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{m = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\varphi_1 \land \varphi_2\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\land$)}]1{m' = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\varphi_1, \varphi_2\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\end{prooftree}
\]
By induction hypothesis we get $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \Gamma \cup \{\varphi_1,\varphi_2\}$.
This implies that $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \varphi_1$ and $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \varphi_2$,
so $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \Gamma \cup \{\varphi_1 \land \varphi_2\}$.
\item[($\neg \land$)] We have
\[
\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{m = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg (\varphi_1 \land \varphi_2)\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\neg \land$)}]1{m_1 = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg \varphi_1\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle \quad m_2 = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg \varphi_2\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\end{prooftree}
\]
We have three cases to consider;
either $m_1$ is included in $\mathcal{T}'$,
$m_2$ is included in $\mathcal{T}'$,
or both $m_1$ and $m_2$ are included in $\mathcal{T}'$.
If $m_1$ is included in $\mathcal{T}'$ we get, by the induction hypothesis,
that $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \Gamma \cup \{\neg \varphi_1 \}$
implying that $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \not \models \varphi_1$.
If $m_2$ is included in $\mathcal{T}'$ we get, by the induction hypothesis,
that $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \Gamma \cup \{ \neg \varphi_2 \}$
implying that $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \not \models \varphi_2$.
In either case we get that $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \not \models \varphi_1 \land \varphi_2$ and $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \Gamma$,
and therefore $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \Gamma \cup \{\neg (\varphi_1 \land \varphi_2)\}$.
The last case follows trivially from the preceding arguments.
\item[($\neg\neg$)] We have
\[
\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{m = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg \neg \varphi'\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\neg\neg$)}]1{m' = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\varphi'\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\end{prooftree}
\]
By induction hypothesis we know that $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \Gamma \cup \{\varphi'\}$,
so $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \Gamma \cup \{\neg \neg \varphi'\}$.
\item[(mod)] We have
\[
\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{m = \langle \Gamma \cup \{N^1_{r_1} \varphi_1, \dots, N^n_{r_n} \varphi_n\} \cup \{\neg O^1_{r_1'} \varphi_1', \dots, \neg O^{n'}_{r_{n'}'} \varphi_{n'}'\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {(mod)}]1{m_1 = \langle \{\psi_1\}, \mathcal{I}^L_1, \mathcal{I}^M_1 \rangle \quad \cdots \quad m_k = \langle \{\psi_k\}, \mathcal{I}^L_k, \mathcal{I}^M_k \rangle}
\end{prooftree}
\]
$\Gamma$ must consist only of literals, because otherwise the (mod) rule could not be used.
As in the case for $l = 0$, we then get $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \Gamma$ since $m$ is consistent.
Let $\Psi = \{\psi_1, \ldots, \psi_k\}$,
and for any $1 \leq j \leq k$, let $\mathcal{I}^L_j = \lbag a_j,b_j \rbag$
and $\mathcal{I}^M_j = \lbag c_j, d_k \rbag$.
By the induction hypothesis, we know that $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}), s_j \models \psi_j$ for all $j \in \{1,\ldots,k\}$,
and, by construction, $s_j$ is the only successor of $s$ that satisfies $\psi_j$.
Now consider a formula $N^i_{r_i} \varphi_i$.
There must exist a subset $\Psi_{\varphi_i} \subseteq \Psi$ such that
$\trans{s}{\sat{\varphi_i}} = \trans{s}{\bigcup_{\psi' \in \Psi_{\varphi_i}} \sat{\psi'}}$.
We first consider the case where $N^i = L$.
Because $\Psi_{\varphi_i}$ is finite,
there exists $\psi_j' \in \Psi_{\varphi_i}$ such that
$\transl{s}{\sat{\varphi_i}} = \transl{s}{\sat{\psi_j'}}$,
implying the existence of $\psi_j \in \Psi$ such that $\transl{s}{\sat{\varphi_i}} = \transl{s}{\sat{\psi_j}} = a_j$.
We must have $a_j \geq r_i$ implying $\transl{s}{\sat{\varphi_i}} \geq r_i$, and thus $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models L_{r_i} \varphi_i$.
In the case where $N^i = M$ we can, similarly to the previous case,
find $\psi_j \in \Psi$ such that
$\transr{s}{\sat{\varphi_i}} = \transr{s}{\sat{\psi_j}}$,
and we know that $d_i \neq \infty$ implying
\[\transr{s}{\sat{\psi_j}} = \max\left\{ a_j, \frac{d_j - c_j}{2} + c_j \right\} \leq d_j \leq r_i .\]
Therefore, $\transr{s}{\sat{\varphi}} \leq r_i$ and thus $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models M_{r_i} \varphi_i$.
Lastly we consider a formula $\neg O^i_{r_i'}\varphi_i'$.
If there is no $\psi_j \in \Psi$ such that $\models \psi_j \to \varphi_i'$, then,
by the construction of $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T})$, there is no successor
$s'$ of $s$ such that $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \varphi_i'$.
Therefore, $\transl{s}{\sat{\varphi_i'}} = \infty$ and $\transr{s}{\sat{\varphi_i'}} = - \infty$,
and thus $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \neg O^i_{r_i'}\varphi_i'$
is trivially satisfied for $O^i \in \{L, M\}$.
Suppose $\models \psi_j' \to \varphi_i'$ for some $\psi_j' \in \Psi$.
We first consider the case where $O^i = L$.
There must exist $\psi_j \in \Psi$ such that
$\transl{s}{\sat{\varphi_i'}} = \transl{s}{\sat{\psi_j}} = a_j$.
By the assumption that $\mathcal{T}$ is successful,
we must have that $m_j$ is consistent.
Therefore, $a_j < b_j \leq r_{i'}$ implying
$\transl{s}{\sat{\varphi_i'}} < r_i'$,
and thus $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \neg L_{r_i'}\varphi_i'$.
In the case where $O^i = M$ we must be able to find $\psi_j \in \Psi$
such that $\transr{s}{\sat{\varphi_i'}} = \transr{s}{\sat{\psi_j}}$.
We have to consider $d_j = \infty$ and $d_j \neq \infty$ separately.
If $d_j = \infty$ we have
\[\transr{s}{\sat{\psi_j}} = \max\left\{a_j, c_j + 1\right\} > c_j \geq r_i' .\]
If $d_j \neq \infty$ we have
\[\transr{s}{\sat{\psi_j}} = \max\left\{a_j, \frac{d_j - c_j}{2} + c_j\right\} > c_j \geq r_i' .\]
In either case we have that $\trans{s}{\sat{\varphi_i'}} > r_i'$ and
therefore $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T}),s \models \neg M_{r_i'}\varphi_i'$. \qedhere
\end{description}
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:tableaux}
Let $\mathcal{T}_1$ and $\mathcal{T}_2$ be tableaux for $\varphi$.
Then it holds that $\mathcal{T}_1$ is successful if and only if $\mathcal{T}_2$ is successful.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Assume that $\mathcal{T}_1$ is a successful tableau.
Let $\mathcal{T}_1'$ be a subtree of $\mathcal{T}_1$
which witnesses the fact that $\mathcal{T}_1$ is successful.
If $\mathcal{T}_1'$ is also a subtree of $\mathcal{T}_2$,
then we are done. If not, let $d$ be the smallest number such that
$\mathcal{T}_1'$ differs at depth $d$ from any subtree of $\mathcal{T}_2$ with the same root as $\mathcal{T}_2$.
Note that we must have $d > 0$ because $\mathcal{T}_1'$ and $\mathcal{T}_2$ have the same root.
Denote by $\mathcal{T}_1' |_n$ the restriction of $\mathcal{T}_1'$ to depth $n$.
Then $\mathcal{T}_1' |_{d-1}$ is a subtree of $\mathcal{T}_2$.
At this point we note that $\mathcal{T}_1$ and $\mathcal{T}_2$
contain the same terminal nodes.
To see this, let the level $k$ terminal nodes be those terminal nodes that can be reached from the root
by going through $k-1$ terminal nodes.
We now argue that the level $k$ terminal nodes of $\mathcal{T}_1$ and $\mathcal{T}_2$
are the same by induction on $k$.
$k = 1$:
The level $1$ terminal nodes of $\mathcal{T}_1$ and $\mathcal{T}_2$
must be the same, since they are all constructed by applying the $(\land)$, $(\neg\land)$, or $(\neg\neg)$
rules to the root node $\langle \{\varphi\}, [0,0], [0,0] \rangle$.
$k > 1$:
Since the level $k-1$ terminal nodes of $\mathcal{T}_1$ and $\mathcal{T}_2$
are the same, they must also have the same children,
which are constructed from the (mod) rule.
Hence each level $k$ terminal node is constructed by applying the $(\land)$, $(\neg\land)$, or $(\neg\neg)$
rules to a child of one of the level $k-1$ terminal nodes,
so they are also the same in $\mathcal{T}_1$ and $\mathcal{T}_2$.
Now let $X$ be the set of all terminal nodes that are in $\mathcal{T}_1'$ at depth $d$ or below.
Since every node in $X$ is a node in $\mathcal{T}_1$,
it must also be a node in $\mathcal{T}_2$.
Furthermore, every node in $X$ is reachable in $\mathcal{T}_2$ from $\mathcal{T}_1' |_{d-1}$.
Hence, if we extend $\mathcal{T}_1' |_{d-1}$ to include all paths in $\mathcal{T}_2$ leading from the leaves of $\mathcal{T}_1' |_{d-1}$ to an element in $X$,
then this extension is a subtree of $\mathcal{T}_2$.
Denote this extension by $\mathcal{T}_2'$.
Finally we argue that $\mathcal{T}_2'$ is a witness for the fact that $\mathcal{T}_2$ is successful
by checking the three conditions of Definition~\ref{def:success}.
Every leaf of $\mathcal{T}_2'$ is also a leaf in $\mathcal{T}_2$,
since all the leaves of $\mathcal{T}_2'$ are elements of $X$.
This takes care of the first condition.
If $m_i$ is a child of the modal node $m$ in $\mathcal{T}_2$,
and $m$ is included in $\mathcal{T}_2'$,
then $m$ is also a modal node in $\mathcal{T}_1'$,
and hence $m_i$ must be included in $\mathcal{T}_1'$.
This means that there is a terminal node $m'_1$ in $\mathcal{T}_1'$
which is reached by $m_i$.
Hence, if $m_i$ is not included in $\mathcal{T}_2'$,
then the terminal node $m'_1$ can not be reached in $\mathcal{T}_2'$,
but this contradicts how $\mathcal{T}_2'$ was constructed.
Therefore $m_i$ must also be included in $\mathcal{T}_2'$,
so the second condition is satisfied.
The last condition is satisfied because every terminal node in $\mathcal{T}_2'$
is also a terminal node in $\mathcal{T}_1'$,
and we know that every terminal node in $\mathcal{T}_1'$ is consistent.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:sat}
$\varphi$ is satisfiable if and only if there exists a successful tableau for $\varphi$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
($\implies$) Assume $\varphi$ is satisfiable, meaning that $\mathcal{M},s \models \varphi$
for some $\mathcal{M} = (S, \rightarrow, \ell)$ and $s \in S$.
Let $\mathcal{T}$ be a tableau for $\varphi$,
and note that such a tableau always exists by applying the tableau rules to $\langle \{\varphi\}, [0,0], [0,0] \rangle$.
Now construct a marking $\mathfrak{M} \subseteq S \times \mathcal{T}$ as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item $(s,r) \in \mathfrak{M}$ where $r$ is the root of $\mathcal{T}$.
\item If $(s',m) \in \mathfrak{M}$ and ($\land$) or ($\neg\neg$) was applied to $m$,
add $(s',m')$ to $\mathfrak{M}$, where $m'$ is the child of $m$.
\item If $(s',m) \in \mathfrak{M}$ and ($\neg \land$) was applied to $m$, meaning that
\[
\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{m = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg (\varphi_1 \land \varphi_2)\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\neg \land$)}]1{m_1 = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg \varphi_1\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle \quad m_2 = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg \varphi_2\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\end{prooftree}
\]
then add $(s',m_1)$ to $\mathfrak{M}$ if $s' \in \sat{\neg \varphi_1}$ and add $(s',m_2)$ to $\mathfrak{M}$ if $s' \in \sat{\neg \varphi_2}$.
\item If $(s',m) \in \mathfrak{M}$ and (mod) was applied to $m$, meaning that
\[
\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{m = \langle \Gamma \cup \{N^1_{r_1} \varphi_1, \dots, N^n_{r_n} \varphi_n\} \cup \{\neg O^1_{r_1'} \varphi_1', \dots, \neg O^{n'}_{r_{n'}'} \varphi_{n'}'\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {(mod)}]1{m_1 = \langle \{\psi_1\}, \mathcal{I}^L_1, \mathcal{I}^M_1\rangle \quad \cdots \quad m_k = \langle \{\psi_k\}, \mathcal{I}^L_k, \mathcal{I}^M_k\rangle}
\end{prooftree}
\]
then add $(t',m_i)$ to $\mathfrak{M}$ if $t' \in \sat{\psi_i}$ and $s' \xrightarrow{r} t'$ for some $r \in \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}$.
\end{itemize}
We will first argue that for any $(s', \langle \Gamma, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle) \in \mathfrak{M}$ we have $\mathcal{M},s' \models \Gamma$,
meaning $\mathcal{M},s' \models \varphi'$ for all $\varphi' \in \Gamma$.
We prove this by induction on the depth $d$ of $m$.
$d = 0$: We have $(s', \langle \Gamma, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle) = (s,r) = (s, \langle \{\varphi\}, [0,0], [0,0] \rangle)$,
and by assumption we get $\mathcal{M},s \models \varphi$.
$d > 0$: We consider which rule was applied to the parent of $m$.
\begin{description}
\item[($\land$)]
\[
\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{m' = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\varphi_1 \land \varphi_2\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\land$)}]1{m = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\varphi_1, \varphi_2\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\end{prooftree}
\]
By induction hypothesis, we have $\mathcal{M},s' \models \Gamma \cup \{\varphi_1 \land \varphi_2\}$,
so $\mathcal{M},s' \models \varphi_1$ and $\mathcal{M},s' \models \varphi_2$,
and hence $\mathcal{M},s' \models \Gamma \cup \{\varphi_1, \varphi_2\}$.
\item[($\neg \land$)]
\[
\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{m' = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg (\varphi_1 \land \varphi_2)\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\neg \land$)}]1{m_1 = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg \varphi_1\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle \quad m_2 = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg \varphi_2\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\end{prooftree}
\]
If $m = m_1$, then by the way $\mathfrak{M}$ was constructed we get $\mathcal{M},s' \models \neg \varphi_1$,
and hence by induction hypothesis, $\mathcal{M},s' \models \Gamma \cup \{\neg \varphi_1\}$.
Likewise we get $\mathcal{M},s' \models \Gamma \cup \{\neg \varphi_2\}$ if $m = m_2$.
\item[($\neg\neg$)]
\[
\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{m' = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg \neg \varphi'\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\neg\neg$)}]1{m = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\varphi'\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\end{prooftree}
\]
By induction hypothesis we have $\mathcal{M},s' \models \Gamma \cup \{\neg \neg \varphi'\}$,
which is equivalent to $\mathcal{M},s' \models \Gamma \cup \{\varphi'\}$.
\item[(mod)]
\[
\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{m' = \langle \Gamma \cup \{N^1_{r_1} \varphi_1, \dots, N^n_{r_n} \varphi_n\} \cup \{\neg O^1_{r_1'} \varphi_1', \dots, \neg O^{n'}_{r_{n'}'} \varphi_{n'}'\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {(mod)}]1{m_1 = \langle \{\psi_1\}, \mathcal{I}^L_1, \mathcal{I}^M_1 \rangle \quad \cdots \quad m_k = \langle \{\psi_k\}, \mathcal{I}^L_k, \mathcal{I}^M_k \rangle}
\end{prooftree}
\]
We must have $m = m_i$ for some $1 \leq i \leq k$.
By construction of $\mathfrak{M}$ we know that $\mathcal{M},m_i \models \psi_i$.
\end{description}
Now let $\mathcal{T}'$ be the subtree of $\mathcal{T}$
consisting of those nodes $m$ where there exists a state $s'$ such that $(s',m) \in \mathfrak{M}$.
We will now prove that $\mathcal{T}'$
satisfies the three conditions in Definition~\ref{def:success}.
For the first condition we prove the contrapositive:
If $m$ is not a leaf in $\mathcal{T}$, then it is not a leaf in $\mathcal{T}'$.
Hence we assume that $m$ is not a leaf in $\mathcal{T}$.
If $m$ is not a node in $\mathcal{T}'$,
then it is also not a leaf node in $\mathcal{T}'$.
If $m$ is a node in $\mathcal{T}'$,
then there must exist some state $s'$
such that $(s',m) \in \mathfrak{M}$.
We now consider which rule was applied to $m$ in $\mathcal{T}$.
\begin{description}
\item[($\land$) or ($\neg\neg$)] In these cases, $m$ has a child $m'$ in $\mathcal{T}$,
and by construction of $\mathfrak{M}$, we get $(s',m') \in \mathfrak{M}$, so $m'$ is a child of $m$ in $\mathcal{T}'$.
\item[($\neg \land$)]
\[
\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{m = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg (\varphi_1 \land \varphi_2)\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M\rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\neg \land$)}]1{m_1 = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg \varphi_1\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle \quad m_2 = \langle \Gamma \cup \{\neg \varphi_2\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\end{prooftree}
\]
We know that $\mathcal{M},s' \models \Gamma \cup \{\neg (\varphi_1 \land \varphi_2)\}$,
so we must have $\mathcal{M},s' \models \neg \varphi_1$ or $\mathcal{M},s' \models \neg \varphi_2$.
By construction of $\mathfrak{M}$, this means that $(s',m_1) \in \mathfrak{M}$ or $(s',m_2) \in \mathfrak{M}$,
and hence $m_1$ or $m_2$ must be a child of $m$ in $\mathcal{T}'$.
\item[(mod)]
\[
\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{m = \langle \Gamma \cup \{N^1_{r_1} \varphi_1, \dots, N^n_{r_n} \varphi_n\} \cup \{\neg O^1_{r_1'} \varphi_1', \dots, \neg O^{n'}_{r_{n'}'} \varphi_{n'}'\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {(mod)}]1{m_1 = \langle \{\psi_1\}, \mathcal{I}^L_1, \mathcal{I}^M_1 \rangle \quad \cdots \quad m_k = \langle \{\psi_k\}, \mathcal{I}^L_k, \mathcal{I}^M_k \rangle}
\end{prooftree}
\]
For each $m_i$ there must exist some $j$ such that $N^j_{r_j} \varphi_j = N^j_{r_j} \psi_i$.
Then we know that $\mathcal{M},s' \models N^j_{r_j} \psi_i$,
and hence $\transl{s'}{\sat{\psi_i}} \geq r_j$ or $\transr{s'}{\sat{\psi_i}} \leq r_j$.
In either case there must exist some $t' \in \sat{\psi_i}$
such that $s' \xrightarrow{r} t'$ for some $r$.
Hence $(t',m_i) \in \mathfrak{M}$ and $m_i$ is a child of $m$ in $\mathcal{T}'$.
\end{description}
For the second condition, let $(s',m) \in \mathfrak{M}$ where $m$ is a modal node, meaning that
\[
\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{m = \langle \Gamma \cup \{N^1_{r_1} \varphi_1, \dots, N^n_{r_n} \varphi_n\} \cup \{\neg O^1_{r_1'} \varphi_1', \dots, \neg O^{n'}_{r_{n'}'} \varphi_{n'}'\}, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {(mod)}]1{m_1 = \langle \{\psi_1\}, \mathcal{I}^L_1, \mathcal{I}^M_1 \rangle \quad \cdots \quad m_k = \langle \{\psi_k\}, \mathcal{I}^L_k, \mathcal{I}^M_k \rangle}
\end{prooftree}
\]
For every $\psi_i$ we must have $N^j_{r_j} \varphi_j = N^j_{r_j} \psi_i$ for some $j$,
so $\mathcal{M},s' \models N^j_{r_j} \psi_i$,
which implies that there exists $t' \in \sat{\psi_i}$ such that $s' \xrightarrow{r} t'$ for some $r$.
Hence we get $(t',m_i) \in \mathfrak{M}$.
Since this holds for any $i$, we get that every $m_i$ is included in $\mathcal{T}'$.
For the third condition, let $m = \langle \Gamma, \mathcal{I}^L, \mathcal{I}^M \rangle$ be a terminal node in $\mathcal{T}'$.
We check the conditions of Definition \ref{def:consistent}.
There must exist a state $s'$ such that $(s',m) \in \mathfrak{M}$,
which means that $\mathcal{M},s' \models \Gamma$.
Hence $s'$ satisfies all the literals in $\Gamma$,
which can only happen if the first condition is satisfied.
For the second condition, note that $[0,0]$ is a consistent interval,
and every interval constructed by the (mod) rule is also consistent,
so $\mathcal{I}^L$ and $\mathcal{I}^M$ must be consistent.
Hence it remains to check the third condition.
Assume that
\[\mathcal{I}^L = \lbag_1 a,b \rbag_1 \quad \text{and} \quad \mathcal{I}^M = \lbag_2 c,d \rbag_2.\]
Now, either $\mathcal{I}^L = \mathcal{I}^M = [0,0]$,
in which case clearly $a \leq b$, $\lbag_1 = [$, and $\rbag_2 = \; ]$,
or there exists a modal node $m'$ in $\mathcal{T}'$ such that $m$ can be reached from $m'$.
Let
\[m^* = \langle \Gamma^* \cup \{N^1_{r_1}\varphi_1, \dots, N^n_{r_n}\varphi_n\} \cup \{\neg O^1_{r'_1}\varphi'_1, \dots, \neg O^{n'}_{r'_{n'}}\varphi'_{n'}\}, \mathcal{I}^L_*, \mathcal{I}^M_*\rangle\]
be the modal node in $\mathcal{T}'$ with greatest depth from which $m$ can be reached.
Then $m^*$ must have a child $m_i^* = \langle \{\psi_i\}, \mathcal{I}^L_i, \mathcal{I}^M_i\rangle$ where
\[\mathcal{I}^L = \mathcal{I}^L_i \quad \text{and} \quad \mathcal{I}^M = \mathcal{I}^M_i.\]
If $\mathcal{I}^M_i = (\max \mathbb{M}^-_i,\infty)$ or $\mathcal{I}^M_i = [0,\infty)$,
then clearly $a < d = \infty$.
Otherwise, if $\mathcal{I}^L_i = [0,\min\mathbb{L}^-_i)$ or $\mathcal{I}^L_i = [0,\infty)$
and $\mathcal{I}^M_i = (\max\mathbb{M}^-_i,\min\mathbb{M}^+_i]$ or $\mathcal{I}^M_i = [0,\min\mathbb{M}^+_i]$,
then $0 = a \leq d$, $\lbag_1 = [$, and $\rbag_2 = \; ]$.
Otherwise, the only possibility left is that $\lbag_1 = [$, $a = \max\mathbb{L}^+_i$, $\rbag_2 = \; ]$, and $d = \min\mathbb{M}^+_i$.
We must show that $a \leq d$.
Assume towards a contradiction that $a = \max\mathbb{L}^+_i > \min\mathbb{M}^+_i = d$.
Then, by the definition of $\mathbb{L}^+_i$ and $\mathbb{M}^+_i$,
there exist $j_1$ and $j_2$ such that
\[L_{r_1}\varphi_{j_1} = N^{j_1}_{r_{j_1}}\varphi_{j_1} \quad \text{and} \quad \varphi_{j_1} \in \upw{\Gamma'}(\psi_i)\]
\[M_{r_2}\varphi_{j_2} = N^{j_2}_{r_{j_2}}\varphi_{j_2} \quad \text{ and } \quad \varphi_{j_2} \in \upw{\Gamma'}(\psi_i)\]
with $r_1 > r_2$.
Because $m^*$ is a node in $\mathcal{T}'$,
there must exist a state $s^*$ such that $(s^*,m^*) \in \mathfrak{M}$,
which implies that $\mathcal{M}, s^* \models L_{r_1}\varphi_{j_1}$
and $\mathcal{M}, s^* \models M_{r_2}\varphi_{j_2}$.
This gives us
\[\transl{s^*}{\sat{\psi_i}} \geq \transl{s^*}{\sat{\varphi_{j_1}}} \geq r_1 > r_2 \geq \transr{s^*}{\sat{\varphi_{j_2}}} \geq \transr{s^*}{\sat{\psi_i}},\]
which is a contradiction.
Hence $a \leq d$ and we are done.
($\impliedby$) This follows from Lemma \ref{lem:tableaumodel}.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}
The satisfiability problem for our logic is decidable.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{lem:sat}, to decide whether a formula $\varphi$ is satisfiable,
it is enough to check whether there exists a successful tableau for $\varphi$.
Furthermore, by Lemma \ref{lem:tableaux} it is enough to only check a single tableau for $\varphi$:
If the tableau is successful, then all tableaux for $\varphi$ are successful,
and if it is not successful, then no tableau for $\varphi$ is successful.
One can construct such a tableau for $\varphi$
by applying the tableau rules of Table \ref{tab:rules} to the tuple $\langle \{\varphi\}, [0,0], [0,0] \rangle$
until no more rules can be applied.
We will now argue that there is an effective procedure for constructing such a tableau by induction on the modal depth of $\varphi$.
$md(\varphi) = 0$: In this case, the (mod) rule is never used when constructing the tableau.
Hence the procedure proceeds by syntactically checking which rules can be used at a given moment,
and choosing a valid rule to apply.
$md(\varphi) > 0$: In this case we proceed as for the case where $md(\varphi) = 0$,
except that now the (mod) rule may also be applied,
in which case we need to be able to compute the $\psi_i$, $\mathcal{I}^L_i$ and $\mathcal{I}^M_i$.
The difficulty lies in computing the set $\{\psi_1, \dots, \psi_m\} = \min(\mathcal{L}(\Gamma'))$,
where $\Gamma' = \{\varphi_1, \dots, \varphi_n\}$, and the sets
\[\mathbb{L}^+_i = \{r \mid L_r \varphi_j = N^j_{r_j} \varphi_j \text{ for some } j \text{ and } \varphi_j \in \upw{\Gamma'}(\psi_i)\}\]
\[\mathbb{M}^+_i = \{r \mid M_r \varphi_j = N^j_{r_j} \varphi_j \text{ for some } j \text{ and } \varphi_j \in \upw{\Gamma'}(\psi_i)\}\]
\[\mathbb{L}^-_i = \{r \mid L_r \varphi_j' = O^j_{r_j} \varphi_j' \text{ for some } j \text{ and } \models \psi_i \rightarrow \varphi_j'\}\]
\[\mathbb{M}^-_i = \{r \mid M_r \varphi_j' = O^j_{r_j} \varphi_j' \text{ for some } j \text{ and } \models \psi_i \rightarrow \varphi_j'\}.\]
However, note that all $\varphi_i$ and $\varphi_i'$ and have modal depth less than $md(\varphi)$.
Therefore, by induction hypothesis, we have an effective procedure to decide whether
$\models \varphi_i \rightarrow \varphi_j$ and $\models \varphi_i \leftrightarrow \varphi_j$,
which is exactly what we need to compute the aforementioned sets.
Given this we can compute the values needed for the intervals $\mathcal{I}^L_i$ and $\mathcal{I}^M_i$.
The procedure for constructing a tableau for $\varphi$ uses recursion on the modal depth of $\varphi$, $md(\varphi) = k$,
in order to compute the sets $\{\psi_1,\ldots,\psi_m\}$, $\mathbb{L}^+_i$, $\mathbb{M}^+_i$, $\mathbb{L}^-_i$, and $\mathbb{M}^-_i$.
To compute these sets we must instantiate the procedure for constructing tableaux for formulae of modal depth $k - 1$,
which again must instantiate the procedure for constructing tableaux for formulae of modal depth $k - 2$, and so on.
The recursion stops when only the procedure for generating tableaux for formulae with modal depth zero is needed
to construct the sets $\{\psi_1,\ldots,\psi_m\}$, $\mathbb{L}^+_i$, $\mathbb{M}^+_i$, $\mathbb{L}^-_i$, and $\mathbb{M}^-_i$.
Thus, for any $k \in \mathbb{N}$, there exists a procedure for generating a tableau for any formula $\varphi$ with $md(\varphi) = k$.
Because all formulae are finite they must have finite modal depth. Therefore, for any formula $\varphi$, there exists a procedure that generates a tableau for $\varphi$.
\end{proof}
\begin{exa}\label{ex:sat}
Consider the formula $\varphi = \neg(\neg (L_2 p_1 \land M_5L_1 p_1) \land \neg M_2 p_2 ))$.
Using the tableau rules, we get the following tableau $\mathcal{T}$ for $\varphi$.
\[
\begin{prooftree}[proof style=downwards]
\Hypo{\langle \{p_1\}, [1,\infty), [0,\infty) \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {(mod)}]1{\langle \{p_1, L_1 p_1\}, [2, \infty), [5, \infty) \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {(mod)}]1{\langle \{L_2 p_1, M_5L_1 p_1\}, [0,0], [0,0] \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\land$)}]1{\langle \{L_2 p_1 \land M_5L_1 p_1\}, [0,0], [0,0] \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\neg \neg$)}]1{\langle \{\neg\neg (L_2 p_1 \land M_5L_1 p_1)\}, [0,0], [0,0] \rangle}
\Hypo{\langle \{p_2\}, [0,\infty), [0, 2] \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {(mod)}]1{\langle \{M_2 p_2\}, [0,0], [0,0] \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\neg\neg$)}]1{\langle \{\neg\neg M_2 p_2\}, [0,0], [0,0] \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\neg \land$)}]2{\langle \{\neg (\neg (L_2 p_1 \land M_5L_1 p_1) \land M_2 p_2)\}, [0,0], [0,0] \rangle}
\end{prooftree}
\]
In this case the tableau is successful,
since all terminal nodes are consistent.
In fact, there are three distinct subtrees witnessing this fact:
one that chooses the left branch, one that chooses the right branch,
and one that chooses both branches.
In Figure \ref{fig:sat-ex} we show the resulting model $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T})$
for the witness that chooses the left branch.
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}[WTS, node distance=2cm]
\node[state, label=above:{$\{\}$}] (st) {$s_\mathcal{T}$};
\node[state, label=above:{$\{p_1\}$}] (s1) [right=of st] {$s_1$};
\node[state, label=above:{$\{p_1\}$}] (s2) [right=of s1] {$s_2$};
\path (s0) edge[bend right=45] node[below] {$5$} (s1);
\path (s0) edge[bend left=45] node[above] {$2$} (s1);
\path (s1) edge[bend right=45] node[below] {$1$} (s2);
\path (s1) edge[bend left=45] node[above] {$1$} (s2);
\end{tikzpicture}
\captionof{figure}{The model $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{T})$ for the successful tableau $\mathcal{T}$ in Example \ref{ex:sat}.}
\label{fig:sat-ex}
\end{figure}
\end{exa}
\begin{exa}
Consider the formula $\varphi = p_1 \land L_4 p_1 \land \neg L_3 p_1 \land L_2 p_2$.
Using the tableau rules, we get the following tableau $\mathcal{T}$ for $\varphi$.
\[
\begin{prooftree}
\Hypo{\langle \{p_1 \land L_4 p_1 \land \neg L_3 p_1 \land L_2 p_2\}, [0,0], [0,0] \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\land$)}]1{\langle \{p_1, L_4 p_1 \land \neg L_3 p_1 \land L_2 p_2\}, [0,0], [0,0] \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\land$)}]1{\langle \{p_1, L_4 p_1, \neg L_3 p_1 \land L_2 p_2\}, [0,0], [0,0] \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {($\land$)}]1{\langle \{p_1, L_4 p_1, \neg L_3 p_1, L_2 p_2\}, [0,0], [0,0] \rangle}
\Infer[left label = {(mod)}]1{\langle \{p_1\}, [4,3), [0,\infty] \rangle \quad \langle \{p_2\}, [2, \infty), [0,\infty) \rangle}
\end{prooftree}
\]
In this case the interval $[4,3)$ is not consistent,
and hence the tableau is not successful,
so we can conclude that $\varphi$ is not satisfiable.
\end{exa}
\section{Concluding Remarks}
Our contributions in this paper have been to define a new bisimulation relation
for weighted transition systems,
which relates those states that have similar behavior with respect to their minimum
and maximum weights on transitions,
as well as an accompanying modal logic to reason about the
upper and lower bounds of weights on transitions.
We have shown that this logic characterizes exactly
those states that are bisimilar for image-finite systems.
Furthermore, we have provided a complete axiomatization of our logic,
and we have shown that it enjoys the finite model property.
Lastly we have developed an algorithm based on the tableau method which decides the satisfiability of a formula in our logic
and constructs a finite model for the formula if it is satisfiable.
This work could be extended in different ways.
Since our logic is non-compact, strong completeness does not follow directly from weak completeness,
and hence it would be interesting to explore a strong-complete axiomatization of the proposed logic.
Such an axiomatization would need additional, infinitary axioms.
Examples of such axioms would be $\{L_q \varphi \mid q < r\} \vdash L_r \varphi$ and $\{M_q \varphi \mid q < r\} \vdash M_r \varphi$,
which are easily proven sound and describe the Archimedean property discussed in Theorem \ref{thm:noncompact}.
Although we have shown that our logic is expressive enough to capture bisimulation,
it would also be of interest to extend our logic with a kind of fixed-point operator or
standard temporal logic operators such as until in order to increase its expressivity,
and hence its practical use.
We envisage two ways in which such a logic could be given semantics:
either by accumulating weights or by taking the maximum or minimum of weights.
In the accumulating case in particular,
one could also allow negative weights to model that the system gains resources.
\subsection*{Acknowledgements.} We wish to thank the anonymous reviewers for their careful reading of our paper and for their invaluable comments that helped improve the paper. We are also grateful to Bingtian Xue for helpful discussions. This research was partially supported by the Danish FNU project 4181-00360, the ERC Advanced Grant LASSO: ``Learning, Analysis, Synthesis and Optimization of Cyber Physical Systems'' as well as the Sino-Danish Basic Research Center IDEA4CPS.
\bibliographystyle{alpha}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{Sec:Introduction}
In the past few years, face recognition performance, even in unconstrained environments, has improved substantially. For instance, the recognition accuracy on the LFW dataset has reached 99\%, even outperforming most humans \cite{sun2014deep}. However, caricature recognition performances by computers are still low \cite{huo2017variation, klare2012towards}.
Caricatures are facial drawings by artists with exaggerations of certain facial parts or features. The exaggerations are often beyond realism and yet the caricatures are effortlessly recognizable by humans. In some cases, people even find that caricatures with exaggerations are easier to recognise as compared to face photos \cite{mauro1992caricature, Perkins}. However, this is not the case for computers. For computers, the basic goal of caricature recognition consists of deciding whether a caricature image and a photo are from the same person. As caricatures are of varying styles and different shape exaggerations, such recognition is difficult.
Caricatures have long fascinated psychologists, neuroscientists and now computer scientists and engineers in their seemingly and grossly distorted views of veridical faces while still possessing distinctively recognizable features of the subjects \cite{mauro1992caricature, sinha2006face, rodriguez2011reverse}. Studying caricatures can offer valuable insights to how face recognition is robustly performed by humans. Studying caricature recognition can also lead to a better understanding of human perception of faces. For example, studies on caricature recognition \cite{mauro1992caricature} have shown that faces may be encoded as distinctive features deviated from prototype faces in human brain. It is thus interesting to see what will happen if this result is used in the current deep learning methods to explicitly encode face features as their distinctiveness from the prototypes. However, this has been rarely studied. Therefore, it is fundamentally imperative to study caricature recognition to shed light on the intrinsic nature of human perception of faces. Computer scientists can take insights gained from psychological studies to develop machine learning methods to further improve caricature and face recognition performance.
\begin{table*}
\newcommand{\tabincell}[2]{\begin{tabular}{@{}#1@{}}#2\end{tabular}}
\caption{Summary of existing datasets relating to caricature recognition.}
\label{Table:SummaryOfCaricatureRecognition}
\footnotesize
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
& \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Dataset information }\\
\cline{2-4}
& \multicolumn{1}{c|}{Number of subjects} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{Number of images} & {\tabincell{l}{Dataset purpose}} \\
\hline
Klare \emph{et al}\bmvaOneDot \cite{klare2012towards} & 196 subjects&392 images & \tabincell{l}{Caricature recognition} \\
\hline
Abaci and Akgul \cite{abaci2015matching} & 200 subjects&400 images & \tabincell{l}{Caricature recognition} \\
\hline
Crowley \emph{et al}\bmvaOneDot \cite{BMVC2015_65} & \tabincell{l}{Dev: 1,088 subjects\\NPG: 188 subjects\\Train: 496 subjects} & \tabincell{l}{Dev: 8,528 images\\NPG: 3,128 images\\Train: 257,000 images} & \tabincell{l}{Painting retrieval} \\
\hline
Mishra \cite{MishraECCV16} & 100 subjects & \tabincell{l}{Caricature: 8,928 images\\Face: 1,000 images} & Cartoon recognition\\
\hline
This paper & 252 subjects & 12,016 images & \tabincell{l}{Caricature recognition} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}\\
\end{table*}
Currently, there is only limited work on caricature recognition. Besides, there also lack suitable caricature datasets for such research. In fact, there are only four publicly available datasets \cite{klare2012towards, abaci2015matching, MishraECCV16, BMVC2015_65} that are related to caricature recognition, shown in Table \ref{Table:SummaryOfCaricatureRecognition}. The dataset of Klare \emph{et al}\bmvaOneDot \cite{klare2012towards} only has 392 images, while the dataset of Abaci and Akgul \cite{abaci2015matching} has 400 images, which certainly limits the study of caricature recognition. Another limitation of these two datasets is that they do not provide benchmark evaluation protocols, which may prove difficult to compare studies and performances. The dataset of Mishra \emph{et al}\bmvaOneDot \cite{MishraECCV16} has more images, but only from 100 subjects. Another related dataset is from Crowley \emph{et al}\bmvaOneDot\cite{BMVC2015_65}. However, this dataset was developed for painting retrieval rather than caricature recognition.
The main contribution of this paper is that we have built a new, larger dataset of caricatures and photos (called WebCaricature\footnote{https://cs.nju.edu.cn/rl/WebCaricature.htm}) with over 12,000 images to facilitate the study on caricature recognition. Examples of photos and caricatures of this new dataset are shown in Fig. \ref{Fig:ExampleCaricatures}. This dataset is much larger than any existing ones and contains more challenging intra-class variations for both photos and caricatures. In addition, we have provided facial landmark annotations on each images of the entire dataset, as well as several evaluation protocols and their baseline performances for comparison.
On caricature recognition, Klare \emph{et al}\bmvaOneDot \cite{klare2012towards} proposed to use attribute features, labeled by human via Amazon's Mechanical Turk service. Logistic regression (LR) \cite{freedman2009statistical}, multiple kernel learning (MKL) \cite{bach2008consistency}, and support vector machines (SVM) \cite{cortes1995support} were then used to calculate the similarity of a caricature and a photo based on these features. Authors in \cite{ouyang2014cross} proposed to learn a facial attribute model. Facial attribute features were then combined with low-level features for recognition using canonical correlation analysis (CCA). Abaci and Akgul \cite{abaci2015matching} proposed a method to extract facial attribute features for photos. For caricatures, the attribute features were manually labeled. Then the weights of these attribute features were learned by a genetic algorithm (GA) or LR and then used for recognition.
The existing work is monotonous with main effort on extracting facial attribute features. Little work \cite{huo2017variation} has discussed the possibility of applying low-level features and/or deep learning features for caricature recognition. Besides, the existing work did not consider the detection and facial landmark localization of caricatures, an important process for automatic recognition. To complement this absence of related work, a caricature recognition framework is presented. Similar to the current face recognition framework, we present challenges of caricature recognition within the framework as compared to face recognition. Based on this newly constructed dataset and its evaluation protocols, a combination of many state-of-the-art methods under the framework are tested. The experiments not only help to demonstrate the challenges but also offer baseline performances. With the presented framework, future researchers are advocated to focus more on key challenges rather than stalling at attribute feature learning. To summarize, in additional to a new large caricature dataset, WebCaricature, this paper presents a framework for caricature recognition. With the framework, we analyze the challenges of caricature recognition and hence provide baseline performances on the dataset.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.99\textwidth]{EPS/ExampleFaceImages2.pdf}
\caption{Examples of photos and caricatures. For each person, a photo is given in the first column. The next five columns are corresponding caricatures of various artistic styles, exhibiting large intra-class variability.}\label{Fig:ExampleCaricatures}
\end{figure}
\section{Dataset Collection}
\label{Sec:DatasetCollection}
\subsection{Collection Process} For collecting both face photos and caricature drawings, we first drew up a list of names of celebrities. For each person, we manually searched for caricatures and photos and saved these images. All the photos were searched using the Google image search, while caricatures were mainly from the Google image search and the Pinterest website.
After all the images were downloaded, a program was written to detect and remove duplicated caricatures and photos. This was done by extracting features of any two caricatures or photos, pairs of features with large similarities were selected. We then manually checked whether they were indeed duplicated images. The process resulted in a dataset of 252 subjects with a total of 6042 caricatures and 5974 photos. For each person, the number of caricatures ranges from 1 to 114 and the number of photos from 7 to 59.
\subsection{Labeling Process} For each caricature, 17 landmarks were manually labeled. The first four landmarks are the basic face contours. The next four are eye brows. Landmarks 9-12 are eye corners. The 13th landmark is nose tip. The 14th-17th are mouth contours. Details can be found from the dataset website.
The landmark labeling procedure for photos was different. For each photo, firstly we used the facial landmark detection software provided by the Face++ software \cite{face++}. The software could locate up to 83 facial landmarks, from which we used only the parts of the face landmarks that corresponded to the 2nd-17th landmarks labelled on the caricatures. The first landmark was then manually labeled for each of the photos. Note that there were some photos the software did not label well or failed to locate landmarks. For those cases, we manually corrected the labeling or manually labeled them with the same scheme as for the caricatures. After the above two processes, 17 landmarks for each caricature and photo were obtained.
\section{Evaluation Protocols}
\label{Sec:Protocols}
Generally, face recognition can be categorized into two categories: verification and identification. As the two kinds of recognition generally deal with different problems. To promote the study of both caricature verification and identification, four experimental protocols covering both scenarios are developed on the constructed WebCaricature dataset. All the protocols are public available along with the dataset.
\textbf{Caricature Verification.} The task of caricature verification is to verify whether a caricature and a photo are from the same person. Therefore, the algorithm is presented with a pair of images (a caricature and a photo) and the output is either yes or no. To evaluate the performance of this protocol, we have built two settings, similar to that used for LFW \cite{LFWTech}. One is image restricted setting and the other is image unrestricted setting. For each setting, the dataset is divided into training and testing sets.
In the image restricted setting, there are two views. View 1 is for parameter tuning and View 2 for testing. Pairs of images are provided with the information on whether the pairs are from the same person. There is no extra identity information. For training, only the provided pairs should be used. In the image unrestricted setting, there are also two views. In this setting, training images together with person identities are given. Therefore, as many pairs as possible can be formulated for training. For View 1 of both restricted and unrestricted settings, the proportion of subjects in training and testing were set to close to 9:1. For View 2, 10-fold cross validation should be used. Therefore, to report results on View 2, training must be carried out for ten times; and each time, 9 folds of the data are used for training and the remaining fold for testing. For these two settings, researchers are encouraged to use the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, area under the ROC curve (AUC), VR@FAR=0.1\%, and VR@FAR=1\% to report performance, where VR@FAR=0.1\% corresponds to the verification rate (VR) with false accept rate (FAR) equal to 0.1\%, and VR@FAR=1\% denotes VR with FAR of 1\%.
\textbf{Caricature Identification.}
The task of caricature identification can be formulated into two settings. One is to find the corresponding photo(s) of a given caricature from a photo gallery (denoted as Caricature to Photo or C2P). The second is to find the corresponding caricature(s) for a given photo from a set of caricatures (denoted as Photo to Caricature or P2C). For each of the two settings, there are two views. View 1 is for development and parameter tuning and View 2 for testing. While generating data for these two views, subjects were evenly split to training and testing sets. For View 2, the dataset was randomly split for ten times. Thus for results reporting, the algorithm should run ten times and report the average results. Besides, for C2P, photos are used as the gallery and caricatures are used as the probe. For each subject in the gallery set, only one photo is randomly selected. Reversely, for P2C, caricatures are used as the gallery and each subject has only one randomly selected caricature in the gallery. For these two settings, we encourage researchers to use the cumulative match curve (CMC) for evaluation and report average Rank-1 and Rank-10 results.
\section{Recognition Framework and Challenges}
\label{Sec:Framework}
As reviewed in Section \ref{Sec:Introduction}, most existing work on caricature recognition tries to extract descriptive attribute features for recognition. In this paper, we illustrate how to solve the recognition problem without using attributes, as they are subjective and require extensive manual labeling. The proposed recognition framework is shown in Fig. \ref{Fig:RecognitionProcess}. There are four main steps in the framework. The process is similar to the traditional face recognition process, albeit more challenges at each step.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale = 0.34]{EPS/RecognitionProcess5.pdf}\\
\caption{Caricature recognition framework. The first step is face detection and landmark localization. Then faces are aligned. With aligned face images, features are extracted. As illustrated, two kinds of feature extraction methods can be used, hand-crafted or convolutional neural network based. The last step is to measure the similarity of extracted features.}\label{Fig:RecognitionProcess}
\end{figure*}
\textbf{Caricature Face Detection and Landmark Localization.} The first step of the recognition process is to perform caricature face detection and landmark localization. For the detection, as caricatures can vary greatly in artistic styles and facial appearances, it is more difficult to find detection patterns of caricatures compared to real faces in photos. For localizing landmarks, the shapes of caricatures and the positions of eyes, noses and mouths can be exaggerated and sometimes appear at odd positions beyond realism, making most of the existing localization techniques unusable. Although this paper is devoted mainly for studying caricature recognition, further research on automatic caricature detection and landmark localization can also be performed on the proposed dataset, as our dataset only provides 17 landmarks for each caricature.
\textbf{Face Alignment.} The second step is face alignment. For this task, the objective is to make the eyes, noses or mouths appear at the same positions on two cropped face images, such that the two images are comparable. Three alignment methods (details can be found in Section \ref{SubSec:Verification_Align}), which work well for traditional face recognition, were tested in this paper. However, we found that in caricature recognition, caricatures can still be misaligned even after alignment is applied, because many facial parts are exaggerated and distorted. An illustration of misaligned caricatures after applying the eye-based alignment method is given in Fig. \ref{Fig:Misalign}. The eye-based alignment method forces the eye distance to a fixed number and the center of two eyes at a fixed position in an aligned face image. As can be seen, the photos are well aligned. Eyes of the caricatures are also well aligned. However, there are mismatches in nose and mouth areas of the caricatures. Hence for caricature recognition, more sophisticated methods need to be developed to address the misalignment problem.
\textbf{Face Feature Extraction.} The goal of face feature extraction is to extract robust and discriminant person specific features. Besides the challenges of traditional face feature extraction, such as illumination, expression and viewing angle variations, one major challenge for caricature feature extraction is to remove the variation across different drawing styles (also identified as modality variation, as photos and caricatures can be seen as from two modalities). Besides, if misalignment problem is not addressed well in the previous step, the feature extraction step should also take the exaggeration and distortion problems into consideration, making the feature extraction even more difficult.
In the experiments, we have tested two kinds of feature extraction methods. The first kind is hand-crafted feature extraction: local binary patterns (LBP) \cite{1717463}, Gabor \cite{999679} and scale invariant feature transform (SIFT) \cite{Lowe2004} features were tested. The second is the convolutional neural network (CNN) based method, where the VGG-Face model \cite{Parkhi15} was directly adopted. In these experiments, the feature extraction process was the same for caricatures and photos. However, researchers are advocated to design more sophisticated feature extraction methods to solve both the modality variation and misalignment problems.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale = 0.35]{EPS/Misalign.pdf}\\
\caption{Illustration of the misalignment problem of caricatures. Nose and mouth parts appear at different positions on the aligned caricature images (first three). Photos are fairly well aligned (last three).}\label{Fig:Misalign}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Matching Algorithm.} The last step is to compute the similarity of two sets of features from a caricature and a photo to decide whether they are from the same person. If the misalignment problem is not addressed and the image style variation is not removed, then the matching algorithm should consider removing both alignment and modality variations first. In this case, cross-modality metric learning methods can be useful \cite{huo2017variation, 7959077, 8246530}. Otherwise, if the two problems are fairly well addressed by the previous steps, traditional matching algorithm can be directly applied.
For this step, nine subspace and metric learning methods were tested, including both single modality and cross-modality based methods. For single modality based methods, principal component analysis (PCA) \cite{kim1996face}, kernel discriminant analysis (KDA) \cite{Cai11SRKDA}, keep it simple and straightforward metric (KISSME) \cite{koestinger2012large}, the information-theoretic metric learning (ITML) \cite{davis2007information}, the large margin nearest neighbor (LMNN) \cite{weinberger2009distance} were tested. For cross-modality based methods, tested methods include canonical correlation analysis (CCA) \cite{hotelling1936relations}, multi-view discriminant analysis (MvDA) \cite{kan2016multi}, coupled spectral regression (CSR) \cite{lei2009coupled}, kernel coupled spectral regression (KCSR) \cite{lei2009coupled}. In the experiments, we demonstrate that removing modality variation by cross-modality based methods, such as CSR and KCSR, can largely improve the performance.
\section{Baseline Performance}
\label{Sec:Baseline}
Following the proposed evaluation protocols and the caricature recognition framework, various alignment methods, feature extraction methods, subspace and metric learning methods were tested on the developed dataset to demonstrate the challenges of caricature recognition and also to provide baseline performances on the WebCaricature dataset. For the following experiments, under the verification settings, adopted evaluation performance measures include VR@FAR=0.1\% (denoted as FAR=0.1\% in Tables \ref{Table:AlignmentVerification}, \ref{Table:SubspaceVerification}, \ref{Table:Best_Results_Verification}), VR@FAR=1\% (denoted as FAR=1\% in Tables \ref{Table:AlignmentVerification}, \ref{Table:SubspaceVerification}, \ref{Table:Best_Results_Verification}) and AUC. Under the identification settings, the evaluation performance measures used include Rank-1 and Rank-10.
\subsection{Influence of Alignment Methods}
\label{SubSec:Verification_Align}
To study the influence of alignment, three alignment methods were tested. The alignment process of the first method was to rotate the image first to align the two eyes to horizontal position. Then, the image was resized to make eye distance of 75 pixels. After this step, the cropped region was defined by making the eye center to the upside of the bounding box by 70 pixels and to the left/right side of the bounding box by 80 pixels. The bounding box is of size $160\times 200$. This alignment method is denoted as eye location based. In the second alignment method, the first two steps were the same. Then, small regions of $40\times 40$ centered at each of the 17 labeled landmarks were also cropped out. This alignment method is denoted as landmark based. The third alignment method was done according to the face contour (defined by the landmarks 1-4). Then the bounding box was enlarged by a scale of 1.2 in both width and height. With the enlarged bounding box, the face image inside the bounding box was resized to $160\times 200$. This alignment method is denoted as bounding box based. The three alignment methods were combined with two feature extraction methods (SIFT and VGG-Face). The resulting feature vectors were combined with PCA for evaluation and all the principal components were kept.
\begin{table*}
\caption{Results of various alignment (1-5 rows) and feature extraction methods (6-9 rows) under restricted and unrestricted settings. }
\label{Table:AlignmentVerification}
\centering
\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l||l|l|l|}
\hline
\multirow{2}*{Method}&\multicolumn{3}{c||}{Restricted}&\multicolumn{3}{c|}{Unrestricted}\\
\cline{2-7}
& FAR=0.1\% (\%) & FAR=1\% (\%) & AUC & FAR=0.1\% (\%) & FAR=1\% (\%) & AUC \\
\hline
SIFT-Eye & $2.78\pm0.46$ & $10.46\pm1.43$ & $0.738\pm 0.016$ & $2.74\pm 0.75$ & $10.74\pm 1.53$ & $0.734\pm 0.016$ \\
\hline
SIFT-Land & $\mathbf{4.67}\pm\mathbf{1.08}$ & $\mathbf{15.39}\pm\mathbf{1.85}$ & $\mathbf{0.777}\pm \mathbf{0.017}$ & $\mathbf{4.43}\pm \mathbf{0.82}$ & $\mathbf{15.24}\pm \mathbf{2.03}$ & $\mathbf{0.780}\pm \mathbf{0.017}$ \\
\hline
SIFT-Box & $2.96\pm0.72$ & $9.15\pm1.17$ & $0.720\pm 0.018$ & $3.42\pm 0.52$ & $11.76\pm 1.21$ & $0.724\pm 0.013$ \\
\hline
VGG-Eye & $21.42\pm2.02$ & $40.28\pm2.91$ & $0.896\pm 0.013$ & $19.24\pm 1.95$ & $40.88\pm 2.23$ & $0.898\pm 0.007$ \\
\hline
VGG-Box & $\mathbf{28.42}\pm\mathbf{2.04}$ & $\mathbf{55.53}\pm\mathbf{2.76}$ & $\mathbf{0.946}\pm \mathbf{0.009}$ & $\mathbf{32.07}\pm \mathbf{2.60}$ & $\mathbf{56.76}\pm \mathbf{2.35}$ & $\mathbf{0.946}\pm \mathbf{0.005}$\\
\hline
\hline
LBP-Eye & $0.33\pm0.15$ & $1.92\pm0.38$ & $0.600\pm 0.015$ & $0.19\pm 0.04$ & $1.65\pm 0.27$ & $0.597\pm 0.006$ \\
\hline
Gabor-Eye & $3.23\pm0.74$ & $9.75\pm1.36$ & $0.716\pm 0.017$ & $2.76\pm 0.47$ & $10.36\pm 1.54$ & $0.718\pm 0.016$ \\
\hline
SIFT-Eye & $2.78\pm0.46$ & $10.46\pm1.43$ & $0.738\pm 0.016$ & $2.74\pm 0.75$ & $10.74\pm 1.53$ & $0.734\pm 0.016$\\
\hline
VGG-Eye & $\mathbf{21.42}\pm\mathbf{2.02}$ & $\mathbf{40.28}\pm\mathbf{2.91}$ & $\mathbf{0.896}\pm \mathbf{0.013}$ & $\mathbf{19.24}\pm \mathbf{1.95}$ & $\mathbf{40.88}\pm \mathbf{2.23}$ & $\mathbf{0.898}\pm \mathbf{0.007}$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
The first 5 rows of Table \ref{Table:AlignmentVerification} summarise the results. It can be seen: (1) for SIFT features, it is obvious that landmark based feature extraction (denoted with a suffix `-Land') obtains the best performance. The results of eye location based (denoted by suffix `-Eye') and bounding box based (denoted by suffix `-Box') methods are worse. \textit{In fact, landmark based method is a hard alignment method that forces two patches of images at the same landmark to be directly compared so as to alleviate misalignment problem. Hence it is consistently the best for extracting hand-crafted features, such as SIFT.} (2) For deep features, the bounding box based alignment is much better than the eye location based method. This is perhaps because that the bounding box based alignment can retain more face information. The cropped face images of eye location based method may miss certain part of the face such as chin and mouth due to the exaggerations in caricatures. \textit{The deep learning based methods may have mechanisms to alleviate misalignments. Thus the results of bounding box based alignment are better. Note that landmark based method is not applicable for deep learning, but it is straightforward to think that introducing a hard alignment scheme into deep learning would address the misalignment problem.}
\subsection{Evaluation of Feature Extraction Schemes}
To study the influence of features, LBP, Gabor, SIFT and CNN (VGG-Face) is adopted for experiments, where the first three are hand-crafted features. For all these feature extraction methods, eye location based alignment is used. All the extracted features were combined with PCA for evaluation. In Table \ref{Table:AlignmentVerification}, 6-9 rows summarizes results. From the table, SIFT feature is almost the best among the hand-crafted features. Gabor is the next. The results of LBP are the worst. The results of VGG-Face are the best, significantly improving over that of SIFT. This illustrates the superiority of deep learned features. Note that VGG-Face was not fine-tuned in this application. Still, the performance is much better than that of any hand-crafted features. \textit{However, under the eye location based alignment setting, the results of VGG-Face for VR@FAR=0.1\% and VR@FAR=1\% are 21.42\% and 40.28\% for the restricted setting and 19.24\% and 40.88\% for the unrestricted setting. Thus, there is still much room for improvement even with deep learning.} Note that there are many other modern deep learning based algorithms that can also be used as baseline. Besides, fine-tuning VGG-Face model is also an interesting approach. These results will be updated in our future work.
\begin{table*}
\caption{Results of various learning methods under restricted and unrestricted verification settings.}
\label{Table:SubspaceVerification}
\centering
\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l||l|l|l|}
\hline
\multirow{2}*{Method}&\multicolumn{3}{c||}{Restricted}&\multicolumn{3}{c|}{Unrestricted}\\
\cline{2-7}
& FAR=0.1\% (\%) & FAR=1\% (\%) & AUC & FAR=0.1\% (\%) & FAR=1\% (\%) & AUC \\
\hline
Euc & $2.12\pm0.68$ & $8.28\pm1.13$ & $0.661\pm 0.014$ & $2.56\pm 0.38$ & $8.40\pm 0.87$ & $0.661\pm 0.009$ \\
\hline
PCA & $4.67\pm1.08$ & $15.39\pm1.85$ & $0.777\pm 0.017$ & $4.43\pm 0.82$ & $15.24\pm 2.03$ & $0.780\pm 0.017$ \\
\hline
KDA & - & - & - & $6.62\pm 1.37$ & $24.23\pm 3.26$ & $0.875\pm 0.014$ \\
\hline
KissME & $4.55\pm1.07$ & $12.15\pm1.73$ & $0.724\pm 0.011$ & $4.56\pm 0.89$ & $14.66\pm 1.70$ & $0.781\pm 0.016$ \\
\hline
ITML & $\mathbf{5.08}\pm\mathbf{1.82}$ & $\mathbf{18.07}\pm\mathbf{4.72}$ & $\mathbf{0.841}\pm \mathbf{0.018}$ & $5.35\pm 1.20$ & $18.48\pm 2.40$ & $0.828\pm 0.016$ \\
\hline
LMNN & - & - & - & $6.59\pm 1.61$ & $21.37\pm 3.22$ & $0.842\pm 0.014$ \\
\hline
CCA & $4.77\pm0.68$ & $12.96\pm1.40$ & $0.775\pm 0.016$ & $5.02\pm 1.19$ & $17.66\pm 2.49$ & $0.812\pm 0.017$ \\
\hline
MvDA & - & - & - & $1.41\pm 0.37$ & $8.29\pm 0.72$ & $0.753\pm 0.014$ \\
\hline
CSR & - & - & - & $\mathbf{11.76}\pm \mathbf{2.72}$ & $31.86\pm 3.85$ & $0.887\pm 0.013$ \\
\hline
KCSR & - & - & - & $11.66\pm 2.69$ & $\mathbf{32.00}\pm \mathbf{3.94}$ & $\mathbf{0.888}\pm \mathbf{0.013}$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\caption{Results of various learning methods under C2P and P2C identification settings. }
\label{Table:SubspaceIdentification}
\centering
\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l||l|l|}
\hline
\multirow{2}*{Method}&\multicolumn{2}{c||}{C2P}&\multicolumn{2}{c|}{P2C}\\
\cline{2-5}
& Rank-1 (\%) & Rank-10 (\%)& Rank-1 (\%) & Rank-10 (\%)\\
\hline
Euc & $13.38\pm 1.10$ & $38.40\pm 1.92$ & $9.04\pm 0.80$ & $29.63\pm 1.35$ \\
\hline
PCA & $15.63\pm 0.82$ & $43.48\pm 1.69$ & $12.47\pm 1.14$ & $40.13\pm 1.53$ \\
\hline
KDA & $19.32\pm 1.36$ & $56.77\pm 1.58$ & $18.92\pm 1.35$ & $57.19\pm 2.61$ \\
\hline
KissME & $15.16\pm 1.63$ & $43.95\pm 2.13$ & $13.30\pm 1.18$ & $43.63\pm 1.64$ \\
\hline
ITML & $15.25\pm 3.07$ & $46.39\pm 6.46$ & $16.48\pm 1.77$ & $49.88\pm 2.29$ \\
\hline
LMNN & $17.92\pm 0.86$ & $50.58\pm 1.72$ & $15.90\pm 1.73$ & $48.08\pm 1.95$ \\
\hline
CCA & $10.84\pm 0.78$ & $40.76\pm 1.08$ & $10.73\pm 0.94$ & $41.12\pm 1.87$ \\
\hline
MvDA & $4.77\pm 0.74$ & $27.73\pm 1.90$ & $4.71\pm 0.87$ & $27.19\pm 2.55$ \\
\hline
CSR & $\mathbf{25.18}\pm \mathbf{1.39}$ & $60.95\pm 1.20$ & $23.36\pm 1.47$ & $60.27\pm 1.97$ \\
\hline
KCSR & $24.87\pm 1.50$ & $\mathbf{61.57}\pm \mathbf{1.37}$ & $\mathbf{23.42}\pm \mathbf{1.57}$ & $\mathbf{60.95}\pm \mathbf{2.34}$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Evaluation of Different Matching Methods}
\label{Sec:EvalLearningVerification}
In this section, we tested several single modality subspace learning methods as mentioned in Section \ref{Sec:Framework}, including PCA \cite{kim1996face}, KDA \cite{Cai11SRKDA} and multi-modality subspace learning methods such as, CCA \cite{hotelling1936relations}, MvDA \cite{kan2016multi}, CSR \cite{lei2009coupled} and KCSR \cite{lei2009coupled}. The state-of-the-art single modality metric learning methods include the KISSME \cite{koestinger2012large}, ITML \cite{davis2007information} and LMNN \cite{weinberger2009distance}. Landmark based alignment and SIFT features were used for comparing all these methods. Prior to applying these methods, PCA was applied.
As the restricted setting only provides information that two images are either of the same class or not and algorithms such as KDA, LMNN, MvDA, CSR, KCSR require explicit label information for each image, they are not applicable for the image restricted setting. From Table \ref{Table:SubspaceVerification}, the best result was achieved by ITML under the restricted setting. For the unrestricted setting, the best and second best results were achieved by CSR and KCSR, respectively. \textit{In summary, all these learning methods were better than simple Euclidean distance on original features.} For the unrestricted setting, the performance of CSR and KCSR was the best, because they were designed for cross-modality subspace learning. \textit{This suggests that further studies on cross-modality metric learning or cross-modality subspace learning will be beneficial, due to limited work on this direction.} Under the identification settings, from the results in Table \ref{Table:SubspaceIdentification}, CSR and KCSR achieved similarly the best results. The best rank-1 performance for C2P setting was only $25.18 \pm 1.39$ and ${23.42}\pm {1.57}$ for P2C setting. \textit{This means that there is a large room for improvement on these two settings with the traditional face recognition process.}
\subsection{Summary of Results}
A summary of the best combinations of the methods at three stages are provided as baselines. Results under verification settings are given in Table \ref{Table:Best_Results_Verification}. For identification settings, the results are summarized in Table \ref{Table:Best_Results_Identification}. From the tables, the deep learning feature based methods outperform the hand-crafted feature based methods to a large extent. Another observation is that the results of VGG-Face can be further improved with KCSR. \textit{This is mainly because that VGG-Face is trained using only photos and may not be able to deal with modality variations. With the help of KCSR to further remove modality variations, the performance can be enhanced. Thus one future direction is to develop end-to-end modality invariant deep learning methods.} Another finding is that performances, \textit{VR@FAR=0.1\%, VR@FAR=1\%, Rank-1 and Rank-10, of deep learning based methods are still far from satisfactory, indicating that there is still room for improvement.} Lastly, although bounding box based alignment is better than eye based alignment, as analyzed in Section \ref{SubSec:Verification_Align}, \textit{there is still lack of good alignment methods of caricatures for deep learning.}
\begin{table*}
\begin{floatrow}
\capbtabbox{
\caption{Summary of results under restricted and unrestricted settings. }
\label{Table:Best_Results_Verification}}
{\centering
\scalebox{0.668}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
\multicolumn{4}{|c|}{Restricted}\\
\hline
Method& FAR=0.1\% (\%) & FAR=1\% (\%) & AUC \\
\hline
SIFT-Land-ITML & $5.08\pm1.82$ & $18.07\pm4.72$ & $0.841\pm 0.018$\\
\hline
VGG-Eye-PCA & $21.42\pm2.02$ & $40.28\pm2.91$ & $0.896\pm 0.013$\\
\hline
VGG-Eye-ITML & $18.97\pm3.90$ & $41.72\pm5.83$ & $0.911\pm 0.014$\\
\hline
VGG-Box-PCA & $28.42\pm2.04$ & $55.53\pm2.76$ & $0.946\pm 0.009$\\
\hline
VGG-Box-ITML & $\mathbf{34.94}\pm\mathbf{5.06}$ & $\mathbf{57.22}\pm\mathbf{6.50}$ & $\mathbf{0.954}\pm \mathbf{0.010}$\\
\hline
\hline
\multicolumn{4}{|c|}{Unrestricted}\\
\hline
Method& FAR=0.1\% (\%) & FAR=1\% (\%) & AUC \\
\hline
SIFT-Land-KCSR & $11.66\pm2.69$ & $32.00\pm3.94$ & $0.888\pm 0.013$\\
\hline
VGG-Eye-PCA & $19.24\pm1.95$ & $40.88\pm2.23$ & $0.898\pm 0.007$\\
\hline
VGG-Eye-KCSR & $23.46\pm2.65$ & $48.57\pm2.73$ & $0.925\pm 0.007$\\
\hline
VGG-Box-PCA & $32.07\pm2.60$ & $56.76\pm2.35$ & $0.946\pm 0.005$\\
\hline
VGG-Box-KCSR & $\mathbf{39.09}\pm\mathbf{3.62}$ & $\mathbf{65.82}\pm\mathbf{2.48}$ & $\mathbf{0.963}\pm \mathbf{0.004}$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
}
\capbtabbox{
\caption{Summary of results under C2P and P2C settings.}
\label{Table:Best_Results_Identification}}
{
\scalebox{0.668}{
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|}
\hline
\multicolumn{3}{|c|}{C2P}\\
\hline
Method& Rank-1 (\%) & Rank-10 (\%)\\
\hline
SIFT-Land-KCSR & $24.87\pm 1.50$ & $61.57\pm 1.37$ \\
\hline
VGG-Eye-PCA & $35.07\pm 1.84$ & $71.64\pm 1.32$ \\
\hline
VGG-Eye-KCSR & $39.76\pm 1.60$ & $75.38\pm 1.34$ \\
\hline
VGG-Box-PCA & $49.89\pm 1.97$ & $84.21\pm 1.08$ \\
\hline
VGG-Box-KCSR & $\mathbf{55.41}\pm \mathbf{1.41}$ & $\mathbf{87.00}\pm \mathbf{0.92}$ \\
\hline
\hline
\multicolumn{3}{|c|}{P2C}\\
\hline
Method& Rank-1 (\%) & Rank-10 (\%) \\
\hline
SIFT-Land-KCSR & $23.42\pm 1.57$ & $60.95\pm 2.34$ \\
\hline
VGG-Eye-PCA & $36.18\pm 3.24$ & $68.95\pm 3.25$ \\
\hline
VGG-Eye-KCSR & $40.67\pm 3.61$ & $75.77\pm 2.63$ \\
\hline
VGG-Box-PCA & $50.59\pm 2.37$ & $82.15\pm 1.31$ \\
\hline
VGG-Box-KCSR & $\mathbf{55.53}\pm \mathbf{2.17}$ & $\mathbf{86.86}\pm \mathbf{1.42}$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
}
\end{floatrow}
\end{table*}
\section{Conclusions}
\label{Sec:Conclusion}
A new benchmark dataset of face caricatures and photos is presented, together with a framework and protocols, to facilitate caricature recognition and tackling its challenges. The main contribution of this paper includes: a large caricature dataset of 252 people with 6024 caricatures and 5974 photos, which is made publicly available. Facial landmarks, evaluation protocols and baseline performances are provided on the dataset. Following these protocols and the framework, a set of face alignment methods, hand-crafted and deep learning features, and various subspace and metric learning methods are tested. A conclusion is that there is still room for improvement even with the best results. With this dataset and from the baseline evaluations, there are several future directions. Caricature face landmark detection is of great interest and a key step for caricature recognition. As the performance on this dataset is still far from saturated, future work on caricature and face feature extraction and cross-modal metric learning methods are also promising directions.
\section*{Acknowlegement} This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation of China under Grant 61432008, Grant 61673203, in part by the Young Elite Scientists Sponsorship Program by CAST under Grant YESS 2016QNRC001, and in part by the Collaborative Innovation Center of Novel Software Technology and Industrialization.
|
\section{Introduction}
The effect of systematic model error is being increasingly studied in the hydrological literature, specifically in the context of forward modeling \citep[][]{Gupta2008,Vrugt2008,Lin2012a,Gong2013,Vrugt2013,White2014} and data assimilation \citep[][]{DelGiudice2015a}, with systematic treatments presented by \cite{Refsgaard2006} and \cite{Gupta2012}. Some attention has also been directed explicitly at the effect of model error in inverse modeling \citep{Hansen2016}.
Inverse analyses now form a major part of hydrogeologic practice, being of relevance to all forms of model parametrization, including hydraulic tomography and contaminant source identification. In the inverse problems literature, it is common to assume a perfect model, with all divergence between model prediction and observed data vector attributable to ``noise'' drawn from a symmetric, zero-mean probability distribution function. This theoretical approach underlies classical regularization methods such as Tikhonov and TSVD techniques \citep{Hansen1992}, and is also used for specifying the likelihood function in the Bayesian inversion paradigm \citep{BuiThanh2012}. That the approach of encoding all errors as unbiased parametric uncertainties may not be appropriate in hydrogeologic inverse modeling has been recognized. However in the absence of a paradigm that captures model error in a systematic fashion, the perfect model assumption remains common in practice \citep{Lin2012a,DelGiudice2015}. Thus, it is timely to consider formal analyses of the systematic model errors on inverse-model estimates.
Current approaches to quantifying the effect of model error are typically probabilistic, treating the impact of the model uncertainty on output with Bayesian \citep[][]{Krzysztofowicz1999} or information theoretic \citep[][]{Gong2013} formalisms. The uncertainty about model structure is modeled by parameterizing the model itself as a probability distribution function (pdf) linking inputs and outputs, or as a deterministic numerical model with pdfs defined on its state variables \citep[see summary in][]{Renard2010}. To quantify uncertainty using either approach, some type of Monte Carlo computational analysis is indicated. Since computational exploration cannot proceed in infinite dimensions, it is of course unavoidable that explorations will impose some sort of coarse-grained parametrization which is at best approximately valid.
This paper follows a somewhat different path. The focus is on a specific class of inverse problems commonly faced by hydrogeologists: time series recovery problems with a temporal convolution structure. More concretely, this means the recovery of an input signal from one or more remote output signal measurements, where each output signal is generated by temporal convolution of the (shared) input signal with a (unique) transfer function, which is only approximately known. Hydrogeologic examples of such problems include the inference of hydraulic head history at some location of interest from available time series obtained at remote monitoring wells, and the inference of contaminant source histories from breakthrough curves.
For these problems, it is shown in Sect. 2 how it is possible to formally decompose the transfer function(s) as well as the input and output signals into generalized Fourier series. Some apparently new results concerning triangular Toeplitz matrices are established. Techniques of matrix analysis are then employed to derive concrete error bounds on the L2 signal reconstruction as a function of the error in dominant components of the transfer function(s). In Sect. 3, a Monte Carlo study of hydraulic inversion is presented which contextualizes the theoretical results shown in Sect. 2 and some empirical observations that go beyond the theoretical work are noted. Section 4 summarizes what has been learned and suggests interesting future research directions.
\section{Derivation of error bounds}
\subsection{Laguerre expansion method}
Consider a linear system in which it is possible to express a transient output signal, $h(\bm{x},t)$, at a location $\bm{x}$, resulting from a transient input signal at location $\bm{0}$, $h(\bm{0},t)$, by means of the convolution $h(\bm{x},t) = b(\bm{x},t)*h(\bm{0},t)$, where $b$ is a Green's function (i.e., transfer function) representing the response to an instantaneous Dirac input signal at the origin (i.e. $h(\bm{0},t)=\delta(t)$). In general, for some fixed $\bm{x}$, the input signal, transfer function, and output signal can be expanded as a generalized Fourier series in a basis of Laguerre functions, ${\phi_n(\cdot)}$ ($n \ge 0$). Each Laguerre function is defined according to the formula:
\begin{equation}
\phi_n(t) = \frac{e^\frac{t}{2}}{n!}\frac{d^n}{dt^n}(e^{-t}t^n),
\end{equation}
and together they form an orthonormal basis on $[0,\infty)$ \citep{Abate1996}. The series expansions are written as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
h(\bm{0},t) &=& \sum_n a_n\phi_n\left(\frac{t}{T}\right), \\
b(\bm{x},t) &=& \sum_n b_n\phi_n\left(\frac{t}{T}\right), \\
h(\bm{x},t) &=& \sum_n c_n\phi_n\left(\frac{t}{T}\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where $T$ is a characteristic time of the problem, chosen to accelerate convergence.
Let $\mathbf{c}$ be a vector of $N$ Laguerre coefficients, such that its $n$-th entry, $\mathbf{c}_n = c_n$. Similarly, define $\mathbf{a}$ to be a vector of $N$ Laguerre coefficients, such that $\mathbf{a}_n = a_n$. It has been shown \citep{Hansen2009} that, in general, these vectors of coefficients can be related by the matrix operation
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{c=Ba},
\label{eq: exact MIP}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{B}$ is the following lower triangular Toeplitz (LTT) matrix:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{B}= T
\begin{bmatrix}
b_0 & 0 & 0 & \dots & 0 \\
b_1 - b_0 & b_0 & 0 & \dots & 0 \\
b_2 - b_1 & b_1 - b_0 & b_0 & \dots & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots& \vdots \\
b_{N-1} - b_{N-2} & b_{N-2} - b_{N-3} & b_{N-3} - b_{N-4} & \dots & b_0 \\
\end{bmatrix}.
\label{eq: matrix}
\end{equation}
Because $\mathbf{B}$ is a full-rank square matrix, if it is known perfectly then inversion is well defined (although not necessarily numerically stable):
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{B^{-1}c=a}.
\label{eq: exact inverse MIP}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Results on triangular Toeplitz matrix manipulation}
To continue the analysis of the last section, we need to establish some properties of LTT matrices. First, it is proven that the inverse of a (lower or upper) triangular Toeplitz matrix is itself a (lower or upper) triangular Toeplitz matrix. Second, it is proven that the product of two (both lower or both upper) triangular Toeplitz matrices is similarly a (lower or upper) triangular Toeplitz matrix. Without loss of generality, it is assumed the matrices are LTT in both proofs.
\subsubsection{Lemma 1: Inversion of triangular Toeplitz matrices}
Let $\mathbf{M_N}$ be an $N\times N$ LTT matrix, $N$ arbitrary, and let $\mathbf{M_{N}^{-1}}$ be its inverse. It may be shown by induction that $\mathbf{M_{N}^{-1}}$ is LTT. This argument makes repeated use of the following identity for block-triangular matrices \citep[][p. 71]{Bernstein2005}:
\begin{equation}
\begin{bmatrix}
A & 0 \\ C & D
\end{bmatrix}^{-1} =
\begin{bmatrix}
A^{-1} & 0 \\ -D^{-1}CA^{-1} & D^{-1}
\end{bmatrix},
\label{eq: block triangle identity}
\end{equation}
where $A$, $0$, $C$, and $D$ are compatibly-shaped sub-matrices.
The base case is trivial: note that that for any $2 \times 2$ LTT matrix, $\mathbf{M_2}$, Eq. (\ref{eq: block triangle identity}) implies directly that $\mathbf{M_2^{-1}}$ is LTT.
For the inductive step, assume that it has been established for $(N-1)\times(N-1)$ LTT matrices that their inverses are LTT. Define $\mathbf{M_{N-1}}$ to be the sub-matrix consisting of the first $N-1$ rows and first $N-1$ columns of an arbitrary LTT matrix, $\mathbf{M_N}$. Note that $\mathbf{M_{N-1}}$ is also LTT, and by our inductive assumption so is $\mathbf{M_{N-1}^{-1}}$. It is valid to apply Eq. (\ref{eq: block triangle identity}) in two different ways. First, make the assignment $A\equiv\mathbf{M_{N-1}}$ and apply Eq. (\ref{eq: block triangle identity}). This implies that $A^{-1}$ is LTT, and also that $\mathbf{M_{N}^{-1}}$ is lower triangular. This analysis has accounted for all but the $N$-th row of $\mathbf{M_{N}^{-1}}$. To see that the constant descending diagonals continue into the bottom row, note that the sub-matrix consisting of the last $N-1$ rows and last $N-1$ columns of $\mathbf{M_N}$ is also $\mathbf{M_{N-1}}$. Make the assignment $D\equiv\mathbf{M_{N-1}}$ and apply Eq. (\ref{eq: block triangle identity}) again, implying that $D^{-1}$ is LTT, and also that $A^{-1}=D^{-1}$ (Note that these are both $(N-1)\times(N-1)$ matrices which are largely overlapping, and do not participate in the same block partitioning of $\mathbf{M_{N}^{-1}}$). It is thus shown that all descending diagonals of $\mathbf{M_{N}^{-1}}$ are constant (the single element $(\mathbf{M_N^{-1}})_{N1}$ can have any value without affecting this). It has thus been shown that, subject to our inductive assumption, $\mathbf{M_N^{-1}}$ is LTT, for arbitrary LTT $\mathbf{M_N}$.
By combination of base case and inductive step it follows that if $\mathbf{M_N}$ is an LTT $N \times N$ matrix then so is $\mathbf{M_N^{-1}}$, $\forall\ N \ge 2$. $\square$
\subsubsection{Lemma 2: Multiplication of triangular Toeplitz matrices}
For any two $N\times N$ matrices $\mathbf{F}$ and $\mathbf{G}$, it is true that the element $(\mathbf{FG})_{ij} = \sum_{k=1}^N\mathbf{F}_{ik}\mathbf{G}_{kj}$. If the matrices are also LTT, it follows that
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbf{F}_{ik} &=& \left\{
\begin{matrix}
0 & i<k \\
\mathbf{f}_{i-k} & i \le k
\end{matrix}\right. \\
\mathbf{G}_{kj} &=& \left\{
\begin{matrix}
0 & k<j \\
\mathbf{g}_{k-j} & k \ge j
\end{matrix}\right. ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathbf{f}_{n}$ and $\mathbf{g}_{n}$ are the elements on the $n$-th diagonal of $\mathbf{F}$ and $\mathbf{G}$, respectively (with the main diagonal having index 0, the sub-diagonal having index 1, and so on). Then it follows that
\begin{eqnarray}
(\mathbf{FG})_{ij} &=& \sum_{k=j}^i\mathbf{f}_{i-k}\mathbf{g}_{k-j}\\
&=& \sum_{k=0}^{i-j}\mathbf{f}_{(i-j)-k}\mathbf{g}_{k}.
\label{eq: LTT composition}
\end{eqnarray}
$(\mathbf{FG})_{ij}$ is thus a function only of $i-j$ and is zero for $i<j$. Thus, $\mathbf{FG}$ is LTT. $\square$
\subsection{Effect of imperfect model: single observation location}
Assume perfect knowledge of $h(\bm{x},t)$, but imperfect knowledge of $b(\bm{x},t)$, and a need to infer $h(\bm{0},t)$. The imperfect knowledge of $b$ will lead to an approximate solution $\tilde{h}(\bm{0},t)$, whose Laguerre coefficients lie in vector $\mathbf{\tilde{a}}$.
In matrix form, this can be written by distinguishing the (unknown) true matrix, $\mathbf{B}$, from the approximate matrix, $\mathbf{\tilde{B}}$, resulting from our imperfect knowledge of the Green's function, $b$. The matrix inverse problem that is being solved is thus
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{c=\tilde{B}\tilde{a}}.
\label{eq: approx MIP}
\end{equation}
It is also true (by Parseval's theorem) that the squared error of our source history estimate can be expressed in vector form via
\begin{equation}
\int_0^\infty (h(\bm{0},t)-\tilde{h}(\bm{0},t))^2 dt \approx \left \lVert \mathbf{a-\tilde{a}} \right \rVert_2^2,
\end{equation}
with equality in the limit $N\rightarrow\infty$. Although the error introduced by \textit{spectral leakage} (i.e., series truncation) has been recognized as important in some geophysical inversion \citep{Sneider1999}, many transfer functions and input signals are smooth in hydrology, and the approximate equality will be taken to be exact in subsequent analysis. The error analysis can thus be performed in the matrix domain.
Because $\mathbf{\tilde{B}}$ and $\mathbf{B}$ are invertible, there is a unique solution to Eq. (\ref{eq: approx MIP}) and thus:
\begin{equation}
\left \lVert \mathbf{a-\tilde{a}} \right \rVert_2 = \left \lVert \mathbf{(I-\tilde{B}^{-1}B)a} \right \rVert_2.
\label{eq: single error}
\end{equation}
By application of Lemma 1 and Lemma 2, it follows that $\mathbf{I-\tilde{B}^{-1}B}$ is an LTT matrix.
Let $\mathbf{\tilde{b}^{-1}}$, $\mathbf{b}$, and $\mathbf{e}$ be the vectors of coefficients on the diagonals of $\mathbf{\tilde{B}^{-1}}$, $\mathbf{B}$, and $\mathbf{I-\tilde{B}^{-1}B}$, respectively, indexed as in the proof of Lemma 2. By applying Eq. (\ref{eq: block triangle identity}) with $A$ defined as the upper right $2 \times 2$ sub-matrix of $\mathbf{\tilde{B}}$, it follows immediately that $\mathbf{\tilde{b}^{-1}}_0 = \frac{1}{\tilde{b}_0}$ and $\mathbf{\tilde{b}^{-1}}_1 = - \frac{\tilde{b}_1-\tilde{b}_0}{\tilde{b}_0^2}$. Also, from inspection of Eq. (\ref{eq: matrix}), $\mathbf{b}_0 = b_0$ and $\mathbf{b}_1 = b_1 - b_0$. Then, by applying Eq. (\ref{eq: block triangle identity}) and Eq. (\ref{eq: LTT composition}), it follows that
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbf{e}_0 &=& 1- \frac{b_0}{\tilde{b}_0}\\
\mathbf{e}_1 &=& \frac{1}{\tilde{b}_0}\left[b_1 -\tilde{b}_1 \left( \frac{b_0}{\tilde{b}_0}\right)\right].
\end{eqnarray}
Note that these elements (like all of $\mathbf{e}$) are zero when $\mathbf{\tilde{B}=B}$.
The following lower error bound follows from consideration of the first element of $\mathbf{(I-\tilde{B}^{-1}B)a}$:
\begin{equation}
|a_0| \left| 1-\frac{b_0}{\tilde{b}_0}\right| \leq \left \lVert \mathbf{a-\tilde{a}} \right \rVert_2,
\end{equation}
In the useful special case in which the input signal is an arbitrary decaying exponential (with rate constant by $1/2T$, noting that $T$ is a free parameter), the only nonzero term of its Laguerre series is $a_0$ and a lower bound on the \textit{relative} error follows immediately:
\begin{equation}
\left| 1-\frac{b_0}{\tilde{b}_0}\right| \leq \frac{\left\lVert \mathbf{a-\tilde{a}} \right\rVert_2}{\left\lVert \mathbf{a} \right\rVert_2}.
\label{eq: lower bound}
\end{equation}
The coefficient $b_0$ is computed
\begin{equation}
b_0 = \int_0^\infty e^{-\frac{t}{2}} b(0,t) dt,
\end{equation}
and similarly for $\tilde{b}_0$. It should be clear that if $b(x,t)$ and $\tilde{b}(x,t)$ have different shapes, particularly if $\tilde{b}(x,t)$ represents transmission through a homogeneous medium, and the true Green's function, $b(x,t)$, is characterizes a medium that is heterogeneous or homogeneous with substantially different properties, then it is possible to have $b_0/\tilde{b}_0 \gg 1$. In such cases, the error due to fitting of the inaccurate model overwhelms the signal and the errors of signal measurement (detection).
It is generally possible to use the approach developed here to generate lower error bounds relating the first $k$ terms of the sequences $\{a_n\}$, $\{b_n\}$, and $\{\tilde{b}_n\}$, for arbitrary $k$, depending on the amount of information available. For instance, for $k=2$:
\begin{equation}
\left| a_0 \left(1-\frac{b_0}{\tilde{b}_0}\right)\right|^2 + \left| a_0\left(\frac{1}{\tilde{b}_0}\left[b_1 -\tilde{b}_1 \left( \frac{b_0}{\tilde{b}_0}\right)\right] \right) + a_1 \left(1-\frac{b_0}{\tilde{b}_0}\right) \right|^2 \leq \left \lVert \mathbf{a-\tilde{a}} \right \rVert_2^2.
\label{eq: lower bound2}
\end{equation}
It is also possible to derive an upper bound, which does not depend on $\{a_n\}$, but which requires $k=N$ terms of the other sequences. This is seen in the next section.
\subsection{Effect of imperfect model: multiple observation locations}
In the case of $M$ monitoring locations, the problem is generally over-determined, and instead of directly computing the inverse, one may define the optimal solution, $\mathbf{\tilde{a}}$, as the one which minimizes the sum of squared residuals at each location, i.e., satisfies the following condition:
\begin{equation}
\sum_{l=1}^M\lVert \mathbf{c_l-\tilde{c_l}} \rVert_2^2= \min_\mathbf{\tilde{a}} \sum_{l=1}^M\lVert \mathbf{c_l-\tilde{c_l}} \rVert_2^2.
\label{eq:srr}
\end{equation}
This problem may be placed in a matrix form by defining the block diagonal matrices
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbf{B_\otimes} &=&
\begin{bmatrix}
\mathbf{B_1} & 0 & \dots & 0 \\
0 & \mathbf{B_2} & \dots & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & \dots & \mathbf{B_M}
\end{bmatrix},\\
\mathbf{\tilde{B}_\otimes} &=&
\begin{bmatrix}
\mathbf{\tilde{B}_1} & 0 & \dots & 0 \\
0 & \mathbf{\tilde{B}_2} & \dots & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & \dots & \mathbf{\tilde{B}_M}
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{eqnarray}
It is also useful to define the following block-columnar matrix of $M$, $N\times N$ identity matrices:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{D} =
\begin{bmatrix}
\mathbf{I_N}\\
\mathbf{I_N} \\
\vdots \\
\mathbf{I_N}
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{equation}
Using this notation, Eq. (\ref{eq:srr}) can be represented as:\textsl{}
\begin{equation}
\sum_{l=1}^M\lVert \mathbf{c_l-\tilde{c_l}} \rVert_2^2 = \mathbf{a^T D^T B_\otimes^T B_\otimes D a} -2\mathbf{a^T D^T B_\otimes^T \tilde{B}_\otimes D \tilde{a} + \tilde{a}^T D^T \tilde{B}_\otimes^T \tilde{B}_\otimes D \tilde{a}}.
\end{equation}
Differentiating,
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{d}{d\mathbf{\tilde{a}}}\sum_{l=1}^M\lVert \mathbf{c_l-\tilde{c_l}} \rVert_2^2
&=&\frac{d}{d\mathbf{\tilde{a}}} [-2\mathbf{a^T D^T B_\otimes^T \tilde{B}_\otimes D \tilde{a} + \tilde{a}^T D^T \tilde{B}_\otimes^T \tilde{B}_\otimes D \tilde{a}}]\\
&=&-2\mathbf{a^T D^T B_\otimes^T \tilde{B}_\otimes D} + 2 \mathbf{\tilde{a}^T D^T \tilde{B}_\otimes^T \tilde{B}_\otimes D}
\end{eqnarray}
The optimal solution will be when this quantity equals zero, which is satisfied when
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{ D \tilde{a} = \tilde{B}_\otimes^{-1} B_\otimes D a },
\end{equation}
or
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{ \tilde{a}} = \frac{1}{M} \mathbf{D^T\tilde{B}_\otimes^{-1} B_\otimes D a }.
\end{equation}
It is clear that
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\lVert \mathbf{a-\tilde{a}} \right\rVert_2 &=& \frac{1}{M}\left\lVert \mathbf{Da-D\tilde{a}} \right\rVert_2\\
&=& \frac{1}{M}\left\lVert \mathbf{(I_{MN}-\tilde{B}_\otimes^{-1}B_\otimes) Da} \right\rVert_2. \label{eq: kron error}
\end{eqnarray}
By inspection of the last equality, it is apparent that
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\lVert \mathbf{a-\tilde{a}} \right\rVert_2 =\frac{1}{M} \sum_{l=1}^M \left\lVert \mathbf{(I_{N}-\tilde{B}_l^{-1}B_l) a} \right\rVert_2.
\label{eq: series error}
\end{eqnarray}
This is simply the average of the individual model errors if only a single monitoring location were to be used (see Eq. (\ref{eq: single error})), implying that the error bound theory developed above can be carried over straightforwardly. If $\mathbf{a}$ is viewed as a random variable, the expected error is also not reduced by incorporating additional measurements, unlike the scenario of uncorrelated random noise.
One can also derive an upper bound on the relative error of $\mathbf{\tilde{a}}$ from Eq. (\ref{eq: kron error}) by noting that the H\"{o}lder norm $\lVert\cdot\rVert_2$ is submultiplicative, and that $\frac{1}{M}\lVert\mathbf{Da}\rVert_2 = \lVert\mathbf{a}\rVert_2$. From this, it follows immediately that
\begin{equation}
\frac{\left\lVert \mathbf{a-\tilde{a}} \right\rVert_2}{\left\lVert \mathbf{a} \right\rVert_2} \leq \left\lVert \mathbf{I_{MN}-\tilde{B}_\otimes^{-1}B_\otimes}\right\rVert_2.
\end{equation}
Naturally, this applies to single measurement location reconstruction as a special case. Practically, this depends on the full sets of coefficients $\{b_n\}$ and $\{\tilde{b}_n\}$, which is a greater information demand than for the lower bounds, which only involved relationships of the dominant components.
\section{Monte Carlo study: reconstruction of hydraulic transients}
In this section, the inference of a hydraulic head transient history along an aquifer boundary (which might be interpreted as a river stage transient, where the river is in a hydraulic connection with the aquifer) based on a time series of measurements made at a single nearby groundwater monitoring well is considered. This represents both an application of the above ideas, and also a study of independent interest.
\subsection{Procedure}
It is assumed here that the specific storage is known and spatially uniform, and that the log hydraulic conductivity is defined by a multi-Gaussian spatially random field whose mean is known, but which is otherwise unknown. Assuming flow is described by the groundwater flow equation on this heterogeneous conductivity field, $b(\bm{x},t)$ is determined as the head history at a fixed location, $\bm{x}$. A natural interpretive model, $\tilde{b}(\bm{x},t)$, is selected: the same groundwater flow equation, but solved on a homogeneous conductivity field that is everywhere equal to the mean of the true log hydraulic conductivity field.
The study is then performed according to the following basic procedure:
First, a true, exponentially decaying, transient in the river stage on the aquifer domain boundary is specified, along with the location of a monitoring well at which a time series of measurements is to be made. The accuracy of reconstruction of the river stage transient from the transient at the monitoring well is studied, given an overly smooth model of the subsurface. For simplicity, the free parameter, $T$, is selected so that the Laguerre decomposition of the true transient is the vector $\mathbf{a}=<1,0,0,\dots,0>$.
Next, 500 two-dimensional subsurface realizations are generated with different heterogeneous log-hydraulic conductivity fields, all of which have the same multi-Gaussian statistical correlation structure and geometric mean conductivity.
Subsequently, using finite element analysis, head time series are computed at the monitoring well for each of the 500 subsurface realizations resulting from a Dirac head impulse at the river stage. Each impulse response (Green's function) is decomposed as a vector of Laguerre coefficients, $\mathbf{b}$.
Again, using finite element analysis, the impulse response at the well is computed, but assuming a uniform hydraulic conductivity field with the same geometric mean hydraulic conductivity as used in each of the heterogeneous realizations. This impulse response is decomposed as a vector of Laguerre coefficients, $\mathbf{\tilde{b}}$.
Finally, for each realization, the reconstruction error, $\left \lVert \mathbf{(I-\tilde{B}^{-1}B)a} \right \rVert_2$, is computed and compared with the analytical lower bound in Eq. (\ref{eq: lower bound}). Statistics about this quantity are tabulated so that its relationship to qualitative features of the inverse model discrepancy may be studied.
Both the true solution and the interpretive model are described by the following system of equations:
\begin{eqnarray}
S_s \frac{\partial h(\bm{x},t)}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \bm{q}(\bm{x},t) &=& 0, \quad \text{$\bm{x} \in \bm{D}$} \label{eq: gwfe}\\
\bm{q}(\bm{x},t) &=& -K(\bm{x}) \nabla h(\bm{x},t), \quad \text{$\bm{x} \in \bm{D}$} \label{eq: darcy}
\end{eqnarray}
solved subject to the initial and boundary conditions
\begin{eqnarray}
h(\bm{x},0) &=& 0, \quad \text{$\bm{x} \in \bm{D}$}\\
h(\bm{x},t) &=& c(t), \quad \text{$\bm{x} \in \Gamma_L$}\\
h(\bm{x},t) &=& 0, \quad \text{$\bm{x} \in \Gamma_R$}\\
\bm{q}(\bm{x},t) \cdot \bm{n}(\bm{x}) &=& 0, \quad \text{$\bm{x} \in \Gamma_S$} \label{eq: model}
\end{eqnarray}
where the only difference enters due to different choices for $K(\bm{x})$. In the above equations, $\bm{x} \: [\mathrm{L}]$ represents the location, $t \: [\mathrm{T}]$ represents time, $S_s \: [\mathrm{L^{-1}}]$ represents specific storage, $h \: [\mathrm{L}]$ represents hydraulic head, $\bm{q} \: [\mathrm{LT^{-1}}]$ represents groundwater flux, $K \: [\mathrm{LT^{-1}}]$ represents hydraulic conductivity, and $\bm{n} \: [1]$ is the outward-facing unit normal vector. For vector quantities, the units reported are for each of their components.
More concretely, a two-dimensional model of saturated flow in a heterogeneous porous medium is defined over the rectangular domain $\bm{D}=(0,L_1) \times (0,L_2)$, where $L_1=10\ [L]$ and $L_2=4\ [L]$ ($L$ is any consistent length unit), and specific storage, $S_s=1$ (Fig. \ref{flow_domain}). $\Gamma_L$ represents the left boundary of $\bm{D}$ (at $x=0$), $\Gamma_R$ represents the right boundary of $\bm{D}$ (at $x=10$), and $\Gamma_S$ represents the union of the other two sides of $\bm{D}$ (at $y=0$ and $y=4$, respectively). Let $Y(\bm{x}, \omega) = \ln [K(\bm{x}, \omega)]$ be a random field, where $\omega$ belongs to the space of random events $\bm{\Omega}$. Assuming $Y(\bm{x}, \omega)$ is Gaussian with zero mean and a separable exponential covariance function,
\begin{equation}
C(\bm{x_1},\bm{x_2}) = C(x_1, y_1; x_2, y_2) = \sigma^{2}_Y \exp\left[-\frac{\left|x_1 - x_2\right|}{\eta_1} - \frac{\left|y_1 - y_2\right|}{\eta_2}\right],
\end{equation}
where $\sigma^{2}_Y=2$, $\eta_1=4$ and $\eta_2=2$ are the variance and the correlation lengths of the random field.
For the Monte Carlo study, a set of 500 realizations of $b(t)$ is generated by setting $c(t) = \delta(t)$, generating 500 $\ln [K(\bm{x})]$ fields (Fig. \ref{flow_domain}, bottom), using a 100-term truncated Karhunen-Lo\`eve expansions (KLE) to represent the field as weighted sums of predefined spatially variable orthonormal functions \citep{Zhang2004a}, and solving Eqs. (\ref{eq: gwfe}-\ref{eq: model}) on each.
The numerical solution is evaluated using the FEniCS \citep{Logg2012} package to discretize Eqs. (\ref{eq: gwfe}-\ref{eq: darcy}), using finite element methods in space and an implicit Euler method in time. Simulated hydraulic head data is recorded at the point (4, 2) for each realization of $K(\bm{x})$ (Fig. \ref{observation}), and the 50-term LEM is used along with $T=100\ [T]$ to reconstruct the time series of hydraulic head values on the left boundary (Fig. \ref{reconstruction}). The same procedure is followed to generate the interpretive model, $\tilde{b}(t)$ except $K(\bm{x}) = 1 \: \forall \bm{x}$ (i.e., $Y(\bm{x}) = 0 \: \forall \bm{x}$) is employed.
\subsection{Discussion of results}
Given that the random hydraulic conductivity fields chosen for the forward modeling were only moderately heterogeneous, and choice of a spatially uniform interpretive model is a natural response to unresolved heterogeneity, the wide array of possible reconstructions is notable. In particular, a bifurcation of the response classes was noted based on whether the peaks of the forward model impulse response, $b$, preceded or lagged that of the interpretive model, $\tilde{b}$. In case in which the interpretive model predicted a faster response than existed in reality, the reconstruction of the decaying exponential boundary condition was typically smooth, with its peak at a time significantly greater than zero: the delayed reconstruction of the boundary condition compensated for the over-rapid model. However, because signal causality is enforced, the model cannot respond to an earlier-than-anticipated arrival with a non-zero signal at negative time. Instead, the optimal reconstruction features a large peak at time zero, followed by decaying corrective oscillations. This bifurcation of behavior is potentially useful as a model diagnostic tool that does not require any a priori knowledge of the true model (other than that it possesses a unimodal structure): multiple candidate interpretive models could be tested with peaks at different locations, and the true peak location pinpointed by the disappearance of the spurious oscillations.
In Fig. \ref{fig: error summary} (top), the empirical pdf for the L2 error, normalized by the L2 norm of the signal being reconstructed is shown. It is apparent that even for moderate heterogeneity, reconstruction error on the same magnitude as the signal itself is to be expected. In Fig. \ref{fig: error summary} (bottom), the L2 error of approximation in the reconstruction of the boundary condition for each of the 500 realizations is plotted against the zero-order lower error bound in Eq. \eqref{eq: lower bound}.
\section{Summary and conclusion}
Systematic model error was considered in the context of inverse problems in systems whose output signal is determined by convolution of an input signal with a transfer function, or impulse response, which describes system behavior. Using a generalized Fourier series expansion in Laguerre basis functions, it was possible to translate the signal reconstruction inverse problem into a matrix inverse problem whose structure may be analyzed using some classic, and some apparently new, results in matrix algebra. It is thus seen possible to place upper and lower bounds on the L2 signal reconstruction error as in terms of the transfer function infidelity.
The inverse problem of recovering river level history from remote measurements at a well, which has convolution structure, was chosen for Monte Carlo study. Forward predictions were generated by solving the groundwater flow equation on a mildly heterogeneous hydraulic conductivity field, and these were interpreted using the groundwater flow equation, assuming a homogeneous hydraulic conductivity field. The L2 reconstruction error for the river level was established for all realizations, and this error was compared with the error bound developed above. The simple lower bound derived here (Sect. 2) was found to be informative regarding the reconstruction error in the specific realizations. A qualitative bifurcation in the reconstructed signal was discovered, depending on the location of the peak of the interpretation model transfer function relative to that of the true model. Looking forward, this may prove to be a useful tool for transfer function identification.
The Laguerre expansion approach, because of its high degree of structure, relative simplicity and computational efficiency, may also prove to be a profitable foundation for further analysis of systematic model error. The systematic model errors are commonly ignored in the theoretical and practical inverse-model analyses. The matrix transformation of the inverse problem developed here can be also applied for other problems of interest such as groundwater contaminant transport, propagation of low-frequency seismic waves, heat flow, infectious disease transmission, population dynamics, spreading chemical/biochemical substances in atmosphere, and many others.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors acknowledge the support of the LANL Environmental Programs. All data is synthetic; the authors maintain an archive of codes and simulation output employed in the paper.
|
\section{Introduction}
The immersed boundary method was initially formulated by Peskin
\cite{peskin1972flowPhD,peskin1972flow} in early 1970s to study flow patterns around
heart valves, and later it develops into a generally effective method to solve
fluid-structure interaction problems \cite{peskin2002immersed}.
It gives birth to numerous studies of the numerical methods, along with applications in physics, biology and medical sciences.
See \cite{peskin2002immersed, mittal2005immersed} and the references therein.
Various mathematical analysis have also been performed based on the model formulation
itself, e.g.\;\cite{stockie1995stability,stockie1997analysis,mori2008convergence}.
From the analysis point of view, the immersed boundary problem is intriguing on its own right.
It is nonlinear by nature, featuring free moving boundary and singular forcing, which are not well-studied in the classic mathematical theory of hydrodynamics \cite{temam1984navier}.
In this paper, we shall consider Stokes immersed boundary problem in two dimensions.
It models the scenario where there is a 1-D closed elastic string (or fibre) immersed and moving in the 2-D Stokes flow: the string exerts force on the fluid and generates the flow, while the flow in turn moves the string and changes its configuration.
The mathematical formulation will be given below.
We will prove solvability of the string motion and its asymptotic behavior near equilibrium.
Much of the analysis in this paper also applies to immersed boundary problems in three dimensions.
A similar type of problems on one- \cite{solonnikov1977solvability,solonnikov1986solvability,shibata2007free} or two-phase \cite{denisova1991solvability,tanaka1993global,giga1994global,denisova1994problem,denisova1994solvability,shimizu2011local,kohne2013qualitative,solonnikov2014theory} incompressible fluid motion has been extensively studied.
In these settings, the space is occupied by one incompressible viscous fluid and the vacuum, or by two immiscible incompressible viscous fluids; the fluids move with or without surface tension on their interface.
Solvability results have been established in various function spaces.
The main difference between these problems and ours is that only the geometry (such as length, area and curvature) of the interface is involved
there in determining the force balance at the interface.
In particular, it does not depend on how the immersed string or membrane is parametrized.
Consequently, one can use either Eulerian or Lagrangian approach to study the evolution of interfaces.
However, in the immersed boundary problems, elastic strings or membranes have their internal structures and their dynamics also depends on constitutive law of elasticity, which varies from case to case.
In other words, intrinsic parametrization of the immersed boundary and its elastic deformation should play a role.
Indeed, immersed boundaries with identical overall shape can generate force differently.
One can easily construct a 1-D closed string with a circular shape, yet far more
stretched at some point than somewhere else.
In this case, we shall see that the force on the string is not everywhere pointing inward normal to the string.
This suggests that a pure Eulerian approach employed in many mathematical studies of free boundary problems in hydrodynamics (e.g.\;\cite{bertozzi1993global}) would not suffice.
One needs to keep track of the configuration of the immersed boundary, which is typical in the nonlinear elasticity problems, and different techniques need to be used.
\subsection{The Stokes immersed boundary problem in two dimensions}
Consider a 1-D neutrally buoyant massless elastic closed string immersed in 2-D Stokes flow.
The string is modeled as a Jordan curve $\Gamma_t$ parameterized by $X(s,t)$, where $s\in\mathbb{T}$ is the Lagrangian coordinate (or the material coordinate) and $t\geq 0$ is the time variable. Here, $\mathbb{T}\triangleq \mathbb{R}/2\pi\mathbb{Z}$ is the 1-D torus equipped with the induced metric.
We always assume that at least $X(\cdot,t)\in H^2(\mathbb{T})$ for all $t$.
The flow field in the immersed boundary problem is determined by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\;-\mu_0\Delta u +\nabla p = f(x,t),\quad x\in\mathbb{R}^2,\;t>0,\\
&\;\mathrm{div}\, u = 0,\\
&\;|u|,|p|\rightarrow 0\mbox{ as }|x|\rightarrow \infty.
\end{split}
\label{eqn: stokes equation}
\end{equation}
Here $u(x,t)$ is the velocity field in $\mathbb{R}^2$ and $p$ is the pressure; $\mu_0>0$ is the dynamic viscosity; $f(x,t)$ is the elastic force exerted on the fluid generated by the string, given by \cite{peskin2002immersed}
\begin{equation}
f(x,t) = \int_\mathbb{T} F(s,t) \delta (x-X(s,t))\,ds.
\label{eqn: force in the immersed boundary problem general form}
\end{equation}
Here $\delta$ is the 2-D delta measure, which means the force is only supported on the string.
$F(s,t)$ is the force in the Lagrangian formulation; it is given by
\begin{equation}
F(s,t) = \frac{\partial}{\partial s}\left(\mathcal{T}(|X_s|)\frac{X_s}{|X_s|}\right),\quad \mathcal{T}(|v|) = \mathcal{E}'(|v|).
\label{eqn: force in the immersed boundary problem general form Lagrangian}
\end{equation}
where $X_s = \partial X/\partial s$, $\mathcal{T}$ is the tension in the string and $\mathcal{E}$ is the elastic energy density. In the following discussion, we shall take
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{E}(|v|) = k_0|v|^2/2.
\label{eqn: elastic energy density}
\end{equation}
In this case, each infinitesimal segment of the string behaves like a Hookean spring with elasticity coefficient $k_0>0$, and thus
$F(s,t) = k_0X_{ss}(s,t)$.
It will be clear below that most of the discussion in this paper can also apply to more general elastic energy of other forms.
The model is closed by the kinematic equation of the string,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial X}{\partial t}(s,t) = u(X(s,t), t),
\label{eqn: kinematic equation of membrane}
\end{equation}
which means the string moves with the flow.
For simplicity, we shall take $\mu_0 = k_0 = 1$ in the rest of the paper.
Indeed, one can easily normalize both coefficients simultaneously by properly redefining $u$, $p$ and the time variable $t$.
We shall always omit the $t$-dependence whenever it is convenient; and we shall also write $X'(s')$ and $X''(s')$ in the places of $X_s(s',t)$ and $X_{ss}(s',t)$ respectively.
\subsection{Contour dynamic formulation}\label{section: contour dynamic formulation}
The starting point of the analysis in this paper is the following proposition.
It rewrites the original immersed boundary problem \eqref{eqn: stokes equation}-\eqref{eqn: kinematic equation of membrane} that is in mixed Eulerian and Lagrangian formulation into a pure Lagrangian formulation, which we will call \emph{contour dynamic formulation}.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop: tranform into contour dynamic formulation}
Under the assumptions that $X(\cdot,t)\in H^2(\mathbb{T})$ for all $t$, and that there $\exists\,\lambda>0$, s.t.\;$\forall\,s_1,s_2\in\mathbb{T}$,
\begin{equation}
|X(s_1,t)-X(s_2,t)|\geq \lambda|s_1-s_2|,
\label{eqn: well_stretched assumption}
\end{equation}
where $|s_1-s_2|$ is the distance between $s_1$ and $s_2$ on $\mathbb{T}$, the evolution of $X(s,t)$ in the 2-D Stokes immersed boundary problem \eqref{eqn: stokes equation}-\eqref{eqn: kinematic equation of membrane} is equivalently given by
\begin{equation}
X_t(s,t)=\mathcal{L}X(s,t)+g_X(s,t),\quad X(s,0) = X_0(s),
\label{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{L}\triangleq-\frac{1}{4}(-\Delta)^{1/2}$, and
\begin{align}
g_X(s,t) = &\;\int_{\mathbb{T}} \Gamma_0(s,s',t)\,ds' +\frac{1}{4}(-\Delta)^{1/2}X(s,t),\label{eqn: definition of g_X}\\
\Gamma_0(s,s',t) = &\;-\partial_{s'}[G(X(s,t)-X(s',t))](X'(s',t)-X'(s,t)).\label{eqn: introduce the notation Gamma_0}
\end{align}
Here $(-\Delta)^{1/2}$ on $\mathbb{T}$ is understood as a Fourier multiplier or equivalently the following singular integral
\begin{equation}
(-\Delta)^{1/2}Y(s) \triangleq -\frac{1}{\pi} \mathrm{p.v.}\int_\mathbb{T}\frac{Y(s')-Y(s)}{4\sin^2\left(\frac{s'-s}{2}\right)}\,ds',
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
G(x) = \frac{1}{4\pi}\left(-\ln |x| Id +\frac{x \otimes x}{|x|^2}\right)\label{eqn: 2D stokeslet}
\end{equation}
is the fundamental solution of the 2-D Stokes equation for the velocity field \cite{pozrikidis1992boundary}.
\end{proposition}
We call \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption} \emph{well-stretched assumption};
\eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} is called \emph{the contour dynamic formulation} of the immersed boundary problem.
The proof of Proposition \ref{prop: tranform into contour dynamic formulation} is left to Section \ref{section: justification of contour dynamic formulation}.
In the sequel, we shall focus on \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} and prove existence and uniqueness of its solutions and their properties.
Estimates of the velocity field $u_X(x,t)$ can be easily obtained based on that; see Lemma \ref{lemma: the velocity field is continuous} below.
Note that the subscript of $u_X$ stresses that it is determined by $X(s,t)$; see Section \ref{section: justification of contour dynamic formulation} for more details.
\subsection{Main results}
Let us introduce a notation before we state the main results of the paper.
With $T>0$, define
\begin{equation}
\Omega_{T} = \left\{Y(s,t)\in L^{\infty}_T H^{5/2}\cap L^2_T H^{3}(\mathbb{T}):\;Y_t(s,t)\in L^2_T H^2(\mathbb{T})\right\}.
\label{eqn: define the primary function space to prove the local existence}
\end{equation}
It is equipped with the norm
\begin{equation*}
\|Y(s,t)\|_{\Omega_{T}} \triangleq \|Y\|_{L^{\infty}_T {H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}+\|Y\|_{L^2_T {H}^{3}(\mathbb{T})}+\|Y_t\|_{L^2_T {H}^{2}(\mathbb{T})}.
\end{equation*}
Here $L^{\infty}_T {H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T}) = L^\infty([0,T];{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T}))$, and $L^2_T {H}^{3}(\mathbb{T})$ and $L^2_T {H}^{2}(\mathbb{T})$ have similar meanings.
Then we are able to prove the local well-posedness of the immersed boundary problem \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem}.
\begin{theorem}[Existence of the local-in-time solution]\label{thm: local in time existence}
Suppose $X_0(s) \in H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$, s.t.\;there exists some $\lambda>0$,
\begin{equation}
|X_0(s_1)-X_0(s_2)|\geq \lambda|s_1-s_2|,\quad \forall\, s_1, s_2\in \mathbb{T}.
\label{eqn: bi Lipschitz assumption in main thm}
\end{equation}
Then there exists $T_0 = T_0(\lambda, \|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}})\in(0,+\infty]$ and a solution $X(s,t)\in \Omega_{T_0}\cap C_{[0,T_0]}H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$ of the immersed boundary problem \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem}, satisfying that
\begin{equation}
\|X\|_{L^\infty_{T_0} \dot{H}^{5/2}\cap L^2_{T_0} \dot{H}^{3}(\mathbb{T})}\leq 4\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})},\quad \|X_t\|_{L^2_{T_0} \dot{H}^{2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq \|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})},
\label{eqn: a priori estimate for the local solution in the main theorem}
\end{equation}
and that for $\forall\,s_1,s_2\in\mathbb{T}$ and $t\in[0,T_0]$,
\begin{equation}
\left|X(s_1,t) - X(s_2,t)\right| \geq \frac{\lambda}{2}|s_1 - s_2|.
\label{eqn: uniform bi lipschitz constant of the local solution in the main theorem}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
We write $C_{[0,T_0]}H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$ instead of $C_{T_0}H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$ to stress continuity up to the end points of the time interval.
\begin{theorem}[Uniqueness of the local-in-time solution]\label{thm: local in time uniqueness}
Suppose $X_0(s) \in H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$ satisfies \eqref{eqn: bi Lipschitz assumption in main thm} with some $\lambda>0$.
Given an arbitrary $c\in(0,1)$, the immersed boundary problem \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} has at most one solution $X\in\Omega_T$ satisfying that $\forall\,s_1,s_2\in\mathbb{T}$ and $\forall\,t\in[0,T]$,
\begin{equation}
|X(s_1,t)-X(s_2,t)|\geq c\lambda|s_1-s_2|.
\label{eqn: bi lipschitz assumption in uniqueness thm}
\end{equation}
In particular, the local-in-time solution obtained in Theorem \ref{thm: local in time existence} is unique in $\Omega_{T_0}$.
\end{theorem}
To state the results on the global existence of solutions near equilibrium configurations and its exponential convergence, we need the following definition.
\begin{definition}\label{def: closest equilbrium state}
Assume $Y(s) \in H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$ defines a Jordan curve in the plane, s.t.\;the area of domain enclosed by $Y$ is $\pi R_Y^2$ with $R_Y>0$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{2}\int_{\mathbb{T}} Y(s)\times Y'(s)\,ds = \pi R_Y^2.
\label{eqn: enclosed area is pi}
\end{equation}
We call $R_Y$ the \emph{effective radius} of $Y(s)$.
Define
\begin{equation}
Y_{\theta,x}(s) = (R_Y\cos (s+\theta), R_Y\sin(s+\theta))^T + x
\label{eqn: define a parameterization of the candidate equilibrium}
\end{equation}
with $\theta\in[0,2\pi)$ and $x\in \mathbb{R}^2$.
Let
\begin{equation}
(\theta_*,x_*) =\argmin_{\theta\in[0,2\pi), x\in\mathbb{R}^2}\int_{\mathbb{T}}|Y(s)-Y_{\theta,x}(s)|^2\,ds.
\label{eqn: define closest equilibrium and optimal parameters}
\end{equation}
Then $Y_*(s) \triangleq Y_{\theta_*,x_*}(s)$ is called \emph{the closest equilibrium configuration} to $Y(s)$.
\end{definition}
Properties of the closest equilibrium configuration will be discussed in Section \ref{section: global existence}.
Now we have
\begin{theorem}[Existence and uniqueness of global-in-time solution near equilibrium]\label{thm: global existence near equilibrium}
There exist universal $\varepsilon_*, \xi_*>0$, such that for $\forall\, X_0(s)\in H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$ satisfying
\begin{align}
\|X_0(s) - X_{0*}(s)\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq &\;\varepsilon_* R_{X_0},\label{eqn: closeness condition of H 2.5 norm}\\
\|X_0(s) - X_{0*}(s)\|_{\dot{H}^{1}(\mathbb{T})}\leq &\;\xi_* R_{X_0},\label{eqn: closeness condition of H 1 norm}
\end{align}
with $X_{0*}(s)$ being the closest equilibrium configuration to $X_0(s)$, there exists a unique solution $X(s,t)\in C_{[0,+\infty)}H^{5/2}\cap L^2_{[0,+\infty),loc}H^3(\mathbb{T})$ satisfying $X_t(s,t)\in L^2_{[0,+\infty),loc}H^2(\mathbb{T})$ for the immersed boundary problem \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem}.
It satisfies the following estimates
\begin{align}
\|X-X_{*}\|_{L^{\infty}_{[0,+\infty)}\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq &\; \sqrt{2}\varepsilon_* R_{X_0},\label{eqn: estimates on the distance to the equilibrium for the global solution in all time intervals}\\
\left|X(s_1,t) - X(s_2,t)\right| \geq &\;\frac{1}{2\pi}|s_1 - s_2|,\quad \forall \,t\in[0,+\infty),\;s_1,s_2\in\mathbb{T}.\label{eqn: well-stretched constant estimates for the global solution in all time intervals}
\end{align}
In particular,
\begin{equation}
\|X\|_{L^{\infty}_{[0,+\infty)}\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq CR_{X_0}
\label{eqn: uniform bound of H 2.5 norm for the global solution}
\end{equation}
for some universal $C$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}[Exponential convergence to the equilibriums]\label{thm: exponential convergence}
Let $X_0\in H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$ satisfy all the assumptions in Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium} and let $X$ be the unique global solution of \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} starting from $X_0$ obtained in Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium}.
There exist universal constants $\xi_{**}, \alpha_*>0$, such that if in addition
\begin{equation*}
\|X_0(s) - X_{0*}(s)\|_{\dot{H}^{1}(\mathbb{T})}\leq \xi_{**} R_{X_0},\label{eqn: closeness condition of H 1 norm for exp convergence}
\end{equation*}
then
\begin{enumerate}
\item With some universal constant $C>0$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\;\|X-X_{*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}(t) \\
&\;\quad \leq Ce^{-\alpha_* t}\max\{\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})},\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{1}(\mathbb{T})}(|\ln \|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{1}(\mathbb{T})}|+1)^2\}\\
&\;\quad \triangleq Ce^{-\alpha_* t} B(X_0).
\end{split}
\label{eqn: exp convergence in H2.5 norm}
\end{equation}
\item
There exists an equilibrium configuration $X_\infty\triangleq x_\infty+(R_{X_0}\cos(s+\theta_\infty), R_{X_0}\sin(s+\theta_\infty))^T$, such that
\begin{equation}
\|X(t)-X_{\infty}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq CB(X_0)e^{-\alpha_* t},
\label{eqn: exp convergence to a fixed configuration}
\end{equation}
where $C$ is a universal constant and $B(X_0)$ is defined in \eqref{eqn: exp convergence in H2.5 norm}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
The rest of the paper is organized as follows.
In Section \ref{section: justification of contour dynamic formulation}, the reformulation in Proposition \ref{prop: tranform into contour dynamic formulation} is justified.
We also discuss properties of the flow field and law of energy dissipation in the system; their proofs are left to the Appendix \ref{appendix section: study of the flow field}.
In Section \ref{section: a priori estimates}, we will prove a priori estimates necessary for proving the local well-posedness of the contour dynamic formulation \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem}.
In particular, in Section \ref{section: preliminary a priori estimates}, we prove some preliminary estimates as building blocks of more complicated bounds in Section \ref{section: a priori estimates of the immersed boundary problem}, which is devoted to finding out derivatives of $g_X$ and proving its $H^2$-estimate.
In Section \ref{section: local existence and uniqueness}, we will establish the local well-posedness of \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem}.
In Section \ref{section: global existence}, we will show global-in-time existence of solutions of \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} provided that the initial configuration is sufficiently close to an equilibrium configuration.
In Section \ref{section: exp convergence}, we will first prove a lower bound of the rate of energy dissipation in Section \ref{section: lower bound for energy dissipation rate} when the solution is close to an equilibrium.
Based on that, we will show exponential convergence of the solution to an equilibrium configuration in Section \ref{section: proof of exponential convergence to equilibrium configurations}.
Some other auxiliary results will be stated and proved in the Appendix \ref{appendix section: estimates involving L} and \ref{appendix section: auxiliary calculations}.
\section{Problem Reformulation and the Flow Field}\label{section: justification of contour dynamic formulation}
\subsection{Proof of Proposition \ref{prop: tranform into contour dynamic formulation}}\label{section: proof of contour dynamic formulation}
We first justify Proposition \ref{prop: tranform into contour dynamic formulation}, which reformulates the original immersed boundary problem \eqref{eqn: stokes equation}-\eqref{eqn: kinematic equation of membrane} into the contour dynamic formulation \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem}.
Some of the arguments are redundant for proving the proposition itself, but we still derive them here as they will be useful in proving Lemma \ref{lemma: the velocity field is continuous} and Lemma \ref{lemma: energy estimate} below.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{prop: tranform into contour dynamic formulation}]
In 2-D stationary Stokes flow, the velocity field $u$ and the pressure $p$ are instantaneously determined by the forcing $f$ through fundamental solutions
\begin{equation}
G(x) = \frac{1}{4\pi}\left(-\ln |x| Id +\frac{x \otimes x}{|x|^2}\right),\quad Q(x) = \frac{x}{2\pi|x|^2},\label{eqn: fundamental solution for pressure for 2D Stokes equation}
\end{equation}
respectively \cite{pozrikidis1992boundary}, where $Id$ is the $2\times 2$-identity matrix. Hence,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
u_X(x,t) =&\;\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} G(x-y)f(y,t) \,dy=\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}\int_\mathbb{T} G(x-y)\delta(x-X(s',t))F(s',t) \,ds'dy\\
=&\;\int_{\mathbb{T}} G(x-X(s',t))X_{ss}(s',t) \,ds',
\end{split}
\label{eqn: expression for velocity field}
\end{equation}
This is well-defined for $x\not\in\Gamma_t$ and $X(\cdot,t)\in H^2(\mathbb{T})$. The subscript of $u_X$ stresses that it is determined by the configuration $X$.
For $x = X(s,t)\in\Gamma_t$, by \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption},
\begin{equation*}
|G(X(s)-X(s'))|\leq C(\lambda)(1+|\ln |s-s'||).
\end{equation*}
Hence, $G(X(s)-X(\cdot))\in L^2(\mathbb{T})$ and \eqref{eqn: expression for velocity field} is well-defined.
For $x\not \in \Gamma_t$, we do integration by parts in \eqref{eqn: expression for velocity field} and find that
\begin{equation}
u^i_X(x) = \int_{\mathbb{T}} -\partial_{s'} [G^{ij}(x-X(s'))][X'(s')-C_x]^j \,ds',
\label{eqn: expression of velocity field after integration by parts}
\end{equation}
where the superscripts stand for the indices of entries, and $C_x$ is any arbitrary constant vector independent of $s'$.
We may take $C_x = X'(s_x)$, where $s_x$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
|x-X(s_x)| = \inf_{s\in\mathbb{T}}|x-X(s)| = \mathrm{dist}(x,X(\mathbb{T})).
\label{eqn: definition of s_x}
\end{equation}
Note that $s_x$ may not be unique; pick an arbitrary one if it is the case.
Hence,
\begin{equation}
u_X(x) =
\int_{\mathbb{T}} -\partial_{s'} [G(x-X(s'))](X'(s')-X'(s_x))\,ds
\label{eqn: 2D velocity field}
\end{equation}
Similarly, by integration by parts and taking the indetermined constant to be $0$, we find for $x\not \in \Gamma_t$,
\begin{equation}
p_X(x,t) =\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}} \frac{|X'(s')|^2}{|X(s')-x|^2} - \frac{2[(X(s')-x)\cdot X'(s')]^2}{|X(s')-x|^4}\,ds'.
\label{eqn: 2D pressure field}
\end{equation}
For $x = X(s,t)\in \Gamma_t$, by \eqref{eqn: expression for velocity field},
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
u_X(X(s)) =&\;\lim_{\varepsilon \rightarrow 0^+}\int_{|s'-s|\geq \varepsilon} G(X(s)-X(s'))X''(s') \,ds'\\
=&\;\lim_{\varepsilon \rightarrow 0^+}\int_{|s'-s|\geq \varepsilon} -\partial_{s'}[G(X(s)-X(s'))](X'(s')-X'(s)) \,ds'\\
&\;+\lim_{\varepsilon \rightarrow 0^+}G(X(s)-X(s-\varepsilon))(X'(s-\varepsilon)-X'(s)) \\
&\;-\lim_{\varepsilon \rightarrow 0^+}G(X(s)-X(s+\varepsilon))(X'(s+\varepsilon)-X'(s)).
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Using \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption} and the assumption that $X(\cdot,t)\in H^2(\mathbb{T})$, we find
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
|G(X(s)-X(s-\varepsilon))(X'(s-\varepsilon)-X'(s))|\leq &\;C(\lambda)(1+|\ln \varepsilon|)\varepsilon^{1/2}\|X'\|_{\dot{C}^{1/2}(\mathbb{T})}\\
\leq &\;C(\lambda)(1+|\ln \varepsilon|)\varepsilon^{1/2}\|X\|_{\dot{H}^2(\mathbb{T})}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
It goes to $0$ as $\varepsilon\rightarrow 0^+$. A similar bound holds for $|G(X(s)-X(s+\varepsilon))(X'(s+\varepsilon)-X'(s))|$. Hence,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
u_X(X(s))=&\;\mathrm{p.v.}\int_{\mathbb{T}} -\partial_{s'}[G(X(s)-X(s'))](X'(s')-X'(s)) \,ds'\\
=&\;\frac{1}{4\pi}\mathrm{p.v.}\int_{\mathbb{T}} \left[\frac{(X(s')-X(s))\cdot X'(s')}{|X(s')-X(s)|^2}Id \right.\\
&\;\quad- \frac{X'(s')\otimes (X(s')-X(s))+(X(s')-X(s))\otimes X'(s')}{|X(s')-X(s)|^2}\\
&\;\left.\quad+\frac{2(X(s')-X(s))\cdot X'(s') (X(s')-X(s))\otimes (X(s')-X(s))}{|X(s')-X(s)|^4}\right](X'(s')-X'(s)) \,ds'.
\end{split}
\label{eqn: velocity of membrane}
\end{equation}
In \eqref{eqn: introduce the notation Gamma_0}, we denoted the integrand in \eqref{eqn: velocity of membrane} by $\Gamma_0(s,s')$.
It is trivial to show that
\begin{equation*}
|\Gamma_0(s,s')|\leq C\lambda^{-1} |s'-s|^{-1/2}\|X\|_{\dot{C}^1(\mathbb{T})} \|X'\|_{\dot{C}^{1/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq C\lambda^{-1}|s'-s|^{-1/2}\|X\|_{\dot{H}^2(\mathbb{T})}^2.
\end{equation*}
Hence, $\Gamma_0(s,s')$ is integrable, and the principal value integral in \eqref{eqn: velocity of membrane} can be replaced by the usual integral.
As a byproduct, we also find a bound for $u_X(X(s))$,
\begin{equation}
|u_X(X(s))|\leq C\lambda^{-1}\|X\|_{\dot{H}^2(\mathbb{T})}^2.
\label{eqn: a trivial L^infty bound for velocity}
\end{equation}
\eqref{eqn: velocity of membrane} together with \eqref{eqn: kinematic equation of membrane} gives \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem}.
Once \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} is solved, we can recover $u$ and $p$ by \eqref{eqn: expression for velocity field} and \eqref{eqn: 2D pressure field}. The original immersed boundary problem is then solved.
This completes the proof of Proposition \ref{prop: tranform into contour dynamic formulation}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
\eqref{eqn: velocity of membrane} can be equivalently written as
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
u_X(X(s))=&\;\mathrm{p.v.}\int_{\mathbb{T}} -\partial_{s'}[G(X(s)-X(s'))]X'(s') \,ds'\\
=&\;\frac{1}{4\pi}\mathrm{p.v.}\int_{\mathbb{T}} \left[- \frac{|X'(s')|^2}{|X(s')-X(s)|^2}+\frac{2[(X(s')-X(s))\cdot X'(s')]^2}{|X(s')-X(s)|^4} \right](X(s')-X(s)) \,ds'.
\end{split}
\label{eqn: equivalent formualtion of membrane velocity}
\end{equation}
Indeed, under the assumptions $X(\cdot,t)\in H^2(\mathbb{T})$ and \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption},
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{p.v.}\int_{\mathbb{T}} -\partial_{s'}[G(X(s)-X(s'))]\,ds' = \lim_{\varepsilon\rightarrow 0^+} G(X(s)-X(s+\varepsilon)) - G(X(s)-X(s-\varepsilon)) = 0.
\label{eqn: pv integral vanishes}
\end{equation}
To obtain the last convergence, we derive that, since $|X'(s)|\geq \lambda$,
\begin{equation*}
\ln \frac{|X(s)-X(s+\varepsilon)|}{|X(s)-X(s-\varepsilon)|} = \ln \frac{|X(s)-X(s+\varepsilon)|/\varepsilon}{|X(s)-X(s-\varepsilon)|/\varepsilon}\rightarrow \ln \frac{|X'(s)|}{|X'(s)|} = 0,
\end{equation*}
and similarly,
\begin{equation*}
\frac{(X(s)-X(s\pm\varepsilon))\otimes (X(s)-X(s\pm\varepsilon))}{|X(s)-X(s\pm \varepsilon)|^2}\rightarrow \frac{X'(s)\otimes X'(s)}{|X'(s)|^2}.
\end{equation*}
\eqref{eqn: equivalent formualtion of membrane velocity} can be viewed as taking $C_x = 0$ in \eqref{eqn: expression of velocity field after integration by parts}.
\qed
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
The reason why we single out the term $\mathcal{L}X$ in Proposition \ref{prop: tranform into contour dynamic formulation} comes from the following suggestive calculation starting from \eqref{eqn: equivalent formualtion of membrane velocity}.
Note that the integrals in \eqref{eqn: velocity of membrane} and \eqref{eqn: equivalent formualtion of membrane velocity} give the same value, so we use them interchangeably.
Suppose $X(\cdot,t)$ is sufficiently smooth.
There is a singularity in the integrand of \eqref{eqn: equivalent formualtion of membrane velocity} as $s'\rightarrow s$.
Consider $s'$ very close to $s$ and we formally use $(s'-s)X'(s')$ to approximate $X(s')-X(s)$ in \eqref{eqn: equivalent formualtion of membrane velocity}.
In this way, when $|s'-s|$ is sufficiently small, we formally find
\begin{equation*}
-\partial_{s'}[G(X(s)-X(s'))]X'(s')\sim \frac{1}{4\pi} \frac{X'(s')}{s'-s}\sim -\frac{1}{4}\cdot \frac{X'(s')}{2\pi\tan\left(\frac{s-s'}{2}\right)},
\end{equation*}
which presumably accounts for the principal part of the singular integral in \eqref{eqn: equivalent formualtion of membrane velocity}.
Recall that the Hilbert transform $\mathcal{H}$ on $\mathbb{T}$ is defined as \cite{grafakos2008classical}
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{H}Y(s) = \frac{1}{2\pi}\mathrm{p.v.}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\cot\left(\frac{s-s'}{2}\right)Y(s').
\end{equation*}
Hence, if we take out $-\frac{1}{4}\mathcal{H}X' = \mathcal{L}X$ in \eqref{eqn: equivalent formualtion of membrane velocity}, what remains is \emph{expected} to be regular.
We shall see that $\mathcal{L}X$ provides nice dissipation property that helps prove well-posedness of \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem}.
See Lemma \ref{lemma: improved Hs estimate and Hs continuity of semigroup solution} and Lemma \ref{lemma: a priori estimate of nonlocal eqn} for some relevant estimates.
It should be noted that the very idea has been adopted in early numerical literature to, for example, remove stiffness in computing the evolution of elastic immersed boundary in 2-D Stokes flow or the motion of interface with surface tension in 2-D incompressible irrotational flow.
See e.g.\;\cite{hou2008removing, hou1994removing} and references therein.
\qed
\end{remark}
\subsection{Regularity of the flow field and energy dissipation}\label{section: energy estimate}
As is mentioned above, once \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} is solved, we can obtain the flow field $u_X$ by \eqref{eqn: expression for velocity field}.
The following lemma characterizes its regularity.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: the velocity field is continuous}
Let $X(\cdot,t)\in H^2(\mathbb{T})$ and satisfy the well-stretched condition \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption}.
Then $u_X(\cdot,t)$ defined by \eqref{eqn: expression for velocity field} (or equivalently \eqref{eqn: 2D velocity field}, \eqref{eqn: velocity of membrane} and \eqref{eqn: equivalent formualtion of membrane velocity}) is continuous in $\mathbb{R}^2$.
Moreover, $\nabla u_X(\cdot ,t)\in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{remark}
That $u_X(x,t)$ is continuous throughout $\mathbb{R}^2$ agrees with the intuition that the string moves with the ambient flow, and there is no jump in velocity across the string.
\qed
\end{remark}
As a dissipative system, the Stokes immersed boundary problem enjoys a natural law of energy dissipation, which is useful in proving existence and asymptotic behavior of global solution near equilibrium in Section \ref{section: global existence} and Section \ref{section: exp convergence}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: energy estimate}
Assume $X(s,t)\in C_{T}H^2(\mathbb{T})$ with $X_t(s,t)\in L^2_{T}H^1(\mathbb{T})$ is a solution of \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} with some $T>0$ satisfying \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption} with constant $\lambda >0$, and $u_X(x,t)$ is the corresponding velocity field defined by the Stokes equation \eqref{eqn: stokes equation}, with $\nabla u_X(x,t)\in L^\infty_{T}L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ (showed in \eqref{eqn: a trivial bound for the energy dissipation rate or H1 semi norm of velocity field} in the proof of Lemma \ref{lemma: the velocity field is continuous}).
Then
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\mathbb{T}}|X'(s,t)|^2\,ds = -\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}|\nabla u_X(x,t)|^2\,dx
\label{eqn: energy estimate on each time slice simplified version}
\end{equation}
holds in the scalar distribution sense, and
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{2}\int_{\mathbb{T}}|X'(s,T)|^2\,ds - \frac{1}{2}\int_{\mathbb{T}}|X'(s,0)|^2\,ds =-\int_{0}^T\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}|\nabla u_X(x,t)|^2\,dxdt.
\label{eqn: energy estimate of Stokes immersed boundary problem}
\end{equation}
In particular, the total elastic energy of the string $\mathcal{E}_X \triangleq \frac{1}{2}\|X(\cdot,t)\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}^2$ always decreases in $t$.
\end{lemma}
The proofs of these lemmas are technical.
We leave them to Appendix \ref{appendix section: study of the flow field}.
\section{A Priori Estimates}\label{section: a priori estimates}
In this section, we shall prove a priori estimates that are needed in proving well-posedness of \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem}.
\subsection{Preliminaries}\label{section: preliminary a priori estimates}
First we introduce some notations that will be heavily used in the rest of the paper.
Suppose $X\in H^3(\mathbb{T})$. For $s,s'\in\mathbb{T}$, let $\tau = s'-s\in[-\pi,\pi)$. For $s'\not = s$, define
\begin{equation}
L(s,s') = \frac{X(s')-X(s)}{\tau},\quad M(s,s') = \frac{X'(s')-X'(s)}{\tau},\quad N(s,s') = \frac{L(s,s')-X'(s)}{\tau}.
\label{eqn: definition of L M N}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
L(s,s) = X'(s),\quad M(s,s) = X''(s),\quad N(s,s) =\frac{1}{2}X''(s).
\label{eqn: definition of L M N at s}
\end{equation}
It is straightforward to calculate that for $s'\not = s$,
\begin{equation}
\partial_s L(s,s') = N(s,s'),\quad \partial_s M(s,s') = \frac{M(s,s')-X''(s)}{\tau},\quad \partial_s N(s,s') = \frac{2N(s,s')-X''(s)}{\tau}.
\label{eqn: derivatives of L M N wrt s}
\end{equation}
In the sequel, we shall omit the arguments in $L(s,s')$, $M(s,s')$ and $N(s,s')$ whenever it is convenient.
Without assuming the well-stretched assumption \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption}, we have the following estimates for $L$, $M$ and $N$, which will be building blocks of more complicated estimates in Section \ref{section: a priori estimates of the immersed boundary problem}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: estimates for L M N}
\begin{enumerate}
\item For $\forall\, 1\leq p\leq q \leq \infty$, $q>1$ and any interval $I\subset\mathbb{T}$ satisfying $0\in I$
\begin{align}
\|L(s,\cdot)\|_{L^p(s+I)} \leq &\;C|I|^{\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{q}}\|X'\|_{L^q(s+I)},\label{eqn: Lp estimate for L}\\
\|M(s,\cdot)\|_{L^p(s+I)} \leq &\;C|I|^{\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{q}}\|X''\|_{L^q(s+I)},\label{eqn: Lp estimate for M}\\
\|N(s,\cdot)\|_{L^p(s+I)} \leq &\;C|I|^{\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{q}}\|X''\|_{L^q(s+I)},\label{eqn: Lp estimate for N}\\
\|\partial_s M(s,\cdot)\|_{L^p(s+I)} \leq &\;C|I|^{\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{q}}\|X'''\|_{L^q(s+I)},\label{eqn: Lp estimate for M'}\\
\|\partial_s N(s,\cdot)\|_{L^p(s+I)} \leq &\;C|I|^{\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{q}}\|X'''\|_{L^q(s+I)},\label{eqn: Lp estimate for N'}
\end{align}
where the constants $C>0$ only depend on $p$ and $q$.
\item For $\forall\, 1< p\leq q \leq \infty$ and any interval $I\subset\mathbb{T}$ satisfying $0\in I$
\begin{align}
\|L(s,s')\|_{L^q_{s}(\mathbb{T})L^p_{s'}(s+I)} \leq &\;C|I|^{1/q}\|X'\|_{L^p(\mathbb{T})},\label{eqn: double Lp estimate for L}\\
\|M(s,s')\|_{L^q_{s}(\mathbb{T})L^p_{s'}(s+I)} \leq &\;C|I|^{1/q}\|X''\|_{L^p(\mathbb{T})},\label{eqn: double Lp estimate for M}\\
\|N(s,s')\|_{L^q_{s}(\mathbb{T})L^p_{s'}(s+I)} \leq &\;C|I|^{1/q}\|X''\|_{L^p(\mathbb{T})},\label{eqn: double Lp estimate for N}\\
\|\partial_s M(s,s')\|_{L^q_{s}(\mathbb{T})L^p_{s'}(s+I)} \leq &\;C|I|^{1/q}\|X'''\|_{L^p(\mathbb{T})},\label{eqn: double Lp estimate for M'}\\
\|\partial_s N(s,s')\|_{L^q_{s}(\mathbb{T})L^p_{s'}(s+I)} \leq &\;C|I|^{1/q}\|X'''\|_{L^p(\mathbb{T})},\label{eqn: double Lp estimate for N'}
\end{align}
where the constants $C>0$ only depend on $p$ and $q$.
\item Let $\mathcal{M}$ be the centered Hardy-Littlewood maximal operator on $\mathbb{T}$. Then for $\forall\, s,s'\in\mathbb{T}$,
\begin{equation}
|L(s,s')|\leq 2\mathcal{M} X'(s),\quad |M(s,s')|\leq 2\mathcal{M} X''(s),\quad |N(s,s')|\leq 2\mathcal{M} X''(s).\label{eqn: bound for L M N by maximal function}
\end{equation}
\item If $X\in C^2(\mathbb{T})$,
\begin{equation}
L(s,\cdot),M(s,\cdot),N(s,\cdot)\in C(\mathbb{T}).
\label{eqn: continuity of L M N}
\end{equation}
\item Moreover, if \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption} is satisfied with constant $\lambda>0$,
\begin{equation}
\lambda\leq |L(s,s')|\leq \|X'\|_{L^\infty},
\label{eqn: lower bound for L}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\lambda \leq \min_{s\in\mathbb{T}}|X'(s)|.
\label{eqn: upper bound for lambda}
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
\begin{proof}
\eqref{eqn: lower bound for L} and \eqref{eqn: upper bound for lambda} are obvious.
To prove the $L^p$-estimates and the continuity of $L$, $M$ and $N$, we rewrite
\begin{align*}
&\;L(s,s') =\frac{1}{\tau} \int_0^{\tau} X'(s+\theta)\,d\theta = \int_0^1 X'(s+\tau\theta)\,d\theta,\\
&\;M(s,s') =\frac{1}{\tau} \int_0^{\tau} X''(s+\theta)\,d\theta = \int_0^1 X''(s+\tau\theta)\,d\theta,
\end{align*}
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
N(s,s') =&\;\frac{1}{\tau^2} \int_0^{\tau} (X'(s+\theta)-X'(s))\,d\theta = \frac{1}{\tau^2} \int_0^{\tau} \int_0^{\theta} X''(s+\omega)\,d\omega d\theta\\
=&\;\frac{1}{\tau^2} \int_0^\tau \theta\int_0^1 X''(s+\theta\omega)\,d\omega d\theta=\int_0^1 \theta\int_0^1 X''(s+\tau\theta\omega)\,d\omega d\theta,
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\partial_s M(s,s') =&\;\frac{1}{\tau^2} (X'(s')-X'(s)-\tau X''(s)) = \frac{1}{\tau^2} \int_{0}^{\tau} X''(s+\theta)-X''(s)\,d\theta\\
=&\;\frac{1}{\tau^2} \int_{0}^{\tau} \int_{0}^\theta X'''(s+\omega)\,d\omega d\theta = \int_0^1 \theta\int_0^1 X'''(s+\tau\theta\omega)\,d\omega d\theta,
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\partial_s N(s,s') =&\;\frac{2}{\tau^3} \left(X(s')-X(s)-\tau X'(s)-\frac{1}{2}\tau^2 X''(s)\right)\\
=&\;\frac{2}{\tau^3}\left(\int_0^{\tau} X'(s+\theta)\,d\theta-\tau X'(s)-\frac{1}{2}\tau^2 X''(s)\right)\\
=&\;\frac{2}{\tau^3}\left(\int_0^{\tau} \int_0^{\theta} X''(s+\omega)\,d\omega d\theta-\frac{1}{2}\tau^2 X''(s)\right)\\
=&\;\frac{2}{\tau^3}\int_0^{\tau} \int_0^{\theta} \int_0^{\omega} X'''(s+\xi)\,d\xi d\omega d\theta\\
=&\;2\int_0^{1} \theta^2 \int_0^{1} \omega \int_0^{1} X'''(s+\tau\theta\omega\xi)\,d\xi d\omega d\theta.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\eqref{eqn: continuity of L M N} is immediate by the continuity of $X'$ and $X''$ at $s$.
To prove \eqref{eqn: bound for L M N by maximal function}, we use the above representation to derive that
\begin{align*}
|L(s,s')| \leq &\;\frac{1}{\tau} \int_0^{\tau} |X'(s+\theta)|\,d\theta \leq \frac{1}{\tau} \int_{-\tau}^{\tau} |X'(s+\theta)|\,d\theta \leq 2\mathcal{M}X'(s),\\
|M(s,s')| \leq &\;\frac{1}{\tau} \int_0^{\tau} |X''(s+\theta)|\,d\theta \leq \frac{1}{\tau} \int_{-\tau}^{\tau} |X''(s+\theta)|\,d\theta \leq 2\mathcal{M}X''(s),\\
|N(s,s')| \leq &\;\frac{1}{\tau^2} \int_0^{\tau} \int_0^{\theta} |X''(s+\omega)|\,d\omega d\theta \leq \frac{1}{\tau} \int_0^{\tau} |X''(s+\omega)|\,d\omega \leq 2\mathcal{M}X''(s).
\end{align*}
Now we turn to \eqref{eqn: Lp estimate for L}
\eqref{eqn: double Lp estimate for N'}.
When $p = q =\infty$, \eqref{eqn: Lp estimate for L}
\eqref{eqn: double Lp estimate for N'}
immediately follow from the above representations.
When $1\leq p\leq q \leq \infty$, $p<\infty$ and $q>1$, we find that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\|L(s,\cdot)\|_{L^p(s+I)} = &\;\left(\int_{I} d\tau\left|\int_0^1 X'(s+\tau\theta)\,d\theta\right|^{p}\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\\
\leq &\; C\int_0^1\left(\int_{I} d\tau\left| X'(s+\tau\theta)\right|^{p}\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\,d\theta\\
= &\; C\int_0^1\theta^{-\frac{1}{p}}\left(\int_{s+\theta I} ds'\left| X'(s')\right|^{p}\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\,d\theta\\
\leq &\; C\int_0^1\theta^{-\frac{1}{p}}|\theta I|^{\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{q}}\|X'\|_{L^q(s+I)}\,d\theta \leq C|I|^{\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{q}}\|X'\|_{L^q(s+I)}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
We applied Minkowski inequality in the second line and H$\mathrm{\ddot{o}}$lder's inequality in the fourth line; we also used the fact that $s+\theta I \subset s+I$.
This proves \eqref{eqn: Lp estimate for L}; \eqref{eqn: Lp estimate for M} could be proved in exactly the same way simply by replacing $X''$ by $X'''$. For \eqref{eqn: Lp estimate for N},
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\|N(s,\cdot)\|_{L^p(s+I)} =&\; \left(\int_I d\tau\left|\int_0^1 \theta\int_0^1 X''(s+\tau\theta\omega)\,d\omega d\theta\right|^p\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\\
\leq &\; C\int_0^1 \theta\int_0^1 \left(\int_I d\tau\left|X''(s+\tau\theta\omega)\right|^p\right)^\frac{1}{p} \,d\omega d\theta\\
= &\; C\int_0^1 \theta\int_0^1 \left(\frac{1}{\theta \omega}\int_{s+\theta \omega I} ds'\left|X''(s')\right|^p\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\,d\omega d\theta\\
\leq &\; C\int_0^1 \int_0^1 \frac{\theta^{1-\frac{1}{p}}}{ \omega^{\frac{1}{p}}}|\theta\omega I|^{\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{q}}\|X''\|_{L^q(s+I)}\,d\omega d\theta\leq C|I|^{\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{q}}\|X''\|_{L^q(s+I)}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
\eqref{eqn: Lp estimate for M'} could be proved in exactly the same way simply by replacing $X''$ by $X'''$.
For \eqref{eqn: Lp estimate for N'},
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\|\partial_s N(s,\cdot)\|_{L^p(s+I)} =&\; \left(\int_I d\tau\left|2\int_0^{1} \theta^2 \int_0^{1} \omega \int_0^{1} X'''(s+\tau\theta\omega\xi)\,d\xi d\omega d\theta\right|^p\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\\
\leq &\; C\int_0^{1} \theta^2 \int_0^{1} \omega \int_0^{1} \left(\int_I d\tau|X'''(s+\tau\theta\omega\xi)|^p\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\,d\xi d\omega d\theta\\
= &\; C\int_0^{1} \theta^2 \int_0^{1} \omega \int_0^{1} (\theta\omega\xi)^{-\frac{1}{p}}\left(\int_{s+\theta\omega\xi I} ds'|X'''(s')|^p\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\,d\xi d\omega d\theta\\
\leq &\; C\int_0^{1} \theta^2 \int_0^{1} \omega \int_0^{1} (\theta\omega\xi)^{-\frac{1}{p}}|\theta\omega\xi I|^{\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{q}}\|X'''\|_{L^q(s+\theta\omega\xi I)}\,d\xi d\omega d\theta\\
\leq &\; C|I|^{\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{q}}\int_0^{1} \theta^2 \int_0^{1} \omega \int_0^{1} (\theta\omega\xi)^{-\frac{1}{q}}\|X'''\|_{L^q(s+I)}\,d\xi d\omega d\theta\\
\leq &\; C|I|^{\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{q}}\|X'''\|_{L^q(s+I)}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
For \eqref{eqn: double Lp estimate for L}, we first consider the case $p=q\in(1,\infty)$. \eqref{eqn: Lp estimate for L} implies that, $\|L(s,s')\|_{L^p_{s'}(s+I)}\leq C\|X'\|_{L^p(s+I)}$. Hence, by Fubini's Theorem,
\begin{equation*}
\|L(s,s')\|_{L^{p}_{s}(\mathbb{T})L^p_{s'}(s+I)}\leq C\left(\int_{\mathbb{T}}\|X'\|^p_{L^p(s+I)}\,ds\right)^{1/p}\leq C|I|^{1/p}\|X'\|_{L^p(\mathbb{T})}
\end{equation*}
On the other hand, by \eqref{eqn: Lp estimate for L}, $\|L(s,s')\|_{L^{\infty}_{s}(\mathbb{T})L^p_{s'}(s+I)}\leq C\|X'\|_{L^p(\mathbb{T})}$. Hence, by interpolation between $L^p$-spaces, we proved \eqref{eqn: double Lp estimate for L}. In a similar manner, we can prove \eqref{eqn: double Lp estimate for M}-\eqref{eqn: double Lp estimate for N'}.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
\subsection{$H^2$-estimate of $g_X$}\label{section: a priori estimates of the immersed boundary problem}
In Section \ref{section: local existence and uniqueness}, we will prove well-posedness of \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} via a fixed-point-type argument by making use of dissipation structure of the operator $\mathcal{L}$ (see Lemma \ref{lemma: improved Hs estimate and Hs continuity of semigroup solution} and Lemma \ref{lemma: a priori estimate of nonlocal eqn} in the Appendix \ref{appendix section: estimates involving L}).
In order to do that, in this section, we focus on the term $g_X$ in \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} and establish its $H^2$-estimate; recall that $g_X$ is defined in \eqref{eqn: definition of g_X}.
We are also going to prove an $H^2$-estimate of $g_{X_1}-g_{X_2}$, which will be used in proving the uniqueness of the local solution.
We start from a pointwise estimate of $g_X$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: L infty estimate for g_X}
Suppose $X\in H^2(\mathbb{T})$ satisfies \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption} with some $\lambda>0$. Then
\begin{equation}
|g_X(s)|\leq \frac{C}{\lambda}\|X'\|_{L^2}\|X''\|_{L^2},
\label{eqn: L infty estimate for g_X}
\end{equation}
where $C>0$ is a universal constant.
\begin{proof}
Recall that $\Gamma_0(s,s')$ is defined in \eqref{eqn: introduce the notation Gamma_0}. By \eqref{eqn: velocity of membrane}, and the definitions of $L$ and $M$, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\Gamma_0(s,s')=&\; \frac{1}{4\pi}\left(\frac{L\cdot X'(s')}{|L|^2}Id-\frac{X'(s')\otimes L + L\otimes X'(s')}{|L|^2}+\frac{2L\cdot X'(s')L\otimes L}{|L|^4}\right)M\\
=&\;\frac{1}{4\pi}\left(\frac{L\cdot X'(s')}{|L|^2}M-\frac{L\cdot M}{|L|^2}X'(s') -\frac{X'(s')\cdot M}{|L|^2}L+\frac{2L\cdot X'(s')L\cdot M}{|L|^4}L\right).
\end{split}
\label{eqn: simplification of integrand of g_X part 1}
\end{equation}
Hence, by \eqref{eqn: lower bound for L},
\begin{equation}
|\Gamma_0(s,s')|\leq C \frac{|M(s,s')||X'(s')|}{|L(s,s')|} \leq \frac{C}{\lambda} |M(s,s')||X'(s')|.
\label{eqn: pointwise estimate of integrand of g_X part 1}
\end{equation}
This implies by H$\mathrm{\ddot{o}}$lder's inequality and Lemma \ref{lemma: estimates for L M N} that
\begin{equation}
\left|\int_{\mathbb{T}} \Gamma_0(s,s')\,ds'\right| \leq \frac{C}{\lambda} \|X'\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\|X''\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}.
\label{eqn: L infty estimate for g_X part 1}
\end{equation}
The other term in $g_X(s)$, $(-\Delta)^{1/2}X$, has mean zero on $\mathbb{T}$. By Gagliardo-Nirenberg interpolation inequality,
\begin{equation*}
\left|(-\Delta)^{1/2}X(s)\right|\leq C \left\|(-\Delta)^{1/2}X(s)\right\|_{\dot{H}^1}^{1/2}\left\|(-\Delta)^{1/2}X(s)\right\|_{L^2}^{1/2}\leq C \|X''\|_{L^2}^{1/2}\|X'\|_{L^2}^{1/2}.
\end{equation*}
Using \eqref{eqn: lower bound for L}, we find that
\begin{equation}
\left|(-\Delta)^{1/2}X(s)\right| \leq C\frac{\|X'\|_{L^\infty}}{\lambda}\|X''\|^{1/2}_{L^2}\|X'\|_{L^2}^{1/2}\leq \frac{C}{\lambda}\|X''\|_{L^2}\|X'\|_{L^2}
\label{eqn: L infty estimate for g_X part 2}
\end{equation}
\eqref{eqn: L infty estimate for g_X} is then proved by \eqref{eqn: L infty estimate for g_X part 1} and \eqref{eqn: L infty estimate for g_X part 2}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
If we further assume $X\in H^3(\mathbb{T})\subset C^2(\mathbb{T})$, using the continuity of $L(s,\cdot)$ and $M(s,\cdot)$, it is not difficult to show in \eqref{eqn: simplification of integrand of g_X part 1} that
\begin{equation}
\lim_{s'\rightarrow s} \Gamma_0(s,s') = \frac{1}{4\pi} X''(s).
\label{eqn: limit of integrand of g_X part 1 at s}
\end{equation}
This will be useful below in proving Lemma \ref{lemma: derivative of g_X}.
\qed
\end{remark}
\end{lemma}
\begin{corollary}\label{coro: L2 estimate for g_X1-g_X2}
Let $X_1(s),X_2(s)\in H^2(\mathbb{T})$ both satisfy \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption} with some $\lambda>0$. Then
\begin{equation}
\|g_{X_1}(s)-g_{X_2}(s)\|_{L^2}\leq C\lambda^{-2} (\|X_1\|_{\dot{H}^2}+\|X_2\|_{\dot{H}^2})^2\|X_1-X_2\|_{\dot{H}^2},
\label{eqn: L2 estimate for g_X1-g_X2}
\end{equation}
where $C>0$ is a universal constant.
\begin{proof}
By the definition of $g_X$ in \eqref{eqn: definition of g_X} and \eqref{eqn: simplification of integrand of g_X part 1},
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\;g_{X_1}(s)-g_{X_2}(s) \\
= &\;\int_\mathbb{T}ds'\,\frac{1}{4\pi}\left(\frac{L_1\cdot X_1'(s')}{|L_1|^2}M_1-\frac{L_1\cdot M_1}{|L_1|^2}X_1'(s') -\frac{X_1'(s')\cdot M_1}{|L_1|^2}L_1+\frac{2L_1\cdot X_1'(s')L_1\cdot M_1}{|L_1|^4}L_1\right)\\
&\;-\int_\mathbb{T}ds'\,\frac{1}{4\pi}\left(\frac{L_2\cdot X_2'(s')}{|L_2|^2}M_2-\frac{L_2\cdot M_2}{|L_2|^2}X_2'(s') -\frac{X_2'(s')\cdot M_2}{|L_2|^2}L_2+\frac{2L_2\cdot X_2'(s')L_2\cdot M_2}{|L_2|^4}L_2\right)\\
&\;-\mathcal{L}X_1(s)+\mathcal{L}X_2(s).
\end{split}
\label{eqn: difference of X_t at two moments}
\end{equation}
where $L_i$, $M_i$ and $X_i'$ denote the corresponding quantities associated with $X_i(\cdot)$; see definitions in \eqref{eqn: definition of L M N} and \eqref{eqn: definition of L M N at s}.
To make an $L^2$-estimate, for conciseness, we only consider a part of the difference above.
By \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption} and \eqref{eqn: lower bound for L},
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&\;\left\|\int_\mathbb{T}ds'\,\frac{L_1\cdot X_1'(s')}{|L_1|^2}M_1 - \frac{L_2\cdot X_2'(s')}{|L_2|^2}M_2\right\|_{L^2}\\
\leq &\;\left\|\frac{L_1\cdot (X_1'-X_2')(s')}{|L_1|^2}M_1\right\|_{L^2_sL_{s'}^1}+\left\|\frac{L_1\cdot X_2'(s')}{|L_1|^2}(M_1-M_2)\right\|_{L^2_sL_{s'}^1}\\
&\;+\left\|\frac{(L_1-L_2)\cdot X_2'(s')}{|L_1|^2}M_2\right\|_{L^2_sL_{s'}^1}+\left\|L_2\cdot X_2'(s')M_2\frac{|L_2|^2-|L_1|^2}{|L_1|^2|L_2|^2}\right\|_{L^2_sL_{s'}^1}\\
\leq &\;C\lambda^{-2}\left(\|L_1\|_{L^\infty_s L^\infty_{s'}}\|X_1'-X_2'\|_{L^2}\|M_1\|_{L^2_s L^2_{s'}}+\|L_1\|_{L^4_s L^2_{s'}}\|X_2'\|_{L^\infty}\|M_1-M_2\|_{L^4_s L^2_{s'}}\right.\\
&\;\left.+\|L_1-L_2\|_{L^4_s L^2_{s'}}\|X_2'\|_{L^\infty}\|M_2\|_{L^4_s L^2_{s'}}\right).
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
By Lemma \ref{lemma: estimates for L M N} and Sobolev inequality,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&\;\left\|\int_\mathbb{T}ds'\,\frac{L_1\cdot X_1'(s')}{|L_1|^2}M_1 - \frac{L_2\cdot X_2'(s')}{|L_2|^2}M_2\right\|_{L^2}\\
\leq &\;C\lambda^{-2}\left(\|X_1'\|_{L^\infty}\|X_1'-X_2'\|_{L^2}\|X_1''\|_{L^2}+\|X_1'\|_{L^2}\|X_2'\|_{L^\infty}\|X_1''-X_2''\|_{L^2}\right.\\
&\;\left.+\|X_1'-X_2'\|_{L^2}\|X_2'\|_{L^\infty}\|X_2''\|_{L^2}\right)\\
\leq &\; C\lambda^{-2} (\|X_1\|_{\dot{H}^2}+\|X_2\|_{\dot{H}^2})^2\|X_1-X_2\|_{\dot{H}^2}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Similarly,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&\;\left\|\int_\mathbb{T}ds'\,\frac{L_1\cdot X_1'(s')L_1\cdot M_1}{|L_1|^4}L_1 -\frac{L_2\cdot X_2'(s')L_2\cdot M_2}{|L_2|^4}L_2\right\|_{L^2}\\
\leq &\;\left\|\frac{L_1\cdot (X_1'(s')-X_2'(s'))L_1\cdot M_1}{|L_1|^4}L_1\right\|_{L^2_sL^1_{s'}}+\left\|\frac{L_1\cdot X_2'(s')L_1\cdot (M_1-M_2)}{|L_1|^4}L_1\right\|_{L^2_sL^1_{s'}}\\
&\;+\left\|\frac{(L_1-L_2)\cdot X_2'(s')L_1\cdot M_2}{|L_1|^4}L_1\right\|_{L^2_sL^1_{s'}}+\left\|\frac{L_2\cdot X_2'(s')L_1\cdot M_2}{|L_1|^2}L_1\frac{|L_2|^2-|L_1|^2}{|L_1|^2|L_2|^2}\right\|_{L^2_sL^1_{s'}}\\
&\;+\left\|\frac{L_2\cdot X_2'(s')(L_1-L_2)\cdot M_2}{|L_1|^2|L_2|^2}L_1\right\|_{L^2_sL^1_{s'}}+\left\|\frac{L_2\cdot X_2'(s')L_2\cdot M_2}{|L_1|^2|L_2|^2}(L_1-L_2)\right\|_{L^2_sL^1_{s'}}\\
&\;+\left\|\frac{L_2\cdot X_2'(s')L_2\cdot M_2}{|L_2|^2}L_2\frac{|L_2|^2-|L_1|^2}{|L_1|^2|L_2|^2}\right\|_{L^2_sL^1_{s'}}\\
\leq &\;C\lambda^{-2}\left(\|X_1'-X_2'\|_{L^2}\|L_1\|_{L^\infty_s L^\infty_{s'}}\| M_1\|_{L^2_sL^2_{s'}}+\|X_2'\|_{L^\infty}\|L_1\|_{L^4_s L^2_{s'}}\| M_1-M_2\|_{L^4_sL^2_{s'}}\right.\\
&\;+\left.\|X_2'\|_{L^\infty}\|M_2\|_{L^4_sL^2_{s'}} \|L_2-L_1\|_{L^4_sL^2_{s'}}\right)\\
\leq &\;C\lambda^{-2}\left(\|X_1'-X_2'\|_{L^2}\|X_1'\|_{L^\infty}\|X_1''\|_{L^2}+\|X_2'\|_{L^\infty}\|X_1'\|_{L^2}\| X_1''-X_2''\|_{L^2}\right.\\
&\;+\left.\|X_2'\|_{L^\infty}\|X_2''\|_{L^2} \|X_2'-X_1'\|_{L^2}\right)\\ \leq&\;C\lambda^{-2}(\|X_1\|_{\dot{H}^2}+\|X_2\|_{\dot{H}^2})^2\|X_1-X_2\|_{\dot{H}^2}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
We can estimate the other terms in \eqref{eqn: difference of X_t at two moments} in a similar fashion and obtain \eqref{eqn: L2 estimate for g_X1-g_X2}.
\end{proof}
\end{corollary}
In order to estimate $H^2$-norm of $g_X$, we find out its weak derivatives $g_X'$ and $g_X''$ in the following two lemmas.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: derivative of g_X}
Suppose $X\in H^3(\mathbb{T})$ and satisfies \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption} with some $\lambda>0$. Then
\begin{equation}
g'_X(s) = \mathrm{p.v.}\int_\mathbb{T}\left(-\partial_{ss'}[G(X(s)-X(s'))]-\frac{Id}{16\pi\sin^2\left(\frac{s'-s}{2}\right)}\right)(X'(s')-X'(s))\,ds'.\label{eqn: derivative of g_X}
\end{equation}
\begin{proof}
We define a cut-off function $\varphi(y)\in C^\infty (\mathbb{T})$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\varphi(y)= \varphi(-y)$, $\forall\,y\in\mathbb{T}$.
\item $\varphi(y)= 1$ for $|y|\leq 1$; $\varphi(y)= 0$ for $|y|\geq 2$; and $|\varphi'(y)|\leq C$.
\item $\varphi(y)$ is decreasing on $[0,\pi]$ and increasing on $[-\pi,0]$.
\end{enumerate}
Define $\psi_\varepsilon(y) = 1-\varphi\left(\frac{y}{\varepsilon}\right)$.
Let
\begin{equation*}
g_{X,1}(s) = \int_{\mathbb{T}} \Gamma_0(s,s')\,ds', \quad g_{X,1}^\varepsilon(s) = \int_{\mathbb{T}} \Gamma_0(s,s')\psi_\varepsilon(s'-s)\,ds'.
\end{equation*}
By \eqref{eqn: pointwise estimate of integrand of g_X part 1} and Lemma \ref{lemma: estimates for L M N},
\begin{equation}
|\Gamma_0(s,s')|\leq \frac{C}{\lambda} \|X''\|_{L^\infty}\|X'\|_{L^\infty},
\label{eqn: L infty estimate of integrand of g_X part 1}
\end{equation}
which implies that $g_{X,1},g_{X,1}^\varepsilon\in L^\infty(\mathbb{T})$, and $g_{X,1}^\varepsilon \rightarrow g_{X,1}$ in $L^\infty(\mathbb{T})$. In particular, for any test function $\eta\in C^\infty(\mathbb{T})$,
\begin{equation}
\lim_{\varepsilon\rightarrow 0}(\eta',g_{X,1}^\varepsilon) = (\eta',g_{X,1}),
\label{eqn: derivative of g_X1 test function convergence}
\end{equation}
where $(\cdot,\cdot)$ is the $L^2$-inner product on $\mathbb{T}$. Since there is no singularity in the integral in $g_{X,1}^\varepsilon$, we apply integration by parts on the left hand side above and exchange the derivative and the integral. We will obtain
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
(\eta',g_{X,1}^\varepsilon) = &\;-(\eta, \partial_s g_{X,1}^\varepsilon)\\
=&\;-\left(\eta, \int_{\mathbb{T}} \partial_s\Gamma_0(s,s')\psi_\varepsilon(s'-s)\,ds'\right)+\left(\eta, \int_{\mathbb{T}} \Gamma_0(s,s')\psi'_\varepsilon(s'-s)\,ds'\right)\\
\triangleq &\; I_\varepsilon+II_\varepsilon
\end{split}
\label{eqn: derivative of g_X1 integration by parts}
\end{equation}
It is not difficult to show that
\begin{equation}
\lim_{\varepsilon\rightarrow 0}I_\varepsilon = -\left(\eta, \mathrm{p.v.}\int_{\mathbb{T}} \partial_s\Gamma_0(s,s')\,ds'\right).
\label{eqn: derivative of g_X1 term 1}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, since $\psi_\varepsilon'(\cdot-s)$ is of mean zero on $\mathbb{T}$ and $\|\psi_\varepsilon'(\cdot-s)\|_{L^1(\mathbb{T})} = 2$ due to the monotonicity assumption on $\varphi$, we have that
\begin{equation}
|II_{\varepsilon}|\leq 2\|\eta\|_{L^1} \mathrm{osc}_{s'\in [s-2\varepsilon, s+2\varepsilon]} \Gamma_0(s,s')\rightarrow 0,\quad \mbox{as }\varepsilon\rightarrow 0,
\label{eqn: derivative of g_X1 term 2}
\end{equation}
where the convergence comes from \eqref{eqn: limit of integrand of g_X part 1 at s}. Combining \eqref{eqn: derivative of g_X1 test function convergence}, \eqref{eqn: derivative of g_X1 integration by parts}, \eqref{eqn: derivative of g_X1 term 1} and \eqref{eqn: derivative of g_X1 term 2}, we find
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
g'_{X,1}(s) = &\;\mathrm{p.v.}\int_{\mathbb{T}} \partial_s\Gamma_0(s,s')\,ds'\\
= &\;\mathrm{p.v.}\int_{\mathbb{T}} -\partial_{ss'}[G(X(s)-X(s'))](X'(s')-X'(s))\,ds'\\
&\;+ \mathrm{p.v.}\int_{\mathbb{T}} \partial_{s'}[G(X(s)-X(s'))]X''(s)\,ds'\\
= &\;\mathrm{p.v.}\int_{\mathbb{T}} -\partial_{ss'}[G(X(s)-X(s'))](X'(s')-X'(s))\,ds'.
\label{eqn: derivative of g_X part 1}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We used \eqref{eqn: pv integral vanishes} in the last line.
For the other term in $g_X(s)$, namely $\frac{1}{4}(-\Delta)^{1/2}X$, we note that $(-\Delta)^{1/2}$ and the derivative commute since they are both Fourier multipliers. This gives
\begin{equation}
\partial_s\left(\frac{1}{4}(-\Delta)^{1/2}X\right) = \frac{1}{4}(-\Delta)^{1/2}X' = -\frac{1}{4\pi}\mathrm{p.v.}\int_\mathbb{T} \frac{X'(s')-X'(s)}{4\sin^2\left(\frac{s'-s}{2}\right)}\,ds'.
\label{eqn: derivative of g_X part 2}
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{eqn: derivative of g_X part 1} and \eqref{eqn: derivative of g_X part 2}, we proved \eqref{eqn: derivative of g_X}.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: second derivative of g_X}
Suppose $X\in H^3(\mathbb{T})$ and satisfies \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption} with some $\lambda>0$. Then
\begin{equation}
g''_X(s) = \mathrm{p.v.}\int_\mathbb{T}\partial_s\left[\left(-\partial_{ss'}[G(X(s)-X(s'))]-\frac{Id}{16\pi\sin^2\left(\frac{s'-s}{2}\right)}\right)(X'(s')-X'(s))\right]\,ds'.\label{eqn: second derivative of g_X}
\end{equation}
\begin{proof}
Denote the integrand of \eqref{eqn: derivative of g_X} by $\Gamma_1(s,s')$, i.e.
\begin{equation}
g'_X(s) = \mathrm{p.v.}\int_\mathbb{T} \Gamma_1(s,s')\,ds'.
\label{eqn: introduce the notation Gamma_1}
\end{equation}
What we are going to show in \eqref{eqn: second derivative of g_X} is exactly
\begin{equation*}
g''_X(s) = \mathrm{p.v.}\int_\mathbb{T} \partial_s\Gamma_1(s,s')\,ds'.
\end{equation*}
We claim that for $s\not = s'$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
4\pi\Gamma_1(s,s') = &\;\frac{(X'(s)-L)\cdot N}{|L|^2}M - \frac{2(N\cdot L)(X'(s)\cdot L)}{|L|^4}M - \left(\frac{\tau^2 - 4\sin^2(\frac{\tau}{2})}{4\tau\sin^2(\frac{\tau}{2})}\right)M\\
&\;+\frac{(M-2N)\cdot M}{|L|^2}X'(s)+\frac{2(N\cdot L)( L\cdot M)}{|L|^4}X'(s)\\
&\; +\frac{2 (L\cdot M) (L\cdot (M-N)) (L\cdot X'(s))}{|L|^6}L+\frac{2 ((N-M)\cdot M)(L\cdot X'(s))}{|L|^4}L\\
&\;-\frac{6 (L\cdot M) (L\cdot X'(s')) (L\cdot N)}{|L|^6}L+\frac{2 (L\cdot M) (L\cdot X'(s'))}{|L|^4} N\\
&\;+\frac{2 (N\cdot M) (L\cdot X'(s'))}{|L|^4}L+\frac{2 (L\cdot M) (N\cdot X'(s'))}{|L|^4}L.
\end{split}
\label{eqn: simplified Gamma order 1}
\end{equation}
For conciseness, we leave its proof in Lemma \ref{lemma: simplification of Gamma_1(s,s')} in Appendix \ref{appendix section: auxiliary calculations}. With \eqref{eqn: simplified Gamma order 1} in hand, we use \eqref{eqn: lower bound for L} and \eqref{eqn: upper bound for lambda} to derive that,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
|\Gamma_1(s,s')| \leq &\;C \left(\frac{|X'(s)|+|X'(s')|}{\lambda^2}+\frac{1}{\lambda}\right)|M|(|M|+|N|)+C|\tau| |M|\\
\leq &\;C \frac{|X'(s)|+|X'(s')|}{\lambda^2}|M|(|M|+|N|)+C|\tau| |M|\\
\leq&\; \frac{C}{\lambda^2} \|X'\|_{L^\infty}\|X''\|^2_{L^\infty}.
\label{eqn: rough pointwise estimate of Gamma}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By the continuity of $L$, $M$ and $N$, i.e.\;\eqref{eqn: continuity of L M N}, we also know by \eqref{eqn: simplified Gamma order 1} that
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{s'\rightarrow s}\Gamma_1(s,s') = 0.
\end{equation*}
To this end, we can prove \eqref{eqn: second derivative of g_X} by arguing as in the proof of Lemma \ref{lemma: derivative of g_X}. We omit the details.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
Similar to Corollary \ref{coro: L2 estimate for g_X1-g_X2}, one can prove that
\begin{corollary}\label{coro: H1 estimate for g_X1-g_X2}
Let $X_1(s),X_2(s)\in H^2(\mathbb{T})$ both satisfy \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption} with some $\lambda>0$. Then
\begin{equation}
\|g_{X_1}(s)-g_{X_2}(s)\|_{\dot{H}^1}\leq C\lambda^{-3} (\|X_1\|_{\dot{H}^2}+\|X_2\|_{\dot{H}^2})^3\|X_1-X_2\|_{\dot{H}^2},
\label{eqn: H1 estimate for g_X1-g_X2}
\end{equation}
where $C>0$ is a universal constant.
\begin{proof}
With \eqref{eqn: introduce the notation Gamma_1} and \eqref{eqn: simplified Gamma order 1} in hand, we simply argue as in the proof of Corollary \ref{coro: L2 estimate for g_X1-g_X2} to obtain the desired estimate.
We omit the details.
\end{proof}
\end{corollary}
The following lemma is devoted to $H^2$-estimate of $g_X$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: H2 estimate of g_X}
Suppose $X\in H^3(\mathbb{T})$ and satisfies \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption} with some $\lambda>0$. Then for $\forall\,\delta\in(0,\pi)$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\|g_X''\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})} \leq
&\;C\left(\delta^{1/2}\lambda^{-2}\|X\|_{\dot{H}^{3}}\|X\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2+(|\ln \delta|+1)\lambda^{-3}\|X\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^4\right),
\end{split}
\label{eqn: H2 estimate of g_X}
\end{equation}
where $C>0$ is a universal constant.
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{lemma: second derivative of g_X}, we look into $\partial_s \Gamma_1(s,s')$.
We take $s$-derivative of \eqref{eqn: simplified Gamma order 1} and use $\partial_s L = N$ in \eqref{eqn: derivatives of L M N wrt s} to find that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
|\partial_s \Gamma_1(s,s')| \leq &\;C\frac{|X'(s)|+|X'(s')|}{\lambda^3}|M||N|(|M|+|N|)+C \frac{|X'(s)|+|X'(s')|}{\lambda^2}|\partial_s M|(|M|+|N|)\\
&\;+C \frac{|X'(s)|+|X'(s')|}{\lambda^2}|M|(|\partial_s M|+|\partial_s N|)+C \frac{|X''(s)|}{\lambda^2}|M|(|M|+|N|)\\
&\;+C|M|+C|M-X''(s)|.
\end{split}
\label{eqn: pointwise estimate for s-derivative of Gamma}
\end{equation}
The following estimate is also useful by substituting \eqref{eqn: derivatives of L M N wrt s} into the above formula
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
|\partial_s \Gamma_1(s,s')|\leq &\;C\frac{|X'(s)|+|X'(s')|}{\lambda^3}|M||N|(|M|+|N|)\\
&\;+C \frac{|X'(s)|+|X'(s')|}{\lambda^2}\frac{|M|+|X''(s)|}{|\tau|}(|M|+|N|)\\
&\;+C \frac{|X'(s)|+|X'(s')|}{\lambda^2}|M|\frac{|M|+|N|+|X''(s)|}{|\tau|}\\
&\;+C \frac{|X''(s)|}{\lambda^2}|M|(|M|+|N|)+C|M|+C|M-X''(s)|\\
\leq &\;C \lambda^{-3} (|X'(s)|+|X'(s')|)|M||N|(|M|+|N|)\\
&\;+C \lambda^{-2}|X''(s)||M|(|M|+|N|)+C|M|+C|X''(s)|\\
&\;+C \lambda^{-2}|\tau|^{-1}(|X'(s)|+|X'(s')|)(|M|+|X''(s)|)(|M|+|N|).
\end{split}
\label{eqn: pointwise estimate for s-derivative of Gamma far field}
\end{equation}
In order to prove \eqref{eqn: H2 estimate of g_X}, we split $g_X''$, an integral of $\partial_s\Gamma_1$ with respect to $s'$, into two terms --- the integral in a neighborhood of the singularity at $s'=s$, and the rest. To be more precise, for $\forall\,\delta\in(0,\pi)$, we have
\begin{equation}
\|g_X''\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})} \leq \left\|\int_{B_\delta(s)}|\partial_s \Gamma_1(s,s')|\,ds'\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}+\left\|\int_{B^c_\delta(s)}|\partial_s \Gamma_1(s,s')|\,ds'\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})} \triangleq I_\delta + II_\delta.
\label{eqn: splitting of g_X''}
\end{equation}
For $I_\delta$, we use \eqref{eqn: pointwise estimate for s-derivative of Gamma}. Applying Lemma \ref{lemma: estimates for L M N} with $I = B_\delta(0)$, we obtain that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
I_\delta \leq &\;C\lambda^{-3}\left\|\int_{B_{\delta}(s)}(|X'(s)|+|X'(s')|)|M||N|(|M|+|N|)\,ds'\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;+C\lambda^{-2} \left\|\int_{B_{\delta}(s)}(|X'(s)|+|X'(s')|)|\partial_s M|(|M|+|N|)\,ds'\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;+C \lambda^{-2}\left\|\int_{B_{\delta}(s)}(|X'(s)|+|X'(s')|)|M|(|\partial_s M|+|\partial_s N|)\,ds'\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;+C \lambda^{-2}\left\|\int_{B_{\delta}(s)}|X''(s)||M|(|M|+|N|)\,ds'\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}+C\left\|\int_{B_{\delta}(s)}|M|+|X''(s)|\,ds'\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\\
\leq &\;C\lambda^{-3}\||X'(s)|+|X'(s')|\|_{L^\infty_s(\mathbb{T})L^\infty_{s'}(B_\delta(s))}\|M\|_{L^6_s(\mathbb{T})L^3_{s'}(B_\delta(s))}\|N\|_{L^6_s(\mathbb{T})L^3_{s'}(B_\delta(s))}\\
&\;\quad\cdot\||M|+|N|\|_{L^6_s(\mathbb{T})L^3_{s'}(B_\delta(s))}\\
&\;+C\lambda^{-2} \||X'(s)|+|X'(s')|\|_{L^\infty_s(\mathbb{T})L^\infty_{s'}(B_\delta(s))}\|\partial_s M\|_{L^2_s(\mathbb{T})L^2_{s'}(B_\delta(s))}\||M|+|N|\|_{L^\infty_s(\mathbb{T})L^2_{s'}(B_\delta(s))}\\
&\;+C \lambda^{-2}\||X'(s)|+|X'(s')|\|_{L^\infty_s(\mathbb{T})L^\infty_{s'}(B_\delta(s))}\|M\|_{L^\infty_s(\mathbb{T})L^2_{s'}(B_\delta(s))}\||\partial_s M|+|\partial_s N|\|_{L^2_s(\mathbb{T})L^2_{s'}(B_\delta(s))}\\
&\;+C \lambda^{-2}\|X''(s)\|_{L^3_s(\mathbb{T})L^3_{s'}(B_\delta(s))}\|M\|_{L^{12}_s(\mathbb{T})L^3_{s'}(B_\delta(s))}\||M|+|N|\|_{L^{12}_s(\mathbb{T})L^3_{s'}(B_\delta(s))}\\
&\;+C\||M|+|X''(s)|\|_{L^2_s(\mathbb{T})L^2_{s'}(B_\delta(s))}\\
\leq &\;C\lambda^{-3}\|X'\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\left(\delta^{1/6}\|X''\|_{L^3(\mathbb{T})}\right)^3+C\lambda^{-2} \|X'\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\delta^{1/2}\|X'''\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\|X''\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;+C \lambda^{-2}\|X'\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\|X''\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\delta^{1/2}\|X'''\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;+C \lambda^{-2}\delta^{1/3}\|X''\|_{L^3(\mathbb{T})}\delta^{1/12}\|X''\|_{L^3(\mathbb{T})}\delta^{1/12}\|X''\|_{L^3(\mathbb{T})}+C\delta^{1/2}\|X''\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\\
\leq &\; C\delta^{1/2}(\lambda^{-3}\|X'\|_{L^\infty}\|X''\|_{L^3}^3+ \lambda^{-2}\|X'\|_{L^\infty}\|X'''\|_{L^2}\|X''\|_{L^2}+ \lambda^{-2}\|X''\|_{L^3}^3+ \|X''\|_{L^2})\\
\leq &\; C\delta^{1/2}(\lambda^{-3}\|X\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^4+ \lambda^{-2}\|X\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2\|X\|_{\dot{H}^3}).
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
We used \eqref{eqn: lower bound for L} and Sobolev inequality in the last line. For $II_\delta$, we used \eqref{eqn: pointwise estimate for s-derivative of Gamma far field}.
Applying Lemma \ref{lemma: estimates for L M N} with $I = \mathbb{T}$, we obtain that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
II_\delta\leq &\;C\lambda^{-3}\left\|\int_{B^c_{\delta}(s)} (|X'(s)|+|X'(s')|)|M||N|(|M|+|N|)\,ds'\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;+C \lambda^{-2}\left\|\int_{B^c_{\delta}(s)}|X''(s)||M|(|M|+|N|)\,ds'\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}+C\left\|\int_{B^c_{\delta}(s)} |M|+|X''(s)|\,ds'\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;+C \lambda^{-2} \left\|\int_{B^c_{\delta}(s)} |\tau|^{-1}(|X'(s)|+|X'(s')|)(|M|+|X''(s)|)(|M|+|N|)\,ds'\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\\
\leq &\;C\lambda^{-3}\||X'(s)|+|X'(s')|\|_{L^\infty_s(\mathbb{T})L^\infty_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\|M\|_{L^6_s(\mathbb{T})L^3_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\|N\|_{L^6_s(\mathbb{T})L^3_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\||M|+|N|\|_{L^6_s(\mathbb{T})L^3_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;+C \lambda^{-2}\|X''(s)\|_{L^3_s(\mathbb{T})L^3_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\|M\|_{L^{12}_s(\mathbb{T})L^3_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\||M|+|N|\|_{L^{12}_s(\mathbb{T})L^3_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;+C\|M\|_{L^2_s(\mathbb{T})L^2_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}+C\|X''(s)\|_{L^2_s(\mathbb{T})L^2_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;+C \lambda^{-2} \|(s'-s)^{-1}\|_{L^\infty_s(\mathbb{T}) L^1_{s'}(B^c_\delta(s))}\||X'(s)|+|X'(s')|\|_{L^\infty_s(\mathbb{T})L^\infty_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;\quad\cdot\||M|+|X''(s)|\|_{L^4_s(\mathbb{T})L^\infty_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}
\||M|+|N|\|_{L^4_s(\mathbb{T})L^\infty_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\\
\leq &\;C\lambda^{-3}\|X'\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\|X''\|_{L^3(\mathbb{T})}^3+C \lambda^{-2}\|X''\|_{L^3(\mathbb{T})}\|X''\|_{L^3(\mathbb{T})}^2+C\|X''\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;+C \lambda^{-2} (|\ln \delta|+1)\|X'\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\|\mathcal{M}X''\|_{L^4(\mathbb{T})}^2\\
\leq &\; C(\lambda^{-3}\|X'\|_{L^\infty}\|X''\|_{L^3}^3+ \lambda^{-2}\|X''\|_{L^3}^3+ \|X''\|_{L^2}+(|\ln \delta|+1)\lambda^{-2}\|X'\|_{L^\infty}\|X''\|_{L^4}^2)\\
\leq &\; C(|\ln \delta|+1)\lambda^{-3}\|X\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^4.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Here we used Lemma \ref{lemma: estimates for L M N} and Sobolev inequality.
Combining the above two estimates of $I_\delta$ and $II_\delta$, we proved \eqref{eqn: H2 estimate of g_X}.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
\begin{remark}
It is clear from the proof that, the goal of splitting $g_X''$ into two parts in \eqref{eqn: splitting of g_X''} is to introduce a small parameter $\delta$ in front of $\|X\|_{\dot{H}^3}$ in \eqref{eqn: H2 estimate of g_X}.
This will be useful in the proof of local well-posedness.
See Section \ref{section: local existence and uniqueness}.
\qed
\end{remark}
We can also show that
\begin{corollary}\label{coro: H2 estimate for g_X0-g_X1}
Let $X_1(s),X_2(s)\in H^3(\mathbb{T})$ both satisfy \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption} with some $\lambda>0$. Then for $\forall\, \delta\in(0,\pi)$, and $\forall\,\mu >0$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\;\left\|g''_{X_1}(s)-g''_{X_2}(s)\right\|_{L^2}\\
\leq &\; C_\mu\left[\delta^{1/2}\lambda^{-2}(\|X_1\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}+\|X_2\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}})^2\|X_1-X_2\|_{\dot{H}^3}\right.\\
&\;+\delta^{1/2}\lambda^{-3}(\|X_1\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}+\|X_2\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}})^2(\|X_1\|_{\dot{H}^3}+\|X_2\|_{\dot{H}^3})\|X_1-X_2\|_{\dot{H}^2}\\
&\;\left.+(|\ln \delta|+1)\lambda^{-4}(\|X_1\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}+\|X_2\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}})^4\|X_1-X_2\|_{\dot{W}^{2,2+\mu}}\right],
\end{split}
\label{eqn: H2 estimate for g_X0-g_X1}
\end{equation}
where $C_\mu>0$ is a universal constant depending on $\mu$.
\begin{proof}
We take $s$-derivative in \eqref{eqn: simplified Gamma order 1} first, and argue as in the proofs of Corollary \ref{coro: L2 estimate for g_X1-g_X2} and Lemma \ref{lemma: H2 estimate of g_X}. The calculation is unnecessarily long but tedious.
We omit the details here.
\end{proof}
\end{corollary}
\section{Existence and Uniqueness of the Local-in-time Solution}\label{section: local existence and uniqueness}
To this end, we are able to prove the local well-posedness of \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem}.
\subsection{Existence}\label{section: local existence}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm: local in time existence} (existence of the local-in-time solution)]
For $\forall\,Y\in L^1(\mathbb{T})$, we split it into its mean $\bar{Y}$ and its oscillation $\tilde{Y}$, i.e.
\begin{equation*}
\bar{Y} \triangleq \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_\mathbb{T} Y(s)\,ds,\quad \tilde{Y}(s)\triangleq Y(s)-\bar{Y}.
\end{equation*}
Then \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} could be split into two equations as well, one for $\tilde{X}$ and the other for $\bar{X}$. Namely,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\;\partial_t \tilde{X}(s,t)= \mathcal{L}\tilde{X}(s,t) + \widetilde{g_{\tilde{X}}}(s,t),\quad s\in \mathbb{T}, t> 0,\\
&\;\tilde{X}(s,0) = \widetilde{X_0}(s),
\end{split}
\label{eqn: equation for oscillation of X in the main thm}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\frac{d}{dt}\bar{X}(t) = \overline{g_{\tilde{X}}} = \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_\mathbb{T}g_{\tilde{X}}(s,t)\,ds,\quad \bar{X}(0) = \overline{X_0}.
\label{eqn: equation for mean of X in the main thm}
\end{equation}
We first consider the existence of solutions of the $\tilde{X}$-equation \eqref{eqn: equation for oscillation of X in the main thm}.
Given $X_0$, with $T>0$ to be determined, we define
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\Omega_{0,T}(X_0) = &\;\left\{Y(s,t)\in\Omega_{T}:\;\int_\mathbb{T}Y(s,t)\,ds \equiv 0,\;\|Y_t(s,t)\|_{L^2_T \dot{H}^2(\mathbb{T})}\leq \|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})},\right.\\
&\;\qquad\left.\left\|Y(s,t)-\mathrm{e}^{t\mathcal{L}}\widetilde{X_0}\right\|_{L^{\infty}_T \dot{H}^{5/2}\cap L^2_T \dot{H}^{3}(\mathbb{T})} \leq \|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})},\;Y(s,0)=\widetilde{X_0}(s)\right\}.
\end{split}
\label{eqn: definition of the neighbourhood of X0 used in the proof of local existence}
\end{equation}
The subscript $0$ stresses that functions in $\Omega_{0,T}(X_0)$ has mean zero on $\mathbb{T}$.
We remark that only the seminorms are used, since the mean of $X_0$ is irrelevant in the equation for $\tilde{X}$, which is always this case in the sequel.
$\Omega_{0,T}(X_0)$ is non-empty.
Indeed, by Lemma \ref{lemma: improved Hs estimate and Hs continuity of semigroup solution} and Lemma \ref{lemma: a priori estimate of nonlocal eqn}, $\mathrm{e}^{t\mathcal{L}}\widetilde{X_0}\in \Omega_{0,T}(X_0)$.
It is also convex and closed in $\Omega_T$.
By Aubin-Lions lemma, $\Omega_{0,T}(X_0)$ is compact in $C_T H^2(\mathbb{T})$.
By Lemma \ref{lemma: a priori estimate of nonlocal eqn}, for $\forall\, Y\in \Omega_{0,T}(X_0)$, $\|Y\|_{L^{\infty}_T \dot{H}^{5/2}\cap L^2_T \dot{H}^3(\mathbb{T})} \leq 4 \|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}$.
Moreover, by taking $T$ sufficiently small, we will have
\begin{equation}
\left|Y(s_1,t) - Y(s_2,t)\right| \geq \frac{\lambda}{2}|s_1 - s_2|,\quad \forall\,s_1, s_2\in\mathbb{T},\;t\in[0,T].
\label{eqn: uniform bi lipschitz constant in the neighborhood}
\end{equation}
In fact, if we assume $C_1 \|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}T^{1/2}\leq \lambda/2$, with $C_1$ being a universal constant coming from Sobolev inequality that will be clear below,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
||Y(s_1,t) - Y(s_2,t)| - |X_0(s_1) - X_0(s_2)||\leq &\;|(Y-X_0)(s_1,t) - (Y-X_0)(s_2,t)|\\
\leq &\;C_1 \|Y-X_0\|_{C_T \dot{H}^2(\mathbb{T})} |s_1 - s_2|\\
\leq &\;C_1 \|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}T^{1/2} |s_1 - s_2|\leq \frac{\lambda}{2}|s_1-s_2|.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Here we used the assumptions that $\|Y_t(s,t)\|_{L^2_T \dot{H}^2(\mathbb{T})}\leq \|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}$ and $Y(s,0)=\widetilde{X_0}(s)$.
Then \eqref{eqn: uniform bi lipschitz constant in the neighborhood} follows from \eqref{eqn: bi Lipschitz assumption in main thm} and the triangle inequality.
Under the above assumption, we define a map $V: \Omega_{0,T}(X_0) \rightarrow \Omega_{0,T}(X_0)$ as follows, with $T$ to be determined. For given $Y(s,t) \in \Omega_{0,T}(X_0)$, let $Z \triangleq VY$ solve
\begin{equation}
\partial_t Z(s,t)= \mathcal{L}Z(s,t) + \widetilde{g_Y}(s,t),\quad s\in \mathbb{T}, t\in[0,T],\quad Z(s,0) = \widetilde{X_0}(s).
\label{eqn: equation to define the map V}
\end{equation}
To show $V$ is well-defined, we first claim that $Z\in \Omega_T$.
In fact, for $Y\in\Omega_{0,T}(X_0)$, by Lemma \ref{lemma: H2 estimate of g_X},
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\|\widetilde{g_Y}\|_{L^2_T\dot{H}^2(\mathbb{T})} \leq&\;C\left(\delta^{1/2}\lambda^{-2}\|Y\|_{L^2_T\dot{H}^{3}(\mathbb{T})}\|Y\|_{L^\infty_T\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}^2+T^{1/2}(|\ln \delta|+1)\lambda^{-3}\|Y\|_{L^\infty_T\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}^4\right)\\
\leq &\;C_2\lambda^{-3}\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}^4(\delta^{1/2}+T^{1/2}(|\ln \delta|+1)).
\end{split}
\label{eqn: estimate for the source term in local existence}
\end{equation}
In the last line, we used \eqref{eqn: lower bound for L} and Sobolev inequality to have that $\lambda\leq C\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}$.
Then for $\forall\, T>0$, Lemma \ref{lemma: a priori estimate of nonlocal eqn} gives the existence and uniqueness of the solution $Z\in \Omega_T$, which satisfies
\begin{equation}
\|\partial_t Z\|_{L^2_{T} \dot{H}^2(\mathbb{T})} \leq \frac{1}{2}\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}+\|\widetilde{g_Y}\|_{L^2_{T}\dot{H}^2(\mathbb{T})}.
\label{eqn: bound of Z_t}
\end{equation}
$Z$ obviously has mean zero for all time.
Now consider $W =Z-\mathrm{e}^{t\mathcal{L}}\widetilde{X_0}$, which solves
\begin{equation*}
\partial_t W(s,t)= \mathcal{L}W(s,t) + \widetilde{g_Y}(s,t),\quad W(s,0) = 0.
\end{equation*}
By Lemma \ref{lemma: a priori estimate of nonlocal eqn} and \eqref{eqn: estimate for the source term in local existence}, we find that
\begin{equation}
\|W\|_{L^\infty_{T}\dot{H}^{5/2}\cap L^2_{T} \dot{H}^{3}(\mathbb{T})} \leq 6\|\widetilde{g_Y}\|_{L^2_T\dot{H}^{2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq 6C_2\lambda^{-3}\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}^4(\delta^{1/2}+T^{1/2}(|\ln \delta|+1)).
\label{eqn: bound on W}
\end{equation}
To this end, we first take $\delta \leq \delta_0(\lambda,\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}})$ sufficiently small, s.t.
\begin{equation*}
C_2\lambda^{-3}\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}^4\delta^{1/2} \leq \frac{1}{12}\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})},
\end{equation*}
and then assume $T \leq T_0(\lambda,\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}},\delta)$ sufficiently small as well, s.t.
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\;C_1 \|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}T^{1/2}\leq \frac{1}{2}\lambda,\\
&\;C_2\lambda^{-3}\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}^4 T^{1/2}(|\ln \delta|+1) \leq \frac{1}{12}\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}.
\end{split}
\label{eqn: constraints on existence time T}
\end{equation}
This implies $\|Z-\mathrm{e}^{t\mathcal{L}}\widetilde{X_0}\|_{L^\infty_{T}\dot{H}^{5/2}\cap L^2_{T} \dot{H}^{3}(\mathbb{T})} \leq \|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}$ by \eqref{eqn: bound on W}.
Also by \eqref{eqn: estimate for the source term in local existence} and \eqref{eqn: bound of Z_t}
\begin{equation*}
\|\partial_t Z\|_{L^2_{T} \dot{H}^2(\mathbb{T})} \leq \frac{1}{2}\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}+\frac{1}{6}\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})} \leq \|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}.
\end{equation*}
Hence, $V$ is well-defined from $\Omega_{0,T}(X_0)$ to itself.
We note that the upper bound of valid $T$, which is $T_0$, essentially only depends on $\lambda$ and $\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}$.
By Aubin-Lions lemma, $V(\Omega_{0,T}(X_0))$ is compact in $C_{T} H^2(\mathbb{T})$. By Schauder fixed point theorem, there is a fixed point of the map $V$ in $V(\Omega_{0,T}(X_0))\subset \Omega_{0,T}(X_0)$, denoted by $\tilde{X}\in \Omega_{T}$, which is a solution of \eqref{eqn: equation for oscillation of X in the main thm}.
It satisfies
\begin{equation}
\|\tilde{X}\|_{L^\infty_{T} \dot{H}^{5/2}\cap L^2_{T} \dot{H}^{3}(\mathbb{T})}\leq 4\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})},\quad \|\partial_t \tilde{X}\|_{L^2_{T} \dot{H}^2(\mathbb{T})} \leq \|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})},
\label{eqn: a priori estimate for the local solution}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\left|\tilde{X}(s_1,t) - \tilde{X}(s_2,t)\right| \geq \frac{\lambda}{2}|s_1 - s_2|,\quad \forall\,s_1,s_2\in\mathbb{T},\;t\in[0,T].
\label{eqn: uniform bi lipschitz constant of the local solution}
\end{equation}
To this end, we turn to the ODE \eqref{eqn: equation for mean of X in the main thm} for $\bar{X}$.
By Lemma \ref{lemma: L infty estimate for g_X}, for $\forall\, s\in\mathbb{T}$ and $t\in[0,T]$,
\begin{equation*}
|\overline{g_{\tilde{X}}}|\leq \|g_{\tilde{X}}(s,t)\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\leq \frac{C}{\lambda}\|\tilde{X}\|_{\dot{H}^1}\|\tilde{X}\|_{\dot{H}^2}\leq C\lambda^{-1}\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}^2.
\end{equation*}
It is then easy to show that \eqref{eqn: equation for mean of X in the main thm} admits a unique solution $\bar{X}(t)\in C^{0,1}([0,T])$ once $\tilde{X}$ is given.
The solution for \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} is thus given by $X(s,t) = \bar{X}(t)+\tilde{X}(s,t)$. This proves the existence of the local-in-time solutions in $\Omega_{T}$. \eqref{eqn: a priori estimate for the local solution in the main theorem} and \eqref{eqn: uniform bi lipschitz constant of the local solution in the main theorem} follow from \eqref{eqn: a priori estimate for the local solution} and \eqref{eqn: uniform bi lipschitz constant of the local solution} respectively.
That $X\in L^2_{T}H^3(\mathbb{T})$ together with $X_t\in L^2_{T}H^2(\mathbb{T})$ implies that $X$ is almost everywhere equal to a continuous function valued in $H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$, i.e.\;$X$ could be realized as an element in $C([0,T];H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T}))$. This can be proved by classic arguments (see Temam \cite{temam1984navier}, \S\,1.4 of Chapter III).
\end{proof}
\subsection{Uniqueness}\label{section: local uniqueness}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm: local in time uniqueness} (uniqueness of the local-in-time solution)]
Suppose $X_1,X_2\in \Omega_T$ are two solutions of \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem}, both satisfying the assumption \eqref{eqn: bi lipschitz assumption in uniqueness thm}.
Let
\begin{equation}
R = \|X_1\|_{L_{T}^\infty\dot{H}^{5/2}\cap L_{T}^2 \dot{H}^3(\mathbb{T})} + \|X_2\|_{L_{T}^\infty\dot{H}^{5/2}\cap L_{T}^2 \dot{H}^3(\mathbb{T})}\geq C(c)\lambda
\label{eqn: uniform bound in uniqueness thm}
\end{equation}
and $Q(s,t) \triangleq X_1-X_2$. Then $\tilde{Q} = \widetilde{X_1}-\widetilde{X_2}$ solves
\begin{equation*}
\partial_t \tilde{Q}(s,t)= \mathcal{L}\tilde{Q}(s,t) + \widetilde{g_{\widetilde{X_1}}}(s,t)-\widetilde{g_{\widetilde{X_2}}}(s,t),\quad \tilde{Q}(s,0) = 0,\quad (s,t)\in\mathbb{T}\times [0,T].
\end{equation*}
By Corollary \ref{coro: H2 estimate for g_X0-g_X1} with $\mu = 2$ and Sobolev inequality, with $t\in(0,T]$ to be determined
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\;\left\|g''_{X_1}(s)-g''_{X_2}(s)\right\|_{L_{t}^2L^2}\\
\leq &\;C\left
\delta^{1/2}\lambda^{-2}(\|X_1\|_{L^\infty_t\dot{H}^{5/2}}+\|X_2\|_{L^\infty_t\dot{H}^{5/2}})^2\|X_1-X_2\|_{L^2_t\dot{H}^3}\right.\\
&\;+\delta^{1/2}\lambda^{-3}(\|X_1\|_{L^\infty_t\dot{H}^{5/2}}+\|X_2\|_{L^\infty_t\dot{H}^{5/2}})^2(\|X_1\|_{L^2_t\dot{H}^3}+\|X_2\|_{L^2_t\dot{H}^3})\|X_1-X_2\|_{L^\infty_t\dot{H}^2}\\
&\;\left.+(|\ln \delta|+1)\lambda^{-4}t^{1/2}(\|X_1\|_{L^\infty_t\dot{H}^{5/2}}+\|X_2\|_{L^\infty_t\dot{H}^{5/2}})^4\|X_1-X_2\|_{L^\infty_t\dot{W}^{2,4}}\right],\\
\leq &\; C(c)\left[\delta^{1/2}\lambda^{-2}R^2\|Q\|_{L^2_t\dot{H}^3}+\delta^{1/2}\lambda^{-3}R^3\|Q\|_{L^\infty_t\dot{H}^2}+(|\ln \delta|+1)\lambda^{-4}R^4t^{1/2}\|Q\|_{L^\infty_t\dot{H}^{5/2}}\right]\\
\leq &\; C(c)[\delta^{1/2}+(|\ln \delta|+1)t^{1/2}]\lambda^{-4}R^4\|\tilde{Q}\|_{L^{\infty}_{t}\dot{H}^{5/2}\cap L^2_{t}\dot{H}^3(\mathbb{T})}.
\end{split}
\label{eqn: space time estimate for the difference of solutions in proving uniqueness}
\end{equation}
Here we repeatedly used \eqref{eqn: uniform bound in uniqueness thm}. By Lemma \ref{lemma: a priori estimate of nonlocal eqn},
\begin{equation*}
\|\tilde{Q}\|_{L^{\infty}_{t}\dot{H}^{5/2}\cap L^2_{t}\dot{H}^3(\mathbb{T})}\leq C(c)[\delta^{1/2}+(|\ln \delta|+1)t^{1/2}]\lambda^{-4}R^4\|\tilde{Q}\|_{L^{\infty}_{t}\dot{H}^{5/2}\cap L^2_{t}\dot{H}^3(\mathbb{T})}.
\end{equation*}
Hence, we first take $\delta = \delta_*(\lambda, R, c)$ sufficiently small and then take $t=t_*(\lambda, R, c)$ sufficiently small,
such that $C(c)[\delta^{1/2}+(|\ln \delta|+1)t^{1/2}]\lambda^{-4}R^4\in(0,1)$.
This implies that
\begin{equation*}
\|\tilde{Q}\|_{L^{\infty}_{t_*}\dot{H}^{5/2}\cap L^2_{t_*}\dot{H}^3(\mathbb{T})}=0,
\end{equation*}
i.e.\;$\tilde{Q}(s,t) = 0$ for $t\in[0,t_*]$. Since \eqref{eqn: bi lipschitz assumption in uniqueness thm} and \eqref{eqn: uniform bound in uniqueness thm} are uniform throughout $[0,T]$, the above argument is also true for arbitrary initial time, i.e.\;provided that $\tilde{Q}(s,t_0) = 0$ for some $t_0\in [0,T]$, then $\tilde{Q}(s,t) = 0$ for $t\in[t_0,\min\{t_0+t_*,T\}]$. Hence, $\tilde{Q}(s,t) \equiv 0$ for $t\in[0,T]$, i.e.\;$\widetilde{X_1}(s,t) \equiv \widetilde{X_2}(s,t)$.
Recall that in \eqref{eqn: equation for mean of X in the main thm}, the solution $\bar{X}(t)$ is uniquely determined in $C^{0,1}([0,T])$ by $\tilde{X}(s,t)$. This implies that $\overline{X_1}(t)\equiv \overline{X_2}(t)$, and thus $X_1(s,t) \equiv X_2(s,t)$ for $(s,t)\in\mathbb{T}\times [0,T]$.
This proves the uniqueness under the assumption \eqref{eqn: bi lipschitz assumption in uniqueness thm}.
The uniqueness of the local-in-time solution obtained in Theorem \ref{thm: local in time existence} follows immediately.
\end{proof}
\section{Existence and Uniqueness of Global-in-time Solutions near Equilibrium Configurations}\label{section: global existence}
In this section, we will prove that existence of global solution provided that the initial string configuration is sufficiently close to equilibrium.
The closeness is measured using the difference between a string configuration $Y$ and its closet equilibrium configuration $Y_*$ (see Definition \ref{def: closest equilbrium state}).
We start with several remarks on the definition of the closest equilibrium configuration.
\begin{remark}\label{remark: mass center of the equilibrium agrees with initial data}
In the definition of $Y_*$, we have $x_* = \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}} Y(s)\,ds$.
This can be seen from the Fourier point of view.
Assume $Y(s) = \sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}} \hat{Y}_k \mathrm{e}^{iks}$, where $\hat{Y}_k$'s are complex-valued 2-vectors. By Parseval's identity,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}|Y(s)-Y_{\theta,x}(s)|^2\,ds = &\;|\hat{Y}_0-x|^2 +\sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z},|k|\geq 2} |\hat{Y}_k|^2\\
&\;+ \left|\hat{Y}_{1}-
R_Y \mathrm{e}^{i\theta}\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\frac{1}{2}\\\frac{1}{2i}
\end{array}
\right)
\right|^2
+\left|\hat{Y}_{-1}-
R_Y \mathrm{e}^{-i\theta}\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\frac{1}{2}\\-\frac{1}{2i}
\end{array}
\right)
\right|^2.
\end{split}
\label{eqn: L2 difference of Y and its closest equilibrium using Parseval}
\end{equation}
In order to achieve its minimum, we should take $x_* = \hat{Y}_0 = \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}} Y(s)\,ds$. In the sequel, we shall denote $Y_\theta(s) \triangleq Y_{\theta,x_*}(s)$ and only minimize $\|Y-Y_\theta\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}$ with respect to $\theta$.
\qed
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{remark: L2 closest is also Hs closest}
Although $Y_*$ is defined to be the closest to $Y$ in the $L^2$-distance among all $Y_\theta $, it is also the closest in the $H^s$-sense for all $s\geq 0$. Indeed, by Parseval's identity,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{2\pi}\|Y-Y_{\theta}\|^2_{\dot{H}^s(\mathbb{T})} = &\;\sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z},|k|\geq 2} |k|^{2s}|\hat{Y}_k|^2+ \left|\hat{Y}_{1}-
R_Y \mathrm{e}^{i\theta}\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\frac{1}{2}\\\frac{1}{2i}
\end{array}
\right)
\right|^2
+\left|\hat{Y}_{-1}-
R_Y \mathrm{e}^{-i\theta}\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\frac{1}{2}\\-\frac{1}{2i}
\end{array}
\right)
\right|^2\\
=&\;\frac{1}{2\pi}\|Y-Y_{\theta}\|^2_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}+\sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z},|k|\geq 2} (|k|^{2s}-1)|\hat{Y}_k|^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
The last term in the last line is constant with respect to $\theta$, which implies that $\theta_*$ also optimizes $\|Y-Y_{\theta}\|_{\dot{H}^s(\mathbb{T})}$.
\qed
\end{remark}
The following lemma establishes the equivalence of the $H^1$-distance and the energy difference between a string configuration $Y$ and its closest equilibrium configuration $Y_*$.
Recall that the elastic energy of $Y$ is $\|Y\|_{\dot{H}(\mathbb{T})}^2/2$ (see Lemma \ref{lemma: energy estimate}).
The motivation is that we wish to transform the global coercive bound on the energy difference, which comes from \eqref{eqn: energy estimate of Stokes immersed boundary problem}, into a bound for more convenient quantity $\|Y-Y_*\|_{\dot{H}^1}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: estimates concerning closest equilbrium}
We have the following estimates for $Y$ and its closest equilibrium configuration $Y_*$:
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{2}\left(\|Y'(s)\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}^2-\|Y_*'(s)\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}^2\right)\leq \|Y'(s)-Y_*'(s)\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}^2\leq 4\left(\|Y'(s)\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}^2-\|Y_*'(s)\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}^2\right).
\label{eqn: difference in H1 bounded by difference in energy}
\end{equation}
\begin{proof}
Without loss of generality, we assume that $(\theta_*,x_*) = (0,0)$. Otherwise we simply make a translation and rotation of $Y$.
Define $D(s) = Y(s)-Y_*(s)$. By Remark \ref{remark: mass center of the equilibrium agrees with initial data} and the above assumption, $D(s)$ is of mean zero on $\mathbb{T}$.
We first prove the upper bound. By the definition of $\theta_*$ and $Y_*$, we know that
\begin{equation}
0 = \left.\frac{d}{d\theta}\right|_{\theta = \theta_*}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\left|Y(s)-Y_\theta(s)\right|^2\,ds = -2\int_\mathbb{T} (Y-Y_*)\cdot Y'_*\,ds = -2\int_\mathbb{T} D\cdot Y'_*\,ds,
\label{eqn: equation for the optimal approximated equilibrium}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
0 \leq &\; \left.\frac{d^2}{d\theta^2}\right|_{\theta = \theta_*}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\left|Y(s)-Y_\theta(s)\right|^2\,ds = -2\int_\mathbb{T} -Y'_*\cdot Y'_*+(Y-Y_*)\cdot Y_*''\,ds\\
= &\;2\int_\mathbb{T} |Y'_*|^2+(Y-Y_*)\cdot Y_*\,ds = 2\int_\mathbb{T} |Y'_*|^2+D\cdot Y_*\,ds\\
= &\;4\pi R_Y^2+2\int_\mathbb{T} D\cdot Y_*\,ds\\
\label{eqn: second order equation for the optimal approximated equilibrium}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Here we used $Y_{*}'' = -Y_{*}$.
Moreover, since $Y$ and $Y_*$ have the same effective radius, by \eqref{eqn: enclosed area is pi},
\begin{equation*}
0 =\int_\mathbb{T}Y\times Y'\,ds - \int_\mathbb{T}Y_*\times Y_*'\,ds =\int_\mathbb{T}D\times Y_*'+ Y_*\times D' + D\times D'\,ds.
\end{equation*}
Since $Y_*'(s) = (-R_Y\sin s, R_Y\cos s) = Y_*^\perp(s)$ and $Y_*'' = - Y_*$, it is further simplified to be
\begin{equation}
0 =\int_\mathbb{T}D\cdot Y_*+ Y_*'\cdot D' + D\times D'\,ds = \int_\mathbb{T}D\cdot Y_*- Y_*''\cdot D + D\times D'\,ds = \int_\mathbb{T}2D\cdot Y_* + D\times D'\,ds.
\label{eqn: constraint on deviation from volume conservation}
\end{equation}
In the sequel, we shall write $Y_*$ and $D$ in terms of their Fourier coefficients. With the assumption that $(\theta_*,x_*) = (0,0)$, we have
\begin{align*}
&\;Y_*(s) = R_Y\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\frac{1}{2}\\-\frac{i}{2}
\end{array}
\right)\mathrm{e}^{is} + R_Y\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\frac{1}{2}\\\frac{i}{2}
\end{array}
\right)\mathrm{e}^{-is},\\
&\;Y'_*(s) = R_Y\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\frac{i}{2}\\\frac{1}{2}
\end{array}
\right)\mathrm{e}^{is} + R_Y\left(
\begin{array}{c}
-\frac{i}{2}\\\frac{1}{2}
\end{array}
\right)\mathrm{e}^{-is}.
\end{align*}
Assume $D(s) = \sum_{k\in \mathbb{Z}}\hat{D}_k \mathrm{e}^{iks}$, where $\hat{D}_k$'s are complex-valued $2$-vectors satisfying $\hat{D}_{-k} = \overline{\hat{D}_{k}}$. Hence, \eqref{eqn: equation for the optimal approximated equilibrium} could be rewritten as
\begin{equation*}
0= \hat{D}_1\cdot \overline{\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\frac{i}{2}\\\frac{1}{2}
\end{array}
\right)} + \hat{D}_{-1}\cdot \overline{\left(
\begin{array}{c}
-\frac{i}{2}\\\frac{1}{2}
\end{array}
\right)} = \left(-\frac{i}{2}\hat{D}_{1,1}+ \frac{1}{2}\hat{D}_{1,2}\right)+\overline{\left(-\frac{i}{2}\hat{D}_{1,1}+ \frac{1}{2}\hat{D}_{1,2}\right)},
\end{equation*}
where $\hat{D}_{1,1}$ and $\hat{D}_{1,2}$ represent the first and the second component of $\hat{D}_1$ respectively. This implies that
\begin{equation}
0 = \Re(-i\hat{D}_{1,1}+\hat{D}_{1,2}) = \Im \hat{D}_{1,1}+\Re \hat{D}_{1,2}.
\label{eqn: simplified equation for the optimal approximated equilibrium}
\end{equation}
Similarly, the terms in \eqref{eqn: constraint on deviation from volume conservation} could be rewritten as follows:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\int_\mathbb{T} 2D\cdot Y_*\,ds = &\;4\pi R_Y\hat{D}_1\cdot \overline{\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\frac{1}{2}\\-\frac{i}{2}
\end{array}
\right)} + 4\pi R_Y\hat{D}_{-1}\cdot\overline{\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\frac{1}{2}\\\frac{i}{2}
\end{array}
\right)}\\
= &\;4\pi R_Y(\Re \hat{D}_{1,1} - \Im \hat{D}_{1,2}),
\end{split}
\label{eqn: inner product of D and Y_star}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\int_\mathbb{T}D\times D'\,ds = &\;2\pi \sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}\hat{D}_k\times \overline{\left(ik \hat{D}_k\right)}\\
=&\;2\pi \sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}} -ik \left(\hat{D}_{k,1}\overline{\hat{D}_{k,2}} - \hat{D}_{k,2}\overline{\hat{D}_{k,1}}\right)\\
=&\;2\pi \sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}} 2k \Im\left(\hat{D}_{k,1}\overline{\hat{D}_{k,2}}\right)\\
=&\;4\pi \sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}} k (\Im \hat{D}_{k,1}\Re \hat{D}_{k,2}-\Re \hat{D}_{k,1}\Im \hat{D}_{k,2})\\
\leq &\;2\pi \sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k\in\mathbb{Z}}{|k|\geq 2}} |k| |\hat{D}_{k}|^2+ 4\pi (\Im \hat{D}_{1,1}\Re \hat{D}_{1,2}-\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}\Im \hat{D}_{1,2})\\
&\;-4\pi (\Im \hat{D}_{-1,1}\Re \hat{D}_{-1,2}-\Re \hat{D}_{-1,1}\Im \hat{D}_{-1,2})\\
= &\;2\pi \sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k\in\mathbb{Z}}{|k|\geq 2}} |k| |\hat{D}_{k}|^2+ 8\pi (\Im \hat{D}_{1,1}\Re \hat{D}_{1,2}-\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}).
\end{split}
\label{eqn: cross product of D and D'}
\end{equation}
Here we used the fact that $\hat{D}_{-1} = \overline{\hat{D}_1}$.
By \eqref{eqn: second order equation for the optimal approximated equilibrium} and \eqref{eqn: inner product of D and Y_star}, we know that
\begin{equation}
-\Re \hat{D}_{1,1} + \Im \hat{D}_{1,2}\leq R_Y.
\label{eqn: constraints on the coefficients from the second order condition of optimal approximation}
\end{equation}
We calculate that
\begin{equation}
\|Y'(s) - Y_*'(s)\|_{L^2}^2 = \|D'(s)\|_{L^2}^2 = 2\pi\sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}} k^2|\hat{D}_k|^2,
\label{eqn: H1 norm of deviation in terms of Fourier coefficients}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\|Y'(s)\|_{L^2}^2 - \|Y_*'(s)\|_{L^2}^2 = &\;\int_\mathbb{T}(Y_*'+D')\cdot(Y_*'+D') - Y_*'\cdot Y_*'\,ds = \int_\mathbb{T}2Y_*'\cdot D'+D'\cdot D'\,ds\\
= &\;\int_\mathbb{T}-2Y_*''\cdot D+D'\cdot D'\,ds= \int_\mathbb{T}2Y_*\cdot D+D'\cdot D'\,ds\\
= &\;\int_\mathbb{T}2D\cdot Y_*\,ds+2\pi \sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}} k^2 |\hat{D}_k|^2.
\end{split}
\label{eqn: expression for excess energy}
\end{equation}
\begin{case}
If $\int_\mathbb{T}2D\cdot Y_*\,ds\geq 0$, we readily proved the upper bound in \eqref{eqn: difference in H1 bounded by difference in energy} by comparing \eqref{eqn: H1 norm of deviation in terms of Fourier coefficients} and \eqref{eqn: expression for excess energy}.
\end{case}
\begin{case}
If $\int_\mathbb{T}2D\cdot Y_*\,ds < 0$, by \eqref{eqn: inner product of D and Y_star}, $\Re \hat{D}_{1,1} - \Im \hat{D}_{1,2} <0$. Then by \eqref{eqn: constraint on deviation from volume conservation}, \eqref{eqn: inner product of D and Y_star}, \eqref{eqn: cross product of D and D'} and \eqref{eqn: expression for excess energy},
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\|Y'(s)\|_{L^2}^2 - \|Y_*'(s)\|_{L^2}^2 = &\;2\pi \sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}} k^2 |\hat{D}_k|^2 +\frac{3}{2}\int_\mathbb{T}2D\cdot Y_*\,ds-\int_\mathbb{T}D\cdot Y_*\,ds\\
=&\;2\pi \sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}} k^2 |\hat{D}_k|^2 -\frac{3}{2}\int_\mathbb{T}D\times D'\,ds-\int_\mathbb{T}D\cdot Y_*\,ds\\
\geq &\; 2\pi \sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k\in\mathbb{Z}}{|k|\geq 2}} k^2 |\hat{D}_k|^2 -3\pi \sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k\in\mathbb{Z}}{|k|\geq 2}} |k| |\hat{D}_k|^2+2\pi(|\hat{D}_1|^2+|\hat{D}_{-1}|^2)\\
&\;-12\pi(\Im \hat{D}_{1,1}\Re \hat{D}_{1,2}-\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}\Im \hat{D}_{1,2})\\
&\;-2\pi R_Y(\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}- \Im \hat{D}_{1,2})\\
\geq &\; \pi \sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k\in\mathbb{Z}}{|k|\geq 2}} (2k^2-3|k|) |\hat{D}_k|^2+4\pi|\hat{D}_1|^2 \\
&\;+12\pi\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}-2\pi R_Y(\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}- \Im \hat{D}_{1,2}).
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
In the last line, we used the fact that $\hat{D}_{-1} = \overline{\hat{D}_1}$ and $\Im \hat{D}_{1,1}\Re \hat{D}_{1,2}\leq 0$ due to \eqref{eqn: simplified equation for the optimal approximated equilibrium}.
If $\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}$ and $\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}$ have the same sign, then $12\pi\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}-2\pi R_Y(\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}- \Im \hat{D}_{1,2})\geq 0$. Hence,
\begin{equation*}
\|Y'(s)\|_{L^2}^2 - \|Y_*'(s)\|_{L^2}^2 \geq \pi \sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}} \frac{1}{2}k^2 |\hat{D}_k|^2+3\pi|\hat{D}_1|^2 \geq \frac{1}{4}\|D'(s)\|_{L^2}^2.
\end{equation*}
Otherwise, if $\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}$ and $\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}$ have different signs, i.e., $\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}\leq 0$ and $-\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}\leq 0$ since $\Re \hat{D}_{1,1} - \Im \hat{D}_{1,2} <0$, we know that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\|Y'(s)\|_{L^2}^2 - \|Y_*'(s)\|_{L^2}^2 \geq &\; \pi \sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}} \frac{1}{2}k^2 |\hat{D}_k|^2+3\pi|\hat{D}_1|^2\\
&\;-12\pi|\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}||\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}|+4\pi R_Y\sqrt{|\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}||\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}|}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Also, by \eqref{eqn: constraints on the coefficients from the second order condition of optimal approximation},
\begin{equation}
|\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}||\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}|\leq \frac{1}{4}(-\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}+\Im \hat{D}_{1,2})^2\leq \frac{1}{4}R_Y^2.
\end{equation}
This implies
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&\;3\pi|\hat{D}_1|^2-12\pi|\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}||\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}|+4\pi R_Y\sqrt{|\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}||\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}|}\\
\geq &\; 3\pi|\hat{D}_1|^2 - 3\pi\left(|\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}|^2+|\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}|^2\right)-6\pi|\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}||\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}|+4\pi R_Y\sqrt{|\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}||\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}|}\\
\geq &\;\pi\sqrt{|\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}||\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}|}\left(4R_Y-6\sqrt{|\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}||\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}|}\right)\\
\geq &\;0.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Therefore,
\begin{equation}
\|Y'(s)\|_{L^2}^2 - \|Y_*'(s)\|_{L^2}^2 \geq \frac{\pi}{2}\sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}k^2 |\hat{D}_k|^2 = \frac{1}{4}\|D'(s)\|_{L^2}^2.
\label{eqn: the excess energy can bound the H1 difference}
\end{equation}
This proves the upper bound in \eqref{eqn: difference in H1 bounded by difference in energy}.
\end{case}
Now we turn to the lower bound.
By \eqref{eqn: constraint on deviation from volume conservation} and \eqref{eqn: expression for excess energy},
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\|Y'(s)\|_{L^2}^2 - \|Y_*'(s)\|_{L^2}^2 = &\;\int_\mathbb{T}2D\cdot Y_*\,ds+\|D'\|_{L^2}^2 = -\int_\mathbb{T}D\times D'\,ds+\|D'\|_{L^2}^2\\
\leq &\;\|D\|_{L^2}\|D'\|_{L^2}+\|D'\|_{L^2}^2 \leq 2\|D'\|_{L^2}^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Here we used the fact that $D$ has mean zero on $\mathbb{T}$.
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
As a byproduct, we know that for any Jordan curve $Y(s)\in H^1(\mathbb{T})$, $\|Y_*\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}\leq \|Y\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}$. The equality holds if and only if $Y = Y_*$.
Hence, Lemma \ref{lemma: estimates concerning closest equilbrium} implies that the string configuration having a circular shape and uniform parameterization has the lowest elastic energy among all the $H^1$-configurations that enclose the same area.
This can also be showed by isoperimetric inequality and Cauchy-Schwarz inequality.
\qed
\end{remark}
\end{lemma}
Let $X$ be a local solution of \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} obtained in Theorem \ref{thm: local in time existence}.
By Lemma \ref{lemma: energy estimate} and Lemma \ref{lemma: estimates concerning closest equilbrium}, we readily have global bound on $\|X-X_*\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}(t)$.
It would be very ideal if we could show that $\|X-X_*\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}(t)$ can not be (always) big when $\|X-X_*\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}(t)$ is small.
The following lemma is an effort in this direction, which is crucial in proving Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: bound and decay for H2.5 difference when energy difference is small}
Suppose $T\in(0,1]$ and $X_0\in H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$. Let $X(s,t)\in \Omega_T$ be a (local) solution of \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem}, s.t.
\begin{equation}
\|X\|_{L^\infty_{T}\dot{H}^{5/2}\cap L^2_{T}\dot{H}^3(\mathbb{T})} \leq R<+\infty,
\label{eqn: uniform bound in the lemma for the small energy regularity}
\end{equation}
and for some $\lambda>0$,
\begin{equation}
|X(s_1,t)-X(s_2,t)|\geq \lambda|s_1-s_2|,\quad \forall\,s_1,s_2\in\mathbb{T},\;t\in[0,T].
\label{eqn: uniform bi lipschitz constant in the lemma for the small energy regularity}
\end{equation}
\begin{enumerate}
\item There exists $T_*=T_*(T,R,\lambda)\in(0,T]$, s.t.
\begin{equation}
\|X-X_{*}\|_{L^{\infty}_{T_*}\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}^2\leq 2\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}^2,
\label{eqn: upper bound for the growth of H2.5 norm in a short period of time in the statement of the lemma}
\end{equation}
where $X_*(\cdot,t)$ and $X_{0*}$ are the closest equilibrium configuration to $X(\cdot,t)$ and $X_0(\cdot)$ respectively.
\item Given $T'\in(0,T_*]$, there exist a constant $c_* = c_*(R,\lambda, T')>0$, s.t.\;if
\begin{equation}
\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\geq c_* \|X-X_{0*}\|_{L^\infty_{T'}\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})},
\label{eqn: condition in the small energy lemma initial H2.5 norm is much larger than H1 norm on the whole interval}
\end{equation}
then there exists $t_*\in[T'/4,T']$, s.t.
\begin{equation}
\|X-X_{0*}\|^2_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}(t_*)\leq \mathrm{e}^{- t_*/4}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|^2_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}.
\label{eqn: a lower H2.5 norm could be found}
\end{equation}
In particular,
\begin{equation}
\|X-X_{*}\|^2_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}(t_*)\leq \mathrm{e}^{-t_*/4}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|^2_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}.
\label{eqn: a lower H2.5 norm with updated approximation could be found}
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
\begin{proof}
It is easy to see that $X_{0*}(s,t) \equiv X_{0*}(s)\in H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$ is the (unique, by Theorem \ref{thm: local in time uniqueness}) solution for \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} starting from $X_{0*}$.
Consider $\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}$, which satisfies
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\;\partial_t (\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}})= \mathcal{L}(\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}) + (\widetilde{g_X} - \widetilde{g_{X_{0*}}}),\quad s\in \mathbb{T}, t\in[0,T],\\
&\;(\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}})(s,0) = (X_0-X_{0*})(s).
\label{eqn: equation for the difference from the initial steady state}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Similar to \eqref{eqn: space time estimate for the difference of solutions in proving uniqueness}, we use the assumptions \eqref{eqn: uniform bound in the lemma for the small energy regularity} and \eqref{eqn: uniform bi lipschitz constant in the lemma for the small energy regularity} and Corollary \ref{coro: H2 estimate for g_X0-g_X1} with $\mu = 2$ to find that for $\forall\, t\in[0,T]$ with $T\leq 1$ and $\forall\, \delta\in(0,1]$,
\begin{equation}
\left\|g_{X}-g_{X_{0*}}\right\|_{L_{t}^2\dot{H}^2}
\leq C\left(\delta^{1/2}\|X-X_{0*}\|_{L^2_t\dot{H}^3}+[\delta^{1/2}+(|\ln \delta|+1)t^{1/2}]\|X-X_{0*}\|_{L^\infty_t\dot{W}^{2,4}}\right),
\label{eqn: H2 estimate of the difference between solution and equilibrium solution}
\end{equation}
where $C = C(R,\lambda)$.
By Lemma \ref{lemma: a priori estimate of nonlocal eqn} and the interpolation inequality, for $\forall\, t\in[0,T]$ and $\forall\, \delta \in(0,1]$,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&\;\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2(t)+\frac{1}{4}\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{L^2_{t} \dot{H}^{3}}^2\\
\leq &\; \|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2+ 4\|\widetilde{g_X} - \widetilde{g_{X_{0*}}}\|_{L_{t}^2 \dot{H}^{2}}^2\\
\leq &\; \|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2\\
&\;+ C_3 \left(\delta\|X-X_{0*}\|_{L^2_t\dot{H}^3}^2+[\delta+(|\ln \delta|+1)^2t]\|X-X_{0*}\|_{L^\infty_t\dot{H}^{1}}^{1/3}\|X-X_{0*}\|_{L^\infty_t\dot{H}^{5/2}}^{5/3}\right),
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $C_3 = C_3(R,\lambda)$ is a constant. For simplicity, let us assume $C_3(R,\lambda)\geq 1$.
Take $\delta = t\leq 1$ with $t\in[0,T_*]$ and we find that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\;\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2(t)+\left(\frac{1}{4}-C_3 t\right)\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{L^2_{t} \dot{H}^{3}}^2\\
\leq &\; \|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2+ 2C_3 t(|\ln t|+1)^2 \|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{L^{\infty}_{t}\dot{H}^{1}}^{1/3}\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{L^{\infty}_{t}\dot{H}^{5/2}}^{5/3},
\end{split}
\label{eqn: estimates on the difference between X and its closest equilibrium configuration}
\end{equation}
Now we take $T_*\leq T\leq 1$ sufficiently small, s.t.
\begin{equation}
8C_3(R,\lambda) T_*(|\ln T_*|+1)^2 \leq 1
\label{eqn: expression for T* in the lemma for small energy regularity}
\end{equation}
and $x(|\ln x|+1)^2$ is increasing in $[0,T_*]$.
In this way, $C_3t\leq C_3 T_*(|\ln T_*|+1)^2\leq 1/8$.
By \eqref{eqn: estimates on the difference between X and its closest equilibrium configuration},
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\;\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2(t)+\frac{1}{8}\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{L^2_{t} \dot{H}^{3}}^2\\
\leq &\;\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2(t)+\left(\frac{1}{4}-C_3 t\right)\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{L^2_{t} \dot{H}^{3}}^2\\
\leq &\; \|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2+ 2C_3 t(|\ln t|+1)^2 \|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{L^{\infty}_{t}\dot{H}^{1}}^{1/3}\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{L^{\infty}_{t}\dot{H}^{5/2}}^{5/3}\\
\leq &\; \|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2+ \frac{1}{4}\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{L^{\infty}_{T_*}\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2.
\label{eqn: energy estimate in global existence by applying a priori estimates in Appendix}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By taking supremum in $t\in[0,T_*]$ on the left hand side, we find that
\begin{equation}
\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{L^{\infty}_{T_*}\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}^2\leq \frac{4}{3}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}^2.
\label{eqn: upper bound for the growth of H2.5 norm in a short period of time in the proof}
\end{equation}
In view of Remark \ref{remark: L2 closest is also Hs closest}, \eqref{eqn: upper bound for the growth of H2.5 norm in a short period of time in the statement of the lemma} immediately follows with $T_*$ defined in \eqref{eqn: expression for T* in the lemma for small energy regularity}.
Next we shall prove the second part of the Lemma for given $T'\in(0,T_*]$.
Putting \eqref{eqn: upper bound for the growth of H2.5 norm in a short period of time in the proof} back into the third line of \eqref{eqn: energy estimate in global existence by applying a priori estimates in Appendix} and take $t= T'$, we find that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\;\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2(T')+\frac{1}{8}\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{L^2_{T'} \dot{H}^{3}}^2\\
\leq &\; \|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2+2C_3T'(|\ln T'|+1)^2 \left(\frac{4}{3}\right)^{5/6}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^{5/3}\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{L^{\infty}_{T'}\dot{H}^1}^{1/3}\\
\leq &\; \|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2+4C_3 T'(|\ln T'|+1)^2 c^{-1/3}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^{2},
\label{eqn: equation for J before introducing the notation J}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In the last inequality, we introduce the notation $c = \|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}/\|X-X_{0*}\|_{L^\infty_{T'} \dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}$.
Denote $J(t) = \|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}^2(t)$. By interpolation, for $\forall\,t\in[0,T']$,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
J(t)^{4/3} = \|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}^{8/3}(t)
\leq &\;\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{L^\infty_{T'}\dot{H}^{1}(\mathbb{T})}^{2/3}\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{\dot{H}^{3}(\mathbb{T})}^2(t)\\
= &\;c^{-2/3}J(0)^{1/3}\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{\dot{H}^{3}(\mathbb{T})}^2(t).
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
We multiply both sides of \eqref{eqn: equation for J before introducing the notation J} by $c^{-2/3}J(0)^{1/3}$ and find that
\begin{equation}
c^{-2/3}J(0)^{1/3} J(T')+\frac{1}{8}\int_0^{T'} J(\omega)^{4/3}\,d\omega\leq (c^{-2/3}+4C_3 T'(|\ln T'|+1)^2 c^{-1})J(0)^{4/3}.
\label{eqn: simplified evolution equation for J the H2.5 difference}
\end{equation}
Now suppose the statement of the Lemma is false. Namely, for $\forall\,c>0$, there exists a solution $X^{(c)}(s,t)$ with $t\in[0,T']$, starting from some $X_0^{(c)}(s)\in H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$, satisfying \eqref{eqn: uniform bound in the lemma for the small energy regularity}, \eqref{eqn: uniform bi lipschitz constant in the lemma for the small energy regularity} and that
\begin{equation*}
\|X^{(c)}_0-X^{(c)}_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\geq c \|X^{(c)}-X^{(c)}_{0*}\|_{L^\infty_{T'}\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})},
\end{equation*}
while for $\forall\,t\in [T'/4,T']$,
\begin{equation*}
J^{(c)}(t) = \|X^{(c)}-X^{(c)}_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2(t)> \mathrm{e}^{-t/4}\|X^{(c)}_0-X^{(c)}_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}^2 = \mathrm{e}^{- t/4}J^{(c)}(0).
\end{equation*}
Since \eqref{eqn: simplified evolution equation for J the H2.5 difference} holds with $J$ replaced by $J^{(c)}$, we find that
\begin{equation*}
c^{-2/3}\mathrm{e}^{- T'/4}J^{(c)}(0)^{4/3} +\frac{1}{8}\int_{T'/4}^{T'} \mathrm{e}^{-\omega/3}J^{(c)}(0)^{4/3}\,d\omega < (c^{-2/3}+4C_3 T'(|\ln T'|+1)^2 c^{-1})J^{(c)}(0)^{4/3},
\end{equation*}
which implies that
\begin{equation}
\frac{3}{8}\left(\mathrm{e}^{-T'/12} - \mathrm{e}^{-T'/3}\right) < c^{-2/3}\left(1-\mathrm{e}^{-T'/4}\right)+4C_3 T'(|\ln T'|+1)^2 c^{-1}.
\label{eqn: constraint for c}
\end{equation}
Since $T'\leq T_*\leq 1$,
\begin{equation*}
\mathrm{e}^{-T'/12} - \mathrm{e}^{-T'/3} > \frac{1}{4}T' \mathrm{e}^{-T'/3}> \frac{1}{6}T',\quad 1-\mathrm{e}^{-T'/4} < \frac{1}{4}T'.
\end{equation*}
Then \eqref{eqn: constraint for c} implies that
\begin{equation}
\frac{c}{4} - c^{1/3}<16C_3(|\ln T'|+1)^2.
\label{eqn: equation for c before introducing definitions of constants}
\end{equation}
Let $c_+$ be the unique positive real number such that the equality is achieved in \eqref{eqn: equation for c before introducing definitions of constants}.
Then we have
\begin{equation*}
\frac{c_+}{4} = 16C_3(|\ln T'|+1)^2 +c_+^{1/3}\leq 16C_3(|\ln T'|+1)^2 + \frac{c_+}{27}+2,
\end{equation*}
which implies that
\begin{equation}
c_+\leq C_4(R,\lambda)(|\ln T'|+1)^2.
\label{eqn: introducing C_4}
\end{equation}
Here $C_4\geq 1$ is some constant depending only on $R$ and $\lambda$; it will be used in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium} and Theorem \ref{thm: exponential convergence}.
Therefore, if $c\geq C_4(R,\lambda)(|\ln T'|+1)^2$, \eqref{eqn: equation for c before introducing definitions of constants} does not hold, which is a contradiction.
Hence, we proved \eqref{eqn: a lower H2.5 norm could be found} with
\begin{equation}
c_*(R,\lambda,T') = C_4(R,\lambda)(|\ln T'|+1)^2.
\label{eqn: defintion of c_*}
\end{equation}
\eqref{eqn: a lower H2.5 norm with updated approximation could be found} immediately follows from \eqref{eqn: a lower H2.5 norm could be found} by virtue of Remark \ref{remark: L2 closest is also Hs closest}.
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Taking smaller $\mu$ in \eqref{eqn: H2 estimate of the difference between solution and equilibrium solution} can give sharper bound for $c_*$ in \eqref{eqn: defintion of c_*}, but that is not necessary for the remaining results.
\qed
\end{remark}
\end{lemma}
Using Lemma \ref{lemma: bound and decay for H2.5 difference when energy difference is small}, we are able to prove Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium} (existence and uniqueness of global solution near equilibrium)]
With no loss of generality, we assume $R_{X_0} = 1$; otherwise, simply rescale $X_0$ by a factor of $R_{X_0}^{-1}$. Note that the contour dynamic formulation \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} is translation and scaling-invariant. Moreover, we note that the effective radius of $X(\cdot,t)$ is invariant in time, since the flow is volume-preserving.
Define
\begin{equation}
S_\varepsilon = \left\{Z(s)\in H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T}):\
R_Z = 1,\,\|Z-Z_* \|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq \varepsilon\right\}
\label{eqn: def of data close to equilibrium}
\end{equation}
We claim that there exists a universal constant $\varepsilon_0$ which will be clear below, for $\forall\, Z(s)\in S_{\varepsilon_0}$, $\|Z\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}\leq C$ for some universal constant $C$, and
\begin{equation}
|Z(s_1)-Z(s_2)|\geq \frac{1}{\pi}|s_1 -s_2|,\quad \forall\, s_1,s_2\in \mathbb{T}.
\label{eqn: uniform lower bound for lambda in the proof of global existence}
\end{equation}
In fact,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
|Z(s_1)-Z(s_2)|\geq &\;|Z_*(s_1)-Z_*(s_2)|-|(Z_*-Z)(s_1)-(Z_*-Z)(s_2)|\\
\geq &\;\frac{2}{\pi}|s_1 -s_2| - \|Z-Z_*\|_{\dot{C}^1(\mathbb{T})}|s_1-s_2|\\
\geq &\;\left(\frac{2}{\pi}-C_5\varepsilon_0\right)|s_1 -s_2|,
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $C_5>0$ is a universal constant coming from Sobolev inequality.
Hence, it suffices to take $\varepsilon_0=\min\{(C_5 \pi)^{-1},1\}$;
that $\|Z\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}\leq C$ is obvious.
The above uniform estimates, together with Theorem \ref{thm: local in time existence} and Theorem \ref{thm: local in time uniqueness}, imply that there is a universal constant $T_0\in(0,1)$, s.t.\;for $\forall\, X_0\in S_{\varepsilon_0}$, there is a unique solution $X(s,t)$ for \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} in $C_{[0,T_0]}H^{5/2}\cap L^2_{T_0}H^3(\mathbb{T})$ starting from $X_0$, s.t.
\begin{equation}
\|X\|_{L^\infty_{T_0} \dot{H}^{5/2}\cap L^2_{T_0} \dot{H}^{3}(\mathbb{T})}\leq 4\|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq 4(\|X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}+\varepsilon_0) \triangleq C_6,
\label{eqn: uniform bound of the family of solution}
\end{equation}
where $C_6$ is a universal constant. Moreover, for $\forall\, s_1,s_2\in\mathbb{T}$ and $t\in[0,T_0]$,
\begin{equation}
\left|X(s_1,t) - X(s_2,t)\right| \geq \frac{1}{2\pi}|s_1 - s_2|.
\label{eqn: uniform bi lipschitz constant of the family of solution}
\end{equation}
That is, $X(s,t)$ satisfies the assumption of Lemma \ref{lemma: bound and decay for H2.5 difference when energy difference is small} with $T = T_0$, $R = C_6$, and $\lambda =(2\pi)^{-1}$, which are all universal constants. Hence, by Lemma \ref{lemma: bound and decay for H2.5 difference when energy difference is small}, there exists a universal constant $T_* = T_*(T_0, C_6, 1/(2\pi))\in(0,T_0]$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\|X-X_*\|_{L^\infty_{T_*}\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq \sqrt{2}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}.
\end{equation*}
To this end, we shall first investigate $\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{L^{\infty}_{[0,t]}\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}$. Using the equation for $\tilde{X}$ (see \eqref{eqn: equation for oscillation of X in the main thm}), we find that for $\forall\, t\in[0,T_0]$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{L^{\infty}_{t}\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})} \leq &\; \|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_0}\|_{L^{\infty}_{t}\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}+\|\widetilde{X_0}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}\\
\leq &\; \int_0^t\|\partial_t \tilde{X}\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}(\tau)\,d\tau+\|\widetilde{X_0}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}\\
\leq &\; \int_0^t\|\mathcal{L}\tilde{X}\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}(\tau)+\|\widetilde{g_{\tilde{X}}}\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}(\tau)\,d\tau+\|\widetilde{X_0}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}.
\label{eqn: estimate for H1 difference of X and X0*}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In order to give an estimate for $\|\widetilde{g_{\tilde{X}}}\|_{\dot{H}^1}$, we should go back to \eqref{eqn: introduce the notation Gamma_1} and \eqref{eqn: rough pointwise estimate of Gamma} and apply Lemma \ref{lemma: estimates for L M N}. Indeed, with \eqref{eqn: uniform bound of the family of solution} and \eqref{eqn: uniform bi lipschitz constant of the family of solution}, we have
\begin{equation*}
\|g_{\tilde{X}}'\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}(t)\leq C \|\tilde{X}\|_{\dot{H}^2(\mathbb{T})}^2(t)\|\tilde{X}'\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}(t)\leq C,
\end{equation*}
where $C$ is a universal constant.
Hence, by \eqref{eqn: uniform bound of the family of solution}, \eqref{eqn: estimate for H1 difference of X and X0*} and Lemma \ref{lemma: estimates concerning closest equilbrium},
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\|\tilde{X}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{L^{\infty}_{t}\dot{H}^1} \leq &\;\int_0^t C\left(\|\tilde{X}\|_{\dot{H}^2}(\tau)+1\right)\,d\tau+\|\widetilde{X_0}-\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{\dot{H}^{1}}\\
\leq &\;C_7 t+2\left(\|\widetilde{X_0}\|_{\dot{H}^1}^2-\|\widetilde{X_{0*}}\|_{\dot{H}^1}^2\right)^{1/2}\\
\triangleq &\;C_7t +2\zeta_{X_0},
\end{split}
\label{eqn: bound for H1 norm of the difference to the equilibrium}
\end{equation}
where $C_7$ is a universal constant.
Here we applied Lemma \ref{lemma: estimates concerning closest equilbrium}
and defined $\zeta_{X_0}^2 = \|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^1}^2 - \|X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^1}^2$.
The above estimate is true as long as $X_0\in S_{\varepsilon_0}$ and $t\in[0,T_0]$
In what follows, we shall prove the Theorem with
\begin{equation}
\varepsilon_* = \varepsilon_0 = \min\{(C_5 \pi)^{-1},1\}
\label{eqn: definition of epsilon* in the global existence}
\end{equation}
We also take $\xi_* \leq T_*/2$ such that
\begin{equation}
2 C_4(C_7+2) (|\ln (2\xi_*)|+1)^2(2\xi_*)\leq \varepsilon_*,
\label{eqn: definition of xi* in the global existence}
\end{equation}
where $T_* = T_*(T_0, C_6, 1/(2\pi))\in(0,T_0]$ given by Lemma \ref{lemma: bound and decay for H2.5 difference when energy difference is small}, $C_4 = C_4(C_6,1/(2\pi))$ defined in \eqref{eqn: introducing C_4} and $C_7$ defined in \eqref{eqn: bound for H1 norm of the difference to the equilibrium} are all universal constants.
Hence, both $\varepsilon_*$ and $\xi_*$ are universal.
We fix $T' = 2\xi_*$, which is also a universal constant.
By Lemma \ref{lemma: estimates concerning closest equilbrium} and the assumption that $\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^1} \leq \xi_*$,
\begin{equation}
\zeta_{X_0}^2 \leq 2\|X_0-X_{0*}\|^2_{\dot{H}^1}\leq 2\xi_*^2 \leq T'^2 \leq T_*^2.
\label{eqn: T' is smaller than T_*}
\end{equation}
We are going to use mathematical induction to show existence of the global solution.
First we focus on the local solution $X(s,t)$ for $t\in[0,T']$.
By \eqref{eqn: bound for H1 norm of the difference to the equilibrium} and \eqref{eqn: T' is smaller than T_*},
\begin{equation}
\|X-X_{0*}\|_{L^\infty_{T'}\dot{H}^1}\leq (C_7+2)T'.
\label{eqn: a final bound in the proof of global existence for H1 norm of X-X0* in 0 to T'}
\end{equation}
We apply Lemma \ref{lemma: bound and decay for H2.5 difference when energy difference is small} to obtain the constant $c_* = c_*(C_6,1/(2\pi),T')$, and claim that the assumption \eqref{eqn: condition in the small energy lemma initial H2.5 norm is much larger than H1 norm on the whole interval} holds if $\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\geq \varepsilon_*/2$.
In fact, by \eqref{eqn: defintion of c_*}, \eqref{eqn: definition of xi* in the global existence} and \eqref{eqn: a final bound in the proof of global existence for H1 norm of X-X0* in 0 to T'},
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
c_*\|X-X_{0*}\|_{L^\infty_{T'}\dot{H}^1}\leq &\; C_4(|\ln T'|+1)^2\cdot (C_7+2)T'= C_4(C_7+2) (|\ln (2\xi_*)|+1)^2(2\xi_*)\leq \varepsilon_*/2.
\end{split}
\label{eqn: proof of the threshold of H2.5 norm in the proof of global existence}
\end{equation}
Therefore, if $\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})} \in[ \varepsilon_*/2, \varepsilon_*]$, by \eqref{eqn: proof of the threshold of H2.5 norm in the proof of global existence} and Lemma \ref{lemma: bound and decay for H2.5 difference when energy difference is small}, there exists $t_1\in [T'/4,T']$, s.t.
\begin{equation*}
\|X-X_*\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}(t_1)\leq e^{-t_1/8}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}\leq \varepsilon_*.
\end{equation*}
Otherwise, if $\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})} \leq \varepsilon_*/2$, by the fact that $T'\leq T_*$ and Lemma \ref{lemma: bound and decay for H2.5 difference when energy difference is small}, there exists $t_1\in [T'/4,T']$, s.t.
\begin{equation*}
\|X-X_{*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}(t_1)\leq \|X-X_{*}\|_{L^{\infty}_{T'}\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq \sqrt{2}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})} \leq \varepsilon_*.
\end{equation*}
This implies that for all $X_0\in S_{\varepsilon_*}$, we can always find $t_1\in [T'/4,T']$, such that the unique local solution of \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} in $C_{[0,t_1]}H^{5/2}\cap L^2_{t_1}H^{3}(\mathbb{T})$ satisfies that
\begin{align*}
&\;\|X-X_{*}\|_{L^{\infty}_{t_1}\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq \sqrt{2}\varepsilon_*,\\
&\;|X(s_1,t) - X(s_2,t)| \geq \frac{1}{2\pi}|s_1 - s_2|,\quad \forall \,t\in[0,t_1],\;s_1,s_2\in\mathbb{T},\\
&\;X(t_1)\in S_{\varepsilon_*}.
\end{align*}
We note that $T'$ is a universal constant.
Suppose we have found $t_k$'s for $k\leq n$, satisfying that for $\forall\, k =1,\cdots,n$,
\begin{enumerate}
\item $t_k\in[T'/4,T']$.
\item There exists a unique solution $X$ of \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} in $C_{[0,T_{n}]}H^{5/2}\cap L^2_{T_{n}}H^{3}(\mathbb{T})$, where $T_k = \sum_{i=1}^k t_i$ for $i = 1,\cdots,n$, such that
\begin{align}
&\;\|X-X_{*}\|_{L^{\infty}_{[0,T_k]}\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq \sqrt{2}\varepsilon_*, \label{eqn: estimates on the distance to the equilibrium for the global solution in first k-th time intervals}\\
&\;|X(s_1,t) - X(s_2,t)| \geq \frac{1}{2\pi}|s_1 - s_2|,\quad \forall \,t\in[0,T_k],\;s_1,s_2\in\mathbb{T},\label{eqn: well-stretched constant estimates for the global solution in first k-th time intervals}\\
&\;X(\cdot,T_k) \in S_{\varepsilon_*}.
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
Now let us restart the equation at $t = T_n$. To be more precise, we consider
\begin{equation*}
\partial_t X(s,t)= \mathcal{L}X(s,t) + g_X(s,t),\quad s\in \mathbb{T}, t\geq T_n,
\end{equation*}
with $X(\cdot,T_n)\in S_{\varepsilon_*}= S_{\varepsilon_0}$ given.
As before, there exists a unique local solution $X(s,t)$ for $t\in [T_n,T_n+T_0]$ satisfying the uniform estimates \eqref{eqn: uniform bound of the family of solution} and \eqref{eqn: uniform bi lipschitz constant of the family of solution} for solutions starting in $S_{\varepsilon_*}$.
Moreover, with $T_*$ and $T'$ defined as before,
\begin{equation*}
\|X-X_{*}\|_{L^{\infty}_{[T_n,T_n+T']}\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq \sqrt{2}\|X_{T_n}-(X_{T_n})_*\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}.
\end{equation*}
By \eqref{eqn: bound for H1 norm of the difference to the equilibrium},
\begin{equation}
\|X-(X_{T_n})_*\|_{L^{\infty}_{[T_n,T_n+T']}\dot{H}^1} \leq C_7 T'+2\left(\|X_{T_n}\|_{\dot{H}^1}^2-\|(X_{T_n})_*\|_{\dot{H}^1}^2\right)^{1/2} = C_7 T'+2\zeta_{X_{T_n}},
\label{eqn: crude form of the bound for H1 norm of the difference to the equilibrium for later time}
\end{equation}
where $X_{T_n}(s) \triangleq X(s,T_n)$.
Since the solution obtained in $[0,T_n]$ satisfies the assumption of Lemma \ref{lemma: energy estimate}, by \eqref{eqn: energy estimate of Stokes immersed boundary problem},
\begin{equation*}
\zeta_{X_{T_n}}^2=\|X_{T_n}\|_{\dot{H}^1}^2-\|(X_{T_n})_*\|_{\dot{H}^1}^2 \leq \|X_0\|_{\dot{H}^1}^2-\|X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^1}^2 = \zeta_{X_{0}}^2=T'^2.
\end{equation*}
Note that $\|(X_{T_n})_*\|_{\dot{H}^1} = \|X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^1}$.
Hence,
$\|X-(X_{T_n})_*\|_{L^{\infty}_{[T_n,T_n+T']}\dot{H}^1} \leq (C_7+2)T'$.
To this end, we simply argue to show $\exists \,t_{n+1}\in [T'/4,T']$, s.t.\;there exists a unique local solution in $C_{[0,T_{n+1}]}H^{5/2}\cap L^2_{T_{n+1}}H^{3}(\mathbb{T})$ with $T_{n+1} = T_n+t_{n+1}$ and $X(T_{n+1})\in S_{\varepsilon_*}$.
Estimates \eqref{eqn: estimates on the distance to the equilibrium for the global solution in first k-th time intervals} and \eqref{eqn: well-stretched constant estimates for the global solution in first k-th time intervals} in the new time interval $[0, T_{n+1}]$ follow as before.
Since $T_n \geq nT'/4$ with $T'>0$ being a universal constant, $T_n\rightarrow +\infty$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$.
The existence of global solution is thus established.
The uniqueness follows from Theorem \ref{thm: local in time uniqueness}.
That $X_t\in L^2_{[0,+\infty),loc}H^2(\mathbb{T})$ follows from Theorem \ref{thm: local in time existence}.
Estimates \eqref{eqn: estimates on the distance to the equilibrium for the global solution in all time intervals}, \eqref{eqn: well-stretched constant estimates for the global solution in all time intervals} and \eqref{eqn: uniform bound of H 2.5 norm for the global solution} are established in the induction.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Instead of \eqref{eqn: definition of epsilon* in the global existence}, we may take arbitrary $\varepsilon_*\in(0,\varepsilon_0]$, and the same proof still works.
\qed
\end{remark}
The main idea in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium} is that when the string configuration is close to an equilibrium, $\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^1}$ sets a bound for $\|X-X_*\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}$ in an indirect way (at least within a short time).
In the same spirit, we prove the following corollary with refined estimates.
It will be useful in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: exponential convergence}.
\begin{corollary}\label{coro: refined decay estimate of global solution}
Let $X_0\in H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$ satisfy all the assumptions of Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium} and let $X$ be the unique global solution of \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} starting from $X_0$ obtained in Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium}. Then for any given $\xi\in(0,\xi_*]$, if in addition
\begin{equation}
\|X_0(s) - X_{0*}(s)\|_{\dot{H}^{1}(\mathbb{T})}\leq \xi R_{X_0},
\label{eqn: closeness condition of H 1 norm in corollary}
\end{equation}
then the solution $X$ satisfies that for $\forall \,t\geq 0$,
\begin{equation}
\|X-X_{*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}(t)\leq \max \{2e^{-t/8}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})},\varepsilon_\xi R_{X_0}\},
\label{eqn: refined H2.5 bound of global solution}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\varepsilon_\xi \triangleq 2C_4(C_7+2) (|\ln (2\xi)|+1)^2(2\xi),\quad \xi>0,
\label{eqn: defintion of varepsilon_* in the corollary}
\end{equation}
where $C_4 = C_4(C_6,1/(2\pi))$ and $C_7$ are universal constants defined in \eqref{eqn: introducing C_4} and \eqref{eqn: bound for H1 norm of the difference to the equilibrium} respectively.
\begin{remark}
We only define $\varepsilon_\xi$ for $\xi>0$ in order to avoid abusing the notation $\varepsilon_0$ defined in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium}.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
We follow exactly the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium} until the definition of $T'$.
Now we define $T' = 2\xi$ instead.
It is worthwhile to note that
\begin{equation*}
\zeta_{X_0}^2\leq 2\|X_0-X_{0*}\|^2_{\dot{H}^1}\leq 2\xi^2 \leq T'^2\leq T_*^2.
\end{equation*}
For the solution $X(s,t)$ in $t\in[0,T']$, \eqref{eqn: a final bound in the proof of global existence for H1 norm of X-X0* in 0 to T'} still holds.
With $c_* = C_4(C_6,1/(2\pi))(|\ln T'|+1)^2$ as before, we have a similar estimate as \eqref{eqn: proof of the threshold of H2.5 norm in the proof of global existence}
\begin{equation}
c_*\|X-X_{0*}\|_{L^\infty_{T'}\dot{H}^1}\leq C_4(|\ln T'|+1)^2\cdot (C_7+2)T' = C_4(C_7+2) (|\ln (2\xi)|+1)^2(2\xi)= \varepsilon_\xi/2.
\label{eqn: new threshold in the corollary such that the assumption holds}
\end{equation}
Therefore, if $\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})} \geq \varepsilon_\xi/2$, the assumption \eqref{eqn: condition in the small energy lemma initial H2.5 norm is much larger than H1 norm on the whole interval} holds.
By Lemma \ref{lemma: bound and decay for H2.5 difference when energy difference is small}, there exists $t_1\in [T'/4,T']$, s.t.
\begin{equation*}
\|X-X_*\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}(t_1)\leq e^{-t_1/8}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}.
\end{equation*}
Otherwise, if $\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})} \leq \varepsilon_\xi/2$, by Lemma \ref{lemma: bound and decay for H2.5 difference when energy difference is small}, there exists $t_1\in [T'/4,T']$, s.t.
\begin{equation*}
\|X-X_{*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}(t_1)\leq \|X-X_{*}\|_{L^{\infty}_{T'}\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq \sqrt{2}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})} \leq \varepsilon_\xi/\sqrt{2}.
\end{equation*}
This implies that there always exists $t_1\in [T'/4,T']$, s.t.
\begin{equation*}
\|X-X_{*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}(t_1)\leq \max\{e^{-t_1/8}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}, \varepsilon_\xi/\sqrt{2}\}.
\end{equation*}
Now suppose that we have found $t_k$'s for $k\leq n$, satisfying that for $\forall\, k =1,\cdots,n$, $t_k\in[T'/4,T']$, and
\begin{equation*}
\|X-X_{*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}(T_k)\leq \max\{e^{-T_k/8}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}, \varepsilon_\xi/\sqrt{2}\}.
\end{equation*}
where $T_k = \sum_{i=1}^k t_i$ for $i = 1,\cdots,n$.
Now we consider the equation in $t \in [T_n, T_n+T']$.
As in \eqref{eqn: crude form of the bound for H1 norm of the difference to the equilibrium for later time},
\begin{equation*}
\|X-(X_{T_n})_*\|_{L^{\infty}_{[T_n,T_n+T']}\dot{H}^1} \leq C_7 T'+2\zeta_{X_{T_n}}\leq C_7 T'+2\zeta_{X_0} \leq (C_7+2)T'.
\end{equation*}
Here we used the energy estimate \eqref{eqn: energy estimate of Stokes immersed boundary problem} again.
Hence, as in \eqref{eqn: new threshold in the corollary such that the assumption holds}, we have $c_*\|X-X_{0*}\|_{L^\infty_{[T_n,T_n+T']}\dot{H}^1}\leq \varepsilon_\xi/2$.
We argue as before to find that there always exists $t_{n+1}\in[T'/4,T']$, s.t.
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\|X-X_{*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}(T_n+t_{n+1})\leq &\;\max\{e^{-t_{n+1}/8}\|X-X_*\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}(T_n), \varepsilon_\xi/\sqrt{2}\}\\
\leq &\;\max\{e^{-(T_n+t_{n+1})/8}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}, \varepsilon_\xi/\sqrt{2}\}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
By induction, there exists a sequence $\{t_k\}_{k\in\mathbb{Z}_+}$, $t_k\in [T'/4, T']$, such that for $\forall\, k\in\mathbb{Z}_+$,
\begin{equation*}
\|X-X_{*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}(T_k)\leq \max\{e^{-T_k/8}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}, \varepsilon_\xi/\sqrt{2}\}.
\end{equation*}
where $T_k = \sum_{i=1}^k t_i\rightarrow +\infty$.
Since $t_k\leq T'\leq T_*\leq 1$, by Lemma \ref{lemma: bound and decay for H2.5 difference when energy difference is small},
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\|X-X_{*}\|_{L^\infty_{[T_{k-1}, T_k]}\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq &\;\sqrt{2}\|X-X_{*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}(T_{k-1})\\
\leq &\;\max\{\sqrt{2}e^{-T_{k-1}/8}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}, \varepsilon_\xi\}\\
\leq &\;\max\{\sqrt{2}e^{T'/8}e^{-T_{k}/8}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}, \varepsilon_\xi\}\\
\leq &\;\max\{2e^{-T_{k}/8}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}, \varepsilon_\xi\}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Note that here we are abusing the notation $T_0$ by defining $T_0 = 0$; it does not refer to the $T_0$ in Theorem \ref{thm: local in time existence}.
Using the fact that $X\in C_{[0,+\infty)}H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$,
for $\forall\,t\in [T_{k-1}, T_k]$,
\begin{equation*}
\|X-X_{*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}(t)\leq \max\{2e^{-t/8}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}, \varepsilon_\xi\}.
\end{equation*}
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\end{corollary}
\section{Exponential Convergence to Equilibrium Configurations}\label{section: exp convergence}
In this section, we shall prove that the global-in-time solution near equilibriums obtained in Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium} converges exponentially in the $H^s$-sense to an equilibrium configuration as $t\rightarrow +\infty$.
See the statement of Theorem \ref{thm: exponential convergence}.
In the sequel, we shall always consider the contour dynamic formulation \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem}, with $X_0\in H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$ satisfying \eqref{eqn: closeness condition of H 2.5 norm} and \eqref{eqn: closeness condition of H 1 norm} with $\varepsilon_*, \xi_*>0$ found in Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium}.
Without loss of generality, we assume $R_{X_0} = 1$.
\subsection{A lower bound of the rate of energy dissipation}\label{section: lower bound for energy dissipation rate}
A key step to prove the exponential convergence of the global solution near equilibrium is to establish a lower bound of the rate of energy dissipation $\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}|\nabla u_X|^2\,dx$ (see Lemma \ref{lemma: energy estimate}) in terms of $\|X-X_*\|_{\dot{H}^1}$ provided that the latter is sufficiently small.
Let $S_\varepsilon$ be defined as in \eqref{eqn: def of data close to equilibrium}. Let $\varepsilon_*' \in(0,\varepsilon_*)$ to be determined.
Let $\Omega_X\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ denote the bounded open domain enclosed by $X(\mathbb{T})$ where $X\in S_{\sqrt{2}\varepsilon'_*} $.
Here the constant $\sqrt{2}$ comes from the estimate \eqref{eqn: estimates on the distance to the equilibrium for the global solution in all time intervals} of the global solution.
Define the collection of all such domains to be
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{M}_{\varepsilon_*'} = \{\Omega_X \Subset\mathbb{R}^2:\; \partial \Omega_X = X(\mathbb{T}), \;X\in S_{\sqrt{2}\varepsilon'_*} \}.
\end{equation*}
We assume that $\varepsilon_*'$ is sufficiently small, such that domains in $\mathcal{M}_{\varepsilon_*'}$ satisfy uniform $C^{1}$-regularity condition with uniform constants (see \cite{adams2003sobolev} in \S\,4.10 for the rigorous definition).
Indeed, this is achievable due to the implicit function theorem and the Sobolev embedding $H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})\hookrightarrow C^{1,\alpha}(\mathbb{T})$ for $\forall\, \alpha\in(0,1)$.
Let $u_X$ be the velocity field determined by a configuration $X\in S_{\sqrt{2}\varepsilon'_*} $. Let
\begin{equation*}
(u_X)_{\Omega_X}= |\Omega_X|^{-1}\int_{\Omega_X} u_X\,dx,\quad (u_X)_{\partial\Omega_X} = |\partial \Omega_X|^{-1}\int_{\partial\Omega_X} u_X\,dl,
\end{equation*}
where $l$ is the arc-length parameter of $\partial\Omega_X$.
Then by the boundary trace theorem \cite{adams2003sobolev},
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} |\nabla u_X|^2 \,dx \geq &\;\int_{\Omega_X} |\nabla u_X|^2 \,dx \geq C \int_{\partial\Omega_X} |u_X-(u_X)_{\Omega_X}|^2\,dl \\
\geq &\;C \int_{\partial\Omega_X} |u_X-(u_X)_{\partial\Omega_X}|^2\,dl = C\int_{\mathbb{T}} |u_X-(u_X)_{\partial\Omega_X}|^2 |X'(s)|\,ds.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Here we used the fact that $dl = |X'(s)|\,ds$, since $s$ is a monotone parameterization of $\partial\Omega_X$.
Thanks to the uniform $C^1$-regularity of $\Omega_X\in \mathcal{M}_{\varepsilon_*'}$, the constant $C$ is uniform for $\forall\, X\in S_{\sqrt{2}\varepsilon'_*} $.
We derive that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\int_{\mathbb{T}} |u_X(X(s))-(u_X)_{\partial\Omega_X}|^2 |X'(s)|\,ds \geq &\;\int_{\mathbb{T}} |u_X(X(s))-(u_X)_{\partial\Omega_X}|^2 (|X_*'(s)|-|X_*'(s)-X'(s)|)\,ds\\
\geq &\;(1- C_5\varepsilon_*')\int_{\mathbb{T}} |u_X(X(s))-(u_X)_{\partial\Omega_X}|^2\,ds\\
\geq &\;(1- C_5\varepsilon_*')\int_{\mathbb{T}} |u_X(X(s))-\bar{u}_X|^2\,ds.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Here $\bar{u}_X = |\mathbb{T}|^{-1}\int_{\mathbb{T}} u_X(X(s))\,ds$.
Again, the constant $C_5$, which first showed up in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium}, comes from the Sobolev embedding $H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})\hookrightarrow C^1(\mathbb{T})$ and is independent of $X\in S_{\sqrt{2}\varepsilon'_*}$.
Taking $\varepsilon_*'\leq (2C_5)^{-1}$, we obtain that
\begin{equation}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} |\nabla u_X|^2 \,dx \geq C\int_{\mathbb{T}} |u_X(X(s))-\bar{u}_X|^2\,ds
\label{eqn: energy dissipation rate can be bounded from below by the L2 norm of velocity oscillation}
\end{equation}
for some universal constant $C$ independent of $X\in S_{\sqrt{2}\varepsilon'_*} $.
Now we turn to derive a lower bound for $\int_{\mathbb{T}} |u_X(X(s))-\bar{u}_X|^2\,ds$.
We are going to perform linearization of $u_X(X(s))$ around the equilibrium configuration $X_*$.
Fix $X\in S_{\sqrt{2}\varepsilon'_*} $, with $\varepsilon_*'\leq \min\{1,\varepsilon_*\}$ satisfying all the assumptions above and to be determined.
Let $D(s) = X(s)-X_*(s)$ and
\begin{equation}
X_{\eta}(\cdot) \triangleq X_*(\cdot) +\eta D(\cdot),\quad\eta \in[0,1].
\label{eqn: defintion of X_eta}
\end{equation}
By definition, $\|D\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq \sqrt{2}\varepsilon_*'$.
It is easy to show that with $\varepsilon_*'$ sufficiently small,
\begin{align}
&\;\|X_\eta\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq C,\quad \forall\, \eta\in[0,1],\label{eqn: uniform H2.5 upper bound for the family of configurations near equilibrium}\\
&\;|X_\eta(s_1) - X_\eta(s_2)|\geq \frac{1}{\pi}|s_1-s_2|,\quad \forall\,s_1,s_2\in\mathbb{T},\;\forall\,\eta\in[0,1],\label{eqn: uniform stretching constant for the family of configurations near equilibrium}
\end{align}
where $C$ is a universal constant.
Note that with $\varepsilon_*'$ being sufficiently small, $X_\eta$ is also a non-self-intersecting string configuration, but it may not be in $ S_{\sqrt{2}\varepsilon'_*} $, as $R_{X_{\eta}} = 1$ is not necessarily true.
The following lemma shows that $u_X(X(s))$, as a function of $X$, can be well approximated by linearization around $X_*$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: linearization of velocity field around equilibrium}
Assume $\varepsilon_*'\leq \min\{1,\varepsilon_*, (2C_5)^{-1}\}$ is sufficiently small such that domains in $\mathcal{M}_{\varepsilon_*'}$ satisfy uniform $C^{1}$-regularity condition with uniform constants, and \eqref{eqn: uniform H2.5 upper bound for the family of configurations near equilibrium} and \eqref{eqn: uniform stretching constant for the family of configurations near equilibrium} hold. Then
\begin{equation}
u_X(X(s)) = \left.\frac{\partial}{\partial\eta}\right|_{\eta = 0}u_{X_\eta}(X_\eta(s))+\mathcal{R}_X(s),
\label{eqn: first approximation by linearization of velocity around equilibrium}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\|\mathcal{R}_X(s)\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\leq C\varepsilon_*' \|D\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})},
\label{eqn: estimate of the higher order error term in estimating the velocity around equilibrium}
\end{equation}
with $C$ being a universal constant.
\begin{proof}
Recall that $u_X$ is given by \eqref{eqn: velocity of membrane}.
By \eqref{eqn: simplification of integrand of g_X part 1},
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
u_X(X(s)) = &\;\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{L_{X}\cdot X'(s')}{|L_{X}|^2}M_{X}-\frac{L_{X}\cdot M_{X}}{|L_{X}|^2}X'(s') -\frac{X'(s')\cdot M_{X}}{|L_{X}|^2}L_{X}\,ds'\\
&\;+\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{2L_{X}\cdot X'(s')L_{X}\cdot M_{X}}{|L_{X}|^4}L_{X}\,ds',
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $L_X = L_X(s,s')$ and $M_X = M_X(s,s')$ are defined in \eqref{eqn: definition of L M N} and \eqref{eqn: definition of L M N at s}. The subscripts stress that they are determined by $X$.
Since $u_{X_*} \equiv 0$, by mean value theorem with respect to $\eta$, there exists an $\eta_*\in[0,1]$ such that,
\begin{equation*}
u_X(X(s)) = u_X(X(s)) -u_{X_*}(X_*(s)) = \left.\frac{\partial}{\partial\eta}\right|_{\eta = \eta_*}u_{X_\eta}(X_\eta(s)).
\end{equation*}
In Lemma \ref{lemma: eta derivative and the integral in u_X commute} in the Appendix \ref{appendix section: auxiliary calculations}, we will show that the $\eta$-derivative and the integral in $u_{X_\eta}$ commute. Hence,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
u_X(X(s)) = &\;\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{L_{D}\cdot X'_{\eta_*}(s')}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}M_{X_{\eta_*}} +\frac{L_{X_{\eta_*}}\cdot D'(s')}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}M_{X_{\eta_*}} +\frac{L_{X_{\eta_*}}\cdot X'_{\eta_*}(s')}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}M_{D}\,ds'\\
&\;+\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}-\frac{(L_{X_{\eta_*}}\cdot L_{D})(L_{X_{\eta_*}}\cdot X'_{\eta_*}(s'))}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^4}M_{X_{\eta_*}}\,ds'\\
&\;-\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{L_{D}\cdot M_{X_{\eta_*}}}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}X'_{\eta_*}(s')+\frac{L_{X_{\eta_*}}\cdot M_{D}}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}X'_{\eta_*}(s')+\frac{L_{X_{\eta_*}}\cdot M_{X_{\eta_*}}}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}D'(s')\,ds'\\
&\;+\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{2(L_{D}\cdot L_{X_{\eta_*}})(L_{X_{\eta_*}}\cdot M_{X_{\eta_*}})}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}X'_{\eta_*}(s')\,ds'\\
&\;-\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{D'(s')\cdot M_{X_{\eta_*}}}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}L_{X_{\eta_*}}+\frac{X'_{\eta_*}(s')\cdot M_{D}}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}L_{X_{\eta_*}}+\frac{X'_{\eta_*}(s')\cdot M_{X_{\eta_*}}}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}L_{D}\,ds'\\
&\;+\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{2(L_D\cdot L_{X_{\eta_*}})(X'_{\eta_*}(s')\cdot M_{X_{\eta_*}})}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}L_{X_{\eta_*}}\,ds'\\
&\;+\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{2(L_{D}\cdot X'_{\eta_*}(s'))(L_{X_{\eta_*}}\cdot M_{X_{\eta_*}})}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^4}L_{X_{\eta_*}} + \frac{2(L_{X_{\eta_*}}\cdot D'(s'))(L_{X_{\eta_*}}\cdot M_{X_{\eta_*}})}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^4}L_{X_{\eta_*}}\,ds'\\
&\;+\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{2(L_{X_{\eta_*}}\cdot X'_{\eta_*}(s'))(L_{D}\cdot M_{X_{\eta_*}})}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^4}L_{X_{\eta_*}} + \frac{2(L_{X_{\eta_*}}\cdot X'_{\eta_*}(s'))(L_{X_{\eta_*}}\cdot M_{D})}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^4}L_{X_{\eta_*}}\,ds'\\
&\;+\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{2(L_{X_{\eta_*}}\cdot X'_{\eta_*}(s'))(L_{X_{\eta_*}}\cdot M_{X_{\eta_*}})}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^4}L_{D}\,ds'\\
&\;-\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{8(L_{D}\cdot L_{X_{\eta_*}})(L_{X_{\eta_*}}\cdot X'_{\eta_*}(s'))(L_{D}\cdot M_{X_{\eta_*}})}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^4}L_{X_{\eta_*}}\,ds'.
\end{split}
\label{eqn: representation of velocity close to equilibrium}
\end{equation}
We then replace all the $X_{\eta_*}$ in \eqref{eqn: representation of velocity close to equilibrium} by $X_*$, i.e.\;$\eta = 0$, and introduce some error denoted by $\mathcal{R}_X(s)$. In this way, we obtain the representation \eqref{eqn: first approximation by linearization of velocity around equilibrium}.
To show \eqref{eqn: estimate of the higher order error term in estimating the velocity around equilibrium}, for conciseness, we only look at one part of $\mathcal{R}_X(s)$, which is the error in approximating the first term on the right hand side of \eqref{eqn: representation of velocity close to equilibrium},
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&\;\left\|\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{L_{D}\cdot X'_{\eta_*}(s')}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}M_{X_{\eta_*}}-\frac{L_{D}\cdot X'_{*}(s')}{|L_{X_{*}}|^2}M_{X_*}\,ds'\right\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\\
\leq &\;\left\|\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{L_{D}\cdot (X'_{\eta_*}(s') - X'_{*}(s'))}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}M_{X_{\eta_*}}\,ds'\right\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}+\left\|\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{L_{D}\cdot X'_{*}(s')}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}(M_{X_{\eta_*}}-M_{X_*})\,ds'\right\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;+\left\|\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{L_{D}\cdot X'_{*}(s')}{|L_{X_{*}}|^2}M_{X_*}\frac{|L_{X_{*}}|^2-|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}\,ds'\right\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\\
\leq &\;\left\|\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{L_{D}\cdot \eta_* D'(s')}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}M_{X_{\eta_*}}\,ds'\right\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}+\left\|\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{L_{D}\cdot X'_{*}(s')}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}\eta_* M_{D}\,ds'\right\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;+\left\|\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{L_{D}\cdot X'_{*}(s')}{|L_{X_{*}}|^2}M_{X_*}\frac{(L_{X_{*}}+L_{X_{\eta_*}})\cdot \eta_* L_D}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}\,ds'\right\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Note that \eqref{eqn: lower bound for L} and \eqref{eqn: uniform stretching constant for the family of configurations near equilibrium} imply that $|L_{X_*}|, |L_{X_{\eta_*}}|\geq C$ for some universal constant $C$.
By Lemma \ref{lemma: estimates for L M N}, \eqref{eqn: uniform H2.5 upper bound for the family of configurations near equilibrium}, and \eqref{eqn: uniform stretching constant for the family of configurations near equilibrium},
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&\;\left\|\frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{\mathbb{T}}\frac{L_{D}\cdot X'_{\eta_*}(s')}{|L_{X_{\eta_*}}|^2}M_{X_{\eta_*}}-\frac{L_{D}\cdot X'_{*}(s')}{|L_{X_{*}}|^2}M_{X_*}\,ds'\right\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\\
\leq &\;C \|L_D\|_{L^\infty_s(\mathbb{T})L^2_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\|D'\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\|M_{X_{\eta_*}}\|_{L^\infty_s(\mathbb{T})L^2_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;+C \|L_D\|_{L^\infty_s(\mathbb{T})L^2_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\|X_*'\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\|M_{D}\|_{L^\infty_s(\mathbb{T})L^2_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;+C \|L_D\|_{L^\infty_s(\mathbb{T})L^2_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\|X_*'\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\|M_{X_*}\|_{L^\infty_s(\mathbb{T})L^2_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}
\|L_{X_{*}}+L_{X_{\eta_*}}\|_{L^\infty_s(\mathbb{T})L^\infty_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\|L_{D}\|_{L^\infty_s(\mathbb{T})L^\infty_{s'}(\mathbb{T})}\\
\leq &\;C \|D'\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\|D'\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\|X_{\eta_*}''\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}+C \|D'\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\|X_*'\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\|D''\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\\
&\;+C \|D'\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\|X_*'\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\|X_*''\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}
(\|X_{*}'\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}+\|X_{\eta_*}'\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})})\|D'\|_{L^\infty(\mathbb{T})}\\
\leq &\;C \|D'\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\|D\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\\
\leq &\;C\varepsilon_*' \|D'\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
In a similar manner, we can prove the same bound for the other terms in $\mathcal{R}_{X}$. Thus we proved \eqref{eqn: estimate of the higher order error term in estimating the velocity around equilibrium}.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
The following lemma calculates the leading term of $u_X(X(s))$ in \eqref{eqn: first approximation by linearization of velocity around equilibrium}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: final representation of the linearization of velocity near equilibrium}
Assume $X_*(s) = (\cos s, \sin s)^T$. Then
\begin{equation}
\left.\frac{\partial}{\partial\eta}\right|_{\eta = 0}u_{X_\eta}(X_\eta(s))=-\frac{1}{4}\left(\begin{array}{cc}0&1\\-1&0\end{array}\right)\mathcal{H}D(s)-\frac{1}{4}\mathcal{H}D'(s).
\label{eqn: final representation of the linearization of velocity near equilibrium}
\end{equation}
Here $\mathcal{H}$ denotes the Hilbert transform on $\mathbb{T}$ \cite{grafakos2008classical}.
\end{lemma}
The proof is simply a long calculation. We leave it to the Appendix \ref{appendix section: auxiliary calculations}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: lower bound for the energy dissipation rate in terms of excess energy}
There is a universal $\varepsilon_{*}'>0$ and a universal constant $C>0$, such that
\begin{equation}
\|u_X(X(s)) - \bar{u}_X\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\geq C\|X-X_*\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})},\quad\forall\, X\in S_{\sqrt{2}\varepsilon_{*}'},
\label{eqn: lower bound for the L2 norm of velocity oscillation}
\end{equation}
where $S_\varepsilon$ is defined in \eqref{eqn: def of data close to equilibrium}.
In particular, this implies that
\begin{equation}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} |\nabla u_X|^2 \,dx\geq C\left(\|X\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}^2-\|X_*\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}^2\right),\quad\forall\, X\in S_{\sqrt{2}\varepsilon_{*}'},
\label{eqn: lower bound for the energy dissipation rate in terms of excess energy}
\end{equation}
with some universal constant $C>0$.
\begin{proof}
We always assume that $\varepsilon_*'$ satisfies the assumptions in Lemma \ref{lemma: linearization of velocity field around equilibrium}.
By Lemma \ref{lemma: final representation of the linearization of velocity near equilibrium},
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\left.\frac{\partial}{\partial\eta}\right|_{\eta = 0}u_{X_\eta}(X_\eta(s))=&\;-\frac{1}{4}\left(\begin{array}{cc}0&1\\-1&0\end{array}\right)\mathcal{H}D(s)-\frac{1}{4}\mathcal{H}D'(s)\\
=&\;-\frac{1}{4}\sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}} \left(\begin{array}{c}-i\cdot\mathrm{sgn}(k)\hat{D}_{k,2}+|k| \hat{D}_{k,1} \\i\cdot\mathrm{sgn}(k) \hat{D}_{k,1}+|k| \hat{D}_{k,2}\end{array}\right) \mathrm{e}^{iks}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Obviously,
\begin{equation}
\int_{\mathbb{T}}\left.\frac{\partial}{\partial\eta}\right|_{\eta = 0}u_{X_\eta}(X_\eta(s))\,ds = 0.
\label{eqn: linearization of velocity field has mean zero}
\end{equation}
By Parseval's identity and the fact that $\hat{D}_{-k} = \overline{\hat{D}_{k}}$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\left\|\left.\frac{\partial}{\partial\eta}\right|_{\eta = 0}u_{X_\eta}(X_\eta(s))\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}^2
=&\;\frac{\pi}{8}\sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}} \left|\left(\begin{array}{c}-i\cdot\mathrm{sgn}(k)\hat{D}_{k,2}+|k| \hat{D}_{k,1} \\i\cdot\mathrm{sgn}(k) \hat{D}_{k,1}+|k| \hat{D}_{k,2}\end{array}\right)\right|^2\\
\geq &\;\frac{\pi}{8}\left|\left(\begin{array}{c}-i\hat{D}_{1,2}+ \hat{D}_{1,1} \\i \hat{D}_{1,1}+\hat{D}_{1,2}\end{array}\right)\right|^2+\frac{\pi}{8}\left|\left(\begin{array}{c}i\hat{D}_{-1,2}+ \hat{D}_{-1,1} \\-i \hat{D}_{-1,1}+\hat{D}_{-1,2}\end{array}\right)\right|^2\\
&\;+\frac{\pi}{8}\sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}\atop |k|\geq 2} \left|(|k|-1)|\hat{D}_k|\right|^2\\
\geq &\;\frac{\pi}{2}\left[(\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}+\Im \hat{D}_{1,2})^2+(\Im \hat{D}_{1,1}-\Re \hat{D}_{1,2})^2\right]+\frac{\pi}{32}\sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}\atop |k|\geq 2} |k|^2|\hat{D}_k|^2.
\end{split}
\label{eqn: a crude lower bound for the linearized velocity L2 norm with mode 1 -1 unhandled}
\end{equation}
Recall that $D(s)$ satisfies the constraints \eqref{eqn: constraint on deviation from volume conservation} and \eqref{eqn: simplified equation for the optimal approximated equilibrium}, with $Y_*$ replaced by $X_*$.
\eqref{eqn: simplified equation for the optimal approximated equilibrium} imples that $(\Im \hat{D}_{1,1}-\Re \hat{D}_{1,2})^2 = 2(\Im \hat{D}_{1,1})^2+2(\Re \hat{D}_{1,2})^2$;
\eqref{eqn: constraint on deviation from volume conservation} together with \eqref{eqn: inner product of D and Y_star} implies that
\begin{equation*}
|\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}-\Im \hat{D}_{1,2}| \leq C\left|\int_\mathbb{T}D\cdot Y_* \right|\leq C\left|\int_\mathbb{T}D\times D'\,ds\right|\leq C\|D\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\|D'\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\leq C\varepsilon_*'\|D'\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}.
\end{equation*}
Here we used the fact that $D$ has mean zero on $\mathbb{T}$, and thus $\|D\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\leq C\|D\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq C\varepsilon_*'$.
Hence, we use \eqref{eqn: a crude lower bound for the linearized velocity L2 norm with mode 1 -1 unhandled} to derive that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\;\left\|\left.\frac{\partial}{\partial\eta}\right|_{\eta = 0}u_{X_\eta}(X_\eta(s))\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}^2\\
\geq &\;\frac{\pi}{2}\left[(\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}+\Im \hat{D}_{1,2})^2+(\Re \hat{D}_{1,1}-\Im \hat{D}_{1,2})^2+2(\Im \hat{D}_{1,1})^2+2(\Re \hat{D}_{1,2})^2\right]\\
&\;+\frac{\pi}{32}\sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}\atop |k|\geq 2} |k|^2|\hat{D}_k|^2 - C\varepsilon_*'^2\|D'\|^2_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\\
\geq &\;\frac{\pi}{32}\sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}} |k|^2|\hat{D}_k|^2 - C\varepsilon_*'^2\|D'\|^2_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}= \left(\frac{1}{64} - C\varepsilon_*'^2\right)\|D'\|^2_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}.
\end{split}
\label{eqn: a lower bound for the linearized velocity L2 norm with mode 1 -1 unhandled}
\end{equation}
Here $C$ is a universal constant.
To this end, we use Lemma \ref{lemma: linearization of velocity field around equilibrium} and \eqref{eqn: linearization of velocity field has mean zero} to derive that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\|u_X(X(s)) - \bar{u}_{X}\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})} \geq &\; \left\|\left.\frac{\partial}{\partial\eta}\right|_{\eta = 0}u_{X_\eta}(X_\eta(s))\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})} - \left\|\mathcal{R}_X(s) - \overline{\mathcal{R}_X}\right\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\\
\geq &\;\left(\frac{1}{64} - C\varepsilon_*'^2\right)^{1/2}\|D'\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})} - \|\mathcal{R}_X(s)\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}\\
\geq &\;\left[\left(\frac{1}{64} - C\varepsilon_*'^2\right)^{1/2}-C\varepsilon_*'\right]\|D'\|_{L^2(\mathbb{T})}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Again, $C$ is a universal constant. Taking $\varepsilon_*'$ sufficiently small, but still universal, we proved the desired lower bound \eqref{eqn: lower bound for the L2 norm of velocity oscillation} with some universal constant $C$.
\eqref{eqn: lower bound for the energy dissipation rate in terms of excess energy} follows immediately from \eqref{eqn: energy dissipation rate can be bounded from below by the L2 norm of velocity oscillation}, \eqref{eqn: lower bound for the L2 norm of velocity oscillation} and Lemma \ref{lemma: estimates concerning closest equilbrium}.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
With Lemma \ref{lemma: lower bound for the energy dissipation rate in terms of excess energy}, we conclude by \eqref{eqn: energy estimate on each time slice simplified version} and Lemma \ref{lemma: estimates concerning closest equilbrium} that
\begin{corollary}\label{coro: exponential decay of H1 distance from equilibrium when it is in a small H2.5 neighborhood}
Let $X_0$ satisfy all the assumptions in Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium} so that $X$ is the unique global-in-time solution of \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} starting from $X_0$. Then there exist universal constants $\varepsilon_{*}',\alpha>0$, such that if in addition $X(\cdot, t)\in S_{\sqrt{2}\varepsilon_{*}'}$,
\begin{align*}
\|X\|^2_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}(t)-\|X_*\|^2_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}(t)\leq &\;e^{-2\alpha t}\left(\|X_0\|^2_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}-\|X_{0*}\|^2_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}\right),\\
\|X-X_*\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}(t)\leq &\;2\sqrt{2}e^{-\alpha t}\|X_0-X_{0*}\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})},
\end{align*}
where $S_\varepsilon$ is defined in \eqref{eqn: def of data close to equilibrium}.
\end{corollary}
\subsection{Proof of exponential convergence to equilibrium configurations}\label{section: proof of exponential convergence to equilibrium configurations}
Before we prove Theorem \ref{thm: exponential convergence}, we first state the following simple lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: property of epsilon_xi}
Let $\varepsilon_\xi$ be defined as in \eqref{eqn: defintion of varepsilon_* in the corollary}, i.e.\;$\varepsilon_\xi = 2C_4(C_6,1/(2\pi))(C_7+2) (|\ln (2\xi)|+1)^2(2\xi)$, where $C_4$, $C_6$ and $C_7$ are universal constant. Then $\varepsilon_\xi$ is increasing on $\xi \in(0,1/(2e)]$. Moreover, for $\forall\,\xi \in(0,1/(2e)]$ and $\forall \,c\geq e$,
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{c}\varepsilon_{\xi}\leq \varepsilon_{(\xi/c)}\leq \frac{1}{c}\left(\frac{2+\ln c}{2}\right)^2\varepsilon_{\xi}\triangleq \beta_c\varepsilon_\xi.
\end{equation*}
The first inequality is true even for $\forall\, c\geq 1$. $\beta_c$ is decreasing in $c\geq e$ and $\beta_c\leq \frac{9}{4e}<1$ for $\forall\, c\geq e$.
\end{lemma}
Its proof is a simple calculation, which we shall omit.
Now we are able to prove Theorem \ref{thm: exponential convergence}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm: exponential convergence}]
As before, we assume $R_{X_0} = 1$.
For convenience, we denote
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{F}(t) = \|X-X_*\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}(t),\quad \mathcal{G}(t) = \|X-X_*\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}(t).
\end{equation*}
Note that the case $\mathcal{F}(0) = 0$ is trivial; we shall only discuss the case $\mathcal{F}(0)>0$ in the sequel.
Let $\varepsilon_*'$ be defined as in Corollary \ref{coro: exponential decay of H1 distance from equilibrium when it is in a small H2.5 neighborhood}. We may assume $\varepsilon_*'\leq 1$. Take $\xi_{**}\leq 1/(16e)$ such that
\begin{equation}
\varepsilon_{8\xi_{**}} = 2C_4(C_6,1/(2\pi))(C_7+2) (|\ln (16\xi_{**})|+1)^2(16\xi_{**}) = \sqrt{2}\varepsilon_*',
\label{eqn: definition of xi_**}
\end{equation}
where $C_4$, $C_6$ and $C_7$ are universal constants defined in \eqref{eqn: introducing C_4}, \eqref{eqn: uniform bound of the family of solution} and \eqref{eqn: bound for H1 norm of the difference to the equilibrium} respectively.
Such $\xi_{**}$ is uniquely achievable as a universal constant by the assumptions $C_4\geq 1$ and $\varepsilon_*'\leq 1$, since it is required that
\begin{equation*}
(|\ln (16\xi_{**})|+1)^2(16\xi_{**}) =\frac{\sqrt{2}\varepsilon_*'}{2C_4(C_7+2) }\leq\frac{\sqrt{2}}{4},
\end{equation*}
while $x(|\ln x|+1)^2$ monotonically maps $(0,1/e]$ onto $(0,4/e]$.
Hence, by Corollary \ref{coro: refined decay estimate of global solution}, the solution $X$ satisfies that for $\forall\, t\geq 0$,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{G}(t)\leq \max\{2\mathcal{G}(0)e^{-t/8},\varepsilon_{\mathcal{F}(0)}\}\leq \max \{2\mathcal{G}(0)e^{-t/8},\sqrt{2}\varepsilon_*'\}.
\label{eqn: decay of G in the first time interval crude form}
\end{equation}
Here we used Lemma \ref{lemma: property of epsilon_xi} to find that $\varepsilon_{\mathcal{F}(0)} \leq \varepsilon_{8\xi_{**}}= \sqrt{2}\varepsilon_*'$.
If $2\mathcal{G}(0)\leq \varepsilon_{\mathcal{F}(0)}$, we take $t_* = 0$; otherwise, take $t_*$ such that
\begin{equation}
2\mathcal{G}(0)e^{-t_*/8}=\varepsilon_{\mathcal{F}(0)}.
\label{eqn: first constraints on t_* in exp convergence}
\end{equation}
Hence, we have $X(t)\in S_{\varepsilon_{\mathcal{F}(0)}}\subset S_{\sqrt{2}\varepsilon_*'}$ if $t\geq t_*$, which allows us to apply Corollary \ref{coro: exponential decay of H1 distance from equilibrium when it is in a small H2.5 neighborhood} for $t\geq t_*$.
By Lemma \ref{lemma: energy estimate} and Lemma \ref{lemma: estimates concerning closest equilbrium}, we derive that
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{F}(t_*)\leq 2 \left(\|X\|^2_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})} - \|X_*\|^2_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}\right)^{1/2}(t_*)\leq 2\left(\|X_0\|^2_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})} - \|X_{0*}\|^2_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})}\right)^{1/2}\leq 2\sqrt{2}\mathcal{F}(0).
\end{equation*}
By Corollary \ref{coro: exponential decay of H1 distance from equilibrium when it is in a small H2.5 neighborhood}, for some universal $\alpha>0$, and $\forall\, t>0$,
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{F}(t_*+t)\leq 2\sqrt{2}\mathcal{F}(t_*)e^{-\alpha t}\leq 8\mathcal{F}(0)e^{-\alpha t}.
\end{equation*}
Note that $8\mathcal{F}(0)\in (0,1/(2e)]$ by the assumption on $\xi_{**}$, in which interval $\varepsilon_\xi$ is increasing in $\xi$.
Without loss of generality, we may assume $\alpha <\frac{1}{8}$.
We additionally take $t_{**}>0$ to be a universal constant such that
\begin{equation}
e^{-\alpha t_{**}}\leq \frac{1}{8},\quad e^{\left(\frac{1}{8}-\alpha\right)t_{**}}\geq 2.
\label{eqn: constraint on t_**}
\end{equation}
To this end, we shall use mathematical induction to show \eqref{eqn: exp convergence in H2.5 norm}.
Let us summarize what has been proved so far:
\begin{enumerate}
\item For $\forall\, t\geq 0$, $\mathcal{G}(t)\leq \max \{2e^{-t/8}\mathcal{G}(0),\varepsilon_{\mathcal{F}(0)}\}$.
\item Wit the choice of $t_*$ in \eqref{eqn: first constraints on t_* in exp convergence}, for $\forall\, t\in[t_*, t_*+2t_{**}]$, $\mathcal{G}(t)\leq \varepsilon_{\mathcal{F}(0)}\leq \sqrt{2}\varepsilon_*'$.
\item For $\forall\, t>0$, $\mathcal{F}(t_*+t)\leq 8\mathcal{F}(0)e^{-\alpha t}$. In particular, with the choice of $t_{**}$ in \eqref{eqn: constraint on t_**}, for $\forall\,k\in\mathbb{Z}_+$, $k\geq 2$, $\mathcal{F}(t_*+kt_{**})\leq e^{-\alpha (k-1)t_{**}}\mathcal{F}(0)$.
\end{enumerate}
Suppose that
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{G}(t_*+kt_{**})\leq \varepsilon_{e^{-(k-2)\alpha t_{**}}\mathcal{F}(0)}
\label{eqn: decay of G in the exp convergence}
\end{equation}
has been proved for some $k\geq 2$, $k\in\mathbb{Z}_+$ (indeed, the case $k =2$ has been established above).
By Corollary \ref{coro: refined decay estimate of global solution}, $\forall\, t\in[0,t_{**}]$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{G}(t_*+kt_{**}+t)\leq &\;\max\{2e^{-t/8}\mathcal{G}(t_*+kt_{**}),\varepsilon_{\mathcal{F}(t_*+kt_{**})}\}\\
\leq &\;\max\{2e^{-t/8}\varepsilon_{e^{-(k-2)\alpha t_{**}}\mathcal{F}(0)},\varepsilon_{e^{-(k-1)\alpha t_{**}}\mathcal{F}(0)}\}.
\end{split}
\label{eqn: estimates of G inside the time interval}
\end{equation}
In particular,
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{G}(t_*+(k+1)t_{**})\leq \max\{2e^{-t_{**}/8}\varepsilon_{e^{-(k-2)\alpha t_{**}}\mathcal{F}(0)},\varepsilon_{e^{-(k-1)\alpha t_{**}}\mathcal{F}(0)}\}.
\end{equation*}
We claim that with the choice of $t_{**}$ in \eqref{eqn: constraint on t_**}, the first term on the right hand side is always smaller.
Indeed, by \eqref{eqn: constraint on t_**}, and the lower bound in Lemma \ref{lemma: property of epsilon_xi},
\begin{equation*}
\frac{2e^{-t_{**}/8}\varepsilon_{e^{-(k-2)\alpha t_{**}}\mathcal{F}(0)}}{\varepsilon_{e^{-(k-1)\alpha t_{**}}\mathcal{F}(0)}} \leq \frac{2e^{-t_{**}/8}\varepsilon_{e^{-(k-2)\alpha t_{**}}\mathcal{F}(0)}}{e^{-\alpha t_{**}}\varepsilon_{e^{-(k-2)\alpha t_{**}}\mathcal{F}(0)}} = 2e^{-\left(\frac{1}{8}-\alpha\right)t_{**}}\leq 1.
\end{equation*}
Hence, we proved that
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{G}(t_*+(k+1)t_{**})\leq \varepsilon_{e^{-(k-1)\alpha t_{**}}\mathcal{F}(0)}.
\end{equation*}
Therefore, by induction, \eqref{eqn: decay of G in the exp convergence} is true for all $k\in\mathbb{Z}_+$, $k\geq 2$; so is \eqref{eqn: estimates of G inside the time interval}.
With the choice of $t_{**}$, we use \eqref{eqn: estimates of G inside the time interval} and the upper bound in Lemma \ref{lemma: property of epsilon_xi} to derive that for $\forall\, t\in[0,t_{**}]$,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{G}(t_*+kt_{**}+t)\leq &\;\max\{2e^{-t/8}\varepsilon_{e^{-(k-2)\alpha t_{**}}\mathcal{F}(0)},\varepsilon_{e^{-(k-1)\alpha t_{**}}\mathcal{F}(0)}\}\\
\leq &\;\max\{2e^{-t/8}\beta_{e^{\alpha t_{**}}}^{k-2}\varepsilon_{\mathcal{F}(0)},\beta_{e^{\alpha t_{**}}}^{k-1}\varepsilon_{\mathcal{F}(0)}\}\\
\leq &\;\beta_{8}^{k-2}\varepsilon_{\mathcal{F}(0)} \max\{2e^{-t/8},\beta_{8}\} \leq 2\beta_{8}^{k-2}\varepsilon_{\mathcal{F}(0)}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Note that $t_{**}$ and $\beta_8<1$ are both universal constants.
Hence, combining this with the fact that $\mathcal{G}(t_*+t) \leq \varepsilon_{\mathcal{F}(0)}$ for $\forall\, t\geq 0$, we find that there exist universal constants $\alpha_*\leq 1/8$ and $C>1$, such that for $\forall\, t\geq 0$,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{G}(t_*+t)\leq C e^{-\alpha_* t}\varepsilon_{\mathcal{F}(0)}.
\label{eqn: exp decay when t is larger than t_*}
\end{equation}
If $t_* = 0$, we readily proved that for $\forall\, t\geq 0$,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{G}(t)\leq C e^{-\alpha_* t}\varepsilon_{\mathcal{F}(0)},
\label{eqn: exp decay when G is small}
\end{equation}
where $C$ and $\alpha_*$ are universal constants.
If $t_*>0$, by \eqref{eqn: first constraints on t_* in exp convergence} and the fact that $\alpha_*\leq 1/8$, $\varepsilon_{\mathcal{F}(0)} = 2e^{-t_*/8}\mathcal{G}(0)\leq 2e^{-\alpha_{*}t_*}\mathcal{G}(0)$.
Hence, by \eqref{eqn: exp decay when t is larger than t_*}, for $\forall\, t\geq 0$,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{G}(t_*+t)\leq C e^{-\alpha_* (t_*+t)}\mathcal{G}(0).
\label{eqn: decay of G in the latter time interval}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, since $\alpha_*\leq 1/8$, we also know that for $t\in[0,t_*]$,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{G}(t)\leq 2e^{-t/8}\mathcal{G}(0)\leq 2e^{-\alpha_{*}t}\mathcal{G}(0).
\label{eqn: decay of G in the first time interval}
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{eqn: decay of G in the latter time interval} and \eqref{eqn: decay of G in the first time interval}, we proved that
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{G}(t)\leq Ce^{-\alpha_{*}t}\mathcal{G}(0).
\label{eqn: exp decay when G is large}
\end{equation}
with some universal constants $\alpha_*$ and $C$.
Combining \eqref{eqn: exp decay when G is small} and \eqref{eqn: exp decay when G is large}, we complete the proof of \eqref{eqn: exp convergence in H2.5 norm}.
In order to prove \eqref{eqn: exp convergence to a fixed configuration}, we use the fact $u_{X_*}(x) \equiv 0$ to derive that
\begin{equation*}
\|u_X(X(s))\|_{H^1(\mathbb{T})} = \|u_X(X(s))- u_{X_*}(X_*(s))\|_{H^1(\mathbb{T})} \leq \|\mathcal{L}X-\mathcal{L}X_*\|_{H^1(\mathbb{T})}+\|g_X-g_{X_*}\|_{H^1(\mathbb{T})}.
\end{equation*}
By Corollary \ref{coro: L2 estimate for g_X1-g_X2} and Corollary \ref{coro: H1 estimate for g_X1-g_X2},
\begin{equation*}
\|X_t(s,t)\|_{H^1(\mathbb{T})} = \|u_X(X(s),t)\|_{H^1(\mathbb{T})} \leq C \|X-X_*\|_{\dot{H}^2(\mathbb{T})}(t) \leq C \|X-X_*\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}(t).
\end{equation*}
Here $C$ is a universal constant thanks to the uniform estimates of solutions obtained in Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium}.
Hence, by \eqref{eqn: exp convergence in H2.5 norm},
\begin{equation}
\|X(s,t)-X(s,t')\|_{H^1(\mathbb{T})} \leq \int_{t}^{t'} \|X_t(s,\tau)\|_{H^1(\mathbb{T})}\,d\tau \leq CB(X_0)\int_{t}^{t'} e^{-\alpha_*\tau}\,d\tau.
\label{eqn: X(t) is a Cauchy sequence in H^1 given the exp decay}
\end{equation}
Here $B(X_0)$ is defined in \eqref{eqn: exp convergence in H2.5 norm} and $C$ is a universal constant.
This implies that $X(s,t)$ is a Cauchy sequence in $H^1(\mathbb{T})$, which converges to some $X_\infty(s)\in H^1(\mathbb{T})$.
Take $t'\rightarrow +\infty$ in \eqref{eqn: X(t) is a Cauchy sequence in H^1 given the exp decay} and we find
\begin{equation}
\|X(s,t)-X_\infty(s)\|_{H^1(\mathbb{T})} \leq CB(X_0)e^{-\alpha_*t}.
\label{eqn: exp convergence to a fixed configuration in H^1 norm}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, by virtue of the bound \eqref{eqn: uniform bound of H 2.5 norm for the global solution} of $\|X\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}(t)$, we may take $\tilde{X}_{w,\infty}\in H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$ as an arbitrary weak limit (up to a subsequence) of $\{\tilde{X}(t)\}_{t\geq 0}$ in $H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$.
Note that we only have the bound on the $H^{5/2}$-seminorm of $X(t)$, so we can only extract weak limit for $\{\tilde{X}(t)\}_{t\geq 0}$ instead of $\{X(t)\}_{t\geq 0}$ at this moment.
By compact Sobolev embedding, $\tilde{X}_{w,\infty}$ is a strong $H^1(\mathbb{T})$-limit of a subsequence of $\{\tilde{X}(t)\}_{t\geq 0}$.
Since $\tilde{X}(t)\rightarrow \tilde{X}_{\infty}$ in $H^1(\mathbb{T})$, one must have $\tilde{X}_{w,\infty} = \tilde{X}_\infty$.
And this is true for all weak limits of $\{\tilde{X}(t)\}_{t\geq 0}$.
Hence, $X_{\infty} \in H^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})$ and satisfies $\|X_\infty\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}(\mathbb{T})}\leq C$, with the same universal constant $C$ as in \eqref{eqn: uniform bound of H 2.5 norm for the global solution}.
By \eqref{eqn: exp convergence in H2.5 norm} and the convergence $X(t)\rightarrow X_\infty$ in $H^1(\mathbb{T})$, we know that $\|X_\infty - X_{\infty,*}\|_{\dot{H}^1(\mathbb{T})} = 0$. Hence $X_\infty = X_{\infty,*}$ is an equilibrium configuration.
To this end, we derive \eqref{eqn: exp convergence to a fixed configuration} as follows
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\|X(t)-X_\infty\|_{H^{5/2}} \leq &\; C\|X(t)-X_\infty\|_{H^1}+C\|X(t)-X_\infty\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}\\
\leq &\; C\|X(t)-X_\infty\|_{H^1}+C\|X(t)-X_*(t)\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}+C\|X_\infty(t)-X_*(t)\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Note that both $X_*$ and $X_\infty$ are equilibrium configurations. Since $X_\infty(s,t)-X_*(s,t)$ as a function of $s\in\mathbb{T}$ only contains Fourier modes with wave numbers $0$ and $\pm 1$, we can replace the $H^{5/2}$-seminorm in the last term by $H^1$-seminorm without changing its value, i.e.
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\|X(t)-X_\infty\|_{H^{5/2}} \leq &\; C\|X(t)-X_\infty\|_{H^1}+C\|X(t)-X_*(t)\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}+C\|X_\infty(t)-X_*(t)\|_{\dot{H}^{1}}\\
\leq &\; C\|X(t)-X_\infty\|_{H^1}+C\|X(t)-X_*(t)\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}+C\|X(t)-X_\infty(t)\|_{\dot{H}^{1}}\\
&\;+C\|X(t)-X_*(t)\|_{\dot{H}^{1}}\\
\leq &\; C\|X(t)-X_\infty\|_{H^1}+C\|X(t)-X_*(t)\|_{\dot{H}^{5/2}}\\
\leq &\; CB(X_0)e^{-\alpha_*t}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
In the last inequality, we used \eqref{eqn: exp convergence in H2.5 norm} and \eqref{eqn: exp convergence to a fixed configuration in H^1 norm}.
This completes the proof of \eqref{eqn: exp convergence to a fixed configuration}.
\end{proof}
\section{Conclusion and Discussion}
In this paper, we transform the Stokes immersed boundary problem \eqref{eqn: stokes equation}-\eqref{eqn: kinematic equation of membrane} in two dimensions into a contour dynamic formulation \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem} via the fundamental solution of the Stokes equation.
We proved that there exists a unique local solution of the contour dynamic formulation (Theorem \ref{thm: local in time existence} and Theorem \ref{thm: local in time uniqueness}), provided that the initial data is an $H^{5/2}$-function in Lagrangian coordinate and satisfies the well-stretched condition \eqref{eqn: well_stretched assumption}.
If in addition the initial configuration is sufficiently close to an equilibrium, the solution should exist globally in time (Theorem \ref{thm: global existence near equilibrium}), and it converges exponentially to an equilibrium as $t\rightarrow +\infty$ (Theorem \ref{thm: exponential convergence}).
Regularity of the ambient flow field can thus be recovered through the fundamental solution of the Stokes equation (Lemma \ref{lemma: the velocity field is continuous} and Lemma \ref{lemma: energy estimate}).
In the contour dynamic formulation \eqref{eqn: contour dynamic formulation of the immersed boundary problem}, the string motion is given by a singular integral, which depends nonlinearly functional on the string configuration.
The starting point of the proofs in this paper is that the principal part of the singular integral in the contour dynamic formulation introduces dissipation, which essentially results from the dissipation in the Stokes flow.
Then it suffices to show that the remainder term is regular in some sense and can be well-controlled by the dissipation.
The same approach may also apply to the higher dimensional case, where a 2-D closed membrane is immersed and moving in a 3-D Stokes flow, although the description of the 2-D membrane needs some extra efforts.
Note that the equilibrium shape of the membrane may not necessarily be a sphere.
We shall address this problem in a forthcoming work.
In this paper, we only consider the simplest case where the 1-D string is modeled by a Hookean material with zero resting length in the force-free state.
See the local elastic energy density \eqref{eqn: elastic energy density}.
In particular, the material always tends to shorten its length in all time.
Other types of elastic constitutive law can be also considered.
In fact, most of the discussion in this paper may also apply to more general elastic energy of other forms.
We do not dig deep into this topic here, but it would be interesting to find out what conditions are needed for the energy density so that the current approach still works.
|
\section{Introduction}
\section{Introduction}
Physical processes driven by the flavor changing neutral currents (FCNC) are forbidden in the Standard Model (SM) at tree level. Since they occur through loops,
their measurements offer a low energy window to the particle content in the loops. In other words, they do not only represent a fine test of validity of the SM, but they also offer an opportunity
to look for the effects of physics (particles) beyond the SM (BSM) at low energies. The main obstacle to the accurate comparison between the SM theory and the experimental data lies in the fact that the non-perturbative QCD effects are not under full theoretical control. While the solution to non-perturbative QCD is lacking, in some situations the hadronization effects can be solved by means of numerical simulations of QCD on the lattice (LQCD). Over the past couple of decades we witnessed a huge progress in reducing the uncertainties in the LQCD results. Nowadays, an excellent theoretical control of the neutral meson mixing processes promoted those FCNC processes to viability tests of the New Physics (NP) model candidates.
Besides the oscillation frequencies of the neutral meson systems, the processes based on $b\to s$ transitions received a great deal of attention in the particle physics community. While the inclusive and exclusive processes based on the penguin-induced $b\to s\gamma$ decay have been, and still are, a very significant constraint when building a NP model, the processes based on $b\to s\ell^+\ell^-$ received a huge attention because they allow to access another types of penguin and box diagrams. With the advent of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) the measurement of ${\mathcal B}(B_s\to \mu^+\mu^-)$ became possible~\cite{CMS:2014xfa} and the result appeared to be somewhat lower than predicted~\cite{Bobeth:2013uxa}. The spectrum of $d{\mathcal B}(B\to K\mu^+\mu^-)/dq^2$ has been measured~\cite{Aaij:2014pli} too and in the range of large $q^2$'s it appears to be larger than predicted~\cite{Bobeth:2011nj,Becirevic:2015asa}. A full angular analyses of ${\mathcal B}(B\to K^\ast \mu^+\mu^-)$~\cite{Aaij:2014pli,Aaij:2016flj} and ${\mathcal B}(B_s\to \phi \mu^+\mu^-)$~\cite{Aaij:2015esa} revealed discrepancies in several observables with respect to their SM predictions~\cite{Altmannshofer:2014rta}. Moreover, the measurement of $R_K= {\mathcal B}^\prime (B\to K \mu^+\mu^-)/{\mathcal B}^\prime (B\to K e^+e^-)$~\cite{Aaij:2014ora} was shown to be significantly lower than predicted (by $2.4\sigma$)~\cite{Bordone:2016gaq}.~\footnote{We use ${\mathcal B}^\prime (B\to K\ell^+\ell^-)$ to indicate that the decay rate has not been fully integrated but only within the window $q^2\in [1,6]\ {\rm GeV}^2$.} Those new experimental data helped discarding several NP models and are currently used as constraints in building a NP model.
Simultaneously with the research of FCNC processes, the LHC experiments allowed observing the missing ingredient of the SM, the Higgs boson, the mass of which has been found to be $m_h = 125.09(24)$~GeV~\cite{Aad:2015zhl}. While this was a milestone of the LHC, the pending question of hierarchy of scales remains open and a quest for physics BSM continues. One of the minimalistic approaches to building a model of physics BSM is to extend the Higgs sector by introducing an extra Higgs doublet. Phenomenology in the scenarios with two Higgs doublets appears to be very rich and the associated models are generically called the Two Higgs Doublet Models (2HDM), cf. e.g.~\cite{Gunion:1989we,Gunion:2002zf,Branco:2011iw}. Nowadays the experimental search of the additional Higgs bosons is one of the main goals at LHC, in particular that of the charged Higgs boson~\cite{Akeroyd:2016ymd}. Like in the SM, introducing fermions to the 2HDM context results in a plethora of new parameters. To restrain the number of those parameters and to prevent from appearance the FCNC at tree level it is common to assume a peculiar pattern of Yukawa couplings. To test those assumptions one needs to compare many measured observables with theoretical expressions derived in SM with the extended Higgs sector. In this paper we elaborate a few lessons one can learn from the measured $b\to s\mu^+\mu^-$ processes about 2HDM with a softly broken $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry. In doing so we will use two observables, namely ${\mathcal B}(B_s\to \mu^+\mu^-)$ and ${\mathcal B}(B\to K \mu^+\mu^-)_{\mathrm{high}-q^2}$, which are very well measured experimentally and for which the theoretical control of the corresponding hadronic uncertainties is established by the LQCD computations~\cite{Aoki:2016frl}. For other observables the theoretical uncertainties are not as well assessed and one might run a risk of interpreting the unknown hadronic uncertainties as signals of physics BSM. We should also emphasize that 2HDM alone cannot explain $R_K^\mathrm{SM}>R_K^\mathrm{exp}$, and in this paper we will ignore the channels with electrons in the final state.
A study along the line we are pursuing here has been initiated in Ref.~\cite{Li:2014fea} in which the authors computed the Wilson coefficients in the Aligned 2HDM (A2HDM), for the operators relevant to the $B_s\to \mu^+\mu^-$ decay. In this paper we revisit their computation and extend it to include the operators that are needed for the phenomenological analysis of $B\to K^{(\ast)}\ell^+\ell^-$ and other similar decays. While we broadly agree with the results of Ref.~\cite{Li:2014fea}, there are a couple of points in which we disagree. We will examine those points, compute the remaining Wilson coefficients and use our results to discuss the phenomenological consequences on the 2HDM scenarios by comparing ${\mathcal B}(B_s\to \mu^+\mu^-)^\mathrm{2HDM}$ and ${\mathcal B}(B\to K \mu^+\mu^-)_{\mathrm{high}-q^2}^\mathrm{2HDM}$ with their experimental values. We will then discuss the consequences on the similar decays with $\tau$-leptons in the final state.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: In Sec.~\ref{sec:2hdm} we remind the reader of the main general constraints on the spectrum of scalars in 2HDM and perform a scan of parameters by assuming the lowest CP-even Higgs state to be the one measured at LHC. In Sec.~\ref{sec:eff} we write the low energy effective theory and present our results for all the Wilson coefficients in Sec.~\ref{sec:wc}. We compare our results with the existing ones (in the limits in which the comparison can be made) in Sec.~\ref{sec:compare} and elucidate the subtleties related to the matching procedure in the between the full (2HDM) and effective theories in Sec.~\ref{sec:MATCH}. Phenomenological discussion is made in Sec.~\ref{sec:pheno0} and Sec.~\ref{sec:pheno}. We briefly conclude in Sec.~\ref{sec:concl}.
\section{General constraints on 2HDM}
\label{sec:2hdm}
In this Section we remind the reader of the basic ingredients of 2HDM, enumerate the parameters of the model and list the main general constraints
on the spectrum of scalars which are then used to perform a scan of allowed parameters to obtain the allowed ranges of the Higgs masses and couplings.
\subsection{2HDM}
We consider a general CP-conserving 2HDM with a softly broken $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry.
The most general potential can then be written as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:V2hdm}
V(\Phi_1,\Phi_2) = m_{11}^2\Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_1 & +m_{22}^2\Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_2 + m_{12}^2(\Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_2+\Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_1)+\dfrac{\lambda_1}{2}(\Phi_1^\dagger \Phi_1)^2+\dfrac{\lambda_2}{2}(\Phi_2^\dagger \Phi_2)^2\nonumber\\
&+\lambda_3 \Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_1 \Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_2+\lambda_4 \Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_2 \Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_1+\dfrac{\lambda_5}{2}\left[ (\Phi_1^\dagger\Phi_2)^2+(\Phi_2^\dagger\Phi_1)^2\right],
\end{align}
where the term proportional to $m_{12}^2$ accounts for the soft breaking of $\mathbb{Z}_2$.~\footnote{
We remind the reader that the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry ($\Phi_1 \to \pm \Phi_1,\, \Phi_2 \to \mp \Phi_2$) of the Lagrangian forbids
transitions $\Phi_1 \leftrightarrow \Phi_2$. Soft breaking of $\mathbb{Z}_2$ means that such transitions may occur only due to dimension-$2$ operators
(terms proportional to $m_{12}^2$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:V2hdm}) so that $\mathbb{Z}_2$ remains preserved at very short distances, cf. discussion in Ref.~\cite{ginzburg}.} The scalar doublets $\Phi_a$ ($a=1,2$) can be parameterized as
\begin{align}
\Phi_a(x) = \begin{pmatrix}
\phi_a^+(x) \\
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left[v_a+\rho_a(x)+i \eta_a(x)\right]
\end{pmatrix},
\end{align}
with $v_{1,2}\geq 0$ being the vacuum expectation values satisfying $v^\mathrm{SM}=\sqrt{v_1^2+v_2^2}$, already known from experiments, $v^\mathrm{SM}=246.22$~GeV~\cite{Olive:2016xmw}. In the following, for notational simplicity, we will drop the argument of the Higgs fields. Two of the six fields are Goldstone bosons, while the remaining ones are four massive scalars: two CP-even states ($h$, $H$), one CP-odd state ($A$), and one charged Higgs ($H^\pm$). These fields are defined as
\begin{align}
\begin{pmatrix}
\phi_1^+\\ \phi_2^+
\end{pmatrix}
&=\begin{pmatrix}
\cos \beta & - \sin \beta\\
\sin\beta & \cos \beta
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
G^+\\ H^+
\end{pmatrix},\qquad
\begin{pmatrix}
\eta_1\\ \eta_2
\end{pmatrix}
=\begin{pmatrix}
\cos \beta & - \sin \beta\\
\sin\beta & \cos \beta
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
G^0\\ A
\end{pmatrix},
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\begin{pmatrix}
\rho_1\\ \rho_2
\end{pmatrix}
&=\begin{pmatrix}
\cos \alpha & - \sin \alpha\\
\sin\alpha & \cos \alpha
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
H\\ h
\end{pmatrix},
\end{align}
The mixing angles $\alpha$ and $\beta$ satisfy
\begin{align}
\tan \beta = \frac{v_2}{v_1},\qquad \tan 2\alpha = \dfrac{2(-m_{12}^2+\lambda_{345}v_1 v_2)}{m_{12}^2(v_2/v_1-v_1/v_2)+\lambda_1 v_1^2-\lambda_2 v_2^2},
\end{align}
with $\lambda_{345}\equiv \lambda_3+\lambda_4+\lambda_5$.
The masses of the physical scalars can be written in terms of parameters which appear in the potential as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:massesH}
m_H^2 &= M^2 \sin^2(\alpha-\beta)+\left(\lambda_1 \cos^2\alpha \cos^2\beta+\lambda_2 \sin^2\alpha \sin^2\beta+\frac{\lambda_{345}}{2}\sin 2\alpha \sin 2\beta\right)v^2,\\
\label{eq:massesh}
m_h^2 &= M^2 \cos^2(\alpha-\beta)+\left(\lambda_1 \sin^2\alpha \cos^2\beta+\lambda_2 \cos^2\alpha \sin^2\beta-\frac{\lambda_{345}}{2}\sin 2\alpha \sin 2\beta\right)v^2,\\
\label{eq:massesA}
m_{A}^2 &= M^2-\lambda_5 v^2,\\
\label{eq:massesHp}
m_{H^\pm}^2 &= M^2-\frac{\lambda_{4}+\lambda_5}{2} v^2,
\end{align}
where the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ breaking term is now parameterized via $M^2\equiv \dfrac{m_{12}^2}{\sin \beta \cos \beta}$.
In the Yukawa sector, the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry becomes particularly important as it prevents the flavor changing processes to appear at tree level~\cite{Glashow:1976nt}. Furthermore it
enforces that each type of the right-handed fermion couples to a single Higgs doublet. Four choices are then possible and they are called Type I, II, X (Lepton Specific) and Z (Flipped) 2HDM~\cite{Branco:2011iw}.~\footnote{The model that we call Type~Z or Flipped 2HDM is sometimes referred to as Type~Y.} To be more specific, we first write the Yukawa Lagrangian as
\begin{align}
\label{eq:lyuk}
\mathcal{L}_Y = &- \dfrac{\sqrt{2}}{v} H^+ \Big{\lbrace} \bar{u}~[\zeta_d \, V m_d P_R-\zeta_u \, m_u V P_L]~d +\zeta_\ell \, \bar{\nu} m_\ell P_R \ell \Big{\rbrace}\nonumber \\
&-\dfrac{1}{v}\sum_{f,\varphi_i^0\in\{h,H,A\}} \xi_f^{\varphi_i^0} \varphi_i^0 \, \Big{[}\bar{f} m_f P_R f \Big{]}+\mathrm{h.c.,}
\end{align}
where $u$ and $d$ stand for the up- and down-type quark, $\ell$ is a lepton flavor, $f$ stands for a generic fermion, $V$ for the Cabibbo--Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) matrix, and $P_{L,R}= (1\mp\gamma_5)/2$. A specific choice of parameters $\zeta_f$ corresponds to the above mentioned types of 2HDM, which we also summarize in Table~\ref{tab:y2hdm}. Notice that the couplings $\xi_f^{\varphi_i^0}$ appearing in the neutral Lagrangian part can be mapped onto the charged ones via
\begin{align}
\xi^h_f &= \sin(\beta-\alpha) +\cos(\beta-\alpha) \zeta_f, \nonumber \\
\xi^H_f &= \cos(\beta-\alpha) -\sin(\beta-\alpha) \zeta_f, \nonumber \\
\xi^A_{u}&=-i\zeta_u,\qquad \xi^A_{d,\ell}=i \zeta_{d,\ell}.
\end{align}
\begin{table}[ht!]
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Model & $\zeta_d$ & $\zeta_u$ & $\zeta_\ell$ \\ \hline\hline
Type I & $\cot \beta$ & $\cot \beta$ & $\cot \beta$ \\
Type II & $-\tan \beta$ & $\cot \beta$ & $-\tan \beta$ \\
Type X (lepton specific) & $\cot \beta$ & $\cot \beta$ & $-\tan \beta$ \\
Type Z (flipped) & $-\tan \beta$ & $\cot \beta$ & $\cot \beta$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{ \sl Couplings $\zeta_f$ in various types of 2HDM.}
\label{tab:y2hdm}
\end{table}
\subsection{General Constraints and Scan of Parameters}
\label{sec:scan}
To perform a thorough scan of scalars in a general 2HDM we use the general constraints summarized below.
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{\underline{Stability}}:
To ensure that the scalar potential is bounded from below, the quartic couplings should satisfy the relations~\cite{Gunion:2002zf}
\begin{equation}
\lambda_{1,2}>0,\qquad \lambda_3>-(\lambda_1 \lambda_2)^{1/2},\qquad \mathrm{and} \qquad \lambda_3+\lambda_4- \vert \lambda_5 \vert >-(\lambda_1 \lambda_2)^{1/2}.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, the stability of the electroweak vacuum implies that
\begin{align}
m_{11}^2+\dfrac{\lambda_1 v_1^2}{2}+\dfrac{\lambda_3 v_2^2}{2} &= \frac{v_2}{v_1} \left[ m_{12}^2 - (\lambda_4+\lambda_5)\dfrac{v_1 v_2}{2}\right],\\
m_{22}^2+\dfrac{\lambda_2 v_2^2}{2}+\dfrac{\lambda_3 v_1^2}{2} &= \frac{v_1}{v_2} \left[ m_{12}^2 - (\lambda_4+\lambda_5)\dfrac{v_1 v_2}{2}\right],
\end{align}
which then allows us to express $m_{11}^2$ and $m_{22}^2$ in terms of the soft $\mathbb{Z}_2$ breaking term $m_{12}^2$ and the quartic couplings $\lambda_{1-5}$. These constraints should be combined with the necessary and sufficient condition that the minimum developed at $(v_1,v_2)$ is global~\cite{Barroso:2013awa}:
\begin{equation}
m_{12}^2 \left(m_{11}^2-m_{22}^2 \sqrt{\lambda_1/\lambda_2} \right) \left( \tan \beta - \sqrt[4]{\lambda_1/\lambda_2}\right) >0.
\end{equation}
\item \textbf{\underline{Perturbative Unitarity}}:
An important constraint on the spectrum of scalars within 2HDM stems from the unitarity requirement of the $S$-wave component of the scalar scattering amplitudes. That condition implies the following inequalities~\cite{Kanemura:1993hm,Swiezewska:2012ej}
\begin{equation}
|a_\pm|, |b_\pm|, |c_\pm|, |f_\pm|, |e_{1,2}|, |f_1|, |p_1| < 8 \pi,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
a_\pm &= \dfrac{3}{2}(\lambda_1+\lambda_2)\pm \sqrt{\dfrac{9}{4}(\lambda_1-\lambda_2)^2+(2\lambda_3+\lambda_4)^2},\\
b_\pm &= \dfrac{1}{2}(\lambda_1+\lambda_2)\pm \dfrac{1}{2} \sqrt{(\lambda_1-\lambda_2)^2+4\lambda_4^2},\\
c_\pm &= \dfrac{1}{2}(\lambda_1+\lambda_2)\pm \dfrac{1}{2} \sqrt{(\lambda_1-\lambda_2)^2+4\lambda_5^2},\\
e_1 &= \lambda_3 + 2 \lambda_4 -3\lambda_5,\hspace*{3cm}
e_2 = \lambda_3-\lambda_5,\\
f_+ &= \lambda_3+2 \lambda_4+3\lambda_5, \hspace*{2.9cm} f_- =\lambda_3+\lambda_5,\\
f_1 &= \lambda_3+\lambda_4, \hspace*{4.3cm}p_1 = \lambda_3-\lambda_4.
\end{split}
\end{align}
\item \textbf{\underline{Electroweak Precision Tests}}:
Finally, the additional scalars contribute to the gauge boson vacuum polarization. As a result, the electroweak precision data provide important constraint. In particular
the $T$ parameter bounds the mass splitting between $m_H$ and $m_{H^\pm}$ in the scenario in which $h$ is identified with the SM-like Higgs,
cf.~Ref.~\cite{Becirevic:2015fmu} for example. The general expressions for the parameters $S$, $T$ and $U$ in 2HDM can be found in Ref.~\cite{Barbieri:2006bg}.
To derive the bounds on the scalar spectrum we consider the following values and the corresponding correlation matrix~\cite{Baak:2014ora},
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
& \Delta S^{\rm SM} = 0.05\pm 0.11, \\
& \Delta T^{\rm SM} = 0.09\pm 0.13, \\
& \Delta U^{\rm SM} = 0.01\pm 0.11, \\
\end{aligned}
\qquad\qquad
\mathrm{corr} = \left(\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & 0.90 & -0.59 \\
0.90 & 1 & -0.83 \\
-0.59 & -0.83 & 1
\end{array}\right).
\end{equation}
\noindent The $\chi^2$ function is then expressed as
\begin{equation}
\chi^2= \sum_{i,j}(X_i - X_i^{\rm SM})(\sigma^2)_{ij}^{-1}(X_j - X_j^{\rm SM}),
\end{equation}
where the vector of central values and uncertainties are denoted as $X=(\Delta S, \Delta T, \Delta U)$ and $\sigma =(0.11,0.13,0.11)$, while the elements of the
covariance matrix are obtained via $\sigma_{ij}^2\equiv \sigma_i \mathrm{corr}_{ij} \sigma_j$.
\end{itemize}
\
As mentioned above, we identify the lightest CP-even state $h$ with the SM-like scalar observed at the LHC with mass $m_h=125.09(24)$~GeV~\cite{Olive:2016xmw}. To forbid the dangerous decays $h\to A A$ which could over-saturate the total width of $h$ ($\simeq \Gamma_h^\mathrm{SM}$), we assume that $m_A> m_h/2$. Moreover, we impose the alignment condition $|\cos(\beta-\alpha)|\leq 0.3$, in order to ensure that the couplings of $h$ to $V=W,Z$ remain consistent with the values measured so far, which appear to be in good agreement with the SM predictions~\cite{Corbett:2015ksa}. The above-mentioned constraints are then imposed onto a set of randomly generated points in the intervals:
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
&\tan \beta \in (0.2,50),\qquad \hspace*{1.5cm}\alpha\in\left(-\frac{\pi}{2},\frac{\pi}{2}\right), \qquad \hspace*{1cm} \left|M^2\right| \leq (1.2~\mathrm{TeV})^2,\\[0.6em]
&m_{H^\pm}\in (m_W, 1.2~\mathrm{TeV}),\qquad m_{H}\in (m_h, 1.2~\mathrm{TeV}),\qquad m_{A}\in \left(m_h/2, 1.2~\mathrm{TeV}\right).
\end{split}
\end{align}
\
\noindent A scan of parameters consistent with the constraints listed above favors the moderate and small values of $\tan\beta \in (0.2,15]$. To see that the larger values of $\tan \beta$ cannot be discarded it is sufficient to examine Eq.~\eqref{eq:massesH} in the alignment limit. For that reason, and in addition to the free scan, we perform a second scan with $m_H\approx|M|$, which helps us probing higher values of $\tan\beta$, and we then combine results of both scans. The combined results are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:scan} in two planes, $(\tan \beta, m_{H^\pm})$ and $(m_A, m_{H^\pm})$. From the right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:scan} we observe that the additional scalars become mass degenerate in the decoupling region ($M^2 \gg v^2$), as it can be easily deduced from Eqs.~\eqref{eq:massesH}--\eqref{eq:massesHp}. We should also emphasize that the results of our scans agree with what has been previously reported in the literature, cf.~\cite{scans}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Figs/tanb_mHp.pdf}~\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Figs/mA_mHp.pdf}
\caption{ \sl Results of the scan described in the text.}
\label{fig:scan}
\end{figure}
In Sec.~\ref{sec:pheno} we will confront the points allowed by our scan with the experimental measurements of exclusive $b\to s$ decays.
\section{Effective Hamiltonian}
\label{sec:eff}
The most general effective Hamiltonian describing the $b\to s \ell \ell$ transitions, made of dimension six operators, is given by~\cite{Altmannshofer:2008dz}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:heff}
\mathcal{H}_\mathrm{eff} = - \frac{4 G_F}{\sqrt{2}}V_{tb}V_{ts}^\ast \sum_{i}\Bigg{(}C_i(\mu)\mathcal{O}_i(\mu)+C_i^\prime(\mu)\mathcal{O}_i^\prime(\mu)\Bigg{)} + \mathrm{h.c.},
\end{equation}
\noindent where
\begin{alignat}{3}
\label{eq:basisA}
\mathcal{O}_9 &= \frac{e^2}{(4\pi)^2}(\bar{s}\gamma_\mu P_L b)(\bar{\ell}\gamma^\mu \ell), \qquad\qquad && \mathcal{O}_S &&= \frac{e^2}{(4\pi)^2}(\bar{s} P_R b)(\bar{\ell} \ell), \\
\mathcal{O}_{10} &= \frac{e^2}{(4\pi)^2}(\bar{s}\gamma_\mu P_L b)(\bar{\ell}\gamma^\mu \gamma_5 \ell) ,\qquad\qquad && \mathcal{O}_P &&= \frac{e^2}{(4\pi)^2}(\bar{s} P_R b)(\bar{\ell}\gamma_5 \ell), \\
\mathcal{O}_T &= \frac{e^2}{(4\pi)^2}(\bar{s}\sigma_{\mu\nu} b)(\bar{\ell}\sigma^{\mu\nu} \ell), \qquad \qquad && \mathcal{O}_{T5} &&= \frac{e^2}{(4\pi)^2}(\bar{s}\sigma_{\mu\nu} b)(\bar{\ell}\sigma^{\mu\nu} \gamma_5\ell),
\end{alignat}
and $\mathcal{O}_7=e/(4\pi)^2 m_b (\bar{s} \sigma_{\mu\nu}P_R b)F^{\mu\nu}$ is the electromagnetic penguin operator. The operators with a flipped chirality, $\mathcal{O}^\prime_{7,9,10,S,P}$, are obtained from $\mathcal{O}_{7,9,10,S,P}$ by replacing $P_L \leftrightarrow P_R$ in the quark current.
The dimension six operators appearing in Eq.~\eqref{eq:heff} are sufficient to match the one-loop amplitude when the external fermion momenta are neglected.
This, however, is not true if the computation is made with external momenta different from zero which is, in general, {\it necessary} when dealing with {\bf (pseudo-)scalar operators}.
For example, in order to get a correct expression for the Wilson coefficient $C_P$ one needs to consider the external momenta, which then can give rise to the contributions coming from the dimension-seven operators. One class of such terms can be related to the operators of basis~\eqref{eq:basisA} by equations of motion. For example,
\begin{align}
\frac{\alpha}{4\pi} \frac{1}{m_W} \left(\bar{s}\slashed{q} P_L b \right) \left( \bar{\ell}\gamma_5 \ell \right) &=
\frac{\alpha}{4\pi} \frac{m_b}{m_W} \left(\bar{s} P_R b \right) \left( \bar{\ell}\gamma_5 \ell \right) -
\frac{\alpha}{4\pi} \frac{m_s}{m_W} \left(\bar{s} P_L b \right) \left( \bar{\ell}\gamma_5 \ell \right) \nonumber\\
& = \frac{m_b}{m_W} \mathcal{O}_P -\frac{m_s}{m_W} \mathcal{O}_P^\prime \simeq \frac{m_b}{m_W} \mathcal{O}_P
\,.
\end{align}
A complication arises when encountering the operators with insertion of
$\slashed{p}_{b} +\slashed{p}_s$ in the leptonic current, with the convention $b(p_b)\to s(p_s) \ell^-(p_-)\ell^+(p_+)$, where we also use $q=p_b-p_s=p_++p_-$.
A way to deal with that, adopted in Ref.~\cite{Li:2014fea}, consists in setting $p_s=0$, so that $\slashed{p}_{b} +\slashed{p}_s= \slashed{q} + 2 \slashed{p}_{s} = \slashed{q}=\slashed{p}_{+} +\slashed{p}_-$, and in this way one can again, like in the previous example, use the equations of motion. That way to deal with the problem in hands, however, leads to a wrong expression for $C_P$, for example. If, instead, one keeps all the momenta non-zero, we get a correct result. At this point we just emphasize that the matching should be performed by keeping all the external momenta different from zero
and the contributions stemming from dimension-seven operators can be neglected at the very end of computation. We further elucidate this problem in Sec.~\ref{sec:MATCH} where we also propose a general framework for the appropriate matching between the full and effective theories in a case in which the (pseudo-)scalar bosons are explicitly taken into account.
\section{Wilson Coefficients}
\label{sec:wc}
After unambiguously matching the full with the effective theories we obtain the one-loop expressions for the Wilson coefficients generated by the additional scalar particles. We summarize our results in this Section. For clarity we will write them as,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:c7}
C_{7} &= C_7^{\mathrm{NP}\,,\gamma} , \\
\label{eq:c9}
C_{9} &= C_9^{\mathrm{NP}\,,\gamma}+C_9^{\mathrm{NP},\,Z}, \\
\label{eq:c10}
C_{10} &= C_{10}^{\mathrm{NP},\,Z},\\%+C_{10}^{\mathrm{NP},\,\mathrm{box}}\\
\label{eq:cp}
C_{P} &= C_{P}^{\mathrm{NP},\,\mathrm{box}}+C_{P}^{\mathrm{NP},\,Z}+C_{P}^{\mathrm{NP},\,A}\\
\label{eq:cs}
C_{S} &= C_{S}^{\mathrm{NP},\,\mathrm{box}}+C_S^{\mathrm{NP},\,h}+C_S^{\mathrm{NP},\,H}
\end{align}
\noindent where the superscripts denote the types of diagrams that contributes to a given Wilson coefficient, namely, the box diagrams, the $\gamma,Z$-penguins and the (pseudo-)scalar penguins. These coefficients should be added to the (effective) ones obtained in the SM: $C_{7}=-0.304$, $C_9=4.211$, $C_{10}=-4.103$, and $C_{S,P}\simeq 0$~\cite{Bobeth:1999mk}.~\footnote{Special attention should be paid to the scalar penguin with the SM-like Higgs to avoid the double counting since it also appears with modifications in A2HDM.}
Henceforth, we neglect the $s$-quark mass and give all our results in the unitary gauge. To check the consistency of our formulas, we also performed the computation in the Feynman gauge. In the
remainder of this Section we present our resulting expressions for each of the coefficients appearing in Eqs.~\eqref{eq:c10}--\eqref{eq:cs}. We use the standard notation,
\begin{equation}
x_q = \dfrac{m_q^2}{m_W^2},\qquad\quad x_{H^\pm} = \dfrac{m_{H^\pm}^2}{m_W^2},\qquad\quad x_{\varphi_i^0}=\dfrac{m_{\varphi_i^0}^2}{m_W^2},
\end{equation}
where $q\in\{ b,t\}$, and $\varphi_i^0 \in \lbrace h,H,A \rbrace$.
\subsection{$\gamma$-penguins in 2HDM}
\label{sec:wc-gamma-penguins}
The $\gamma$--penguin diagrams induced by the charged Higgs are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:gamma-penguins}. The off-shell and on-shell contributions can be matched onto the Wilson coefficients $C_7$ and $C_9$, respectively, we obtain,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
C_7^{\mathrm{NP}, \gamma} = &-|\zeta_u|^2 \frac{x_t}{72}\Bigg{[}\frac{7 x_{H^\pm}^2-5 x_{H^\pm}x_t-8 x_t^2}{ (x_{H^\pm}-x_{t})^3}+\dfrac{6 x_{H^\pm}x_t(3x_t-2 x_{H^\pm})}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_{t})^4}\log \left( \frac{x_{H^\pm}}{x_{t}} \right)\Bigg{]}\\
&-\zeta_u^\ast \zeta_d \frac{x_t}{12} \Bigg{[} \frac{3 x_{H^\pm}-5 x_t}{(x_{t}-x_{H^\pm})^2}+\dfrac{2 x_{H^\pm}(3x_{t}-2x_{H^\pm})}{(x_{t}-x_{H^\pm})^3}\log \left( \frac{x_{t}}{x_{H^\pm}} \right)\Bigg{]},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
C_9^{\mathrm{NP}, \gamma} &= |\zeta_u|^2 \frac{x_t}{108 }\Bigg{[} \frac{38 x_{H^\pm}^2-79 x_{H^\pm}x_t+47 x_t^2}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_{t})^3}-\dfrac{6(4 x_{H^\pm}^3-6 x_{H^\pm}^2 x_t+3 x_t^3)}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_{t})^4}\log \left(\frac{x_{H^\pm}}{x_{t}}\right)\Bigg{]}\\
&\hspace*{-0.95cm}+\zeta_u^\ast \zeta_d\dfrac{x_t x_b}{108}\Bigg{[}\frac{-37 x_{H^\pm}^2+8x_{H^\pm}x_t+53 x_t^2}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)^4}+\frac{6(2 x_{H^\pm}^3+6 x_{H^\pm}^2 x_t-9 x_{H^\pm}x_t^2-3 x_t^3)}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)^5}\log \left(\frac{x_{H^\pm}}{x_t}\right)\Bigg{]}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The dominant terms in both $C_7^{\mathrm{NP}, \gamma}$ and $C_9^{\mathrm{NP}, \gamma}$ come from the top quark contribution and are proportional to $|\zeta_u|^2$. The terms proportional to $\zeta_u^\ast\zeta_d$ are suppressed by $m_b^2$, thus indeed subdominant.
\begin{figure}[h]
\captionsetup[subfigure]{labelformat=empty}
\centering
\subfloat[2.1]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/gamma_pen_top}}
\subfloat[2.2]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/gamma_pen_higgs}}
\subfloat[2.3]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/gamma_pen_s}}
\subfloat[2.4]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/gamma_pen_b}}
\caption{\sl Photon penguin diagrams generated by the charged Higgs bosons. }
\label{fig:gamma-penguins}
\end{figure}
\subsection{$Z$-penguins in 2HDM}
\label{sec:wc-Z-penguins}
The $Z$-penguin diagrams contribute significantly to the Wilson coefficients $C_P$, $C_9$ and $C_{10}$ through the diagrams shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Z-penguins}. The leading order expressions for $C_9$ and $C_{10}$ read,
\begin{align}
C_{9}^{\mathrm{NP},Z} &= C_{10}^{\mathrm{NP},Z}(-1+4\sin^2 \theta_{W}), \\
C_{10}^{\mathrm{NP},Z} &= |\zeta_u|^2 \frac{x_t^2}{8 \sin^2\theta_W }\Bigg{[}\frac{1}{x_{H^\pm}-x_{t}}-\frac{x_{H^\pm}}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_{t})^2}\log\left(\frac{x_{H^\pm}}{x_{t}}\right)\Bigg{]}\nonumber \\
&+\zeta_u^\ast\zeta_d \frac{x_t x_b}{16 \sin^2\theta_W}\Bigg{[}\frac{x_{H^\pm}+x_{t}}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_{t})^2}-\frac{2 x_t x_{H^\pm}}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_{t})^3}\log\left(\frac{x_{H^\pm}}{x_{t}}\right)\Bigg{]}.
\end{align}
\noindent Similarly, for $C_P$ we obtain,
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
C_P^{\mathrm{NP},Z} &= \zeta_u^\ast \zeta_d \dfrac{\sqrt{x_b x_\ell} \,x_t}{16 \sin^2\theta_W}\Bigg{[}\frac{x_t-3 x_{H^\pm}}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)^2}+\frac{2 x_{H^\pm}^2}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)^3}\log\left(\frac{x_{H^\pm}}{x_t}\right)\Bigg{]} \\
&+|\zeta_u|^2\frac{\sqrt{x_b x_\ell} \,x_t}{216}\Bigg{\lbrace} \frac{38 x_{H^\pm}^2+54 x_{H^\pm}^2 x_t-79 x_{H^\pm}x_t-108 x_{H+} x_t^2+47 x_t^2+54 x_t^3}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)^3 } \\
&-\dfrac{6(4 x_{H^\pm}^3+9 x_{H^\pm}^3 x_t-6 x_{H^\pm}^2 x_t-18 x_{H^\pm}^2x_t^2+9 x_{H^\pm}x_t^3+3 x_t^3)}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)^4}\log\left(\frac{x_{H^\pm}}{x_t}\right)\\
&-\dfrac{3}{2\sin^2{\theta_W}}\Bigg{[}\dfrac{2 x_{H^\pm}^2 +36 x_{H^\pm}^2 x_t- 7 x_{H^\pm}x_t-72 x_{H^\pm} x_t^2+11 x_t^2+36 x_t^3}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)^3}\\
&-\dfrac{6 x_t(6 x_{H^\pm}^3-12 x_{H^\pm}^2x_t+6 x_{H^\pm}x_t^2+x_t^2}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)^4}\log\left(\frac{x_{H^\pm}}{x_t}\right)\Bigg{]}\Bigg{\rbrace}.
\end{split}
\end{align}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\captionsetup[subfigure]{labelformat=empty}
\subfloat[3.1]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/Z_pen_top}}
\subfloat[3.2]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/Z_pen_higgs}}
\subfloat[3.3]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/Z_pen_s}}
\subfloat[3.4]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/Z_pen_b}}
\caption{\sl $Z$ penguin diagrams generated by the additional scalars.}
\label{fig:Z-penguins}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Charged Higgs Boxes in 2HDM}
\label{sec:wc-box}
The box diagrams, peculiar for 2HDM, are drawn in Fig.~\ref{fig:boxes}. At low-energy they contribute to the Wilson coefficients $C_{S}$ and $C_{P}$ as,
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
C_S^\mathrm{NP,\,box} &= \dfrac{\sqrt{x_\ell x_b}\,x_t}{8(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)\sin^2\theta_W}\Bigg{\lbrace}\zeta_\ell \zeta_u^\ast \left(\frac{x_t}{x_t-1}\log x_t-\frac{x_{H^\pm}}{x_{H^\pm}-1}\log x_{H^\pm}\right)\\
&+\zeta_u \zeta_\ell^\ast\left[1-\frac{x_{H^\pm}-x_t^2}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)(x_t-1)}\log x_t - \frac{x_{H^\pm}(x_t-1)}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)(x_{H^\pm}-1)}\log x_{H^\pm} \right]\\
&+2\zeta_d\zeta_\ell^\ast \log \left(\dfrac{x_t}{x_{H^\pm}}\right)\Bigg{\rbrace},
\end{split}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
C_P^\mathrm{NP,\,box} &= \dfrac{\sqrt{x_\ell x_b}\,x_t }{8(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)\sin^2\theta_W}\Bigg{\lbrace}\zeta_\ell \zeta_u^\ast \left(\frac{x_t}{x_t-1}\log x_t-\frac{x_{H^\pm}}{x_{H^\pm}-1}\log x_{H^\pm}\right) \\
&-\zeta_u \zeta_\ell^\ast\left[1-\frac{x_{H^\pm}-x_t^2}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)(x_t-1)}\log x_t - \frac{x_{H^\pm}(x_t-1)}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)(x_{H^\pm}-1)}\log x_{H^\pm} \right]\\
&-2\zeta_d\zeta_\ell^\ast \log\left( \frac{x_t}{x_{H^\pm}}\right)\Bigg{\rbrace}.
\end{split}
\end{align}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\captionsetup[subfigure]{labelformat=empty}
\subfloat[4.1]{\includegraphics[scale=0.47]{Diagrams/boxHW}}
\subfloat[4.2]{\includegraphics[scale=0.47]{Diagrams/boxWH}}
\subfloat[4.3]{\includegraphics[scale=0.47]{Diagrams/boxHH}}
\subfloat[4.4]{\includegraphics[scale=0.47]{Diagrams/boxHG_GH}
\caption{\sl Box diagrams generated by the additional scalars.}
\label{fig:boxes}
\end{figure}
\noindent In addition to $C_{S,P}^\mathrm{NP,\,box}$, the tensor and (axial-)vector operators receive contributions but suppressed by the lepton mass, i.e. by $x_\ell=m_\ell^2/m_W^2$. These coefficients are negligible even for decays with $\tau$'s in the final state as it can be verified by using the expressions we provide in Appendix~\ref{app:wc-xl-suppr}.
\subsection{Scalar penguins in 2HDM}
\label{sec:s-penguins}
We now turn to the effective coefficients $C_P^{\mathrm{NP},\, A}$, $C_S^{\mathrm{NP},\, h}$ and $C_S^{\mathrm{NP},\, H}$, generated by the scalar penguin diagrams shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:scalar-penguins}. We recall that the total ultraviolet divergence coming from these diagrams is proportional to the factor $(1+\zeta_u\zeta_d)(\zeta_u-\zeta_d)$, which vanishes due to the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry (cf.~Table \ref{tab:y2hdm}).~\footnote{Notice that this is not true in general. For instance, in the A2HDM the divergences are canceled by contributions coming from the radiatively induced misalignment of the Yukawa matrices. The alignment is only preserved at all scales in the context of $\mathbb{Z}_2$-symmetric models~\cite{Li:2014fea}.}
The penguins with the CP-odd Higgs give rise to,
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
C_P^{\mathrm{NP},\, A}&= -\dfrac{\sqrt{x_\ell x_b}}{\sin^2\theta_W}\dfrac{\zeta_\ell x_t}{2 x_A }\Bigg{\lbrace} \dfrac{\zeta_u^3 x_t}{2} \Bigg{[} \dfrac{1}{x_{H^\pm}-x_t}-\dfrac{x_{H^\pm}}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)^2}\log \left(\dfrac{x_{H^\pm}}{x_t}\right)\Bigg{]}\\
&+\frac{\zeta_u}{4}\Bigg{[} -\dfrac{3 x_{H^\pm}x_t-6 x_{H^\pm}-2 x_t^2+5x_t}{(x_t-1)(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)}+\dfrac{x_{H^\pm}(x_{H^\pm}^2-7 x_{H^\pm}+6 x_t)}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)^2(x_{H^\pm}-1)}\log x_{H^\pm}\\
&-\dfrac{x_{H^\pm}^2(x_t^2-2 x_t+4)+3 x_t^2(2x_t-2 x_{H^\pm}-1)}{(x_{H^\pm}-x_t)^2(x_t-1)^2}\log x_t\Bigg{]}\Bigg{\rbrace},
\end{split}
\end{align}
\noindent where we used that $\zeta_f \in \mathbb{R}$, and $(1+\zeta_u\zeta_d)(\zeta_u-\zeta_d)=0$. Similarly, the penguins with the CP-even Higgs lead to:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:CS-hH}
\begin{split}C_S^{\mathrm{NP},\, h} &= \dfrac{\sqrt{x_\ell x_b}}{\sin^2 \theta_W}\dfrac{x_t}{2 x_h }\left[\sin(\beta-\alpha)+\cos(\beta-\alpha)\zeta_\ell\right]\\
&\qquad\qquad\quad\times\Bigg{[}g_1\sin (\beta-\alpha)+g_2\cos(\beta-\alpha)-g_0 \frac{2v^2}{m_W^2}\lambda_{H^+ H^-}^h \Bigg{]},\\[0.7em]
C_S^{\mathrm{NP},\, H} &= \dfrac{\sqrt{x_\ell x_b}}{\sin^2 \theta_W}\dfrac{x_t}{2 x_H }\left[\cos(\beta-\alpha)-\sin(\beta-\alpha)\zeta_\ell\right]\\
&\qquad\qquad\quad\times\Bigg{[}g_1\cos (\beta-\alpha)-g_2\sin(\beta-\alpha)-g_0\frac{2v^2}{m_W^2}\lambda_{H^+ H^-}^H\Bigg{]},
\end{split}
\end{align}
\noindent where $\lambda_{H^+H^-}^{\varphi_i^0}$ are the trilinear couplings defined in Appendix \ref{app:feynman-rules}. The functions $g_{0,1,2}$ are given in Appendix \ref{app:scalar-penguins} along with the amplitudes generated by each of the diagrams shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:scalar-penguins}.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\captionsetup[subfigure]{labelformat=empty}
\subfloat[5.1]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/91}}
\subfloat[5.2]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/92}}
\subfloat[5.3]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/93}}
\subfloat[5.4]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/94}}
\subfloat[5.5]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/95}}
\subfloat[5.6]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/96}}
\subfloat[5.7]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/97}}
\subfloat[5.8]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/98}}
\subfloat[5.9]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/99}}
\subfloat[5.10]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/910}}
\subfloat[5.11]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/911}}
\subfloat[5.12]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/912}}
\subfloat[5.13]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/913}}
\subfloat[5.14]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/914}}
\subfloat[5.15]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/915}}
\subfloat[5.16]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/916}}
\subfloat[5.17]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/917}}
\subfloat[5.18]{\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{Diagrams/918}}
\caption{\sl Higgs penguin diagrams generated by the additional scalars.}
\label{fig:scalar-penguins}
\end{figure}
\section{Comparison with Other Computations}
\label{sec:compare}
In this Section we compare our Wilson coefficients with the results obtained in previous studies. Before doing so we should emphasize the novelties of the present work:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] The result for $C_9$ in a general 2HDM with a $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry is new;
\item[(ii)] The subleading terms $\mathcal{O}(m_{b})$ to $C_{9,10}$ have been neglected in the previous computations, and they are included here;
\item[(iii)] We provided an independent computation of the coefficients $C_S$ and $C_P$, and elucidate inconsistencies present in
Ref.~\cite{Li:2014fea}, cf. Sec.~\ref{sec:MATCH} where we propose a general prescription for matching procedure when the external momenta are not neglected.
\end{itemize}
The effective coefficients $C_S$ and $C_P$, in the context of Type~II 2HDM, were first computed in Refs.~\cite{Huang:2000sm,Logan:2000iv,Bobeth:2001sq,Isidori:2001fv,Chankowski:2000ng,Dedes:2008iw}. In these papers $\tan\beta$ was assumed to be very large, which considerably simplifies the computation because in that case only the box diagrams give significant contributions. We agree with these results if we keep only the leading terms in $\tan\beta$ in our expressions, namely,
\begin{align}\label{eq:largeB_Csp}
C_P=-C_S &\simeq \tan^2\beta\dfrac{\sqrt{x_\ell x_b}}{4\sin^2\theta_W}\dfrac{x_t}{x_{H^\pm}-x_t}\log\left(\dfrac{x_{H^\pm}}{x_t}\right).
\end{align}
\noindent Along the same lines, the leading order QCD corrections to the same coefficients were included in Ref.~\cite{Bobeth:2004jz}.
Recently, the computation of $C_S$ and $C_P$ was extended to the context of a general A2HDM, which comprises all four types of 2HDM with $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry discussed here but without the usual assumption of large $\tan\beta$~\cite{Li:2014fea}. We agree with their general results, except for the expression for $C_P^{\mathrm{NP},\, Z}$ which differs from the one reported in the present paper. The disagreement comes from the fact that the authors of Ref.~\cite{Li:2014fea} worked with the assumption $p_s=0$, which appears not to be fully appropriate.~\footnote{We should emphasize that we were able to reproduce the expression for $C_P^{\mathrm{NP},\, Z}$ reported in Ref.~\cite{Li:2014fea} by taking $p_s=0$, which however is not an appropriate assumption as we argue in the text.} By keeping $p_s\neq 0$ one realizes that the computation of $Z$-penguin leads to two independent terms, one proportional to $p_H=p_b+p_s$ and the other to $q=p_b-p_s$.
By using equations of motion, $C_{P,S}$ correctly receive contributions from the terms proportional to $q$, but not from those proportional to $p_H$.
With $p_s=0$ only one invariant appears, because $p_H\equiv q$, and thus the resulting $C_{P,S}$ also receive spurious contributions from $p_H$.
Regarding the other Wilson coefficients, the first computations of $C_7$ for a general 2HDM have been performed in Ref.~\cite{Bertolini:1990if}, then in Refs.~\cite{Ciuchini:1997xe,Degrassi:2006eh} and~\cite{Hermann:2012fc} where the leading and subleading QCD corrections were included too. Our results are consistent with those, as well as with the expression for $C_{10}$ presented in Ref.~\cite{Chankowski:2000ng} and more recently in Ref.~\cite{Li:2014fea}. The only difference with respect to those results is that we include the subleading terms in $m_b$.
\section{Matching Procedure}
\label{sec:MATCH}
In this section we discuss in more detail the matching of the one-loop amplitudes when the nonzero external momenta are considered. We stress once again that keeping external momenta non-zero is necessary to obtain the correct values for the Wilson coefficients $C_{S,P}$. As we mentioned in Sec.~\ref{sec:eff} the insertion of external momenta result in dimension-seven operators which can be simplified by using equations of motion, except in the cases when the lepton momenta are to be contracted with the quark current and/or the quark momenta to be contracted with the lepton current.
The amplitudes which need a special treatment, to leading order in external momenta, are:
\begin{align}\label{eq:AMPS}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{A}^\ell_{ij} &= \dfrac{\alpha}{4 \pi} \dfrac{1}{m_W} (\bar{s}(\slashed{p}_- -\slashed{p}_+ )P_i b)(\bar{\ell} P_j \ell), \hspace*{2.1cm} \mathcal{A}_{ij}^q=\dfrac{\alpha}{4\pi}\dfrac{1}{m_W}(\bar{s}P_i b)(\bar{\ell}(\slashed{p}_b +\slashed{p}_s )P_j\ell),\\
\mathcal{A}^{V\ell}_{ij} &= \dfrac{\alpha}{4 \pi}\dfrac{1}{m_W} (\bar{s}(\slashed{p}_- -\slashed{p}_+ )\gamma_\mu P_i b)(\bar{\ell} \gamma^\mu P_j \ell), \hspace*{1.15cm} \mathcal{A}_{ij}^{Vq}=\dfrac{\alpha}{4\pi}\dfrac{1}{m_W}(\bar{s}\gamma_\mu P_i b)(\bar{\ell}(\slashed{p}_b +\slashed{p}_s)\gamma^\mu P_j\ell),
\end{split}
\end{align}
\noindent where $i,j=L,R$ and $s,b,\ell$ are the fermion spinors. Note again that our convention is $b(p_b)\to s(p_s) \ell^-(p_-)\ell^+(p_+)$, and $q=p_b-p_s=p_++p_-$. In order to keep our discussion general, we first extend the Hamiltonian~\eqref{eq:heff} and include the following operators
\begin{align}
\label{eq:heff-deriv}
\mathcal{H}_\mathrm{eff}^{\prime}= - \frac{4 G_F}{\sqrt{2}}V_{tb}V_{ts}^\ast \sum_{i,j=L,R}\Bigg{(}C_{ij}^{\mathcal{T}\ell}(\mu)\mathcal{O}_{ij}^{\mathcal{T}\ell}(\mu)+C_{ij}^{\mathcal{T}q}(\mu)\mathcal{O}_{ij}^{\mathcal{T}q}(\mu)\Bigg{)}+ \mathrm{h.c.},
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
\label{eq:ope-deriv-2}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{O}_{ij}^{\mathcal{T}\ell}&=\frac{e^2}{(4\pi)^2}\frac{1}{m_W}(\bar{s}\gamma^\mu P_i b)\partial^\nu(\bar{\ell}\sigma_{\mu\nu} P_j\ell),\\
\mathcal{O}_{ij}^{\mathcal{T}q}&=-\frac{e^2}{(4\pi)^2}\frac{1}{m_W}{\partial^\nu}(\bar{s}\sigma_{\mu\nu} P_i b)(\bar{\ell}\gamma^\mu P_j \ell),
\end{split}
\end{align}
with $i,j=L,R$.~\footnote{Notice that we are not computing the QCD corrections to the Wilson coefficients and therefore, at this order, we do not make distinction between the ordinary and the covariant $SU(3)_c$ derivative.} We reiterate that even though these operators are suppressed by $1/m_W$, they are necessary to unambiguously match the loop induced amplitudes with the effective field theory. The above choice of the basis of dimension-seven operators is convenient since they do not contribute to $\mathcal{B}(B_s\to\mu^+\mu^-)$, while for the other decays their hadronic matrix elements are easy to calculate.
By using the Fierz rearrangement and by applying the field equations, the amplitudes~\eqref{eq:AMPS} are reduced to
\begin{align}
\mathcal{A}^\ell_{LL} &\leftrightarrow - \mathcal{O}_{LL}^{\mathcal{T}\ell}+\mathcal{O}_9\frac{m_\ell}{m_W},\\
\mathcal{A}^\ell_{LR} &\leftrightarrow - \mathcal{O}_{LR}^{\mathcal{T}\ell}+\mathcal{O}_9\frac{m_\ell}{m_W}, \\
\mathcal{A}^{V\ell}_{LL} &\leftrightarrow -\mathcal{O}_{LL}^{\mathcal{T}q}+ \left(\mathcal{O}_S^\prime-\dfrac{\mathcal{O}_T-\mathcal{O}_{T5}}{4}\right)\dfrac{m_\ell}{m_W},\label{eq:ex}\\
\mathcal{A}^{V\ell}_{LR} &\leftrightarrow \mathcal{O}_{LR}^{\mathcal{T}q}+ \left(\mathcal{O}_S^\prime+\dfrac{\mathcal{O}_T-\mathcal{O}_{T5}}{4}\right)\dfrac{m_\ell}{m_W},\\
\mathcal{A}^q_{LL} &\leftrightarrow \mathcal{O}_{LL}^{\mathcal{T}q}+\dfrac{\mathcal{O}_9^\prime-\mathcal{O}_{10}^\prime}{2}\dfrac{m_b}{m_W}+\dfrac{\mathcal{O}_9-\mathcal{O}_{10}}{2}\dfrac{m_s}{m_W}, \\
\mathcal{A}^q_{LR} &\leftrightarrow \mathcal{O}_{LR}^{\mathcal{T}q}+\dfrac{\mathcal{O}_9^\prime+\mathcal{O}_{10}^\prime}{2}\dfrac{m_b}{m_W}+\dfrac{\mathcal{O}_9+\mathcal{O}_{10}}{2}\dfrac{m_s}{m_W},\\
\mathcal{A}^{Vq}_{LL} &\leftrightarrow \mathcal{O}_{LL}^{\mathcal{T}\ell}+\dfrac{\mathcal{O}_S-\mathcal{O}_P}{2}\dfrac{m_b}{m_W}+\left(\mathcal{O}_S^\prime-\mathcal{O}_P^\prime - \dfrac{\mathcal{O}_T-\mathcal{O}_{T5}}{2}\right)\dfrac{m_s}{2 m_W},\\
\mathcal{A}^{Vq}_{LR} &\leftrightarrow -\mathcal{O}_{LR}^{\mathcal{T}\ell}+\dfrac{\mathcal{O}_S^\prime+\mathcal{O}_P^\prime}{2}\dfrac{m_s}{m_W}+\left(\mathcal{O}_S+\mathcal{O}_P + \dfrac{\mathcal{O}_T+\mathcal{O}_{T5}}{2}\right)\dfrac{m_b}{2 m_W}.
\end{align}
\noindent To remain completely general, in the above equations we also kept the lepton mass and the mass of $s$-quark different from zero.
As an example we show the validity of Eq.~\eqref{eq:ex}.
Using $p_--p_+=2p_--q$, and by the multiple use of field equations, we can write:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{A}^{V\ell}_{LL} &= \dfrac{\alpha}{4 \pi} \dfrac{2}{m_W} (\bar{s}\slashed{p}_- \gamma_\mu P_L b)(\bar{\ell} \gamma^\mu P_L \ell)- \dfrac{\alpha}{4 \pi} \dfrac{1}{m_W} (\bar{s}\slashed{q} \gamma_\mu P_L b)(\bar{\ell} \gamma^\mu P_L \ell)\nonumber\\
& = \dfrac{\alpha}{4 \pi} \dfrac{1}{m_W} \left[ 4
(\bar{s} P_L b)(\bar{\ell} \slashed{p}_- P_L \ell) - 2 (\bar{s} \gamma_\mu P_R \underbracket{ \slashed{p}_- b})(\bar{\ell} \gamma^\mu P_L \ell)
\right.\nonumber\\
&\left. \qquad +m_s (\bar{s} \gamma_\mu P_L b)(\bar{\ell} \gamma^\mu P_L \ell)
+m_b (\bar{s} \gamma_\mu P_R b)(\bar{\ell} \gamma^\mu P_L \ell)
- 2 (\bar{s} P_L b)(\bar{\ell} \slashed{p}_b P_L \ell)
\right]\nonumber\\
& \stackrel{\text{Fierz}}{=} \dfrac{\alpha}{4 \pi} \dfrac{1}{m_W} \left[ 4 m_\ell
(\bar{s} P_L b)(\bar{\ell} P_L \ell) - 4 (\bar{s} P_L \ell )(\bar{\ell} P_R\slashed{p}_- b)
+m_s (\bar{s} \gamma_\mu P_L b)(\bar{\ell} \gamma^\mu P_L \ell)
\right.\nonumber \\
&\left. \qquad
+m_b (\bar{s} \gamma_\mu P_R b)(\bar{\ell} \gamma^\mu P_L \ell)
- (\bar{s} P_L b)(\bar{\ell} (\slashed{p}_b + \slashed{p}_s) P_L \ell) + m_\ell (\bar{s} P_L b)(\bar{\ell} \gamma_5 \ell)
\right].
\end{align}
By applying the Fierz identity once again, we arrive at,
\begin{align}
\mathcal{A}^{V\ell}_{LL} & \stackrel{\text{Fierz}}{\to} \frac{m_\ell}{m_W} \left( \mathcal{O}_S^\prime - { \mathcal{O}_T - \mathcal{O}_{T5}\over 4}\right) - \mathcal{O}_{LL}^{\mathcal{T}q}.
\end{align}
Clearly, for the appropriate matching of these amplitudes to the effective theory, the operators appearing in Eq.~\eqref{eq:heff} are not enough and the extended basis given in Eq.~\eqref{eq:heff-deriv} is necessary. Once the matching is performed, the operators from Eq.~\eqref{eq:heff} could be neglected since they are $1/m_W$ suppressed with respect to the dominant (dimension six) ones.
This delicate point can then be verified explicitly by computing the Wilson coefficients $C_{RL}^{\mathcal{T}q}$ and $C_{RR}^{\mathcal{T}q}$ which come from the $Z$-penguin diagrams and the coefficients $C^{\mathcal{T}\ell}_{LL}=(C^{\mathcal{T}\ell}_{LR})^\ast$ generated by the box diagrams.
Their explicit expression is given in Appendix~\ref{app:wc-dim7}.
We can now easily understand the source of our disagreement with Ref.~\cite{Li:2014fea}.
If one sets $p_s=0$ in $\mathcal{A}_{RR}^q$ of Eq.~\eqref{eq:AMPS}, then just like in Ref.~\cite{Li:2014fea} one could write $\slashed{p}_b+ \slashed{p}_s =\slashed{p}_b=\slashed{q}$ which, by means of equations of motion, yields
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{A}_{RR}^q = \frac{m_\ell}{m_W}
\dfrac{\alpha}{4\pi} (\bar{s}P_R b) \left(\bar{\ell} (P_R-P_L)\ell\right) =
\sqrt{x_\ell}\, \mathcal{O}_P \ ,
\end{eqnarray}
which then in the actual computation gives a contribution to $C_P$. With our procedure, we understand that this contribution does not come from $C_P$ but actually from $\sqrt{x_\ell} C_{RL}^{\mathcal{T}q}$. In other words, and by using our definition of operators and of the effective Hamiltonian, we find~\footnote{ Notice also that the notation of Ref.~\cite{Li:2014fea} is such that their Wilson coefficient $C_P$, which we can call $\widetilde C_P$, is related to our's via $C_P = \sqrt{x_\ell x_b} \widetilde C_P/\sin^2\theta_W$. }
\begin{eqnarray}
C_P^\mathrm{Ref.[17]}
= \left[ C_P +\frac{\sqrt{x_\ell}}{2 \sin^2\theta_W} C_{RR}^{\mathcal{T}q}\right]^\mathrm{(this\,work)}\!\!\!.
\end{eqnarray}
Therefore the Wilson coefficient $C_P$ of Ref.~\cite{Li:2014fea} contains the Wilson coefficient of the operator $\mathcal{O}_{RR}^{\mathcal{T}q}$, the matrix element of which is not equal to the matrix element of the operator $\mathcal{O}_P$ but is, instead, suppressed by $m_W$ as we explicitly check in the next section. For that reason the Wilson coefficient of Ref.~\cite{Li:2014fea} is not correct.
\section{$B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$ and $B \to K \mu^+\mu^-$ in 2HDM}
\label{sec:pheno0}
In this Section we give the expressions for $\mathcal{B}(B_s\to \mu^+\mu^-)$ and $\mathcal{B}(B\to K \mu^+\mu^-)$ to which we also include the contributions
of the operators given in Eq.~\eqref{eq:ope-deriv-2}. Those additional operators were necessary for the appropriate matching procedure between the full and the effective theories. However, since they are suppressed by $1/m_W$ they are expected to be negligible with respect to the dominant operators entering the effective Hamiltonian~\eqref{eq:heff}. The purpose of this exercise is to check whether or not the size of the matrix elements of the operators~\eqref{eq:ope-deriv-2} is indeed numerically insignificant for phenomenology.
\subsection{$B_s \to \mu^+ \mu^-$}
On the basis of Lorentz invariance and invariance of the strong interaction with respect to parity, one can easily verify that $B_s\to \mu^+\mu^-$ is not affected by the operators $\mathcal{O}_{i,j}^{\mathcal{T}q}$ and $\mathcal{O}_{i,j}^{\mathcal{T}\ell}$, with $i,j=L,R$. The expression for the decay rate of this process remains the standard one
\begin{align}
\label{eq:BS}
\mathcal{B}(B_s\to \ell^+\ell^-)^\mathrm{th} &= \tau_{B_s}\dfrac{\alpha^2 G_F^2 m_{B_s}\beta_\ell }{16 \pi^3} \left| V_{tb}V_{ts}^\ast \right|^2 f_{B_s}^2 m_\ell^2 \Bigg{[}\left|C_{10}-C_{10}^\prime +\dfrac{m_{B_s}^2 (C_P-C_{P}^\prime)}{2 m_\ell(m_b+m_s)} \right|^2 \nonumber \\
&+ \left|C_S-C_S^\prime \right|^2\dfrac{m_{B_s}^2(m_{B_s}^2-4 m_\ell^2)}{4 m_\ell^2(m_b+m_s)^2}\Bigg{]},
\end{align}
where $\beta_\ell=\sqrt{1-4 m_\ell^2/m_{B_s}^2}$. To compare Eq.~\eqref{eq:BS} with the available experimental value, one needs to take into account the effects of $B_s- \overline{B}_s$ oscillations which, to a good approximation, amounts to~\cite{DeBruyn:2012wj}
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{B}(B_s\to\ell^+\ell^-)^\mathrm{exp} \approx \dfrac{1}{1-y_s}\mathcal{B}(B_s\to \ell^+\ell^-)^\mathrm{th},
\end{equation}
\noindent where $y_s=\Delta \Gamma_{B_s}/(2 \Gamma_{B_s})=0.061(9)$, experimentally established by the LHCb Collaboration~\cite{Aaij:2014zsa}.
As we mentioned before, the dimension-seven operators~\eqref{eq:ope-deriv-2} were chosen in such a way that they do not contribute the $B_s\to \ell^+\ell^-$ decay amplitude.
\subsection{$B \to K \mu^+\mu^-$}
In contrast to $B_s\to \ell^+\ell^-$, the decay $B\to K \ell^+\ell^-$ receives contributions from the operators of the extended basis~\eqref{eq:ope-deriv-2}.
To write the decay amplitude in a compact form, it is convenient to use the formalism of helicity amplitudes (HA's). In the absence of the (pseudo-)scalar operators, the total amplitude can be schematically written as
\begin{align}
\mathcal{M}=\mathcal{M}_\mu^L \,\bar{\ell} \gamma^\mu P_L \ell+\mathcal{M}_{\mu\nu}^L \,\bar{\ell} \sigma^{\mu\nu} P_L \ell + (L \leftrightarrow R).
\end{align}
\noindent By describing the decay mode as $B\to K V^\ast \to K \ell^+\ell^-$, where $V^\ast$ is a virtual vector boson, one can decompose the total decay amplitude in terms of HA's,
\begin{align}
A_{m}^{L(R)} = \mathcal{M}_{\mu}^{L(R)}\varepsilon_V^{\mu\ast}(m), \qquad \text{and} \qquad A_{mn}^{L(R)}=\mathcal{M}_{\mu\nu}^{L(R)}\varepsilon_V^{\mu\ast}(m)\varepsilon_V^{\nu\ast}(n),
\end{align}
\noindent where $\varepsilon_V^{\mu}(m)$ (with $m,n=0,t,\pm$) are the $V^\ast$-boson polarization vectors, explicitly defined in Appendix~\ref{app:angular}. We repeat that the above decomposition is valid as long as the scalar and the pseudoscalar operators are not present. To incorporate those contributions unambiguously one can assume the lepton masses to be unequal ($m_{\ell_1}\neq m_{\ell_2}$) and then apply the Ward identities,
\begin{align}
\bar{\ell}_1 \gamma_5 \ell_2 =\dfrac{q^\mu }{m_{\ell_1}+m_{\ell_2}}\bar{\ell}_1 \gamma_\mu \gamma_5 \ell_2,\qquad \bar{\ell}_1 \ell_2 =\dfrac{q^\mu }{m_{\ell_1}-m_{\ell_2}}\bar{\ell}_1 \gamma_\mu \ell_2 ,
\end{align}
to absorb the (pseudo-)scalar terms in the time-like coefficients ${A}_{t}^{L(R)}$. By taking the limit $m_{\ell_1}=m_{\ell_2}$ in the final expression one ends up with the desired HA's and the total decay amplitude, from which is then easy to compute the decay rate~\cite{Becirevic:2016zri}. Notice that the contributions from $C_{S,P}^{(\prime)}$ enter the amplitudes $A_S$ and $A_t$ defined as,
\begin{align}
A_t &= \lim_{m_{\ell_1}\to m_{\ell_2}}\left(A_t^L - A_t^R \right),\\
A_S &= \lim_{m_{\ell_1}\to m_{\ell_2}} \Bigg{[} \dfrac{m_{\ell_1}-m_{\ell_2}}{\sqrt{q^2}} \left(A_t^L + A_t^R \right) \Bigg{]}.
\end{align}
\noindent More details regarding this point can be found in Ref.~\cite{Becirevic:2016zri}.
We also need to stress that all the helicity amplitudes are the $q^2$-dependent functions, $A_i\equiv A_i(q^2)$.
By applying the method briefly sketched above we obtain,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:BK}
\begin{split}
\dfrac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}q^2}\mathcal{B}(B \to K &\ell^+ \ell^-)^\mathrm{th} = \dfrac{2(q^2-m_\ell^2)}{3}\left[|A_0^L|^2+|A_0^R|^2\right]+2 m_\ell^2 \left|A_t\right|^2+\dfrac{q^2-4m_\ell^2}{2}|A_S|^2 \\[0.4em]
&+\dfrac{q^2+2 m_\ell^2}{3}\left[|A_{t0}^L-A_{0t}^L|^2+|A_{t0}^R-A_{0t}^R|^2\right]+4m_\ell^2 \mathrm{Re}\left[A_0^{L\ast} A_0^R\right]\\[0.4em]
&+\dfrac{8 (q^2-4m_\ell^2)}{3}\left|A_{T5}\right|^2+\dfrac{4\left(q^2-4 m_\ell^2\right)}{3}\mathrm{Re}\left[A_{T5}^\ast (A_{t0}^L-A_{0t}^L)-(L\leftrightarrow R)\right] \\[0.4em]
&+4 m_\ell^2 \mathrm{Re}\left[A_{0t}^{L\ast}\left(A_{0t}^R-A_{t0}^R\right)-A_{t0}^{L\ast}\left(A_{0t}^R-A_{t0}^R\right) \right]\\[0.4em]
&-2 m_\ell \sqrt{q^2}\,\mathrm{Im} \left[\left(A_0^L+A_0^R\right)^\ast \left(A_{t0}^L-A_{0t}^L+(L \leftrightarrow R)\right) \right] ,
\end{split}
\end{align}
\noindent where the explicit expressions for the helicity amplitudes are:
\begin{align}
A_0^{L(R)}(q^2) &= \mathcal{N}_K\dfrac{\lambda_B^{1/2}}{2\sqrt{q^2}} \Bigg{[}f_+(q^2)\left[(C_9+C_9^\prime)\mp(C_{10}+C_{10}^\prime)\right] +f_T(q^2) \dfrac{2 m_b }{m_B+m_K}(C_7+C_7^\prime)\nonumber\\
&-f_T(q^2) \dfrac{q^2}{m_W (m_B+m_K)} \left[C_{L,L(R)}^{\mathcal{T}q}+C_{R,L(R)}^{\mathcal{T}q}\right] \Bigg{]},\\[0.7em]
A_t (q^2) &= - \mathcal{N}_K f_0(q^2) \dfrac{m_B^2-m_K^2}{\sqrt{q^2}} \Bigg{[}C_{10}+C_{10}^\prime+\dfrac{q^2 \left(C_P+C_P^\prime\right)}{2 m_\ell (m_b-m_s)} \Bigg{]}, \\[0.7em]
A_S(q^2) &= \mathcal{N}_K f_0(q^2) \dfrac{m_B^2-m_K^2}{m_b-m_s}\left( C_S+C_S^\prime\right),\\[0.7em]
A_{0t}^{L(R)} (q^2)&= i \mathcal{N}_K\lambda^{1/2}_B\Bigg{[}f_T(q^2)\dfrac{C_T}{m_B+m_K}+f_+(q^2)\dfrac{C_{L,L(R)}^{\mathcal{T}\ell}+
C_{R,L(R)}^{\mathcal{T}\ell}}{2 m_W}\Bigg{]},\\[0.7em]
A_{t0}^{L(R)} (q^2)&= -i \mathcal{N}_Kf_T(q^2) \dfrac{C_T \lambda_B^{1/2}}{m_B+m_K},\\[0.7em]
A_{T5} (q^2) &\equiv A^{L(R)}_{+-} = i \mathcal{N}_K f_T(q^2) \dfrac{C_{T5} \lambda_B^{1/2}}{m_B+m_K},
\end{align}
\noindent where the normalization factor also accounts for the remaining phase space, namely,
\begin{equation}
\left|\mathcal{N}_K(q^2)\right|^2 = \tau_{B_d}\dfrac{\alpha_\mathrm{em}^2 G_F^2 \left| V_{tb}V_{ts}^\ast \right|^2}{512 \pi^5 m_B^3}\dfrac{\lambda_q^{1/2}}{q^2}\lambda_B^{1/2}.
\end{equation}
For shortness, in the above formulas, we used $\lambda_q=\lambda(\sqrt{q^2},m_\ell,m_\ell)$ and $\lambda_B=\lambda(m_B,m_K,\sqrt{q^2})$, where $\lambda(a,b,c)\equiv[a^2-(b-c)^2][a^2-(b+c)^2]$.
The kinematic conventions and the form factor definitions are collected in Appendix~\ref{app:angular}. In the limit in which the derivative operators vanish we retrieve the usual expression for differential branching fraction~\cite{Becirevic:2016zri}. The choice of dimension-seven operators~\eqref{eq:ope-deriv-2} is convenient also because their matrix elements are proportional to the original hadronic matrix elements multiplied by $i q^\mu$. As it can be seen from the above expressions the coefficients $C_{i,j}^{\mathcal{T}\ell}$ and $C_{i,j}^{\mathcal{T}q}$ enters the above formulas with the explicit $1/m_W$-suppression factor. In other words, with the above formulas and by using the Wilson coefficients presented in the previous Sections, we see that the derivative operators~\eqref{eq:ope-deriv-2} are indeed irrelevant for phenomenology. Their presence is therefore essential for the unambiguous matching procedure in the computation of Wilson coefficients but they do not alter the phenomenological analysis even at the sub-percent level.
\section{Phenomenology and discussion}
\label{sec:pheno}
In this Section we use our results for Wilson coefficients and compare the experimental data for the exclusive $b\to s\ell^+\ell^-$ modes with various types of 2HDM.
We decided to focus on $\mathcal{B}(B_s\to \mu^+ \mu^-)^\mathrm{exp}=(2.8^{+0.7}_{-0.6})\times 10^{-9}$~\cite{CMS:2014xfa},
and $\mathcal{B}(B\to K \mu^+ \mu^-)_{\mathrm{high}\,q^2}^\mathrm{exp}=(8.5\pm 0.3 \pm 0.4)\times 10^{-8}$~\cite{Aaij:2014pli}, where ``high~$q^2$" means that the decay rate has been
integrated over the interval $q^2\in [15,22]~\mathrm{GeV}^2$. The reason for opting for these decay modes is that the relevant hadronic uncertainties
are under good theoretical control.
The hadronic quantity entering the $B_s\to \mu^+ \mu^-$ decay amplitude is the decay constant, $f_{B_s}$. It has been abundantly computed
by means of numerical simulations of QCD on the lattice (LQCD) and its value is nowadays one of the most accurately computed hadronic quantities as far as $B_{(s)}$-mesons are concerned~\cite{Aoki:2016frl}. The hadronic form factors entering the $B\to K \mu^+ \mu^-$ decay amplitude
have been directly computed in LQCD only in the region of large $q^2$'s~\cite{Bouchard:2013pna,Bailey:2015dka}, which explains why we use $\mathcal{B}(B\to K \mu^+ \mu^-)_{\mathrm{high}\,q^2}^\mathrm{exp}$ to do phenomenology.
Furthermore, since the bin corresponding to $q^2\in [15,22]~\mathrm{GeV}^2$ is rather wide and away from the very narrow charmonium resonances,
the assumption of quark-hadron duality is likely to be valid~\cite{Beylich:2011aq}.
By using the recent LQCD results for the form factors provided by HPQCD~\cite{Bouchard:2013pna} and MILC Collaborations~\cite{Bailey:2015dka},
the SM results are
\begin{align}
\mathcal{B}(B\to K \mu^+\mu^-)_{\mathrm{high}\,q^2} &=\left\{\biggl. (10.0\pm 0.5)\times 10^{-8}\biggr|_\mathrm{HPQCD} ,\biggl.(10.7\pm 0.5)\times 10^{-8}\biggr|_\mathrm{MILC} \right\} ,
\end{align}
\noindent both being about $2 \sigma$ larger than the experimental value measured at LHCb.~\footnote{In the following we will average the results obtained by using the two sets of form factors obtained in LQCD.} Since the current disagreement between theory and experiment needs to be corroborated by more data, we decided to impose all the constraints to $3\sigma$ accuracy.
We will then discuss the impact of $\mathcal{B}(B\to K \mu^+ \mu^-)_{\mathrm{high}\,q^2}^\mathrm{exp}$ on 2HDM if the current discrepancy remains,
i.e. by requiring the 2HDM to compensate the disagreement between theory (SM) and experiment at the level of $2\sigma$ and more. Notice also that the measured $\mathcal{B}(B_s\to \mu^+ \mu^-)^\mathrm{exp}$ is slightly smaller than predicted, $\mathcal{B}(B_s\to \mu^+ \mu^-)^\mathrm{SM} =(3.65\pm 0.23)\times 10^{-9}$\cite{Bobeth:2013uxa}.
We now use the results of our scan from Sec.~\ref{sec:scan}, require the $3\sigma$ agreement between experiment and theory, which means that we add the generic 2HDM Wilson coefficients derived in the previous Section to the SM values. The result, in the plane $(\tan\beta,m_{H^\pm})$, is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:scan-3sigma} for each type of 2HDM discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:2hdm}. We learn that both $\mathcal{B}(B_s\to \mu^+ \mu^-)$ and $\mathcal{B}(B\to K \mu^+ \mu^-)_{\mathrm{high}\,q^2}$ exclude the low $\tan\beta \lesssim 1$ region regardless of the type of 2HDM considered. The limit of exclusion of low $\tan\beta$ coming from $\mathcal{B}(B\to K \mu^+ \mu^-)_{\mathrm{high}\,q^2}$ is slightly larger than the one arising from $\mathcal{B}(B_s\to \mu^+ \mu^-)$. The limit on low $\tan\beta$ obtained in this way for each of our four models is given in Tab.~\ref{tab:limitstanb}.
\begin{figure}[!htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Figs/tanb_mHp_typeI.pdf}~\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Figs/tanb_mHp_typeII.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Figs/tanb_mHp_typeX.pdf}~\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Figs/tanb_mHp_typeZ.pdf}
\caption{\sl Results of the scan given in Fig.~\ref{fig:scan} after imposing the constraints coming from $\mathcal{B}(B_s\to \mu^+\mu^-)^\mathrm{exp}$ and $\mathcal{B}(B\to K \mu^+ \mu^-)_{\mathrm{high}\,q^2}^\mathrm{exp}$ to $3\sigma$ accuracy. Blue points are allowed by all observables, while gray points are excluded by $\mathcal{B}(B_s\to \mu^+\mu^-)$, and the red ones are excluded by $\mathcal{B}(B\to K \mu^+ \mu^-)_{\mathrm{high}\,q^2}$.}
\label{fig:scan-3sigma}
\end{figure}
Besides excluding $\tan\beta \lesssim 1$, it may appear as a surprise that the large $\tan \beta$ are not excluded by these data. The reason for that is the fact that the (pseudo-)scalar Wilson coefficient, with respect to the dominant (axial-)vector one, comes with a term proportional to $(m_{B_s}/m_W)^2$ which suppresses the large $\tan
\beta$ values. This feature can be easily verified in the Type~II model for which the coefficients $C_{S,P}$, in the large $\tan\beta$ limit, are given in Eq.~\eqref{eq:largeB_Csp}. This is why only a small number of points have been eliminated from our scan of Type~II model at large $\tan\beta$ but relatively light $m_{H^\pm}$.
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|cccc|}
\hline
Model & Type I & Type II & Type X & Type Z \\ \hline\hline
$\tan\beta$ & $ >1.0$ & $ >0.9$ & $ >1.0$ & $>0.9 $\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\label{tab:limitstanb} \sl Allowed values of low $\tan\beta$ (at $99\%$ CL) for the different 2HDMs. See text for details.}
\end{table}
Since the SM value is in slight tension with $\mathcal{B}(B\to K \mu^+ \mu^-)_{\mathrm{high}\,q^2}^\mathrm{exp}$ at the $2.1\sigma$ level, we can now check which of the models discussed in this paper can be made consistent with the experimental data if any disagreement beyond $2\sigma$ between theory (SM) and experiment is to be attributed to 2HDM. It turns out that two such models are Type~II and Type~Z 2HDM, which we illustrate in Fig.~\ref{fig:scan-2sigma}. For the other two scenarios (Type~I and Type~X) the NP contributions are either too small or already in conflict with $\mathcal{B}(B_s\to \mu^+\mu^-)^\mathrm{exp}$. From Figs.~\ref{fig:scan-2sigma} and ~\ref{fig:scan-2sigma-bis} we see that
in order to explain the discrepancy one needs a relatively light charged scalar: (i) $m_{H^\pm} \lesssim 735~\mathrm{GeV}$ and $\tan\beta > 2.3$ in the Type~II scenario, and (ii) $m_{H^\pm} \lesssim 380~\mathrm{GeV}$ and $\tan\beta > 3.5$ for the Type~Z scenario. Since the masses of the additional scalars are correlated, we see that $m_H$ and $m_A$ become bounded as well, cf.~Fig.~\ref{fig:scan-2sigma-bis}. In the case of Type~II and Type~Z 2HDM an additional bound on the charged Higgs has been recently derived from the inclusive mode $\mathcal{B}(B\to X_s \gamma)$. After comparing the experimental spectra with theoretical expressions in which the higher order QCD corrections have been included, the lower bound $m_{H^\pm} >570$~GeV (95\% CL) was obtained in Ref.~\cite{Misiak:2017bgg} (c.f. also Ref.\cite{Misiak:2015xwa}). This bound is superposed on our results
in Figs.~\ref{fig:scan-2sigma} and~\ref{fig:scan-2sigma-bis}, which then also eliminates Type~Z 2HDM. Furthermore, we can say that the requirement of agreement between theory and experiment to $2\sigma$, for the quantities discussed in this Section, reduces the available space of parameters for Type~II 2HDM to $m_{H^\pm} \in (570, 735)~\mathrm{GeV}$, and $\tan \beta \in (16, 35)$, while the available range of values for the mass of the CP-odd Higgs becomes $m_A\in (145, 865)~\mathrm{GeV}$.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Figs/tanb_mHp_typeII-2sigma.pdf}~\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Figs/tanb_mHp_typeZ-2sigma.pdf}
\caption{\sl Results of the scan in Fig.~\ref{fig:scan} after imposing the $b\to s$ constraints to $2\sigma$ accuracy. The hatched area is excluded by $\mathcal{B}(B\to X_s \gamma)$ at 95\%~\cite{Misiak:2017bgg}. See Fig.~\ref{fig:scan-3sigma} for the color code.}
\label{fig:scan-2sigma}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Figs/mA_mHp_typeII-2sigma.pdf}~\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Figs/mA_mHp_typeZ-2sigma.pdf}
\caption{\sl Same as in Fig.~\ref{fig:scan-2sigma} but in the $(m_A,m_{H^\pm})$ plane.}
\label{fig:scan-2sigma-bis}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Figs/plot-Bstautau-II.pdf}~\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Figs/plot-BKtautau-II.pdf}
\caption{\sl We show the branching fractions of the decay to $\tau$-leptons with respect to their SM predictions, as obtained in the Type~II 2HDM, consistent with experimental results for the decays to muons in the final state.
}
\label{fig:XXX}
\end{figure}
In what follows we will assume that the $2\sigma$ disagreement of the measure ${\mathcal B}(B\to K\mu^+\mu^-)_{\mathrm{high}\,q^2}^\mathrm{exp}$ with respect to the SM prediction indeed remains as such in the future and discuss
the consequences on the decays ${\mathcal B}(B_s\to \tau^+\tau^-)$ and ${\mathcal B}(B\to K\tau^+\tau^-)_{\mathrm{high}\,q^2}$ if the Type~II 2HDM is used to explain the disagreement. From Eq.~\eqref{eq:BS} we can see that
\begin{eqnarray}
{{\mathcal B}(B_s\to \tau^+\tau^-)\over {\mathcal B}(B_s\to \tau^+\tau^-)^{\mathrm{SM}} }= {{\mathcal B}(B_s\to \mu^+\mu^-)\over {\mathcal B}(B_s\to \mu^+\mu^-)^{\mathrm{SM}} } - { |C_S^{\tau\tau}|^2\over
|C_{10}^\mathrm{SM}|^2 } {m_{B_s}^2\over (m_b+m_s)^2}\,,
\end{eqnarray}
where the only remaining $m_\ell$ dependence comes from the last numerator in the factor multiplying $|C_S-C_S^\prime|^2$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:BS}.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:XXX} we illustrate the validity of the above equality. Notice that a tiny departure from equality comes from the large $\tan\beta$ values which enhance the $C_S$ contribution.
In other words, the current experimental result ${\mathcal B}(B_s\to \mu^+\mu^-)^\mathrm{exp}$, which is slightly lower than the one predicted in the SM, is expected to
lead to ${\mathcal B}(B_s\to \tau^+\tau^-)^\mathrm{exp}$ compatible or slightly lower than predicted in the SM.
The cancellation of the lepton mass in ${\mathcal B}(B_s\to \ell^+\ell^-)^{\mathrm{2HDM}}$, discussed above, does not occur in ${\mathcal B}(B\to K \ell^+\ell^-)^{\mathrm{2HDM}}_{\mathrm{high}-q^2}$.
As a result we obtain,
\begin{eqnarray}
{{\mathcal B}(B\to K \tau^+\tau^-)^{\mathrm{Type\,II}}\over {\mathcal B}(B\to K \tau^+\tau^-)^{\mathrm{SM}} } \lesssim {{\mathcal B}(B\to K \mu^+\mu^-)^{\mathrm{Type\,II}}\over {\mathcal B}(B\to K\mu^+\mu^-)^{\mathrm{SM}} }\,,
\end{eqnarray}
where we omitted the subscript ``high-$q^2$" to avoid too heavy a notation. Illustration is provided in Fig.~\ref{fig:XXX}. We can rephrase this observation with an
equivalent statement:
\begin{eqnarray}
{{\mathcal B}(B\to K \tau^+\tau^-)^{\mathrm{Type~II}}\over {\mathcal B}(B\to K \mu^+\mu^-)^{\mathrm{Type~II}}} <
{{\mathcal B}(B\to K \tau^+\tau^-)^{\mathrm{SM}}\over {\mathcal B}(B\to K \mu^+\mu^-)^{\mathrm{SM}}} \,.
\end{eqnarray}
To be fully explicit, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
\left. {{\mathcal B}(B\to K \tau^+\tau^-)\over {\mathcal B}(B\to K \mu^+\mu^-)}\right|_{\mathrm{high}-q^2}\!\! \in (1.12,1.14)_\mathrm{SM}, (1.0,1.1)_{\mathrm{Type~II}}.
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:concl}
In this paper we computed the leading order Wilson coefficients relevant to the exclusive $b\to s\ell^+\ell^-$ decays in the framework of 2HDM with a softly broken $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry. Most of these Wilson coefficients have been computed previously but in the limit of large $\tan\beta$, which we extend here to a generic setup. We also included $\mathcal{O}(m_b)$ corrections, which were neglected in the previous computations. Regarding the (pseudo-)scalar Wilson coefficients, we elucidated the issue of unambiguous matching of the one-loop amplitudes between the full and effective theories which requires extending the basis of operators in the effective theory by including two types of operators suppressed by $1/m_W$ (altogether, eight new operators).
We pointed out that for the appropriate identification of the $Z$-penguin contribution to the Wilson coefficient $C_P$ it is necessary to keep all external momenta different from zero.
After having computed the full set of Wilson coefficients we were able to make a phenomenological analysis by focusing on ${\mathcal B}(B_s\to \mu^+\mu^-)$ and ${\mathcal B}(B\to K \mu^+\mu^-)_{\mathrm{high}-q^2}$, the quantities which are measured at LHC and for which the hadronic uncertainties are under good theoretical control (computed in LQCD). After carefully scanning the parameter space of 2HDM with a softly broken $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry, we tested various types of 2HDM against the experimental data for ${\mathcal B}(B_s\to \mu^+\mu^-)^\mathrm{exp}$ and ${\mathcal B}(B\to K \mu^+\mu^-)_{\mathrm{high}-q^2}^\mathrm{exp}$,
and found that to $3\sigma$ the values of low $\tan\beta \lesssim 1$ are excluded for all types of 2HDM's considered here.
If, instead, we require the $2\sigma$ agreement with experiment, then only Type~II and Type~Z models provide a viable description of the data. After combining ours with the bound on the charged Higgs deduced from the inclusive $b\to s\gamma$ decay, we find that the Type~Z model can be discarded and
\begin{align}
&\mathrm{Type ~II}\ : & m_{H^\pm} \in (570,735)~{\rm GeV}, && m_A\in (145,865)~{\rm GeV}, && \tan \beta \in (16,35).
\end{align}
We also discussed the repercussions of the current results on the decays ${\mathcal B}(B_s\to \tau^+\tau^-)$ and ${\mathcal B}(B\to K \tau^+\tau^-)_{\mathrm{high}-q^2}$.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
P.~A. and F.~M. acknowledge the financial support from FPA2016-76005-C2-1-P, 2014-SGR-104, and project MDM-2014-0369 of ICCUB (Unidad de Excelencia {\em Maria de Maeztu}). F.~M. have further been supported by project FPA2014-61478-EXP.
This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under
the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreements No. 690575 and No. 674896.
\clearpage
|
\chapter{Linear and nonlinear effect of hyperviscosity}
\label{App:hyperviscosity}
For the MAST configuration that we investigated, hyperviscosity was a key
requirement in order for us to be able to run ion-scale-only simulations to
saturation. To demonstrate the need for hyperviscosity, we start by
considering the linear growth rate $\gamma$ (calculated with zero flow shear,
$\gamma_E=0$) over a range of $k_y \rho_i$ that covers both ion ($k_y \rho_i
\sim 1$) and electron scales ($k_y \rho_i \gtrsim 10$). This is shown in
\figref{gamma_vs_ky}. We see that there is no clear scale separation between
ion- and electron-scale instabilities and, therefore, it is problematic to
choose a maximum value of $k_y \rho_i$ at which our nonlinear simulations
could naturally be cut off. \Figref{gamma_vs_ky} suggests that multiscale
simulations, covering both ion and electron scales, are required as any
intermediate cut-off scale would lead to finite growth at the smallest
resolved scales.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{growth_rate_vs_ky_nspec_2_full_scan}
\caption{}
\label{fig:gamma_vs_ky}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{growth_rate_vs_ky_with_hyp}
\caption{}
\label{fig:growth_with_hyp}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Linear effect of hyperviscosity]{
\subref*{fig:gamma_vs_ky} Linear growth rate $\gamma$ as a function of $k_y
\rho_i$ covering both ion and electron scales for $\kappa_T = 5.1$ and
$\gamma_E=0$. There is no clear scale separation between the ion and
electron dynamics.
\subref*{fig:growth_with_hyp} Effective linear growth
rates $\gamma_{\mathrm{eff}}$ versus $k_y \rho_i$ at $k_x \rho_i = 0$ for
a range of different values of $D_{\mathrm{hv}}$, calculated from
\eqref{growth_rate_with_hyp}. We have used $k_{y,\max} \rho_i = 3.1$
because this was the maximum value resolved in our nonlinear simulations.
}
\end{figure}
Using equation~\eqref{hypervisc} we can determine the effect of different
levels of hyperviscosity on linear growth rate (in the absence of flow shear)
without running additional linear simulations. Hyperviscosity is implemented
as a wave-number-dependent factor applied to the distribution function at
every time step, with the result that, in the presence of hyperviscosity,
a perturbed quantity like $\varphi$ evolves in a linear simulations in time as
\begin{equation}
\varphi(t) \sim \exp \left[\left( \gamma -
D_{\mathrm{hv}} \frac{k_\perp^4}{k_{\perp,\max}^4}\right)t\right],
\label{phi_with_hyp}
\end{equation}
where $D_{\mathrm{hv}}$ is a constant
coefficient controlling the strength of the hyperviscosity (denoted by
\texttt{d\_hypervisc} in GS2), $k_\perp^2 = k_x^2 + k_y^2$, $k_{\perp,\max}$
is the largest perpendicular wavenumber resolved in the simulation.
Hence, the effective growth rate is given by
\begin{equation}
\gamma_{\mathrm{eff}} = \gamma -
D_{\mathrm{hv}} \frac{k_\perp^4}{k_{\perp,\max}^4}.
\label{growth_rate_with_hyp}
\end{equation}
\Figref{growth_with_hyp} shows the effective linear growth rate, calculated
using \eqref{growth_rate_with_hyp} as a function of $k_y \rho_i$ for $k_x
\rho_i = 0$ for a range of values of $D_{\mathrm{hv}}$. We have used
$k_{y,\max} \rho_i \approx 3$, which was the maximum resolved wavenumber in
our nonlinear simulations. The $D_{\mathrm{hv}} =0$ curve shows the need for
hyperviscosity in our nonlinear simulations: there is no clear scale
separation between ion ($k_y \rho_i \sim 1$) and electron scales ($k_y \rho_i
\gtrsim 2$). Therefore, a purely ion-scale nonlinear simulation would have
strongly growing electron modes at the smallest simulated scales, but
wouldn't resolve the electron dissipation scale at $k_y \rho_i \sim 60$.
Hence, hyperviscosity provides the damping needed to run an ion-scale
simulation and stop an unphysical build up of free energy at the smallest
scales. In our nonlinear simulations we settle on the value $D_{\mathrm{hv}}
= 9$ and prove later that it does not affect the transport properties.
In the presence of flow shear, the picture is made more complicated by the
fact that the system is subcritical; however, we are still able to study the
effect of hyperviscosity. Setting $\gamma_E>0$, and calculating
the transient-amplification factor $N_\gamma$, instead of $\gamma$, leads to a
similar conclusion as for $\gamma_E=0$ simulations without hyperviscosity:
there is no clear maximum value of $k_y \rho_i$ that would ensure there is
no growth at the smallest scales, as shown by the blue line in
\figref{N_with_hyp} (with $\gamma_E = 0.16$). The red line in
\Figref{N_with_hyp} shows the effect of hyperviscosity on $N_\gamma$ [at
$(\kappa_T,\gamma_E) = (5.1, 0.16)$ and $k_x \rho_i = 0$] for a value of
$k_{\perp, \max}$ equal to that in our nonlinear simulations. We see that
ion-scale transient growth is not strongly affected by the hyperviscosity
while electron-scale transient growth is effectively damped (mainly due to
their long transient growth time), i.e, $N_\gamma$
goes to zero. This allowed us to choose a cut-off scale for our nonlinear
simulations at $k_y \rho_i \sim O(1)$ and focus our attention at ion scales
while still simulating electrons via a kinetic equation and including their
effect on the ions.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{trans_amp_vs_ky_with_hypervisc}
\caption{}
\label{fig:N_with_hyp}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{hyp_scan}
\caption{}
\label{fig:hyp_scan}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Effect of hyperviscosity on $N_\gamma$ and $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$]{
\subref*{fig:N_with_hyp} Transient-amplification factor $N_\gamma$ (at
$(\kappa_T,\gamma_E) = (5.1, 0.16)$ and $k_x \rho_i = 0$) for a range of
$k_y \rho_i$ identical to that in our nonlinear simulations with
$D_\mathrm{hv} = 0$ (blue line) and $D_\mathrm{hv} = 9$ (red line). While
ion-scale transient growth is unaffected electron-scale modes are
suppressed by the hyperviscosity.
\subref*{fig:hyp_scan} Ion heat flux $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ as a function
of time for nonlinear simulations with $(\kappa_T,\gamma_E) = (5.1,0.16)$
with $D_\mathrm{hv} =$ $5$, $15$, and $20$.
}
\label{fig:hypervisc}
\end{figure}
The key requirement when artificially removing energy from the system, as
hyperviscosity does, is that the nonlinear saturated state should not depend
strongly on the value of $D_\mathrm{hv}$. \Figref{hyp_scan} shows four
nonlinear simulations at $(\kappa_T,\gamma_E) = (5.1, 0.16)$ with different
levels of hyperviscosity. The simulation at $D_\mathrm{hv} = 9$ was run until
saturation and then restarted three times with different values of
$D_\mathrm{hv}$: $D_\mathrm{hv} =$ $5$, $15$, and $20$. \Figref{hyp_scan}
shows that these level of $D_\mathrm{hv}$ do not affect the level of
transport strongly while allowing our simulations to saturate. Based on
\figref{hyp_scan}, we have used $D_\mathrm{hv} = 9$ for all of our nonlinear
simulations.
In conclusion, using hyperviscosity we were able to damp high wavenumber
dynamics and allowed us to run ion-scale-only simulations, with a cut-off
scale around $k_y \rho_i \sim 3$. As a consequence of being limited to ion
scales only, our simulations will miss the effects of turbulence at electron
scales, as well as possible cross-scale coupling effects between electron and
ion scales. Previous realistic multiscale
studies~\cite{Howard2014,Howard2014a} have shown that these effects may
increase the level of turbulence via the stabilisation of zonal flows by
electron scale turbulence. However, for the purposes of this work we will
assume that we are capturing the majority of the physics at ion scales, and
are not introducing any artificial effects through our high-wavenumber
cut-off.
\chapter{Resolving the effect of flow shear}
\label{App:res_flow_shear}
In this appendix, we estimate the conditions that need to be satisfied in
order to resolve the effect of flow shear using the results from nonlinear
simulations in the absence of flow shear.
In Section~\ref{sec:flow_shear}, we showed that flow shear is implemented in
GS2 by allowing the radial wavenumber $k_x$ to vary with time according
to~\eqref{kx_time}, and by ``shifting'' the fluctuation fields along the $k_x$
dimension. The frequency at which GS2 shifts the fluctuation fields in the
$k_x$ dimension depends on the value of the radial grid spacing
$\Delta k_x$, $\gamma_E$, and the poloidal wavenumber $k_y$. From
\eqref{kx_time}, the time taken before the exact shift is $\Delta k_x/2$
(at which points GS2 shifts the fluctuation fields by $\Delta k_x$ as
explained in Section~\ref{sec:flow_shear}) is
\begin{equation}
\tau_{\mathrm{shift}} = \frac{\Delta k_x}{2 \gamma_E k_y}.
\label{tau_shift}
\end{equation}
In order for the effect of flow shear to be considered ``resolved'', this
shifting operation should occur at least once during the lifetime of an
eddy, otherwise turbulence will interact and decorrelate as though the
simulation were shearless. The turbulence decorrelation time
$\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$ is estimated from the correlation properties of
turbulence via~\eqref{tau_nl}, and the condition for flow shear to be
resolved is, therefore,
\begin{equation}
\tau_{\mathrm{shift}} \lesssim \tau_{\mathrm{NL}}.
\label{shift_cond}
\end{equation}
To estimate the value of $\tau_\mathrm{NL}$ relevant to our parameter scan,
we performed a series of nonlinear simulations at a range of different values
of ion temperature gradient $\kappa_T$ in the absence of flow shear. The
results are shown in \figref{taunl_tprim}, and we see that at the
experimental value $\kappa_T=5.1$, $\tau_{\mathrm{NL}} \sim 30$~$\mu$s. We
now want to find the approximate value of $\gamma_E$ that ensures
\eqref{shift_cond} is satisfied, given the value of $\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$
above. Returning to \eqref{tau_shift}, the radial grid spacing we employed
in our nonlinear simulations was $\Delta k_x \approx 0.03$, and the most
important scales in the system is $k_y \rho_i \sim 0.2$
[see \figref{N_with_hyp}]. Using \eqref{tau_shift}, the value of $\gamma_E$
that satisfies \eqref{shift_cond} is $\gamma_E \approx 0.08$, where values
less than this satisfy \eqref{shift_cond} less well. Therefore, we have taken
this to be the minimum value of flow shear for our parameter scan in this
work.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{tau_nl_vs_tprim}
\caption[Nonlinear decorrelation time versus ITG]{
Nonlinear decorrelation time $\tau_\mathrm{NL}$, calculated using
\eqref{tau_nl}, as a function of $\kappa_T$ for simulations with
$\gamma_E=0$.
}
\label{fig:taunl_tprim}
\end{figure}
\chapter{Linear simulations with $\gamma_E = 0$}
\label{App:linear_sims}
In Section~\ref{sec:subcritical}, we showed that, in the presence of flow
shear, the turbulence is subcritical. This means that one cannot easily
define a linear growth rate for $\gamma_E>0$ simulations; however, it is
still useful to consider the linear physics in the absence of flow shear to
investigate which scales are important. Here, we look at the linear growth
rates and frequencies for simulations with adiabatic and kinetic electron
species.
In the absence of flow shear, $\varphi$ will evolve in time according to
$\varphi \sim e^{\gamma t}$, where $\gamma$ is the linear growth rate. We
start by looking at $\gamma$ and real frequency $\omega_g$ versus $k_y$
for simulations with kinetic ions and adiabatic electrons for a range of ion
temperature gradient length scales $\kappa_T$ as shown in
Figure~\ref{fig:linear_nspec_1}. The dashed line indicates the experimental
value of flow shear $\gamma_E = 0.16 \pm 0.02$. We see that the flow shear is
comparable to the maximum linear growth rate, i.e., $\gamma_E \sim
\gamma_{\max}$. Previous numerical studies with adiabatic electrons and flow
shear~\cite{Waltz1994} have defined the so-called ``Waltz Rule'', which
states that ion-scale turbulence tends to be quenched when $\gamma_{\max}
\sim \gamma_E$. Indeed, nonlinear simulations of our system with adiabatic
electrons and flow shear show that steady-state turbulence cannot be achieved
for any $\kappa_T$ within the experimental error range, in agreement with the
above quenching rule.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{growth_rate_vs_ky_nspec_1}
\caption{}
\label{fig:gamma_nspec_1}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{frequency_vs_ky_nspec_1}
\caption{}
\label{fig:omega_nspec_1}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Linear growth rates and frequencies for one species, adiabatic
electron simulations]{
\subref*{fig:gamma_nspec_1} Linear growth rate $\gamma$ and
\subref*{fig:omega_nspec_1} real frequency $\omega_g$ versus $k_y$ for
simulations with a single kinetic ion species and adiabatic electrons.
For these linear simulations plots, $k_x \rho_i = 0$. The shaded region
shows the experimental level of flow shear $\gamma_E = 0.16 \pm 0.02$.
}
\label{fig:linear_nspec_1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{growth_rate_vs_ky_nspec_2}
\caption{}
\label{fig:gamma_nspec_2}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{frequency_vs_ky_nspec_2}
\caption{}
\label{fig:omega_nspec_2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Linear growth rates and frequencies for two-species simulations]{
\subref*{fig:gamma_nspec_2} Linear growth rate $\gamma$ and
\subref*{fig:omega_nspec_2} real frequency $\omega_g$ versus $k_y$ for
simulations with a kinetic ion and electron species. For these linear
simulations plots, $k_x \rho_i = 0$. The shaded region shows the
experimental level of flow shear $\gamma_E = 0.16 \pm 0.02$.
}
\label{fig:linear_nspec_2}
\end{figure}
Including a kinetic electron species, leads to much stronger linear growth as
shown in \figref{linear_nspec_2}, which again shows $\gamma$ and
$\omega_g$ as a function of $k_y \rho_i$. We focus here on the dynamics at
ion scales ($k_y \rho_i \sim 1$), given that the hyperviscosity we apply in
our nonlinear simulations acts predominantly on the electron scales (see
Appendix~\ref{sec:hyperviscosity}). \Figref{max_growth_rate} shows the maximum
growth rate at ion scales as a function of $\kappa_T$ with $\kappa_T=4.8$.
The horizontal dashed line indicates $\gamma_E = 0.16 \pm 0.02$ and the
vertical dashed line indicates $\kappa_T=4.8$, which was the value of
$\kappa_T$ at which turbulence was quenched in our nonlinear simulations at
this flow shear [see \Figsref{contour_heatmap}{value_heatmap}]. We see that
the maximum growth rate at ion scales is clearly much larger than $\gamma_E$,
and that $\gamma_E/\gamma_{\max} \sim 1/3$ at $\kappa_T=4.8$. Previous
numerical investigations with kinetic electrons investigating the quenching
of turbulence with flow shear estimated that~\cite{Kinsey2007}:
$\gamma_E/\gamma_{\max} = 0.71 (\kappa/1.5) / (A/3)^{0.6}$, where
$A$ aspect ratio and $\kappa$ is the flux surface elongation. For the flux
surface we are considering, $A \sim 1.5$ and $\kappa=1.46$ (see
Table~\ref{tab:sim_params}), giving $\gamma_E/\gamma_{\max} \sim 1$, similar
to the quench condition for adiabatic electrons. We see that in our nonlinear
simulations, turbulence is quenched for a much lower ratio of
$\gamma_E/\gamma_{\max}$ suggesting that, for the system we are
investigating, flow shear is more effective than expected at quenching
ion-scale turbulence, at least compared to the estimates
in~\cite{Kinsey2007}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{max_growth_rate_vs_tprim}
\caption[Maximum growth rate]{Maximum linear growth rate $\gamma_{\max}$ as
a function of $\kappa_T$. The dashed line and shaded area indicate
$\gamma_E = 0.16 \pm 0.02$.
}
\label{fig:max_growth_rate}
\end{figure}
\chapter{Transforming to real space and laboratory frame}
\label{App:real_space_transform}
As explained in Section~\ref{sec:local_approx}, GS2 solves the gyrokinetic
equation~\eqref{gk} in curvilinear coordinates~\cite{Beer1995a} in a domain
known as a ``flux tube'', shown in~\figref{flux_tube}, that rotates with the
plasma. In order to analyse the real-space structure of turbulence and
compare with BES measurements, we need to transform our data from the
rotating plasma frame to the laboratory frame and from flux-tube geometry to
real-space geometry, i.e., from the GS2 coordinates $(x,y,\theta)$ to $(R, Z,
\lambda)$ where $x$ and $y$ are the GS2 perpendicular coordinates, $\theta$ is the
poloidal angle, $R$ is the major radius, $Z$ is poloidal height above the
midplane of the machine, and $\lambda$ is the distance along the field line.
\section{Laboratory frame}
GS2 simulates the plasma in a frame rotating with the plasma [see
equation~\eqref{rot_vel} and~\eqref{u_grad}], with toroidal
rotation frequency $\omega_0$, whereas the BES diagnostic measures turbulence
in the laboratory frame. In order to make realistic comparisons with BES
measurements, we applied the following transformation to the GS2 distribution
function to transform from the rotating to the laboratory
frame~\cite{Holland2009}:
\begin{equation}
{\qty(\frac{\delta n_i}{n_i})}_{\mathrm{lab}}(t, k_x, k_y, \theta) =
{\qty(\frac{\delta n_i}{n_i})}_{\mathrm{GS2}}(t, k_x, k_y, \theta)
e^{- i n \omega_0 t},
\label{lab_transform}
\end{equation}
where ${\qty(\delta n_i/n_i)}_{\mathrm{GS2}}(t, k_x, k_y, \theta)$ is
the fluctuating density field calculated by GS2 in the rotating frame,
${\qty(\delta n_i/n_i)}_{\mathrm{lab}}(t, k_x, k_y, \theta)$ is the
density field in the laboratory frame, and
\begin{equation}
n = k_y \rho_i \dv{\psi_N}{r} \frac{a}{\rho_i}
\label{tor_mode_no}
\end{equation}
is the toroidal mode number of a given $k_y$ mode, $\psi_N$ is the normalised
poloidal magnetic flux, $r=D/2a$ is the Miller~\cite{Miller1998} radial
coordinate, $D$ is the diameter of the flux surface, $a$ is half of the
diameter of the last closed flux surface (LCFS), and $\rho_i$ is the ion
gyroradius.
\section{Radial domain size}
\label{sec:radial_domain}
Here, we calculate the radial domain size $L_R$ at the outboard
midplane from the radial domain size in GS2 coordinates $L_x$. We start by
noting that gradients across the GS2 domain are held constant, meaning that
\begin{equation}
R'(\theta = 0) = \frac{1}{a} \dv{R(\theta = 0)}{r}
= \frac{1}{a} \frac{\Delta R(\theta = 0)}{\Delta r},
\label{R_prime}
\end{equation}
where $R$ is the major radius, $R'(\theta)$ is the derivative of $R$ with
respect to the poloidal angle $\theta$, and $\Delta R(\theta = 0) \equiv L_R$
is the radial domain size. We calculate $\Delta r$ from the local GS2
coordinate $x$ as follows. Using the Taylor expansion $r \approx r_0 +
(\psi_N - \psi_{0N}) \eval{\dv*{r}{\psi_N}}_{r_0}$ and substituting
into~\eqref{gs2_x} we get
\begin{equation}
x = (r - r_0) \frac{q_0}{r_0} \dv{\psi_N}{r} \frac{a}{\rho_i},
\label{gs2_x_with_rho}
\end{equation}
where $r_0 = 0.8$ is the location of the flux surface we are investigating,
and $q_0$ is the safety factor at $r = 0.8$. The extent of the radial domain
in the coordinate $x$ is then
\begin{equation}
\Delta x = \Delta r \frac{q}{r_0} \dv{\psi_N}{r} \frac{a}{\rho_i}.
\label{delta_x}
\end{equation}
Using the following values from our simulations $\Delta x = 2 \pi /
k_{x,\min} \rho_i \approx 200 \rho_i$, where $k_{x,\min}$ is the minimum
resolved $k_x$ in our nonlinear simulations, $\qty(\dv*{\psi_N}{r})^{-1} =
1.44$, and from the experiment [see Tables~\ref{tab:equil_params}
and~\ref{tab:sim_params}] $a = 0.58$~m, $\rho_i = 6.08 \times10^{-3}$~m, $q_0
= 2.31$, we calculate $\Delta r$ from equation~\eqref{delta_x} and substitute
into equation~\eqref{R_prime} to find $\Delta R(\theta = 0) \equiv L_R
\approx 65 \rho_i \approx 0.4$~m. We note that while $x$ is a local
coordinate and $R$ is a physical coordinate our simulations only describe the
turbulence at $r=0.8$. Hence, our results are only comparable to experimental
results at this radius.
\section{Poloidal domain size}
\label{sec:pol_domain}
To calculate the poloidal domain size $L_Z$, we start by noting that, the GS2
grid points lie on $(\phi, \psi)$ planes at constant values of $\theta$.
Therefore, at $\theta = 0$, GS2 simulates turbulence on a radial-toroidal
plane. The extent of the GS2 domain in toroidal angle $\phi$
is~\cite{Beer1995a}
\begin{equation}
\Delta \phi = \frac{2 \pi}{n_0},
\label{phi_box_size}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
n_0 = k_{y,\min} \rho_i \dv{\psi_N}{r} \frac{a}{\rho_i}
\label{n0}
\end{equation}
is the minimum toroidal mode number simulated and $k_{y,\min} \rho_i$ is
the smallest resolved $k_y$ mode in our nonlinear simulations. The toroidal
extent of the domain is therefore given by $L_\phi = R \Delta \phi$, where
$R$ is the major radius of the flux surface at the outboard midplane. We can
relate $L_\phi$ to the poloidal extent of the GS2 domain, $L_\theta$, via the
relation $\tan \vartheta = L_\theta / L_\phi$, where $\vartheta$ ($\approx
0.6$) is the pitch-angle of the magnetic field, as shown
in~\figref{pitch_angle}, for the flux surface $r=0.8$ at the outboard
midplane.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{torus_side_view}
\caption[MAST magnetic-field pitch-angle]{
Side view sketch of the MAST geometry shown in~\figref{flux_tube}.
The magnetic field's pitch-angle, $\vartheta$ ($\approx 0.6$), relates the
toroidal extent of the GS2 domain, $L_\phi$, with the poloidal extent,
$L_\theta$, through $\tan \vartheta = L_\theta / L_\phi$.
}
\label{fig:pitch_angle}
\end{figure}
In our nonlinear simulations, $k_{y,\min} \rho_i = 0.1$, giving
$n_0 \approx 7$ using \eqref{n0} and $L_\phi \approx 1.2$~m.
Using the above relations we find that the poloidal projection of the plane
at $\theta = 0$ is $L_\theta \approx 134 \rho_i \approx 0.81$~m.
Using the results from this section and Section~\ref{sec:radial_domain}, we
can transform our density fluctuation fields at the outboard midplane to a
radial-poloidal plane similar to the BES measurement window. For example,
\Figref{marginal_rz} shows the same plot as in \figref{marginal} at $\theta =
0$ in terms of the real-space poloidal coordinates $R$ and $Z$. Also
indicated in \figref{marginal_rz} are the domains used for the correlation
analysis of BES data and raw GS2 data, as used in Sections~\ref{sec:corr_exp}
and~\ref{sec:corr_gs2}, respectively.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{density_marginal_rz}
\caption[GS2 density fluctuations for a near-marginal case on an $(R,Z)$-plane]{
Density-fluctuation field $\delta n_i/n_i$ for the same near-marginal
shown in \Figref{marginal} for the equilibrium parameters
$(\kappa_T,\gamma_E) = (4.8, 0.16)$ as a function $R$ and $Z$. The
indicated domains are those used for the correlation analysis of raw GS2
density fluctuations (GS2) and the approximate size of the BES viewing
window (BES).
}
\label{fig:marginal_rz}
\end{figure}
\section{Parallel coordinate and domain size}
Finally, we calculate the parallel distance along the magnetic field line at
the centre of our flux tube. This procedure is non-trivial for a
general geometry because a uniform grid in $\theta$ does not map to a uniform
spatial grid along the field line as it would have done for circular flux
surfaces. For our D-shaped geometry we want to find $\lambda(\theta)$, the
distance along the field line parametrised by the poloidal angle $\theta$.
The differential arc length of a line element along the field line in terms
of $(R,Z,\phi)$ is
\begin{equation}
d \lambda^2 = dR^2 + dZ^2 + {(R d\phi)}^2,
\label{line_element}
\end{equation}
where $R = R(\theta)$ and $Z = Z(\theta)$ are the coordinates of the magnetic
field line at the centre of the flux tube.
We can differentiate with respect to $\theta$ and integrate to get the arc
length as a function of $\theta$:
\begin{equation}
\lambda(\theta) = \int_0^\theta d \theta' \sqrt{{\qty(\dv{R}{\theta'})}^2 +
{\qty(\dv{Z}{\theta'})}^2 +
{\qty(R \dv{\phi}{\theta'})}^2}.
\label{l_theta}
\end{equation}
The quantities $R(\theta)$, $Z(\theta)$, $\dv*{\phi}{\theta}$ are obtained
from GS2 and we then calculate their numerical derivatives with respect to
$\theta$, and then the integral~\eqref{l_theta} to determine
$\lambda(\theta)$. With the knowledge of the real-space parallel grid, we can
calculate correlation lengths in the parallel direction.
\chapter{Synthetic correlation properties without the ``spike filter''}
\label{App:no_spike}
A key step in the analysis of experimental data involves the removal of
high-energy radiation (e.g., neutron, gamma ray, or hard X-ray) impinging on
the BES detector. This radiation manifests itself as
delta-function-like spikes in time, typically only on a single BES channel.
These are removed via a numerical ``spike filter''~\cite{Field2012,Fox2016a},
which was included in the main analysis for consistency with experimental
analysis. Here, we show the results of a correlation analysis of GS2
density fluctuations with the synthetic diagnostic applied, but without this
``spike filter''. \Figref{bes_ns} shows the correlation results for
parameter values within the experimental uncertainty: the radial correlation
length $l^{\mathrm{NS}}_R$ [\figref{lr_bes_ns}], the poloidal correlation
length $l^{\mathrm{NS}}_Z$ [\figref{lz_bes_ns}], the correlation time
$\tau^{\mathrm{NS}}_c$ [\figref{tau_bes_ns}], the RMS density fluctuation
${(\delta n_i/n_i)}^{\mathrm{NS}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$ [\figref{n_bes_ns}].
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{lr_vs_tprim_w_flow_wo_sf}
\caption{}
\label{fig:lr_bes_ns}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{lz_vs_tprim_w_flow_wo_sf}
\caption{}
\label{fig:lz_bes_ns}
\end{subfigure}
\\
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{tau_vs_tprim_w_flow_wo_sf}
\caption{}
\label{fig:tau_bes_ns}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{n_vs_tprim_w_flow_wo_sf}
\caption{}
\label{fig:n_bes_ns}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[GS2 correlation parameters with a synthetic diagnostic
applied without a numerical ``spike filter'']{
Correlation-analysis results calculated from the analysis of GS2
fluctuation data (within the region of experimental uncertainty) after
applying the synthetic diagnostic, but without the spike filter normally
applied to experimental data:
\subref*{fig:lr_bes_ns} radial correlation length $l^{\mathrm{NS}}_R$,
\subref*{fig:lz_bes_ns} poloidal correlation length $l^{\mathrm{NS}}_Z$,
\subref*{fig:tau_bes_ns} correlation time $\tau^{\mathrm{NS}}_c$, and
\subref*{fig:n_bes_ns} RMS density fluctuation level
${(\delta n_i/n_i)}^{\mathrm{NS}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$. The simulations that
matched the experimental heat flux are circled. The quantities plotted
here are discussed in Section~\ref{sec:corr_overview}.
}
\label{fig:bes_ns}
\end{figure}
Comparing these results to the results in Section~\ref{sec:corr_synth} with
the ``spike filter'', we see that only the poloidal correlation length is
affected: $l^{\mathrm{NS}}_Z$ is several centimetres lower with the ``spike
filter'' compared to cases without it. We found that in some cases,
fast-moving structures in the poloidal direction (especially the long-lived
structures found in our near-marginal simulations) were removed by the
``spike filter'' and, therefore, would not affect to the poloidal correlation
function, resulting in a drop in $l^{\mathrm{NS}}_Z$. In particular,
\figref{lz_bes_ns} shows that $l^{\mathrm{NS}}_Z$ increased significantly in
near-marginal simulations compared to the results with the ``spike filter'',
suggesting that the coherent structures were no longer removed by the ``spike
filter''. This observation may assist future attempts to observe
experimentally the coherent structures predicted by our simulations.
\chapter{Example GS2 input file}
\label{App:gs2_input_file}
The following is an example GS2 input file used for this study (see
\url{http://gyrokinetics.sourceforge.net} on how to run the code with these
settings). A description of each of these variables can be found at
\url{http://gyrokinetics.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Gs2_Input_Parameters}.
\lstinputlisting[language=Fortran]{gs2.in}
\chapter{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusion}
We have simulated the conditions inside MAST discharge \#27274 using local
gyrokinetic simulations and performed a systematic parameter scan in the
ion-temperature-gradient length scale $\kappa_T$ and the flow shear $\gamma_E$. We
have demonstrated in Section~\ref{sec:heat_flux} that, within experimental
uncertainty, simulations reproduce the experimental ion heat flux and that the
experimentally measured equilibrium gradients lie close to the turbulence
threshold inferred from the simulations (see \figref{contour_heatmap}).
Importantly, this is one of the first numerical demonstrations that a MAST
plasma is close to the turbulence threshold. The parameter scan performed in
this work has clearly shown that $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$ are useful control
parameters, in agreement with several previous experimental and numerical
studies~\cite{Dimits1996, Mantica2009, Ritz1990, Burrell1997}.
We have shown in Section~\ref{sec:subcritical}, that the system is subcritical
for $\gamma_E>0$, i.e., finite initial perturbations, which we assume are
generated by the experiment, are required in order to achieve a saturated
nonlinear state. Subcriticality is a defining feature of this system: for
$\gamma_E>0$, even the largest values of $\kappa_T$ that we considered required
large initial perturbations to ignite turbulence. Using linear and nonlinear
simulations, we have estimated the conditions necessary for the onset of
subcritical turbulence: we require that maximum transient-amplification factor
be $N_{\gamma,\max} \gtrsim 0.4$ (see \figref{max_trans_amp}), and that the
transient-growth time $t_0$ be approximately greater than the nonlinear
interaction time, i.e., $t_0 \gtrsim \tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$
(Section~\ref{sec:time_scales}). These conditions were comparable to those in
previous work for simpler systems~\cite{Schekochihin2012}.
Furthermore, we have showed that the linear dynamics do not show significant
changes as the turbulence threshold is passed, and so nonlinear simulations are
essential in predicting the exact onset of subcritical turbulence.
Our simulations have shown that, near the turbulence threshold, a previously
unreported turbulent state exists in which fluctuation energy is concentrated into
a few coherent, long-lived structures, which have a finite minimum amplitude
(Section~\ref{sec:coherent_strucs}). We have argued that this phenomenon is due
to the subcriticality of the system, which cannot support arbitrarily
small-amplitude perturbations (as in supercritical turbulence). We have investigated
the changes in the nature of these nonlinear structures by tracking the maximum
fluctuation amplitude (Section~\ref{sec:max_amp}) and the number of structures
(Section~\ref{sec:struc_count}) as we changed our equilibrium parameters, and
have shown the following. Near the turbulence threshold, the system is
comprised of just a few finite-amplitude structures. As the system is taken away from
the turbulence threshold, the number of these structures increases (at
constant amplitude). Upon increasing in number sufficiently to fill the spatial
simulation domain, they begin to increase in amplitude (at a roughly constant
number of structures) (see \Figsref{amplitude}{nblobs}). Interestingly, the
evolution of our system as the system is taken away from the turbulence
threshold is reminiscent of the transition to subcritical turbulence via
localised structures in pipe flows~\cite{Barkley2015}. We have further shown
that, in contrast to conventional ITG-driven turbulence regulated by
zonal flows~\cite{Dimits2000} (and their associated shear), in our system,
close to the turbulence threshold, the shear due to the mean toroidal flow
dominates over the shear due to the zonal flows. We have shown that
the experimental gradients lie close to the threshold, meaning that it is
essential to include the background flow shear in simulations of MAST plasmas.
Only reasonably far from the turbulence threshold does the effect of the zonal
shear and the flow shear due to the background flow become comparable (see
\figref{zf_shear}), and further still the turbulence becomes similar to
ITG-driven turbulence in the absence of background flow shear.
We have made quantitative comparisons between density fluctuations in our
simulations and those measured by the MAST BES diagnostic~\cite{Field2009,
Field2012} (Section~\ref{sec:struc_of_turb}). A correlation
analysis~\cite{Ghim2012} was previously performed on the measurements of
density fluctuations from the BES diagnostic~\cite{Field2014}
(Section~\ref{sec:corr_exp}), giving the following properties of the
turbulence: the radial correlation length $l_R$, the poloidal correlation
length $l_Z$, and the correlation time $\tau_c$. We have performed two types of
correlation analysis on our simulated density fluctuations: one after applying
a synthetic BES diagnostic (Section~\ref{sec:corr_synth}), and one directly on
the raw GS2-generated density fluctuations (Section~\ref{sec:corr_gs2}). We
have compared these results to experimental measurements and achieved reasonable
agreement of the correlation lengths, time, and amplitude measurements, except
for the radial correlation length, which was predicted by us to be lower than
the resolution limit of the BES diagnostic. Notably, the simulated and
experimentally measured correlation times were in good agreement, unlike in
previous global, gyrokinetic simulations of the same MAST
discharge~\cite{Field2014}.
Finally, we have shown that the nature of the turbulence is effectively a
function of the distance from the turbulence threshold [for example, see
Figures~\ref{fig:amplitude}, \ref{fig:nblobs}, \ref{fig:zf_shear_q_scatter},
\ref{fig:gs2_q_scatter1}, and \ref{fig:gs2_q_scatter2}]. We have quantified
this distance from threshold via the ion heat flux $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$, and
have shown that it is this quantity, rather than the specific values of the
equilibrium parameters $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$, that determines the
properties of the turbulence. Throughout this work, we have presented our data
as functions of the distance from threshold to highlight the two distinct
turbulence regimes that we have identified. Close to the threshold, where
coherent structures dominate the dynamics, and far from the threshold, where
the turbulence appears to be similar to conventional strongly driven ITG
turbulence in the absence of flow shear. It is important to note that the
experiment is located at the boundary of these two regimes, in parameter
space, and may suggest that this boundary is most relevant to the experiment,
as opposed to the boundary separating the non-turbulent and turbulent states
--- the so-called ``zero-turbulence manifold''~\cite{Highcock2012}.
Using the local gyrokinetic code GS2, we have been able to reproduce both the
experimental heat flux and the quantitative measurements of turbulence
obtained using the BES diagnostic. This has given us confidence in
our simulations and has allowed us to trust some conclusions from them that do
not (yet) have direct experimental backing. More broadly, we have gained
confidence in the future use of local gyrokinetic simulations in predicting
turbulence and transport in high-aspect-ratio spherical tokamaks such as MAST.
\section{Future directions}
The most interesting experimental question that has arisen from this study is
about the existence of the long-lived, coherent structures near the turbulence
threshold, which support heat fluxes that are experimentally relevant. Given
that these structures occur at ion scales, the BES diagnostic is well-suited
for detecting them. However, as we have found in this investigation, the
``spike filter'', which plays an important role in cleaning experimental data
of high-energy radiation, may complicate the detection of these structures,
since it may erroneously remove long-lived, poloidally fast-moving structures.
Currently, the ``spike filter'' is a simple and efficient algorithm to remove
any spike in the emission above a certain threshold; however, future work might
involve more carefully filtering out only high-energy radiation and ensuring
that high-intensity emission that is correlated in time or across detectors
(such as that produced by a fast moving structure) is not overlooked. It might
also be possible to investigate the existence of structures statistically.
Recent work on this question has provided some tentative but encouraging
indications that a regime dominated by isolated structures might manifest
itself in experimentally observed skewed probability distributions of density
fluctuations \cite{Fox2016a}. Clearly, further more extensive analysis of MAST
BES measurements is needed.
In addition to detecting the coherent structures in experiments, it may be
useful to attempt to formulate an analytical description of their structure and
behaviour. Our simulations were of a realistic experimental configuration;
however, it may be possible to observe them in simpler systems and in this way
identify the key physical mechanisms that give rise to them. Our
simulations have identified the flow shear as a key physical mechanism and that
the relevant part of parameter space where the structures are found, is close
to the turbulence threshold. However, open questions remain regarding, for
example, the importance of the MAST geometry, the influence of dissipation
mechanisms such as collisions, and the role played by electron-scale
turbulence.
In this work we have identified two regimes of turbulence: a
coherent-structure-dominated regime and a more conventional ITG-turbulence
regime. Future studies could attempt to more precisely identify the criteria
that define the boundary between the two regimes, since it may be this boundary
that is most relevant to experiments, as is the case for the system we have
investigated.
Finally, we may ask: how universal are the turbulence regimes that we have
identified? First, with respect to other fusion devices and secondly, with
respect to other subcritical systems. We have shown in
Section~\ref{sec:subcritical} that even turbulence that has reached a saturated
state may still be quenched at a seemingly unpredictable time. Previous work
on subcritical systems in neutral fluid flow down a
pipe~\cite{Hof2006,Avila2011} and Keplerian magnetorotational accretion
flows~\cite{Rempel2010} have shown (using large numbers of experiments and/or
numerical simulations) that subcritical turbulence has a finite life time and
is a statistical property of the system that depends on how far the system is
from the turbulence threshold, much like the ion heat flux in our study. Most
recently, it has been shown, for neutral fluid flow down a pipe, that
subcritical turbulence has a finite life time \emph{regardless} of how far the
system is from the turbulence threshold. Currently, our simulations are much
too expensive to carry out the number of simulations required to determine the
turbulence life time as in the above studies. However, it would be an exciting
demonstration of the universality of subcritical turbulence if the turbulence
life time could be shown to behave similarly in tokamak plasmas.
\chapter{Introduction}
\section{Nuclear fusion}
Nuclear fusion is the process that powers the stars. Confined by the
gravitational force and heated to very high temperatures, hydrogen isotopes
can collide and fuse to form helium and release large amounts of energy. When
it comes to harnessing this power for use on Earth, the most promising fusion
reaction is between deuterium and tritium isotopes of hydrogen, which
produces a 3.5~MeV helium nucleus and a 14.6~MeV neutron. Utilising this
reaction for the purposes of electricity generation has been the goal of
fusion scientists since the idea was first proposed in the 1950s.
The tokamak has emerged as the most promising concept for confining this
reaction by using a toroidal configuration of magnetic field lines
(see~\figref{cbc_field_lines}). At the temperatures
required for fusion to occur, deuterium and tritium become fully ionised and
the gas becomes a plasma. In the presence of a magnetic field, these charged
particles are forced to gyrate about the magnetic field lines in a plane
perpendicular to the field lines and although they can freely stream along
them, they remain confined. This is because in the toroidal configuration,
magnetic field lines lie on a single surface and so provide no direct
route out of the plasma. This is crucial given that no material one could
feasibly build a fusion reactor out of, can withstand direct contact with the
extremely high temperature fusion plasma. This also
necessarily means that large pressure gradients are set up between the hot
core, where fusion reactions take place, and the relatively cool edge near
the reactor walls. It is these gradients that give rise to a physical process
that has hindered the realisation of fusion energy since the first attempts
to build reactors large enough to produce electricity: turbulence.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{cbc_field_lines.png}
\caption[Toroidal configuration of magnetic field lines]{
Toroidal configuration of magnetic field lines used to confine fusion
plasmas.
}
\label{fig:cbc_field_lines}
\end{figure}
\section{Turbulence}
Even in the ideal confinement scenario described above, there are still
processes by which plasma particles can escape. These processes include
collisions with other particles in addition to
particle drifts due the presence of an electric field, magnetic field line
curvature, and magnetic field gradients. The transport of particles,
momentum, and heat out of the plasma due to these processes is known as
neoclassical transport~\cite{Hinton1976, Hinton1985, Catto1987, Sugama1997,
Helander2005}. While important, neoclassical transport alone would not
significantly hinder the viability of a well-designed fusion reactor.
Instead, it is turbulence that presents a much greater challenge to fusion
power as an energy source~\cite{Coppi1967,Catto1973,Cowley1991, Connor1994,
Jenko2000a,Dorland2000,Dannert2005,Tynan2009}. In the presence of gradients
of density, flow, or temperature, small perturbations to the plasma state can
grow exponentially, and eventually interact with each other, leading to a
turbulent state. This turbulent state gives rise to enhanced radial
transport of particles, momentum, and heat, which can significantly exceed
neoclassical estimates~\cite{Hawryluk1998,Lazarus1996,Akers2003,Mantica2009}.
This presents a challenge for sustaining the temperatures and densities
necessary in the core for fusion. Thus, reducing or eliminating turbulence
completely would be the most effective means of achieving improved fusion
power.
Experimental, numerical, and theoretical studies have
shown that turbulent transport is strongly dependent on the ion temperature
gradient (ITG)~\cite{Baker2001,Tardini2002,Mantica2009,Mantica2011,Ghim2014,
Horton1980,Waltz1988,Kotschenreuther1995a,Dimits1996,
Highcock2010,Barnes2011a}. Additionally, the electron temperature and density
gradients, which give rise to the electron temperature gradient (ETG)
mode~\cite{Dorland2000,Jenko2000a} and the trapped electron mode
(TEM)~\cite{Dannert2005}, can also drive turbulence. In this work, we will
focus on turbulence driven by the ITG, which is a source of free energy and
drives the well-known ITG instability~\cite{Coppi1967, Cowley1991}, in
combination with turbulence driven by the TEM, which also drives
turbulence at ion scales. It is well-established that modest increases in
the ITG lead to large increases in ion heat flux, so-called ``stiff
transport'' (see~\cite{Mantica2009} for a recent experimental study). The
phenomenon of stiff transport is an important consideration in the design of
fusion reactors. In order to maximise the temperature in the core (to
increase fusion power) we want to maximise the temperature gradient between
the core and the relatively cool edge, where technological constraints (e.g.
material strain due to heat deposition, melting due to high temperatures,
etc.) must be taken into account. However, enhanced ITG-driven transport
(which reduces the ITG) would set an upper bound on the ITG and, hence, on
the core temperature that we can achieve. That is, unless some process
exists that can reduce or eliminate turbulence, driven by the ITG
instability, without reducing the ITG itself. Fortunately, it has been shown
that such a process exists in the form of sheared flows perpendicular to the
magnetic field lines.
\section{Sheared flows and subcritical turbulence}
It has been shown experimentally that toroidal rotation, or more
specifically the differential rotation between surfaces of constant magnetic
field, can lead to a
reduction or even complete suppression of
turbulence~\cite{Ritz1990,Burrell1997,Mantica2009, Mantica2011,Field2011}.
Toroidal differential rotation can be driven by the neutral beam injection
(NBI) system present in most fusion experiments~\cite{Field2011}. The NBI
system injects deuterium atoms at high energy to heat the plasma and
simultaneously generates a toroidal flow in the plasma. This gives rise to a
sheared flow (since the NBI system deposits most of its momentum and heat
at the core of the plasma) with components both parallel and perpendicular to
the direction of the magnetic field. Perpendicular flow shear has been shown
to reduce, or even eliminate, turbulence, while parallel flow shear has been
shown to drive a linear instability~\cite{Catto1973} (the parallel-velocity
gradient (PVG) instability), which can increase the level of turbulence.
This effect has been confirmed in many numerical studies~\cite{Waltz1994,
Waltz1997, Kinsey2005, Camenen2009, Roach2009, Barnes2011a,Highcock2010}.
However, it was shown that large flow shears and temperature gradients are
required before the destabilising effect of the parallel flow shear is strong
enough to overcome the stabilising effect of the perpendicular flow
shear~\cite{Highcock2010,Barnes2011a}. For this reason, PVG-driven turbulence
is not expected to play a large role in the experimentally relevant plasmas
we will consider in this work, given the modest levels of the ITG and flow
shear. To summarise, we see that there is a competition in fusion plasmas
between the destabilising effects of the ITG and PVG instabilities, and the
stabilising effect of the perpendicular flow shear.
Perpendicular flow shear can reduce turbulence levels in two ways: by
stabilising the linear instabilities that amplify small perturbations, and by
shearing apart eddies that characterise the turbulent state. It has
been shown that perpendicular flow shear can, in fact, render the plasma
completely linearly stable. However, there may still be substantial transient
growth of perturbations and, given large enough initial perturbations, this
transient growth can still lead to a saturated nonlinear state -- a
phenomenon known as ``subcritical'' turbulence~\cite{Newton2010,Highcock2010,
Highcock2011,Barnes2011a, Schekochihin2012, Landreman2015}. This is a
well-known phenomenon in neutral fluid systems, such as Couette and
Poiseuille flows, where, though they are linearly stable, finite
perturbations can nonetheless lead to a turbulent
state~\cite{Reynolds1883, Salwen1980, Trefethen1993, Kerswell2005, Avila2011,
Barkley2015}. Understanding the transition to a turbulent state in
subcritical systems is a long-standing challenge in neutral fluids and, more
recently, in fusion plasmas, where dramatically improved confinement is
possible in the absence of turbulence. However, there is currently very
little known about the transition to subcritical turbulence in
fusion-relevant plasmas -- an issue we address in this thesis.
\section{Comparisons between simulations and experimental measurements}
At the temperatures and densities found in fusion experiments, such as MAST,
it can be shown that the conditions for a fluid description are rarely
satisfied and that a kinetic description must be used
(see~\cite{Schekochihin2007} for a recent discussion).
Gyrokinetics~\cite{Frieman1982, Sugama1998,Abel2013} has emerged as the most
appropriate first-principles description in the context of plasma turbulence
in the core of tokamaks -- the focus of this thesis. The nonlinear gyrokinetic
equation is derived via an asymptotic expansion of the Fokker-Planck
equation. In general, it can only be solved numerically, and a number of
codes have been developed for this purpose, for example,
GS2~\cite{Kotschenreuther1995,Dorland2000} (the code used in this work),
GENE~\cite{Jenko2000a,Gorler2011}, and GYRO~\cite{Candy2003}. There has been
a concerted effort to include in these codes a large number of physical
effects relevant to experimental plasmas, such as realistic magnetic-surface
geometries, arbitrary numbers of kinetic species, realistic Fokker-Planck
collision operators, and so on. This has allowed the simulation of turbulence
in fusion plasmas with sufficient realism to be compared quantitatively to
experimental measurements. These ``local'' codes, such as GS2, take as input
the values and first derivatives of equilibrium quantities at a
particular radial location, and predict a host of quantities that could
theoretically be measured by an experimental diagnostic, for example, the
flux of particles, momentum, and heat, or density, flow, and temperature
fluctuations.
In conjunction with increasingly realistic modelling, more sophisticated
diagnostic techniques have been designed, which aid in our understanding of
the conditions inside the reactor and allow us to make comparisons with
modelling results. Initial comparisons between simulations and experiments
were limited to averaged quantities such as the transport of particles,
momentum, and heat. More recently, diagnostics that measure fluctuating
quantities have been developed: beam emission spectroscopy (BES) that
measures ion-scale density fluctuations~\cite{McKee2003,Field2009,Field2012,
Smith2010}; Doppler reflectometry that measures density fluctuation at scales
intermediate to ion and electron scales, rotation velocity of turbulent
structures, and the radial electron field~\cite{Hennequin2006,Hillesheim2012,
Hillesheim2015}; scattering diagnostics that measure electron scale density
fluctuations~\cite{Mazzucato2008}; and correlation electron cyclotron
emission (CECE) diagnostics~\cite{White2008b} that measure electron
temperature fluctuations. Measurements of fluctuating quantities allow
more extensive quantitative comparisons between experiment and simulations.
However, meaningful comparisons are only possible via the use of ``synthetic
diagnostics'' that take account of the measurement characteristics of the
particular diagnostic and modify the simulation output
accordingly~\cite{White2008b, Holland2009, Shafer2012, Ghim2012,
Field2014,Fox2016}.
In this work, we will focus on measurements from the BES system on
MAST~\cite{Field2009,Field2012}. The BES diagnostic
infers ion-scale turbulent density fluctuations from D$_\alpha$ emission (the
emission of light resulting from the dominant transition of ionised
deuterium), which is generated as a result of the injection of neutral
particles by the NBI system. The BES diagnostic takes measurements in a
two-dimensional radial-poloidal plane. In the case of an ITG- or TEM-unstable
plasma, the characteristic turbulence length scale in the direction
perpendicular to the magnetic field is of the order of the ion
gyroradius~\cite{Barnes2011}: $l_\perp \sim \rho_i$, and it is these
turbulent structures that BES is designed to measure. Such two-dimensional
measurements provide insight into the structure of turbulence, and they have
allowed turbulence to be visualised for the first time. From the BES
measurements, it is possible to estimate the turbulence correlation time
$\tau_c$ via the cross-correlation time delay (CCTD)
method~\cite{Durst1992,Ghim2012,Fox2016}, the radial and poloidal correlation lengths
$l_R$ and $l_Z$, and the relative density-fluctuation field $\delta
n_i/n_i$~\cite{Ghim2013,Fox2016}. A recent experimental
study~\cite{Field2014} used the BES diagnostic to measure turbulent density
fluctuations in the outer core of a MAST L-mode plasma and compared with
global gyrokinetic simulations. While there was some agreement at mid-radius,
serious discrepancies remained at outer radii, where ITG turbulence may not
be fully suppressed by flow shear, in predictions of turbulence
characteristics, such as the ion heat flux and turbulence correlation time.
In this work, we will study turbulence in the outer-core region of the MAST
discharge in Ref.~\cite{Field2014} using high-resolution local gyrokinetic
simulations.
In simulating experimentally-relevant plasmas using gyrokinetic
codes, we aim to achieve the following. First, we want to better understand
the physical mechanisms that most affect influence turbulence and its
associated enhanced transport. Specifically, how do turbulence characteristics
(such as transport, spatial scales, time scales, etc.) change in the outer
core of MAST with the ITG and the flow shear? Secondly, in light of newly
available experimental data from the MAST BES diagnostic~\cite{Field2014}, do
the turbulence characteristics found in local gyrokinetic GS2 simulations
agree with experimental BES measurements within the experimental
uncertainties of the ITG and flow shear? Such quantitative comparisons with
experimental results are essential in developing confidence in our
theoretical models and numerical implementations. In understanding the
properties of turbulence, we ultimately aim to guide the optimisation and
design of future experiments and fusion reactors to mitigate or eliminate the
causes of turbulence.
\section{Thesis outline}
The rest of this thesis is organised as follows. In
Chapter~\ref{sec:exp_setup}, we give an overview of MAST, the MAST BES
diagnostic, and discuss the discharge we will be considering in this work. In
Chapter~\ref{sec:gk_modelling}, we give an overview of gyrokinetics and
the GS2 code that we use to solve the system of gyrokinetic equations in an
axisymmetric torus. We discuss the toroidal geometry that is appropriate to
tokamaks and the relevant approximations in this setting that are used to
derive the gyrokinetic equation. We discuss details of the numerical
implementation of GS2 pertinent to our study, such as the extraction of
geometric information from experimental output, the calculation of collision
frequencies, and the implementation of flow shear and hyperviscosity.
Finally, we detail the numerical setup for our study, including the extent of
our parameter scan, the physics we have included, the approximations we have
made, the numerical resolutions we have used (along with a justification for
choosing them), and lastly a comprehensive table of parameters extracted from
the experiment required to run a numerical study.
The main results of this work are split into two parts. In
Chapter~\ref{sec:nl}, we will study, numerically, the effect on turbulence in
the outer core of MAST, when the ITG and perpendicular flow shear are
changed. We will show that turbulent
transport is stiff with respect to changes in the ITG, but also that the
perpendicular flow shear is effective at suppressing turbulence.
Performing an extensive parameter scan in these two equilibrium parameters,
we map out the turbulence threshold (the line separating regions of enhanced
turbulent transport and neoclassical transport) and show that the
experimental level of ion heat flux corresponds to values of the ITG and
flow shear
close to the turbulence threshold. We discover that the system is
subcritical and that large initial perturbations are required to ignite
turbulence, a phenomenon not previously observed for experimentally-relevant
plasmas. Furthermore, we discover that the near-threshold state is one
dominated by long-lived, coherent structures, which exist against a
background of much smaller fluctuations. We argue that these structures are a
direct consequence of the subcritical nature of the system, which
concentrates plasma into these structures as a means of maintaining the
minimum amplitude below which fluctuations would be quenched. Sufficiently
far from the turbulence threshold in parameter space, we recover a more
conventional turbulent state consisting of many strongly interacting eddies
simultaneously being sheared apart by the perpendicular flow shear. The
number and amplitude of the above structures are shown to be functions of the
distance from the turbulence threshold in the parameter space of ITG and flow
shear -- both increasing as the ITG is increased or as the flow shear is
decreased. In this way, we identify three distinct regions of parameter
space: the region of no turbulence (where transport would be neoclassical); a
marginally unstable, intermediate state between the non-turbulent and
fully turbulent states, characterised by long-lived, coherent structures; and a
conventional chaotic, turbulent state far from the turbulence threshold.
In Chapter~\ref{sec:struc_of_turb}, we make direct comparisons
with experimental measurements from the BES. We review the existing methods
for performing a correlation analysis of BES measurements and discuss the
differences in applying such an analysis to our simulations. Additional
analyses are performed, such as calculating the parallel correlation length
-- something not currently experimentally measured. We then proceed to
present two types of correlation analysis of our simulations: with and
without a synthetic diagnostic. We show that there is reasonable agreement with
experimental measurements in the case of analysis with the synthetic
diagnostic. However, radial correlation lengths predicted by GS2 are shown to
be below the resolution threshold of the BES diagnostic (an issue discussed in
detail in Ref.~\cite{Fox2016}). Our analysis without the synthetic
diagnostic shows that the synthetic diagnostic has a measurable effect on
several turbulence characteristics, including the poloidal correlation length
and the fluctuation amplitude, consistent with work in Ref.~\cite{Fox2016}.
Finally, we present the correlation properties as functions of the ion
heat flux and show that the structure of the turbulence in our
simulations is effectively only a function of this parameter, which measures
the distance to the turbulence threshold.
Our discussion and conclusions are presented in Chapter~\ref{sec:conclusion},
along with suggestions for future work.
\part{\hspace{2pt}#1}}
\newcommand{\red}[1]{\textcolor{red}{#1}}
\newcommand{$\vb*{E} \times \vb*{B}$ }{$\vb*{E} \times \vb*{B}$ }
\newcommand{\epsilon}{\epsilon}
\newcommand{\rho_{\mathrm{miller}}}{\rho_{\mathrm{miller}}}
\newcommand{\ensav}[2]{\left<{#1}\right>_{#2}}
\newcommand{\varepsilon}{\varepsilon}
\newcommand{\figref}[1]{Figure~\ref{fig:#1}}
\newcommand{\figsref}[2]{Figures~\ref{fig:#1} and~\ref{fig:#2}}
\newcommand{\figsdash}[2]{Figures~\ref{fig:#1} -- \ref{fig:#2}}
\newcommand{\Figref}[1]{Figure~\ref{fig:#1}}
\newcommand{\Figsref}[2]{Figures~\ref{fig:#1} and~\ref{fig:#2}}
\newcommand{\Figsdash}[2]{Figures~\ref{fig:#1} -- \ref{fig:#2}}
\newcommand{\collop}[1][f_s]{\ensuremath{{C}\hspace{-0.5mm}\left[#1\right]}}
\newcommand{\vth}[1][s]{\ensuremath{v_{\mathrm{th}_#1}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{v_{\mathrm{th}}}}{\ensuremath{v_{\mathrm{th}}}}
\newcommand{\pd}[2]{\ensuremath{ \frac{\partial #1} {\partial #2} } }
\newcommand{\inpd}[2]{\ensuremath{ \infrac{\partial #1} {\partial #2} } }
\newcommand{\gyror}[1]{\ensuremath{ {\left< #1 \right>}_{\bm{r}}}}
\newcommand{\fav}[1]{\ensuremath{\left< #1 \right>_{\psi}}}
\newcommand{\gyroR}[1]{\ensuremath{{\left< #1 \right>}_{\bm{R}}}}
\newcommand{\eqsref}[2]{Eqs.\ (\ref{#1}) and (\ref{#2})}
\newcommand{\eqsdash}[2]{Eqs.\ (\ref{#1}) -- (\ref{#2})}
\newcommand{\Secref}[1]{Section~\ref{#1}}
\providecommand{\Or}[1]{\mathcal{O}#1}
\providecommand{\Eref}[1]{Equation\ (\ref{#1})}
\providecommand{\eref}[1]{(\ref{#1})}
\newcommand{\uv}[1]{\bm{\hat{#1}}}
\newcommand{\dg}{\cdot\nabla}
\providecommand{\curl}{\nabla\times}
\newcommand{\tor}{\phi}
\newcommand{\gyr}{\vartheta}
\newcommand{\pot}{\varphi}
\newcommand{\fpot}{\Phi}
\newcommand{\pol}{\theta}
\newcommand{\gkeps}{\epsilon}
\newcommand{\aspect}{\epsilon}
\newcommand{\energy}[1][s]{{{\varepsilon}_#1}}
\newcommand{\denergy}[1][s]{{\dot{\varepsilon}}_{#1}}
\newcommand{\torflux}{\Psi}
\newcommand{\source}[1][s]{\ensuremath{{{{S}}_{#1}}}}
\newcommand{\delta \pot'}{\delta \pot'}
\newcommand{\chi}{\chi}
\newcommand{\psistar}[1][s]{{\psi^*_#1}}
\newcommand{\magmom}[1][s]{\mu_#1}
\newcommand{\dmu}[1][s]{\dot{\mu}_#1}
\newcommand{\mathcal{J}}{\mathcal{J}}
\newcommand{\hat{u}_{\parallel s}}{\hat{u}_{\parallel s}}
\newcommand{\ddR}[2][s]{\pd{#2}{\bm{R}_{#1}}}
\newcommand{\dgR}[2][s]{\cdot\ddR[#1]{#2}}
\newcommand{\tcite}[1]{Ref.\ \onlinecite{#1}}
\providecommand{\tensor}[1]{ {\bm{\mathsf{#1}}}}
\newcommand{\viscosity}[1][s]{\tensor{\Pi}_#1}
\newcommand{\tensor{I}}{\tensor{I}}
\newcommand{\ParticleFlux}[1][s]{\Gamma_{#1}}
\newcommand{\HeatFlux}[1][s]{q_{#1}}
\newcommand{\MomentumFlux}[1][s]{\pi^{(\psi\tor)}_{#1}}
\newcommand{{\pi}^{(\psi\tor)}_{\mathrm{tot}}}{{\pi}^{(\psi\tor)}_{\mathrm{tot}}}
\newcommand{J}{J}
\newcommand{\accel}[1][s]{\bm{a}_{#1}}
\newcommand{\daccel}[1][s]{\delta \bm{a}_{#1}}
\newcommand{\left.\pd{}{t}\right|_{\psi}}{\left.\pd{}{t}\right|_{\psi}}
\newcommand{\oxford}{
Rudolf Peierls Centre for Theoretical Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3NP, UK
}
\newcommand{\culham}{
EURATOM/CCFE Fusion Association, Culham Science Centre, Abingdon OX14 3DB, UK
}
\newcommand{\imperial}{
Blackett Laboratory, Imperial College, London SW7 2AZ, UK
}
\newcommand{\maryland}{
Department of Physics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-4111, USA
}
\newcommand{\llnl}{
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94550, USA
}
\newcommand{\merton}{
Merton College, Oxford, OX1 4JD, UK
}
\newcommand{\mitpsfc}{
Plasma Science and Fusion Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA
}
\newcommand{\princeton}{
Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, Princeton, NJ 08543, USA
}
\newcommand{\pcts}{
Princeton Center for Theoretical Science, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA
}
\newcommand{\ippgreifs}{
Max-Planck-Institut f\"ur Plasmaphysik, 17491 Greifswald, Germany
}
\newcommand{\int\hspace{-1.25mm} d^3 \bm{w}}{\int\hspace{-1.25mm} d^3 \bm{w}}
\newcommand{\Fneo}[1][s]{F^{\mathrm{(nc)}}_{#1}}
\newcommand{F^{\mathrm{(E)}}_{s}}{F^{\mathrm{(E)}}_{s}}
\newcommand{\tilde{F}^{\mathrm{(nc)}}_{s}}{\tilde{F}^{\mathrm{(nc)}}_{s}}
\newcommand{\Fstar}[1][s]{F^{*}_{1#1}}
\newcommand{\Esource}[1][s]{S^{({E})}_{#1}}
\newcommand{\Psource}[1][s]{S^{({n})}_{#1}}
\newcommand{S^{({\omega})}}{S^{({\omega})}}
\newcommand{W}{W}
\newcommand{\perpav}[1]{\left<#1\right>_\perp}
\newcommand{\timeav}[1]{\left<#1\right>_T}
\newcommand{P_{\mathrm{inj}}}{P_{\mathrm{inj}}}
\newcommand{\entropy}[1][]{\widetilde{H}_{#1}}
\newcommand{\MeanEntropy}[1][]{H_{#1}}
\newcommand{\deltaEntropy}[1][]{\delta H_{#1}}
\newcommand{\bm{\Gamma}^{({H})}}{\bm{\Gamma}^{({H})}}
\newcommand{\infrac}[2]{ {#1}/{#2} }
\newcommand{\binfrac}[2]{\left(\infrac{#1}{#2}\right)}
\newcommand{\CollEnergy}[1][s]{C^{{(E)}}_#1}
\newcommand{\ViscousHeat}[1][s]{P^{\mathrm{visc}}_#1}
\newcommand{\JouleHeat}[1][s]{P^{\mathrm{Ohm}}_#1}
\newcommand{\PotEng}[1][s]{P^{\mathrm{pot}}_#1}
\newcommand{\CompHeat}[1][s]{P^{\mathrm{comp}}_#1}
\newcommand{\TurbInj}[1][s]{P^{\mathrm{drive}}_#1}
\newcommand{\TurbColl}[1][s]{P^{\mathrm{diss}}_#1}
\newcommand{\TurbPow}[1][s]{P^{\mathrm{turb}}_#1}
\newcommand{\pi_{\mathrm{EM}}^{(\psi\tor)}}{\pi_{\mathrm{EM}}^{(\psi\tor)}}
\newcommand{\NeoMomFlux}[1][s]{\pi^{\mathrm{(nc)}}_{#1}}
\newcommand{\ClassMomFlux}[1][s]{\pi^{\mathrm{(cl)}}_{#1}}
\newcommand{\bm{V}_\chi}{\bm{V}_\chi}
\newcommand{\gyroR{\vchi}}{\gyroR{\bm{V}_\chi}}
\newcommand{\vdrift}[1][s]{\bm{V}_{\mathrm{D}#1}}
\newcommand{\Gamma_{s}^{\mathrm{turb}}}{\Gamma_{s}^{\mathrm{turb}}}
\newcommand{q_{s}^{\mathrm{turb}}}{q_{s}^{\mathrm{turb}}}
\newcommand{\pi_{s}^{\mathrm{turb}}}{\pi_{s}^{\mathrm{turb}}}
\newcommand{C^{\mathrm{(H)}}}{C^{\mathrm{(H)}}}
\newcommand{\Gamma^{({H})}}{\Gamma^{({H})}}
\newcommand{\Gamma^{{(U)}}}{\Gamma^{{(U)}}}
\newcommand{C^{{(H)}}}{C^{{(H)}}}
\newcommand{S^{{(H)}}}{S^{{(H)}}}
\newcommand{\lambda_{\mathrm{De}}}{\lambda_{\mathrm{De}}}
\newcommand{\NotN}[1][s]{N_{#1}}
\newcommand{\delta}{\delta}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\delta\bm{B}}}}{{\ensuremath{\delta\bm{B}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\delta B_\parallel}}}{{\ensuremath{\delta B_\parallel}}}
\newcommand{\delBpN}[1]{{\ensuremath{\delta B_\parallel^{(#1)}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\delta A_\parallel}}}{{\ensuremath{\delta A_\parallel}}}
\newcommand{\delApN}[1]{{\ensuremath{\delta A_\parallel^{(#1)}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\delta\bm{E}}}}{{\ensuremath{\delta\bm{E}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\delta\bm{A}}}}{{\ensuremath{\delta\bm{A}}}}
\newcommand{{\ensuremath{\delta\bm{j}}}}{{\ensuremath{\delta\bm{j}}}}
\newcommand{{\delta\pot}}{{\delta\pot}}
\newcommand{{\delta B}} \newcommand{\bhat}{{\widetilde{\bm{b}}}}{{\delta B}} \newcommand{\bhat}{{\widetilde{\bm{b}}}}
\newcommand{{\bm{B}}}{{\bm{B}}}
\newcommand{{\bm{E}}}{{\bm{E}}}
\newcommand{{B}}{{B}}
\newcommand{{\bm{b}}}{{\bm{b}}}
\newcommand{{\bm{j}}}{{\bm{j}}}
\newcommand{{\widetilde{\bm{E}}}}{{\widetilde{\bm{E}}}}
\newcommand{{\widetilde{\bm{B}}}}{{\widetilde{\bm{B}}}}
\newcommand{{\widetilde{B}}}{{\widetilde{B}}}
\newcommand{{\widetilde{\bm{j}}}}{{\widetilde{\bm{j}}}}
\newcommand{{\widetilde{\varrho}}}{{\widetilde{\varrho}}}
\newcommand{{\widetilde{\bm{A}}}}{{\widetilde{\bm{A}}}}
\newcommand{{\widetilde{\pot}}}{{\widetilde{\pot}}}
\newcommand{{\bm{A}}}{{\bm{A}}}
\newcommand{{\pot}}{{\pot}}
\newcommand{\bav}[1]{\left<#1\right>_{\parallel}}
\newcommand{\bm{u}_{\mathrm{eff}}}{\bm{u}_{\mathrm{eff}}}
\newcommand{\fluctfav}[1]{\left<#1\right>_{\tilde\psi}}
\newcommand{\delta u_{\parallel e}}{\delta u_{\parallel e}}
\newcommand{\tilde{\psi}}{\tilde{\psi}}
\newcommand{\tilde{\alpha}}{\tilde{\alpha}}
\newcommand{\tilde{l}}{\tilde{l}}
\newcommand{\ddttwiddles}[1][]{\left.\pd{#1}{t}\right|_{\tilde{\psi},\tilde{\alpha},\tilde{l}}}
\newcommand{\delta q_{\parallel e}}{\delta q_{\parallel e}}
\newcommand{\FHat}[1][s]{\widehat{F}_{1#1}}
\newcommand{\omega}{\omega}
\newcommand{\cycfreq}[1][s]{\Omega_{#1}}
\newcommand{\ExEnergy}[1][s]{\widetilde{\varepsilon}_{#1}}
\newcommand{\ExMagmom}[1][s]{\widetilde{\mu}_{#1}}
\newcommand{\widetilde{\gyr}}{\widetilde{\gyr}}
\newcommand{\dExenergy}[1][s]{{\dot{\widetilde{\varepsilon}}}_{#1}}
\newcommand{\magmomN}[2][s]{{\mu}_{#2#1}}
\newcommand{\mmbar}[2][s]{\overbar{\magmomN[#1]{#2}}}
\newcommand{\dmmbar}[2][s]{\overbar{\delta\magmomN[#1]{#2}}}
\newcommand{\vA}{v_{\mathrm{A}}}
\newcommand{\beta_{\mathrm{pol}}}{\beta_{\mathrm{pol}}}
\providecommand{\omstar}[1][]{\ensuremath{\omega_{*#1}}}
\newcommand{\chempot}[1][s]{\Upsilon_{#1}}
\newcommand{\quantconc}[1][s]{n_{\mathrm{Q}#1}}
\newcommand{\bm{V}_\psi}{\bm{V}_\psi}
\newcommand{\widetilde{\bm{w}}}{\widetilde{\bm{w}}}
\newcommand{\int d^{3}\widetilde{\bm{w}}}{\int d^{3}\widetilde{\bm{w}}}
\newcommand{\widetilde{{w}}}{\widetilde{{w}}}
\newcommand{\cdot\widetilde{\nabla}_\perp}{\cdot\widetilde{\nabla}_\perp}
\newcommand{\widehat{\bm{V}}_D}{\widehat{\bm{V}}_D}
\newcommand{\left.\pd{ }{t}\right|_{\tpsi}}{\left.\pd{ }{t}\right|_{\tilde{\psi}}}
\newcommand{P^{\mathrm{turb}}_e}{P^{\mathrm{turb}}_e}
\newcommand{P^{\mathrm{mean}}_e}{P^{\mathrm{mean}}_e}
\newcommand{\tilde{V}'}{\tilde{V}'}
\newcommand{\tilde{\varepsilon}_e}{\tilde{\varepsilon}_e}
\newcommand{\overbar{\delta n}_e}{\overbar{\delta n}_e}
\newcommand{\overbar{\delta T}_e}{\overbar{\delta T}_e}
\newcommand{\delEnt}[1][s]{{\Delta S_{#1}}}
\newcommand{\overbar}[1]{\mkern 1.5mu\overline{\mkern-1.5mu#1\mkern-1.5mu}\mkern 1.5mu}
\newcommand{\nustar}[1][e]{\nu^{*}_{#1}}
\newcommand{\hat{s}}{\hat{s}}
\newcommand{\lincol}[1][\cdot]{\ensuremath{{C}_{L}\hspace{-0.5mm}\left[#1\right]}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{n^{\mathrm{pol}}_s}}{\ensuremath{n^{\mathrm{pol}}_s}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\bm{V}^{\mathrm{pol}}_s}}{\ensuremath{\bm{V}^{\mathrm{pol}}_s}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{ash}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{ash}}}
\newcommand{\rhos}{\ensuremath{\rho_{\mathrm{s}}}}
\chapter{MAST experimental configuration}
\label{sec:exp_setup}
\section{The Mega Ampere Spherical Tokamak}
\label{sec:mast}
MAST~\cite{Darke1994,Morris2012} is a medium-sized, low-aspect ratio
spherical tokamak. Along with the National Spherical Torus Experiment
Upgrade (NSTX-U)\cite{Ono2000, Menard2012} in Princeton, USA, it is one of
the leading spherical tokamaks: a novel reactor design that is under active
research as an alternative to conventional high-aspect ratio
reactors~\cite{Peng2000}, such as the Joint European Torus (JET). Spherical
tokamaks offer a number of potential advantages over conventional tokamaks
that could make them suitable as fusion reactors~\cite{Sykes1999,Peng2000}:
\begin{inparaenum}[(i)]
\item lower cost due to compact design;
\item higher plasma $\beta$ (ratio of plasma pressure to magnetic
pressure), as a result of more efficient confinement;
\item superconducting magnets are not strictly needed due to already high
plasma $\beta$;
\item in the case of MAST, high rotation and resulting sheared flows can
suppress turbulence.
\end{inparaenum}
The energy confinement of spherical tokamaks has been shown to be comparable to
conventional tokamaks~\cite{Counsell2002} and promisingly, spherical tokamaks
show more favourable energy confinement scalings with experimental
parameters~\cite{Kaye2007,Valovic2009}.
\Figref{mast} shows an image of a typical MAST
plasma\footnote{\url{http://www.opendata.ccfe.ac.uk/mast/}}
and Table~\ref{tab:mast_params} gives some important parameters of the MAST
device\cite{Morris2012}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{minipage}[t]{\linewidth}
\begin{minipage}{0.47\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{mast.png}
\captionof{figure}[Image of MAST plasma]{
Image of the MAST tokamak in operation highlighting the compact D-shaped
geometry aided by a narrow central magnet column. The bright spot is
the location at which deuterium fuel is pumped into the plasma and is
ionised.
}
\label{fig:mast}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}{0.47\linewidth}
\vspace{-50pt}
\centering
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.4}%
\begin{tabular}{r c}
\toprule
Major radius $R$ & $\approx 0.9$~m \\
Minor radius $a$ & $\approx 0.6$~m \\
Aspect ratio $A = R/a$ & $\approx 1.5$ \\
Plasma current $I_p$ & $1.3$ MA \\
Magnetic field $B$ & $0.5$ T \\
Pulse duration & $0.5$ s \\
Power injected & $ 3.8$~MW \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\captionof{table}{Experimental parameters for the MAST experiment.}
\label{tab:mast_params}
\end{minipage}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
MAST is equipped with two NBI systems directed tangential to the flux
surfaces that heat the plasma, with injected power up to $3.8$~MW. The NBI
system also gives rise to toroidal rotation and differential toroidal
rotation, which will be the subject of our investigation. MAST is one of the
more well-diagnosed tokamaks in operation, making it an ideal experiment to
test theoretical predictions against. We detail the range of diagnostics that
have allowed us to perform our numerical transport study in
Section~\ref{sec:exp_profiles} and the review the BES system in
Section~\ref{sec:bes} with which we compared our simulation results.
\section{Equilibrium profiles}
\label{sec:exp_profiles}
\subsection{MAST discharge \#27274}
In this work, we will focus on the MAST discharge \#27274, which forms part of a
set of three nominally identical experiments (i.e., identical profiles and
equilibria) previously reported in Ref.~\cite{Field2014}, differing only in
the radial viewing location of the BES system. The three discharges are
\#27272, \#27268, and \#27274, wherein the centre of the BES was located at
$1.05$~m, $1.2$~m, and $1.35$~m, respectively. Each discharge produced an
L-mode plasma with strong toroidal rotation and, hence, flow shear
perpendicular and parallel to the magnetic field~\cite{Field2014}. The MAST
BES diagnostic~\cite{Field2009,Field2012} observes an area of approximately
$16\times8$~cm$^2$ in the radial and poloidal directions, respectively,
corresponding to approximately one third of the minor radius of the plasma.
Therefore, the combination of the above discharges provided a complete radial
profile of BES measurements on the outboard side of the plasma.
Previous investigations of MAST turbulence for similar
configurations~\cite{Roach2009, Field2011}, found that ion-scale turbulence is
suppressed in the core region by flow shear. However, flow shear is weaker in
the outer-core region,
which may still be unstable to ITG modes, making it possibly to study
ion-scale turbulence. Turbulence is also driven partly by trapped electron
modes (TEMs) and the electron temperature gradient (ETG). In this work, we
will restrict our attention to the time window $t=0.250\pm0.002$~s and the
radial location $r = D/2a = 0.8~(\equiv r_0)$ of \#27274, where $D$ is the
diameter of the flux surface and $a$ is the half diameter of the last closed
flux surface (LCFS), both measured at the height of the magnetic axis.
Importantly, there is no large-scale and disruptive magnetohydrodynamic (MHD)
activity at this time and radial location~\cite{Field2014}; as such activity
would interfere with the quality of BES measurements. The normalized radial
location $r=0.8$ corresponds to a major radius of approximately $1.32$~m and,
therefore, falls within the viewing area covered by discharge \#27274 [see
\figref{flux_surfaces}].
\subsection{A note on radial grids}
We use $r=D/2a$ as the definition of the radial location because it corresponds
to the radial coordinate used by the Miller specification of flux-surface
geometry~\cite{Miller1998} (see Section~\ref{sec:miller}). In terms of other
commonly used radial coordinates, $r = 0.8$
corresponds to $\rho_\mathrm{tor} =
\sqrt{\psi_\mathrm{tor}/\psi_\mathrm{tor,LCFS}} = 0.7$ where
\begin{equation}
\psi_\mathrm{tor} = {\qty(\frac{1}{2\pi})}^2 \int_0^V dV \vb*{B} \cdot \nabla \phi
\label{psi_tor}
\end{equation}
is the toroidal magnetic flux, $V$ is the volume enclosed by the flux surface,
$\vb*{B}$ is the magnetic field, $\phi$ is the toroidal angle, and
$\psi_\mathrm{tor,LCFS}$ is the toroidal flux enclosed by the last closed
flux surface [see \figref{flux_surfaces}]. In terms of the poloidal magnetic
flux, $\rho_\mathrm{pol} = \sqrt{\psi_\mathrm{pol}/\psi_\mathrm{pol,LCFS}} =
0.87$, where
\begin{equation}
\psi \equiv \psi_\mathrm{pol} = {\qty(\frac{1}{2\pi})}^2 \int_0^V dV \vb*{B} \cdot \nabla \theta
\label{psi_pol}
\end{equation}
is the poloidal magnetic flux, $\theta$ is the poloidal angle, and
$\psi_\mathrm{pol,LCFS}$ is the poloidal flux enclosed by the LCFS.
\subsection{MAST profile diagnostics}
\label{sec:mast_diagnostics}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.55\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{3d_nested_flux_surfaces.png}
\caption{}
\label{fig:nested_flux_surfaces}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.37\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{flux_surface}
\caption{}
\label{fig:flux_surfaces}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[MAST flux surfaces]{\subref*{fig:nested_flux_surfaces} A
three-dimensional view of the nested flux surfaces.
\subref*{fig:flux_surfaces} The poloidal cross-section of the magnetic
geometry along with the LCFS and the separatrix, which separates closed
field lines from open ones. The flux surface of interest is at $r = 0.8$,
shown in red. It was chosen so that this surface intersects the BES
measurement plane for discharge \#27274. The blue shaded region
indicates the location of the BES diagnostic.
}
\end{figure}
MAST has a range of high-quality diagnostics, which allow us to extract the
equilibrium parameters required to conduct a numerical transport study. The ion
temperature, $T_i$, and toroidal flow velocity, $u_\phi = R \omega$, where
$\omega$ is the toroidal angular rotation frequency, were obtained from
charge-exchange-recombination spectroscopy (CXRS) measurements of C$^{+6}$
impurity ions with a spatial resolution of $\sim 1$~cm~\cite{Conway2006}. The
electron density, $n_e$, and temperature, $T_e$, were obtained from a
Thomson-scattering (TS) diagnostic~\cite{Scannell2010} with resolution comparable
to the CXRS system. These measured profiles were mapped onto flux-surface
coordinates by the pre-processing code $MC^\mathit{3}$ using a
motional-Stark-effect-(MSE)-constrained EFIT equilibrium~\cite{Lao1985}.
These equilibrium profiles served as input to the transport analysis
code TRANSP\footnote{\url{http://w3.pppl.gov/transp/}}~\cite{Hawryluk1981},
which calculates the transport coefficients of particles, momentum, and heat.
\Figref{nested_flux_surfaces} shows a three-dimensional view of the
axisymmetric nested flux surfaces and \figref{flux_surfaces} shows the
poloidal cross-section of the flux surfaces extracted from an EFIT
equilibrium. The $r=0.8$ surface is highlighted in both plots. The
measurement window of the BES diagnostic for discharge \#27274 is also shown
in \figref{flux_surfaces}.
The chosen flux surface at $r = 0.8$ intersects the measurement window
at the outboard midplane, allowing direct comparisons between our numerical
predictions of turbulence and experimental measurements.
\subsection{Equilibrium profiles}
The important experimental quantities needed to conduct a numerical
study are the radial profiles of $T_i$, $T_e$, $n_i$ (the ion density), $n_e$, and
$\omega$. MAST does not take direct measurements of $n_i$, but we assume that
it is equal to $n_e$, as measured by the TS diagnostic, due
to quasineutrality. As explained in Section~\ref{sec:gk_theory}, it is
assumed in the local formulation of gyrokinetics that only the physical
quantities (and their first derivatives) at the location of the flux tube
determine the characteristics of the turbulence. Therefore, to conduct a
numerical study of turbulence we need only the equilibrium values and their
first derivatives (or for some quantities their gradient length scales) at
$r=0.8$ to simulate turbulence at that radius. The appropriate (normalised)
gradient length scales of $T_i$, $T_e$, and $n_e$, and flow shear (gradient
of $\omega$) are
\begin{align}
\label{ti_prime}
\frac{1}{L_{Ti}} &= - \dv{\ln T_i}{r} \equiv \kappa_T, \\
\label{te_prime}
\frac{1}{L_{Te}} &= - \dv{\ln T_e}{r}, \\
\label{ne_prime}
\frac{1}{L_{ne}} &= - \dv{\ln n_e}{r}, \\
\label{flow_shear}
\gamma_E &= \frac{r_0}{q_0} \dv{\omega}{r} \frac{a}{v_{\mathrm{th}i}},
\end{align}
where $q(\psi) = \pdv*{\psi_\mathrm{tor}}{\psi_{\mathrm{pol}}}$ is the safety
factor and $q_0$ is the value at $r_0$, $v_{\mathrm{th}i} = \sqrt{2T_i/m_i}$
is the ion thermal velocity, and $m_i$ is the mass of the ion species
(deuterium). In a tokamak, the safety factor is approximately
$q(\psi) \sim (r/R)(B_\phi/B_\theta)$, where $B$ is the magnetic field, $B_\theta
= |\nabla \psi|/R$ is the poloidal component of $B$, and $R$ is the major
radius at the location of the flux surface at the outboard midplane.
The flow shear parameter $\gamma_E$ can be interpreted as the
(non-dimensionalised) shear of the component of the toroidal shear
perpendicular to the local magnetic field. The sign of $\gamma_E$ is
determined in Section~\ref{sec:sign_omega}, given that $\omega$ can be
positive or negative depending on the sign convention used.
The left-hand column of \figref{profiles} shows the radial profiles of $T_i$,
$T_e$, $n_e$, and $\omega$ (with the sign determined as in
Section~\ref{sec:sign_omega}), as functions of $r$. The gradient scale
lengths~\eqref{ti_prime}--\eqref{ne_prime} and flow shear~\eqref{flow_shear}
are plotted as functions of $r$ in the right-hand column
in~\figref{profiles}. The dashed lines indicate $r=0.8$ and the equilibrium
values at this radial location are given in Table~\ref{tab:equil_params}. The
profiles in \figref{profiles} represent a $20$-ms time average around $t =
0.25$~s and the shaded areas indicate the standard deviations.
The profile of the ion heat flux $Q_i^{\exp}$ was calculated by using the
equilibrium profiles and magnetic geometry as input to a TRANSP analysis, which
calculated $Q^{\exp}_i$ as a function of $r$ by equating it to the net
deposited power within the flux surface labelled by $r$. The profile of
$Q_i^{\exp}$ as a function of $r$ is shown in~\figref{q_exp}. In this work,
we normalise the heat flux to the gyro-Bohm value defined by
\begin{equation}
Q_{\mathrm{gB}} = n_i T_i v_{\mathrm{th}i} \frac{\rho_i^2}{a^2}.
\label{q_gb}
\end{equation}
From~\figref{q_exp}, we find that the experimental level of heat flux at $r =
0.8$ is $Q^{\exp}_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}} = 2 \pm 1$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.35\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{ion_temp}
\caption{}
\label{fig:ti}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.35\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{ion_temp_gradient}
\caption{}
\label{fig:ti_prime}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.35\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{electron_temp}
\caption{}
\label{fig:te}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.35\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{electron_temp_gradient}
\caption{}
\label{fig:te_prime}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.35\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{electron_density}
\caption{}
\label{fig:ne}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.35\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{electron_density_gradient}
\caption{}
\label{fig:ne_prime}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.37\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{omega}
\caption{}
\label{fig:omega}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.37\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{flow_shear}
\caption{}
\label{fig:g_exb}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Experimental profiles]{Radial profile measurements from MAST
discharge \#27274 (see Section~\ref{sec:mast_diagnostics}) of
\subref*{fig:ti} the ion temperature, $T_i$,
\subref*{fig:ti_prime} the ion temperature gradient, $1/L_{Ti}$,
calculated using~\eqref{ti_prime},
\subref*{fig:te} the electron temperature, $T_e$,
\subref*{fig:te_prime} the electron temperature gradient, $1/L_{Te}$,
calculated using~\eqref{te_prime},
\subref*{fig:ne} the electron density, $n_e$,
\subref*{fig:ne_prime} the electron density gradient, $1/L_{ne}$,
calculated using~\eqref{ne_prime},
\subref*{fig:omega} the toroidal angular frequency, $\omega$, and
\subref*{fig:g_exb} the flow shear, $\gamma_E$, calculated
using~\eqref{flow_shear}. The dashed line in each plot indicates $r=0.8$
and the shaded regions indicate the standard deviation of the profiles
over a $20$-ms time window around $t = 0.25$~s.
}
\label{fig:profiles}
\end{figure}
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5}%
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Equilibrium values for MAST discharge \#27274 at $t = 0.25$~s.}
\begin{tabular}{r c}
\toprule
Name & Value \\
\midrule
Electron density $n_e (= n_i)$ & $1.31 \times 10^{19}$~m$^{-3}$ \\
Electron temperature $T_e$ & $0.24$ keV \\
Half diameter of LCFS $a$ & $0.58$~m \\
Ion gyroradius $\rho_i$ & $6.08 \times 10^{-3}$~m \\
Ion temperature $T_i$ & $0.22$ keV \\
Toroidal magnetic field $B_{\phi}(r=0)$ & $0.46$~T \\
Toroidal angular frequency $\omega$ & $4.71 \times 10^{4}$~s$^{-1}$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:equil_params}
\end{table}}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{q_exp_vs_r}
\caption[Experimental heat flux profile]{Experimental ion heat flux
determined from power balance by the TRANSP analysis code as a function
of $r$. The dashed line indicates $r=0.8$ and the shaded region
indicates the uncertainty estimated by TRANSP.
}
\label{fig:q_exp}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Sign of $\omega$ and $\gamma_E$}
\label{sec:sign_omega}
Determining the appropriate sign of $\gamma_E$ is essential when running
numerical simulations and comparing with experimental measurements, such as
from the BES diagnostic. Given that $r_0$ and $q_0$ are positive numbers, the
sign of $\gamma_E$ is completely determined by the sign of $\dv*{\omega}{r}$,
as in \eqref{flow_shear}. The sign of $\dv*{\omega}{r}$ is determined
by the convention used in the experiment. For MAST, the
directions of $\vb*{u}$ and $\vb*{B}$ are defined with respect to the plasma
current $\vb*{I}_p$, which is in the toroidal direction at the magnetic
axis~\cite{Field2011}:
\begin{align}
\sgn(\vb*{B} \cdot \vb*{I}_p) &= -1, \\
\sgn(\vb*{u} \cdot \vb*{I}_p) &= 1,
\label{mast_signs}
\end{align}
i.e, $\vb*{B}$ and $\vb*{u}$ are in opposite directions. We will be
simulating this experimental configuration using the GS2 code and we employ the
GS2 sign conventions, which is to define $\vb*{B}$ in the direction of
increasing $\phi$~\cite{HighcockThesis}, and determine other signs with
respect to increasing $\phi$:
\begin{align}
\sgn (\vb*{B} \cdot \nabla \phi) \equiv 1 \\
\sgn(\omega) = \sgn (\vb*{u} \cdot \nabla \phi).
\label{gs2_signs}
\end{align}
Therefore, given that $\vb*{u}$ and $\vb*{B}$ are in opposite directions,
$\sgn(\omega) = -1$ and $\dv*{\omega}{r} > 0$, as shown in \figref{omega}. We
conclude that for the MAST configuration we are investigating, the appropriate
sign of the flow shear is
\begin{equation}
\sgn(\gamma_E) > 0.
\label{sig_gexb}
\end{equation}
\section{Beam emission spectroscopy}
\label{sec:bes}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{psf_27274}
\caption[MAST point-spread functions]{
Point-spread functions for MAST discharge \#27274 at $t=0.25$~s centred
around $1.35$~m. The points indicate the BES channels associated with
each PSF. Approximately half of the BES is outside the plasma volume and
no PSFs are calculated for those channels.
}
\label{fig:psf}
\end{figure}
Turbulent eddies in tokamak plasmas are
anisotropic due to the strong background magnetic field~\cite{Barnes2011,
Ghim2013}. In the parallel direction, turbulent eddies have a length scale
comparable to the system size, which in a torus is the \emph{connection
length} $qR$, i.e., $l_\parallel \sim qR \sim 1$~m~\cite{Barnes2011}. In the
direction perpendicular to the magnetic field, ITG-unstable turbulent
structures have a typical length scale of the order of the ion gyroradius
$l_\perp \sim \rho_i \sim 1$~cm. Therefore, in the plane perpendicular to
the magnetic field, we are interested in two-dimensional measurements of
fluctuating quantities at approximately the scale of $\rho_i$. Beam emission
spectroscopy is a diagnostic technique that was developed to address this
need. Specifically, the BES diagnostic on MAST~\cite{Field2009, Field2012}
is designed to measure ion-scale density fluctuations in a radial-poloidal
plane. Density fluctuations are inferred from D$_\alpha$ emission produced
by the NBI beam as it penetrates the plasma. The fluctuating intensity of the
D$_\alpha$ emission $\delta I$, is proportional to the local plasma density
at the corresponding viewing location, and the two quantities are related via
point-spread functions (PSFs)~\cite{Ghim2012, Field2014, Fox2016},
\begin{equation}
\delta I_j = \int P_j(R - R_j, Z - Z_j) \delta n (R,Z) \dd R \dd Z,
\label{psf_eqn}
\end{equation}
where $\delta n(R,Z)$ is the fluctuating (laboratory-frame) density field,
$R$ and $Z$ are the radial and poloidal coordinates, and $P_j(R - R_j, Z - Z_j)$
is the PSF for the BES channel $j$. The PSFs depend on the magnetic
equilibrium, beam parameters, viewing location, and plasma profiles and as a
result, have to be calculated explicitly for each measurement. The PSFs
for MAST discharge \#27274 at $t = 0.25$~s are shown in \figref{psf}. Note
that only part of the BES is inside the plasma volume for this discharge [see
\figref{flux_surfaces}], hence, only approximately half the PSFs are
calculated. Recent work~\cite{Fox2016}, has shown that the PSFs play an
important role in the measurement of turbulence and the precise form that
they take determines a lower bound on the BES resolution as well as affecting
the measurement of the turbulent structures and density fluctuation levels --
effects that we will also consider in this work. For further details on the
MAST BES system the reader is referred to
Ref.~\cite{Field2009,Field2012,Ghim2012} and for a detailed study of the
effect of PSFs on the measurement of turbulent structures to
Ref.~\cite{Fox2016}.
\chapter{Modelling plasma turbulence}
\label{sec:gk_modelling}
\section{Introduction}
To model the scenario described in Chapter~\ref{sec:exp_setup}, we use
gyrokinetics. The aim of modelling plasma turbulence, using
gyrokinetics or any other theoretical framework, is to predict the
properties of turbulent fluctuations given a description, or measurement, of
the equilibrium conditions inside a fusion device (e.g., temperatures,
densities, flows, etc.). Above all, we are interested in the turbulent
transport of particles, momentum, and heat due to turbulence, since this is
significantly enhanced by turbulence in an experimental plasma, and can
adversely affect potential fusion performance.
The gyrokinetic equation is derived from the Fokker-Planck equation; however,
a number of important approximations are employed that are specifically
relevant to fusion plasmas in tokamaks, and, crucially, result in a reduction
of the number of phase-space dimensions from six to five. The approximations
made are, in short: only considering time scales longer than the
gyrofrequency, but shorter than the time scales over which the equilibrium
profiles vary; only considering spatial scales which are larger than the
gyroradius, but smaller than the scale over which equilibrium profiles vary;
and assuming that turbulent structures are elongated along the magnetic field
lines. The formulation of \emph{local} gyrokinetics takes this approximation
one step further by introducing the ``local approximation'': that turbulence
at a given radial location depends only on the equilibrium quantities and
their first derivatives at that radial location. This allows a further
reduction of computational cost. In order for this local approximation to be
valid, we require that $\rho_i/a \ll 1$, where we assume that other important
length scales in the system, such as $L_{Ti}$, are of the same order as $a$.
For the MAST discharge and radial location described in
Chapter~\ref{sec:exp_setup}, one finds $\rho_i/a \sim 1/100$, where $\rho_i
\approx 6 \times 10^{-3}$~m and $a\approx 0.6$~m. While this is a reasonably
small number (which we formally assume to be zero in the local formulation of
gyrokinetics), previous work has shown that non-local effects can reduce the
level of turbulent transport at values similar to
$1/100$~\cite{McMillan2010}. To test whether non-local effects change the
level of turbulence, one could run a $\rho^*$ scan using a global gyrokinetic
code. There is also ongoing work to extend GS2 to include finite radial
effects, such as profile variation, which may be used to test their effect on
MAST turbulence.
To solve the gyrokinetic system of equations we use the local gyrokinetic GS2
code~\cite{Kotschenreuther1995, Dorland2000, HighcockThesis}, which has been
under active development since the 1990s, when the algorithm for solving the
linear gyrokinetic problem was first developed. Taking advantage of the
local approximation as well as of the axisymmetric nature of tokamak plasmas,
GS2 solves the gyrokinetic equation in a region known as a ``flux tube'', a
thin radial region that follows the magnetic field where equilibrium
quantities and their first derivatives are assumed be constant.
This chapter is organised as follows. In Section~\ref{sec:tor_geometry}, we
review the toroidal geometry relevant to plasmas in tokamak devices and
define an appropriate coordinate system. In Section~\ref{sec:gk_theory}, we
give an overview of gyrokinetics and the approximations that are required to
derive the gyrokinetic equation. In Section~\ref{sec:gs2} we give an overview
of the GS2 code along with parts of the implementation that are relevant to
our study. Finally, we give the specific numerical setup for the study that
is the main purpose of this work in Section~\ref{sec:num_setup}.
\section{Toroidal geometry}
\label{sec:tor_geometry}
In a tokamak, magnetic field lines lie on
nested toroidal surfaces of constant $\psi$ called flux surfaces. These
surfaces are roughly axisymmetric, and in such cases one may write the
magnetic field as:
\begin{equation}
\vb*{B} = B_\phi R \nabla \phi + \nabla \psi \times \nabla \phi,
\label{axis_B}
\end{equation}
where $B_\phi$ is the toroidal component of the magnetic field.
\Figref{tor_geometry} is an illustration of the nested flux surfaces of
constant $\psi$ in a system with circular flux surfaces, along with the
coordinates we will use in this work: the major radius $R$, the poloidal
height $Z$ above the midplane of the machine, the toroidal angle $\phi$, the
minor radius $r$ (which is simply the distance from the magnetic axis in the
case of concentric circular flux surfaces, but $r=D/2a$ in the case of more
complicated flux surface shapes, such as MAST), the diameter of the LCFS at
the height of the magnetic axis $2a$, and the poloidal angle $\theta$. The
LCFS is the flux surface just inside the separatrix which separates flux
surfaces with open and closed field lines [see \figref{flux_surfaces}].
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{cbc_surfaces}
\caption[Toroidal geometry]{
Illustration of circular nested flux surfaces of constant $\psi$
highlighting the axisymmetric toroidal geometry of a tokamak. Also shown
is the magnetic axis (which need not be at the geometric centre of any
flux surface for a finite Shafranov shift), the major radius $R$, the
poloidal height $Z$ above the midplane of the machine, the minor radius
$r$, the diameter of the LCFS at the height of the magnetic axis $2a$,
the toroidal angle $\phi$, and the poloidal angle $\theta$.
}
\label{fig:tor_geometry}
\end{figure}
\section{Local gyrokinetic description}
\label{sec:gk_theory}
Gyrokinetics~\cite{Frieman1982, Sugama1998, Abel2013} describes the
time-evolution of turbulent plasma in the toroidal geometry described in
Section~\ref{sec:tor_geometry}. The derivation of the gyrokinetic equation
has been extensively covered and the reader is referred to
Ref.~\cite{Abel2013}, and references therein, for a detailed review. In this
section, we will provide only an overview.
\subsection{The Fokker-Planck equation}
Our starting point is the Fokker-Planck equation that describes the
evolution of the distribution function of species $s$, $f_s$. In simplified
terms, $f_s$ is the probability that there is a particle of species $s$ at
a given location $\vb*{r}$ and travelling at a given speed $\vb*{v}$. The
Fokker-Planck equation for the evolution of $f_s$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\pd{f_s}{t} + \vb*{v}\cdot \nabla f_s + \frac{Z_s e}{m_s}
\qty(\vb*{E} + \frac{1}{c} \vb*{v} \times \vb*{B}) \cdot \pd{f_s}{\vb*{v}}
= C[f_s],
\label{fokker_planck}
\end{equation}
where $Z_s e$ is the charge of species $s$ as a multiple of the fundamental
charge $e$, $m_s$ is the mass of species $s$, $c$ is the speed of light,
$\vb*{E}$ and $\vb*{B}$ are the electric and magnetic fields, respectively,
and $C[f_s]$ is the Landau collision operator. In theory, one could solve
\eqref{fokker_planck} directly; however, $f_s(t, \vb*{r}, \vb*{v})$ is a
six-dimensional function (plus time) and solving \eqref{fokker_planck}
is impractical for the conditions of a magnetically confined fusion
plasma. The gyrokinetic description makes several simplifying assumptions and,
importantly, reduces the number of dimensions from six to five, resulting in
a more tractable problem.
\subsection{The gyrokinetic orderings and assumptions}
We start by splitting $f_s$ into an equilibrium part $F_s$, and a fluctuating
part $\delta f_s$:
\begin{equation}
f_s = F_s + \delta f_s.
\label{fs_expansion}
\end{equation}
We then make the following assumptions:
\begin{itemize}
\item perturbations of the distribution function and background electric
and magnetic fields are small compared to their equilibrium values;
\item the frequency of the turbulent fluctuations,
$\omega_{\mathrm{turb}}$, is small compared to the frequencies at which the
particles gyrate around the magnetic field $\Omega_s$, but large
compared to the rate at which the equilibrium quantities change
$\tau_E^{-1}$;
\item the turbulent structures are anisotropic and, as such, vary more
quickly across magnetic field lines compared to along the magnetic field;
and
\item the spatial scale of the turbulence perpendicular to the magnetic
field is of the order of the gyroradius $\rho_s$, and is much smaller
than the scale over which the equilibrium quantities vary, $a$.
\end{itemize}
We define the gyrokinetic parameter as
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_{\mathrm{GK}} \equiv \frac{\rho_i}{a},
\label{gk_param}
\end{equation}
and impose the following order on the small parameters identified
above~\cite{Frieman1982, Abel2013}:
\begin{equation}
\frac{|\delta \vb*{B}|}{|\vb*{B}|} \sim
\frac{|\delta \vb*{E}|}{|\vb*{E}|} \sim
\frac{\delta f_s}{f_s} \sim
\frac{k_\parallel}{k_\perp} \sim
\frac{\omega_{\mathrm{turb}}}{\Omega_i} \sim
\frac{\rho_i}{a} = \epsilon_{\mathrm{GK}},
\label{gk_orderings}
\end{equation}
where $k_\parallel$ and $k_\perp$ are the typical parallel and perpendicular
wavelengths of the turbulence, respectively, and $\Omega_i = Z_i e B/m_i c$
is the gyrofrequency of the ions.
As this point we translate into a frame rotating with the plasma at
velocity $\vb*{u}$. Following from the above assumptions, it can be shown
that, to lowest order in $\epsilon_{\mathrm{GK}}$, $\vb*{u}$ is in the
toroidal direction and independent of the species. It is defined such that
\begin{equation}
\vb*{u} = \omega(\psi) R^2 \nabla \phi.
\label{tor_vel}
\end{equation}
We now convert from $(\vb*{r}, \vb*{v})$ to the following variables,
which reflect the roughly helical motion of the particles in the plasma, and
the conserved quantities of that motion: the guiding-centre position
$\vb*{R}_s$, the particle energy $\varepsilon_s$, the magnetic moment $\mu_s$,
the gyrophase $\xi$, and the sign of the parallel velocity $\sigma$:
\begin{align}
\vb*{R}_s &= \vb*{r} - \frac{\vu*{b} \times \vb*{w}}{\Omega_s} \\
\varepsilon_s &= \frac{1}{2} m_s w^2 \\
\mu_s &= \frac{m_s w_\perp^2}{2 B} \\
\sigma &= \frac{w_\parallel}{|w_\parallel|}
\label{gk_variables}
\end{align}
where $\vu*{b} = \vb*{B}/B$ is a unit vector in the direction of the magnetic
field, $w = |\vb*{w}|$ is the velocity shifted into the rotating
frame~\cite{Abel2013}
\begin{equation}
\vb*{w} = \vb*{v} - \vb*{u} = w_\parallel + w_\perp (\cos \xi \vb*{e}_2 -
\sin \xi \vb*{e}_1),
\label{peculiar_vel}
\end{equation}
$w_\parallel$ and $w_\perp$ are the parallel and perpendicular components of
$\vb*{w}$, and $\vb*{e}_1$ and $\vb*{e}_2$ are arbitrary orthogonal unit
vectors perpendicular to the magnetic field.
Finally, we will formally assume that the Mach number $M$ of
the plasma rotation is small, but that the flow shear is large enough to
affect the plasma dynamics:
\begin{equation}
\frac{R\omega}{v_{{\mathrm{th}}i}} \equiv M \ll 1,\quad
|a\nabla\ln\omega| \sim \frac{1}{M}.
\label{flow_scaling}
\end{equation}
This allows us to formulate local gyrokinetics on a rotating surface,
neglecting effects such as the Coriolis and centrifugal force, but retaining
the effect of flow shear.
\subsection{The gyrokinetic equation}
\label{sec:gk_eqn}
Using the gyrokinetic orderings \eqref{gk_orderings} and assuming
that the plasma is sufficiently collisional, it can be shown that the
background distribution function of species $s$, $F_s$, is a Maxwellian
distribution, to lowest order,
\begin{equation}
F_s = F_{Ms} \equiv
n_s {\qty(\frac{m_s}{2 \pi T_s})}^{3/2} \exp\qty(- \frac{\varepsilon_s}{T_s}),
\label{maxwellian}
\end{equation}
where $n_s$ and $T_s$ are the density and temperature of
species $s$, respectively. Furthermore, it may be shown that, to the first
order in $\epsilon_{\mathrm{GK}}$, the fluctuating part of the perturbed
distribution function $\delta f_s$ can be written
\begin{equation}
\delta f_s = - \frac{Z_s e \varphi}{T_s} F_{Ms} +
h_s (t, \vb*{R}_s, \mu_s, \varepsilon_s, \sigma),
\label{pert_dist}
\end{equation}
where $\varphi$ is the perturbed electrostatic potential and
$h_s (t, \vb*{R}_s, \mu_s, \varepsilon_s, \sigma)$ is the gyrophase-independent
distribution function of Larmor rings that will completely determine the
plasma dynamics in the gyrokinetic formulation. As $h_s$ is independent of
the gyrophase, we have effectively removed one of the velocity space
dimensions (with velocity space now described only by $\varepsilon_s$ and
$\mu_s$) and reduced the problem to five dimensions instead of six, and in
doing so, significantly reduced the computational requirements.
Applying the gyrokinetic orderings to the Fokker-Planck equation
\eqref{fokker_planck}, we obtain the gyrokinetic equation, which describes
the evolution of the gyrophase-independent distribution function $h_s$
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\left(\pdv{}{t} + \vb*{u} \cdot \nabla \right) \left(h_s
- \frac{Z_s e \ensav{\varphi}{\vb*{R}s}}{T_s} F_s\right) +
\left(w_\parallel \vu*{b} + \vb*{V\!}_{{\mathrm{D}}s} +
\ensav{\vb*{V\!}_E}{\vb*{R}s}\right)
\cdot \nabla{h_s} - \ensav{C[h_s]}{\vb*{R}s} \\
&\quad=
-\ensav{\vb*{V\!}_E}{\vb*{R}s} \cdot \nabla r
\left[\dv{\ln n_s}{r} + \left(\frac{\varepsilon_s}{T_s} -
\frac{3}{2}\right)\dv{\ln T_s}{r}
+ \frac{m_s w_\parallel}{T_s}\frac{R B_\phi}{B}\dv{\omega}{r}\right]F_{Ms},
\label{gk}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\ensav{\ldots}{\vb*{R}s}$ is an average over the particle orbit at
constant guiding centre position $\vb*{R}_s$,
\begin{equation}
\vb*{V\!}_{{\mathrm{D}}s} = \frac{c}{Z_s e B}\vu*{b}\times \left[ m_s w_\parallel^2
\vu*{b} \cdot \nabla \vu*{b} + \mu_s \nabla B \right]
\label{v_drift}
\end{equation}
is the magnetic drift velocity,
\begin{equation}
\vb*{V\!}_E = \frac{c}{B}\vu*{b}\times \nabla \varphi
\label{v_exb}
\end{equation}
is the perturbed $\vb*{E} \times \vb*{B}$ drift velocity, and $C[h_s]$ is the linearised
collision operator~\cite{Abel2008a,Barnes2008}.
To close our system of equations, we use the quasineutrality condition
\begin{equation}
\sum_s Z_s\delta n_s = 0
\quad\Rightarrow\quad
\sum_s \frac{Z_s^2 e \varphi}{T_s} n_s = \sum_s Z_s \int \dd^3 \vb*{w}
\ensav{h_s}{\vb*{r}},
\label{quasineutrality}
\end{equation}
where $\ensav{\ldots}{\vb*{r}}$ indicates a gyroaverage at constant
$\vb*{r}_s$, to calculate $\varphi$ using $h_s$.
The right-hand side of~\eqref{gk} represents the advection by the
gyroaveraged $\vb*{E} \times \vb*{B}$ velocity of the Maxwellian equilibrium
distribution function, which is characterised by $n_s$, $T_s$, and $\omega$.
The equilibrium quantities $n_s$, $T_s$, and $\omega$ are functions only of
the poloidal magnetic flux $\psi$. However, for the purposes of this work,
we have converted this dependence from $\psi$ to the Miller coordinate $r =
D/2a$ introduced previously. Since $r$ is also a flux-surface label, it is
simple to relate gradients in $\psi$ and $r$ via
\begin{equation}
\nabla r = \dv{r}{\psi} \nabla \psi.
\label{grad_relation}
\end{equation}
The right-hand side of~\eqref{gk} contains terms proportional to $\dv*{\ln
T_s}{r}$ and $\dv*{\omega}{r}$, which are related to the parameters $\kappa_T$
and $\gamma_E$, defined by~\eqref{ti_prime} and~\eqref{flow_shear},
respectively. These terms are sources of free energy in the system and
are responsible for the ITG and PVG instabilities. The stabilising effect of
$\gamma_E$ on $h_s$ is contained in the term proportional to $\vb*{u} \cdot
\nabla$ and is further discussed in Section~\ref{sec:gamma_stab}. In deriving
\eqref{gk}, we have also assumed that the fluctuations are purely
electrostatic, i.e., no fluctuating magnetic fields (see
Section~\ref{sec:num_setup} for further details).
\subsection{Flow shear stabilisation}
\label{sec:gamma_stab}
\begin{quote}
\emph{This section is based on Appendix A of Ref.~\cite{Schekochihin2012}.}
\end{quote}
As noted in Section~\ref{sec:gk_eqn}, flow shear enters~\eqref{gk} as a
\emph{destabilising} term on the right-hand side, but for the values of
$\gamma_E$ that we will be considering, this effect is small compared to the
destabilising effect of the ITG (see~\cite{Schekochihin2012} for further
details). However, flow shear also enters our system as a \emph{stabilising}
term, as we will now explain using a simplified magnetic geometry.
Consider a locally straight and uniform magnetic field that has constant
magnitude, no curvature, and no shear. We define a local Cartesian coordinate
system with unit vectors (note we do note use these definitions throughout
this work, we define a related but slightly different coordinate system in
Section~\ref{sec:gs2}):
\begin{equation}
\vu*{x} = \frac{\nabla \psi}{B_\theta R}, \qquad
\vu*{y} = \frac{\vu*{z} \times \nabla \psi}{B_\theta R}, \qquad
\vu*{z} = \vu*{b}.
\label{slab_coords}
\end{equation}
We choose our local coordinate $x$ such that $x=0$ at some reference flux
surface labelled by $\psi_0$. In the vicinity of this flux surface, we may then
Taylor expand $\psi$ in terms of this local radial coordinate as
$\psi(x) \approx \psi(x=0) + x \dv*{\psi}{x} = \psi_0 + x B_\theta R$. The
toroidal angular frequency is a function of $\psi$ only and we can again
Taylor expand in $x$ (since we assume in~\eqref{flow_scaling} that the scale
over which $\omega$ changes is much smaller than $a$) to get $\omega \approx
\omega_0 + x B_\theta R \dv*{\omega}{\psi}$. Now consider the $\vb*{u} \cdot
\nabla$ term on the left-hand side of~\eqref{gk}, where $\vb*{u}$ is given
by~\eqref{tor_vel}. Using the axisymmetric representation of the magnetic
field in a torus \eqref{axis_B}, we can write
\begin{equation}
\vb*{u} = \omega R^2\nabla\phi
\approx \left(\omega_0 R + x B_\theta R^2 \dv{\omega}{\psi} \right)
\left(\frac{B_\phi}{B}\vu*{b} + \frac{B_\theta}{B}\vu*{y}\right),
\label{rot_vel}
\end{equation}
If we now go to the frame rotating with the flux surface at the
rate $\omega_0$ and also use the fact that, in gyrokinetics, gradients of
fluctuating quantities parallel to $\vu*{b}$ are always small compared to
those perpendicular to it, we find
\begin{equation}
\vb*{u}\cdot\nabla \approx
x \frac{B_{\theta}^2 R^2}{B} \dv{\omega}{\psi}\vu*{y}\cdot\nabla
= \left(\frac{q R B_{\theta}}{rB}|\nabla r|\right) x \gamma_E
\frac{v_{{\mathrm{th}}i}}{a} \vu*{y}\cdot\nabla,
\label{u_grad}
\end{equation}
with $\gamma_E$ as defined in~\eqref{flow_shear}. The prefactor enclosed in
the parentheses is close to unity and so $\gamma_E$ is the
normalised shear that acts on the distribution function. The presence of this
shear will have a stabilising effect on the turbulence.
\section{Overview of GS2}
\label{sec:gs2}
In this work, we used the local gyrokinetic code
GS2\footnote{\url{http://gyrokinetics.sourceforge.net}}~\cite{Kotschenreuther1995,
Dorland2000,HighcockThesis} to solve the system of equations given
by~\eqref{gk} and~\eqref{quasineutrality} to give us the time evolution of
$h_s(t, \vb*{R}_s, \varepsilon_s, \mu_s, \sigma)$ and $\varphi(t, \vb*{R}_s)$.
With knowledge of $h_s$ and $\varphi$, one can calculate a range of physical
characteristics of the turbulence, e.g., density-, flow-,
temperature-fluctuation fields, particle, momentum, and heat transport, and
so on. Of particular interest is the ion density fluctuation field,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\delta n_i}{n_i} = \frac{1}{n_i} \int \dd^3 \vb*{w} \ensav{h_i}{\vb*{r}},
\label{delta_n}
\end{equation}
and the radially outwards, time-averaged turbulent heat flux carried by the
ions (for reasons which have been given previously),
\begin{equation}
Q_i = \left\langle\frac{1}{V}\int \dd^3 \vb*{r} \int \dd^3 \vb*{w}
\frac{m_i v^2}{2} h_i \vb*{V\!}_E \cdot \nabla r \right\rangle,
\label{q_def}
\end{equation}
where $V$ is the volume enveloping a given flux surface and
$\langle \ldots \rangle$ is a flux-surface average. $Q_i$ can be
normalised to the gyro-Bohm heat flux given in~\eqref{q_gb}. It is
a feature of the asymptotic ordering on which gyrokinetic theory is based
that $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ is a number of order unity~\cite{Abel2013}.
In this section, we will review aspects of the GS2 code that are pertinent to
our study. The geometry of the nested flux surfaces in GS2 is described by
the Miller specification~\cite{Miller1998}, which is detailed in
Section~\ref{sec:miller}. The Miller specification consists of nine
parameters that control the aspects of the magnetic field lines and
flux-surface shapes such as the safety factor, elongation, triangularity, and
so on. In Section~\ref{sec:gs2_geometry}, we define the coordinate system
relative to the magnetic flux surfaces used in GS2. By making the ``local
approximation'' (Section~\ref{sec:local_approx}), GS2 is able to solve the
gyrokinetic equation on a single flux surface in a region known as a flux
tube, which follows a single magnetic field line described by the Miller
parameters. In Section~\ref{sec:collisions}, we detail the calculation of the
ion-ion and electron-ion collision frequencies from equilibrium parameters
and show how we can account for enhanced ion-ion collisionality due impurity
ions without treating them as additional kinetic species in our simulations.
The implementation of flow shear and its effect on turbulence is detailed
in Section~\ref{sec:flow_shear}. Finally, we show the form of hyperviscosity
used in GS2 to damp plasma dynamics at large values of $k_\perp$ and explain
how this is beneficial in our simulations. For a detailed review of the
algorithms and numerical implementations that are used in GS2 to solve the
gyrokinetic equation, the reader is referred to~\cite{HighcockThesis}, and
references therein.
\subsection{Geometry}
\label{sec:gs2_geometry}
\subsubsection{The Miller flux-surface specification}
\label{sec:miller}
Throughout this work we have used the Miller specification~\cite{Miller1998}
of the magnetic equilibrium. The Miller specification is a nine-parameter
parametrisation of up-down symmetric flux surfaces suitable for the
description of MAST flux surfaces\footnotemark.
Table~\ref{tab:miller_params} lists the definitions of the Miller parameters.
As explained in Section~\ref{sec:mast_diagnostics}, experimental flux
surfaces from MAST were obtained from an MSE-constrained EFIT equilibrium, or
more conveniently, from a TRANSP output file, where TRANSP used the EFIT
equilibrium as input. For reference, we also list in Table~\ref{tab:miller_params} the associated variable names
of the Miller parameters as they are listed or calculated from the TRANSP
analysis output. The Miller parameter values
and associated GS2 input parameters for our study are detailed, along with
other equilibrium parameters, in Section~\ref{sec:num_setup}.
\footnotetext{For the specification of up-down \emph{asymmetric} flux
surfaces the reader is referred to recent work by Ball
\emph{et. al.}~\cite{Ball2014} that extends the Miller specification.}
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.25}%
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{The Miller parametrisation of flux surfaces along with
their associated variable names in the TRANSP output file. The
derivatives of geometric quantities are calculated by manually taking a
derivative with respect to $r$ (after transforming from the TRANSP
$\rho_{\mathrm{tor}}$ grid onto an $r$ grid).
}
\begin{tabular}{r c c}
\toprule
Name & Definition & TRANSP variable \\
\midrule
Elongation & $\kappa$ & \texttt{ELONG} \\
Elongation derivative & $\kappa' = \dv*{\kappa}{r}$ &
$\dv*{r}(\texttt{ELONG})$ \\
Magnetic shear & $\hat{s} = r_0/q_0 \dv*{q}{r}$ &
$r_0/q_0 \dv*{r}(\texttt{Q})$ \\
Major radius & $R_{N} = R/a$ & $\texttt{RMAJM}/a$ \\
Miller radial coordinate & $r_0 = {D/2a}$ & calc. using \texttt{RMAJM} \\
Safety factor & $q_0 = \pdv*{\psi_\mathrm{tor}}{\psi_{\mathrm{pol}}}$ &
\texttt{Q} \\
Shafranov Shift & $1/a \dv*{R}{r}$ & $1/a\dv*{r}(\texttt{RMJMP})$ \\
Triangularity & $\delta$ & \texttt{TRIANG} \\
Triangularity derivative & $\delta' = \dv*{\delta}{r}$ &
$\dv*{r}(\texttt{TRIANG})$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:miller_params}
\end{table}}
\subsubsection{GS2 Coordinate system}
We saw in Section~\ref{sec:tor_geometry} that the magnetic field lines in a
tokamak form well-defined, nested flux surfaces of constant magnetic field
and, hence, constant $\psi$. As well as this, magnetic field lines, in the
absence of magnetic islands and other similar effects (the typical
configuration in a tokamak), do not cross each other. Therefore, we can use
these two observations to define a coordinate system, following
Ref.~\cite{Beer1995a,HighcockThesis}.
The first natural basis vector is the direction of the magnetic field,
$\vu*{b} = \vb*{B}/B$. As stated in Section~\ref{sec:gk_theory}, equilibrium
quantities are functions only of the poloidal flux $\psi$ because that they
are constant on a given flux surface (no poloidal dependence) and that the
system is axisymmetric (no toroidal dependence). Therefore, we can use the
gradient of $\psi$ to define the radial coordinate with basis vector:
\begin{equation}
\vu*{\psi} = \frac{\nabla \psi}{\abs{\nabla \psi}}.
\label{rad_basis}
\end{equation}
Finally, we define a third coordinate, $\alpha$, with basis vector
\begin{equation}
\vu*{\alpha} = \frac{\nabla \alpha}{\abs{\nabla \alpha}},
\label{alpha_basis}
\end{equation}
such that $\vb*{B} = \nabla \alpha \times \nabla \psi$ (using the Clebsch
representation of the magnetic field~\cite{Kruskal1958}). It was shown
in~\cite{Kruskal1958} that $\alpha$ is a function of the form
\begin{equation}
\alpha = \phi + q(\psi) \theta + \nu(\theta, \psi),
\label{alpha}
\end{equation}
where $\nu$ is a function which depends on the geometry and is periodic in
$\phi$ and $\theta$~\cite{Kruskal1958}.
\subsubsection{The local approximation}
\label{sec:local_approx}
Using the above coordinate system we define the coordinates used in GS2 after
employing the ``local approximation''. Due to the fast motion of particles
along the magnetic field lines and the relatively slow drift across them,
turbulent structures are anisotropic in the parallel and perpendicular
directions to the field line. Specifically, turbulent structures in a
tokamak are elongated along field lines, with length scales of the order of
the connection length $l_\parallel \sim q R$, and are much shorter in the
perpendicular directions, with length scales of the order of the ion
gyroradius $l_\perp \sim \rho_i$. GS2 takes advantage of this anisotropy by
solving the gyrokinetic equation in a region known as a ``flux
tube''~\cite{Beer1995a}. A flux tube is chosen to be several turbulence
decorrelation lengths long in both the perpendicular and parallel directions,
i.e., long enough to avoid spurious interactions of turbulence with the edges
of the box, but still short enough to be highly resolved. \Figref{flux_tube} shows
the MAST flux surface and magnetic field lines at $r = 0.8$ with one field
line highlighted in red to represent a flux tube. The actual flux tube is
approximately rectangular at the outboard midplane and is highly twisted
along the field line due to the magnetic shear (this is not shown in
\figref{flux_tube} for clarity). Assuming axisymmetry, along with the
anisotropy of the fluctuations, implies that we are in fact capturing the
dynamics of the entire flux surface. Simulating only a single flux tube in
this way leads to dramatic savings in computational cost.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{surface_and_field_lines.png}
\caption[MAST magnetic field lines]{
Magnetic field lines that lie on the flux
surface at $r = 0.8$ (setting $q=2$ so that field lines are closed for
visualisation purposes). The field line marked in red is the centre line
of the GS2 flux tube that we use to simulate the plasma. The GS2 flux
tube itself is approximately rectangular at the outboard midplane but
twists as it follows the magnetic field line due to the magnetic shear.
The flux tube follows the field line once around the flux surface in the
poloidal direction.
}
\label{fig:flux_tube}
\end{figure}
The local approximation in gyrokinetics assumes that the gradients of
equilibrium quantities (such as those shown in \figref{profiles}) are
constant across the radial simulation domain. It is also assumed that,
provided the simulation domain in the plane perpendicular to the magnetic
field is significantly larger than the spatial scales of the turbulence, it
is acceptable to take periodic boundary conditions in the radial and binormal
directions. For these two directions, the two perpendicular coordinates used
in GS2 are $x$ and $y$, which measure the distance from the magnetic field
line located at $(\psi_0, \alpha_0)$~\cite{HighcockThesis}:
\begin{align}
x &= a \frac{q_0}{r_0} (\psi_N - \psi_{0N}), \label{gs2_x}\\
y &= a \eval{\dv{\psi_N}{r}}_{r_0} (\alpha - \alpha_0), \label{gs2_y}
\end{align}
where $\psi_N = \psi/a^2 B_{\mathrm{ref}}$ is the normalised poloidal flux.
In the parallel direction, the poloidal angle $\theta$ is used in GS2 (noting
that any coordinate that is not fixed at fixed $\psi$ and $\alpha$ can be
used as a parallel coordinate and noting in addition, some geometric
quantities are more convenient to calculate when using $\theta$ as a parallel
coordinate~\cite{HighcockThesis}).
\subsubsection{Spectral coordinates}
\label{sec:spectral_coords}
In the absence of flow shear, the gyrokinetic equation \eqref{gk} has no
explicit dependence on $x$ or $y$ and can be solved using spectral methods in
these directions. Spectral methods are computationally efficient and can be
used to enforce the conservation properties required by the system exactly.
More specifically, GS2 uses a pseudo-spectral algorithm with only the
nonlinear term being calculated in $(x,y,\theta)$ coordinates. Otherwise,
perturbed quantities have the following spectral
representation~\cite{Beer1995a}
\begin{equation}
A = \sum_{k_x,k_y} \hat{A}(t,\theta)_{k_x,k_y} e^{i(k_x x + k_y y)}
\equiv \mathcal{F}^{-1}[\hat{A}(t,\theta)],
\label{pert_spectral}
\end{equation}
where $k_x$ and $k_y$ are the perpendicular coordinates used by GS2 in
spectral space, and $\mathcal{F}^{-1}$ is the inverse Fourier transform.
One important caveat regarding the use of spectral coordinates and the
conversion of GS2 perturbed quantities from spectral to real space (as we do
in this work) is the normalisation convention used when performing the
Fourier transform. GS2 uses the open-source
FFTW\footnote{\url{http://www.fftw.org/}} package to transform between $(x,
y)$ and $(k_x, k_y)$ representations. FFTW performs the following
calculations\footnote{\url{http://www.fftw.org/doc/What-FFTW-Really-Computes.html}}:
\begin{align}
\text{Forward: } \hat{A}(k) &= \mathcal{F}[A(x)] =
\sum_{j=0}^{n-1} A_j e^{-2 \pi j k i/n}, \label{fftw_calc_forward} \\
\text{Backward: } A(x) &= \mathcal{F}^{-1}[\hat{A}(k)] =
\sum_{j=0}^{n-1} \hat{A}_j e^{2 \pi j k i/n}, \label{fftw_calc_backward}
\end{align}
where $A$ is the real-space representation, $\hat{A}$ is the spectral-space
representation, and $\mathcal{F}$ is the forward Fourier transform. We see
that there is no implicit normalisation applied by the FFTW library, meaning
that applying a forward (going from real to spectral space) and then a backward
(going from spectral to real space) transform will multiply the input by $n$.
Therefore, the following normalisation is commonly used:
\begin{align}
\hat{A}(k) &= \mathcal{F}[A(x)], \label{gs2_fft_forward} \\
A(x) &= \frac{\mathcal{F}^{-1}[\hat{A}(k)]}{n}. \label{gs2_fft_backward}
\end{align}
In contrast, GS2 uses the following normalization:
\begin{align}
\hat{A}(k) &= \frac{\mathcal{F}[A(x)]}{n}, \\
A(x) &= \mathcal{F}^{-1}[\hat{A}(k)].
\label{gs2_fft_norm}
\end{align}
In other words, when converting GS2 fields from spectral space to real space,
no normalisation is necessary and care must be taken when using FFT packages
external to GS2 since they may be using the normalisations given in
equations~\eqref{fftw_calc_forward} and~\eqref{fftw_calc_backward}.
\subsubsection{GS2 variable Normalisations}
Before detailing aspects of the GS2 algorithm, we note the normalisations
used in GS2 and this work. The normalisations used within GS2 are chosen such
that all quantities are of order unity. Table~\ref{tab:normalising} lists the
normalising quantities and Table~\ref{tab:normalised} lists
the main normalised quantities used within GS2~\cite{HighcockThesis}.
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.25}%
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Normalising quantities used in GS2.}
\begin{tabular}{r c}
\toprule
Quantity & Definition \\
\midrule
$a$ & Half the diameter of the LCFS at the height of the magnetic axis \\
$B_{\mathrm{ref}}$ & Toroidal magnetic field strength at $r=0$ \\
$v_{\mathrm{th}i}$ & $\sqrt{2 T_i / m_i}$ \\
$Z_i \equiv 1$ & Charge number of ion species \\
$m_i$ & Mass of ion species \\
$\Omega_i$ & $Z_i e B_{\mathrm{ref}} / m_i c$ \\
$\rho_i$ & $v_{\mathrm{th}i}/\Omega_i$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:normalising}
\end{table}}
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.25}%
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{The main normalised quantities used in this
work~\cite{HighcockThesis}.
}
\begin{tabular}{r c c}
\toprule
Name & Normalised definition \\
\midrule
Binormal coordinate & $y/\rho_i$ \\
Binormal wavenumber & $k_y \rho_i$ \\
Charges & $Z_s/Z_i$ \\
Densities & $n_s/n_i$ \\
Density gradients & $\kappa_{ns} = 1/L_{ns}$ \\
Flow shear & $\gamma_E = (r_0/q_0) \dv*{\omega}{r} (a/v_{\mathrm{th}i})$ \\
Magnetic field & $B/B_{\mathrm{ref}}$ \\
Masses & $m_s/m_i$ \\
Perturbed electrostatic potential & $\varphi/(\rho_i/a)(T_i/e)$ \\
Radial coordinate & $x/\rho_i$ \\
Radial wavenumber & $k_x \rho_i$ \\
Temperatures & $T_s/T_i$ \\
Temperature gradients & $\kappa_{Ts} = 1/L_{Ts}$ \\
Time & $t/(a/v_{\mathrm{th}i})$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:normalised}
\end{table}}
\subsection{Collisions}
\label{sec:collisions}
The fundamental effect of turbulence is to transfer energy from large spatial
scales at which energy is injected to small scales where energy is
dissipated, which leads to heating. As well as the transfer of energy due to
turbulence, there are several mechanisms that lead to phase-space mixing,
which produce small-scale structure and large gradients in velocity space
(see~\cite{Schekochihin2008} and references therein). It is these large
gradients in velocity space that eventually bring collisions into effect
regardless of how small the collisionality is. Therefore, in any plasma
turbulence simulation some form of dissipation must be included to smooth out
the small-scale structure that develops in velocity space. While dissipation
due to collisions is the primary physical dissipation mechanism in kinetic
plasmas, artificial dissipation is also possible, and useful, in numerical
simulations (see Section~\ref{sec:hyperviscosity}).
Recent work~\cite{Abel2008a, Barnes2008} has led to the implementation of a
linearised Fokker-Planck collision operator in GS2 that satisfies the
following important properties,
\begin{inparaenum}[(i)]
\item smooths out small-scale structure in velocity space;
\item obeys Boltzmann's H-theorem (the condition that collisional processes
are irreversible and cannot decrease entropy); and
\item conserves particles, momentum, and energy.
\end{inparaenum}
This collision operator includes the effect of both pitch-angle scattering
and energy diffusion because small-scale structure can be generated in
both $v_\perp$ and $v_\parallel$ by phase mixing. The level of collisional
dissipation in GS2 is set by the collision frequencies calculated as follows.
In GS2, velocity space is represented by the particle energy $\varepsilon_s$ and
the pitch-angle variable $\lambda'_s = \mu_s/\varepsilon_s$. The associated
input parameters which control the grid sizes are \texttt{negrid} and
\texttt{ngauss}. These parameters are only related to the real grid sizes used
by GS2, because the exact magnetic geometry also plays a role through the
calculation of bounce points of trapped particles (see
Ref.~\cite{HighcockThesis} for further details). The input parameters that
control the strength of the collisional dissipation in GS2 are the collision
frequencies for each species. The electron-ion collisionality is calculated
via~\cite{Hammett2003, Abel2008a}
\begin{equation}
\texttt{vnewk\_2} = \nu_{ei} \frac{a}{v_{\mathrm{th}i}} =
\frac{4 \pi n_e e^4 \ln \Lambda}{(2T_e)^{3/2} m_e^{1/2}} \frac{a}{v_{\mathrm{th}i}},
\label{elec_coll}
\end{equation}
where~\cite{Huba2016}
\begin{equation}
\ln \Lambda = 24 - \ln (10^4 \sqrt{\frac{n_e^{1/2}}{10}} T_e^{-1}),
\label{loglam}
\end{equation}
is the Coulomb logarithm where $n_e$ is in units of $10^{19}$~m$^{-3}$ and
$T_e$ is in keV, and \texttt{vnewk\_2} is the GS2 parameter denoting the
electron collision frequency. We can derive a convenient form
of~\eqref{elec_coll} by converting to cgs units and eliminating physical
constants~\cite{Hammett2003}:
\begin{equation}
\texttt{vnewk\_2} \approx 2.7913 \times 10^{-3}
\frac{n_e \ln \Lambda a A_i^{1/2}}{T_{e}^{3/2} T_i^{1/2}},
\label{elec_coll_simple}
\end{equation}
where $A_i$ is the atomic mass of the ion species in units of the proton mass
$m_p$ and $T_i$ is in units of keV.
In this work, we have simulated only a single ion species. However, the
experiment contains several different ion impurities, such as C$^{+6}$ carbon
impurity ions, and beam ions, that may affect the ion equilibrium profiles
and ion-ion collision frequencies. Unfortunately, including additional
gyrokinetic ion species in our simulations is prohibitively expensive for the
extensive parameter scan performed in this work. Instead, it is possible to
improve the realism of our simulations by creating an aggregate ion species,
instead of simulating a pure deuterium plasma. We achieve this by calculating
an effective ion charge,
\begin{equation}
Z_{\mathrm{eff}} = \frac{\sum_j n_j Z_j^2}{|\sum_j n_j Z_j|},
\label{zeff}
\end{equation}
where the summation is over all ion species present in the experiment, and
$n_j$ and $Z_j$ are the density and charge of ion species $j$, respectively.
This parameter is denoted \texttt{zeff} in GS2 and the value, determined from
the experiment, is given in Section~\ref{sec:num_setup}. This leads to the
following enhancement of the ion-ion collision frequency~\cite{Hammett2003}
\begin{equation}
\texttt{vnewk\_1} = \texttt{vnewk\_2} \times Z_i^2 Z_\mathrm{eff}
\qty(\frac{m_e}{m_i})^{1/2} \qty(\frac{T_e}{T_i})^{3/2},
\label{ion_coll}
\end{equation}
where \texttt{vnewk\_1} is the GS2 parameter denoting the ion-ion collision
frequency. The calculated values for the above collision frequencies that
were inputs to our simulations are listed in Table~\ref{tab:sim_params} in
Section~\ref{sec:num_setup}.
\subsection{Real-space effect of flow shear}
\label{sec:flow_shear}
Flow shear is implemented in GS2 by allowing $k_x$ to vary with
time~\cite{Hammett2006}:
\begin{equation}
k_x^*(t) = k_x - \gamma_E k_y t.
\label{kx_time}
\end{equation}
In simplified terms, GS2 shifts the fluctuation fields along the $k_x$
dimension as a function of time (see~\cite{HighcockThesis} for a complete
review of the GS2 flow shear algorithm). This leads to finer radial structure
and a displacement of fluctuations in the $y$ direction, as
illustrated in \figref{flow_shear_effect}. However, complications arise in
this implementation as a result of the fixed $k_x$ grid in GS2,
which causes jumps in the displacement of fluctuations in the $y$ direction
at the radial extremes of the box as we will now explain.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{flow_shear_effect.pdf}
\caption[Physical effect of $\gamma_E$]{
Illustration of the effect of flow shear of turbulent structures. As
$k_x^*$ increases in time there is increased radial structure and
displacement in the $y$ direction.
}
\label{fig:flow_shear_effect}
\end{figure}
When $k_x^*$ changes by $\delta k_x = \gamma_E k_y \Delta t$, where $\Delta
t$ is a GS2 time step, the value of the GS2 fluctuation fields at $k_x$ would
ideally be shifted to $k_x \pm \delta k_x$. However, the $k_x$ grid
is fixed in GS2 (with a grid separation of $\Delta k_x$) and so the
fluctuation fields must be shifted by at least $\Delta k_x$. This issue is
resolved in GS2 by keeping track of the difference between the exact shift in
$k_x$ and the grid spacing $\Delta k_x$: when the exact shift is less than
$\Delta k_x/2$, no shifting takes place but the value is recorded and added
to the size of the shift at the next time step. This process is repeated
until the shift is greater than or equal to $\Delta k_x/2$, at which point
all fluctuation fields are shifted by $\Delta k_x$.
The distribution function calculated by GS2 is of the form
\begin{equation}
h \sim \exp[i (k_x^* x + k_y y)].
\label{gs2_h}
\end{equation}
Substituting for $k_x^*$ using~\eqref{kx_time}, we get $h \sim \exp[i (k_x x
+ k_y y - \gamma_E k_y x t)]$ and we can identify the wave frequency
$\omega_h = \gamma_E k_y x$ to calculate the group velocity
\begin{equation}
\vb*{v}_g = \pdv*{\omega_h}{\vb*{k}} = -\gamma_E x \vu*{y}.
\label{v_group}
\end{equation}
Writing $\vb*{v}_g = \Delta y / \Delta t$, we find the displacement of
fluctuations in the $y$ direction, for an ideal $k_x$ shift of $\delta k_x =
\gamma_E k_y \Delta t$,
\begin{equation}
\Delta y = - \frac{ \delta k_x x}{k_y}.
\label{y_disp}
\end{equation}
However, $\delta k_x$ is forced to match the fixed $k_x$
grid with a spacing $\Delta k_x = 2 \pi / L_x$, where $L_x$ is the size of
the box in the $x$ direction. Using $k_y = 2 \pi / \lambda_y$,
where $\lambda_y$ is the wavelength of a given $k_y$ mode, we can finally
write the displacement due to the flow shear as,
\begin{equation}
\Delta y = \lambda_y \frac{x}{L_x}.
\label{y_disp_final}
\end{equation}
This means that at the edges of the radial domain, where $x = \pm L_x/2$, the
displacement in the $y$ direction for every shift in $k_x$ due to the flow
shear is $\Delta y = \pm \lambda_y/2$. The rate of shifting is dependent on
$k_y$ according to~\eqref{kx_time} and so the largest modes (smallest
$k_y$s) will be acted on more infrequently than smaller modes
(larger $k_y$s). However, the largest modes are then shifted by half the
size of their wavelength according to~\eqref{y_disp_final}. This causes
visual separation (or multiplication) of structures at the edges of the GS2
domain in real space in a way that may affect our correlation analyses
performed in Chapter~\ref{sec:struc_of_turb}.
We emphasise that the separation of turbulent structures we have described
above is only present in the real-space representation of the GS2
distribution function. Given that GS2 performs calculations (apart from the
calculation of nonlinear interactions) in Fourier space, this does not
present a problem to the overall calculation. We note that the implementation
of flow shear in GS2 is correct in the limit of infinitely small $\Delta k_x$
and so it is sufficient to check convergence with $\Delta k_x$ to be
confident of our results. Ideally, some form of interpolation could be used
to smooth out these shifts in $k_x$ and a future program of work is planned
to implement this in GS2.
\subsection{Implementation of hyperviscosity}
\label{sec:hyperviscosity}
In addition to the dissipation caused by collisions (see
Section~\ref{sec:collisions}), it is possible to dissipate energy
artificially at moderately small spatial scales, rather than having to
resolve the entire spatial cascade of energies. However, this has to be done
in such a way so as not to affect the turbulent transport that we are
trying to predict by running simulations. The benefit of such artificial
dissipation is that it allows us to damp the dynamics at small scales where we do
not expect the contribution to the transport to be large, but would require
significant computational resources to resolve (see
Appendix~\ref{App:hyperviscosity}). Hyperviscosity is one such technique for
artificially damping turbulent dynamics at small scales (large wavenumbers).
Whereas collisional dissipation acts on large gradients in velocity space,
hyperviscosity directly damps large wavenumbers.
The GS2 implementation is based on a 2D Smagorinsky-like hyperviscosity
subgrid model~\cite{Belli2006}. It is a fourth-order damping model applied
to the non-adiabatic part of the distribution function at every time step,
with the result that a perturbed quantity like the
electrostatic potential $\varphi$ is multiplied at each time step by
\begin{equation}
\exp \left [ -D_{\mathrm{hv}} S \Delta t
{\left (\frac{k_\perp}{k_{\perp, \max}}\right)}^4 \right],
\label{hypervisc}
\end{equation}
where $D_{\mathrm{hv}}$ is a constant coefficient controlling the
strength of the hyperviscosity (denoted by \texttt{d\_hypervisc} in
GS2), $k_\perp^2 = k_x^2 + k_y^2$, $k_{\perp,\max}$ is the largest
perpendicular wavenumber in the simulation, and $S$ is the $x$-$y$ averaged
shearing rate, defined in terms of the perturbed $\vb*{E} \times \vb*{B}$ drift velocity
$\vb*{V}_E = (c/B) \vu*{b} \cross \nabla \ensav{\varphi}{\vb*{R}_s}$
as~\cite{Belli2006}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
S^2(\theta) & = \left< {\left(\dv{V_{Ex}}{x} \right)}^2 +
{\left(\dv{V_{Ey}}{y} \right)}^2 +
\frac{1}{2}{\left(\dv{V_{Ex}}{x} +
\dv{V_{Ey}}{y} \right)}^2 \right>_{x,y} \\
& = \sum_{k_x} \sum_{k_y} k_\perp^4 \frac{c}{B} |\varphi|^2,
\end{split}
\label{hyp_shear_rate}
\end{equation}
where $\left<\cdots \right>_{x,y}$ indicates an average over $x$-$y$ space.
We see that the damping rate in \eqref{hypervisc} is a function of $k_\perp$
and thus damps large wavenumbers most strongly.
Equation~\eqref{hyp_shear_rate} shows that the damping due to hyperviscosity
depends on the amplitude of $\varphi$. This is beneficial when focusing on
nonlinear simulations since it reduces the importance of choosing the right
value of $D_{\mathrm{hv}}$, i.e., the damping rate will change dynamically with
the amplitude of the plasma dynamics. However, it complicates the study of
the linear dynamics, where the amplitude of $\varphi$ grows exponentially in
time -- with the implication that hyperviscous damping would have an
ever-increasing effect. Whereas in a saturated nonlinear simulation, the
damping due to hyperviscosity would be roughly constant (since $\varphi$ is
roughly constant). For this reason, there are two methods for using
hyperviscosity in GS2, controlled by the input flag \texttt{const\_amp}:
\begin{itemize}
\item \texttt{const\_amp = True}: The shearing rate \eqref{hyp_shear_rate}
$S = 1$ and the level of damping will
only depend on the value of $D_{\mathrm{hv}}$ and the wavenumber.
\item \texttt{const\_amp = False}: The level of damping will depend on the
fluctuation amplitude of $\varphi$ via~\eqref{hyp_shear_rate}.
\end{itemize}
In this work, we are interested in both the linear and nonlinear behaviour,
and so our simulations were all run with \texttt{const\_amp = False}. This
allows us to study linear growth rates and be sure they are relevant to our
nonlinear simulations. When using hyperviscosity, it is important to study
its effect on linear growth rates and turbulent transport. We investigate
this in Appendix~\ref{App:hyperviscosity} and show that by damping electron
spatial scales we are able to keep simulations resolutions modest while not
significantly affecting the turbulent transport. This was further tested by
sensitivity scan for nonlinear simulations: assessing that the precise value
of $D_{\mathrm{hv}}$ did not affect any measured quantities.
\section{Numerical set-up}
\label{sec:num_setup}
The MAST equilibrium parameters used in our simulations were extracted
from the MAST diagnostics and EFIT equilibrium, as explained in
Section~\ref{sec:exp_profiles}. In practise, these diagnostic measurements
and equilibria are cleaned and serve as input to a TRANSP analysis to
calculate the transport coefficients. As a result, the output from a TRANSP
analysis contains all the information necessary to run GS2 simulations. To
extract these parameters, an open-source, and freely available
package\footnote{\url{https://github.com/ferdinandvanwyk/transp_to_gs2}} was
developed that reads a TRANSP output file and calculates all the required GS2
parameters. The equilibrium parameters at $r=0.8$ and $t=0.25$~s, for the
MAST discharge \#27274 we will be investigating in this work, are listed in
Table~\ref{tab:sim_params}. The two nominal experimental values for the
parameters we vary in this study were $\kappa_T = 5.1 \pm 1$ and $\gamma_E =
0.16 \pm 0.02$; however, we also scanned outside the region of experimental
uncertainty in order to map out the turbulence threshold more fully. Overall,
our parameter scan consisted of 76 simulations over the regions $\kappa_T \in
[4.3,8.0]$ and $\gamma_E \in [0, 0.19]$. \Figref{scan_scatter} shows the
parameter values for the full parameter scan in this study, where the
highlighted region indicates parameters that lie within the experimental
uncertainty. Due to resolution constraints, we were not able to simulate
between $0 < \gamma_E \lesssim 0.08$ (as explained in
Appendix~\ref{App:res_flow_shear}).
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{full_scan_scatter}
\caption[$(\kappa_T, \gamma_E)$ values in parameter scan]{
Equilibrium values of $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$ for the parameter scan in
this study. The highlighted region indicates the region of experimental
uncertainty. Simulations in the region $0 < \gamma_E < 0.08$ were not
reliable due to resolution constraints (see main text).
}
\label{fig:scan_scatter}
\end{figure}
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.25}%
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{GS2 equilibrium parameters calculated from diagnostic measurements
and from the EFIT equilibrium of the MAST discharge \#27274 and
appropriately normalised. The nominal experimental values for $\kappa_T$
and $\gamma_E$ are $\kappa_T = 5.1 \pm 1$ and $\gamma_E = 0.16 \pm 0.02$.
The reference magnetic field is the toroidal magnetic field strength at
the magnetic axis, i.e., $B_{\mathrm{ref}} = B_{\phi}(r=0)$. See
Appendix~\ref{App:gs2_input_file} for an example GS2 input file with
these parameters.
}
\begin{tabular}{r c c}
\toprule
Quantity & GS2 variable & Value \\
\midrule
$\beta = {8\pi n_i T_i}/{B_\mathrm{ref}^2}$ & \texttt{beta} &
0.0047 \\
$\beta' = \pdv*{\beta}{r}$ & \texttt{beta\_prime\_input}
& -0.12 \\
Eff. ion charge $Z_{\mathrm{eff}}
= {\sum_i n_i Z_i^2/|\sum_i n_i Z_i|}$ & \texttt{zeff} & 1.59 \\
Elec.-ion collisionality $\nu_{ei}$ & \texttt{vnewk\_2} & 0.59 \\
Elec. density $n_{eN} = n_e/n_i$ &
\texttt{dens\_2} & 1.00 \\
Elec. density grad. $1/L_{ne} = - \dv*{\ln n_e}{r}$ &
\texttt{fprim\_2} & 2.64 \\
Elec. mass $m_{eN} = m_e/m_i$ &
\texttt{mass\_2} & $1 / (2 \times 1836)$ \\
Elec. temp. $T_{eN} = T_e/T_i$ &
\texttt{temp\_2} & 1.09 \\
Elec. temp. grad. $1/L_{Te} = - \dv*{\ln T_e}{r}$ &
\texttt{tprim\_2} & 5.77\\
Elongation $\kappa$ & \texttt{akappa} & 1.46 \\
Elongation derivative $\kappa' = \dv*{\kappa}{r}$ &
\texttt{akappri} & 0.45 \\
Flow shear $\gamma_E = (r_0/q_0) \dv*{\omega}{r} (a/v_{{\mathrm{th}}i})$ &
\texttt{g\_exb} & [0, 0.19] \\
Ion collisionality $\nu_i$ & \texttt{vnewk\_1} & 0.02 \\
Ion density $n_{iN} = n_i/n_i$ & \texttt{dens\_1} & 1.00 \\
Ion density grad. $1/L_{ni} = - \dv*{\ln n_i}{r}$ &
\texttt{fprim\_1} & 2.64 \\
Ion mass $m_{iN} = m_i/m_i$ & \texttt{mass\_1} & 1.00 \\
Ion temp. $T_{iN} = T_i/T_i$ & \texttt{temp\_1} & 1.00 \\
Ion temp. grad. $\kappa_T \equiv 1/L_{Ti} = - \dv*{\ln T_i}{r}$ &
\texttt{tprim\_1} & [4.3, 8.0] \\
Magnetic shear $\hat{s} = r_0/q_0\dv*{q}{r}$ & \texttt{s\_hat\_input} & 4.00\\
Magnetic field reference point $R_\mathrm{geo}$ & \texttt{r\_geo} & 1.64 \\
Major radius $R_{N} = R/a$ & \texttt{rmaj} & 1.49 \\
Miller radial coordinate $r_0 = {D/2a}$ & \texttt{rhoc} & 0.80 \\
Safety factor $q_0 = \pdv*{\psi_\mathrm{tor}}{\psi_{\mathrm{pol}}}$ &
\texttt{qinp} & 2.31\\
Shafranov Shift $1/a \dv*{R}{r}$ & \texttt{shift} & -0.31 \\
Triangularity $\delta$ & \texttt{tri} & 0.21 \\
Triangularity derivative $\delta' = \dv*{\delta}{r}$ &
\texttt{tripri} & 0.46 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:sim_params}
\end{table}}
Previous investigations~\cite{Roach2009,Field2011} of similar MAST
discharges have found that electrons play an important role in driving
turbulence in MAST, even at ion scales. Our study confirmed these findings:
in Appendix~\ref{App:linear_sims} we present a series of linear simulations
with $\gamma_E=0$ while varying $\kappa_T$. We show that the maximum linear
growth rates at ion scales for simulations with a kinetic electron species is
$\sim$~2--3 times larger than linear simulations with adiabatic electrons.
Initial simulations with adiabatic electrons confirmed that sustained
turbulence required $\kappa_T$ significantly higher than even the upper
estimate based on the experimental uncertainties. Accordingly, we have
included electrons in our simulations as a kinetic species. Given that our
simulations contained only two kinetic species (deuterium ions and
electrons), it follows from the quasineutrality condition that they must have
the same density and density gradient, i.e., $n_i$ = $n_e$ and $L_{ni} =
L_{ne}$.
Previous work investigating electromagnetic effects
in MAST plasmas~\cite{Applegate2004,Roach2005a}, found that electromagnetic
effects were only significant at $r\sim0.5$, where $\beta\geq0.1$.
In the outer-core region we consider in this work, where $\beta \sim 0.005$,
these effects are not significant and we are thus able to assume the plasma
is electrostatic.
We determined the appropriate grid sizes for our nonlinear
simulations using the results from the linear simulations without flow shear
presented in Appendix~\ref{App:hyperviscosity} and~\ref{App:linear_sims}.
Without hyperviscosity, we found strong linear growth at both ion and
electron scales without a clear separation -- suggesting expensive
multiscale simulations are required. However, we are only interested in ion
scales (given that the BES diagnostic measures turbulent dynamics at this
scale), while still including the effect of kinetic electrons. Therefore, we
have made use of hyperviscosity and show in Appendix~\ref{App:hyperviscosity}
that we can truncate our nonlinear simulations at $k_y \rho_i \gtrsim 2$,
where we have chosen $k_y \rho_i \sim 3$, and verified that changes in
this cut-off scale or the number of $k_y$ modes (where we were only able to
test with $\sim20\%$ more $k_y$ modes due to cost constraints) do not
significantly affect the turbulence.
In the $x$ direction, we have chosen our grid based on the grid spacing
$\Delta k_x$ such that we could resolve reasonably small values of $\gamma_E$
(as explained above and in Section~\ref{sec:flow_shear}). Again, we have
verified that changes in $k_{x,\max}$ or the number of $k_x$ modes (where we
increased the number by $50\%$) do not significantly affect the turbulence. In
both the $x$ and $y$ directions, we chose the truncation scale to be somewhat
higher than necessary to ensure a sufficient ``inertial range'' between the
injection and dissipation scales and such that favourable parallelisation was
achieved when decomposing our grids over supercomputing nodes.
In the parallel direction we chose the smallest grid that adequately resolved
the eigenfunction and ensured that it reached very small values at the edges
of the parallel domain. The cost of GS2 simulations is a strong function of
the parallel resolution and so minimising parallel resolution was key to
being able to run such a large numerical study.
In velocity space, we again chose grid sizes as small as possible in order
to minimise computational cost. We tested this by ensuring that the
velocity-space integrals had small errors when velocity-space grid points
were added or taken away.
Table~\ref{tab:resolution_params} lists the GS2 resolution input parameters
used for our nonlinear simulations. We note that the pseudo-spectral method
employed by GS2 requires additional Fourier modes to prevent
aliasing~\cite{Orszag1970}. As a result, the number of physical grid points
were $85 \times 32 \times 20$ in the radial, binormal, and parallel
directions (while the number of grid points in the code was $128 \times 96
\times 20$), and $27 \times 16$ pitch-angle and energy-grid points,
respectively. We chose the box sizes in $x$ and $y$ to be $L_x \approx 200
\rho_i$ and $L_y \approx 62\rho_i$, respectively, while $\theta \in [-\pi,
\pi]$. We note that while $L_x$ is comparable to the size of MAST, the
turbulence predicted by GS2 can only be compared to experimental MAST
turbulence at $r=0.8$. All of the GS2 parameters summarised in this section
can be found in the example GS2 input file in
Appendix~\ref{App:gs2_input_file}.
{\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5}%
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Resolution parameters used in our nonlinear simulations. See
Appendix~\ref{App:gs2_input_file} for and example GS2 input file with
these parameters.
}
\begin{tabular}{r c c}
\toprule
Name & GS2 variable & Value \\
\midrule
No. of $k_x$ modes & \texttt{nx} & 128 \\
No. of $k_y$ modes & \texttt{ny} & 96 \\
$\theta$ grid points & \texttt{ntheta} & 20 \\
$\varepsilon_s$ grid points & \texttt{negrid} & 16 \\
$\lambda'_s$ grid points & \texttt{ngauss} & 8 \\
$x$ box size parameter & \texttt{x0} & 10 \\
$y$ box size parameter & \texttt{y0} & 10 \\
No. of $2\pi$ parallel segments & \texttt{nperiod} & 1 \\
Hyperviscosity coefficient & \texttt{d\_hypervisc} & 9 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:resolution_params}
\end{table}}
\chapter{Nonlinear simulations}
\label{sec:nl}
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:part_2_intro}
In this chapter, we present the results of a parameter scan in $\kappa_T$ and
$\gamma_E$. We focus on the prediction of the ion heat flux $Q_i$ and make
comparisons with experimental estimates of the ion heat flux $Q_i^{\exp}$
calculated from TRANSP results. In a fusion reactor we would like to
maximise the core temperature (and hence the temperature gradient between the
edge and the core) at a given heat flux. In local simulations, the heat
flux is a useful measure of the level of turbulence and we would, therefore,
like to explore how the heat flux changes with the equilibrium parameters
that we vary and whether our simulations are in agreement with experimental
measurements. This will allow us to gain confidence in our models and
eventually make predictions for the optimal parameters to maximise the fusion
power for a given reactor. We exclusively vary $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$,
while keeping all other equilibrium quantities constant. In other words, we
do not self-consistently recalculate other equilibrium quantities that would
be needed to support the values of $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$ that we use.
However, this allows us to isolate the effect of these two parameters on MAST
turbulence. We demonstrate in Section~\ref{sec:heat_flux} that GS2 is able to
match the experimental heat flux at equilibrium values within the
experimental uncertainty and that the experiment lies close to the turbulence
threshold.
We showed in Sections~\ref{sec:gk_eqn} and~\ref{sec:gamma_stab}, that the ITG
is a source of free energy, which drives instabilities, while flow shear has
a stabilising effect on turbulence. In the absence of a background flow shear,
numerical studies have suggested that ITG-unstable plasma reaches a
statistically steady-state in the following way~\cite{Waltz1994, Dimits2000,
Rogers2000}. Linear modes are unstable due to the ITG instability and grow
exponentially in time. Once the modes have sufficient amplitude, they interact
nonlinearly to give rise to a turbulent state. The nonlinear interactions
spontaneously generate ``zonal flows'' (poloidally symmetric flows with
finite radial wavenumber). The zonal flows give rise to an $\vb*{E} \times \vb*{B}$
shear and have a suppressing effect on turbulence. When the nonlinear
interaction is sufficiently suppressed, linear growth due to the ITG
instability returns and the process repeats.
In the presence of a background
flow shear, the situation may become more complicated. It has been
shown, in simple geometries, that the turbulence can become
subcritical~\cite{Newton2010,Schekochihin2012,Landreman2015},
i.e., large initial perturbations are required to ignite turbulence, as
opposed to only requiring infinitesimal perturbations in conventional
supercritical turbulence. In
Section~\ref{sec:subcritical}, we show that the turbulence for the MAST
configuration we are investigating is subcritical. We study the linear
dynamics and estimate the conditions necessary to ignite turbulence,
namely the transient-amplification factor and time. Studying the real-space
structure of turbulence (Section~\ref{sec:struc_analysis}), we show that
coherent, long-lived structures dominate the saturated state close to the
turbulence threshold. Furthermore, the fluctuations in the system have a
clear minimum amplitude needed to sustain turbulence. We present a novel
structure counting analysis and show that the number of turbulent structures
increases rapidly as one moves away from the turbulence threshold into more
strongly driven regimes. Finally, we show that far from the turbulence
threshold, the turbulence is similar to turbulence in the absence of flow
shear, characterised by many interacting eddies. This suggests that the
observed nonlinear state dominated by coherent structures is an intermediate
state between completely suppressed turbulence and the zonal-flow regulated
scenarios observed in conventional ITG-unstable plasmas. We estimate the
$\vb*{E} \times \vb*{B}$ shear due to the zonal flows
(Section~\ref{sec:zf_shear}) and show that it is small compared to the
background flow shear close to the turbulence threshold, but becomes
comparable and eventually dominates over the flow shear far from the
threshold, again resembling a system in the absence of flow shear.
\section{Heat flux}
\label{sec:heat_flux}
We performed a parameter scan in $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$ around their
respective experimental values to investigate the resulting changes in
turbulent transport. The
experimental values and associated uncertainties were $\kappa_T = 5.1 \pm 1$
and $\gamma_E = 0.16 \pm 0.02$. However, we also performed simulations
outside the experimental uncertainty ranges to aid our understanding of how
the nature of the turbulence changes with $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$ and, in
particular, how it is different near to versus far from the
(nonlinear) stability threshold. Our entire study covered $\kappa_T \in [4.3,
8.0]$ and $\gamma_E \in [0, 0.19]$ and consisted of 76 simulations. All
simulations were run until they reached a statistical steady state, i.e.,
until the running time average became independent of time. Averages were
taken over a time period of approximately $200$--$400~(a/v_{\mathrm{th}i})$
(which corresponds to $\sim 800$--$1600~\mu$s) and in many cases longer.
\Figsref{contour_heatmap}{value_heatmap} show the
anomalous ion heat flux versus $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$ found in our
simulations. \Figref{contour_heatmap} shows the full parameter scan with the
rectangular region indicating the extent of the experimental errors in each
equilibrium parameter. The dashed line indicates the value of experimental
heat flux, $Q_i^{\exp}/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$, and the shaded region the
experimental uncertainty. \Figref{contour_heatmap} demonstrates two of the
important conclusions of this work:
\begin{inparaenum}[(i)]
\item GS2 is able to match the experimental heat flux within the
experimental uncertainties of $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$, and
\item the experiment regime is located close to the turbulence threshold
(defined as the separating line between the regions of parameter space
with $Q_i = 0$ and $Q_i > 0$).
\end{inparaenum}
\Figref{value_heatmap} shows part of the region of experimental uncertainty
around the turbulence threshold giving the specific values of
$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ in each simulation. It demonstrates that transport is
``stiff'', i.e.,\ that relatively small changes in the equilibrium parameters
lead to large changes in $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ as one moves away from the
turbulence threshold. From~\figref{value_heatmap}, we can identify several
simulations that represent the marginally unstable cases in our parameter
scan: $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E) = (4.4, 0.14), (4.8, 0.16), (5.1, 0.18)$. We will
consider these parameter values when studying the conditions necessary to
reach a saturated turbulent state in Section~\ref{sec:subcritical}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{heat_flux_contour_heatmap}
\caption[Contour plot of $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ versus $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$]{
$Q_{i}/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ as a function of $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$ for
all simulations with $\gamma_E>0$. The rectangular region indicates the range
in $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$ consistent with the experiment within
measurement uncertainties. The dashed line indicates the value of
$Q_{i}^{\exp}/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ and the shaded area the experimental
uncertainty. The experiment is clearly near the turbulence threshold
defined by $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E)$. The points indicate the parameter
values for which the density-fluctuation fields are shown
in~\figref{density_fluctuations}.
}
\label{fig:contour_heatmap}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{ion_heatflux}
\caption[Values of $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ versus $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$]{
Values of the ion heat flux $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ as a function of
$\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$ for part of the region of experimental
uncertainty around the turbulence threshold. It is clear that the system
is subject to ``stiff transport'' as shown by the dramatic increase in
heat flux for small changes in our equilibrium gradient stability
parameters.
}
\label{fig:value_heatmap}
\end{figure}
The plots in \figref{q_line_plots} give another view of the data
in~\figref{contour_heatmap} and also demonstrate the stiffness of the
transport. \Figref{q_vs_tprim} shows the values of
$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ for several values of $\gamma_E$ (including
$\gamma_E=0$) as a function of $\kappa_T$, whereas \figref{q_vs_gexb} shows
$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ as a function of $\gamma_E$ for several values of
$\kappa_T$. We see that an $O(1)$ change in $\kappa_T$ gives rise to an
$O(10)$ change in $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$, and even more dramatically for
changes in $\gamma_E$, which requires only an $O(0.1)$ change to cause
$O(10)$ changes in the turbulent heat flux. The important conclusion from
\figref{q_vs_tprim} is that the presence of flow shear does not significantly
affect the transport stiffness, i.e., the rate of increase of
$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ with respect to $\kappa_T$, but only changes the
threshold value of $\kappa_T$ above which turbulence is present. This
increase in critical ITG without a change in the stiffness of
$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ with respect to $\kappa_T$ has been observed in
numerical simulations of simplified ITG-unstable plasmas in the presence of
flow shear~\cite{Highcock2010, Barnes2011a}. It is also in agreement with
experimental~\cite{Mantica2009,Mantica2011} and numerical~\cite{Citrin2014}
findings in the outer core of the JET experiment, which also showed that ion
heat transport stiffness is not affected by an increase in $\gamma_E$, but
may increase the critical ITG threshold.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{q_vs_tprim_full}
\caption{}
\label{fig:q_vs_tprim}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{q_vs_gexb_with_exp}
\caption{}
\label{fig:q_vs_gexb}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ line plots versus $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$]
{\subref*{fig:q_vs_tprim} $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ as a function of
$\kappa_T$ for several values of $\gamma_E$ (including $\gamma_E=0$).
\subref*{fig:q_vs_gexb} $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ as a function of $\gamma_E$
for several values of $\kappa_T$.
}
\label{fig:q_line_plots}
\end{figure}
\Figref{q_vs_tprim_marginal} shows $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ as a function of
$\kappa_T$ strictly within the region of measurement uncertainty of $\kappa_T$ and
$\gamma_E$, close to the turbulence threshold. The dashed line and shaded
region indicate $Q_i^{\exp}/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ and its associated uncertainty.
We see that there is a range of $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$ values where we
might expect $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ to match $Q_i^{\exp}/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$, and
we have a number of individual simulations that match the value of
$Q_i^{\exp}/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$. A list of these is given in
Table~\ref{tab:exp_match_sims} . We will investigate these simulations
further when we make more detailed comparisons with the experiment.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{q_vs_tprim_with_exp_marginal}
\caption[$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ line plots within experimental uncertainty]
{$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ as a function of $\kappa_T$ strictly within
experimental uncertainty of $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$, and close to the
turbulence threshold. The shaded region indicates the experimental heat
flux $Q_i^{\exp}/Q_{\mathrm{gB}} = 2 \pm 1$, determined
from~\figref{q_exp}.
}
\label{fig:q_vs_tprim_marginal}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Parameter values for simulations that match the experimental
heat flux, $Q_i^{\exp}/Q_{\mathrm{gB}} = 2 \pm 1$.
}
\begin{tabular}{c c c}
\toprule
$\kappa_T$ & $\gamma_E$ & $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ \\
\midrule
4.4 & 0.14 & $1.3 \pm 0.1$ \\
4.45 & 0.14 & $1.0 \pm 0.1$ \\
4.8 & 0.16 & $1.44 \pm 0.05$ \\
4.85 & 0.16 & $1.2 \pm 0.1$ \\
5.15 & 0.18 & $4 \pm 1$ \\
5.2 & 0.18 & $4 \pm 1$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:exp_match_sims}
\end{table}
\section{Subcritical turbulence}
\label{sec:subcritical}
We have found that in all our simulations with $\gamma_E>0$, a finite initial
perturbation was required in order to ignite turbulence and reach a saturated
turbulent state. In subcritical systems~\cite{Trefethen1993,Schekochihin2012,
Highcock2012,Landreman2015}, linear modes are formally stable, but may
be transiently amplified by a given factor over a given time. If the
transient amplification is sufficient for nonlinear interactions to become
significant before the modes decay, then a turbulent state may persist,
provided the fluctuation amplitudes do not fall below the critical values
(by way of random fluctuations that characterise the turbulent state) that
prevent them being transiently amplified once again to amplitudes where
nonlinear interactions are dominant.
In our simulations, the amplitude of the initial condition required was found
to depend on how far the system was from the turbulence threshold, i.e.,
simulations far from the turbulence threshold required a smaller initial
perturbation because they were shown to amplify transiently growing modes by a
larger factor (see below). This suggests that the turbulence threshold
identified in Section~\ref{sec:heat_flux} in terms of $\kappa_T$ and
$\gamma_E$ is also a function of the amplitude of the initial condition.
However, in this work, we have assumed that the fluctuations in the
experiment (e.g., due to large-scale MHD modes or more virulent turbulence on
neighbouring flux surfaces) can generate arbitrarily large perturbations as
an initial condition to our system. For this reason, we have used the largest
initial perturbation allowed by the numerical algorithm used in GS2 in this
work, i.e., as large as possible without forcing the system to evolve the
distribution function with time steps so small that the simulations would
require prohibitively long simulation times. The
nonlinear simulations presented in Section~\ref{sec:heat_flux} were run with
such large initial conditions. Thus, for the regions where we have
indicated $Q_i = 0$, we could not ignite turbulence using even the largest
initial condition allowed by the GS2 algorithm. We will demonstrate the
subcritical nature of the turbulence in this section by investigating the
effect of changing the amplitude of the initial perturbation in both linear
and nonlinear simulations.
\subsection{Minimum initial perturbation amplitude}
GS2 initialises the distribution function (both wavenumbers and velocity
space) with random complex numbers between $-0.5$ and $0.5$, and scales these
numbers via the input parameter \texttt{phiinit}. We start by considering the
nonlinear time evolution of $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ at the nominal equilibrium
parameters $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E) = (5.1, 0.16)$ varying the value of
\texttt{phiinit}, shown in \Figref{phiinit}. These equilibrium parameter
values represent a simulation far from the turbulence threshold
(see~\figref{contour_heatmap}) and yet, for a range of initial amplitudes, we
see that the system decays rapidly. This is a clear demonstration that the
turbulence is subcritical. We see that there is a certain minimum value of
\texttt{phiinit} between $0.2$ and $0.3$, starting from which it is possible
for the system to reach a saturated state, rather than decay. Importantly,
for simulations that do reach a saturated state, the level of saturation does
not depend on the amplitude of the initial perturbation. However, a large
initial perturbation is not sufficient to guarantee that a subcritical system
continues in a statistically steady state indefinitely, as we explain in the
next section.
\subsection{Finite lifetime of turbulence}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{phiinit_scan_full}
\caption{}
\label{fig:phiinit}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{subcrit_demo}
\caption{}
\label{fig:subcrit_demo}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Demonstration of subcritical turbulence]{
\subref*{fig:phiinit} The ion heat flux $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ as a
function of time for different initial-condition amplitudes for
$(\kappa_T, \gamma_E) = (5.1, 0.16)$, keeping all other parameters the
same. \subref*{fig:subcrit_demo} $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ as a function of
time for identical simulations at $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E ) = (5.1, 0.18)$.
The difference between the blue and green time series is random noise
with which GS2 initialises a simulation (having again excluded the noisy
initial time evolution). Beyond $t=300$~$(a/v_{\mathrm{th}i})$, the
simulations seem to converge to a similar average value before one is
abruptly quenched due to the amplitudes falling below the critical values
required to sustain a saturated state.
}
\end{figure}
In simulations with equilibrium parameters close to the
turbulence threshold, we found that turbulence could be quenched at a
seemingly unpredictable time. For example, \figref{subcrit_demo} shows the
time trace of $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ for two identical simulations at the
parameter values $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E) = (5.1, 0.18)$, close to the
turbulence threshold. Our simulations were initialised with random noise
in each Fourier mode (with $\mathtt{phiinit}=1$) and the only difference
between the two simulations is the realisation of this random noise. We see
the simulations saturate at a similar level beyond
$t=300$~$(a/v_{\mathrm{th}i})$ before one of them abruptly decays. This is
another indication that the system is subcritical: the decaying simulation
has fallen below the critical amplitude to sustain turbulence. Practically,
we decided that a simulation reached a saturated state if the heat flux
evolved at a roughly constant value for at least
$200$~$(a/v_{\mathrm{th}i})$.
The finite life time of turbulence in subcritical systems is well established
in some hydrodynamic systems, such as fluid flow in a pipe~\cite{Faisst2004}.
By running a large number of identical pipe-flow
experiments~\cite{Peixinho2006, Hof2006, Avila2011} and numerical
simulations~\cite{Faisst2004, Hof2006, Avila2010, Avila2011}, it was shown
that the ``lifetime'' of subcritical turbulence (the characteristic time it
takes before turbulence decays to laminar flow) is a function of the Reynolds
number. The Reynolds number in pipe flows characterises the tendency of the
system to be turbulent and is used to quantify the ``distance from the
turbulence threshold''. In particular, it was shown that the larger the
value of the Reynolds number (i.e., the further the system is from the
turbulence threshold), the longer the turbulence is likely to persist. More
recently, this same phenomenon of finite turbulence lifetime has been
observed in MHD simulations of astrophysical Keplerian shear flow
systems~\cite{Rempel2010}, where the magnetic Reynolds number characterises
the distance from threshold and the turbulence persists longer for larger
values.
Given the above findings, we would also expect the turbulence to persist
longer for larger values of $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ in the subcritical
turbulence we consider here. However, the pipe flow and astrophysical
studies referred to above relied on running many experiments in order to
build up sufficient statistics to determine the dependence of the turbulence
lifetimes on the system parameters. Currently, we are neither able to run
enough simulations nor run them for a sufficient amount of time to determine
the turbulence lifetimes for our system, given the high resolutions demanded
by nonlinear gyrokinetic simulations of plasmas in the core of tokamaks.
However, this may be possible in future, given advances in computing and
numerics or through the use of reduced models (upon being shown to be valid
for this MAST regime).
\subsection{Transient growth of perturbations}
A system can reach a saturated turbulent state despite being stable to
infinitesimal perturbations due to transient growth of perturbations.
This transient growth is sufficient to sustain turbulence provided
perturbations reach an amplitude sufficient for nonlinear interaction. The
question we would like to answer now is how much transient growth is
sufficient for the system to reach a turbulent state. We have already seen
which values of $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$ lead to a turbulent state (see
\figref{contour_heatmap}) and we now investigate transient growth of
perturbations via linear GS2 simulations.
We performed an extensive series of linear simulations and calculated the
time-evolution of the electrostatic potential as a function of $k_y \rho_i$,
$\kappa_T$, and $\gamma_E$. \figref{transient} shows the time evolution of
$\varphi$ (at $k_y \rho_i = 0.2$ and $\gamma_E=0.16$) for a range of
$\kappa_T$, normalised to the value at the time when the flow shear is
switched on, i.e., $\varphi_N^2(t) = \varphi^2(t)/\varphi^2(0)$, where $t=0$
defines the time at which $\gamma_E$ is changed from $0$ to $0.16$. We have
averaged $\varphi$ over $k_x$. \Figref{transient} illustrates the phenomenon
of transient growth in a subcritical system and we see that, as $\kappa_T$ is
increased, the system shows stronger transient growth. At $\gamma_E = 0.16$,
we saw in \figref{contour_heatmap} that turbulence could be sustained at
$\kappa_T \approx 4.8$. \figref{transient} shows only a marginal amount of
transient growth for $\gamma_E = 0.16$
We investigate the linear dynamics in the absence of flow shear in
Appendix~\ref{App:hyperviscosity} and~\ref{App:linear_sims}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{transient_growth_phi}
\caption{}
\label{fig:transient}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{phi_transient_vs_time}
\caption{}
\label{fig:phi_transient}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Transient growth of electrostatic potential]{
\subref*{fig:transient}
Transient growth of initial perturbations of the electrostatic potential
$\varphi^2_N(t)$ (normalised to the time at which flow shear is switched
on ) at $\gamma_E = 0.16$, for a range of $\kappa_T$ values.
These time evolutions were obtained from purely linear simulations for a
binormal wavenumber $k_y \rho_i = 0.2$, approximately the wavenumber
that gives the largest transient growth (see~\figref{N_16}), and averaged
over $k_x$. As $\kappa_T$ is increased, the strength of the transient
growth is also increased.
\subref*{fig:phi_transient} $\varphi^2_N(t)$ as a function of time for a
strongly growing mode at $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E, k_y \rho_i) = (5.1,
0.16, 0.2)$ to further illustrate transient amplification. The total
amplification is given by $e^{N_\gamma}$ and the time taken to reach
maximal amplification is $t_0$.
}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Characterising transient growth}
For linear simulations such as those shown in~\figref{transient}, it is
problematic to define a ``linear growth rate'', as we do for linear
simulations with $\gamma_E = 0$, where $\varphi(t)$ grows exponentially.
Methods for determining an
``effective'' linear growth rate have been outlined in Refs.~\cite{Roach2009}
and~\cite{Schekochihin2012}. Here, we follow Ref.~\cite{Schekochihin2012} and
use the ``transient-amplification factor'' as a measure of the
vigour of the transient growth. For a total amplification factor,
$e^{N_\gamma}$, the amplification exponent $N_\gamma$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
N_\gamma = \int_0^{t_0} \dd t \gamma(t) = \frac{1}{2} \ln
\frac{\varphi^2(t_0)}{\varphi^2(0)},
\label{amp_exponent}
\end{equation}
where $t_0$ is the time taken to reach the maximum amplification, and
$\gamma(t)$ is the time-dependent growth rate. We note that both the
transient-amplification factor and time are functions of $k_y$:
$N_\gamma = N_\gamma(k_y)$ and $t_0 = t_0(k_y)$, however, we will write these
as $N_\gamma$ and $t_0$ for convenience. The concept of transient growth is
more clearly illustrated in \Figref{phi_transient}, which shows a typical
linear simulation with strong amplification at $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E, k_y
\rho_i) = (5.1, 0.16, 0.2)$. The total amplification $e^{N_\gamma}$ and the
time taken to reach maximal amplification $t_0$, are also indicated in
\figref{phi_transient}.
It was shown in Ref.~\cite{Schekochihin2012} that the parameters $N_\gamma$
and $t_0$ determine whether turbulence can be sustained in the following way.
Perturbations grow transiently because they are swept from values of $k_x(t)$
that are unstable to values that are stable, where $k_x(t)$
evolves according to \eqref{kx_time}. If nonlinear interactions scatter
energy back into the unstable modes before perturbations decay to values too
small to be acted upon by the nonlinearity, they can be transiently amplified
once again, and so on. In this way, a nonlinear saturated state can be
sustained. The typical timescale for nonlinear interactions is the nonlinear
decorrelation time $\tau_\mathrm{NL} \sim 1/k_\perp V_E$, where
$k_\perp$ is the typical perpendicular wavenumber, and $V_E \sim
k_\perp (c \varphi/B)$ from \eqref{v_exb}. To sustain turbulence, transient
growth should last at least as long as one nonlinear decorrelation time:
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
t_0 &\gtrsim \tau_{\mathrm{NL}}.
\label{schek_t0}
\end{split}
\end{align}
At the same time, the rate of amplification should be comparable to the
nonlinear decorrelation rate for a sustained turbulent state:
\begin{equation}
\frac{N_\gamma}{t_0} \sim \frac{1}{\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}}.
\label{schek_gamma_eff}
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{schek_t0} and \eqref{schek_gamma_eff}, we see that a
sustained turbulent state requires
\begin{equation}
N_\gamma \gtrsim 1.
\label{schek_N}
\end{equation}
We will now investigate the values of $N_\gamma$ and $t_0$ for
experimentally-relevant equilibrium parameters and return to the comparison
of $t_0$ with $\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$ in Section~\ref{sec:corr_gs2} after
estimating $\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$ using the results from our correlation
analysis.
Considering figures~\ref{fig:transient} and \subref{fig:phi_transient}, we
want to estimate the critical values of $N_\gamma$ and $t_0$ above which
turbulence is triggered and a saturated state can be established in our
system. We note that reaching a saturated state would still require a
sufficiently large initial perturbation, as we showed in \figref{phiinit}.
\Figref{N_and_t0_16} shows $N_\gamma$ and $t_0$ as functions of $k_y \rho_i$
for a range of different $\kappa_T$ values at $\gamma_E = 0.16$. The linear
simulations are only shown up to $k_y \rho_i = 1.3$, because hyperviscosity
effectively suppresses transient growth beyond this value (this is discussed
in more detail in appendix~\ref{App:hyperviscosity}). As a point of
reference, \figref{value_heatmap} previously showed that for $\gamma_E =
0.16$, the transition to turbulence occurs at $\kappa_T = 4.8$. For the
linear simulations in \figref{N_and_t0_16}, we see a relatively smooth
increase in $N_\gamma$ and $t_0$ as $\kappa_T$ is increased across this
nonlinear threshold. We see larger transient amplification and modes with
smaller $k_y \rho_i$ experiencing amplification over a longer time period as
$\kappa_T$ is increased. The fact that neither~\figref{N_16}
nor~\figref{t0_16} show significant changes as the nonlinear turbulence
threshold is passed suggests that nonlinear simulations are essential for
predicting whether the system will exhibit turbulence for this experimental
configuration.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{trans_amp_vs_ky_gexb_16}
\caption{}
\label{fig:N_16}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{t0_vs_ky_gexb_16}
\caption{}
\label{fig:t0_16}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[$N_\gamma$ and $t_0$ versus $k_y \rho_i$]{
\subref*{fig:N_16} The transient-amplification factor $N_\gamma$
\eqref{amp_exponent} for a range of values of $\kappa_T$ at $\gamma_E =
0.16$. $N_\gamma$ increases with increasing $\kappa_T$ and increases
smoothly as the nonlinear threshold is passed.
\subref*{fig:t0_16} Time taken to reach maximum amplification $t_0$
for a range of values of $\kappa_T$, also at $\gamma_E = 0.16$.
Increasing $\kappa_T$ leads to transient amplification lasting for a
longer time.
}
\label{fig:N_and_t0_16}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Conditions for the onset of subcritical turbulence}
For supercritical turbulence, the onset of turbulence is typically
characterised by a critical value of the linear growth rate. Similarly, for
subcritical systems, we may reasonably expect that critical values of
$N_\gamma$ and/or $t_0$ exist that lead to a saturated turbulent state. To
investigate the conditions for the onset of turbulence we consider $N_\gamma$
and $t_0$ for the marginally unstable simulations identified in
Section~\ref{sec:heat_flux}. Figures~\ref{fig:N_marginal} and
\subref{fig:t0_marginal} show $N_\gamma$ and $t_0$ as functions of
$k_y \rho_i$ for $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E) = (4.4, 0.14), (4.8, 0.16), (5.1,
0.18)$. We see that both $N_\gamma$ and $t_0$ are roughly the same for our
marginally unstable simulations, suggesting that the values shown in
Figures~\ref{fig:N_marginal} and \subref{fig:t0_marginal} are the critical
values necessary for the onset of turbulence. Assuming that low $k_y$ modes
are the dominant scales in the system, it is reasonable to estimate from
\figsref{t0_16}{t0_marginal} that the onset of turbulence requires
$t_0 \gtrsim 10$~$(a/v_{\mathrm{th}i})$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{trans_amp_vs_ky_marginal}
\caption{}
\label{fig:N_marginal}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{t0_vs_ky_marginal}
\caption{}
\label{fig:t0_marginal}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[$N_\gamma$ and $t_0$ versus $k_y \rho_i$ for marginally unstable
simulations]{
\subref*{fig:N_marginal} Transient-amplification factor $N_\gamma$ and
\subref*{fig:t0_marginal} transient-amplification time $t_0$
for the three marginal simulations identified in
Section~\ref{sec:heat_flux}. The values of $N_\gamma$ and $t_0$ that
correspond to the marginally unstable equilibria are approximately the
same, suggesting that these are the critical values required in order to
reach a saturated turbulent state.
}
\label{fig:N_and_t0_marginal}
\end{figure}
To determine a critical condition for $N_\gamma$, we consider the value at
the peak of the $N_\gamma$ spectrum, $k_y \rho_i \sim 0.2$, shown in
\figref{N_16}. \Figref{max_trans_amp} shows the maximum value of the
transient-amplification factor $N_{\gamma,\max}$, as a function of
$\kappa_T$. The marked simulations are for the critical values of $\kappa_T$
above which turbulence can be sustained, given a sufficiently large initial
perturbation amplitude. \Figref{max_trans_amp} shows that $N_{\gamma,\max}$
is linear in $\kappa_T$ for each $\gamma_E$, with higher values of $\gamma_E$
resulting in lower values of $N_{\gamma,\max}$. The other important feature
is that the values of $N_{\gamma,\max}$ at the critical values of $\kappa_T$
are similar, giving an approximate critical condition: $N_{\gamma,\max} \sim
0.4$. We can conclude that, for the system we are investigating, the
conditions for the onset of turbulence (given a sufficiently large initial
perturbation) are:
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
N_{\gamma,\max} &\gtrsim 0.4,\\
t_0 &\gtrsim 10~(a/v_{\mathrm{th}i}).
\label{linear_turb_conds}
\end{split}
\end{align}
The value of $N_{\gamma,\max}$ in \eqref{linear_turb_conds} is comparable to
that found in previous work~\cite{Schekochihin2012,Highcock2012}. We will
return to the comparison of $t_0$ with $\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$ after estimating
$\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$ in Section~\ref{sec:struc_of_turb}, where we confirm
that $t_0 \gtrsim \tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$ and, therefore, that a sustained
turbulent state requires an amplification time comparable to the nonlinear
decorrelation time.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{max_trans_amp_vs_tprim}
\caption[Maximum transient-amplification factor]{
Maximum transient-amplification factor $N_{\gamma,\max}$ versus
$\kappa_T$ for three values of $\gamma_E$ within the range of
experimental uncertainty. The simulations circled in black represent the
critical values of $\kappa_T$ above which turbulence can be sustained,
suggesting the onset to turbulence occurs at $N_{\gamma,\max} \sim 0.4$.
}
\label{fig:max_trans_amp}
\end{figure}
We can summarise the linear behaviour described above as follows. Flow shear
sweeps perturbations in time from regions of $k_x$ space where modes are
unstable to where they are damped. This sweeping through unstable regions
leads to the transient growth of the perturbations. The turbulent state is
sustained through transient amplification of sufficient strength and
duration. We showed that the changes in $N_\gamma$ and $t_0$ are relatively
smooth as the turbulence threshold is surpassed (determined from our
simulations in Section~\ref{sec:heat_flux}), suggesting nonlinear simulations
are essential in predicting the transition to turbulence. Therefore, we will
now investigate our nonlinear simulations further to determine the nature of
this transition to turbulence.
\section{Structure of turbulence close to and far from the threshold}
\label{sec:struc_analysis}
\begin{quote}
\emph{Much of this section is based on Ref.~\cite{VanWyk2016}}.
\end{quote}
Having established the subcritical nature of the system, we want to
investigate the consequences for the structure of turbulence. We
will argue that a subcritical system such as ours supports the
formation of coherent structures close to the turbulence threshold, that
the heat flux is proportional to the product of number of structures and
their maximum amplitude, and that the properties of the turbulence are
characterised by the ``distance from threshold'' (as opposed to the specific
values of the stability parameters $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$), as measured,
for example, by the turbulent ion heat flux.
\subsection{Coherent structures in the near-marginal state}
\label{sec:coherent_strucs}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{density_marginal}
\caption{}
\label{fig:marginal}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{density_intermediate}
\caption{}
\label{fig:intermediate}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{density_strongly_driven}
\caption{}
\label{fig:strongly_driven}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{density_no_shear}
\caption{}
\label{fig:no_shear}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Real-space density-fluctuation fields on $(x,y)$ plane]{
Density-fluctuation field $\delta n_i/n_i$ at the outboard midplane of
MAST as a function of the local GS2 coordinates $x$ and $y$, for four
combinations of stability parameters.
\subref*{fig:marginal} Near-threshold turbulence, $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E) =
(4.8, 0.16)$. The dashed lines indicate the planes of constant $x$ and
$y$ used to demonstrate the parallel structure in
\figref{parallel_density}.
\subref*{fig:intermediate} Turbulence intermediate between the
near-threshold and strongly driven cases, $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E) =
(4.9,0.16)$.
\subref*{fig:strongly_driven} Strongly driven turbulence, $(\kappa_T,
\gamma_E) = (5.2,0.16)$.
\subref*{fig:no_shear} Turbulence without flow shear, $(\kappa_T,
\gamma_E) = (5.2,0)$, showing strong zonal flows.
}
\label{fig:density_fluctuations}
\end{figure}
\Figref{density_fluctuations} shows the density-fluctuation field $\delta n_i
/ n_i$ at the outboard midplane of MAST as functions of the local GS2
coordinates $x$ and $y$ (see Appendix~\ref{App:real_space_transform} for how
these are related to real-space $(R,Z)$ coordinates). The simulations shown
in Figures~\subref{fig:marginal}--\subref{fig:strongly_driven} are marked by
points in~\figref{contour_heatmap} and importantly they are all well within
the region of experimental uncertainty. We choose four combinations of the
stability parameters $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E)$ as the system is taken away from
the turbulence threshold: $(4.8, 0.16)$, which is close to the turbulence
threshold [\figref{marginal}], $(4.9, 0.16)$, an intermediate case between
the marginal and strongly driven turbulence [\figref{intermediate}], $(5.2,
0.16)$, a strongly driven case further from the threshold
[\figref{strongly_driven}], and $(5.2, 0)$, a case without flow shear
[\figref{no_shear}], representative of the basic ITG turbulence that has been
thoroughly studied in the past~\cite{Waltz1988,Dimits1996,Rogers2000}.
We can describe the change in the nature of the density-fluctuation field as
follows. The near-threshold state [\figref{marginal}] is dominated by intense
(compared to the background fluctuations), coherent, and long-lived
structures. As $\kappa_T$ is slightly increased (in this case by only 0.1),
these structures become more numerous [\figref{intermediate}], but have
roughly the same maximum amplitude: ${(\delta n_i/n_i)}_{\max} \sim 0.08$.
The strongly driven state [\figref{strongly_driven}] exhibits a more
conventional chaotic turbulent state characterised by many interacting eddies
with larger amplitudes. The coherent structures in the marginal case are
unlike the strongly interacting eddies that characterise the strongly driven
turbulent state and more likely constitute nonlinear travelling wave
(soliton-like) solution to the gyrokinetic equation. We note that these
simulations are representative of the regions close to and far from the
turbulence threshold, i.e.,\ in simulations near the threshold, we always
find sparse but well-defined coherent structures that survive against a
backdrop of weaker fluctuations. An important exception are simulations with
$\gamma_E=0$, where we do not observe such coherent structures. As the system
is taken away from the threshold by increasing $\kappa_T$, or decreasing
$\gamma_E$, the structures become more numerous, while maintaining roughly
the same amplitude, until they fill the entire domain, interact with each
other, and break up. For parameter values far from the threshold, we observe
no discernible coherent structures, but rather strongly time-dependent
fluctuations with amplitudes that increase with $\kappa_T$. For completeness,
\figsref{vel_fluctuations}{tperp_fluctuations} show the perturbed radial $\vb*{E} \times \vb*{B}$
velocity $V_{Er}$ and the perpendicular temperature-fluctuation $\delta
T_{\perp i}/T_{\perp i}$ fields. We have calculated $V_{Er}$ velocity by
taking the radial component of~\eqref{v_exb}, given by (see equation (3.42)
in Ref.~\cite{HighcockThesis})
\begin{equation}
V_{Er} = \frac{c}{a B_{\mathrm{ref}}} \frac{1}{|\nabla \psi|}
\qty|\pd{\psi}{r}|_{r_0} \pd{\varphi}{y}.
\label{v_er}
\end{equation}
We see that the coherent structures have both high $V_{Er}$ and
$\delta T_{\perp i}/T_{\perp i}$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{vel_marginal}
\caption{}
\label{fig:vel_marginal}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{vel_intermediate}
\caption{}
\label{fig:vel_intermediate}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{vel_strongly_driven}
\caption{}
\label{fig:vel_strongly_driven}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{vel_no_shear}
\caption{}
\label{fig:vel_no_shear}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Real-space radial $\vb*{E} \times \vb*{B}$ velocity on $(x,y)$ plane]{
Radial $\vb*{E} \times \vb*{B}$ velocity $V_{Er}$ at the outboard midplane of MAST as a
function of the local GS2 coordinates $x$ and $y$ for the same
equilibrium parameters as in \figref{density_fluctuations}.
}
\label{fig:vel_fluctuations}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{tperp_marginal}
\caption{}
\label{fig:tperp_marginal}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{tperp_intermediate}
\caption{}
\label{fig:tperp_intermediate}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{tperp_strongly_driven}
\caption{}
\label{fig:tperp_strongly_driven}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{tperp_no_shear}
\caption{}
\label{fig:tperp_no_shear}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Real-space perpendicular temperature-fluctuation fields
$T_{\perp i}$ on $(x,y)$ plane]{
Perpendicular-temperature fluctuation field $\delta T_{\perp i}/T_{\perp
i}$ outboard midplane of MAST as a function of the local GS2 coordinates
$x$ and $y$ for the same equilibrium parameters as in
\figref{density_fluctuations}.
}
\label{fig:tperp_fluctuations}
\end{figure}
We now consider the marginal cases, and the dynamics of the coherent
structures, more carefully, starting with their parallel structure.
\Figref{parallel_density} shows two views of the coherent structures in
\figref{marginal} in the parallel direction (which in GS2 is quantified by
the poloidal angle $\theta$; see Appendix~\ref{App:real_space_transform}) at
constant $y$ [\figref{marginal_xz}] and at constant $x$
[\figref{marginal_yz}]. It is clear that the coherent structures are
elongated in the parallel direction and have an amplitude much larger than
the ``background'' fluctuations.
In time, the coherent structures are advected by the flow imposed by the flow
shear in the poloidal direction, but also drift in the radial direction.
Figures~\ref{fig:marginal_xt} and~\subref{fig:marginal_yt} show $\delta n_i /
n_i$ for a marginal nonlinear simulation at $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E) = (5.1,
0.18)$, which has only one coherent structure, as a function of $(t,x)$ and
$(t,y)$ (taking the maximum value of $\delta n_i/n_i$ in the other
direction), respectively. \Figref{marginal_xt} shows the radial motion of
the structure across the domain, which the structures crosses in a time of
roughly $50~(a/v_{\mathrm{th}i})$. The radial motion of the structures in
\figref{marginal_xt} has a constant velocity and fitting the trajectory with
a straight line (the dashed line) gives a radial velocity of $v_x = 0.0330
\pm 0.0001$~$v_{\mathrm{th}i}$. \figref{marginal_yt} shows the poloidal
advection of the structure with a much shorter poloidal crossing time of
roughly $5~(a/v_{\mathrm{th}i})$. The poloidal motion of the structure is
entirely due to the advection caused by the flow shear as we will now
explain. As we saw in \figref{marginal_xt}, $v_x$ is constant and the radial
position is given by $x(t) = v_x t$. The poloidal advection due to the flow
shear is given by $v_y(t) = \gamma_E x(t)$ and so the direction of the flow shear
reverses at $x=0$. Combining the expressions for $x(t)$ and $v_y(t)$ and
integrating, we find that $y(t) \propto \gamma_E v_x t^2$, and, as shown by
the dashed line in \figref{marginal_yt}, this explains the poloidal motion of
the structure, which indeed reverses direction at $x=0$. The long-lived
nature of coherent structures close to the turbulence threshold is
illustrated by \figref{marginal_xt} given that the GS2 domain is periodic in
$x$ and $y$, and so the structure exists for $t > 100~(a/v_{\mathrm{th}i})$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{density_marginal_xz}
\caption{}
\label{fig:marginal_xz}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{density_marginal_yz}
\caption{}
\label{fig:marginal_yz}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Real-space density-fluctuation fields in parallel direction]{
\subref*{fig:marginal_xz} Density-fluctuation field $\delta n_i / n_i$ in
the $x$-$z$ plane at $y=0$.
\subref*{fig:marginal_yz} Density-fluctuation field $\delta n_i / n_i$ in
a $y$-$z$ plane at $x=0$. Both plots are shown for the same simulation
and at the same time as in \figref{marginal}; the corresponding planes
are indicated by the dashed lines in \figref{marginal}. The parallel
direction in GS2 is quantified by the poloidal angle $\theta$ (see
Section~\ref{sec:gs2_geometry}).
}
\label{fig:parallel_density}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.9\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{density_marginal_xt}
\caption{}
\label{fig:marginal_xt}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.9\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{density_marginal_yt}
\caption{}
\label{fig:marginal_yt}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Radial and poloidal advection of coherent structure]{
Density-fluctuation field $\delta n_i / n_i$ as a function of
\subref*{fig:marginal_xt} $x$ and $t$ (taking the maximum in
the $y$ direction) and \subref*{fig:marginal_yt} $y$ and $t$ (taking the
maximum in the $x$ direction) for a marginally unstable case with
$(\kappa_T, \gamma_E) = (5.1, 0.18)$, which contains only one coherent
structure. The structure is advected both radially and poloidally. We
note that the GS2 domain is periodic in $x$ and $y$ and so this is the
same structure throughout the entire time period shown. The dashed line
in \subref*{fig:marginal_xt} indicates $x=v_x t$, and in
\subref*{fig:marginal_yt} indicates $y \propto \gamma_E v_x t^2$ showing
that the poloidal advection is due to the flow imposed by the flow shear.
}
\end{figure}
\subsection{$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ as an order parameter}
The results in Section~\ref{sec:coherent_strucs} suggested that the nature of
the turbulence is set by how far the system is from the turbulence threshold.
Specifically, that the near threshold state is dominated by coherent
structures that seem to increase in number and amplitude as the system is
taken further from the threshold. This suggests that the important metric
that should be used to quantify the state of the system is the ``distance
from threshold'' and not the specific values of $\kappa_T$ and
$\gamma_E$ (although both can be used to control the distance from
threshold). $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ is a strong function of $\kappa_T$ and
$\gamma_E$, with the dependence that we showed in \figref{contour_heatmap},
and so we can use $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ as a control parameter to measure the
distance from the turbulence threshold. In Sections~\ref{sec:max_amp}
and~\ref{sec:struc_count}, we will quantify the changes in the
amplitude and number of structures for our parameter scan and show that the
distance from threshold is the relevant order parameter.
\subsection{Maximum amplitude}
\label{sec:max_amp}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{amp_vs_q}
\caption[Scaling of maximum fluctuation amplitude with $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$]{
Maximum amplitude of the density fluctuations versus
$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$. The naive scaling~\eqref{q_scaling}, $Q_i^{1/2}
\propto \delta n_i / n_i$, is shown for reference and holds far from
threshold, whereas for small values of $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ (around and
below the experimental value $Q_i^{\exp}$), the amplitude becomes
independent of $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$.
}
\label{fig:amplitude}
\end{figure}
Considering the density-fluctuation fields shown in
\figref{density_fluctuations}, we see that a key property that changes as the
system is taken away from the threshold is the amplitude of the eddies. We
would like to know how the amplitude changes with the distance from
threshold, which we quantify using $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$. For marginal cases,
such as \figref{marginal}, the dominant features are structures with high
densities compared to the background fluctuations. In order to measure the
changes in the amplitude of these structures we want to measure the maximum
amplitude, as opposed to an $(x,y)$-averaged quantity, which would be small
because of the relatively small volume taken up by the coherent structures.
Therefore, we consider the maximum amplitude (taken over $x$ and $y$),
${(\delta n_i/n_i)}_{\max}$, of density perturbations averaged over time in a
given simulation. \Figref{amplitude} shows the relationship between ${(\delta
n_i/n_i)}_{\max}$ and $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ for all the simulations in our
parameter scan. The striking feature of~\figref{amplitude} is that ${(\delta
n_i/n_i)}_{\max}$ hits a finite ``floor'' as $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ approaches
and goes below its experimental value. This coincides with the appearance of
the long-lived structures shown in~\figref{marginal}. For $\gamma_E=0$
simulations with values of $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ below $Q_i^{\exp}$, we do
not see a clear trend, and importantly do not see the flattening we see for
$\gamma_E>0$ simulations, suggesting that the turbulence is fundamentally
different close to the turbulence threshold (as was also suggested by the
absence of coherent structures).
Far from the turbulence threshold, we can estimate the expected behaviour of
$\delta n_i / n_i$ via a naive estimate of the dependence of
$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ on $\delta n_i / n_i$ using~\eqref{q_def}:
\begin{equation}
\frac{Q_i}{Q_{\mathrm{gB}}}\sim \frac{a^2}{\rho_i^2}\frac{\delta
n_i}{n_i}\frac{V_{Er}}{v_{{\mathrm{th}}i}} \sim k_y\rho_i \frac{T_e}{T_i}
{\left(\frac{a}{\rho_i}\frac{\delta n_i}{n_i}\right)}^2,
\label{q_scaling}
\end{equation}
where $(a/\rho_i) \delta n_i/n_i$ is an order-unity quantity in gyrokinetic
theory~\cite{Abel2013}. In deriving \eqref{q_scaling}, we have used
\eqref{v_er} and assumed that fluctuations of $\varphi$ are related (by order
of magnitude) to the electron (and, therefore, ion) density via the Boltzmann
response $e\varphi/T_e \sim \delta n_e/n_e$. The scaling
$\delta n_i/n_i \propto Q_i^{1/2}$ (obtained from \eqref{q_scaling} given
that the prefactor is order unity) is indicated by the red line in
\figref{amplitude}, and shows that this describes the scaling far from
threshold well. We also see that $\gamma_E=0$ and $\gamma_E>0$ simulations
are similar far from the threshold.
The above observations are entirely non-trivial. In the case of supercritical
turbulence, we typically observe smaller fluctuation amplitudes all the way
to the turbulence threshold -- there is no minimum amplitude required to
sustain turbulence. In contrast, \figref{amplitude} shows that for the
subcritical we are investigating, the maximum fluctuation amplitude remains
constant, for low heat fluxes, while the heat flux decreases because there is
a critical value required in order to sustain a saturated nonlinear state.
The system reconciles the requirement of finite amplitude structures while
allowing the heat flux to decrease via a reduction of the volume taken up by
structures. This nonlinear state has not been previously observed in fusion
plasmas. We further study the changes in the state of the system by
performing a structure-counting analysis in the next section, explicitly
showing the reduction in the volume taken up by the structures.
\subsection{Structure counting}
\label{sec:struc_count}
We demonstrate the change in volume taken up by finite-amplitude structures
by measuring the typical number of these structures in our simulations
as a function of the distance from threshold. While two-dimensional
structures are easily discerned by the human eye (e.g., in the near-marginal
case shown in \figref{marginal}, there are two), counting them systematically
is a non-trivial problem often encountered in computer vision and pattern
recognition applications. Detection of coherent structures has been
considered before in the context of experimental measurements of
turbulence~\cite{Muller2005,Cheng2013}; a review of various techniques is
given in~\cite{Love2007}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{density_intermediate}
\caption{}
\label{fig:intermediate2}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{density_post_filter}
\caption{}
\label{fig:post_filter}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{density_post_thresh}
\caption{}
\label{fig:post_thresh}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{struc_intermediate}
\caption{}
\label{fig:struc_intermediate}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Structure counting procedure]{
Stages of the structure counting procedure:
\subref*{fig:intermediate2} the original density-fluctuation field
[as in \figref{intermediate}];
\subref*{fig:post_filter} after the application of a Gaussian filter to
smooth the structures;
\subref*{fig:post_thresh} after the application of a 75\% threshold
function;
\subref*{fig:struc_intermediate} after setting $\delta n_i/n_i>0$
values to 1 for simplicity. The image-labelling algorithm is then
applied to \subref*{fig:struc_intermediate} and returns $19$
structures for this case.
}
\label{fig:struc_count_procedure}
\end{figure}
Structure counting can be reduced to an image-labelling, or ``segmentation'',
problem in the following way. We applied a Gaussian image filter (with a
standard deviation on the order of the grid scale) as a pre-processing step
and also removed structures below 10\% of the mean structure size as a
post-processing step. These filtering steps are justified because we are
interested in detecting intense, relatively large-scale structures, and
simply applying a threshold function can lead to single points above the
threshold scattered around the edges of structures that we are actually
interested in counting. We then set values below a certain percentile (here
75\% of the maximum amplitude) to 0 and above it to 1. The level of the
threshold function is somewhat arbitrary and the number of structures will
depend on this level, but the trend as a function of our equilibrium
parameters did not change as we increased or decreased the level of the
threshold function. Choosing too low a level often leads to many structures
being counted as only one, whereas too high a level led to only a handful of
the most intense structures being counted. While this could be acceptable
close to marginality, where we are interested in high-intensity structures
compared to low-intensity background fluctuations, this would significantly
underpredict the number of structures far from the threshold. We chose 75\%
as a reasonable compromise. After applying a threshold function, one is left
with an array of 1's representing our structures against a background of 0's.
To count these structures, we employed a general-purpose image processing
package \emph{scikit-image}~\cite{scikit-image}, which implements an
efficient labelling algorithm~\cite{Fiorio1996}, then used by us to label
connected regions. The structure-counting procedure is shown in
\figref{struc_count_procedure} where the image-labelling algorithm labelled
$19$ structures.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{nblobs_75_vs_q}
\caption[Scaling of number of structures with $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$]{
Number of structures (defined as having an amplitude above 75\% of the
maximum) versus $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$. It grows up to and slightly
beyond the experimental value $Q_i^{\exp}$. Eventually the volume is
filled with structures and their number tends to a constant. The scaling
$Q_i \propto N$ is shown for reference.
}
\label{fig:nblobs}
\end{figure}
\Figref{nblobs} shows the results of the above analysis: the number of
structures $N$ with amplitudes above the 75$^{\mathrm{th}}$ percentile versus the
ion heat flux $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$. As in \figref{amplitude}, there are two
distinct regimes: $N$ grows with $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ until the structures
have filled the simulation domain (which happens just beyond the experimental
value of the flux), whereupon $N$ tends to a constant. Again, we see that the
$\gamma_E=0$ and the $\gamma_E>0$ simulations are similar far from the
threshold. Taking Figures~\ref{fig:amplitude} and~\ref{fig:nblobs} in
combination, we have, roughly,
\begin{equation}
\frac{Q_i}{Q_{\mathrm{gB}}} \sim N {\qty(\frac{\delta n_i}{n_i})}_{\max}^2,
\label{n_amp_scaling}
\end{equation}
i.e., near the threshold, the turbulent heat flux increases because coherent
structures become more numerous (but not more intense), whereas far from the
threshold, it does so because the fluctuation amplitude increases (at a
roughly constant number of structures). This relationship is confirmed
by~\figref{n_amp_squared}, which shows $N{(\delta n_i/n_i)}_{\max}^2$ as a
function of $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$, and we see that these quantities are,
indeed, proportional to each other.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{n_amp_squared_vs_q}
\caption[$N{(\delta n_i/n_i)}_{\max}^2$ scaling with $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$]{
Confirmation of the scaling~\eqref{n_amp_scaling}, where the
red line indicates a line $\propto Q_i$. We note that simulations near
marginality are relatively difficult to saturate leading to the low
number of simulations around $Q_i^{\exp}$. However, the trend is still
clear even for those simulations.
}
\label{fig:n_amp_squared}
\end{figure}
Thus, we have identified two types of nonlinear states depending on the
distance from threshold: one dominated by coherent structures close to
the threshold, and one characterised by many interacting eddies far from the
threshold. We clearly showed that, far from the turbulence threshold,
cases with $\gamma_E=0$ (conventional ITG-driven turbulence) have similar
properties to $\gamma_E>0$ cases. In the next section we investigate the role
of zonal flows in regulating turbulence and come to the same conclusions as
above: the presence of flow shear is important close to the threshold, but
turbulence is similar for $\gamma_E=0$ and $\gamma_E>0$ cases far from the
threshold.
\subsection{Shear due to zonal flows}
\label{sec:zf_shear}
The dominant saturation mechanism for ITG-driven turbulence is thought to be
the stabilisation caused by zonal modes~\cite{Waltz1994, Lin1998, Dimits2000,
Rogers2000, Diamond2005}. Zonal modes are fluctuations in the system with
$k_y = 0$ and $k_x > 0$, i.e.,\ they have finite radial
extent, but are poloidally symmetric. They are generated by nonlinear
interactions in the system and contain sheared flows that can regulate
turbulence. Previous work~\cite{Dimits2000} on the transition to turbulence
showed that near the turbulence threshold (approached by varying the
equilibrium parameter $\kappa_T$), turbulence is regulated by strong zonal
flows, which can cause an upshift in the critical $\kappa_T$ required for a
saturated turbulent state. However, in the system under investigation, the
marginal cases seem to be dominated by the background flow shear
[see~\figref{marginal_yt}], which also has a suppressing effect on the
turbulence. Thus, in this section, we investigate the role played by zonal
flows in the turbulence regimes identified in
Sections~\ref{sec:coherent_strucs}--\ref{sec:struc_count} and show that zonal
flows do not play an important role in the near-marginal cases but become
more important far from the threshold, where their effect is comparable to,
and eventually dominate over that of the background flow shear.
In the MAST plasma we are investigating, there are two sources of shear that
may regulate turbulence: shear due to strong toroidal rotation as a result of
the injection of neutral particles by the NBI heating system, and shear due
to zonal flows which are generated by nonlinear interactions. We have already
seen that shear due to the toroidal rotation is controlled by the equilibrium
parameter $\gamma_E$, which we vary in this study. The shear due to the zonal
flows $V'_{\mathrm{ZF}}$ is calculated from \eqref{v_er} by considering only
the poloidally symmetric component, and is given by
\begin{equation}
V'_{\mathrm{ZF}} = \frac{c}{a B_{\mathrm{ref}}} \frac{q_0}{r_0}
\frac{1}{|\nabla \alpha|} \pdv[2]{\varphi_{\mathrm{ZF}}}{x},
\label{v_zf_prime}
\end{equation}
where $V'_{\mathrm{ZF}}$ is a function only of $t$ and $x$, and
$\varphi_{\mathrm{ZF}}$ is the poloidally symmetric component of $\varphi$.
To determine whether the zonal shear will dominate over $\gamma_E$ we
calculate the RMS value of the zonal shear, $\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}$:
\begin{equation}
\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}} = \left< V^{\prime 2}_{\mathrm{ZF}}\right>^{1/2}_{t,x},
\label{g_zf}
\end{equation}
where $\ensav{\cdots}{t,x}$ indicates an average over $t$ and $x$. We can
now compare $\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}$ with $\gamma_E$ to determine the relative
importance of each as a function of our equilibrium parameters.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.51\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{zf_shear_contour}
\caption{}
\label{fig:zf_shear_contour}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}{0.47\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{zf_shear_q_scatter}
\caption{}
\label{fig:zf_shear_q_scatter}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Ratio of zonal shear to background flow shear]{
\subref*{fig:zf_shear_contour} The ratio of zonal shear to background
flow shear $\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}/\gamma_E$ over the same range of
$\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$ as shown in \figref{contour_heatmap}. The
effects of zonal shear and flow shear are comparable when
$\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}/\gamma_E \sim 1$. The white region in the lower
right-hand corner indicates the region where there is no turbulence,
i.e., $Q_i=0$ (see \figref{contour_heatmap}), and the dashed black line
indicates $\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}/\gamma_E = 1$.
\subref*{fig:zf_shear_q_scatter} $\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}/\gamma_E$ as a
function of $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$. The vertical dashed line indicates
the value of the experimental heat flux and the horizontal dashed line
indicates $\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}/\gamma_E = 1$.
}
\label{fig:zf_shear}
\end{figure}
\Figref{zf_shear_contour} shows the ratio of the zonal shear to the flow
shear, $\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}/\gamma_E$, as a function of $\kappa_T$ and
$\gamma_E$ over the same parameter range as shown in
\figref{contour_heatmap}. The effects of $\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}$ and $\gamma_E$
are comparable where $\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}/\gamma_E \sim 1$, which is
indicated by the dashed line. We see
that the regime in which $\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}$ and $\gamma_E$ become comparable
occurs some distance away from the turbulence threshold. Therefore, close to
the threshold (small $\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}/\gamma_E$), we expect the shear due
to the background flow do dominate, while far from the threshold (large
$\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}/\gamma_E$), we expect the shear due to the zonal flows
to dominate.
Similar to our findings in Section~\ref{sec:struc_count},
\figref{zf_shear_contour} suggests that the change in
$\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}/\gamma_E$ is effectively a function of the
distance from the turbulence threshold because (after comparing to
\figref{contour_heatmap}) we see that regions of similar heat flux have
similar values of $\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}/\gamma_E$.
\Figref{zf_shear_q_scatter} shows this dependence explicitly:
$\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}/\gamma_E$ as a function of $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$.
The vertical dashed line indicates $Q_i^{\exp}/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ and we see
that $\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}/\gamma_E$ is small around this value. This
suggests that zonal shear plays a weaker role than $\gamma_E$ in
regulating experimentally relevant turbulence for this MAST configuration.
Therefore, near-threshold and far-from-threshold turbulence are
distinguished by the fact that $\gamma_E$ is important close to the
threshold, whereas the $\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}$ dominates far from the
turbulence threshold. Far from the threshold the turbulence is likely similar
to conventional ITG-driven turbulence in the absence of background flow
shear. This is demonstrated in \figref{zf_shear_lines} which shows
$\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}$ as a function of $\gamma_E$. We see that for low
$\gamma_E$ and/or high $\kappa_T$ (i.e., cases far from the threshold),
$\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}$ is comparable to cases where $\gamma_E=0$ and so zonal
flows are the likely mechanism for regulating turbulence in these
simulations.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{zf_shear_vs_gexb}
\caption[Zonal shear versus background flow shear]{
Zonal shear $\gamma_{\mathrm{ZF}}$ as a function of background flow
shear $\gamma_E$ showing that zonal flow regulation of turbulence is
comparable between low $\gamma_E$ (high $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$) cases
and $\gamma_E=0$ cases.
}
\label{fig:zf_shear_lines}
\end{figure}
\section{Summary}
In this chapter we performed a parameter scan in $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$
and showed that the experimental ion heat flux is consistent with equilibrium
parameters $(\kappa_T,\gamma_E)$ close to the turbulence threshold. We
demonstrated that in the presence of a background flow shear, the system
is subcritical: above a certain critical value of $\kappa_T$, and below a
critical value of $\gamma_E$, a large initial perturbation is required to
ignite turbulence. We studied the real-space structure of turbulence and
found novel features of the transition to a turbulent state in an
experimentally relevant fusion plasma when the system is
subcritical. For equilibrium parameters near the threshold, the density and
temperature fluctuations (and hence heat flux) are concentrated in
long-lived, intense coherent structures. We demonstrated that flow shear (as
opposed to zonal shear) is important at these experimentally relevant
parameters. As the equilibrium parameters $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E)$ depart
slightly from their critical values into the more strongly driven regime, the
number of these structures increases rapidly while their amplitude stays
roughly constant (in contrast to the conventional supercritical turbulence,
where the amplitude increases with $\kappa_T$ because arbitrarily
low-amplitude turbulence can be supported). Increasing $\kappa_T$ or
decreasing $\gamma_E$ further leads to the structures filling the simulation
domain and any further increase in the heat flux is caused by an increase in
fluctuation amplitude. The latter regime is similar to the conventional
plasma turbulence where zonal flows are the dominant mechanism for regulating
turbulence.
\chapter{Correlation analysis and comparison with experimental results}
\label{sec:struc_of_turb}
\section{Introduction}
In Chapter~\ref{sec:nl}, we discussed the results of our nonlinear simulations
in terms of the observed transport and identified the conditions needed to
sustain a turbulent state. In this chapter, we would like to make more
quantitative comparisons with direct experimental measurements of the turbulent
fluctuations. We are interested in doing such comparisons with experimental
measurements in order to gain confidence in the predictions made by our
simulations. Only once the numerical predictions have been extensively checked
against existing experimental data in a range of different devices, can we
attempt to make predictions of turbulence in future devices. This study is
focused on MAST, but forms an important part of the wider effort of validating
numerical models against experimental data. More broadly, we are
interested in understanding the nature of turbulence itself and how it behaves
in tokamaks as equilibrium quantities are varied, such as the flow shear and
ITG as we do in this study. Ultimately, we want to find equilibrium
configurations that maximise the fusion power and, by necessity, minimise the
turbulence. However, in order to do this, we need to understand the key drivers
of turbulence and how the turbulence responds to changes in equilibrium
parameters. It has only recently become possible to extend the study of
turbulence from the transport of particles, momentum and heat, to the
physical structure by measuring, for example, the density fluctuations. Beam
emission spectrometry is one such technique and it is with measurements from
this diagnostic that we compare our simulation predictions in this work.
The BES diagnostic on MAST infers density fluctuations on a poloidal
$(R,Z)$-plane from D$_\alpha$ emission by excited neutral particles injected by
the NBI heating system. Correlation-analysis techniques were
developed~\cite{Ghim2013} to measure the radial correlation length, $l_R$, the
poloidal correlation length, $l_Z$, and the correlation time, $\tau_c$, of
these measured density fluctuations. The results of such a correlation analysis
for the MAST discharges that we consider in this work were reported
in Ref.~\cite{Field2014}. Also reported in Ref.~\cite{Field2014} were the first
comparisons of BES measurements with global, nonlinear particle-in-cell
simulations using the NEMORB code~\cite{Jolliet2007}, which found the
following. The simulations explicitly showed that kinetic electrons, flow
shear, and collisions between plasma particles played an important role in
predicting the turbulence found in MAST -- effects that we have included. In
the outer-core region, which we consider in this work, global simulations with
the physics effects listed above did not predict a turbulent state, possibly
due to the boundary conditions, forcing fluctuations to be zero at the plasma
boundary. However, at inner radii there was some agreement between
simulations and experiment with respect to the heat flux, density fluctuation
levels, and perpendicular correlation lengths. The correlation time, on the
other hand, was found to be on average two orders of magnitude larger in the
simulations compared to the experimental measurements over the whole radius.
The inability of global gyrokinetic simulations to predict turbulence in a
region where the BES diagnostic clearly finds the plasma to be turbulent as
well as the significant overprediction of the correlation time may suggest that
the resolution requirements for simulations of MAST plasmas are higher than
those currently allowed by global simulations.
In this work, we have used local gyrokinetic
simulations because they offer two desirable features compared to
global gyrokinetic simulations: they only attempt to simulate plasma turbulence
at a single radius and as a result allow increased resolution for resolving the
turbulence, and they avoid the complications of having to speculate on the
boundary conditions in the inner core and at the plasma edge. It is the goal of
this study to evaluate the merits of local gyrokinetic simulations in
predicting the turbulence in MAST, both in terms of averaged quantities such as
transport and in quantitative comparisons of the statistics of turbulent
fluctuations.
In this chapter, we will make such quantitative comparisons between the
fluctuations predicted by our simulations and those measured by the BES
diagnostic. Before being able to make comparisons between our simulations and
experimental measurements we converted our density fluctuation data from
flux-tube geometry to a poloidal plane, further explained in
Appendix~\ref{App:real_space_transform}. We review the correlation-analysis
techniques (Section~\ref{sec:corr_overview}) and experimental results
(Section~\ref{sec:corr_exp}) in Ref.~\cite{Field2014} and then present two types of
correlation analysis of our nonlinear simulations. The first will be of GS2
density fluctuations with a ``synthetic BES diagnostic'' applied to simulate
what would be measured by a real BES diagnostic (Section~\ref{sec:corr_synth}).
We will consider the results from nonlinear simulations with values of
$(\kappa_T, \gamma_E)$ within the experimental-uncertainty range and compare
them with the experimental results. The second analysis will be of the raw GS2
density fluctuations as a function of $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$, done for our
entire parameter scan (Section~\ref{sec:corr_gs2}), emphasising the extent to
which it is the distance from the threshold rather than individual values of
$\kappa_T$ or $\gamma_E$ that determine the statistical characteristics of the
density fluctuations.
\section{Correlation analysis}
\label{sec:corr_overview}
We start by giving an overview of the correlation-analysis techniques used
in Refs.~\cite{Ghim2013,Field2014}. We will also present an alternative measurement
of the poloidal correlation length $l_Z$, taking advantage of the increased
resolution available in the poloidal direction from our simulations. While
there is no experimental estimate of the parallel correlation length
$l_\parallel$ available from the BES data, we are able to use the
three-dimensional data available from GS2 to extend the correlation analysis
to the parallel direction.
The two-point spatio-temporal correlation function is, by definition,
\begin{multline}
C(\Delta R, \Delta Z, \Delta \lambda, \Delta t) = \\
\frac{\left< \delta n_i/n_i(R, Z, \lambda, t) \delta n_i/n_i(R+\Delta R, Z+\Delta Z, \lambda+\Delta \lambda, t+\Delta t)\right>}
{{\qty[\left< \delta n_i^2/n_i^2(R, Z, \lambda, t) \right> \left<\delta n_i^2/n_i^2(R+\Delta R, Z+\Delta Z, \lambda+\Delta \lambda, t+\Delta t)\right>]}^{1/2}},
\label{corr_fn}
\end{multline}
where $\delta n_i/n_i$ is the density-fluctuation field calculated by GS2
(which has a mean of zero) and $\Delta R$, $\Delta Z$, $\Delta
\lambda$ are the radial, poloidal, and parallel separations, respectively
between the two reference points, $\Delta t$ is the time lag, and
$\left<\ldots\right>$ is an ensemble average, that is, an average over all
possible pairs of points that have the appropriate separation and time lag.
Note that the ensemble averages in the plane perpendicular to the magnetic
field are calculated at $\theta=0$, i.e., they are not averaged over
$\theta$. Note also that we divide our data in the time domain into window
of $\sim 100$--$400$~$\mu$s, and the calculated separate ensemble averages
in each time window. This allows us to estimate the variance of the
correlation parameters we calculate.
However, instead of calculating the full correlation function
\eqref{corr_fn}, we will estimate individual correlation lengths and times
(which we will define below) by performing a one-dimensional correlation
analyses separately in each direction. All of the representative correlation
functions that are plotted in the sections that follow will be for the
equilibrium parameters $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E) = (5.1, 0.16)$ over a real-space
domain of $20\times20$~cm$^2$ (see Appendix~\ref{App:real_space_transform}).
\subsection{Radial correlation length}
\label{sec:radial_corr}
The radial correlation length $l_R$ is estimated by fitting the correlation
function $C(\Delta R, \Delta Z = 0, \lambda(\theta=0), \Delta t = 0)$ with a
Gaussian function:
\begin{equation}
f_R(\Delta R) = \exp \qty[- {\qty(\frac{\Delta R}{l_R})}^2].
\label{radial_fit}
\end{equation}
Following experimental observations in, this fitting function is adopted on
the assumption that fluctuations have no wave-like structure in the radial
direction~\cite{Ghim2013,Field2014}. Unlike in the fitting functions used for
experimental data, no parameters are necessary here to account for global
offsets, usually due to large-scale, global MHD modes, which do not appear in
our simulations, where the mean density fluctuation over the whole domain is
zero. A representative example of the fitting procedure for the radial
correlation function is shown in~\figref{radial_fit}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{radial_fit}
\caption[Radial correlation function]{
A representative radial correlation function fitted with the
function~\eqref{radial_fit} (red line). The points show the correlation
function $C(\Delta R)$ averaged over $t$ and $Z$ and the shaded region
shows the associated standard deviation.
}
\label{fig:radial_fit}
\end{figure}
The points show the measured correlation function and the red line the fit
\eqref{radial_fit}. We took an average over $t$ and $Z$ and assumed that
radial correlations do not change with $t$ and $Z$ (i.e., that the system is
statistically homogeneous in time and in the poloidal direction). The shaded
region indicates the standard deviation calculated over the integrals of $t$
and $Z$ used in this averaging. We expect that $C(\Delta R) \to 0$ as $\Delta
R$ increases (and similarly for subsequent correlation functions in the other
directions) because the fluctuations have a mean of zero over the
computational domain.
\subsection{Poloidal correlation length}
\label{sec:poloidal_corr}
The poloidal correlation length is calculated by assuming wave-like
fluctuations in the poloidal direction and fitting
$C(\Delta R = 0, \Delta Z, \lambda(\theta=0), \Delta t = 0)$ with an
oscillating Gaussian function of the form
\begin{equation}
f_Z(\Delta Z) = \cos \qty(2 \pi k_Z \Delta Z)
\exp \qty[-{\qty(\frac{\Delta Z}{l_Z})}^2],
\label{poloidal_fit}
\end{equation}
where $k_Z$ is the poloidal wavenumber. References~\cite{Ghim2013,Field2014}
found that with only four poloidal channels, the BES diagnostic could not fix
$l_Z$ and $k_Z$ separately in a meaningful way. As a result, when fitting
experimental data, the wavenumber is fixed to the value $k_Z = 2 \pi / l_Z$.
In our GS2 simulations, we can have many more points in the poloidal
direction, allowing us to compare fits with $k_Z$ both as a free fitting
parameter and fixed in the way described above. \Figref{poloidal_fit} shows a
representative poloidal correlation function from our simulations along with
a fitted function~\eqref{poloidal_fit}, both with fixed $k_Z = 2 \pi / l_Z$
[\figref{poloidal_fixed_fit}] and free $k_Z$ [\figref{poloidal_free_fit}].
The red lines in each plot indicate the fit \eqref{poloidal_fit} and the
dashed lines indicate the Gaussian envelope $\exp(-(\Delta Z/l_Z))$.
We have taken an average over the variables $t$ and $R$. We see that the fit
with $k_Z$ as a free parameter approximates the correlation function better
and predicts a shorter $l_Z$. For consistency with previous work, we will
show the correlation results for both cases in Section~\ref{sec:corr_gs2}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{poloidal_fixed_fit}
\caption{}
\label{fig:poloidal_fixed_fit}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{poloidal_free_fit}
\caption{}
\label{fig:poloidal_free_fit}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Poloidal correlation function]{
Representative poloidal correlation function fitted with the
function~\eqref{poloidal_fit} (red line) keeping the poloidal wavenumber
$k_Z$ \subref*{fig:poloidal_fixed_fit} fixed to $k_Z = 2 \pi / l_Z$,
\subref*{fig:poloidal_free_fit} as a free fitting parameter. The points
in each plot show the correlation function $C(\Delta Z)$ averaged over
$t$ and $R$ and the shaded regions show the associated standard
deviation. The dashed lines indicate the Gaussian envelope $\exp(-(\Delta
Z/l_Z))$
}
\label{fig:poloidal_fit}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Correlation time}
\label{sec:time_corr}
In the presence of toroidal rotation, turbulent structures are advected in
the poloidal direction with an apparent velocity $v_Z$ given
by~\cite{Ghim2012}
\begin{equation}
v_{Z} = R \omega_0 \tan \vartheta,
\label{v_z}
\end{equation}
where $\vartheta$ is the magnetic-field pitch-angle (see
Appendix~\ref{App:real_space_transform}). Following Ref.~\cite{Ghim2012}, we
can use this to calculate the correlation time $\tau_c$ by tracking turbulent
structures as they move poloidally and measuring their temporal
decorrelation. This method assumes that the temporal decorrelation dominates
over any effects due to the finite parallel correlation length, as we will
now explain. While turbulent structures are elongated along the field lines,
they rotate rapidly in the toroidal direction. Measurements taken at a single
point (or a poloidal plane) will measure the correlation time as a
combination of two effects:
\begin{inparaenum}[(i)]
\item true decorrelation of turbulent structures in time, and
\item structures of finite parallel length moving past the measurement
point.
\end{inparaenum}
Both of these two effects will appear as structures decorrelating in time
but are indistinguishable in stationary measurements of turbulence. In order
for the true decorrelation of structures (the quantity we are interested in)
to dominate over the movement of structures past the detector
we require that~\cite{Ghim2013}
\begin{equation}
\tau_c \ll l_\parallel \cos \vartheta / R \omega_0.
\label{time_assumption}
\end{equation}
In Section~\ref{sec:pol_par_corr}, we will confirm that this condition is
indeed satisfied.
The correlation time $\tau_c$ is calculated using the so-called
``cross-correlation time delay'' technique~\cite{Durst1992, Ghim2012,
Fox2016}. Following this method, we calculate the correlation function
$C_{\Delta Z}(\Delta t) = C(\Delta R = 0, \Delta Z, \lambda(\theta=0), \Delta
t)$ for several poloidal separations $\Delta Z$, including $\Delta Z = 0$, as
shown in \figref{time_fit}. As the structures are advected poloidally, they
decorrelate and the peak of the correlation function at a given $\Delta Z$,
i.e., the value of $C_{\Delta Z}(\Delta t)$, decreases for increasing $\Delta
Z$. The correlation time $\tau_c$ is then defined as the characteristic
exponential decay time of the peaks of the correlation functions. Namely, we
fit $C_{\Delta Z}(\Delta t = \Delta t_{\mathrm{peak}})$ with the function
\begin{equation}
f_\tau(\Delta Z) =
\exp \qty[- \qty|\frac{\Delta t_{\mathrm{peak}}(\Delta Z)}{\tau_c}|],
\label{time_fit}
\end{equation}
as shown for a representative correlation function in \figref{time_fit},
where the blue lines show correlation functions $C_{\Delta Z}(\Delta t)$ for
different poloidal separations and the red line shows the fit
\eqref{time_fit}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{time_fit}
\caption[Time correlation function]{
Time correlation functions $C_{\Delta Z} (\Delta t)$ for several poloidal
separations $\Delta Z$. The points indicate the maximum value of
$C(\Delta t)$ for a given $\Delta Z$, and the red line indicates the
function~\eqref{time_fit} fitted to those points.
}
\label{fig:time_fit}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Parallel correlation length}
\label{sec:par_corr}
Since GS2 simulations supply the full 3D density-fluctuation field (unlike
BES measurements), we are able to study the parallel structure of the
turbulence. To do this, we convert the fluctuation field from the GS2
parallel coordinate $\theta$ to a real-space coordinate $\lambda(\theta)$
along the field line, as discussed in Appendix~\ref{App:real_space_transform}.
We then calculate the correlation function $C(\Delta R=0, \Delta Z=0, \Delta
\lambda, \Delta t = 0)$ and take an average over $(R, Z, t)$.
We fit the correlation function with an oscillating Gaussian function of the
form
\begin{equation}
f_\parallel(\Delta \lambda) = \cos \qty(2 \pi k_\parallel \Delta \lambda)
\exp \qty[- {\qty(\frac{\Delta \lambda}{l_\parallel})}^2],
\label{parallel_fit}
\end{equation}
where $k_\parallel$ is the parallel wavenumber. A representative example of
the fitting procedure for the radial correlation function is shown
in~\figref{parallel_fit}, where the red line indicates the fit
\eqref{parallel_fit} and the dashed line shows the Gaussian envelope
$\exp(-(\Delta \lambda/k_\parallel))$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{parallel_fit}
\caption[Parallel correlation function]{
Representative parallel correlation function fitted with the oscillating
Gaussian function~\eqref{parallel_fit} (red line). The points show the
correlation function $C(\Delta \lambda)$ averaged over $(t,R,Z)$ and the
shaded region shows the associated standard deviation. The dashed line
shows the Gaussian envelope $\exp(-(\Delta \lambda/k_\parallel))$.
}
\label{fig:parallel_fit}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Density-fluctuation amplitude}
\label{sec:rms_density}
The final simulation prediction we can compare with the experimental results
in Ref.~\cite{Field2014}, is the RMS density fluctuation at the outboard midplane
averaged over the $(t,R,Z)$:
\begin{equation}
\qty(\frac{\delta n_i}{n_i})_{\mathrm{rms}} =
\left< \frac{\delta n_i^2(t,R,Z)}{n_i^2} \right>_{t,R,Z}^{1/2}.
\label{dn_rms}
\end{equation}
\section{Experimental BES results}
\label{sec:corr_exp}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{lr_vs_r}
\caption{}
\label{fig:lr_exp}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{lz_vs_r}
\caption{}
\label{fig:lz_exp}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{tau_vs_r}
\caption{}
\label{fig:tau_exp}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{n_vs_r}
\caption{}
\label{fig:n_exp}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Experimental correlation results]{
Results of the correlation analysis of BES data from MAST discharges
\#27272, \#27268, and \#27274 combined to give correlation properties of
the turbulence as functions of $r=D/2a$. These results are the same as
those previously presented in~\cite{Field2014}. The values of the
correlation parameters were not available at $r \lesssim 0.4$, because
turbulence was suppressed in this region. The vertical dashed line
indicates the radius corresponding to the local equilibrium
configurations for which we performed our simulations.
}
\label{fig:exp_corr_results}
\end{figure}
Before applying the correlation analysis to our simulations, we review the
experimental results from MAST discharge \#27274, with which we will be
comparing, first presented in~\cite{Field2014}. As discussed in
Section~\ref{sec:exp_profiles}, MAST discharge \#27274 forms part of a set
of three discharges, which measured correlation properties over the whole
outer radius. \Figref{exp_corr_results} shows the experimental results
obtained for the radial correlation length $l_R^{\mathrm{EXP}}$, the poloidal
correlation length $l_Z^{\mathrm{EXP}}$, the correlation time
$\tau_c^{\mathrm{EXP}}$, and the RMS density fluctuations ${\qty(\delta n_i /
n_i)}^{\mathrm{EXP}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$ as functions of $r = D/2a$. The vertical
dashed line in each plot indicates the radius at which we performed our
simulations and the corresponding values with which we will compare. From
these results, we find the following (after interpolating between the
experimental data points):
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
l_R^{\mathrm{EXP}} &= 3 \pm 0.4~\mathrm{cm}, \\
l_Z^{\mathrm{EXP}} &= 14.06 \pm 0.09~\mathrm{cm}, \\
\tau_c^{\mathrm{EXP}} &= 3.2 \pm 0.4~\mu\mathrm{s}, \\
{\qty(\frac{\delta n_i}{n_i})}^{\mathrm{EXP}}_{\mathrm{rms}} &= 0.0214 \pm 0.0006.
\label{exp_results}
\end{split}
\end{align}
We will be comparing the correlation parameters calculated from our
simulations in the following sections to those in \eqref{exp_results}.
\section{Correlation analysis with synthetic diagnostic}
\label{sec:corr_synth}
In order to compare our simulations with the BES measurements, a number of
data transformations were necessary. We mapped our density fluctuations
``measured'' in the outboard midplane (at $\theta = 0$) from GS2 $(x, y)$
coordinates onto a poloidal $(R,Z)$-plane as explained in
Appendix~\ref{App:real_space_transform}. We also transformed from the
rotating plasma frame, the frame in which our simulations were performed, to
the laboratory frame, as also explained in
Appendix~\ref{App:real_space_transform}. We then applied a synthetic
diagnostic to our density fluctuations, including the point-spread functions
(described in Section~\ref{sec:bes}) to model instrumentation effects and
atomic physics, to add artificial noise similar to that found in the
experiment, and to map the density-fluctuation field onto an $8 \times 4$
grid similar to the arrangement of BES channels. An important feature of
the analysis of experimental data is the presence of a filter to remove
high-energy radiation present in the experiment. We have included this filter
for consistency in the analysis of synthetic data produced applying the
synthetic diagnostic to our simulation data. The results without this filter
are presented and discussed in Appendix~\ref{App:no_spike}.
\Figref{synth_corr_results} shows the radial correlation length
$l_R^{\,\mathrm{SYNTH}}$, poloidal correlation length
$l_Z^{\,\mathrm{SYNTH}}$, correlation time $\tau_c^{\,\mathrm{SYNTH}}$, and
RMS density fluctuation $\qty(\delta n_i /
n_i)^{\,\mathrm{SYNTH}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$ calculated from our simulations with
the synthetic diagnostic applied using the correlation analysis described in
Section~\ref{sec:corr_overview}. These values should agree with the
experimentally measured correlation parameters in \eqref{exp_results}
because the equilibrium parameters $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$ at which the
results shown in \figref{synth_corr_results} were obtained are strictly
within the experimental-uncertainty range of these parameters. The dashed
lines and shaded areas in \figref{synth_corr_results} indicate the
experimental values and associated errors given in \eqref{exp_results} . The
circled points indicate the simulations that matched the experimental level
of heat flux (listed in Table~\ref{tab:exp_match_sims}).
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{lr_vs_tprim_w_flow_w_sf}
\caption{}
\label{fig:lr_synth}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{lz_vs_tprim_w_flow_w_sf}
\caption{}
\label{fig:lz_synth}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{tau_vs_tprim_w_flow_w_sf}
\caption{}
\label{fig:tau_synth}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{n_vs_tprim_w_flow_w_sf}
\caption{}
\label{fig:n_synth}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Correlation parameters of synthetic GS2 data]{
Comparison of correlation parameters obtained via synthetic BES
measurements of GS2-simulated density field:
\subref*{fig:lr_synth} radial correlation length $l_R^{\mathrm{SYNTH}}$
(Section~\ref{sec:radial_corr}),
\subref*{fig:lz_synth} poloidal correlation length $l_Z^{\mathrm{SYNTH}}$
(Section~\ref{sec:poloidal_corr}),
\subref*{fig:tau_synth} correlation time $\tau_c^{\mathrm{SYNTH}}$
(Section~\ref{sec:time_corr}), and
\subref*{fig:n_synth} RMS fluctuation amplitude $\qty( \delta n_i /
n_i)^{\,\mathrm{SYNTH}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$ (Section~\ref{sec:rms_density})
as functions of $\kappa_T$ and for several values of $\gamma_E$ within
experimental uncertainty. The circled points indicate the simulations
match match the experimental heat flux, given in
Table~\ref{tab:exp_match_sims}. The dashed lines indicate the
experimental values and the shaded areas the associated error at $r =
0.8$ obtained from interpolating between experimental measurements seen
in \figref{exp_corr_results}, which correspond to the local equilibrium
configuration studied in these simulations.
}
\label{fig:synth_corr_results}
\end{figure}
Examining \figref{lr_synth}, we see that the values of
$l_R^{\,\mathrm{SYNTH}}$ are clustered around $2$~cm and below the
experimental BES measurement of $3\pm0.4$~cm (see Section~\ref{sec:corr_exp}).
According to the BES specifications~\cite{Field2009}, the approximate
resolution limit in the radial and poloidal directions is $\sim2$~cm,
the physical separation between BES channels. More recent work studying
the measurement effect of the PSFs, concluded that the radial resolution limit
can be between $2$ and $4$~cm depending on the orientation of the PSFs for a
given configuration~\cite{Fox2016}. It is therefore likely that the results
shown in \figref{lr_synth} simply confirm the radial resolution limit
of the experimental analysis and the true value of $l_R$ may be lower than
2~cm (as suggested by \figref{radial_fit}). We will confirm this in
Section~\ref{sec:corr_gs2}, where we consider the correlation properties of
the raw GS2 density fluctuations.
Figures~\ref{fig:lz_synth}--\subref{fig:n_synth} give $l_Z^{\,\mathrm{SYNTH}}
=$~$10$--$15$~cm, $\tau_c^{\,\mathrm{SYNTH}} =$~$2$--$15$~$\mu$s, and $\qty(
\delta n_i / n_i)^{\,\mathrm{SYNTH}}_{\mathrm{rms}} \sim$~$0.005$--$0.03$. We
see that these correlation parameters match experimental measurements for
certain combinations of $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$. The values of
$l_Z^{\,\mathrm{SYNTH}}$ are scattered around the experimental value
$l_Z^{\,\mathrm{EXP}} = 14.06\pm0.09$~cm, showing no clear trend. While none
of the cases that match the experimental heat flux (circled cases) match
$l_Z^{\,\mathrm{EXP}}$, there are several simulations within the experimental
uncertainty ranges of $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$ that do match.
Similarly, there are several values of $\tau_c^{\,\mathrm{SYNTH}}$ that match
$\tau_c^{\,\mathrm{EXP}}$, including two cases that match the experimental
level of heat flux. This is an important improvement over previous nonlinear
gyrokinetic simulations of this MAST discharge~\cite{Field2014}, which
overpredicted $\tau_c^{\,\mathrm{SYNTH}}$ by two orders of magnitude.
Examining \figref{n_synth}, we see that $\qty( \delta n_i /
n_i)^{\,\mathrm{SYNTH}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$ increases with increasing
$\kappa_T$ or decreasing $\gamma_E$, and that increasing $\gamma_E$ leads
to a increase in the value of $\kappa_T$ required to achieve the same $\qty(
\delta n_i / n_i)^{\,\mathrm{SYNTH}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$. The latter is
consistent with \figref{q_vs_tprim}, which showed that increasing $\gamma_E$
shifted the nonlinear turbulence threshold to higher $\kappa_T$. While
\figref{n_synth} shows that there is agreement between $\qty( \delta n_i /
n_i)^{\,\mathrm{SYNTH}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$ and $\qty( \delta n_i /
n_i)^{\,\mathrm{EXP}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$ at certain combinations of $(\kappa_T,
\gamma_E)$, we see that the circled cases, representing simulations that
match the experimental heat flux, have values of $\qty( \delta n_i /
n_i)^{\,\mathrm{SYNTH}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$ well below $\qty( \delta n_i /
n_i)^{\,\mathrm{EXP}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$. This may suggest that some effects are
missing from the synthetic diagnostic procedure. For example, a more
comprehensive analysis could be performed by translating both density
\emph{and} temperature fluctuations to fluctuating emission
intensity~\cite{Holland2009}. We note that this discrepancy between
simulation and experimental density fluctuation measurements has been
observed in previous BES diagnostic
studies~\cite{Holland2009,Shafer2012,Gorler2014}, and so further work is
clearly necessary.
One phenomenon that was not present in our simulations but is present in the
experiment is high-energy radiation (e.g., neutron, gamma ray, or hard X-ray)
impinging on the BES detectors. These photons cause high-amplitude spikes in
the time series, which are typically confined to a single detector channel
and, therefore, uncorrelated with other channels. These radiation spikes then
give rise to large auto-correlations at zero time delay, which are unrelated
to the turbulent field that is being measured. A numerical ``spike filter''
is normally used to remove radiation spikes by identifying changes above a
certain threshold between one time point and the next, and replacing the
high-intensity value with the value of a neighbouring point~\cite{Field2012,
Fox2016a}. This ``spike filter'' is an important component of the
experimental analysis of BES data and, while our simulations do not include
such sources of radiation, we have included it in the analysis of our
simulated density fluctuations for consistency with experimental analysis.
For completeness, the results without the ``spike filter'' are given in
Appendix~\ref{App:no_spike}. The results show little difference to those with
the ``spike filter'' except for the value of $l_Z$. We found that in some
cases, fast-moving structures in the poloidal direction (especially the
long-lived structures found in our simulations close to the turbulence
threshold) were removed by the ``spike'' filter and therefore did not
contribute to the poloidal correlation function, resulting in a drop in
$l_Z$. In particular, \figref{lz_bes_ns} in Appendix~\ref{App:no_spike} shows
that $l_Z$ increased significantly in marginal cases compared to the results
with the ``spike filter'', which may be dominated by coherent structures,
since structures were no longer removed by the ``spike filter''.
From the above results we can conclude that local gyrokinetic simulations are
a reasonable approximation to the experimental turbulence. We showed that all
correlation parameters apart from $l_R^{\,\mathrm{EXP}}$ show reasonable
agreement with the experimental measurements within the
experimental-uncertainty ranges. This shows that from the point of view of
turbulence measured by the BES diagnostic, the experimental turbulence and the
synthetic turbulence are comparable.
Unlike the experiment, we have the raw density fluctuations, as calculated by
GS2. In the next section we will repeat (and extend) the correlation analysis
presented in this section for the raw density fluctuations.
\section{Correlation analysis of raw GS2 data}
\label{sec:corr_gs2}
Having considered the structure of turbulence processed through a synthetic
BES diagnostic, we now want to investigate the raw GS2 density fluctuations,
which will allow us to
\begin{inparaenum}[(i)]
\item study the (distorting) effect of the synthetic diagnostic, \item
study the parallel structure using GS2 data along the field line, and \item
consider our entire parameter scan to understand how the structure of
turbulence in MAST might change with the equilibrium parameters
$\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$.
\end{inparaenum}
This extends the previous analysis and comparison with simulations performed
for this MAST discharge~\cite{Field2014}, which only considered for
equilibrium parameters for a single equilibrium configuration and simulations
with a synthetic diagnostic applied.
\subsection{Correlation parameters within experimental uncertainty}
We start by considering the correlation analysis results for simulations
with values of $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$ within the experimental
uncertainty. The only operations applied to the raw density-fluctuation field
output by GS2 are the transformation to the laboratory frame using
equation~\eqref{lab_transform} and the transformation from the GS2 parallel
coordinate $\theta$ to the real-space coordinate $\lambda$, as described in
Appendix~\ref{App:real_space_transform}. Our correlation analysis is performed
over a square $(R,Z)$-plane $20\times20$~cm$^2$ in size, located at the centre of
our computational domain (see \figref{marginal_rz}). We do this to analyse a
region of similar size to the region probed by the BES diagnostic and also to
avoid the real-space remapping effect at the edges of the radial domain
inherent to the GS2 implementation of flow shear (see
Section~\ref{sec:flow_shear}).
\subsubsection{Correlation parameters}
\Figref{gs2_corr_results1} shows the radial correlation length
$l_R^{\mathrm{GS2}}$, the poloidal correlation length $l_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}}$,
correlation time $\tau_c^{\mathrm{GS2}}$, and RMS density fluctuation
${\qty(\delta n_i / n_i)}^{\mathrm{GS2}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$ calculated for our GS2
density-fluctuation field. The results shown in \figref{gs2_corr_results1}
are for a range of values of $\kappa_T$ and for $\gamma_E = [0.14, 0.16,
0.18]$, with circled points describing the simulations that match the
experimental value of the heat flux. The results are as follows.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{lr_gs2_vs_tprim}
\caption{}
\label{fig:lr_gs2}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{lz_gs2_vs_tprim}
\caption{}
\label{fig:lz_gs2_fixed}
\end{subfigure}
\\
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{tau_lab_gs2_vs_tprim}
\caption{}
\label{fig:tau_gs2}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{n_gs2_vs_tprim}
\caption{}
\label{fig:n_gs2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Correlation parameters for raw GS2 density fluctuations]{
Correlation parameters calculated for raw GS2 density fluctuations
for $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E)$ within the region of experimental uncertainty
indicated in \figref{contour_heatmap}:
\subref*{fig:lr_gs2} radial correlation length $l_R^{\mathrm{GS2}}$
(Section~\ref{sec:radial_corr}),
\subref*{fig:lz_gs2_fixed} poloidal correlation length
$l_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ keeping $k_y$ fixed to $k_y = 2 \pi / l_Z$
(Section~\ref{sec:poloidal_corr}),
\subref*{fig:tau_gs2} correlation time $\tau_c^{\mathrm{GS2}}$
(Section~\ref{sec:time_corr}), and
\subref*{fig:n_gs2} RMS density fluctuations ${\qty(\delta n_i /
n_i)}^{\mathrm{GS2}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$ (Section~\ref{sec:rms_density}).
}
\label{fig:gs2_corr_results1}
\end{figure}
We find that the radial correlation length is $l_R^{\mathrm{GS2}} \sim$
$1$--$1.5$~cm, increasing with $\kappa_T$ and decreasing with $\gamma_E$.
This suggests that $l_R^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ has a tendency to increase with
$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$, as we will show explicitly later. In comparison with
the synthetic diagnostic results shown in \figref{lr_synth}, where
$l_R^{\mathrm{SYNTH}} \sim 2$~cm, the true radial correlation length of the
turbulence $l_R^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ is below $2$~cm and, therefore, below the
resolution threshold of the BES diagnostic (discussed in
Section~\ref{sec:corr_synth}).
\Figref{lz_gs2_fixed} shows that the poloidal
correlation length is $l_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}} \sim$ $13$--$20$~cm, keeping the
poloidal wavenumber $k_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ fixed to $k_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}} = 2 \pi
/ l_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ (giving $k_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}} \sim$~$30$--$50$~m$^{-1}$).
In contrast to $l_R^{\mathrm{GS2}}$, we see that $l_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}}$
decreases rapidly as $\kappa_T$ is increased from its value at the turbulence
threshold.
The correlation time [\figref{tau_gs2}] does not vary significantly with
$\kappa_T$ or $\gamma_E$ and is in the range $\tau_c^{\mathrm{GS2}}\sim$
$1$--$6$~$\mu$s.
Finally, \figref{n_gs2} shows that ${\qty(\delta n_i /
n_i)}^{\mathrm{GS2}}_{\mathrm{rms}} \sim$~$0.01$--$0.08$ and increases with
increasing $\kappa_T$ or decreasing $\gamma_E$, i.e., has an upward tendency
as heat flux increases.
\subsubsection{Comparisons between experimental and GS2 correlation properties}
We have presented the correlation parameters measured
\begin{inparaenum}[(i)]
\item by the BES diagnostic in Section~\ref{sec:corr_exp},
\item from GS2 density fluctuations with the synthetic diagnostic applied
in Section~\ref{sec:corr_synth}, and
\item from the raw GS2 density fluctuations.
\end{inparaenum}
We show the results from all these analyses in Table~\ref{tab:corr_summary}.
We can summarise the comparison between
simulation results and experimental measurements as follows. Comparing the
results of the correlation analysis of the GS2 density fluctuations with the
experimental measurements, we see that the all the experimental values,
except for the radial correlation length $l_R$, fall within the ranges found
for the simulation results. This is particularly important in the case of
$\tau_c$, which was significantly overestimated in the previous modelling
effort for this MAST discharge~\cite{Field2014}. It is clear that the
correlation parameters vary with the equilibrium parameters and there is no
single simulation, i.e., no single combination of $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E)$, that
perfectly matches the BES measurements in all four parameters (see
\figref{gs2_corr_results1}), even for the correlation parameters where there
is overlap between the experimental value and the simulation ranges.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Summary of results for the correlation parameters $l_R$, $l_Z$,
$\tau_c$, and $(\delta n_i / n_i)_{\mathrm{rms}}$ from experimental BES
measurements (EXP), from the correlation analysis of GS2 density
fluctuations with synthetic diagnostic applied (SYNTH) using an identical
correlation analysis to that used on the BES data, and from the
correlation analysis of raw GS2 density fluctuations (GS2).
}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c}
\toprule
Parameter & EXP & SYNTH & GS2 \\
\midrule
$l_R$ (cm) & $3 \pm 0.4$ & 2 & 1--1.5 \\
$l_Z$ (cm) & $14.06 \pm 0.09$ & 10--15 & 13--20 \\
$\tau_c$ ($\mu$s) & $3.2 \pm 0.4$ & 2--15 & 1--6 \\
$(\delta n_i / n_i)_{\mathrm{rms}}$ & $0.0214 \pm 0.0006$ &
0.005--0.03 & 0.01--0.08 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:corr_summary}
\end{table}
Considering the difference between the GS2 density fluctuations with and
without the synthetic diagnostic gives us an indication of the effect of the
PSFs on the measurement of turbulence correlation properties. Given that
the value of $l_R$ measured from the raw GS2 density fluctuations is below
the approximate resolution threshold, it is unclear what effect the PSFs have
on the radial correlation length $l_R$. We see from
Table~\ref{tab:corr_summary} that the ranges of values of the poloidal
correlation length $l_Z$ are comparable in the SYNTH and GS2 cases. However,
\figref{lz_synth} shows that, with the synthetic diagnostic applied, we do
not see the clear trends versus $\kappa_T$ that we see in
\figref{lz_gs2_fixed}. This may be due to the limited poloidal resolution,
which can resolve the measured correlation lengths, but is not sensitive
enough to recover the trend of decreasing $l_Z$ with $\kappa_T$ seen in
\figref{lz_gs2_fixed}. The measurement of the correlation time $\tau_c$ is,
again, less certain in the case of the correlation analysis of density
fluctuations with a synthetic diagnostic applied, but there is reasonable
agreement with the correlation time measured from the raw GS2 density
fluctuations. Finally, the application of the synthetic
diagnostic leads to a reduction of roughly $50$\% of the RMS fluctuation
amplitude, i.e., from ${(\delta n_i / n_i)}^{\mathrm{GS2}}_{\mathrm{rms}}
\sim$~$0.01$--$0.08$ for the raw density fluctuations to ${(\delta
n_i/n_i)}^{\mathrm{SYNTH}}_{\mathrm{rms}}~\sim$~$0.005$--$0.03$. This
observation is consistent with a recent detailed analysis of the effect of
PSFs on the measurement of MAST turbulence using a subset of GS2 simulations
found in this work~\cite{Fox2016}.
\subsubsection{Poloidal and parallel correlation parameters}
\label{sec:pol_par_corr}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{lz_free_gs2_vs_tprim}
\caption{}
\label{fig:lz_gs2_free}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{kz_free_gs2_vs_tprim}
\caption{}
\label{fig:kz_gs2}
\end{subfigure}
\\
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{lpar_gs2_vs_tprim}
\caption{}
\label{fig:lpar_gs2}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{kpar_gs2_vs_tprim}
\caption{}
\label{fig:kpar_gs2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Correlation parameters for raw GS2 density fluctuations (cont'd)]{
Correlation parameters calculated for raw GS2 density fluctuations
for $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E)$ within the region of experimental uncertainty
indicated in \figref{contour_heatmap}:
\subref*{fig:lz_gs2_free} poloidal correlation length
$l_{Z,\mathrm{free}}^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ with $k_y$ as a free fitting
parameter,
\subref*{fig:kz_gs2} poloidal wavenumber
$k_{Z,\mathrm{free}}^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ (Section~\ref{sec:poloidal_corr}),
\subref*{fig:lpar_gs2} parallel correlation length
$l_{\parallel}^{\mathrm{GS2}}$, and
\subref*{fig:kpar_gs2} parallel wavenumber $k_{\parallel}^{\mathrm{GS2}}$
(Section~\ref{sec:par_corr}).
}
\label{fig:gs2_corr_results2}
\end{figure}
We now consider two further diagnostics, which were not available to us
experimentally: the poloidal and parallel correlation lengths and wavenumbers
calculated as independent fitting parameters to the corresponding correlation
functions (see Sections~\ref{sec:poloidal_corr} and~\ref{sec:par_corr}). As
explained in Section~\ref{sec:poloidal_corr}, the higher poloidal resolution
of GS2 data compared to the experimental BES measurements allows us to fit
the poloidal correlation function with $l_Z$ and $k_Z$ as independent fitting
parameters. In addition, GS2 predicts density fluctuations in the parallel
direction allowing us to calculate parallel correlation functions.
Figures~\ref{fig:lz_gs2_free} and \subref{fig:kz_gs2} show the
result of such fitting: $l_{Z,\mathrm{free}}^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ and
$k_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ versus $\kappa_T$. As already anticipated by
\figref{poloidal_fit}, we see a roughly $50$\% decrease in
$l_{Z,\mathrm{free}}^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ compared to $l_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}}$
[\figref{lz_gs2_fixed}], from $13$--$20$~cm to $7$--$10$~cm, again decreasing
as $\kappa_T$ increases or $\gamma_E$ decreases. The value of
$k_{Z,\mathrm{free}}^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ is in the range $35$--$45$~m$^{-1}$ --
comparable to one obtained via fitting the procedure where $k_Z = 2\pi/l_Z$.
Regardless of the fitting method, \figref{lz_gs2_fixed} and
\figref{lz_gs2_free} show a similar dependence of $l_Z$ on $\kappa_T$ and
$\gamma_E$.
Currently the BES diagnostic on MAST is not capable of determining both $l_Z$
and $k_Z$, but these estimates may be used for future comparisons between
experimental measurements and numerical results if higher-resolution BES
measurements become available. Similarly there is currently no diagnostic on
MAST capable of measuring the parallel correlation length, but our
estimates may guide future attempts at designing diagnostics to measure it.
The results of the parallel correlation analysis, given in
\figref{lpar_gs2} and \subref{fig:kpar_gs2}, are the values
$l_\parallel^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ and $k_\parallel^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ versus
$\kappa_T$. We see that $l_\parallel^{\mathrm{GS2}} \sim$~$6$--$12$~m and
decreases with increasing $\kappa_T$ and decreasing $\gamma_E$. Based on this
measurement of the parallel correlation length, it is clear that the
turbulence is highly anisotropic, i.e., $l_\parallel \gg l_\perp$, as it is
expected to be~\cite{Abel2013}.
Using the measurement of $l_\parallel^{\mathrm{GS2}}$, we can return to, and
confirm, the assumption upon which the calculation of $\tau_c$ depends. In
Section~\ref{sec:time_corr}, we assumed that reliably estimating the
correlation time depends on the temporal decorrelation dominating over
effects due to the finite parallel correlation length
[see~\eqref{time_assumption}]. Using the value of $l_\parallel$ above, we can
estimate that $l_\parallel \cos \vartheta / u_\phi \sim$ $80$--$160$~$\mu$s,
where we have used $R = 1.32$ m, $\omega = 4.71 \times 10^4$
$\mathrm{s}^{-1}$, and $\vartheta \approx 0.6$. This confirms that $\tau_c$
is smaller than $l_\parallel \cos \vartheta / u_\phi$ by more than an order
of magnitude and that the time correlation analysis is valid in this MAST
configuration.
\subsubsection{Comparison between linear and nonlinear time scales}
\label{sec:time_scales}
With the knowledge of the correlation parameters, we can return to the
comparison of the transient-growth time $t_0$ and nonlinear time
$\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$ discussed in section~\ref{sec:subcritical}. In
particular, we want to determine one of the two conditions for the onset of
subcritical turbulence [equation~\eqref{schek_t0}] proposed
in Ref.~\cite{Schekochihin2012}. We also follow Ref.~\cite{Field2014} and compare
$\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$ with the correlation time of the turbulence $\tau_c$ and
compare with the corresponding experimental results.
The non-zonal nonlinear interaction time is estimated to be~\cite{Ghim2013}:
\begin{equation}
\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}^{-1} =
\frac{v_{\mathrm{th}i} \rho_i}{l_R l_Z} \frac{T_e}{T_i}
\qty(\frac{\delta n_i}{n_i})_{\mathrm{rms}},
\label{tau_nl}
\end{equation}
where we have assumed $l_Z \approx l_y$ (where $l_y$ is the correlation
length in the binormal direction as defined in~\cite{Ghim2013}) because $l_Z =
l_y \cos \vartheta$, where $\vartheta$ is the magnetic field pitch-angle (see
\figref{pitch_angle}), and $\cos \vartheta \sim 1$ for this magnetic
equilibrium. The transient-growth time $t_0$ was calculated from linear
simulations and plotted in
\figref{N_and_t0_16}, showing that, at ion scales, the longest transient
growth occurred at $k_y \rho_i \sim 0.1$. \Figref{tnl_t0} shows
$\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ versus $t_0$ (at $k_y \rho_i = 0.1$) for
all simulations with $\gamma_E > 0$, where the dashed line indicates
$\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}^{\mathrm{GS2}} = t_0$. We see that the majority of
simulations are below the line defined by $\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}^{\mathrm{GS2}}
= t_0$, showing that the condition for the onset of turbulence given
by~\eqref{schek_t0} is approximately true, i.e., that $t_0 \gtrsim
\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{tau_nl_vs_t0}
\caption{}
\label{fig:tnl_t0}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{tau_nl_vs_tauc}
\caption{}
\label{fig:tnl_tauc}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Comparison of linear and nonlinear time scales]{
\subref*{fig:tnl_t0} Nonlinear interaction time of the raw density
fluctuations $\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}^{\mathrm{GS2}}$, calculated
using~\eqref{tau_nl}, versus the transient-growth time $t_0$.
We have taken $t_0$ at $k_y \rho_i = 0.1$, where $t_0$ is largest (see
\figref{N_and_t0_16}). We show all simulations in our parameter scan with
$\gamma_E>0$.
\subref*{fig:tnl_tauc} $\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$ versus $\tau_c$ for
the correlation parameters calculated from the raw GS2 density
fluctuations (GS2), from density fluctuations with the synthetic
diagnostic applied (SYNTH), and from experimental measurements (EXP).
The cases shown are for values of $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E)$ within
experimental uncertainty and the circled simulations indicate the
simulations that match the experimental heat flux. The dashed lines in
each plot indicate where the time scales are equal.
}
\label{fig:time_scales}
\end{figure}
Ref.~\cite{Field2014} compares $\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$ with the
turbulence correlation time $\tau_c$, both calculated from experimental
measurements, and provides another possible point of comparison using the
results from our correlation analysis of raw GS2 density fluctuations.
\Figref{tnl_tauc} shows $\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$ versus $\tau_c$ for
nonlinear simulations with values of $(\kappa_T, \gamma_E)$ within
experimental uncertainty. The values of $\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$ were calculated
from correlation parameters of raw GS2 density fluctuations (GS2), from
correlation parameters calculated from GS2 density fluctuations with a
synthetic diagnostic applied (SYNTH), and from the experimental BES
measurements at $r=0.8$ (EXP). The dashed line indicates a line defined by
$\tau_{\mathrm{NL}} = \tau_c$. First, we see that $\tau_{\mathrm{NL}} >
\tau_c$ for both the GS2 and SYNTH cases, consistent with the experimental
value: the red triangle at approximately $(\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}, \tau_c) =
(3, 2 \times 10^2)$. Secondly, we see that $\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$ for the raw
GS2 density fluctuations tends to be below the experimental value, whereas
the SYNTH cases are comparable. The results shown in \figref{tnl_tauc} are
consistent with the experimental results in~\cite{Field2014} that showed
$\tau_{\mathrm{NL}} > \tau_c$ for this and other experimental cases, and so
gives us further confidence in the ability of GS2 to predict the properties
of turbulence in MAST. However, we can also conclude from \figref{tnl_tauc}
that $\tau_{\mathrm{NL}} \gg \tau_c$ in all cases, with $\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$
being up to three orders of magnitude larger in some cases. The value of
$\tau_c$ is measured from the turbulence itself, and so \figref{tnl_tauc}
suggests that the estimate of $\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$ \eqref{tau_nl} can
significantly overestimate the actual interaction time, given that it does
not make sense to consider the interaction of eddies (over a time scale
$\tau_{\mathrm{NL}}$) that have already decorrelated (over a much shorted
time scale $\tau_c$).
\subsection{Correlation parameters versus $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$}
The correlation analysis results in Figures~\ref{fig:gs2_corr_results1}
and~\ref{fig:gs2_corr_results2}, in particular $l_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}}$, $(
\delta n_i / n_i)^{\mathrm{GS2}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$, and
$l_\parallel^{\mathrm{GS2}}$, show similar trends versus $\kappa_T$ for
different values of $\gamma_E$. As we showed in \figref{contour_heatmap},
increasing $\kappa_T$ or decreasing $\gamma_E$ effectively amounts to
controlling the distance from the turbulence threshold. Furthermore, our
investigations of the transition to turbulence (see~\cite{VanWyk2016} and
Section~\ref{sec:subcritical}) and the effect of flow shear on its
structure~\cite{Fox2016a} suggest that the key determining factor is the
distance from the threshold. This is most conveniently parametrised by the
ion heat flux $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$. Here we describe the results of our
correlation analysis of raw GS2 density fluctuations as a function of this
parameter.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{lr_q_scatter}
\caption{}
\label{fig:lr_q}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{lz_q_scatter}
\caption{}
\label{fig:lz_q}
\end{subfigure}
\\
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{tau_lab_q_scatter}
\caption{}
\label{fig:tau_q}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{n_q_scatter}
\caption{}
\label{fig:n_q}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Correlation parameters for GS2 density fluctuations versus
$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$]{
Correlation parameters calculated for raw GS2 density fluctuations
for the entire parameter scan as a function of $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$:
\subref*{fig:lr_gs2} radial correlation length $l_R^{\mathrm{GS2}}$
(Section~\ref{sec:radial_corr}),
\subref*{fig:lz_gs2_fixed} poloidal correlation length
$l_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ keeping $k_y$ fixed to $k_y = 2 \pi / l_Z$
(Section~\ref{sec:poloidal_corr}),
\subref*{fig:tau_gs2} correlation time $\tau_c^{\mathrm{GS2}}$
(Section~\ref{sec:time_corr}), and
\subref*{fig:n_gs2} RMS density fluctuations $(\delta n_i /
n_i)^{\mathrm{GS2}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$ (Section~\ref{sec:rms_density}),
where the dashed line indicates the scaling \eqref{q_scaling}.
}
\label{fig:gs2_q_scatter1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{lz_free_q_scatter}
\caption{}
\label{fig:lz_free_q}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{kz_free_q_scatter}
\caption{}
\label{fig:kz_free_q}
\end{subfigure}
\\
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{lpar_q_scatter}
\caption{}
\label{fig:lpar_q}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{kpar_q_scatter}
\caption{}
\label{fig:kpar_q}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[Correlation parameters for GS2 density fluctuations versus
$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ (cont'd)]{
Correlation parameters calculated for raw GS2 density fluctuations
for the entire parameter scan as a function of $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$:
\subref*{fig:lz_gs2_free} poloidal correlation length
$l_{Z,\mathrm{free}}^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ with $k_y$ as a free fitting
parameter, and
\subref*{fig:kz_gs2} poloidal wavenumber
$k_{Z,\mathrm{free}}^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ (Section~\ref{sec:poloidal_corr}),
\subref*{fig:lpar_gs2} parallel correlation length
$l_{\parallel}^{\mathrm{GS2}}$, and
\subref*{fig:kpar_gs2} parallel wavenumber
$k_{\parallel}^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ (Section~\ref{sec:par_corr}). The dashed
line in \subref*{fig:lpar_gs2} indicates a line of $l_\parallel \sim qR$
(see main text).
}
\label{fig:gs2_q_scatter2}
\end{figure}
Figures~\ref{fig:gs2_q_scatter1} and~\ref{fig:gs2_q_scatter2} show the
correlation parameters from Figures~\ref{fig:gs2_corr_results1}
and~\ref{fig:gs2_corr_results2} as functions of $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ for our
entire parameter scan, including $\gamma_E = 0$. These figures clearly show
that it is distance from threshold that determines the structure of
turbulence and characterise this structure for realistic MAST configuration
and for a large range of $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$. We start by discussing the
$\gamma_E>0$ cases, which we can characterise as follows.
We see a roughly monotonic increase in the radial correlation length
$l_R^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ [\figref{lr_q}], which is consistent with an increasing
$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ because the formation of larger radial structures is
one way the turbulence can transport heat more effectively.
\Figref{lz_q} [along with figures~\ref{fig:lz_free_q}
and~\subref{fig:kz_free_q}] shows the poloidal correlation length
$l_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ decreasing (and the corresponding wavenumber
$k_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ increasing) with increasing $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$.
Again, this is consistent with an increasing $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$, where
structures which are poloidally thin (large $k_Z$) are the most efficient at
transporting heat out of the plasma, according to~\eqref{q_scaling} (given
$k_Z \propto k_y$). However, an increase in amplitude may also lead to
increased heat transport and so radially elongated and poloidally thin
turbulent structures are not necessarily expected for turbulence in general.
\Figref{lz_q} shows that $l_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ decreases to roughly $14$~cm
for $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}} \sim O(10)$ and possibly starts \emph{increasing}
again for $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}} \sim O(100)$. Theoretical and numerical
estimates of the scaling of $l_Z$ far from the turbulence threshold
suggested that $l_Z \sim q \kappa_T$~\cite{Barnes2011}. While our data shows
that the value of $l_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ increases at large
$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$, further simulations at higher $\kappa_T$ are necessary
to confirm whether our simulations adhere to this scaling.
The RMS density fluctuations $(\delta n_i /
n_i)^{\mathrm{GS2}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$ [\figref{n_q}] increase as
$(Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}})^{1/2}$ far from threshold, as expected from the
scaling \eqref{q_scaling}. However, in contrast to the results in
\figref{amplitude}, we do not see a flattening of $( \delta n_i /
n_i)^{\mathrm{GS2}}_{\mathrm{rms}}$ at low $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ (as in
\figref{amplitude}, where we plotted the \emph{maximum} amplitude), for
$\gamma_E>0$ simulations. This is due to the relatively little volume taken
up by the coherent structures and, hence, their small contribution to the RMS
value. We verified this by calculating the RMS density fluctuations while
excluding varying amounts of the turbulence structures (near the threshold)
and found that the RMS value did not change very much, showing that for the
cases near the threshold the RMS value is dominated by the low-amplitude
density fluctuations.
Finally, we see that the parallel correlation length
$l_\parallel^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ [\figref{lpar_q}] decreases as the system is
taken away from the turbulence threshold. Estimates of $l_\parallel$ for
strongly driven ITG turbulence~\cite{Barnes2011} suggested that $l_\parallel$
should be proportional to the connection length, i.e., $l_\parallel \sim \pi qR$.
This estimate is indicated by the dashed line in \figref{lpar_q}, and we see
that, indeed, $l_\parallel$ is of the order of the connection length.
We have highlighted cases for which $\gamma_E=0$ (red) and $\gamma_E>0$
(black) in \figsref{gs2_q_scatter1}{gs2_q_scatter2} to highlight two
important features of sheared versus unsheared turbulence previously
discussed in Section~\ref{sec:struc_analysis}. First, close to the turbulence
threshold, the cases with $\gamma_E=0$, represent a different regime of
turbulence to those cases with $\gamma_E>0$. In particular,
$l_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ shown in \figref{lz_q} [as well as
Figures~\ref{fig:lz_free_q} and~\subref{fig:kz_free_q}], shows an \emph{increasing}
trend for cases with $\gamma_E=0$: from $\sim 10$~cm near the turbulence
threshold to $\sim 15$~cm far away from it, whereas cases with $\gamma_E>0$
\emph{decrease} from $\sim 23$~cm near marginality to $\sim 15$~cm far away
from it. This represents a different dependence on $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ as
well as showing a significantly lower value of $l_Z^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ at
experimentally relevant $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ ($=2 \pm 1$).
\Figref{tau_q} shows that $\tau_c^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ predicted by
$\gamma_E=0$ simulations stays roughly constant over a large range of
$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$ whereas for $\gamma_E>0$ simulations,
$\tau_c^{\mathrm{GS2}}$ diminishes rapidly for small $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$.
Secondly, we see that far from the threshold, the
$\gamma_E=0$ and $\gamma_E>0$ cases for \emph{all} correlation parameters
show the same dependence on $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$. This shows that far from
the threshold there is little difference between sheared and unsheared (by a
background flow) turbulence. This result is consistent with the results in
Section~\ref{sec:zf_shear}, further confirming the conclusions reached in
Section~\ref{sec:zf_shear}: close to the turbulence threshold the background
flow shear has a significant effect on the turbulence leading to reduced heat
transport (as shown in Chapter~\ref{sec:nl}), whereas far from the threshold
the turbulence is much like conventional ITG-driven turbulence in the absence
of flow shear. This has been studied in related work~\cite{Fox2016a}, which
attempted to argue a similar case in terms of symmetry breaking of
fluctuation spectra close to the threshold in the presence of flow shear.
Far from the threshold, however, the symmetry is effectively restored, and
resembles turbulence in the absence of flow shear.
\section{Summary}
In this chapter, we made quantitative comparisons between our GS2 simulations
and the experimental measurements from the BES diagnostic. We first presented
an overview of the correlation techniques in Section~\ref{sec:corr_overview},
developed in Ref.~\cite{Ghim2013}, to measure the properties of turbulence
from density fluctuations and extended the correlation analysis to the
parallel direction, in which it is not currently possible to measure density
fluctuations in order to calculate correlation lengths. The results from
BES diagnostic measurements~\cite{Field2014} were presented in
Section~\ref{sec:corr_exp}.
In Section~\ref{sec:corr_synth}, we presented the first of our two
correlation analyses, which looked strictly at simulations with equilibrium
parameters within the experimental uncertainty ranges, we applied a synthetic
diagnostic to the GS2 density-fluctuation fields before performing a
correlation analysis exactly like the one used on experimental data. We
showed reasonable agreement between our simulations and the BES measurements in the
poloidal correlation length and correlation time (a major improvement
compared to previous attempts at measuring this quantity). We also found that
the radial correlation length was likely below the resolution threshold of
the BES diagnostic. We showed agreement for the RMS density fluctuation amplitude
within the experimental uncertainties of $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$; however,
this was at values of the equilibrium parameters far from those found to be
relevant to the experiment, i.e., far from the turbulence threshold.
In Section~\ref{sec:corr_gs2}, we performed a correlation analysis of the raw
GS2 density fluctuations. We first presented the results within the
experimental-uncertainty ranges of $\kappa_T$ and $\gamma_E$ and showed the
following. We confirmed that the radial correlation tended to
be below the resolution threshold of the BES diagnostic and showed that the
poloidal correlation length and correlation times were comparable to both the
results with a synthetic diagnostic applied and the experimental results. The
effect of the synthetic diagnostic and associated PSFs was to reduce the
measured density fluctuation amplitude compared to the raw GS2 density
fluctuations. We compared the results from our two correlation analyses and
experimental measurements and showed reasonable agreement across all the
correlation properties of turbulence.
Calculating the nonlinear decorrelation time, we confirmed in
Section~\ref{sec:time_scales} that the onset of subcritical turbulence
requires that the transient-growth time be approximately greater than the
nonlinear interaction time in a given simulation. Furthermore, we showed that
nonlinear interaction time tends to be much greater than the correlation
times -- in agreement with the experimental results in Ref.~\cite{Field2014}.
Finally, we showed that the correlation
properties of the turbulence in our simulations are effectively determined by
how far the system is from the turbulence threshold; quantified by the ion
heat flux $Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$. This was consistent with the results shown
in Sections~\ref{sec:subcritical} and~\ref{sec:zf_shear}, which showed that
the number of structures, their maximum amplitude, and the relative
importance of zonal flows were also effectively functions of
$Q_i/Q_{\mathrm{gB}}$. Presenting the data in this way highlighted two
important properties of the turbulence:
\begin{inparaenum}[(i)]
\item close to the turbulence threshold, the background flow shear has a
significant effect on the properties, and
\item far from the threshold, the properties of sheared and unsheared
turbulence were similar.
\end{inparaenum}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intr}
Critical fluids generate long-ranged forces
between their confining walls \cite{FdG}. This phenomenon is an analogue of the well-known Casimir effect in
quantum electrodynamics \cite{Casimir,krech:99:0}. These so-called critical Casimir forces (CCF)
are described in terms of universal scaling functions which are
determined by the universality class of
the bulk liquid and the surface universality classes of the confining surfaces \cite{binder}.
Classical fluids belong to the Ising bulk universality class. The confining
surfaces, such as the container walls, typically realize the surface universality class of the
so-called normal transition
\cite{pershan,rafai,nature,nature_long,nellen}, which is characterized by
a strong effective surface field acting on the order parameter of the fluid.
For example, for a binary liquid mixture near its demixing transition the order parameter is defined as
the deviation of the concentration from its critical value and
the surface field describes the preference of the container wall
for one of the two components of the mixture. If there is no such preference, the surface typically
belongs to the surface universality class
of the so-called ordinary transition
corresponding to Dirichlet boundary conditions (BC) for the order parameter \cite{binder}.
While Dirichlet BC are difficult to realize for classical fluids,
they occur naturally for $^4$He near its superfluid transition \cite{chan}.
For $^3$He/$^4$He mixtures near their tricritical point both types of BC can occur \cite{chan1}.
The scaling functions of the CCF for various bulk and surface universality classes have been determined analytically
by mean field theory and beyond \cite{dietrich_krech,krech,upton,Borjan,md} as well as
by using Monte Carlo
simulations \cite{VGMD,hucht,Hasenbusch}; if applicable they are in fine agreement with the experimental findings.
The properties of the CCF $f_{\mathrm C}$, such as the sign and the strength,
depend crucially on the surface fields characterizing the confining surfaces.
By suitable surface treatments one can design the sign of the surface fields, e.g., in the case of aqueous mixtures by fabricating
hydrophilic or hydrophobic surfaces
\cite{nature,nature_long}.
One can also create spatially varying surface fields by modulating the chemical composition of the surfaces.
In Ref.~\cite{NHB} a smooth lateral variation of the surface field between hydrophilic (positive surface field) and hydrophobic
(negative surface field) parts of the surface
has been achieved. Along this gradient, the CCF acting on a colloidal particle have been
measured. Various other crossover behaviors of CCF have been analyzed
analytically and by computer simulations \cite{MMD,abraham_maciolek,vas-11,diehl}. The CCF for surfaces endowed
with geometrically well defined alternating chemical stripes have been investigated
experimentally and theoretically \cite{TZGVHBD}.
Even very carefully fabricated surfaces are not perfectly smooth or homogenous.
Typically they carry random chemical heterogeneities
due to adsorbed impurities which act as local surface fields. Here we focus on kinetically frozen surface fields
which form quenched disorder and study CCF acting in their presence.
It is known that for quenched random-charge disorder on surfaces of dielectric parallel walls at a distance $L$
long-ranged forces $ \propto \; L^{-2}$ emerge,
even if the surfaces are on average neutral \cite{NDSHP,BAD}. For large $L$ these
forces, induced by quenched disorder, dominate the pure van der Waals interactions, which decay as
$L^{-3}$.
This differs from the behavior of systems which exhibit quenched random surface fields (RSF).
Recent {\it MC simulations} for three-dimensional Ising films \cite{MVDD} have shown that the presence
of random surfaces fields with zero mean leads to CCF which at bulk criticality asymptotically decay
as function of the film thickness $L$
as $L^{-3}$. This is the same behavior as for the pure critical system and as for the pure van der Waals term.
This result has been obtained for the case in which
in the absence of RSF the surfaces of the film belong to the surface universality class of
the ordinary transition ($(o,o)$ BC). Roughly speaking, such surfaces are realized in systems in which droplets
of, for example, the demixed binary liquid mixture form a contact angle of $90^0$ with the chemically disordered substrate
(see the intermediate substrate compositions discussed in Ref.~\cite{NHB}).
It follows from finite-size {\it scaling analyses}, in agreement with the corresponding {\it MC simulation} data \cite{MVDD},
that for weak disorder the CCF still exhibit scaling, acquiring a random field scaling variable $w$ which is zero for pure systems.
The data of the MC simulations suggest that for weak disorder the difference
between the force corresponding to the random surface field
and the corresponding force for the pure system (with $(o,o)$ BC) varies as
$f_{\mathrm C}(w\to 0)-f_{\mathrm C}(w=0)\sim w^2$. Moreover, for thin films such that $w \simeq 1$,
the presence of RSF with vanishing mean value increases
significantly the strength of CCF, as compared to systems without them, and shifts the extremum of the scaling function of $f_{\mathrm C}$
towards lower temperatures. But $f_{\mathrm C}$ remains attractive.
Finite-size scaling predicts that asymptotically, for large $L$, $w$ scales as
$w \sim L^{-0.26} \to 0$ indicating that this type of disorder
is an irrelevant perturbation of the ordinary surface universality class.
This conjecture is consistent with results of Ref.~\cite{francesco} in which the so-called 'improved'
Blume-Capel model~\cite{Blume,capel,Hasenbusch} was studied by MC simulations. This work is concerned
with quenched random disorder which is present only at one of the two surfaces
and is governed by the
binomial distribution, i.e., spins at the surface, which are subjected to disorder,
take the value 1 with probability $p$ and the value -1 with probability $1-p$. It has been found that for $p=0.5$
the leading critical behavior of the CCF is still governed
by the ordinary fixed point.
These findings are in agreement with the Harris criterion which concerns the relevance of disorder for bulk critical
phenomena and which has been generalized to surface critical behavior
\cite{diehl_nusser1}. Within the framework and limitations of a weak-disorder expansion,
quenched random surface fields with vanishing mean value are expected to be irrelevant if the pure
system belongs to the ordinary surface universality class \cite{diehl_nusser1}.
For the three-dimensional ($d=3$) Ising model, in Ref.~\cite{mon_nig}
this was pointed out and confirmed by Monte Carlo simulations.
For semi-infinite systems the influence of random surface fields has been studied also in the context of wetting (for reviews see Ref.~\cite{dietrich}) and surface
critical phenomena \cite{mon_nig,diehl_nusser1,igloi,cardy} (for a review see Ref.~\cite{Pleimling}).
In contrast to the case of simple fluids or binary liquid mixtures, for complex fluids surface disorder effects on
Casimir-like interactions can be dominant as shown recently for nematic liquid-crystalline films \cite{podgornik}.
So far, except of the general finite-size scaling analysis, the CCF in the presence of RSF has not been studied {\it analytically}.
This lack of theoretical insight has rendered the corresponding MC simulations data obtained in Ref.~\cite{MVDD} rather difficult to interpret.
Here we develop a fieldtheoretical approach in terms of Gaussian perturbation theory, which is valid
in the limit of weak disorder.
As in Ref.~\cite{MVDD}, we consider films of thickness $L$, which
in the three-dimensional bulk belong to the Ising universality class
and the surfaces of which in the absence of RSF belong to the surface universality class of the ordinary transition.
Our presentation is organized as follows. In Sec.~\ref{sec:sc} we briefly summarize the results
of the finite-size scaling analysis in the presence of a random surface field, which were derived
in Ref.~\cite{MVDD} and which form the analytical basis of the present study.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:PS} we introduce and discuss our model in the absence of RSF.
In Sec.~IV we include RSF and calculate the corresponding scaling function of the CCF.
In Sec.~V we compare our findings with MC simulations data and provide an outlook. Technical details
of the calculations in Sec.~IV are given in Appendices A and B.
\newpage
\section{Scaling}
\label{sec:sc}
Within mean field theory, for pure systems within the basin of attraction of the ordinary transition of semi-infinite
systems, in the ordered phase the order parameter profile exhibits an extrapolation
length $1/c$; $c=\infty$ is the fixed point of the ordinary transition (o) ~\cite{binder}.
Close to this transition there is a single linear scaling field $g_{1}=H_1/{\tilde c}^{y_c}$
associated with the dimensionless, uniform surface
field of strength $H_1$ and with the dimensionless surface enhancement parameter $\tilde c=ca$,
where $a$ is a characteristic
microscopic length scale of the system
\cite{binder} such as the amplitudes $\xi_0^{\pm}$ of the bulk correlation length
$\xi_b(t=\frac{T-T_c}{T_c}\to 0^{\pm}) \;\simeq \; \xi_0^{\pm}|t|^{-\nu}$
( the symbol ``$\simeq$'' stands for asymptotic equality).
In the following all lengths, such as $L$ and $1/c$, are taken in units of $a$ and thus are dimensionless.
The above scaling exponent is $y_c=\left(\Delta_1^{sp}-\Delta_1^{ord}\right)/\Phi$,
where $\Delta^{ord}_{1}$ and $\Delta^{sp}_{1}$ are the surface counterparts at the ordinary and special transition, respectively,
of the bulk gap exponent $\Delta$,
and $\Phi$ is a crossover exponent \cite{binder}. Within mean field theory one has $y_c=1$
whereas $y_c(d=3)\;\approx \; 0.87 $ ~\cite{binder,GZ}.
Close to the critical point, the {\it sing}ular part $f_{sing}$ of the free energy per $k_BT$ and per
volume of a film of thickness $L$ scales as
$f_{sing}(t,h_b,g_1;L^{-1}) \; \simeq \; L^{-d}f_{sing}(L^{1/\nu}t,L^{\Delta/\nu}h_b,L^{\Delta^{ord}_1/\nu}g_1;1)$,
where $h_b$ is the dimensionless bulk ordering field.
In the presence of random surface fields with a Gaussian distribution and with the ensemble averages
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:0}
\overline{H_{1}(\mathbf{r})}=0 \qquad \mathrm{and} \qquad \overline{H_{1}(\mathbf{r}) H_{1}(\mathbf{r}')} = h^{2}\delta(\mathbf{r} - \mathbf{r}'),
\end{equation}
where
$\mathbf{r}$ and $\mathbf{r'}$ denote dimensionless lateral positions, finite-size scaling predicts ~\cite{MVDD} that
the appropriate scaling variable, which
replaces $L^{\Delta^{ord}_1/\nu}g_1$
for the pure system, is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:w}
w \equiv \kappa L^{\Delta^{ord}_1/\nu -(d-1)/2}h/c^{y_c} = \kappa L^{y_1-(d-1)/2}h/c^{y_c},
\end{equation}
where $\kappa$ is a nonuniversal amplitude.
The scaling exponent $y_1-(d-1)/2$ has been derived in Ref.~\cite{diehl_nusser1}; there
it was shown that it is related to $\gamma_{11}$, which is a standard surface susceptibility exponent of the ordinary transition:
$\gamma_{11}=\nu(1-\eta_{||}) =-(d-1-2y_1)\nu$.
In the MC simulation study reported in Ref.~\cite{MVDD} for the three-dimensional $(d=3)$ Ising model, the following
values of the critical exponents have been used: $\Delta^{ord}_{1} \; \approx \; 0.46(2)$ \cite{GZ},
$\Delta^{sp}_{1} \; \approx \; 1.05$~\cite{binder},
$\Phi \; \approx \; 0.68$~\cite{binder},
and $\nu \approx 0.63$ \cite{PV,Hasenbusch}.
These values yield
$y_{1}-(d-1)/2 \; \approx \; -0.26(6)$.
(More accurate estimates for the surface critical exponents at the special and ordinary
transitions were obtained recently
from MC simulations \cite{Hasenbusch84}. They yield $y_c\approx 1.282(5)$
and $y_1\approx 0.7249(6)$ so that $y_{1}-(d-1)/2 \approx -0.2750(4)$.)
Within mean field theory, i.e., for $d=4$, one has $\Delta_1^{ord} = \nu=1/2$ \cite{binder} so that $y_{1}-(d-1)/2 = -1/2$.
Accordingly, for the $d=3$ Ising model one has $w=\kappa (h/c^{0.87})L^{-0.26}$
whereas within mean field theory $w=\kappa (h/c)L^{-1/2}$.
Because the scaling exponent of the random surface field is negative, the scaling field $h/c^{y_c}$ is irrelevant in the sense of
renormalization-group theory, which implies that for sufficiently thick films the effect of disorder
is expected to be negligible.
\section{Pure system}
\label{sec:PS}
Within the field-theoretic framework, near criticality a symmetric Ising film of thickness $L$ without ordering fields
is described by the (dimensionless) $d$-dimensional Ginzburg-Landau Hamiltonian
for the order parameter $\phi(\mathbf{r}, z)$ \cite{binder}:
\begin{equation}
\label{1}
{\cal H}_{0}[\phi] = \int d^{d-1}r \int_{0}^{L}dz \Bigl[\frac{1}{2}\bigl(\nabla \phi\bigr)^{2} + \frac{1}{2}\tau\phi^{2}
+ \frac{1}{4!} g \phi^{4} +\frac{1}{2} c \phi^{2} \bigl[\delta(z) + \delta(z-L)\bigr] \Bigr]
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{r}$ is a $(d-1)$-dimensional lateral vector with $|\mathbf{r}| < R$; the thermodynamic limit
requires $R \to \infty$, while the width $L$ remains large but finite.
In Eq.~(\ref{1}) and below the integral over $z$ is understood to be taken as $\lim_{\epsilon \to 0} \int_{0-\epsilon}^{L+\epsilon} dz$.
Negative values of the temperature variable
$\tau \sim t $
correspond to the bulk ferromagnetic phase which we study in the following (concerning the disordered phase
see Appendix B). We also assume that the surface coupling parameter
is large, i.e., $c \gg 1$, which corresponds to the ordinary transition
in semi-infinite systems. In particular this implies that for $\tau \geq 0$ the order parameter is identically zero.
The mean field equilibrium configuration $\phi_{*}(\mathbf{r},z)$ minimizes ${\cal H}_{0}[\phi]$,
satisfying $\phi_{*}''(z) = -|\tau| \phi_{*}(z) + \frac{1}{6} g \phi_{*}^{3}(z)$ with the boundary conditions
$\phi_{*}'(z)\Big|_{z=0} = c \phi_{*}(0)$ and $\phi_{*}'(z)\Big|_{z=L} = - c \phi_{*}(L)$.
With the bulk correlation length
$\xi_{-} = 1/\sqrt{2|\tau|}=\xi_{0}^{-}|t|^{-1/2}$ for $\tau < 0$ and
$\xi_{+} = 1/\sqrt{\tau}=\xi_{0}^{+}|t|^{-1/2}$ for $\tau > 0$ the function
$\phi_{*}(z, t <0,L) = \phi_{0} \times \bigl(L/\xi_{0}^{-}\bigr)^{-\beta/\nu} \psi_{-}\bigl(z/L,L/\xi_{-}\bigr)$
decomposes into the amplitude $\phi_{0}$ of the bulk order parameter
$\phi_{b} = \phi_{0} |t|^{\beta}$, the power law $(L/\xi_{0}^{-})^{-\beta/\nu}$ and a universal scaling function
$\psi_{-}\bigl(s=z/L,x_{-}=L/\xi_{-}\bigr)$ with $0 \leq s \leq 1$ and
$\psi_{-}\bigl(1-s,x_{-}\bigr) = \psi_{-}\bigl(s,x_{-}\bigr)$; $\phi_{*} \equiv 0$ for $t \geq 0$.
Within the present mean field theory (MFT)
$\tau = t/\bigl(2(\xi_{0}^{-})^{2}\bigr)$ and $\phi_{0} = \sqrt{3/g}/ \xi_{0}^{-}$
with the universal ratio $\xi_{0}^{+}/\xi_{0}^{-} = \sqrt{2}$.
The above scaling form for $\phi_{*}(z,t,L)$ holds beyond MFT.
The MFT scaling function satisfies the differential equation
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:diffeq}
\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial s^{2}} \psi_{-}(s,x_{-}) =- x_{-}^{2} \psi_{-}(s,x_{-})+\psi_{-}^{3}(s,x_{-})
\end{equation}
with the boundary conditions
$
\frac{\partial}{\partial s} \psi_{-}(s,x_{-})\Big|_{s=0} = c L \psi_{-}(s=0,x_{-})
$
and
$
\frac{\partial}{\partial s} \psi_{-}(s,x_{-})\Big|_{s=1}~=~-c L \psi_{-}(s=1,x_{-}) \, .
$
In the following we refrain from indicating the dependence of the scaling function
$\psi_{-}$ on $x_{-}$ unless it is necessary.
The limit $c\to\infty$ has been studied in detail
in Ref.~\cite{Gambassi_Dietrich}. In this case the
scaling function $\psi_{-}(s)$ can be expressed
in terms of the Jacobi elliptic function $sn(s)$ which satisfies
$sn(s=0) = sn(s=1) = 0$
while its derivatives at $s=0$ and at $s=1$ are nonzero.
This solution is the equilibrium one only for $\tau < \tau_{c} \equiv -\pi^{2}/L^{2}$;
for $\tau \geq \tau_{c}$ one has $\phi_{*}(z) \equiv 0$
{ (Beyond MFT this holds only for $\tau \geq 0$.
Within MFT, in the interval $-\pi^{2}/L^{2} < \tau \leq 0$, or
equivalently
$-\sqrt{2} \pi < x_{-} \leq 0$, the film is disordered although the bulk is ordered.)
For large $x_{-}$ the scaling function $\psi_{-}(s)$ approaches that of
the semi-infinite system:
$\psi_{-}\bigl(s\to 0, x_{-}\to\infty; s x_{-}=y_{-} \bigr) = x_{-}^{\beta/\nu} \, P_{-}\bigl(y_{-}=z/\xi_{-}\bigr)$
with $P_{-}(y_{-} = \infty) = 1$ and
$P_{-}(y_{-} \to 0) \sim y_{-}^{(\beta_{1}-\beta)/\nu}$
where $\beta_{1}(d=4) = 1$ and $\beta_{1}(d=3) = 0.80(1)$ \cite{diehl_rev,LZ} is a surface critical exponent;
within mean field theory $P_{-}(y_{-}) = \tanh(y_{-})$.
For large but finite values of the surface
enhancement parameter $cL$ the scaling function $\psi_{-}(s)$
is close to its fixed point form
corresponding to $c=\infty$ but still with nonzero values
$\psi_{-}(0)$ and $\psi_{-}(1)$, in accordance with the boundary conditions
$\psi_{-}(s=0) = \psi_{-}(s=1) \sim 1/c$.
We now consider fluctuations $\varphi(\mathbf{r}, z)$ around the mean field equilibrium profile
$\phi_{*}(z) = \bigl(\phi_{0}\xi_{0}^{-}/L\bigr) \psi_{-}(z/L, L/\xi_{-}) \theta(-\tau)$,
where $\theta$ is the Heaviside function.
Inserting $\phi(\mathbf{r}, z) = \phi_{*}(z) + \varphi(\mathbf{r}, z)$
into ${\cal H}_{0}[\phi]$
and subtracting the bulk contribution
${\cal H}_{0}[\phi_{b}] = S_{d-1} L \bigl(-\frac{3\tau^{2}}{2g}\bigr) \theta(-\tau)$
one obtains within Gaussian approximation
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{10}
{\cal H}_{0}[\varphi] - {\cal H}_{0}[\phi_{b}] &=& E_{0} S_{d-1}
+ \frac{1}{2} \int d^{d-1}r \int_{0}^{L}dz \Bigl[\bigl(\nabla \varphi\bigr)^{2}
+ \xi_{-}^{-2}\varphi^{2} - \xi_{-}^{-2} m_{-}(z/L, x_{-}) \varphi^{2} \\ \nonumber
&+& c \varphi^{2} \bigl[\delta(z) + \delta(z-L)\bigr] \Bigr]
\end{eqnarray}
where
$
m_{-}(z/L, x_{-}) = \frac{3}{2} \Bigl[1 - \frac{1}{x_{-}^{2}}\psi_{-}^{2}(z/L)\Bigr], \;
-\frac{1}{2} \xi_{-}^{2} = \tau,
$
$S_{d-1}$ is the $(d-1)$-dimensional crossectional area of the system such that $S_{d-1} L$ is the volume of the film, and
$E_{0}$ is the mean field excess free energy density (per area) of a film over the bulk value (obtained by
inserting the mean-field profile $\phi_{*}(z)$ into Eq.~(\ref{1}) and subtracting ${\cal H}_{0}[\phi_{b}]$):
\begin{equation}
\label{11}
E_{0} = -\frac{g}{24} \int_{0}^{L}dz \; \phi_{*}^{4}(z)
+ L \frac{3\tau^{2}}{2g} \theta(-\tau) =
-\frac{3}{8 g} L^{-3} \int_{0}^{1} ds \; \psi_{-}^{4}(s,L/\xi)
+ L \frac{3\tau^{2}}{2g} \theta(-\tau).
\end{equation}
Note that $E_{0}$ depends on $c$ via $m_{-}$ and $\psi_{-}$. In the limit $L\to \infty$, $\; E_{0}$ reduces
to twice the surface energy of the corresponding semi-infinite system.
In terms of the Fourier representation
\begin{equation}
\label{12}
\varphi(\mathbf{r}, z) = \int\frac{d^{d-1}p}{(2\pi)^{d-1}} \,
\frac{1}{L} \sum_{l=-\infty}^{+\infty} \tilde{\varphi}({\bf p}, l) \,
\exp\Bigl[i \, {\bf p} \cdot \mathbf{r} + \frac{2\pi i}{L} l z\Bigr] \; ,
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{\varphi}({\bf p}, l)$ is given by the inverse Fourier transform
\begin{equation}
\label{12a}
\tilde{\varphi}({\bf p}, l) = \int d^{d-1}r \,\int_{0}^{L}dz \,
\varphi(\mathbf{r}, z) \,
\exp\Bigl[-i \, {\bf p} \cdot \mathbf{r} - \frac{2\pi i}{L} l z\Bigr] \; ,
\end{equation}
Eq.~(\ref{10}) yields
\begin{equation}
\label{14}
{\cal H}_{0}[\varphi] - {\cal H}_{0}[\phi_{b}] = E_{0} S_{d-1} +
\frac{1}{2} \int\frac{d^{d-1}p}{(2\pi)^{d-1}} \, \frac{1}{L^{2}} \sum_{l,l'=-\infty}^{+\infty}
G^{-1}_{l,l'}(p) \,
\tilde{\varphi}({\bf p}, l) \tilde{\varphi}(-{\bf p}, l')
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{15}
G^{-1}_{l,l'}(p) \; \equiv \; L \Bigl[p^{2} + \xi_{-}^{-2} + \frac{4\pi^{2}}{L^{2}} l^{2} \Bigr] \delta_{l, -l'}
\, - \, \tilde{m}_{-}(l+l', x_{-}) \, + \, 2 c ;
\end{equation}
$\delta_{l, -l'}$ is the Kronecker symbol and (due to $\psi_{-}(s,x_{-}) = \psi_{-}(1-s,x_{-})$)
\begin{equation}
\label{16}
\tilde{m}_{-}(l,x_{-}) =
\frac{3x_{-}}{\xi_{-}} \int_{0}^{1/2} ds \, \bigl[1 - \frac{1}{x^{2}_{-}}\psi_{-}^{2}(s, x_{-})\bigr] \,
\cos\bigl( 2\pi s\, l \bigr) .
\end{equation}
Accordingly, one has $\tilde{m}_{-}(l,x_{-}) =\frac{3}{\xi_{-} }\, f_{-}(l,x_{-})$
with
\begin{equation}
\label{16a}
f_{-}(l,x_{-}) \; = \; \int_{0}^{x_{-}/2} ds' \,
\bigl[1 - \frac{1}{x_{-}^{2}}\psi_{-}^{2}(s'/x_{-}, x_{-})\bigr]
\cos\Bigl( \frac{2\pi}{x_{-}} l s'\Bigr).
\end{equation}
Due to $\psi_{-}(s\ll 1, x_{-}\gg 1) \simeq x_{-} \tanh(s x_{-})$, taken to be valid up to $s=1/2$, one finds
\begin{equation}
f_{-}(l, x_{-} \gg 1) \simeq \int_{0}^{x_{-}/2} ds \bigl[1 - \tanh^{2}(s)\bigr] \cos\Bigl( \frac{2\pi l}{x_{-}} s\Bigr)
=
\int_{0}^{x_{-}/2} ds \; \cosh^{-2}(s) \cos\Bigl( \frac{2\pi l}{x_{-}} s\Bigr) \, .
\label{17}
\end{equation}
In other words, the off-diagonal terms $\tilde{m}_{-}(l,x_{-})$ of the matrix given by Eqs.~(\ref{15}) and (\ref{16})
can be approximated as follows:
\begin{equation}
\label{17a}
\tilde{m}_{-}(l,x_{-} \gg 1) \simeq \frac{3}{\xi_{-}} \int_{0}^{x_{-}/2} ds \cosh^{-2}(s) \cos\Bigl( \frac{2\pi l}{x_{-}} s\Bigr)
\, .
\end{equation}
\section{Random surface fields}
\label{sec:RSF}
Within the present model the presence of random surface fields is described by
\begin{equation}
\label{18}
{\cal H}[\phi] = {\cal H}_{0}[\phi] +
\int d^{d-1}r \; \Bigl[ H_{1}(\mathbf{r}) \phi(\mathbf{r}, 0) + H_{2}(\mathbf{r}) \phi(\mathbf{r}, L) \Bigr]
\end{equation}
where ${\cal H}_{0}[\phi]$ is the Ginzburg-Landau Hamiltonian of the pure system (Eq.~(\ref{1})) and
$H_{i}(\mathbf{r})$ ($i=1,2$) are random surface fields (see the Introduction).
$H_{1}$ and $H_{2}$ are taken to be uncorrelated.
Considering the fluctuations $\varphi(\mathbf{r}, z)$, as introduced in the context of Eq.~(\ref{10}), leads to
\begin{equation}
\label{21}
{\cal H}[\varphi] = {\cal H}_{0}[\varphi] + \int d^{d-1}r \; \Bigl[ H_{1}(\mathbf{r}) \phi_{*}(0) + H_{2}(\mathbf{r}) \phi_{*}(L)
+ H_{1}(\mathbf{r}) \varphi(\mathbf{r}, 0) + H_{2}(\mathbf{r}) \varphi(\mathbf{r}, L) \Bigr]
\end{equation}
where ${\cal H}_{0}[\varphi]$ is the Gaussian Hamiltonian of the pure system (Eq.~(\ref{14})).
The partition function is
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
&& Z = \int {\cal D}[\varphi] \exp\Bigl\{-{\cal H}[\varphi]\Bigr\} \\
\nonumber
&& =
Z_{bulk}
\int {\cal D}[\varphi] \exp\Biggl\{
- E_{0}S_{d-1}
- \frac{1}{2} \int\frac{d^{d-1}p}{(2\pi)^{d-1}} \, \frac{1}{L^{2}} \sum_{l,l'=-\infty}^{+\infty}
G^{-1}_{l,l'}(p) \, \tilde{\varphi}({\bf p}, l) \tilde{\varphi}(-{\bf p}, l')
\\
\nonumber
\\
&& -\int d^{d-1}r \; \Bigl[ H_{1}(\mathbf{r}) \phi_{*}(0) + H_{2}(\mathbf{r}) \phi_{*}(L) \Bigr]
- \int d^{d-1}r \; \Bigl[ H_{1}(\mathbf{r}) \varphi(\mathbf{r}, 0) + H_{2}(\mathbf{r}) \varphi(\mathbf{r}, L) \Bigr]
\Biggr\}
\label{21a}
\end{eqnarray}
where $Z_{bulk} = \exp\bigl\{- S_{d-1} L \bigl(-\frac{3\tau^{2}}{2g}\bigr) \theta(-\tau)\bigr\}$
and the elements $G_{l,l'}^{-1}(\bf{p})$ of the matrix $\hat{G}^{-1}(p)$
are given by Eqs.~(\ref{15}) and (\ref{16}).
Regrouping the terms in the above equation one finds
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
\frac{Z}{Z_{bulk}} &=& Z_{0} \exp\Biggl\{
- E_{0}S_{d-1} \, - \,
\int d^{d-1}r \; \Bigl[ H_{1}(\mathbf{r}) \phi_{*}(0) + H_{2}(\mathbf{r}) \phi_{*}(L) \Bigr]
\Biggr\}
\\
\nonumber
\\
&\times&
\Biggl<
\exp\Biggl\{
- \int d^{d-1}r \; \Bigl[ H_{1}(\mathbf{r}) \varphi(\mathbf{r}, 0) + H_{2}(\mathbf{r}) \varphi(\mathbf{r}, L) \Bigr]
\Biggr\}
\Biggr>_{0} \; .
\label{21b}
\end{eqnarray}
Here $\langle ... \rangle_{0}$ denotes the {\it thermal} average taken with the
Gaussian Hamiltonian of the pure system (Eq.~(\ref{14})):
\begin{equation}
\label{21c}
\bigl< \bigl( ...\bigr) \bigr>_{0} \equiv
Z_{0}^{-1}
\int {\cal D}[\varphi] \; (...) \; \exp\Biggl\{
- \frac{1}{2} \int\frac{d^{d-1}p}{(2\pi)^{d-1}} \, \frac{1}{L^{2}} \sum_{l,l'=-\infty}^{+\infty}
G^{-1}_{l,l'}(p) \, \tilde{\varphi}({\bf p}, l) \tilde{\varphi}(-{\bf p}, l')
\Biggr\} \, .
\end{equation}
Using the general formula for Gaussian integrals,
\begin{equation}
\label{21e}
\prod_{k=1}^{M} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} d\varphi_{k} \,
\exp\Bigl\{ -\frac{1}{2} \sum_{k,k'=1}^{M} A_{k,k'} \, \varphi_{k} \varphi_{k'} \Bigr\} \; = \;
(2\pi)^{M/2}
\exp\Bigl\{ -\frac{1}{2} \mbox{Tr}\ln\bigl[\hat{A}\bigr] \Bigr\}
\end{equation}
which is valid for any matrix $A_{k,k'}$ with positive eigenvalues, one has
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
Z_{0} &=& \int {\cal D}[\varphi] \; \exp\Biggl\{
- \frac{1}{2} \int\frac{d^{d-1}p}{(2\pi)^{d-1}} \, \frac{1}{L^{2}} \sum_{l,l'=-\infty}^{+\infty}
G^{-1}_{l,l'}(p) \, \tilde{\varphi}({\bf p}, l) \tilde{\varphi}(-{\bf p}, l')
\Biggr\}
\\
\nonumber
\\
&=&
{\cal B} \, \exp\Biggl\{
- \frac{1}{2} S_{d-1} \int
\frac{d^{d-1}p}{(2\pi)^{d-1}} \; \mbox{Tr}\ln\bigl[\hat{G}^{-1}(p)\bigr]
\Biggr\}
\label{21d}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mbox{Tr}$ denotes the matrix trace and the factor $L^{-2}$ in the exponential of Eq.~(\ref{21c}) is
absorbed into the pre-exponential factor ${\cal B}$ in Eq.~(\ref{21d}). Note that the value of this
pre-exponential factor depends on the definition of the integration measure of the the fields $\varphi$.
Since the prefactor ${\cal B}$ drops out of Eq.~(\ref{21c}) it is irrelevant for the considered problem
and thus will be omitted in the further calculations.
The average in Eq.~(\ref{21b}) is calculated by using the Gaussian relation
$\langle\exp({\bf \lambda\cdot x})\rangle_{0} =
\exp\bigl(\frac{1}{2} \langle ({\bf \lambda\cdot x})^{2}\rangle_{0}\bigr)$.
Performing the Gaussian integrals over the fluctuating field $\varphi(\mathbf{r}, z)$
leads to
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
\ln\bigl( Z/Z_{bulk}\bigr) &=&
- E_{0}S_{d-1} - \frac{1}{2} S_{d-1} \int
\frac{d^{d-1}p}{(2\pi)^{d-1}} \; \mbox{Tr}\ln\bigl[\hat{G}^{-1}(p)\bigr]
\\
\nonumber
\\
\nonumber
&-&
\int d^{d-1}r \; \Bigl[ H_{1}(\mathbf{r}) \phi_{*}(0) + H_{2}(\mathbf{r}) \phi_{*}(L) \Bigr]
\\
\nonumber
\\
&+&
\frac{1}{2}
\Biggl< \Biggl(
\int d^{d-1}r
\Bigl[ H_{1}(\mathbf{r}) \varphi(\mathbf{r}, 0) + H_{2}(\mathbf{r}) \varphi(\mathbf{r}, L) \Bigr] \Biggr)^{2}\Biggr>_{0}
\Biggr\} \, .
\label{22}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that the first two terms on the rhs of Eq.~(\ref{22}) are independent of $H_{1}$ and $H_{2}$.
Accordingly, for the free energy (per $k_{B} T_{c}$ and in excess of the bulk contribution
$\overline{F}_{b}$) {\it averaged over the random surface fields}
we find ($\overline{H_{1} \; H_{2}} \; = \; \overline{H_{1}} \; \overline{H_{2}} \; = \; 0$)
\begin{equation}
\label{23}
\frac{\overline{F}-\overline{F}_{b} }{S_{d-1}} =
E_{0} + \frac{1}{2} \, \int
\frac{d^{d-1}p}{(2\pi)^{d-1}} \; \mbox{Tr}\ln\bigl[\hat{G}^{-1}(p)\bigr]
- \frac{1}{2} h^{2}
\Bigl(\bigl<\varphi^{2}(\mathbf{r}, 0)\bigr>_{0} + \bigl<\varphi^{2}(\mathbf{r}, L)\bigr>_{0}\Bigr) \, .
\end{equation}
In terms of the Gaussian integral, Eqs.~(\ref{21c}) and (\ref{21d}), for the correlation function of the
fields $\tilde{\varphi}({\bf p}, l)$ one obtains
\begin{equation}
\bigl<\tilde{\varphi}({\bf p}, l) \tilde{\varphi}({\bf p}', l')\bigr>_{0} \; = \;
L^{2} G_{l,l'}(p) \; (2\pi)^{d-1}\delta\bigl({\bf p} + {\bf p}'\bigr) \, .
\end{equation}
Thus, using the Fourier representation in Eq.(\ref{12}) the thermal averages
in Eq.~(\ref{23}) can be represented as
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
&&\bigl<\varphi^{2}(\mathbf{r}, L)\bigr>_{0} = \bigl<\varphi^{2}(\mathbf{r},0)\bigr>_{0}
\\
\nonumber
\\
\nonumber
&&= \int \frac{d^{d-1}p}{(2\pi)^{d-1}} \int \frac{d^{d-1}p'}{(2\pi)^{d-1}}\,
\frac{1}{L^{2}}\sum_{l,l'=-\infty}^{+\infty}
\bigl< \tilde{\varphi}({\bf p}, l) \,\tilde{\varphi}({\bf p'}, l') \bigr>_{0}
\exp\Bigl[i \, ({\bf p} + {\bf p}') \cdot \mathbf{r} \Bigr]
\\
\nonumber
\\
\nonumber
&& =
\int \frac{d^{d-1}p}{(2\pi)^{d-1}} \int \frac{d^{d-1}p'}{(2\pi)^{d-1}}\,
\frac{1}{L^{2}}\sum_{l,l'=-\infty}^{+\infty}
L^{2} \; G_{l,l'}(p) \;(2\pi)^{d-1}\delta\bigl({\bf p} + {\bf p}'\bigr)
\exp\Bigl[i \, ({\bf p} + {\bf p}') \cdot \mathbf{r} \Bigr]
\\
\nonumber
\\
&& =
\int \frac{d^{d-1}p}{(2\pi)^{d-1}} \; \sum_{l,l'=-\infty}^{+\infty} G_{l,l'}(p)
\label{24}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\hat{G}(\bf{p})$ is defined via $\hat{G}^{-1}(\bf{p})$ as
$\sum_{l''=-\infty}^{+\infty} G^{-1}_{l,l''}({\bf p}) G_{l'',l'}({\bf p}) = \delta_{l,-l'}$.
Within the present approach,
$ \bigl<\varphi^{2}(\mathbf{r}, L)\bigr>_{0} = {\cal E}(z=L)$
and $ \bigl<\varphi^{2}(\mathbf{r},0)\bigr>_{0}={\cal E}(z=0)$,
where ${\cal E}(z=L)={\cal E}(z=0)$
is the fluctuation contribution to the energy density at the surfaces of the pure film system
without surface fields \cite{DD,KED};
this quantity is independent of $\mathbf{r}$.
Subtracting the free energy of the pure system, one has
for the free energy contribution $\Delta F(h, L)$ due to the random field:
\begin{equation}
\label{25}
\frac{\Delta F(h, L)}{S_{d-1}} =
- h^{2} \bigl<\varphi^{2}(\mathbf{r}, 0)\bigr>_{0} =
- h^{2}
\int\frac{d^{d-1}p}{(2\pi)^{d-1}} \,\sum_{l,l'=-\infty}^{+\infty} G_{l,l'}(p)
.
\end{equation}
In order to deal with the divergent integral over $p$ we use dimensional regularization.
Using the explicit expressions in Eqs.~(\ref{15}) and ({\ref{17a}) together with the relation \linebreak
$\sum_{l''=-\infty}^{+\infty} G^{-1}_{l,l''}(p) G_{l'',l'}(p)~=~ \delta_{l, -l'}$, one finds
(see Appendix A)
\begin{equation}
\label{26}
\sum_{l,l'=-\infty}^{+\infty} G_{l,l'}(p) \; = \;
\frac{g(p,L,\xi_{-})}{
1 + 2c \, g(p,L,\xi_{-}) - g_{1}\bigl((p\xi_{-})^{2} , x_{-}\bigr) }
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
g(p,L,\xi_{-}) &=& \frac{1}{L}
\sum_{l=-\infty}^{+\infty} \Bigl[p^{2} + \xi_{-}^{-2} + \Bigl(\frac{2\pi l}{L}\Bigr)^{2}\Bigr]^{-1} \; = \;
\frac{1}{2\sqrt{p^{2}+\xi_{-}^{-2}} \, \tanh\Bigl(\frac{L}{2} \sqrt{p^{2}+\xi_{-}^{-2}}\Bigr)} \; = \;
\\
\nonumber
\\
&=&
\frac{\xi_{-}}{2\sqrt{1+ (p\xi_{-})^{2}} \, \tanh\Bigl(\frac{x_{-}}{2} \sqrt{1+ (p\xi_{-})^{2}}\Bigr)}
\label{27}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{equation}
g_{1}\bigl((p\xi_{-})^{2} , x_{-}\bigr) \; = \;
\frac{3}{2\sqrt{(p\xi_{-})^{2} + 1} } \int_{0}^{x_{-}/2} ds \; \cosh^{-2}(s) \; \exp\Bigl\{- s \sqrt{(p\xi_{-})^{2} + 1} \Bigr\} \; .
\label{28}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[scale=1]{fig1.eps}
\caption{The scaling function $\Delta f L^{d}/w^{2}$ of the contribution to the critical Casimir force
due to random surface fields as given by Eqs.~(\ref{33}) and (\ref{34}).
The underlying Gaussian approximation is evaluated for $d=4$, for which it is exact.
The scaling variable $x$ equals $-L/\xi_{-}$ for $T \leq T_{c, bulk}$ and $+L/\xi_{+}$ for $T\geq T_{c, bulk}$.
Withing mean field theory the critical temperature $T_{c, film}(L)$ corresponds to $x_{c} = -\sqrt{2} \, \pi$.
The left vertical line corresponds to $x = x_{c} = -\sqrt{2}\pi$
whereas the right vertical line denotes $x=0$, i.e., the bulk critical point. The inset shows the magnified
part of $\Delta f L^{d}/w^{2}$ as it is given by Eq.~(\ref{33}).}
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure}
By inserting Eq.~(\ref{26}) into Eq.~(\ref{25}) and rearranging the integrand one obtains
\begin{equation}
\label{29}
\frac{\Delta F}{S_{d-1}} \; = \; \frac{h^{2}}{2c} \int \frac{d^{d-1}p}{(2\pi)^{d-1}} \Biggl(\frac{1-g_{1}}{2c g + 1 -g_{1}} \; - \; 1\Biggr)
\; .
\end{equation}
In the next step, we insert the explicit expressions for $g$ and $g_{1}$ (Eqs.~(\ref{27}) and (\ref{28})) and
determine the surface terms by taking
the limit $x_{-} = L/\xi_{-} \to \infty$. Subtracting these $L$-independent terms
we obtain the excess free energy (denoted by $\Delta\tilde{F}$)
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
\frac{\Delta \tilde{F}}{S_{d-1}} &=& \frac{h^{2}}{2c^{2}}
\int \frac{d^{d-1}p}{(2\pi)^{d-1}}
\sqrt{p^{2}+\xi_{-}^{-2}} \, \tanh\Bigl(\frac{L}{2} \sqrt{p^{2}+\xi_{-}^{-2}}\Bigr) \times
\\
\nonumber
\\
&\times&
\Biggl[
1 \; - \;
\frac{3}{2\sqrt{(p\xi_{-})^{2} + 1} } \int_{0}^{x_{-}/2} ds \; \cosh^{-2}(s) \; \exp\Bigl\{- s \sqrt{(p\xi_{-})^{2} + 1} \Bigr\}
\Biggr] \, .
\label{30}
\end{eqnarray}
This expression is valid for large $c$ to leading order in an expansion in terms of $1/c$.
Using the substitution $p = y/\xi_{-}$ and integrating over the angular part of the momenta, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
\frac{\Delta \tilde{F}}{S_{d-1}} &=&
\frac{ \pi^{\frac{1-d}{2}} }{\Gamma\bigl(\frac{d+1}{2}\bigr) } \,
\frac{h^{2}}{2c^{2}\xi_{-}^{d}} \;
\int_{0}^{\infty} dy \;
y^{d-2} \sqrt{y^2 + 1}
\tanh\Bigl(\frac{x_{-}}{2} \sqrt{1+ y^{2}}\Bigr) \times
\\
\nonumber
\\
&\times&
\Biggl[
1 \; - \;
\frac{3}{2\sqrt{y^{2} + 1} } \int_{0}^{x_{-}/2} ds \; \cosh^{-2}(s) \; \exp\Bigl\{- s \sqrt{y^{2} + 1} \Bigr\}
\Biggr] \, .
\label{31}
\end{eqnarray}
Taking the negative derivative of this expression with respect to $L$, which
amounts to
$-\frac{\partial}{\partial L} = -\xi_{-}^{-1} \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{-}}$,
renders the critical Casimir force $\Delta f$, per $k_{B}T$ and per area $S_{d-1}$,
in excess to its value without random fields:
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
\Delta f &\simeq&
-\frac{ \pi^{\frac{1-d}{2}} }{\Gamma\bigl(\frac{d+1}{2}\bigr) } \,
\frac{h^{2}}{4c^{2}\xi_{-}^{d+1}} \\ \nonumber
&& \int_{0}^{\infty} dy \; y^{d-2}
\Biggl\{
\frac{y^2+1}{\cosh^{2}\Bigl[\frac{x_{-}}{2} \sqrt{1+ y^{2}}\Bigr]}
\Biggl[
1 - \frac{3}{2\sqrt{y^{2} + 1} } \int_{0}^{x_{-}/2} ds
\frac{\exp\Bigl(- s \sqrt{y^{2} + 1} \Bigr)}{\cosh^{2}(s)}
\Biggr]
\; - \;
\\
\nonumber
\\
&-&
\frac{3\tanh\Bigl(\frac{x_{-}}{2} \sqrt{1+ y^{2}}\Bigr) \exp\Bigl(- \frac{1}{2} x_{-} \sqrt{y^{2} + 1} \Bigr)}{
2 \cosh^{2}\bigl(\frac{1}{2} x_{-}\bigr)}
\Biggr\} \, .
\label{32}
\end{eqnarray}
Replacing $\xi_{-}$ by $ L/x_{-} $ and identifying the dimensionless scaling variable
$w^{2} = h^{2}/(c^{2} L)$ (see Introduction),
leads to the following final result:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta f &\simeq&
-\mathcal{A}(d)
\frac{w^{2} x_-^{d+1}}{L^{d}}
\int_{0}^{\infty} dy \; y^{d-2} \times \nonumber
\\
\nonumber
&\times&
\Biggl\{
\frac{y^2+1}{\cosh^{2}\Bigl[\frac{x_{-}}{2} \sqrt{1+ y^{2}}\Bigr]}
\Biggl(
1 - \frac{3}{2\sqrt{y^{2} + 1} } \int_{0}^{x_{-}/2} ds
\frac{\exp\Bigl[- s \sqrt{y^{2} + 1} \Bigr]}{\cosh^{2}(s)}
\Biggr)
\\
\nonumber
\\
&-&
\frac{3\tanh\Bigl(\frac{x_{-}}{2} \sqrt{1+ y^{2}}\Bigr) \exp\Bigl[- \frac{1}{2} x_{-} \sqrt{y^{2} + 1} \Bigr]}{
2 \cosh^{2}\bigl(\frac{1}{2} x_{-}\bigr)}
\Biggr\}
\label{33}
\end{eqnarray}
which is valid for $x_{-} \gg 1$ , $c\gg 1$ (to leading order $O(1/c^3)$; compare Eqs.~(\ref{16a}) and (\ref{17})).
The prefactor is given by $\mathcal{A}(d) = \pi^{\frac{1-d}{2}}/(4\Gamma\bigl(\frac{d+1}{2}\bigr))$ .
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[scale=1]{fig2.eps}
\caption{
The scaling function $\Delta f L^{3}/w^{2}$ of the contribution to the critical Casimir force
due to random surface fields calculated within Gaussian approximation in $d=3$ and given by
Eqs.~(\ref{33}) and (\ref{34}). These results are compared with Monte Carlo (MC) simulations
data or the $3d$ Ising film with
random surface fields taken from Fig.~3(b) in Ref.~\cite{MVDD}.
In order to obtain the best fit, the analytic results
have been rescaled as follows:
$x \to 1.55 x$, $y \to 0.3 y$. For the $3d$ Ising model
the random surface field scaling variable is $\hat w=h/L^{0.26}$
(see Eq.~(\ref{eq:w})).
The vertical lines indicate $T_{c, bulk}$ and $T_{c, film}(L)$ within MFT,
corresponding to $x=0$ and $x=-6.88$, respectively.
Concerning the reason for the discrepancy between the MC data and the
analytic result below $x \lesssim -6.88$ see the main text after Eq.~(\ref{34}).
}\label{fig:2}
\end{figure}
\vspace{5mm}
Analogous calculations (see Appendix B) for the contribution of random surface fields to the critical Casimir force
in the disordered film phase for $-\pi^{2}/L^{2} = \; \tau_{c} < \tau < 0$ and for $\tau > 0$ yield
\begin{equation}
\label{34}
\Delta f =
-\frac{\mathcal{A}(d)w^{2}}{L^{d}}\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\int_{0}^{1}dy \frac{x_{-}^{d+1} y^{d-2} (1-y^{2})}{
2^{(d+1)/2}\cos^{2}\Bigl(\frac{x_{-}}{2\sqrt{2}}\sqrt{1-y^{2}}\Bigr)} \\
-\int_{1}^{\infty}dy \frac{x_{-}^{d+1} y^{d-2} (y^{2}-1)}{
2^{(d+1)/2}\cosh^{2}\Bigl(\frac{x_{-}}{2\sqrt{2}}\sqrt{y^{2}-1}\Bigr)}, \; -\sqrt{2}\pi < -x_{-} \leq 0
\\
\\
-\int_{0}^{\infty}dy \frac{x_{+}^{d+1} y^{d-2} (y^{2}+1)}{
\cosh^{2}\Bigl(\frac{x_{+}}{2}\sqrt{y^{2}+1}\Bigr)}, \; \; \; x_{+} \geq 0
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
where $x_- =-L/\xi_{-}$ and $ x_{+} = L/\xi_{+}$.
Note that because in the disordered phase the mean field OP profile $\psi_{-}(s,x_{-})$
is identically equal to zero, the derivation of the above result turns out to be much more simple
than the one for the ordered phase in Eq.~(\ref{33}).
Whereas Eq.~( \ref{33}) is only approximately valid for $x_{-} \gg 1$, i.e., $x =-x_{-} \to -\infty$,
Eq.~(\ref{34}) holds for $0 > -x_{-} \gtrsim -\sqrt{2} \pi$, i.e., not too close to $\tau_c$, and for
$x_{+} = L/\xi_{+} \geq 0$.
The scaling function $\Delta f L^{d}/w^{2}$ of the random field contribution to the critical Casimir force
as given by Eqs. (\ref{33}) and (\ref{34}) is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:1}.
\section{Discussion and perspectives}
\label{sec:dis}
It is interesting and instructive to compare the qualitative behavior of the contribution to the critical Casimir force
due to random surface fields
with the corresponding force for the pure system with Dirichlet-Dirichlet boundary conditions.
In the absence of random surface fields (i.e., $h=0$) the free energy
is given by the first two terms on the r.h.s. of Eq.~(\ref{23}). There, the first term is the
standard mean field contribution (Eq.~(\ref{11})), while the second term
stems from the Gaussian fluctuations
described by the correlation function matrix given in Eq.~(\ref{15}).
Accordingly one finds for the CCF $f_0$ (per $k_BT$ and per area $S_{d-1}$ and in excess of the
$L$-independent contribution from the bulk free energy)
$f_0 = -(\partial E_0/\partial L)+f_0^{(G)} $, where $f_0^{(G)}$ is the contribution from the Gaussian fluctuations.
(The surface free energy of the film does not depend on the film thickness
and thus it does not render a contribution to $f_0$.)
An analytical expression for the mean field contribution $-\partial E_0/\partial L$
is available only for $d=4$; it is given by Eq.~(56) and Fig.~9 in Ref.~\cite{mgd}. This result
vanishes $\sim |x_{-}|^2\exp(-\sqrt{2}|x_{-}|)$ for $-x_{-}\to -\infty$, is parabolic for $-\sqrt{2}\pi \le -x_{-}\le 0$,
and is zero for $x_{+}>0$.
For $T<T_{c,b}$ the Gaussian contribution $f_0^{(G)}$ must be determined numerically (second term in Eq.~(\ref{23})).
For $T>T_{c,b}$ one has $f_0^{(G)}(x_{+}>0,d=4)=3\Theta_{+(0,0)}(x_{+})-x_{+}\Theta'_{+(0,0)}(x_{+})$
with $\Theta_{+(0,0)}(x_{+})= - \bigl(x_{+}^4/(6\pi^2) \bigr)\int_1^{\infty}dy(y^2-1)^{3/2}/(e^{2x_{+}y}-1)$
(see Eq.~(6.12) for $\epsilon =0$ in the first entry of Ref.~\cite{dietrich_krech});
accordingly $f_0^{(G)}(x_{+}\to \infty)=- \bigl(1/(16\pi^{3/2})\bigr)x_{+}^{3/2}e^{-2x_{+}}$.
For $d=3$, the numerically evaluated mean field contribution is shown in Fig.~13 of Ref.~\cite{VGMD}.
For $d=3$ and $T<T_{c,b}$, as for $d=4$, the Gaussian contribution $f_0^{(G)}$ must be determined numerically.
For $d=3$ and $T>T_{c,b}$ one has $f_0^{(G)}(x_{+}>0,d=3)=3\Theta_{+(0,0)}(x_{+})-x_{+}\Theta'_{+(0,0)}(x_{+})$
with $\Theta_{+(0,0)}(x_{+})= - x_{+}^{3/(4\pi)}\int_1^{\infty}dy(y^2-1)/(e^{2x_{+}y}-1)$
(see Eq.~(6.6) in the first entry of Ref.~\cite{dietrich_krech});
accordingly $f_0^{(G)}(x_{+}\to \infty)=- \bigl(1/(6\pi)\bigr)x_{+} e^{-2x_{+}}$.
Our results obtained within the Gaussian approximation for weak disorder in $d=3$
(Eqs.~(\ref{33})) confirm the the interpretation
of the MC simulation data in Ref.~\cite{MVDD}, formulated therein as a hypothesis.
This hypothesis states that for small values of $ w$ the contribution $\Delta f$ to the critical Casimir force
due to random surface fields is, to leading order, proportional to $w^2$, i.e.,
for the scaling function $\vartheta$ of the critical Casimir force one has
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:scal_force_w}
f_0(T,L,h) L^{3} = \vartheta( x,w)\approx \vartheta( x , w=0) + w^2 \delta\vartheta(x) \, ,
\end{equation}
where $\vartheta( x,w=0)$ is the scaling function of the critical Casimir force for $(o,o)$ BC without RSF and
the universal scaling
function $\delta\vartheta$, which is defined via Eq.~(\ref{eq:scal_force_w}), depends on $x$ only.
The scaling variable $x$ equals $-L/\xi_{-}$ for $T \leq T_{c,b}$ and $+L/\xi_{+}$ for $T \geq T_{c,b}$.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:2}, we compare
$\Delta f L^{d}/w^{2} = L^d(f_0(T,L,h) - f_0(T,L,h=0))/w^2 \; \simeq \delta\vartheta(x) $ as given by Eqs.~(\ref{33}) and (\ref{34})
for $d=3$ with the MC simulation data obtained in Ref.~\cite{MVDD}
for $3d$ Ising films with weak surface disorder corresponding to the scaling variable $\hat w=h/L^{0.26}=0.25$.
(In the Ising model considered in Ref.~\cite{MVDD}, the coupling constant within the surface layers
and between the surface layers and their neighboring layers has been taken to be the same as in the bulk.
The corresponding surface enhancement is, within mean-field theory and in units
of the lattice spacing,
$c=1$ \cite{binder}. Beyond mean field theory, the relation between $c$ and
the coupling constants is not known. In Ref.~\cite{MVDD}
the value of $c$ has been set such that $c^{0.87}=1/\kappa$ and
the scaling variable $\hat w=h/L^{0.26}$ has been used.)
The best fit of the MC data by the analytical result is achieved by stretching and compressing
the scaling variable $x$ and the amplitude
of the analytic result for $\Delta f L^{d}/w^{2}$
by a factor of $1.55$ and of $0.3$, respectively.
As can be inferred from Fig.~\ref{fig:2},
the Gaussian approximation qualitatively captures
the influence of the random surface fields on the CCF in the case of weak disorder.
Quantitative agreement is not expected
and, indeed, we find that for $-15\lesssim x \lesssim 10$ the analytic result for $d=3$ deviates from the MC data.
The observed discrepancy is enhanced by the fact that the analytic calculations have been performed by assuming the limit
$c \to \infty$, whereas the MC simulation data have been obtained for $c\simeq 1$.
Moreover, for $x< x_c = -\sqrt{2}\pi$, the scaling function for the OP profile has been approximated by the
scaling function for the associated semi-infinite system close to its fixed-point form corresponding to $c=\infty$
(compare Eqs.~(\ref{16a}) and (\ref{17})).
As already discussed earlier (see Section II, Eqs.~(\ref{16a}) and (\ref{17})),
this approximation is valid for $x_- \gg 1$.
As can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:3}, for $c=1$, which corresponds to the model system studied within the MC simulation,
even for $x_-$ as large as 20 the deviation of the OP scaling function for a film from the one for the corresponding semi-infinite
system is considerable. The smaller the film thickness, the stronger is the deviation.
Concerning future studies, it would be desirable to consider spatially correlated random surface fields with nonzero mean
which better mimic the actual physical systems.
In addition, it would be interesting to study to which extent random surface fields eliminate the critical point
$T_{c, film}$ of the film and, if not, how $T_{c, film}$ is shifted by the Gaussian fluctuations with and without
random surface fields.
Finally it would be rewarding to make analytic progress beyond the Gaussian approximation. To this end one can extend
the renormalization group analysis for the energy density at a single surface (i.e., for a semi-infinite
system \cite{DD}) to that in the presence of a second surface at a distance $L$ (i.e., for the film geometry).
This will lead to a scaling form of the surface energy density which is complicated due to the combination
of multiplicative and additive renormalization. Even the comparison of this scaling property with the present}
explicit Gaussian result is expected to be impeded by logarithmic corrections
appearing in $d=4$. Moreover, in order to be consistent the relation in Eq.~(\ref{25}) has to be
augmented in order to capture non-Gaussian contributions.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig3.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{fig4.eps}
\caption{Scaling function $\psi(s,x)$ of the OP profile in the film (see Sec. III) of thickness $L=10$
(a) and $L=1000$ (b) with $(o,o)$ BCs
for various values of the scaling variable $x_-=L/\xi_-$ (solid lines)
as obtained within mean field theory for $c=1$ (see Ref.~\cite{Gambassi_Dietrich})
compared with the ones for the corresponding semi-infinite system at the fixed point $c=\infty$ (dashed lines).
For the narrow film with $L=10$, deviations from the semi-infinite
OP scaling function are more pronounced and occur at smaller values of $x_-$ as for the thick films.
Such narrow films have been studied by the MC simulations reported in Ref.~\cite{MVDD}.
}
\label{fig:3}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Acknowledgments:} The work by AM has been supported by the Polish National Science Center
(Harmonia Grant No. 2015/18/M/ST3/00403).
\newpage
\begin{center}
|
\section{Introduction}
Turkish is an agglutinating language that builds words by gluing meaning bearing units called morphemes. While gluing morphemes together, vowel harmony and consonant assimilation are intensely applied leading to orthographic transformations in morphemes. For example, the suffix \textit{dir} can be transformed into \textit{d{\i}r}, \textit{dur}, \textit{d\"{u}r} depending on the last vowel in the word to which it is being attached. This is called vowel harmony. Moreover, the same morpheme can be transformed into \textit{tir}, \textit{t{\i}r}, \textit{tur}, \textit{t\"{u}r}, this time depending on the last consonant of the word. This is called consonant assimilation. Both vowel harmony and consonant assimilation introduce different realizations of the same morpheme, which are called allomorphs (e.g. \textit{dir}, \textit{d{\i}r}, \textit{dur}, \textit{d\"{u}r}, \textit{tir}, \textit{t{\i}r}, \textit{tur}, \textit{t\"{u}r} are all allomorphs).
Agglutination already introduces a sparsity problem in natural language processing for especially agglutinating languages. The sparsity problem becomes more crucial when a morpheme has got different realizations. Identifying morphemes that are realizations of each other is the starting point of this work.
Morphological segmentation systems normally provide only the segments of words without any morpheme tags. However, labeled segmentation is required for some natural language processing tasks. For example, in sentiment analysis the Turkish negation suffix \textit{ma} (and its allomorph \textit{me}) needs to be distinguished from the derivational suffix \textit{ma} (and its allomorph \textit{me}) that turns a verb into a noun in order to extract the correct sentiment out. The same also applies for machine translation, question answering, and other natural language processing applications.
Morpheme tagging has become a neglected aspect of morphological segmentation. In this paper, we use conditional random fields (CRF) for morpheme tagging in a weakly-supervised setting. We use the obtained morpheme tags in part-of-speech tagging (PoS tagging) in order to mitigate sparsity in a case when small amount of data is provided. Indeed the sparsity problem is quite severe in PoS tagging for especially agglutinating languages where different methods (e.g. smoothing) have been applied to deal with sparsity. The sparsity is alleviated significantly by using morpheme tags rather than using lexical instances such as words or suffixes.
This paper is organized as follows: Section~\ref{relatedwork} points at the related work in the literature, section~\ref{model} describes the CRF model adopted in morpheme tagging and describes the HMMs used in PoS tagging, section~\ref{experiments} presents the experimental results from both tasks and finally section~\ref{conclusion} concludes the paper with the remaining future work.
\section{Related Work}
\label{relatedwork}
There has been a substantial amount of work on unsupervised morphological segmentation. Goldsmith~\cite{Goldsmith}, Creutz and Lagus~\cite{Creutz2002} build morphological segmentation systems based on minimum description length (MDL). Creutz and Lagus~\cite{CreutzCatMap} introduce a hidden Markov model (HMM) that employs the probability distributions between different morpheme categories such as prefix, stem, and suffix. Poon et al.~\cite{Poon} introduce a log-linear model for unsupervised morphological segmentation that incorporates MDL-inspired priors.
All of these models provide only morphological segmentations of words and not any morphological tags that identify the morpheme roles within a word. Learning morpheme tags involve distinguishing homophonous morphemes\footnote{Morphemes with the same surface forms but with different meanings.} and learning allomorphs. Oflazer~\cite{Oflazer93} introduce derivational boundaries and inflectional groups in Turkish morphological analysis. This is performed by two-level morphology (PC-KIMMO~\cite{Antworth,Kimmo1983}) that formulates morphological segmentation via a cascade of finite state transducers by employing morphophonemic alternations. All ortographic and morphophonemic rules are implemented by a set of finite-state automata (FSA) rules. Their model gives a labeled morphological analysis based on these rules.
Allomorfessor~\cite{Allomorfessor} is one of the models that aims to perform morphological segmentation based on allomorphs by modeling mutations between different surface forms of morphemes, namely allomorphs. Can and Manandhar~\cite{canmanandhar} develop an agglomerative hierarchical clustering to find the morpheme classes in an unsupervised setting.
To our knowledge, Ryan et al.~\cite{Ryan} introduce labeled morphological segmentation for the first time in a supervised learning framework without using any rules. They model morphotactics by a semi-Markov model. Different levels of tagsets are introduced that capture different levels of granularity. Our model resembles their model from the aspect of morphological tagging.
Morpheme tags have been used in many natural language processing tasks. El-Kahlout and Oflazer~\cite{elkahlout} employ morphological tags in order to alleviate the sparsity by matching the Turkish morphemes having the same morphological tag to the same English translation in statistical machine translation task. They address that using morphological tags provides a substantial improvement on the BLUE score.
Morpheme tags have been used in morphological/PoS disambiguation in Turkish language. Ehsani et al.~\cite{ehsani} use conditional random fields for disambiguating PoS tags in Turkish by utilizing the morphological tags. They introduce some dependencies between inflectional groups of morphemes in order to simplify the transition probabilities. Sak et al.~\cite{Sak2007} apply perceptron algorithm for morphological disambiguation. Hakkani-Tur et al.~\cite{hakkanitur} formulate a trigram HMM based on inflectional groups in order to disambiguate morphological parses of a given word. The results show that using the dependencies between inflectional groups of adjacent words improve PoS tagging accuracy. Many of these models select a complete morphological analysis for each word rather than providing a single PoS tag.
Dincer et al.~\cite{dincer} formulate HMMs by emitting suffixes rather than emitting words in order to mitigate the sparsity. However, they do not use any morpheme tags. Our PoS model is mostly similar to their work in this respect. We use morpheme tags in order to cope with the sparsity in emission probabilities rather than using fixed-length endings of words.
\section{Model}
\label{model}
\subsection{Turkish Morphology}
Turkish is an agglutinating language that has a productive inflectional and derivational suffixation. This brings the sparsity problem in nlp tasks due to the large vocabulary introduced by the language. The vocabulary size of a corpus having 1 million words becomes 106.547~\cite{hakkanitur}. In order to deal with the sparsity, a representation that shows inflectional groups and derivation boundaries of the morphological analysis of each word is introduced by Hakkani-T\"{u}r et al.~\cite{hakkanitur}.The different morphological analyses of the word \textit{al{\i}nd{\i}} are given as follows by a two-level morphological analyzer~\cite{ehsani}: \\
al+Verb\textasciicircum{}DB+Verb+Pass+Pos+Past+A3sg (\textit{it was taken})
al+Adj\textasciicircum{}DB+Noun+Zero+A3sg+P2sg+Nom\textasciicircum{}DB+Verb+Zero+Past+A3sg (\textit{it was your red})
al+Adj\textasciicircum{}DB+Noun+Zero+A3sg+Pnon+Gen\textasciicircum{}DB+Verb+Zero+Past+A3sg (\textit{it was the one of the red})
al{\i}nd{\i}+Noun+A3sg+Pnon+Nom (\textit{receipt})
al{\i}n+Verb+Pos+Past+A3sg (\textit{resent})
al{\i}n+Noun+A3sg+Pnon+Nom\textasciicircum{}DB+Verb+Zero+Past+A3sg (\textit{it was the forehead}) \\
Here ˆDB's denote the derivation boundaries and the rest of the morpheme tags denote the inflectional groups (IGs). Most of the words have more than one morphological analysis in Turkish and the morphological disambiguation aim to find the right morphological analysis of the word given in a specific context.
In this work, we are only using the morpheme tags (both derivational and inflectional) of words in order to find a single PoS tag for each word. We believe that morpheme tags give the best clue for a PoS tag. This is sufficient if we are only interested in syntax but not in the meaning. For example, the analyses of \textit{al{\i}nd{\i}} that end with \textit{A3sg} can be considered as verbs, whereas the only analysis ending with \textit{Nom} can be considered as a noun. In order to find the morpheme tags we only use the morphotactic features of morphemes within the words, whereas we use contextual features and morphological features in PoS tagging.
\subsection{Morphological Tagging by Using CRFs}
Conditional Random Fields (CRF)~\cite{lafferty2001conditional} are undirected graphical models that are generally used for segmenting and labeling a given sequence. Unlike HMMs, CRFs are discriminative models that define the conditional distribution \(P(Y|M) \) rather than the joint probability distribution \(P(M,Y) \), where Y corresponds to the label sequence $Y=\{y_0, y_1, \cdots, y_n\}$ and $M$ corresponds to the input (i.e. observations) sequence $M=\{m_0, m_1, \cdots, m_n\}$. In our case, the label sequence $Y$ refers to the morpheme tags and observation sequence $M$ refers to the morphemes.
The conditional distribution \(P(Y|M) \) in our CRF model is given as follows:
\begin{equation}
p(Y|M) = \frac{1}{Z(M)} \prod_n^N \prod_i^{I_n} \lambda F (Y,M)
\end{equation}
that iterates over the morphemes of each word in the corpus with $N$ words, each having $I_n$ morphemes defined on a feature set $F$. Here \({Z(M)}\) is the normalization factor:
\begin{equation}
Z(M)= \sum_{y_i} \prod_n^N \prod_i^{I_n} \lambda F (Y,M)
\end{equation}
Here \(\lambda\) corresponds to the weight vector for the feature set \(F\). Feature function $F$ consists of two types: state feature functions \(s(y,m,i)\) and transition feature functions \(s({y}',y,m,i)\) where $i$ denotes the input position. State feature function is non-zero when the label \(y_{i}\) is matched with the label defined in the function, whereas transition functions depend on the label sequence \(y_{i-1},y_{i}\).
\newsavebox{\crf}
\begin{lrbox}{\crf}
\cropgraphics[0.50]{crf_fig_}{100}{298}
\end{lrbox}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\usebox{\crf}
\end{center}
\caption{Our Naive model for the conditional random field. Each state denotes a morpheme tag, where a word $w$ is defined as $w=m_i/y_{i}+m_{i+1}/y_{i+1}+m_{i+2}/y_{i+2}$.}\label{fig:crf}
\end{figure}
Our model is given in Figure~\ref{fig:crf}. We adopt a Naive model where an edge is built between every state pair. Therefore, morpheme tags within the same word are assumed to be dependent on each other, whereas each word is assumed to be independent from the others. Thus, we deal with only morphotactic rules within the same word for morpheme tagging task without using any contextual features.
\subsection{Adopting Morphological Tags in PoS Tagging}
We use the obtained morpheme tags from the CRF model in order to infer the PoS tags of words. We learn PoS tags according to the following formulation by finding the PoS tag sequence that maximizes the probability for a given sequence of words:
\begin{equation}
\label{posterior}
argmax_{t_{1}\cdots t_{n}} P(t_{1}\cdots t_{n}|w_{1}\cdots w_{n})
\end{equation}
where \(t_{1}\cdots t_{n}\) denotes the PoS tags and \(w_{1}...w_{n}\) denotes the sequence of words. The Bayes' rule is simply applied for the posterior probability as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{hmmformula}
\arg\max\limits_{t_{1}\cdots t_{n}} P(t_{1}\cdots t_{n}|w_{1}...w_{n}) &=& \arg\max\limits_{t_{1}\cdots t_{n}} \frac{P(w_{1}...w_{n}|t_{1}\cdots t_{n}) P(t_{1}\cdots t_{n})}{P(w_{1}\cdots w_{n})} \nonumber \\
&\propto& \arg\max\limits_{t_{1}\cdots t_{n}} P(w_{1}\cdots w_{n}|t_{1}\cdots t_{n}) P(t_{1}\cdots t_{n}) \nonumber \\
\end{eqnarray}
where $P(w_{1}\cdots w_{n})$ is discarded since it is the same for all tag assignments for the given word sequence.
We formulate the posterior probability as a trigram HMM by assuming that each PoS tag depends only on the previous two tags:
\begin{equation}
P(t_{1}\cdots t_{n}) = p(t_1) p(t_2|t_1)\prod_{i}p(t_i|t_{i-2},t_{i-1})
\end{equation}
We apply interpolation to smooth the transition probabilities in order to rule out zeros in transitions with the equation given below:
\begin{equation}
P_{inter}(t_{i}|t^{i-1}_{i-n+1}) = \beta_{t^{i-1}_{i-n+1}}P(t_{i}|t^{i-1}_{i-n+1})+(1-\beta_{t^{i-1}_{i-n+1}})P_{inter}(t_{i}|t^{i-1}_{i-n+2})
\end{equation}
which defines an nth-order smoothed model where \(P_{inter}(t_{i}|t^{i-1}_{i-n+1})\) corresponds to the transition probability after interpolation is applied recursively. We estimate the parameters $\mathbf{\beta}$ by tuning our model on a development set.
\newsavebox{\hmm}
\begin{lrbox}{\hmm}
\cropgraphics[0.35]{hmm_fig}{10}{0}
\end{lrbox}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\usebox{\hmm}
\end{center}
\caption{Our trigram HMM adopted for PoS tagging. The bold units are emitted from the states. The first word \textit{\c{S}imdi} is emitted from $t_1$, the tag of the last morpheme in the second word \textit{Dat} is emitted from $t_2$, and the tag of the last morpheme in the third word \textit{A1sg} is emitted from $t_3$.}\label{fig:hmm}
\end{figure}
The sparsity problem also emerges in the emission probabilities. We emit the tag of the last morpheme in the word if the word has more than two segments. Otherwise, the word itself is emitted from the PoS tag as seen in Figure~\ref{fig:hmm}. Therefore, the emission probabilities are estimated as follows:
\begin{equation}
p(w_i|t_i)=
\begin{cases}
p(y_{n-1}|t_i), & \text{if } w_i=\{m_1/y_1+\cdots +m_{n-1}/y_{n-1}\} \\
p(w_i|t_i),& \text{otherwise}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $y_{n-1}$ is the morpheme tag of the last suffix in the word. We apply interpolation to smooth $p(w_i|t_i)$ for the words which do not exist in the corpus and cannot be segmented further:
\begin{equation}
P_{inter}(w_{i}|t_{i}) = \alpha P(w_{i}|t_{i})+(1-\alpha)\frac{max(f(w_{i}),1)}{N}
\end{equation}
Here \(P_{inter}(w_{i}|t_{i})\) corresponds to the smoothed emission probabilities, \(f(w_{i})\) is the number of word tokens of type \(w_{i}\), \(N\) is the vocabulary size, and $\alpha$ is the interpolation coefficient.
Viterbi algorithm is applied to find the PoS tag sequence that maximizes the posterior probability given in Equation~\ref{hmmformula}.
\section{Experiments \& Results}
\label{experiments}
\subsection{Data}
We used several different corpora for the experiments. One of them is METU-Sabanc{\i} Turkish Treebank~\cite{say2002development} that consists of 56k word tokens and 5600 sentences. The dataset includes PoS tags and morphological analyses of the words.
For the additional experiments, in order to compare our CRF model with the Semi-Markov Model by Ryan et al.~\cite{Ryan}, we used their dataset that consists of 3573 morphologically segmented and tagged word tokens, of which 1987 words belong to the train set and 1586 words belong to the test set.
In order to compare our PoS tagging model with Sak et. al.~\cite{Sak2007}, we used their training and test set that are collected from various newspaper archives. This dataset consists of $\sim$800k word tokens and $\sim$47.5k sentences.
For all of the experiments, we used a separate development set that consists of 6K words to tune the interpolation coefficients. We assigned $\alpha=0.9$ for the emission probabilities, $\beta_1=0.6$ (bigram) and $\beta_2=0.4$ (unigram) for the bigram transition probabilities, and $\beta_1=0.5$ (trigram), $\beta_2=0.3$ (bigram), and $\beta_3=0.2$ (unigram) for the interpolation used in trigram transitions.
For morpheme tagging experiments, we removed out all punctuation from the datasets and reintroduced the terminal punctuation for PoS tagging task since the word boundaries are crucial for PoS tagging.
\subsection{Experiments on Morphological Tagging}
In morpheme tagging task, we assume that morphological segmentations of words are provided. We obtained the segmentations and morpheme labels through an open-source morphological analyzer called Zemberek~\cite{akin2007zemberek} in order to build a train set for the morpheme tagging task. Zemberek defines 84 different morpheme tags on Metu-Sabanc{\i} Treebank. We used the open source CRF package~\cite{sha2003shallow} for training our own model on our training set. Some of the morphemes belonging to the same morpheme tag obtained from the test set by using the trained CRF model are given in Table~\ref{ex_tag}. The final morpheme tags show that allomorphs can ben learned by our model. For example, \textit{la}, \textit{le}, \textit{yla}, and \textit{yle} are all allomorphs.
\begin{table}[!t]
\centering
\caption{Some of the morphemes and their tags (with frequencies) obtained from our CRF model.}
\begin{tabular}{ c | l }
\hline
\textbf{Morpheme tag} & \textbf{Example morphemes obtained by CRF} \\
\hline
Location: & da (7439), de (7633), nde (4877), te (1520), nda (8548), \\ & ta (1537), \c{c}i (2), un (1) \\
\hline
Infinitive: & mek (2774), mak (3481) \\
\hline
Inst: & la (2218), le (2299), yla (2186), yle (2518) \\
\hline
AfterDoing: & y\i{}p (141), yip (104), up (335), \"{u}p (106), yup (20), \"{u}n (12), \\ & \i{}m (24), \"{u}m\"{u}z (2) \\
\hline
Dative: & na (5877), e (7298), ne (4860), ye (2718), ya (2741) \\
\hline
Progressive: & \i{}yor (4738), iyor (6022), uyor (1756), \"{u}yor (1343), \i{}c\i{} (2) \\
\hline
Desire: & se (301), sa (659), yacak (8), yecek (3) \\
\hline
Ablative: & nden (1959), dan (3053), tan (1061), ndan (3514), \\ & ten (874), dik (1) \\
\hline
Narrative: & m\i{}\c{s} (595), m\"{u}\c{s} (276), mi\c{s} (1640), mu\c{s} (782), t\"{u}r (7), t\i{}r (30), \\ & tik\c{c}e (3), \i{}ver (2), t\i{}k (1), \"{u}ver (1), \i{}c\i{} (2), \"{u}n (1), y\i{}ver (1), \\ & t\i{}\u{g} (1), s\i{}n (1), \c{c}i (1), d\"{u}r (1), \"{u}m (1) \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{ex_tag}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Morpheme tagging F1 scores for different training set sizes on Metu-Sabanc{\i} Turkish Treebank}
\begin{tabular}{ c c c c }
\hline
Train set size & Test set size & Number of tags & F1 Score \\
\hline
500 & 46440 & 84 & 80.71\% \\
1000 & 45940 & 84 & 83.92\% \\
1500 & 45440 & 84 & 88.48\% \\
2000 & 44940 & 84 & 90.39\% \\
3000 & 43940 & 84 & 92.13\% \\
4000 & 42940 & 84 & 93.26\% \\
5000 & 41940 & 84 & \textbf{94.12\%} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{crf_results_metusabanci}
\end{table}
We used Zemberek again in order to create gold sets for the morpheme tagging task. F1 scores for morphological tagging for different sizes of train and test sets obtained from Metu-Sabanc{\i} Turkish Treebank are given in Table~\ref{crf_results_metusabanci}\footnote{Precision and recall values are the same because gold sets and results consists of same number of morphemes since we are only doing morpheme tagging and not any segmentation.}. The F1 score of the model is $80.7\%$ for a training set with 500 words, whereas the F1 score increases up to $94.1\%$ on a 5K training set. Therefore, the F1 score significantly improves on the larger training sets.
We also tested our model on the manually collected newspaper archives, which is much larger than Metu-Sabanc{\i} Turkish Treebank. We obtained an F1 score of $93.7\%$ on a 5K train set and 700K test set. This shows that the performance of our model does not drop significantly for larger test sets. The results are given in Table~\ref{crf_results_boun}.
\begin{table}[!t]
\centering
\caption{Results of morpheme tagging on manually collected newspaper archives.}
\begin{tabular}{ c c c c }
\hline
Train set size & Test set size & Number of tags & F1 Score \\
\hline
5000 & 720332 & 88 & 93.70\% \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{crf_results_boun}
\end{table}
We compared our model with Chipmunk~\cite{Ryan} by using their tag set and datasets. The results are given in Table~\ref{comp_chipmunk_crf}. Our CRF model outperforms their model on accuracy, whereas their model outperforms ours on F1 score. However, it should be noted that Chipmunk dataset lacks the derivation morpheme tags, whereas we are also learning derivation morpheme tags in our model.
\begin{table}[!t]
\centering
\caption{Comparison of Chipmunk~\cite{Ryan} and our CRF model for morpheme tagging}
\begin{tabular}{ c c c c c }
\hline
& Train set size & Test set size & Accuracy & F1 Score \\
\hline
Chipmunk & 1987 & 1586 & 56.06\% & \textbf{85.07\%} \\
CRF & 1987 & 1586 & \textbf{66.62\%} & 66.62\% \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{comp_chipmunk_crf}
\end{table}
\subsection{Experiments on PoS Tagging}
Our PoS tag set consists of 13 major PoS tags~\cite{ehsani}, that are Adj, Adv, Conj, Det, Interj, Noun, Num, Postp, Pron, Punc, Verb, Ques, Dup.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{PoS tagging accuracy scores on Metu-Sabanc{\i} Turkish Treebank}
\begin{tabular}{ c c c c c c }
\hline
Train size & Test size & Tag num. & Word Emission Acc. & Suffix Acc. & Morpheme Tag Acc. \\
\hline
5025 & 1017 & 13 &84.85\% & 86.23\% & \textbf{88.98\%} \\
18205 & 1017 & 13 &88.59\% & 88.69\% & \textbf{90.95\%} \\
39392 & 1017 & 13 &89.18\% & 89.57\% & \textbf{91.05\%} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{hmm_results_metu}
\end{table}
We tested our model on two different datasets. The first set of experiments were performed on Metu-Sabanc{\i} Turkish Treebank. The results are given in Table~\ref{hmm_results_metu} for different sizes of train/test sets and for different emission types. We provide results for word emissions, last suffix emissions, and the tag of the last morpheme's emissions. For a 5K training set, word emission accuracy is $84.8\%$, suffix emission accuracy is $86.2\%$, and morpheme tag emission accuracy is $88.9\%$. This shows that using morpheme tag emission outperforms both word emissions and last suffix emissions in smaller datasets. The accuracy increases on a $\sim$40K train set, but still using morpheme tag emissions outperforms using word and last suffix emissions.
The results obtained from the manually collected newspaper archives are given in Table~\ref{hmm_results_boun}. This time using the word emissions outperforms using the last suffix and the last morpheme tag emissions because the sparsity becomes no longer a problem in the larger train sets.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{PoS tagging accuracy scores on manually collected newspaper archives}
\begin{tabular}{ c c c c c c }
\hline
Train size & Test size & Tag num. & Word Emission Acc. & Suffix Acc. & Morpheme Tag Acc. \\
\hline
5677 & 1005 & 13 & 83.88\% & 86.66\% & \textbf{89.25\%} \\
25535 & 1005 & 13 &90.64\% & 89.45\% & \textbf{91.94\%} \\
53829 & 1005 & 13 &92.43\% & 91.11\% & \textbf{92.93\%} \\
106019 & 1005 & 13 &\textbf{94.62\%} & 91.64\% & 93.43\% \\
714757 & 1005 & 13 &\textbf{95.44\%} & 91.34\% & 93.83\% \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{hmm_results_boun}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{PoS Tagging accuracy scores for the experiments with/without terminal punctuation on Metu Sabanc{\i} Turkish Treebank.}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c }
\hline
& 5K & 18K & 39K \\ \hline
With terminal punc - multiple HMM &\textbf{88.98\%} &\textbf{90.95\%} &\textbf{91.05\%} \\
With terminal punc - single HMM
&88.60\% &90.86\% &90.96\% \\
Without terminal punc - multiple HMM &87.51\% &89.74\% &89.85\% \\
Without terminal punc - single HMM &86.30\% &88.19\% &88.53\% \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{hmm_results_comp_with_punc}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Comparison of our model with suffix based tagger~\cite{dincer} and the perceptron algorithm~\cite{Sak2007} on the datasets obtained from Metu Sabanc{\i} Turkish Treebank.}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c }
\hline
& Train Set Size & Test Set Size & Accuracy \\ \hline
Suffix-based tagger~\cite{dincer} & 5025 & 1017 & 84.25\% \\
Perceptron~\cite{Sak2007} & 5025 & 1017 & 85.15\% \\
HMM with the last morpheme tag & 5025 & 1017 & \textbf{88.98\%} \\
\hline
Suffix-based tagger~\cite{dincer} & 18205 & 1017 & 88.90\% \\
Perceptron~\cite{Sak2007} & 18205 & 1017 & 86.71\% \\
HMM with the last morpheme tag & 18205 & 1017 & \textbf{90.95\%} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{hmm_results_comp}
\end{table}
In order to measure the impact of terminal punctuation in PoS tagging, we did two sets of experiments on Metu Sabanc{\i} Turkish Treebank. In the first set of experiments, we included the terminal punctuation, whereas in the second set of experiments we excluded the terminal punctuation. While including the terminal punctuation, first we built one HMM for each sentence in the training set, second we built only one HMM for the entire corpus where all the words are linked to each other on the same HMM that are separated by terminal punctuation. We obtained an accuracy of $88.9\%$ for multiple HMM approach, whereas we obtained an accuracy of $88.6\%$ for a single HMM approach on 5K train set. In the second set of experiments, we completely excluded the terminal punctuation and repeated the experiments for multiple HMMs and a single HMM. We obtained an accuracy of $87.5\%$ for multiple HMMs, whereas we obtained an accuracy of $86.3\%$ for a single HMM. Results are given in Table~\ref{hmm_results_comp_with_punc}. It shows that even though terminal punctuation plays an important role in PoS tagging, behaving each sentence as a single HMM by assuming that sentences are independent from each other leads to a slight increase in the accuracy.
We compared our model with Sak et al.~\cite{Sak2007} and Dincer et al.~\cite{dincer} on Metu Sabanc{\i} Turkish Treebank. We used the last 5 letters of each word with a second order HMM to implement the suffix based tagger by Dincer et al.~\cite{dincer}, since their model gives the best scores for the last 5 letters. Results are given in Table~\ref{hmm_results_comp}. The results show that our model outperforms the other two models on smaller datasets (i.e. 5K and 18K).
Obtaining data is one major problem in natural language processing tasks. Using small datasets by reducing sparsity is one challenge in natural language processing. Here, we aimed to increase the accuracy of PoS tagging for an agglutinating language on smaller datasets when large datasets are not available. Our results show that it is possible to use a kind of class-based language model by grouping the morphemes according to their syntactic roles within a word by tagging them and then using it for PoS tagging to reduce the sparsity in smaller datasets.
\section{Conclusion \& Future Work}
\label{conclusion}
We introduced a CRF model to tag the morphemes syntactically and a HMM model for PoS tagging that uses these morpheme tags in order to reduce the sparsity in Turkish PoS tagging on smaller datasets. We managed to obtain morpheme tags with F1 score 94.1\% on a limited training set by using CRFs. Then, we trained a second-order HMM model with the last morpheme tag of each word emitted from each HMM state in order to perform PoS tagging, contrary to the conventional approach of using words' surface forms emitted from HMM states. The results show that using the last morpheme tags helps dealing with the sparsity especially on small train sets.
We believe that morphological features of the context words will be also informative in morpheme tagging task because Eryigit et al.~\cite{eryigit} shows that using inflectional groups as units in Turkish dependency parsing increases the parsing performance. We leave using the contextual information in morpheme tagging as a future work.
\section{Acknowledgments}
This research is supported by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) with the project number EEEAG-115E464 and we are grateful to TUBITAK for their financial support.
\bibliographystyle{splncs03}
|
\section{Introduction}
Optimal foraging theory is a classic framework that specifies when a forager
should continue to exploit local resources or move to new feeding
grounds~\cite{C76,KR85,SK86,OB90,B91,ASD97,KM01}. The goal is to formulate a
strategy to consume the maximal amount of resource per unit time. Optimal
strategies typically involve the interplay between continuing to exploit
resources in a current search domain or moving to another and potentially
richer search domain. This same tension underlies a diverse range of
decision-making problems, including, for example, the management of
firms~\cite{M91,GDB14}, the multiarm bandit problem~\cite{R52,G79}, the
secretary problem~\cite{F89} and its variant, Feynman's restaurant
problem~\cite{Fe}, and search of human memory~\cite{HJT12,AAG15}. These
problems offer a rich arena for applying statistical physics ideas. An
independent approach to foraging is to search using exotic search strategies,
such as L\'evy walks~\cite{Viswanathan:1999a}, intermittent
walks~\cite{Benichou:2005,Oshanin:2007,Lomholt:2008,Bressloff:2011,VLRS11,PCM14}
and persistent random walks~\cite{Tejedor:2012}. However, these models
typically do not account for resource depletion in an explicit way.
In the context of resource foraging, we recently introduced the
\emph{starving random walk} model, in which the forager is unaffected by the
presence or absence of food and always performs an unbiased random
walk~\cite{BR14,CBR16}. When a forager lands on a food-containing site, all
the food there is consumed. Immediately afterwards, the forager is in a
fully sated state and can hop $\mathcal{S}$ additional steps without again
encountering food before it starves. However, if the forager lands on an
empty site, the forager goes hungry and comes one time unit closer to
starvation. Because there is no replenishment, resources are depleted by
consumption and the forager is doomed to ultimately starve to death. This
feature of depletion makes the forager motion a non-trivial non-Markovian
process. How does the forager lifetime $\mathcal{T}$ depend on basic
parameters---its metabolic capacity $\mathcal{S}$ and the spatial dimension
$d$? While there has been progress in answering this
question~\cite{BR14,CBR16}, a full understanding is still incomplete.
In this work, we investigate an ecologically motivated extension of the
starving random walk where the forager possesses a modicum of environmental
awareness---whenever the nearest neighborhood of a forager contains both
empty and full (food-containing) sites, the forager preferentially moves
towards the food (Fig.~\ref{cartoon}). We define this local propensity to
move towards food as ``greed''. We will also investigate \emph{negative}
greed, or equivalently, food aversion, in which a forager tends to avoid food
in its nearest neighborhood.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{illustrate-1d}\qquad\qquad
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{illustrate-2d}}
\caption{ Greedy forager motion in $d=1$ and $d=2$. Solid and open circles indicate food
and empty sites. Arrow widths indicate relative hopping
probabilities.}
\label{cartoon}
\end{figure}
Because greed is a universal attribute, its role in optimization processes
has been widely investigated. In computer science, greedy algorithms are
often an initial approach to solve complex problems~\cite{CLRN01,BGY04,MM11}.
Such algorithms work well for finding the minimal spanning tree of a
graph~\cite{K56} or the ground state of a spin glass~\cite{NS94}, but work
less well for the traveling salesman problem~\cite{MM11} and depth first
search processes~\cite{G}. Greed also represents a particularly simple
example of feedback between the environmental state and the forager motion, a
mechanism that abounds in the microscopic world. Perhaps the best-known
example is the run and tumble model of chemotaxis~\cite{BB72,BP77,DZ88}, in
which a bacterium effectively swims up a concentration gradient of
nourishment. In chemotaxis, however, the concentration of nutrients is
fixed, while the starving forager model explicitly incorporates resource
depletion.
Endowing a starving random walker with greed allows us to discuss the
dichotomy between exploration and exploitation in foraging problems---should
one continue to exploit a rich local lode in a ``desert'' or is it better to
move to a region where resources are more abundant
overall~\cite{BR08,OCF13,PBHIW}? This is the basic question that we address
by extending first-passage techniques to the unconventional random walk that
arises because of the local bias whenever the forager encounters food.
In $d=1$, we implement greed as follows: when one neighbor of the forager
contains food while the other is empty, the forager moves towards the food
with probability $p=(1+G)/2$, where $G$ is the greediness parameter that lies
in $[-1,1]$; otherwise, the forager hops symmetrically (Fig.~\ref{cartoon}).
For $d>1$ the forager chooses one of the $k$ full sites in its neighborhood
of $z$ sites with probability $p={(1+G)}/{\big[(z-k)(1-G)+k(1+G)\big]}$. The
forager begins in the ``Eden'' condition where all sites initially contain
food. As the forager moves, it carves out a food-depleted region---the
``desert''. As this desert grows, the forager typically spends longer times
wandering within the desert and eventually starves.
\section{Heuristics For One Dimension}
We provide a heuristic argument that predicts both a non-monotonic dependence
of lifetime on greediness and a huge maximum for greediness $G\approx -1$
(Fig.~\ref{greed-prelim}). Here, starvation proceeds in two stages: (i) The
forager first carves a critical desert of length $L_c$ by repeatedly reaching
either edge of the desert within $\mathcal{S}$ steps after food is consumed.
The critical length is defined by a forager of capacity $\mathcal{S}$
typically starving if it attempts to cross a desert of this length. We
denote the time to create this critical-length desert as $\mathcal{T}_c$.
(ii) Once the desert length reaches $L_c$, the forager likely starves if it
attempts to cross the desert. That is, the far side is unreachable and thus
irrelevant. The time for this second stage is just the lifetime of a forager
in a semi-infinite desert, $\mathcal{T}_{\rm SI}$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\hspace{0.35cm}\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{all-greed-1d-l}
\includegraphics[width=0.41\textwidth]{survivaltime-vs-greed-2d-scaled-l}
\caption{ Dependence of the scaled forager lifetime $\mathcal{T}/\mathcal{S}$
on greediness $G$ in $d=1$ and $d=2$. The inset compares simulations with
the analytic result \eqref{T-full} for $G$ close to $-1$ and
$\mathcal{S}=10^6$. Dotted curves in $d=2$ correspond to a non-backtracking
walk (see summary text).}
\label{greed-prelim}
\end{figure}
We now estimate the quantities $L_c$, $\mathcal{T}_c$, and
$\mathcal{T}_{\rm SI}$. The time for a forager to reach food when it starts
a unit distance from food in a desert of length $k$ is given by
$t_1(k)=\frac{1-p}{p}\, k+3-\frac{2}{p}$ (see App.~\ref{app:escape}).
Therefore the time for the desert to grow to the critical length $L_c\gg 1$ is
\begin{equation}
\label{Tc}
\mathcal{T}_c=\sum_{k=1}^{L_c} t_1(k)\simeq \frac{1-p}{p}\,\frac{L_c^2}{2}.
\end{equation}
We determine $L_c$ by equating the typical time to cross a desert of this
length, $t_\times \simeq \frac{2}{3} L_c^2+\frac{4L}{3p}$ (see App.~\ref{app:escape}), to
$\mathcal{S}$. This gives two behaviors: $L_c\simeq \sqrt{3\mathcal{S}/2}$
for $p\gg 1/\sqrt{\mathcal{S}}$, and $L_c\simeq 3p\mathcal{S}/4$ for
$p\ll 1/\sqrt{\mathcal{S}}$. Thus the time to reach the critical-length
desert is
\begin{equation}
\label{Ti}
\mathcal{T}_c\simeq
\begin{cases} \displaystyle{ 3(1\!-\!p)\mathcal{S}/4p} & \qquad p\gg
1/\sqrt{\mathcal{S}}\,,\\[0.15cm]
\displaystyle{9p\mathcal{S}^2/32} & \qquad p\ll 1/\sqrt{\mathcal{S}}\,.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
For the semi-infinite geometry, a typical trajectory consists of segments
where the forager moves ballistically into the food-containing region,
interspersed by diffusive segments in the desert
(Fig~\ref{semi-inf-cartoon}). As long as the diffusive segment lasts less
than $\mathcal{S}$ steps, the forager returns to the food/desert interface
and a new cycle of consumption and subsequent diffusion begins. A ballistic
segment of $m$ consecutive steps towards food (followed by a step away)
occurs with probability $p^m(1-p)$. The average time $t_b$ for this
ballistic segment is $t_b = \sum_{m\geq 1} m\, p^m\,(1\!-\!p)=p/(1\!-\!p)$.
The probability $\mathcal{R}$ for a diffusive segment to return to food
within $\mathcal{S}$ steps is the integral of the first-passage probability
for a forager that starts at $x=1$ to reach $x=0$ within time
$\mathcal{S}$~\cite{R01}:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{R}=\int_0^\mathcal{S} dt\,\,\frac{ e^{-1/4Dt}}{\sqrt{4\pi D t^3}} =
\mathrm{erfc}(1/\sqrt{4D\mathcal{S}})\,,\nonumber
\end{align}
where erfc$(\cdot)$ is the complementary error function. The average number
of returns is
$\langle r \rangle= \sum_{r\geq 1} r \,\mathcal{R}^r(1\!-\!\mathcal{R})=
\mathcal{R}/(1\!-\!\mathcal{R})\simeq \sqrt{\pi\mathcal{S}/2}$
for $\mathcal{S}\to\infty$, where the asymptotics of the error function gives
the final result, and we take the diffusion coefficient $D=\frac{1}{2}$. For
a forager that does return within $\mathcal{S}$ steps, the return time $t_r$
is thus
\begin{align}
t_r &=\frac{1}{\mathcal{R}} \int_0^\mathcal{S} dt\, t\, \frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi Dt^3}}\,\,
e^{-1/4Dt} \simeq \sqrt{\frac{2\mathcal{S}}{\pi}} -1\,.\nonumber
\end{align}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.325\textwidth]{semi-inf-cartoon}}
\caption{ Schematic illustration of the space-time trajectory of a greedy
forager in the semi-infinite geometry. The shaded region denotes food.}
\label{semi-inf-cartoon}
\end{figure}
The total trajectory therefore contains
$\langle r\rangle=\sqrt{\pi\mathcal{S}/2}$ elements, each of which are
comprised of a ballistic and a diffusive segment. The time for each element
equals $t_b+t_r$. There is also the final and fatal diffusive segment of
exactly $\mathcal{S}$ steps. Consequently, the forager lifetime
$\mathcal{T}_{\rm SI}$ in the semi-infinite geometry is
\begin{align}
\label{T-semi}
\mathcal{T}_{\rm SI} &\simeq \langle r\rangle (t_b+t_r)+\mathcal{S}\simeq
\frac{2p-1}{1-p}\, \sqrt{\frac{\pi\mathcal{S}}{2}}+2\mathcal{S}\,.
\end{align}
From \eqref{Ti} and \eqref{T-semi}, we estimate the forager lifetime as
\begin{equation}
\label{T_qualit}
\mathcal{T} \simeq
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle{ \Big[\frac{3(1\!-\!p)}{4p} +2\Big] \mathcal{S}
+\frac{2p\!-\!1}{(1\!-\!p)}\,\sqrt{\frac{\pi\mathcal{S}}{2}}}\,,
& p\gg 1/\sqrt{\mathcal{S}}\,,\\[0.35cm]
\displaystyle{ \frac{9}{32}\,p\mathcal{S}^2+ 2\mathcal{S
}} +\frac{2p\!-\!1}{(1\!-\!p)}\,
\sqrt{\frac{\pi\mathcal{S}}{2}}\,, & p\ll 1/\sqrt{\mathcal{S}}\,.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Two important consequences follow (Fig.~\ref{greed-prelim}):
\begin{itemize}
\item When $\mathcal{S}$ exceeds a critical value, it is easily seen that $\mathcal{T}$
is decreasing with $p$, except for $p\to 0$ and $p\to 1$. Since
$\mathcal{T}$ diverges as $p\to 1$, the dependence of lifetime on
greediness is non-monotonic!
\item For $p\simeq 1/\sqrt{\mathcal{S}}$, Eqs.~\eqref{T_qualit} give a common
lifetime $\mathcal{T}\sim \mathcal{S}^{3/2}$---a huge maximum for large
$\mathcal{S}$\,! This maximum induces a second non-monotonicity in the
negative greed (food averse) regime.
\end{itemize}
\section{One-Dimensional Solution}
We now outline the analytical solution for the forager lifetime that confirms
and quantifies the above heuristic picture. The basic quantity is the
probability $V_k$ that the forager has eaten $k$ times at the instant of
starvation. This quantity can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{general_V}
V_k= \Big[1- \sum_{t=0}^\mathcal{S}\, F_k(t)\Big]\,\,\prod_{j=1}^{k-1} \sum_{t=0}^\mathcal{S}\, F_j(t)\,.
\end{equation}
Here $F_j(t)$ is the first-passage probability that a greedy forager that is
a unit distance from either edge of a desert of $k$ empty sites first reaches
either edge at time $t$. The sum is thus the probability that this forager
escapes a desert of $j$ empty sites, and the product is the probability that
this forager successively escapes a desert of 1,2,3,\ldots, $k-1$ empty sites.
Finally the leading factor is the probability that the forager does not
escape a desert of $k$ empty sites.
We may now write the average forager lifetime as
\begin{align}
\label{general_T}
\mathcal{T}&=\sum_{k\geq 0}\, \big[ \sum_{j=1}^{k-1}\tau_j\big]\,V_k+\mathcal{S}\,.
\end{align}
Here
\begin{align*}
\tau_j=\frac{\sum_{0\leq t\leq\mathcal{S}}\,t \,F_j(t)}{\sum_{0\leq
t\leq\mathcal{S}}\, F_j(t)}
\end{align*}
is the conditional average time for a greedy forager to successfully escape a
desert of $j$ empty sites when it starts one lattice spacing from either
edge. The quantity $\sum_{j=1}^{k-1}\tau_j$ is the conditional time for the
forager to successively escape deserts of 1,2,3,\ldots, $k-1$ empty sites.
Consequently, the first term in \eqref{general_T} is that total time that the
forager takes to carve a desert of $k$ empty sites and the last factor,
$\mathcal{S}$, is the time for the last and fatal excursion in this desert.
To explicitly evaluate the forager lifetime in \eqref{general_T}, we need the
first-passage probability for a greedy forager, $F_k(t)$. This first-passage
probability can be related to the unperturbed first-passage probability
$f_k(t)$ of a symmetric random walk by the convolution
\begin{equation}
\label{GLbasic}
F_k(t) = p\,\delta_{t,1} + (1-p)\sum_{t'\leq t-1} f_{k-2}(t')\,F_k(t-t'-1)\,.
\end{equation}
The first term accounts for a forager that reaches food in a single step.
The second term accounts for the forager hopping to the interior of the
interval. In this case, the walker is at $x=2$ or $k-2$ and hops
symmetrically until it again reaches either $x=1$ or $k-1$. Thus the
relevant first-passage probability is that for an unbiased random walk that
starts at $x=2$ or $k-2$ on $[1,k-1]$. Once the walker first reaches either
$x=1$ or $k-1$, the process renews and the subsequent propagation involves
$F_k$. Since one time unit is used in the first hop to the right, the walker
must reach the boundary in the remaining time $t-t'-1$ steps.
We solve Eq.~\eqref{GLbasic} by substituting in the generating functions
\begin{align}
{\widetilde f_k}(z)=\sum_{t\geq 1} f_k(t)\, z^t\,,\qquad
{\widetilde F_k}(z)=\sum_{t\geq 1} F_k(t)\, z^t\,.\nonumber
\end{align}
The generating functions reduce the convolution in Eq.~\eqref{GLbasic} to an
algebraic relation that is readily solved to give
\begin{equation}
\label{gzbasic}
{\widetilde F_k}(z) = \frac{pz}{1-(1-p)\,z \,{\widetilde f_{k-2}}(z)}\,.
\end{equation}
The next step is to substitute the well-known result for the Laplace
transform of the first-passage probability~\cite{R01}
\begin{align}
{\widetilde f_k}(s)&=
\text{sech}\sqrt{\frac{s}{D}}\,k \left[\sinh\Big(\sqrt{\frac{s}{D}}\Big)+
\sinh\Big(\sqrt{\frac{s}{D}}(k\!-\!1)\Big)\right]\,,\nonumber\\
&\underset{s\to 0}{\longrightarrow}
1-\sqrt{\frac{s}{D}}\tanh\sqrt{\frac{sk^2}{4D}}k+\cdots\,.\nonumber
\end{align}
into Eq.~\eqref{gzbasic}. We also convert the discrete generating function
to a continuous Laplace transform by replacing $z\to 1-s$. This construction
is asymptotically exact in the limit $z\to 1$ or $s\to 0$, which corresponds
to the long-time limit in the time domain. Following these steps, the
Laplace transform of the first-passage probability for the greedy forager for
$s\to 0$ and $k\to\infty$ is
\begin{equation}
\label{finite1}
{\widetilde F_k}(s)
=\bigg(1+\frac{1-p}{p}\sqrt{\frac{s}{D}}\tanh\sqrt{\frac{sk^2}{4D}}\bigg)^{-1}.
\end{equation}
Using the above first-passage probability for a greedy forager in a finite
desert, and also making use of standard Laplace transform manipulations, we
can determine both $\tau_k$ and $V_k$ in terms of ${\widetilde F_k}(s)$.
When these quantities are expressed in terms of
${\widetilde F_k}(s)$ in Eq.~\eqref{general_T}, we can finally determine the
forager lifetime $\mathcal{T}$. These steps are somewhat tedious and all the
details are given in Ref.~\cite{BRB17}.
There are two limiting cases where the forager lifetime has very different
asymptotic behaviors: $p\gg 1/\sqrt{\mathcal{S}}$ and
$p\ll 1/\sqrt{\mathcal{S}}$. In the former case, we find
\begin{align}
\label{T-final}
\mathcal{T} &\simeq\mathcal{S}\,\frac{1\!-\!p}{p}\int_0^\infty \!\!\! d\theta\,
V_\theta\int_0^\theta \!\! \frac{du}{u}\sum_{j\geq 0}\frac{4}{v^2}\left\{
1\!-\!e^{-v^2}\!\left[1\!+\!v^2\right]\right\}+ \mathcal{S}\,.
\end{align}
Here $v=(2j\!+\!1)/u$, $\theta = n/(\pi \sqrt{D\mathcal{S}})$, with $n$ the
number of sites visited by the forager at starvation. Additionally,
\begin{align}
\label{V-final}
V_\theta &\simeq \frac{4(1\!-\!p)}{p\theta}\sum_{j\geq 0} e^{-w^2-Q}\,,\qua
Q= \frac{2(1-p)}{p}\sum_{j\geq 0} E_1(w^2)\nonumber\,,
\end{align}
where $w=(2j\!+\!1)/\theta$, and
$E_1(x)=\int_1^\infty \frac{dt}{t}\, e^{-xt}$ is the exponential integral.
Because the function $V_\theta$ depends on $p$, the greedy forager lifetime
$\mathcal{T}$ does \emph{not} merely equal $\mathcal{T}$ for the non-greedy
forager times $\frac{1-p}{p}$. Our result~\eqref{T-final} agrees with
numerical simulations for large $\mathcal{S}$ (Fig.~\ref{greed-prelim}).
Deep in the negative greed regime $p\ll 1/\sqrt{\mathcal{S}}$,
Eq.~\eqref{finite1} simplifies to
\begin{equation}
{\widetilde F}_k(s)\simeq \left(1+\frac{k}{2pD}s\right)^{-1}\,.
\end{equation}
Following the same steps as given above now leads to
\begin{equation}
\label{T-full}
\mathcal{T}= \sum_{k\geq 1} \frac{k^2}{2p \mathcal{S}}\, e^{-{2pD\mathcal{S}}/{k}}
\exp\left[-\int_1^k e^{-{2pD\mathcal{S}}/{x}}\,dx\right]+\mathcal{S}\,,
\end{equation}
whose numerical evaluation matches the simulation results in the regime
$p\ll 1/\sqrt{\mathcal{S}}$ (Fig.~\ref{greed-prelim} inset).
\section{Two Dimensions}
Surprisingly, simulations show that the forager lifetime again varies
non-monotonically with (positive) greed, but in the opposite sense compared
to one dimension (Fig.~\ref{greed-prelim}). A perfectly greedy forager has a
\emph{smaller} lifetime than one that is not quite as avaricious. We can
explain this feature in a simple way: Because a random walk is recurrent in
two dimensions, it will certain form closed loops along its
trajectory~\cite{F68,W94}. Suppose that a perfectly greedy forager is about
to form such a closed loop (Fig.~\ref{moat}(a)). At this point, the forager
has only two possible choices for the next step. One of them leads outside
the incipient closed loop and the other leads inside. If the latter choice
is made, a ``moat'' is created by the previous trajectory.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{moat-square}}
\caption{ A random-walk trajectory that leads to trapping of a perfectly
greedy forager. (a) Forager ($\times$) at the decision point. (b)
Forager hops to the interior region (shaded). (c) Food in the interior
is completely consumed, so that the forager ($\times$) may be trapped
inside the newly created desert.}
\label{moat}
\end{figure}
Once inside the moat, a perfectly greedy forager always consumes food in its
nearest neighborhood. Ultimately, this interior food is mostly or completely
depleted (the latter is shown in Fig.~\ref{moat}(c)). While the former case
is more likely, the remaining food will be scarce and isolated. Thus the
forager creates and then becomes trapped inside a (perhaps slightly
imperfect) desert.
Conversely, if the greediness $G<1$, a forager that encounters the moat from
the interior can cross it with a non-zero probability and thereby reach food
on the outside. This mechanism provides a route for the forager to escape
the desert and survive longer than if it remained strictly inside. This
argument indicates that the forager lifetime should be a decreasing function
of $G$ as $G\to 1$, as confirmed by simulations (Fig.~\ref{greed-prelim}).
Also in stark contrast to one dimension, there is no peak in the forager
lifetime for negative greed, at least for the values of $\mathcal{S}$ that we
were able to simulate.
\section{Summary}
Greed plays a paradoxical role in the lifetime of a greedy random-walking
forager, which moves preferentially towards local food for positive
greediness, and away from food for negative greediness. The lifetime depends
\emph{non-monotonically} on greediness when the forager capacity is
sufficiently large. Moreover, the sense of the non-monotonicity is opposite
in one and two dimensions. In $d=1$, the forager lifetime exhibits a huge
peak of the order of $S^{3/2}$ for $G\approx -1$, scales as
$\mathcal{S}^{1/2}/(1-G)$ for $G\to 1$, while $\mathcal{T}\simeq \mathcal{S}$
throughout the rest of the range of $G$. Determining these intriguing
properties rests on solving a challenging non-Markovian first-passage problem
in which the forager motion is locally biased when food is in the forager's
nearest neighborhood.
A variety of questions remain open. Can one make analytical progress in two
dimensions? What is the behavior of the lifetime in greater than two
dimensions? Simulations are not useful here because the lifetime is
extremely long for non-negligible greed and memory/computation time
constraints become prohibitive. On a biological note, greed can be viewed as
endowing a forager with a minimal information processing capability. A
related mechanism is for the forager to perform a non-backtracking random
walk (previous step is not retraced). The forager lifetime increases
monotonically with the probability of not backtracking
(Fig.~\ref{greed-prelim}; here $1-G$ is a proxy for the backtracking
probability) and perfect non-backtracking is superior to perfect greed. It
would be useful to understand how to most effectively increase the forager
lifetime with minimal information-processing enhancements to random-walk
motion.
We acknowledge support from the European Research Council starting grant
FPTOpt-277998 (OB), from grants DMR-1608211 and DMR-1623243 from the National
Science Foundation (UB and SR), by the John Templeton Foundation (SR), and
from grant 2012145 from the U.S.-Israel Binational Science Foundation (UB).
|
\section{Introduction.}
\label{intro-sec}
The equation of state (EOS) of common thermodynamic phases of matter
is well understood. However, recent
laser and shock-wave experiments have accessed novel ultrafast regimes
of density and
temperature which are of great theoretical and technological interest.
The same physics appears during the injection of
hot carriers in field-effect transistors and other nanostructures.
Topics like inertial-confinement fusion~\cite{bib2},
Coulomb explosions~\cite{bib3}, space re-entry shielding, laser machining
and ablation~\cite{bib1} involve such regimes of warm dense matter
(WDM). However, elementary approaches
cannot be applied since the Coulomb coupling constant
$\Gamma$, i.e., the ratio of the Coulomb energy to the kinetic energy, is
larger than unity. The electrons may range from degenerate
to Boltzmann-like, with $T/E_F\sim 1$ or larger,
where $T$ is electron temperature
in energy units,
while $E_F$ is the Fermi energy. This
causes a prohibitive increase in basis sets that
span the many excited electronic states.
WDMs pose a theoretical
challenge for rapid accurate computations
of properties like pressure, heat capacity, phonons and conductance
needed even for equilibrium WDMs.
A class of WDMs known as ultra-fast matter (UFM) is produce when energy is
deposited using an ultrafast pulsed laser on a metal surface
\cite{Ping10}. The light couples strongly to the mobile electrons which
equilibrate on femtosecond timescales, to a temperature $T_e$ (as high
as many eV) while the much heavier ions and their strongly-bound core electrons
remain essentially at their initial temperature $T_i$, i.e., usually the room
temperature $T_r$. This two-temperature WDM ($2T$-WDM) phase with $T_e>T_i$
remains valid for timescales $t$ such that $\tau_{ee} < \tau_{ii} < t <
\tau_{ei}$, where $\tau_{ee}$, $\tau_{ii}$ and $\tau_{ei}$ are the
electron-electron, ion-ion and electron-ion temperature relaxation times,
respectively. It has been shown for near-solid densities
that $\tau_{ei}$ is of
the order of picoseconds, and orders of magnitude longer than $\tau_{ee}$ and
$\tau_{ii}$~\cite{Milchberg88,bib7}. For WDMs with $\theta=T/E_F$ small, similar
relaxation times hold
as seen in calculations for typical systems~\cite{XRTS2016}.
Experiments using femtosecond pump-probe
techniques~\cite{bib4,chen2013} provide data for quasi-equilibrium analogues of
free energy and pressure, transport and relaxation processes. While many UFM
samples do not conform to the $2T$ model (e.g., as in Medvadev
{\it et al.}~\cite{Medvadev2011}), the $2T$ model provides a great
simplification when it holds. Even for UFMs, theory and
experiment are quite challenging as the system transits rapidly from a solid to
a plasma depending on the pump energy. Hence a theoretical model that
encompasses a wide range of material conditions is needed to describe the time
evolving system as a series of static 2$T$ systems. The `quasi-equilibrium'
theory is applied to each static picture of the time evolving system.
In this work, we use the neutral pseudoatom (NPA) model, in the form given by
Perrot and Dharma-wardana \cite{Dagens1, Dagens2, PerrotBe, PDW95, MuriDW2008,
MuriDW2013}, to study the $2T$-WDM regime of a few nominally \textit{simple
metals}, \textit{viz}., aluminum, lithium and sodium. These are ``simple'' at
ambient conditions since their valence electrons are ``free-electron like'' and
energetically separated from the core electrons. The number $\bar{Z}$ of valence
electrons per atom (mean ionization) for Al, Li, and Na is 3, 1, and 1,
respectively. Furthermore, if the matter density is $\rho$, each ion can be
assigned a spherical volume with the Wigner-Seitz (WS) radius
$r_{ws}=(3/4\pi\rho)^{1/3}$, and it can be shown for Al, Li, Na that
the bound-electron core has a radius $r_c$ such that it is well inside
the WS sphere for the temperatures studied here (see Sec.~\ref{pseudo.sec}).
In such cases,
the definition of $\bar{Z}=N-n_b$, where $n_b$ is the number of bound electrons in
the core, is unambiguous, clear and is a physically measurable quantity, e.g., using
X-ray Thomson scattering~\cite{GlenzerRevMod}.
In the case of equilibrium WDM, the NPA-calculated $\bar{Z}$ for Al and Li remains 3 and 1
in the range $0<T_e<8$ eV whereas in the case of sodium, $\bar{Z}$ rises to 1.494 by T=8 eV and 1.786 by 10 eV. The case of Na provides us an example of
a typical variation of $\bar{Z}$ very common in equilibrium WDM systems and handled
without any ambiguity and with thermodynamic consistency by the NPA approach
coupled with determinations of the ion-ion $g(r)$ using the NPA pair-potentials. However, in the case of UFM which is the scope of this work, $\bar{Z}$ is kept unchanged for all three elements through the $0<T_e<8$ eV temperature range.
The NPA model replaces the interacting \textit{many-nuclear} and
{\it many-electron} problem by an effective non-interacting
\textit{single-nuclear} and {\it single-electron} formulation where the
many-body problem is reduced using finite-$T$ density functional theory
(DFT)~\cite{bib8,bib9}. The NPA charge densities are used to construct $2T$
pseudopotentials and effective ion-ion pair potentials. The method takes into
account particle correlations at the pair-density level and beyond using
density-functional methods via exchange-correlation functionals for electrons,
and ion-correlation functionals for ions in a decoupled step which uses a
classical integral equation or molecular dynamics. The NPA framework is well
adapted to treating metallic systems ranging from solids to liquids or plasmas
at very high or low compressions, and from $T$=0 to several keV. The importance
and relevance of the NPA lies in its accuracy, flexibility, and computational
rapidity compared to DFT coupled to molecular dynamics (MD) methods (DFT+MD).
However, the NPA, as used here, is inapplicable when inner-shell electrons
(e.g., $d$-electrons) play a role in the ion-ion interactions (e.g., as in
transition metals). A simple metal becomes `complex' when its
electronic bound states extends beyond its WS radius $r_{ws}$. This is not
a short-coming but a strength of the model which signals the need
for multi-ion contributions into the theory in such ranges of
temperature and pressure. In such regimes, discontinuities in $\bar{Z}$ where
some are spurious may appear
unless suitable electron-ion XC-correlation potentials are included in
the theory~\cite{Furutani90}. Furthermore {\it transient} molecule
formation can be successfully handled~\cite{carbonCDW16} within the
NPA as it allows for binary ion-ion correlations.
We compare our $2T$-NPA predictions with those from solid-state DFT
electronic-structure codes such as ABINIT~\cite{bib19} and VASP~\cite{VASP},
which use MD to evolve the finite-$T$ ionic structures. These codes are
primarily designed for $T_i=T_e=0$ situations, and solve the
\textit{multi-nuclear} Kohn-Sham equations in a plane-wave basis, using $T=0$
pseudopotentials to reduce the number of electrons needed in the simulations.
The solid, liquid or plasma is treated as a {\it periodic solid} in a
simulation box (``supercell'') containing $N$ nuclei, with $N$ being $\sim$100.
A finite $T_e$ Fermi-Dirac distribution for electron occupation numbers is
used, along with $T=0$ pseudopotentials and $T=0$ exchange-correlation
functionals (XCF). The number of electronic bands required to access high $T_e$
increases rapidly with $T_e$ and becomes prohibitive for $T_e/E_F$ greater than
$\sim 1$. This method generates energy bands for the periodic solid where as in
reality there are {\it no such band structure} in liquids and plasmas. This
artifact is overcome by
generating electronic-structure calculations for many static ionic
configurations via MD simulations and averaging over a large number of them.
DFT+MD provides only a ``mean ionization'' for the whole $N$-ion
supercell; it cannot provide, e.g., the composition of an equilibrium
mixture of specific charge states of ions in a C, H ``plastic'' at, say, 1
eV. Furthermore, VASP and ABINIT currently only implement the zero-$T$ XCF
even though finite-$T$ parametrizations have been available for some time,
e.g., the evaluation of finite-$T$ bubble diagrams~\cite{bubble1, bubble2},
from the work of Iyetomi and Ichimaru~\cite{Iye}, Perrot and Dharma-wardana
(PDW)~\cite{PDWfxc} and from Feynman-path methods by Brown \textit{et
al}~\cite{Brown} parametrized recently by Karasiev \textit{et
al}~\cite{Karasiev}. The present NPA calculations are done with the PDW
finite-$T$ XCF which is in close agreement with the quantum simulations of
Brown {\it et al.}~\cite{cdw-cpp15}. In most cases finite-$T$ XC effects
contribute only small corrections and DFT+MD provides valuable benchmarks
for testing other methods.
The NPA method is summarized in section~\ref{sec-npa} where we emphasize its
application to the $2T$ regime. Resulting $2T$ pair potentials ($2T$PP),
quasi-equilibrium phonon dispersions and pair distribution functions (PDF)
$g(r)$ are presented in Sec.~\ref{results.sec}. The phonon calculations confirm
the results and also validate the meV accuracy of the NPA method. The NPA
$g(r)$ calculations for normal and compressed Li ($\sim$ up to a compression of
2) show that the {\it local} pseudopotential for Li is successful. Here we
compare the ion-ion structure factor $S(k)$ with the simulations of Kietzmann
{\it et al}. Having confirmed the accuracy of the pseudopotentials and pair
potentials, the 2$T$-thermodynamic properties, such as the quasi-pressure, are
also presented. These are compared with the values for systems in thermal
equilibrium. Discussions about phonon formation times in $2T$ systems, the
role of finite-$T$ XC-contributions in the $2T$-EOS calculation, and the
choice of suitable pseudopotentials in \textit{ab initio} finite-$T$
simulations are also presented.
\section{The neutral pseudoatom model.}
\label{sec-npa}
\subsection{General description of the model.} Several average-atom models and
NPA models have been proposed, even in the early literature \cite{Ziman}.
Many of these are intuitive cell models and are not true
DFT models. A rigorous DFT formulation of a NPA model at $T=0$ was first used
for solids by Dagens \cite{Dagens1, Dagens2}. There the treatment of the ion
distribution was developed in the traditional manner as providing a fixed
external potential; Dagens showed that the NPA results at $T=0$ agree closely
with the band-structure codes available at the time. A finite-$T$ version was
given in several papers by Perrot~\cite{PerrotBe} and
Dharma-wardana~\cite{DWP1, PDW2, PDW3}. In Ref.~\cite{DWP1}, the ion
distribution $\rho(r)$ itself was treated within DFT using the property that
the free energy $F[n,\rho]$ is a functional of {\it both} $n(r)$ and $\rho(r)$
simultaneously. A classical DFT equation for the ions and an ion-correlation
functional, $F_c^{ii}(\rho)$, approximated as a sum of hypernetted-chain (HNC)
diagrams plus bridge diagrams, was introduced, {\it without} invoking a
Born-Oppenheimer approximation or treating the ions as providing a fixed
external potential~\cite{IlCiacco93}. Exchange-correlation functionals
$F_{xc}^{ei}(\rho)$ for
electron-ion interactions were also introduced although neglibible
in common materials. This puts the NPA approach on a very
rigorous DFT footing where approximations enter in modeling the ion-correlation
functional, just as in the case of the electron DFT problem for the electronic
XCF.
However, in the following we present the theory in terms of the more familiar
superposition picture. We consider a system of ions located at sites
$\mathbf{R}_i$ at temperature $T_i$ and average density $\rho$, interacting
with a system of electrons at temperature $T_e$ and average density $n$. The
\textit{multi-center} problem is reduced to a simplified \textit{single-center}
problem where the total electron density $n(r)$ is regarded as the
superposition of single-site densities such that $n(r)=\sum_i
n_i(r-\mathbf{R}_i)$. In contrast to ion-sphere (IS) models like those used in
Purgatorio~\cite{Purgatorio}, or Piron and Blenski~\cite{Blenski2011}, Starrett
and Saumon~\cite{Starrett2013}, the single-site free-electron density $n_f(r)$
extends over the whole of space, approximated by a correlation
sphere~\cite{DWP1} of radius $R_c$ which is of the order of 10 ionic
Wigner-Seitz radii. All particle correlations are assumed to have died out when
$r\to R_c$. This $R_c$ is similar to the linear dimension of the simulation box
of a DFT+MD simulation which has to be as big as possible. However, in
practice the charge distribution used in DFT+MD simulations spreads over a
volume of about 100 ions. In contrast, the NPA correlation sphere with
$R_c \simeq
10r_{ws}$ extends over $\{R_c/r_{ws}\}^{3}$, i.e., the volume covered by
$\sim$1000 ions. The calculation of course uses only one nucleus, but its
charge density overlaps the space of some 1000 atoms, and this is
crucial to getting the right pair-potentials with long-range Friedel
oscillations, and to satisfy the Friedel sum rule~\cite{DWP1}. The IS-models
cannot satisfy the Friedel sum rule. At higher temperatures where particle
correlations are weak, $r_c$ may be reduced to, e.g., $5r_{ws}$, but the
results are independent of $R_c$, and $R_c$ is {\it not} an optimization
parameter.
The ion distribution $\rho(r)=\rho g_{ii}(r)$
contains the full ion-ion PDF, $g(r)$, when seen from any site taken as the
origin. It is found that in most cases it is sufficient, as far as the
bound-electron structure is concerned, to approximate $g(r)$
by a spherical cavity $c(r)$ of radius $r_{ws}$ and total charge $\bar{Z}$
centered on the ion, followed by a uniform positive density $\rho$ for
$r>r_{ws}$. As mentioned below, unlike in IS-models, its effect will be
subtracted out (as a ``cavity correction'') to obtain the response of a
uniform electron gas to the nucleus.
Thus have:
\begin{equation}
\label{cavity.eq}
c(r) = n[H(0)-H(r-r_{ws})],
\end{equation}
where $H(r)$ is the Heaviside step function.
Initially $\bar{Z}$ is unknown but its value is obtained self-consistently from
the iterative Kohn-Sham procedure. The single-site electron density is written as
$n_i = \Delta n_i + m_i$ where $m_i$ is the cavity correction
and $\Delta n_i$ is the electron pile-up obtained by
the DFT calculation for the electrons in the external
potential $V_\text{ext}$ given by
\begin{equation}
V_{\text{ext}}(r) = -\frac{Z}{r}+ \frac{1}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r}'|}
\star c(\mathbf{r}')
\end{equation}
where the symbol $\star$ means integration over all space. Here $Z=Z_n$ is the
nuclear charge. The positive
background with the WS-cavity, the nucleus at its center and the free-electron charge density filling the whole correlation sphere constitute the
neutral pseudoatom~\cite{PDW2,PDW3}. The WDM system is made up of superpositions
of such neutral-pseudo atoms correlated to give the ion-ion $g(r)$, with the cavity contributions subtracted out.
For simple metallic systems, this cavity model that defines the extent of the
bound states is sufficient to produce
physically accurate results and is mathematically convenient, as shown in the
papers by Dagens or those of Perrot and Dharma-wardana cited above. Thus, to
compute the cavity correction $m(r)$, we assume that the electrons respond
linearly to the cavity $c(r)$, {\it viz.}, in Fourier space,
\begin{equation}
m(q) = -V(q)c(q)\chi_{ee}(q, n, T_e).
\end{equation}
Here, $V(q)=4\pi/q^2$ is the Coulomb potential and $\chi_{ee}$ is the
interacting-electron response function at the electron density $n$
and temperature $T_e$. To go beyond the random phase approximation (RPA),
we use the following finite-$T$ response function:
\begin{equation}
\label{response.eq}
\chi_{ee}(q, n, T_e)=\frac{\chi_0(q,n,T_e)}{1-V(q)[1-G(q)]\chi_0(q,n,T_e)},
\end{equation}
with $\chi_0$ the finite-$T$ Lindhard function and
$G(q)=G(q,T_e)$ a local-field correction (LFC) defined as:
\begin{equation}
G(q) = \left(1-\frac{\gamma_0}{\gamma}\right)\left(\frac{q}{k_{\text{TF}}},
\right)^2.
\end{equation}
In the above, the Thomas-Fermi wave vector $k_{\text{TF}}= \sqrt{6\pi n/E_F}$,
is defined by the Fermi energy of the system $E_F=1/(\alpha r_s)$ where $r_s$
is the electron WS radius and $\alpha=(4/9\pi)^{1/3}$. The
finite-$T$ interacting electron compressibility $1/\gamma=
n^2\partial^2[nf(r_s,T_e)]/\partial n^2$ is determined from the homogenous electron
gas free energy per electron $f(r_s,T_e)$, as given in Eq.\ref{free_elec},
which include a finite-$T$ XC contribution $f_{xc}$. The non-interacting
electron compressibility $\gamma_0$ is obtained by setting $f_{xc}=0$.
The simplicity of the NPA model rests on decomposing the total charge
distribution into a superposition of single-center distributions. If the
ion-ion structure factor $S_{ii}(q)$ is known, any total electron charge
distribution $n_t(q)$ can always be written as a convolution of the
$S_{ii}(q)$ with some effective single-center charge distribution $n(q)$, even
for transition metals or systems with resonant levels; but partitioning the
electron contributions from states that extend beyond their WS cells without
correctly including the physical interactions is not sufficient. Furthermore,
a `simple metal' at one temperature may behave as a `transition-metal' at
another temperature when a shell of electrons begins to transit to the
continuum, and {\it vice versa}. If the system is of such low density that
$r_{ws}$ is larger than the bond length of a possible dimer (e.g., Li$_2$),
then the dimer itself will be contained within the WS sphere, and in such
cases the NPA model fails; a more elaborate ``neutral-pseudomolecule''
approach or the use of suitable electron-ion XC-potentials
$F_{xc}^{ei}(n,\rho)$ is then needed. We
do not examine such non-simple WDMs in this study. Similarly, at high
densities, WDM-Li shows complex phases containing persistent Li$_4$
clusters~\cite{bonev2008}, and the simple NPA model needs modifications. In
the present case, a single-center decomposition is physically transparent if
the bound electron core is unambiguously confined within the WS sphere of the
ion. We discuss in the results section (sec.~\ref{pseudo.sec}) the variation
of the $\bar{Z}$ of Na which changes from unity at low $T$ to 1.49 by $T=8$
eV. The occupation number in the 2$p$ level begins to decrease, while its
radius slightly decreases, and hence there is no ambiguity in estimating
$\bar{Z}=Z-n_b$ where $n_b$ are all the bound electrons compactly contained
well inside the WS-sphere. That is, the electron density pileup $\Delta n_i$
can be clearly divided into bound and free parts such that $\Delta n_i = n_b
+ n_f$. Once this division is achieved the interaction of an electron with
the nucleus plus its core can in most cases be replaced by a pseudopotential
$U_{ei}$ which is a weak scatterer because it is constructed using linear
response; this is given by:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq-pseudopot}
U_{ei}(q)=n_f(q)/\chi_{ee}(q,r_s,T_e),
\end{equation}
where $\chi_{ee}$ is provided by Eq.~\ref{response.eq}.
Even though linear response is used, the resulting pseudopotential includes
non-linear effects since $n_f(q)$ is the fully non-linear free-electron density
obtained from DFT. Only a range of $q$ between zero to slightly above $2k_F$
(depending on $T_e$) needs to be included as the large-$q$ behavior
(short-range in $r$, i.e., inside the core) is not relevant. The resulting
pseudopotential is valid only if it satisfies the relation
$U_{ei}/(-\bar{Z}V(q)) \leq 1$. Unlike the pseudopotentials used in VASP,
ABINIT and similar DFT codes, this linear-response pseudopotential does not
require solving a Schr\"{o}dinger equation. It is a state-dependent {\it
local} pseudopotential that can be fitted to, say a Heine-Abarankov form for
convenience (see Shaw and Harrison \cite{HA}). This has a constant core
potential $V_{\text{HA}}= D$ for $r < r_c$ and it is Coulomb-like,
$V_{\text{HA}}= -\bar{Z}/r$ for $r > r_c$. However, such a fitting is not
needed except to conveniently report the pseudopotential and to quantify the
core radius associated with the potential. In our NPA calculations we use
the numerical form of $U_{ei}(q)$ directly.
The pseudopotential calculated at $T_i$ can be used to form a $2T$ ion-ion
pair potential ($2T$PP) with ions at $T_i$ and electrons at $T_e$, since it is
a sum of the direct Coulomb interaction and the indirect interaction via the
displaced-electron charge, {\it viz.}\
\begin{equation}
\label{eq-pairpot}
U_{ii}(q,T_{i},T_e) = -\bar{Z}^2(T_i) V(q) + |U_{ei}(q)|^2\chi_{ee}(q, T_e).
\end{equation}
This procedure is valid because $\bar{Z}$ remains unchanged in UFM since
the bound core of electrons remains at the initial ion temperature for times
$t<\tau_{ei}$. If $T_e$ is large enough to change $\bar{Z}$, be it for UFM
or equilibrium systems, then the pseudopotential has to be re-calculated using
an NPA calculation at the needed temperature.
At low $T_e$, the Friedel oscillations in the electron density resulting from
the sharp discontinuity at $k=2k_F$ in $\chi_{ee}(q)$ produce oscillations in
the pair potential $U_{ii}(r)$. These lead to multiple minima in the ion-ion
energy which contribute to the maxima in $g(r)$. Such physically important
features are not found in ``Slater-sum'' approaches~\cite{Slatersum}
to finite-$T$ potentials,
in `Yukawa-screening' models~\cite{YukawaScr, XRTS2016}, or in
Gordon-Kim models~\cite{Gordon-Kim72}. Furthermore, the charge densities
restricted to the WS-sphere used in IS-models cannot capture such
long-range effects.
Our NPA pair potential can
be used to study phonons in the system or to generate the ion-ion $g_{ii}(r)$
and corresponding structure factor $S_{ii}(k)$ when necessary. The ion
subsystem in a UFM is clamped at $T_i\sim 300$K when Al, Li, and Na are
crystalline metals. Hence the ion-ion pair distribution function is simply
given by the relation
\begin{equation}
g_{ii}(\mathbf{r}) = \frac{1}{4\pi \rho}\sum_{\{ i \} }
\delta(\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{R}_i).
\end{equation}
The summation is over the crystal lattice, permitting a simple computation of
the ion contribution to the quasi free energy and pressure from the $2T$ pair
potential.
\subsection{The NPA quasi thermodynamic relations.}
\label{sec-thermo}
The total free energy $F$ of the $2T$ system given by the NPA is
\begin{equation}
F = F_{\text{emb}} +F_{\text{cav}}+ F_{\text{heg}} + F_{\text{ion}},
\end{equation}
where $F_{\text{heg}}$, $F_{\text{emb}}$, $F_{\text{cav}}$, and
$F_{\text{ion}}$ are respectively the free energy contribution of the
interacting homogeneous electron gas (HEG), the embedding free-energy of the
NPA into the electron gas, the correction from the cavity, and the ion-ion free
energy. The only parameters of this model are the nuclear charge $Z$, electron temperature $T_e$
and the HEG density $n$ such that the average ion density $\rho=n/\bar{Z}$,
itself determined by the ion temperature $T_i$. We discuss these four terms
below, using Hartrees with $\hbar=m_e=|e|=1$.
(i) The embedding energy $F_\text{emb}$ is the difference between the free energy
of the electron gas containing the central ion and the unperturbed HEG; thus
\begin{align}
\nonumber &F_\text{emb} = T[n+\Delta n(r)] -
T[n]-\int\frac{\bar{Z}}{|\mathbf{r}|}\cdot
[\Delta n(\mathbf{r}) + c(\mathbf{r}))]d\mathbf{r}\\
& +\frac{1}{2}\int\frac{[\Delta n(\mathbf{r})+c(\mathbf{r})]}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r}'|}\cdot[\Delta n(\mathbf{r}')+c(\mathbf{r}')]d\mathbf{r}d\mathbf{r}',
\end{align}
with $T[n]$ is the electron kinetic energy.
(ii) The cavity correction $F_\text{cav}$ is computed from the total screened
Coulomb potential $V(r)$ resulting from the total electron displacement $\Delta
n(r)$:
\begin{equation}
V^*_i(\mathbf{r}) = \int\frac{[c(\mathbf{r}') + \Delta n(\mathbf{r}') -\bar{Z}\delta(\mathbf{r}'-R_i)]}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r}'|}d\mathbf{r}'.
\end{equation}
Since each cavity involves a charge deficit $\eta(r)=n-c(r)$, the cavity
correction is
\begin{align}
F_\text{cav} =& - \frac{1}{2}\int\frac{\eta(\mathbf{r})\cdot[c(\mathbf{r}')-m(\mathbf{r}')]}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r}'|} d\mathbf{r}d\mathbf{r}' \\
&\nonumber + \int \eta(\mathbf{r})\cdot V^*(\mathbf{r})d\mathbf{r}.
\end{align}
(iii) The free energy of the HEG $F_\text{heg}$ is written as
\begin{equation}
\label{free_elec}
F_\text{heg} =\bar{Z}f(n,T_e)= \bar{Z}[f_0(n,T_e)+
f_{xc}(n,T_e)],
\end{equation}
where $f_0$ and $f_{xc}$ are respectively the non-interacting and
exchange-correlation free energies per electron at the density $n$ and
temperature $T_e$. To compute $f_0$, we use the thermodynamic relation
$f_0=\Omega_0/nV+\mu_0$, where $\Omega_0$ and $\mu_0$ are the
non-interacting grand potential and the chemical potential, respectively.
We emphasize that the NPA-Correlation-sphere model uses the non-interacting
$\mu_0$ associated with the mean electron density $n$ as required by DFT theory.
In IS models the known matter density defines the
Wigner-Seitz cell, and the free electrons are confined in it, and the corresponding $\mu$ is determined by an integration within the WS-sphere
(e.g., see Eq. 1 of Faussurier~\cite{Faussurier2014}), leading to a value of $\mu\ne\mu_0$.
In contrast, the mean electron density $n$, the nuclear charge $Z_n$ and the temperature $T$ are the only inputs to the NPA code.
The computation outputs the corresponding mean ion density $\rho$ and
$\bar{Z}=n/\rho$. A series of calculations are done in a range of
$n$ and the specific $n$ which gives the physical ion density,
viz., $\rho$ is selected.
For a given electron density $n$ and temperature $T_e$, the non-interacting
chemical potential $\mu_0$ is obtained by satisfying the relation
\begin{equation}
n=(\sqrt{2}/\pi^2)T_e^{3/2}\ I_{1/2}(\mu_0/T_e),
\end{equation}
while, using this $\mu_0$, the non-interacting part of the grand potential
is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq-om0}
\Omega_0/V = (2\sqrt{2}/3\pi^2)T_e^{5/2}\ I_{3/2}(\mu_0/T_e),
\end{equation}
with $I_\nu(z)$ the Fermi-Dirac integral of order $\nu$. Note that only the
non-interacting chemical potential, viz., $\mu_0$ appears in the DFT-level
occupations of the NPA model since DFT theory maps the interacting electrons to
a system of non-interacting electrons at the {\it interacting density} (see
also Ref.~\cite{DWP1}).
The XC contribution $f_{xc}$ is computed directly from the PDW parametrization
at the given $r_s$ and $T_e$. The total free energy per electron of the
interacting HEG is the sum of $f_0$ and $f_{xc}$.
(iv) The ion-ion interaction energy is given explicitly by the pairwise
summation over the pair potential $U_{ii}$ as defined at Eq.(\ref{eq-pairpot}):
\begin{equation}
F_\text{ion}= \frac{1}{V}\frac{1}{2}\sum_{\{ i\neq j\}} U_{ii}(|\mathbf{R}_i-\mathbf{R}_j|),
\end{equation}
where the sum is over the positions of the ions in their initial crystal
configuration. This is the only term in $F$ that depends explicitly on the ion
structure.
Both the cavity correction and the embedding energy involve the ion with its
bound core of electrons held at the temperature $T_i$, while the electrons are
at $T_e$. The numerical results are insensitive to using a simple NPA
calculation with even the core at $T_e$, if the the bound-state
occupancies (and thus $\bar{Z}$) remain virtually unchanged.
The quasi-equilibrium pressure of the system is obtained by the appropriate
density derivative of the ion-structure independent free energy terms while
the structure-dependent ion-ion contribution is given by the viral equation
\begin{align}
P&=n^2 \frac{\partial}{\partial n}(F_\text{heg}+F_\text{emb}+F_\text{cav}) \\
\nonumber &-\int g_{ii}(\mathbf{r})\left( \frac{3}{r}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}-n^2
\frac{\partial}{\partial n}\right)U_{ii}(\mathbf{r})d\mathbf{r}.
\end{align}
The explicit electron-density dependence of the ion-ion
pair potential is taken into account in computing the pressure~\cite{Hansen}.
Analytical
results can be obtained for the terms
\begin{align}
&P_\text{emb} = -\int \eta(\mathbf{r})\cdot V^*(\mathbf{r})d\mathbf{r} \\
&P_\text{cav} = -\bar{Z}V^*(r_{ws})
\end{align}
whereas other derivatives have to be done numerically.
\section{Results.}
\label{results.sec}
We used the NPA model to determine the properties of $2T$-WDM as produced by
femtosecond laser pulses interacting with three common metals in their usual
solid state, viz., aluminum, lithium and sodium, with electron densities such
that $r_s$ is 2.07, 3.25, and 3.93 a.u., corresponding to $\bar{Z}$ = 3, 1 and
1, respectively. Note that the $\bar{Z}$ for Na deviates from unity for $T>3$ eV.
The ion density is kept constant in the calculations for isochoric sodium.
We present the $2T$ ion-ion pair-potentials, non-equilibrium
phonon dispersion curves and pressures for varying $T_e$, while the ions remain
cold at $T_i=$0.026 eV (300K).
\subsection{Ion-ion pair potentials.}
The first step within our UFM model is to compute the equilibrium (at room
temperature, $T_e=T_i=0.026$ eV) free-electron density $n_f(q)$ from the NPA
calculation. The pseudopotential $U_{ei}(q)$ at $T_e=T_i$ can then be obtained
using Eq.~\ref{eq-pseudopot}. This pseudopotential is an atomic property that
depends on $\bar{Z}$ and on the core radius given the ionic $r_{ws}$, which
is then used to construct ion-ion pair potentials $U_{ii}(q,T_e)$ at any $T_e$
via Eq.~(\ref{eq-pairpot}). For this the electron response at $T_e \ne T_i$
is used. This method is simpler and numerically almost indistinguishable from
calculating the pseduopotential from a full 2$T$-NPA procedure where the core
electrons are held frozen at $T_i$ and $n_f(q,T_e)$ is calculated from the
Kohn-Sham equation, with $\bar{Z}$ remaining unchanged. The agreement between
the two different ways of calculating the 2$T$ potentials provides a strong
check on our calculations. Furthermore, while pair potentials cannot be
easily extracted from {\it ab initio} calculations, the NPA model provide
this physically important quantity.
Examples of NPA ion-ion pair potentials at different temperatures are
presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:PairPot}. At equilibrium or sufficiently low
$T_e$, all three pair potentials display Friedel oscillations as discussed in
section \ref{sec-npa}. Hence it requires many neighbor shells to compute the
total pairwise ion-ion interaction energy with sufficient precision. For Li and
Na, we used 8 shells whereas 30 shells were necessary for the Al-Al interaction. As $T_e$
increases, the sharp Fermi surface breaks down, the discontinuity in $f(k)$ at
$k = k_F$ broadens, and oscillations disappear, yielding purely repulsive
Yukawa-screened potentials~\cite{YukawaScr}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width = \columnwidth]{Potentials.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Two-temperature ion-ion pair potentials for
electrons at three different
temperatures and ions at $T_i = 0.026$ eV (300 K), for
(a) Al, (b) Li, and (c) Na.
}
\label{fig:PairPot}
\end{figure}
\subsection{$2T$ quasi-equilibrium phonon spectra.}
As the electrons get heated, the screening weakens and inter-ionic forces
become stronger; hence there is an interest in computing the phonon spectra
although in many cases the phonon oscillation times may be comparable to the
lifetime of the UFM system.
Once the 2TPP is constructed for the desired $T_e$, the phonon spectra are
easily calculated by the diagonalization of the dynamical matrix
\cite{AshcroftBk}
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{D}(\mathbf{k})=\sum_i\mathbf{D}(\mathbf{R}_i)e^{-i\mathbf{k}\cdot \mathbf{R}_i} \quad
\end{equation}
where the elements of the harmonic matrix $\mathbf{D}(\mathbf{R})$ are given by
\begin{equation}
D_{\mu\nu}(\mathbf{R}) = \frac{1}{2}\sum_j\frac{\partial^2 U_{ii}(\mathbf{R}_j)}{\partial u_\mu(\mathbf{R})\partial u_\nu(\mathbf{0})}
\end{equation}
with $\mathbf{R}_j$ the position of the $j$th atom and $U_{ii}$ the
pair-potential of Eq.\ref{eq-pairpot}. From the $s$ eigenvalues
$\lambda_s(\mathbf{k})$ of $\mathbf{D}(\mathbf{k})$, the phonon frequencies are
given by $\omega_s(\mathbf{k})=\sqrt{\lambda_s(\mathbf{k})/M}$ with $M$ the
mass of the ion.
The resulting phonons are compared with the results from ABINIT-DFT
simulations employing density-functional perturbation
theory~\cite{bib201,bib202} (DFPT), which determines the second derivative of
the energy using the first-order perturbation wavefunctions. We used the common
crystal structure for each metal, i.e., face-centered cubic (FCC) for Al and
body-centered cubic (BCC) for Li and Na, with their room temperature lattice
parameters $a = 4.05\ \AA, 3.49\ \AA$, and $4.23\ \AA$, respectively.
Quasi-equilibrium phonon dispersion relations at $T_e=6$ eV using the two
methods are presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:NonEqPhonon} with the NPA equilibrium
phonons as reference to illustrate important modifications in the spectra. In
addition, NPA quasi-equilibrium phonon spectrum at $T_e = 12$ eV are also
presented by which temperature DFPT becomes prohibitive. The excellent accord
between the NPA and experimental equilibrium phonon spectra at low temperatures
has already been demonstrated and shows the meV accuracy of the NPA
calculations even at low temperatures~\cite{CPP-Harb}. This regime can be hard to model as noted by Blenski {\it et al.}~\cite{Blenski2013} when, for example, working on
Al at normal density and at low $T$ within another model.
For the three systems in this study, the two methods (NPA and DFPT) predict very
similar $2T$ phonon spectra, thus reconfirming the $2T$ NPA calculations and
corroborating the DFPT calculations at finite $T$. This is important as there
are as yet no experimental observations of UFM phonon spectra. In the case
of Al, we observe a large increase in frequencies, as high as $32\%$ for
longitudinal (L) modes, which supports the ``phonon hardening'' theory. However,
we notice that transverse (T) branches in the $\Gamma-L$ region are barely
affected by the electron heating, as was also noted by Recoules~\cite{Recoules}.
In the case of Li and Na, we find that the spectral modifications are more
complex than the `homogeneous' increase found for Al; here, an important increase
in the L-branch in the middle of the $\Gamma-H$ region takes place, whereas there
is no change at the symmetry point $H$. No modifications to T-branches are
noticed in this region. In the region $H-\Gamma$, the L-branch frequencies
increase in the middle of the region $H-P$ but remain unchanged at the symmetry
point $H$. For the T-branch, an increase is noticeable at the maximum in the
region $P-\Gamma$ whereas no change affects the minimum in the region $H-P$. In
the region $\Gamma-N$ and for the L-branch, we observe the overall largest
increase of $29\%$ and $37\%$ for Li and Na, respectively, whereas frequencies of
T-modes are only slightly modified.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Al_Phonon.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Li_Phonon.pdf}\vspace{0.1cm}
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Na_Phonon.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Quasi-equilibrium phonon spectra at $T_e=6$ eV obtained
with NPA and with ABINIT for (a) Al, (b) Li, and (c) Na. The NPA equilibrium
phonon spectra at 300 K are shown to illustrate the effect of increasing $T_e$
(dashed lines). }
\label{fig:NonEqPhonon}
\end{figure}
\subsection{$2T$-quasi-equilibrium equation of state.}
A system in its initial equilibrium configuration ($T_i=T_e=T_r$) rapidly reaches
a new UFM state with $T_i$ remaining near $T_r$ while $T_e$ increases.
However, since the ion motion within the time of arrival of the probe pulse is
negligible, the pressure builds up essentially isochorically due to electron
heating.
In Fig \ref{fig:Pressure}, we compare the pressure calculated with the NPA model
with ABINIT and VASP simulations. In the latter, we used an energy cut-off of
1630 eV for the plane-wave basis, with 60 energy bands to capture finite-$T$
effects. In ABINIT simulations, we used norm-conserving (NC) pseudopotentials
with the $T=0$ Perdew-Burke-Ernzerhof (PBE) XCF within the generalized gradient
approximation (GGA). In VASP, we employed projected-augmented-wave (PAW)
pseudopotentials with the PBE XCF for Li and Na, and the Perdew-Wang (PW) $T=0$
XCF for Al. With both codes, pseudopotentials were chosen specifically to
simulate $\bar{Z}$=3 valence electrons for Al, and $\bar{Z}$=1 for Li and Na as
the core electrons remain bound, and at the ion temperature. This is an important
aspect discussed in subsection~\ref{pseudo.sec}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Pressure.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Quasi-equilibrium pressures obtained with the NPA
(lines), ABINIT (circles), and VASP (triangles) for Al, Li, and Na.}
\label{fig:Pressure}
\end{figure}
We find that, for all three metals, calculations using NPA, ABINIT and VASP
predict nearly identical pressures with small deviations only at high $T_e$. At
$T_e=8$ eV, the maximum difference between all model is 9 GPa, 4 GPa and 3 GPa
for Al, Li, and Na, respectively. Thus, the results from the extension of the
NPA model to the $2T$ regime confirms the usability of the solid-state codes at
least up to 6 eV on the one hand, and on the the other hand the validity of the
NPA approach. However, since NPA uses a finite-$T$ XC-functional whereas
\textit{ab initio} simulations do not, the effect of such finite-$T$ corrections
will be reviewed in section \ref{discussion}.
The computational efficiency and accuracy of the NPA
approach make it a valuable tool for studying WDM and other
complex systems where iterative computations of materials properties like
$2T$ EOS, $2T$ specific heat, transport properties, opacities,
energy-relaxation times, etc., are needed as the system evolves with
time, since mean ionization, pair-potentials and structure factors are
readily obtained. A few minutes on a desktop computer is
sufficient in NPA calculations to generate accurate results
which require long and intensive computations with DFT+MD.
\section{Discussion.}
\label{discussion}
\subsection{Crystal-lattice stability.}
As electrons absorb the laser energy (within fs timescales) and heat up to $T_e$,
the internal pressure of the system becomes very high as discussed in section
III-C. In metals, the thermal expansion is also caused by the free-electron
pressure. We studied the crystal stability of the solids as a function of lattice
expansion; the results are presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:LatticeExp}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[scale=1]{AlLattice.pdf}\vspace{-0.4cm}
\includegraphics[scale=1]{LiLattice.pdf}\vspace{-0.4cm}
\includegraphics[scale=1]{NaLattice.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Total pressure of the solids as a function of the lattice
parameter of the crystal relative to the room-temperature value $a_0$ for (a)
Al, (b) Li, and (c) Na. }
\label{fig:LatticeExp}
\end{figure}
For Al at $T_e=2$ eV, we find that a moderate expansion $a/a_0 = 1.24$ is
sufficient to reduce the pressure back to zero, indicating that the crystal may
appear stable if the timescale needed for such lattice motion is available before
the UFM breaks down. However, in all other cases, the pressure goes to zero
only asymptotically with increasing lattice parameter, suggesting that such
UFM crystals are unstable. Such thermal expansions or spontaneous
fluctuations lead to the `explosive' breakdown of the solid on ps timescales.
However, since UFM conditions are reached in fs timescales, the ions remain
essentially in their initial positions and (as already noted) no net linear
forces act upon them due to crystal symmetry. They remain trapped in a stronger
harmonic potential leading to hardening of most of the phonon branches. The
physical reason for the hardening at increased $T_e$ is the decreased screening
of ion-ion interactions by the hotter electron gas.
\subsection{``Phonons'' and surface ablation.}
The UFM system is under very large pressure and the ion-ion $2T$PP is purely
repulsive unless $T_e$ is small (cf.\ Fig.~\ref{fig:PairPot}). The discussion in
terms of phonons may become inapplicable at higher $T_e$ due to non-zero ablation
forces acting on ions in typical UFM samples (0.1-1$\mu m$ thick). An ideal
periodic lattice implies that the linear derivative of the total potential is
zero because the crystal is isochorically constrained by the external pressure.
The phonons of UFM ``exist'' only within this artifice. Small thermal
`Debye-Waller' type ionic displacements $u$ (with a mean value $\langle u\rangle
= 0.2 \AA $ at 300K for Al, retained in the UFM) do not render the periodic
UFM unstable, and slightly split the degeneracy of transverse branches.
However, pump-probe experiments use very thin metal films. Crystal symmetry is
broken and large uncompensated forces act at the surface of the films; as a
result, the surface layer and successive layers ablate. We calculated the
ablation force $F_\text{abl}^\text{VASP}$ on an FCC-(100) Al surface and the two
inner layers using the VASP code with the Al surface reconstructed as happens for
the cold surface at 0K. Five layers of Al and 5 layers of vacuum were used for
evaluating the Hellman-Feynman forces on the surface atoms. The NPA method is
beyond its regime of validity since the charge density at a surface is not
uniform. However, the NPA pressure is the force per unit area at the bounding
(100) surface, with one ion per unit area. This is used as the NPA estimate of
the ablation force $F_\text{abl}^\text{NPA}$. The forces on the inner neighbor
and next-neighbor layers calculated from VASP at $T_e=$6 eV were 3\% and 0.02\%
respectively of the force on the surface layer. The surface force $F_\text{abl}$
determines an approximate ``ablation time'' $\tau_\text{abl}$, the time needed
for the surface plane to move by an inter-plane distance ($a/2$ in the case of
Al). This $\tau_\text{abl}$ estimate makes some assumptions, e.g.,
$F_\text{abl}$ to be constant over $a/2$, with no movement of inner layers. To
verify if phonons can form within such timescales, we compare $\tau_\text{abl}$
with the shortest time for an ion oscillation $\tau_\omega$ at the highest
phonon frequency for the [100] direction; the results are presented in
Table~\ref{tabPhon}.
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{The ``ablation force'' $F_\text{abl}$
and the ``ablation time'' $\tau_\text{abl}$ for the (100) surface
of an Al slab from VASP and NPA at three different electron temperatures
$T_e$ and lattice temperature $T_i=0.026$ eV.
The fastest [100] phonon oscillation time $\tau_\omega$ is also given for
each $T_e$.}
\vspace{0.2cm}
\label{tabPhon}
\begin{tabularx}{\columnwidth}
{>{\centering}X>{\centering}X>{\centering}X>{\centering}X>{\centering}X>
{\centering}X}
\hline\hline
$T_e$ & $F_\text{abl}^\text{NPA}$ & $F_\text{abl}^\text{VASP}$ &
$\tau_\text{abl}^\text{NPA}$& $\tau_\text{abl}^\text{VASP}$ &
$\tau_\omega$ \tabularnewline
eV & eV/$\AA$ & eV/$\AA$ & fs & fs & fs \tabularnewline
\hline
2.00 & 0.91 & 0.90 & 111 & 111 & 105 \tabularnewline
4.00 & 2.75 & 2.70 & 63.9 & 64.2 & 92.6 \tabularnewline
6.00 & 5.03 & 4.70 & 47.1 & 48.6 & 80.6 \tabularnewline
\hline\hline
\end{tabularx}
\end{table}
As $T_e$ increases, phonons ``harden'' and $F_\text{abl}$ increases. In order
to observe the ``hardening'' of phonons on any measurement, a probe time
$\tau_\text{pr}$ such that $\tau_\omega < \tau_\text{pr} < \tau_\text{abl}$ is
required. However, for sufficiently high $T_e$ (e.g., above $\sim 2$ eV for Al),
the $F_\text{abl}$ are strong enough to make $\tau_\text{abl} < \tau_\omega$.
Hence the ion oscillations have no time to build up and it is probably
impossible to satisfy the time constraint enabling the observation of hardened
phonons. The phonon concept itself becomes misleading for thin UFM
films. Interpreting experiments when $\tau_\text{pr} >\tau_\text{abl}$ may
require explicit inclusion of surface ablation corrections in the theory used
for analyzing optical data (e.g., in the Helmholtz equations).
\subsection{Finite-$T$ exchange and correlation.}
In the NPA model, we used the finite-$T$ XCF of PDW and assessed the importance
of such corrections in the temperature regime studied here. The valence density,
or ``free''-electron density $n_f(r)$ of the solid at $T_e>T_i$ is the key
quantity for the NPA model. In Fig.~\ref{fig:Thompson}, we present the $n_f(r)$
obtained using the PDW finite-$T$ XCF with that obtained from the zero-$T$ XCF.
Even though the correction is small, it may be of importance in some
circumstances, e.g., x-ray Thomson scattering spectra, and hence there is no
reason to neglect it. The difference between the $T=0$ XCF and the finite-$T$ XCF
increases with $\theta=T/E_F$ at first, and it rapidly and asymptotically goes to
zero as $\theta>1$ and as $T\to\infty$. Hence the more important consequences of
using finite-$T$ XCF should occur in the partially degenerate regime $0<\theta <
1$.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{zeroXC_Al.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) The NPA free-electron density $n_f(r)$ for
Al$^{3+}$ at density $\rho=2.7$ g/cm$^3$, with $T_e = 8$ eV and $T_i =
0.026$ eV, calculated using XC at finite-$T$ and at $T=0$.
The inset shows the density
for larger $r/r_\text{ws}$.
}
\label{fig:Thompson}
\end{figure}
The finite-$T$ XCF is present in two contributions to the pressure, namely the
electron-electron interacting linear response function $\chi(k,T_e)$, which is
used to construct the pseudopotential and the pair potential, and the HEG
electron kinetic pressure. Although the finite-$T$ XCF has noticeable effects on
the pair potentials or on the energy spectrum of bound states, we observe that
overall thermodynamic effects are only slightly sensitive to such finite-$T$
corrections as can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:Al_P_Exc}. In fact, at $T_e = 8$ eV,
the finite$-T$ XCF only decreases the pressure in Al by $4\%$. Since individual
finite-$T$ contributions are considerable, this insensitivity to XCF comes from
the interplay of several terms. For instance, the electron pressure by itself
differs by about 10$\%$ in the regime $\theta \sim 0.8$, but the overall
pressures obtained from $T=0$ and finite-$T$ NPA calculations differ by less
than $4\%$.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{Al_P_Exc.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Comparison between the pressure of Al in the UFM regime
computed via the NPA model with the finite-$T$ $F_{xc}$ and with the zero-$T$
$F_{xc}$.}
\label{fig:Al_P_Exc}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Pseudopotential and mean ionization.}
\label{pseudo.sec}
Here, we discuss the importance of choosing the proper pseudopotential for
\textit{ab initio} simulations of UFM systems in the $2T$ model.
The pump-laser frequency is normally chosen such that core electrons are not
excited and remain strongly bound to the `cold' nuclei at temperature $T_i$.
Thus, only the $\bar{Z}$ valence electrons on each ion are heated to $T_e$ during
the irradiation. In DFT calculations, the electron temperature is used in a Fermi-Dirac distribution
for the occupation numbers of all electrons in the simulation. Thus, if the chosen
pseudopotential includes more electrons than the typical number of valence
electrons, these core electrons will also be ``heated'' even if they should
not in order to simulate correctly UFM systems. Wrong predictions may result, e.g., for
the 2T pressure of the given UFM and its electronic specific heat.
To illustrate this point, we carried out ABINIT simulations using PAW
pseudopotentials which include $\bar{Z}$=3 and 9 valence electrons for Li
and Na, respectively. We also did NPA-DFT
calculations with {\em all} electrons at $T_e$. In the NPA model, the mean
ionization $\bar{Z}=Z_n-n_b$ can be computed as in Ref.~\cite{PDW2}.
The $\bar{Z}$ as a function of $T_e$ is not an integer in the NPA but represents
an average over different ionization states as discussed in Ref.~\cite{PDW95}.
In the case of Al and Li, the NPA predicts that $\bar{Z}$ is unaffected for
$T_e< 8$ eV, relevant to UFMs. Pressure should also be unchanged, which is
exactly what we obtain with the ABINIT simulations of Li using the
all-electron PAW pseudopotential. However, in the case of Na, $\bar{Z}$
starts to increase around $T_e=3$ eV up to $\bar{Z}=1.49$ at $T_e=8$ eV (see
Table.~\ref{zbar-na.tab}). The increase in $\bar{Z}$ is accompanied by a
decrease in the occupation of the 2$p$ level as electrons are promoted to the
continuum. The decreased screening in the core (both due to increase of $T$
and due to the decrease in the number of core electrons) leads to a {\it
decrease} in the radius of the $n$=2 shell. Hence, the increase of $\bar{Z}$
and the modification of the core levels do not lead to any ambiguity in
specifying $\bar{Z}$.
\begin{table}[]
\caption{Mean ionization $\bar{Z}$, the 2$p$ Fermi factor, and the 2$p$ mean
radius (a.u) for sodium (normal solid density) are given as a function of the
temperature $T$ in eV. The WS radius $r_{ws}$=3.3912 a.u. and hence
the core is compactly contained inside the WS sphere of Na for all values of $T$
investigated here.}
\vspace{0.2cm}
\label{zbar-na.tab}
\begin{tabularx}{\columnwidth}
{>{\centering}X>{\centering}X>{\centering}X>{\centering}X}
\hline\hline
$T$ & $\bar{Z}$ & $f_{2p}$ & $<r_{2p}>$ \tabularnewline
\hline
1.00 & 1.001 & 1.000 & 0.808 \tabularnewline
3.00 & 1.004 & 0.999 & 0.804 \tabularnewline
5.00 & 1.104 & 0.983 & 0.792 \tabularnewline
8.00 & 1.494 & 0.919 & 0.762 \tabularnewline
10.0 & 1.786 & 0.872 & 0.744 \tabularnewline
\hline\hline
\end{tabularx}
\end{table}
We computed the pressure
with the NPA model including the changed $\bar{Z}$ and compared it with the
ABINIT simulations of Na using the nine-electron PAW pseudopotential. Results
are presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:NaPressurePAW}.
\begin{figure}[b]
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Na_PP_Pressure.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Comparison between the pressure
computed with the NPA (line) and with ABINIT (circles) when
heating is applied to the valence electron of Na only or to all electrons
(9 electrons in the ABINIT simulations).}
\label{fig:NaPressurePAW}
\end{figure}
We find that, at $T_e=8$ eV, the pressure, when heating of some core electrons
is included, is $54\%$ higher than the correctly calculated value. The use
of `all-electron' codes for the study of UFM in the $2T$ state suffers from
this pitfall of not selecting the physically appropriate $\bar{Z}$ and the
corresponding pseudopotential. When suitable pseudopotentials are not
available for DFT+MD calculations, one possibility is to use only the relevant
part of the electron density of states (DOS) that is assigned to the free
electrons on the basis of $\bar{Z}$, when pressure and related properties are
computed. For instance, when calculating the specific heat of `free
electrons' for use in UFM studies, the `free-electron' DOS used in the
calculations should be consistent with the number of actual free electrons
that couple with the laser. In a metal like gold (not studied here), even
though a pseudopotential with 11 valence electrons is needed, the DOS used for
evaluating the electron specific heat for $T_e<2$ should be only for
$\bar{Z}=1$. The optical properties of gold (see ref.~\cite{ChristyJon}) show
that the $d$-shell couples to light only when the interband threshold
energy ($\sim$ 2 eV) is exceeded. In the case of gold, the 5$d$ shell
hybridizes with the continuum electrons (nominally made up of 6$s$ electrons)
and extends outside the Au-Wigner-Seitz sphere until the $s-d$ transition
threshold ($\sim $2 eV) is reached. Hence, at low temperatures the NPA model
with its `one-center' formulation cannot be used for gold at normal density.
Similarly, WDM systems with bound states extending outside the Wigner-Seitz
sphere cannot be treated
unless explicit multi-center electron-ion correlation terms are included.
\subsection{Local pseudopotential for Li.}
The Li pseudopotential used in the NPA is a {\it local} pseudopotential,
whereas it is widely found in the context of large DFT codes that Li almost
always needs a non-local pseudopotential. Even in early studies of phonons,
a nonlocal pseudopotential was used by Dagens, Rasolt, and Taylor~\cite{DRT},
and yet the Li phonons at room temperature they obtained were less
satisfactory than for, say, sodium. We have already shown that the NPA
pair potential based on a local pseudopotential quite adequately
reproduces the Li phonons at
room temperature and high temperature at normal density,
but not as accurately as for aluminum or sodium. Hence it is of interest to
test the robustness of the Li pseudopotential and pair potential at
higher compression by calculating the Li-Li $g(r)$ using the NPA
potentials. Here we use the MHNC method
where a bridge term is included using the Lado-Foiles-Ashcroft (LFA)
criterion~\cite{LFA-ChenLai92} which is based on the Gibbs-Bogoliubov
inequality for the free energy of the system. The MHNC assumes radial symmetry and lim-
its us to ``simple-liquid''
structures.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width= 0.95\columnwidth]{Li_gr_0p85g.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) The Li-Li NPA-MHNC pair distribution function
$g(r)$ at 2000K (0.173 eV), $\rho=$ 0.85 g/cm$^3$, compared
with the $g(r)$ of Ref.~\cite{kietzmann2008}.
}
\label{Li-gr-p85g.fig}
\end{figure}
Since Li becomes a complex liquid with clustering effects at high
compressions~\cite{bonev2008}, we consider a compression of $\sim 1.6$
and compute the PDF for Li at 0.85 g/cm$^2$ and at 2000K (0.173 eV) for which
results are available from Kietzmann {\it et
al.}~\cite{kietzmann2008}. The LFA criterion yields a hard-sphere packing
fraction $\eta=0.371$ to model the bridge function. The resulting NPA-MHNC
$g(r)$ is displayed together with the $g(r)$ of Ref.\ ~\cite{kietzmann2008}
in Fig.~\ref{Li-gr-p85g.fig}.
We find
that the simple but state-dependent {\it local} pseudopotential
constructed from the free-electron charge pileup at a Li nucleus is
adequate to calculate phonons (i.e, requiring an accuracy of meV energies),
as well as the Li-Li PDFs up to moderate compressions and
high coupling constants $\Gamma$.
\subsection{Comparison between equilibrium WDM and UFM EOS.}
In UFM, the internal pressure mainly results from the hot
electron subsystem since ions remain close to their initial temperature
$T_r$. Here, we investigate the difference in the pressure between the
quasi-equilibrium UFM regime ($T_i\neq T_e$) and the equilibrium WDM regime which
will usually be in a liquid or plasma state with $T_i=T_e$. In DFT codes it is possible
to simulate liquids by computing forces among ions and the MD evolution of
the positions of the $N$ ions in the simulation cell.
However, to obtain
reasonable statistics, one needs to use a supercell containing as many ions
as possible, thus reducing considerably the first Brillouin zone and increasing
the required number of electronic bands to be included. As mentioned
earlier, the number of bands needs to be even larger in order to
simulate $T_e$ via a Fermi-Dirac distribution. As examples, to obtain
reasonably good band occupations for a system of 108 Al atoms at room
density, 360 bands at $T_e=1$ eV are required, and this number grows to 1200
at $T_e= 5$ eV. Thus, since computing repeatedly at every MD step
a high number of bands in DFT codes is
computationally very demanding, it becomes
prohibitive at higher temperatures. Such a problem does not occur
in the NPA model as only one DFT calculation at a single nucleus
is required to construct the ion-ion pair potential. The structure factors
may be computed using MD, or with MHNC equation for
simple liquids.
The comparison of the pressure from UFM and equilibrium WDM
is presented
in Fig.~\ \ref{Al_Liq_P.fig}. The equilibrium WDM pressure is
much higher than the UFM value. Furthermore,
the DFT-NPA calculation is in agreement with NPA up to $T_e = 5$ eV
(the limit of our DFT+MD simulation). This mutually
reconfirms the validity of the NPA as well as DFT+MD approaches
in the WDM regime.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width= 0.95\columnwidth]{Al_Liq_P.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Comparison of the NPA isochoric pressures
for the UFM system and the equilibrium liquid system.
Inset : Comparison of the NPA pressures in the low-$T$ regime
where DFT+MD is practical.
}
\label{Al_Liq_P.fig}
\end{figure}
Since $\bar{Z}$ reaches $\sim$ 7 at $T_e\sim$100 eV, codes for
simulating Al should employ pseudopotentials that include more
electrons than the 3 valence electrons valid at low temperatures.
Simulations with high $\bar{Z}$ values will greatly increase the
computational load and such calculations become prohibitive. Hence NPA
methods or orbital-free Hohenberg-Kohn
methods become relevant~\cite{karaisev2014}. The latter
do not however provide energy spectra and details of the bound electrons.
\section{Conclusion.}
In order to describe physical properties of UFM, we
examined applications of the NPA model within the
two-temperature quasi-equilibrium model. We computed phonons, as well as
the pressure resulting from the heating of free electrons. The
excellent accord between such NPA calculations and DFT simulations using the
ABINIT and VASP codes reconfirms the use of the NPA in this regime. As the
internal pressure increases due to the heating of electrons by the ultrafast
laser pulses, we explicitly showed that the phonon picture does not have much
physical meaning, especially for thin WDM samples, even if frequencies could
be computed using the harmonic approximation. As the NPA approach has
negligible computational cost compared to standard DFT codes, it is a valuable
tool for swiftly and accurately calculating important WDM properties such as mean
ionization, pair potentials, structure factors, phonons, x-ray Thomson
scattering spectra, electron-ion energy relaxation, conductivity, etc..
\section*{Acknowledgments.}
This work was supported by grants from the
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
and the Fonds de Recherche du Qu\'{e}bec - Nature et Technologies (FRQ-NT).
We are indebted to Calcul Qu\'{e}bec and Calcul Canada for generous
allocations of computer resources.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
The holographic renormalization program has been part of the gauge/gravity correspondence almost since its origins \cite{Bianchi:2001de, Bianchi:2001kw, Skenderis:1999nb, Freedman:1999gp, deBoer:2000cz}, and in particular the Wilsonian approach within this program has been the object of much attention in recent years \cite{Heemskerk:2010hk,Faulkner:2010jy,deBoer:1999tgo,deBoer:2000cz,Skenderis:2002wp}. This approach provides a systematic framework to treat the properties of the renormalization flow in a gauge theory at a non-perturbative level by means of calculations in a dual gravitational theory \cite{Skenderis:2002wp, Balasubramanian:2012hb}.
The staring point is the AdS/CFT correspondence which provides a duality between type IIB string theory in AdS$^5\times$S$_5$ and a {\cal N}=4 supersymmetric conformal $SU(N)$ field theory in a four dimensional Minkowski space. This original correspondence has been modified in a number of ways, for instance by allowing the AdS$^5$ part of the geometry to have an horizon, becoming an AdS-Schwarzschild solution, which corresponds to the introduction of a finite temperature in the gauge theory. A number of modifications of the background metric have been introduced to model different physical scenarios, and in general these modifications are admissible as long as a five dimensional subspace still approaches asymptotically AdS$^5$ space close to its boundary, and the remaining compact subspace retains enough symmetry to describe the dual gauge theory. In all these constructions, the directions along the compact manifold are dual to internal degrees of freedom in the gauge theory, while the directions along the boundary of the asymptotic AdS$^5$ are in correspondence with the directions in which the dual theory propagates. Of particular importance to the renormalization program is that the direction that extends away from the boundary into the bulk of the asymptotic AdS$^5$ space, that is, the radial direction of this space, is related to the energy scale in the gauge theory, which is also a distance scaling.
Since the gauge/gravity correspondence relates the high energy behavior of the field theory with the low energy regime of the string theory, to study high energy processes in the field theory, we can approximate its dual to be governed by the low energy limit of type IIB string theory, that is, type IIB supergravity, making it possible to work with a classical action which exponential is the approximated dual to the quantum generating functional \cite{Heemskerk:2010hk,deBoer:1999tgo,deBoer:2000cz,Skenderis:2002wp}.
Operators in the field theory side are related to fields in the gravity component of the correspondence, so to study the behavior of an operator in the gauge theory we must find its dual field. One general approach to finding this field is by determining the one that matches the symmetries of the operator. It will be important in this work to notice that given the correspondence between the radial direction in the gravity side and the energy scale in the field theory side, a normalizable field that close to the boundary behaves like $m r^{-\Delta}$ is dual to an operator of scaling dimension $\Delta$ and expectation value $m$.
Two theories being dual implies that all the degrees of freedom of one of them have to be codified in the other and vice versa. Holografic renormalization relays on the fact that this should also be true for the renormalization of the fields in the gauge theory, and looks for the way in which this information is encoded in the gravitational side of the duality. In particular, the encoding of the Wilsonian approach to renormalization can be found by, instead of extracting the information of the field theory from a precisely radially localized four dimensional surface in the bulk, integrating out a fraction of the space very near to the boundary and writing it as a surface term on the limiting surface of the integration domain. This integration, being on the radial direction extending away from the boundary and lying very close to it, corresponds to integrating out the high energy modes in the gauge theory, as it should be in the Wilsonian approach to renormalization.
More explicitly, what is needed is to write the gravity action as an integral over the bulk up to a surface close to the boundary, plus the corresponding surface integral just discussed, in such a way that the total action is independent of the location of this surface. This requirement can be expressed as a radial Hamilton-Jacobi equation, where, as the limiting surface is moved, the change in the bulk action is compensated by the change of the surface integral.
Here we study the behavior of a double trace fermionic operator in a thermal theory in the presence of a strong magnetic field, so first, in section \ref{sec:bulk}, we are concerned with the behavior of Dirac fields in the bulk, as we can be sure that a combination of them will be dual to the operator of our interest. It is important to mention that we will use a five dimensional background, and that nonetheless we can still use the correspondence because this background with its magnetic field is a solution to a consistent truncation of type IIB supergravity \cite{Uriel}. In section \ref{sec:flux} we carry an analogous calculation to that done in \cite{Laia:2011wf}, adapted to our background, starting by implementing all the ingredients necessary for the Wilsonian approach to renormalization, and proceeding then to determine the particular combination of fields that is dual to the operator we are interested in. Once we have the dual field, we apply to it the Wilsonian approach and find how the renormalization flux is affected by the reaction of the theory to the background magnetic field. We close that section describing the modifications that could arise by using a different renormalization scheme and identify the conclusions that can be draw independently of this choice. To provide further evidence for one of our conclusions, in section \ref{sec:DimRed} we make a very simple analysis of the behavior of the metric components to show that at low energy scales the plasma develops a substantially subluminal limiting velocity in the directions perpendicular to the background field, suggesting that the expected dimensional reduction takes place, and is maintained up to an energy scale that increases with the strength of the background magnetic field. We close with section \ref{sec:conclusions}, where we use our results to draw the conclusions stated in the abstract.
\section{The bulk equations}
\label{sec:bulk}
In this section we study a fermionic field in a five dimensional asymptotically AdS background with a constant magnetic field \cite{D'Hoker:2009mm} $F=Bdx\wedge dy$ turned on. The metric takes the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:1.b}
ds_{_5}^2 = -U(r)dt^2 + V(r)\left( dx^2 + dy^2\right) + W(r) dz^2 + \frac{dr^2 }{U(r)},
\end{equation}
and we will pick the gauge $A_y =B x$ for the magnetic field. This background was introduced\-\cite{D'Hoker:2009mm} to model the gravitational dual of a gauge theory in the presence of a constant magnetic field in its $z$ direction, and has already been used to study a number of phenomena in the presence of such a magnetic field \cite{Arciniega:2013dqa,Arean:2016het,Ammon:2016szz,Ammon:2017ded}.
This background has to be constructed numerically, and the particular way in which we obtain it lends a family of solutions with a horizon located at $r=r_h$ and characterized by one single parameter $b$ that measures the intensity of the magnetic field. As the magnetic field vanishes, the elements of this family smoothly approach the black brane solution given by plugging
\begin{align}
\label{bb}
U_{BB}(r) &=(r+\frac{r_h}{2})^2(1-\frac{(\frac{3}{2}r_h)^4}{(r+\frac{r_h}{2})^4}),\nonumber\\
V_{BB}(r) &=\frac{4V_0}{9r_h^2}(r+\frac{r_h}{2})^2,\\
W_{BB}(r) &=\frac{4}{3}(r+\frac{r_h}{2})^2, \nonumber
\end{align}
in (\ref{eq:1.b}) and setting $b=0$.
For all elements of the family, except the one for $b=0$, the near horizon geometry is that of a BTZ black hole times a flat two dimensional space, given by inserting
\begin{equation} \label{btz}
U_{BTZ}(r)=3(r^2-r_h^2),\;\;\; V_{BTZ}(r)=\frac{B}{\sqrt{3}}\;\;\; \mathrm{and}\;\;\; W_{BTZ}(r)=3r^2,
\end{equation}
in (\ref{eq:1.b}), while the geometry close to the boundary is the asymptotic $AdS_5$ needed in the correspondence. As the intensity of the magnetic field increases, the transition from the near horizon geometry into the $AdS_5$ zone takes place at a larger radius. From this perspective we can think of the $b=0$ case as the member of this family of solutions for which the transition takes place right at the horizon.
We have already discussed elsewhere the specific way in which we carry this numerical construction, so we refer the interested reader to \cite{Arean:2016het}, and all we shall need to know about the background for the present work are the characteristics described in the previous paragraph and those that will be explicitly exhibit in section \ref{sec:DimRed}. In what follows, we will use the numerical results for $U,V$ and $W$ achieved from the explicit calculations.
We now consider the action
\begin{equation}
S= \int_{r = r_h}^{r = \frac{1}{\epsilon}}d^5 x\sqrt{-g}\,{\cal L} + S_B[\psi,\bar{\psi},\epsilon],\label{action}
\end{equation}
where the Lagrangian density for the fermionic field $\psi$ in the five dimensional background is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:2}
{\cal L} = \bar{\psi}\left[ (1/2)\left( \Gamma^M \overrightarrow{D}_M -\overleftarrow{D}_M\Gamma^M\right) -m \right]\psi,
\end{equation}
and $S_B[\psi,\bar{\psi},\epsilon]$ is a boundary term that will be the topic of discussion bellow. For this work, $\psi$ will be considered to bare no charge to couple to the magnetic field so its minimal coupling to $A$ will be left out, and yet we will see that there is interesting physics in this first approach\footnote{The consistency of considering the fermionic field neutral with respect to $b$ can be seen in the uplift to ten dimensions of the five dimensional background we use here. The five dimensional effective field being neutral corresponds with the ten dimensional field being turned off in the internal directions, which can be consistently done \cite{Uriel}}. The grassmanian nature of the spinors in this action will be relevant for latter calculations. Also, throughout the paper, uppercase gammas are those that satisfy $\{ \Gamma^M,\Gamma^N\}=2g^{MN}$ for $g$ the metric associated to the line element (\ref{eq:1.b}), while lowercase gammas are those satisfying $\{\gamma^a,\gamma^b\}=2\eta^{ab}$, and hence they are related through $\Gamma^M = E^M_a \gamma^a$.
As in the expressions just above, we shall use an index notation where uppercase Latin letters refer to the coordinates of the spacetime with metric \eqref{eq:1.b}, $M= \{t,x,y,z,r\}$, whereas lowercase Greek indexes run only over the first four of these indexes $\mu =\{t,x,y,z\}$, leaving out the radial direction $r\in <r_h,\infty>.$ We reserve lowercase Latin indexes running from 0 to 4 for elements of the tangent or cotangent spaces that are written in terms of the tetrad
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:4}
\begin{split}
E^{t}_{a} =\delta^0_a \,U^{-1/2} \,,
\qquad
E^{x}_{a} & =\delta^1_a \,V^{-1/2},\qquad E^{y}_{a} =\delta^2_a \,V^{-1/2} \,,
\\
\\
E^{z}_{a} =\delta^3_a \,W^{-1/2}, &\qquad E^{r}_{a} =\delta^4_a \,U^{1/2} \,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
or its dual basis.
To compute the spin connection $\omega^{ab}_{M} = E^a_P(\partial_M E^{bP} + E^{bQ} \Gamma^P_{MQ})$ needed for the covariant derivative operator $\overrightarrow{D}_M = \partial_M + \frac{1}{4}\omega^{ab}{}_M \left[\gamma_a, \gamma_b \right]$ in (\ref{eq:2}), we first obtain all non-vanishing Christoffel symbols, which are given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:3.a}
\begin{split}
\Gamma^t_{rt} & =\frac{1}{2} \frac{U^\prime}{U} \,,
\qquad
\Gamma^x_{rx}= \Gamma^y_{ry}= \frac{1}{2}\frac{V^\prime}{V} \,,
\qquad
\Gamma^z_{rz} =\frac{1}{2}\frac{W^\prime}{W} \,,
\\
\Gamma^r_{tt} & =+\frac{1}{2}{U} U^\prime \,,
\qquad
\Gamma^r_{xx}= \Gamma^r_{yy}= -\frac{1}{2}{U}V^\prime \,,
\qquad
\Gamma^r_{zz} = -\frac{1}{2}{U} W^\prime \, ,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
leading to the only non-vanishing components of the spin connection
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:5}
\omega^{bc}\mu = U^b_\mu \delta^c_4 -\delta^b_4 U^c_\mu ,
\end{equation}
where for compactness we have defined
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:6}
U^0_t = \frac{1}{2} U^\prime, \,\, U^1_x = U^2_y = \frac{V^\prime}{2} \sqrt{\frac{U}{V}} \,\,, U^3_z = \frac{W^\prime}{2} \sqrt{\frac{U}{W}},
\end{equation}
with all other $U^a_\mu=0$.
Even if the magnetic field makes the background anisotropic, there is still translational invariance in the four directions perpendicular to the radial one, so we can expand in plane waves and write
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:8}
\psi(x^\mu, r) = e^{i\omega t - i \vec{k}\cdot \vec{x}}\phi(r), \qquad k^\mu = (\omega,\vec{k}),
\end{equation}
so that the equation of motion that results from extremizing (\ref{action}) reads
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:9}
\left[ -i\gamma^\mu K_\mu(r) + U^{1/2}(r)\,\gamma^4\partial_4 - \frac{1}{2} U^{1/2}\gamma^4F(r) -m \right]\phi(r) = 0,
\end{equation}
with
\begin{subequations}
\label{10}
\begin{equation}
\label{10.a}
K^\mu \equiv \left(U^{-1/2}\omega, V^{-1/2}k_x, V^{-1/2}k_y, W^{-1/2}k_z\right),
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{10.b}
F(r) \equiv -\frac{1}{2}\left( \frac{U^\prime}{U} + 2\frac{V^\prime}{V} + \frac{W^\prime}{W}\right).
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
For the variation principle to be well defined, in the sense that a solution to the equation of motion (\ref{eq:9}) is guarantied to extremize (\ref{action}), we need to cancel the boundary contribution of any variation. We will do this here by imposing the Neumann boundary conditions
\begin{equation}
\Pi=\frac{\delta S_B}{\delta \bar{\psi}}\,\,\,\,\, {\mathrm{and}} \,\,\,\, \bar{\Pi}=\frac{\delta S_B}{\delta \psi},\label{boundco0}
\end{equation}
where $\Pi$ is the conjugated momentum of $\psi$ in the radial direction given by
\begin{equation}
\label{23}
\Pi \equiv -\frac{i}{2}\sqrt{-g} E^{r}_a\gamma^a\psi\,\, {\text{and}}\,\,
\bar{\Pi } \equiv -\frac{i}{2}\sqrt{-g}\bar{\psi} E^{r}_a\gamma^a.
\end{equation}
The boundary term that respects covariance is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{bound0}
S_B = \frac{i}{2} \int_{r = \frac{1}{\epsilon}}d^4x \sqrt{-g_B}f\bar{\psi} \psi,
\end{equation}
where $g_B$ is the determinant of the metric induced at the surface ${r = \frac{1}{\epsilon}}$ that in our case is given by $V^2WU|_{r = \frac{1}{\epsilon}}$.
Noticing that $\sqrt{-g_B}=\sqrt{-g}E^{r}_4$ and that ${\gamma^4}^\dagger=\gamma^4$, both Neumann conditions (\ref{boundco0}) are reduced to ${\cal{M}}\psi=0$ and its conjugate for ${\cal{M}}\equiv(f+\gamma^4)$, where it is to be understood that an identity matrix is multiplying $f$.
To determine the value that $f$ can take, we remember that a way to obtain information about an operator in the gauge theory using elements of the bulk physics, is to fix the value of the dual field at the boundary and extract the information we are looking for from the behavior of the fields conjugate momentum. Reversing the rolls in the previous paragraph of the value of the field and its momentum conjugated in the radial direction is also a possibility, and when more than one field, or field component, is involved, fixing some field values and some momentum values is operational just as long as half the boundary conditions are left unfixed.
The components of $\psi$ follow the first order equation (\ref{eq:9}), so the boundary conditions are fully determined by their values there, and hence, according to what was stated in the previous paragraph, only half the components of $\psi$ should be fixed at the boundary. Another way to say this is that the conjugate momentum to $\psi$ is also determined by its value.
If we want the condition (\ref{boundco0}), that we rewrote as ${\cal{M}}\psi=0$, to only fix the value of half the components of $\psi$, the matrix ${\cal{M}}\equiv(f+\gamma^4)$ has to project out half the components of $\psi$ which requires $f=\pm 1$. The previous statement can be seen to be true given that the square of $\gamma^4$ is the identity and hence the operators $P_+=\frac{1}{2}(1+\gamma^4)$ and $P_-=\frac{1}{2}(1-\gamma^4)$ satisfy the properties $i){P_\pm}^2=P_\pm$, $ii)P_\pm P_\mp=0$ and $iii)P_++P_-=1$, that is, they are a complete set of orthogonal projectors. The relationship $\gamma^a {P_+}\gamma^b=\gamma^a\gamma^bP_-$ also holds, and given that the kernel of any Dirac matrix is the empty set, they cannot change the rank of an operator by multiplying it, so the rank of $P_+$ and $P_-$ has to be the same and consequently, each of them projects out half the components of $\psi$, as anticipated.
We are left now with the decision of which one of the projected fields, $\psi_+\equiv P_+\psi$ or $\psi_-\equiv P_-\psi$, will be set to zero at the boundary, which is dictated by their asymptotic behavior as $r$ goes to infinity, that at leading order is the same as in the pure AdS case \cite{Laia:2011wf}, so here we only review the facts that will be useful for the calculations below.
In our background the AdS radius $L$ has already been fixed to 1, so in the limit $r\to \infty$ the three functions $U, V$ and $W$ approach $r^2$, while $F\to \frac{-4}{r}$ and $K_\mu\to\frac{k_\mu}{r}$. The region $r\to \infty$ is better explored using the coordinate $\rho=\frac{1}{r}$, in terms of which as we approach the boundary $\rho\to 0$, equation (\ref{eq:9}) becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{18}
\left[-i\rho\gamma^\mụ k_\mu+ \gamma^\rho \rho\partial_\rho - \frac{1}{2}\left( 4\gamma^\rho + 2m\right)\right]\phi(\rho) =0,
\end{equation}
where $\gamma^\rho$ has to be equal to $-\gamma^r$ to keep $\Gamma^r\partial_r = \Gamma^\rho\partial_\rho$.
Whenever $m$ is not a half integer, the solution to this equation can be put in terms of the modified Bessel functions $I_\nu(k\rho)$ as
\begin{equation}
\label{19}
\phi_{\pm}(k\rho) = \left( k\rho\right) ^{(\frac{5}{2})}\left[C^{\pm}_{\nu_{{}_\pm}}I_{\nu_{{}_\pm}}(k\rho) + C^{\pm}_{-\nu_{{}_\pm}}I_{-\nu_{{}_\pm}}(k\rho)\right],
\end{equation}
with $\nu_{\pm}= (m\mp1/2).$
For half integer $m$ these modified Bessel function are not linearly independent, so we take the Hankel function $K_\nu = (\pi/2 )i^{\nu + 1}H^{(1)}_\nu (ix)$ as a second solution, which asymptotically shows a characteristic logarithmic term.
Close to the boundary the fields are approached by
\begin{subequations}
\label{20}
\begin{equation}
\label{20.a}
\phi_-(k\rho)= A(k)\rho^{2 -m} + B(k)\rho^{2 + m + 1} \cdots
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{20.b}
\phi_+(k\rho)= C(k)\rho^{2 +m} + D(k)\rho^{2 - m + 1} \cdots
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
The energy contribution of the asymptotic region evaluated using (\ref{20}) is given by the integral
\begin{equation}
\int_{\rho=\epsilon}^{\rho=0}\frac{dr}{r^{4+1}}[\bar{A}Dr^{4-2m+1}-\bar{C}Br^{4+2m+1}],
\end{equation}
so we see that for $m\geq 1/2$, the second term is normalizable while the first is not, hence for $A$ to be dynamical it would require an infinite amount of energy and this forces us to make $\psi_-=0$ keeping $\psi_+$ free. If $m\leq -1/2$ the situation is reversed, and the one that is left free is $\psi_-$. For $-1/2 < m < 1/2$ both terms are normalizable, so we can chose either field to be the one that stays dynamical.
The choices $\psi_-=0$ and $\psi_+ =0$ are respectively called standard and alternative quantization. These two options correspond to two fixed points in the renormalization flux on the gauge theory side and represent two different theories in which, as we shall see, if we set $\psi_-=0$, the operator in the gauge theory dual to $\psi_+$ has conformal dimension $\Delta_+ = 2 + m$ whereas for the alternative case the conformal dimension of the operator dual to $\psi_-$ has conformal dimension $\Delta_- = 2 - m$. We will keep the values of $m$ in the interval $-1/2 < m < 1/2$ and observe how the flow takes us from one to the other theory.
\section{The renormalization flux}
\label{sec:flux}
We turn now to the renormalization group flow, and since we will still be working close to the boundary, we will keep using the coordinate $\rho$.
To begin with the Wilsonian approach to renormalization we need to start by integrating out the high energy degrees of freedom, in particular, those with energy in the interval $\{\Lambda+\delta\Lambda,\Lambda\}$, where $\Lambda$ sets the renormalization scale. The way to implement this on the gravity side this is to perform the integral
\begin{equation}
\label{21}
S[\epsilon +\delta\epsilon] -S[\epsilon] = \int_{\rho = \epsilon + \delta \epsilon}^{\rho = \epsilon}d^{d+1} x\sqrt{-g}\,{\cal L} + S_B[\psi(x,\epsilon + \delta \epsilon)] -S_B[\psi(\epsilon)].
\end{equation}
The Wilsonian approach to renormalization is translated to the gravity side \cite{Heemskerk:2010hk,Faulkner:2010jy} by observing that physical quantities should not depend on the position of the boundary, and consequently (\ref{21}) should not depend on $\epsilon$, condition which of course we will be only able to meet if we permit the boundary term to change as the boundary is moved. This flow of the boundary term with $\epsilon$ will encode the renormalization group flow as we will now see.
The boundary conditions (\ref{boundco0}) are to be imposed at $\rho=\epsilon$, since this is the radius associated to the renormalization scale and hence it should mark the boundary of our bulk. It would be convenient then if we write the variation of (\ref{21}) with respect to $\epsilon$ as an expression that is evaluated at $\rho=\epsilon$ solely, which we can do by using the fact that $\delta\epsilon$ is small and expand (\ref{21}) around $\rho=\epsilon$ to first order in $\delta\epsilon$ getting to
\begin{equation}
\label{22}
\frac{dS}{d\epsilon} = -\int_{\rho = \epsilon} d^{d} x\sqrt{-g}\,{\cal L} + \int_{\rho = \epsilon} d^{d} x\left(-\frac{\delta S_B}{\delta \psi}\partial_\rho \psi + \partial_\rho\bar{\psi}\frac{\delta S_B}{\delta \bar{\psi}}\right)
+ \frac{\partial S_B}{\partial \epsilon}
\end{equation}
where, as desired, all terms are evaluated at $\rho= \epsilon$.
Now that everything is evaluated at $\rho=\epsilon$, we can use the conditions (\ref{boundco0}) to write (\ref{22}) as
\begin{equation}
\label{24}
\frac{dS}{d\epsilon} = \int_{\rho = \epsilon}d^{d}x\,\,{\cal H} + \frac{\partial S_B}{\partial \epsilon},
\end{equation}
with the radial Hamiltonian given by
\begin{align}
\label{25}
{\cal H} & = - \bar{\Pi} \partial_\rho \psi + \partial_\rho \bar{\psi}\Pi - \sqrt{-g}{\cal L}
\\
& = -\frac{i}{2}\sqrt{-g} \left[E^{\mu}_a\bar{\psi}\left(2\gamma^a\partial_\mu + \frac{1}{4}\omega_{bc,\mu}\{ \gamma^a,[\gamma^b ,\gamma^c]\} \right) \right],
\end{align}
which is just the Legendre transformation of ${\cal{L}}$ in the radial direction.
For (\ref{21}) to be independent of the value of $\epsilon$ we need to see that its variation with respect to it, given by (\ref{25}), vanishes, condition that can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{26}
\frac{\partial S_B}{\partial \epsilon} = - \int_{\rho = \epsilon}d^d {\cal H},
\end{equation}
which is the Hamilton-Jacobi equation dictating the flow of the boundary term, dual to the Callan-Zymanzyk equation.
For our metric, as any other diagonal metric with components depending only on the radial direction, $E^\mu_a\omega_{bc,\mu}\{ \gamma^a,[\gamma^b ,\gamma^c]\} =0$, and, given that $\partial_\mu \psi=0$, the flow equation can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{28}
\frac{\partial S_B}{\partial r} = i \frac{L^2}{r^2}\int_{r= 1/\epsilon}d^d x\sqrt{-g}\left[m \,\bar{\psi}\psi \right],
\end{equation}
where we have returned to the coordinate $r=1/\rho$.
It will be relevant to close this section by noticing that all we did in it is independent of the particular form of the boundary action, and so anything stated here will apply to the deformed theory that we will study in the following section.
\subsection{Deforming the theory}
As originally stated, one of the things we are interested on is the exploration of the impact that turning on an intense magnetic field on a theory at finite temperature would have on the fermionic renormalization flow. As a trial case, we will use the deformation of the theory given by the relevant operator
\begin{equation}
\Delta S_{\mathrm{Dirac}}=i\int\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi)^3}\xi\bar{\Psi}(k)\Psi(k), \label{diracdef}
\end{equation}
with a constant $\xi$ studied in \cite{Laia:2011wf} so that we can compare our results with the ones there, and in particular, recover them when we set $b=0$.
For defines, we will use the representation of the Dirac matrices given by
\small
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:matrix}
\gamma^0 = \left(\begin{array}{cc}
0&1\\
-1&0
\end{array} \right),
\gamma^1 = \left(\begin{array}{cc}
0&\sigma^1\\
\sigma^1&0
\end{array} \right),
\gamma^2 = \left(\begin{array}{cc}
0&\sigma^2\\
\sigma^2&0
\end{array} \right),
\gamma^3 = \left(\begin{array}{cc}
0&\sigma^3\\
\sigma^3&0
\end{array} \right),
\gamma^4 = \left(\begin{array}{cc}
1&0\\
0&-1
\end{array} \right),
\end{equation}
\normalsize
and also remember that in five dimensions there is no $\gamma^5$ matrix, but that nonetheless, in the four dimensional space of the gauge theory, this roll will be assumed by $\gamma^4$, that is, $\gamma^5_{(4-dim)}=\gamma^4$.
Even before determining the appropriated boundary term, we already see that after the conditions (\ref{boundco0}) have been imposed, we need an extra fermionic field in the bulk, say $\chi$, so that along with $\psi$ they provide enough degrees of freedom to encode those of the four components of the fermionic operator $\Psi_\mu$ in the gauge theory. Just like $\psi$, $\chi$ will also have an expansion identical to (\ref{20}), except with its own fermionic operators, that we will call $\tilde{A},\tilde{B},\tilde{C}$ and $\tilde{D}$ just to tell them apart. As we did with $\psi$, we want to impose on $\chi$ the boundary conditions that correspond to the alternative quantization, so the necessity for the conformal dimension to be equal for all the components of $\Psi_\mu$ demands for $\chi$ to have the same mass as $\psi$.
To model (\ref{diracdef}) we need to introduce, along with (\ref{bound0}) and the corresponding expression for $\chi$, a boundary term using $\psi$ and $\chi$ in a way in which the result has the right symmetries and properties. The total term turns out to be
\begin{equation}
\label{29}
S_B = \frac{i}{2} \int_{\rho = \epsilon}d^dx \sqrt{-g_B}\left[ f\left(\bar{\psi} \psi+ \bar{\chi}\chi\right) + g\left(\bar{\psi}^{(c)}\chi+ \bar{\chi}\psi^{(c)}\right)\right],
\end{equation}
where $\psi^{(c)} \equiv \gamma^2\psi$ is the charge conjugate of the spinor $\psi$. Notice that we have multiplied the first two terms by the same constant $f$, and we did this since different components of $\Psi$ will come from $\psi$ and $\chi$, so in this way $\Psi$ will transform correctly under the Lorentz group.
About this boundary term we notice that since under a chiral symmetry transformation $\psi \to e^{i\alpha}\psi$ and $\bar{\psi}^{(c)}\to e^{-i\alpha}\bar{\psi}^{(c)}$, the second term in (\ref{29}) breaks chirality. Also, in odd spacetime dimensions, the pin group $Pin(1,d)$ is associated with the {\it twisted map}, that sends odd elements of the Clifford algebra to minus themselves, and so for our five dimensional case, expressions like a mass term of the type $\bar{\psi}\psi$ contained in (\ref{29}) break parity. Let us remember that the leading order in both, (\ref{20}) and the corresponding expansion for $\chi$, are those proportional to the expected value of the operator $\Psi$, so the final thing to notice is that since the terms multiplying $g$ in (\ref{29}) are proportional to $A^\dagger\gamma^0\tilde{A}$ and $\tilde{A}^\dagger\gamma^0A$, they are dual to an operator with two copies of $\Psi$, which is the nature of the double trace operator that we are looking for\footnote{This proportionality can be seen by noticing that for our choice of gamma matrices, $\gamma^0\gamma^2\sim \text{diag} (\sigma_2, \sigma_2)$.}.
The considerations just made, make it so that the boundary term we added is dual to a double trace operator that breaks chirality, making it a likely candidate to model (\ref{diracdef}).
Given (\ref{29}), the boundary conditions (\ref{boundco0}) now read
\begin{subequations}
\label{30}
\begin{equation}
\label{30.a}
\left(f +\gamma^4\right) \psi = -g\gamma^2\chi,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{30.b}
\left(f +\gamma^4\right) \chi = -g\gamma^2\psi.
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
By applying $\left(f -\gamma^4\right)$ on (\ref{30.a}) and using (\ref{30.b}) or the other way around, we see that the condition
\begin{equation}
\label{31}
f^2 + g^2 = 1,
\end{equation}
has to be satisfied.
This result is independent of the metric, and it will be so as long as the metric is diagonal and depends only on the radial coordinate, which are conditions satisfied in particular by pure AdS.
\subsection{The RG flow.}
As argued in the previous section, the term multiplying $g$ in (\ref{29}) is dual to the double trace operator in (\ref{diracdef}), so the renormalization flow of the coupling constant of the latter will be encoded in the Hamilton-Jacobi equation for $g$,
\begin{equation}
\label{33}
\left[ \partial_r \left( V\sqrt{WU}f\right) \left( \bar{\psi}\psi + \bar{\chi}\chi\right) + \partial_r \left( V \sqrt{WU} g\right) \left(\bar{\psi} \gamma^2\chi + \bar{\chi}\gamma^2 \psi\right) \right] = 2m \left( \bar{\psi} \psi + \bar{\chi}\chi\right),
\end{equation}
obtained by substituting the expression for the boundary action (\ref{29}) into (\ref{28}).
To polish of (\ref{33}), we see that manipulating the boundary conditions (\ref{30}) we also get
\begin{subequations}
\label{32}
\begin{equation}
\label{32.a}
f\left( \bar{\psi}\psi + \bar{\chi}\chi\right) + g\left( \bar{\chi}\gamma^2\chi + \bar{\psi}\gamma^2 \chi\right) =0,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{32.b}
\bar{\psi}\left( f -\gamma^4\right) \psi + g\bar{\chi} \gamma^2\psi =0 \qquad \bar{\chi}\left( f -\gamma^4\right) \chi + g\bar{\psi} \gamma^2\chi =0,
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
that can be used in (\ref{33}) to either eliminate the bilinear $\left( \bar{\psi}\psi + \bar{\chi}\chi\right)$ in favor of $\left( \bar{\chi}\gamma^2\chi + \bar{\psi}\gamma^2 \chi\right)$, or the other way around, to then use (\ref{31}) and be left with
\begin{equation}
\label{34}
-\sqrt{U}\left( \partial_r g\right) = 2mg( \pm\sqrt{1-g^2}).
\end{equation}
We will see that if we start at $r=0$ with the negative sign for the square root, the flow takes $g$ from zero to 1 at some finite value of $r$, and after this point it is necessary to take the square root with the positive sign to carry with the flow that now takes $g$ back to zero as $r$ approaches infinity.
This flow is easier to follow in the equation for $f$,
\begin{equation}
\sqrt{U}\left( \partial_r f\right) = 2m \left({1-f^2}\right)\label{fflow}
\end{equation}
that, given the restriction $f^2+g^2=1$, is totally equivalent to (\ref{34}), and does not have a square root, so we do not need to pick the sign for different regions and smoothly takes $f$ from -1 for $r=0$ to +1 for $r\to\infty$.
Given that all integrations in the following section will be performed numerically, in practice we will use the flow equation for $f$ to do the calculations.
\subsection{The effect of the magnetic field}
As anticipated in the introduction, so far we have determined which results obtained in pure AdS carry to our background, and now we are ready to explicitly see the impact that the magnetic field has in the gauge theory.
To provide a reference we notice that in AdS, equation (\ref{34}) reeds $-r\left( \partial_r g\right) = 2mg \sqrt{1-g^2}$, with solution
\begin{equation}
g_0=\frac{4\xi r^{-2m}}{4+\xi^2r^{-4m}},\label{gsolads}
\end{equation}
where following \cite{Laia:2011wf}, we have written the solution so that the coupling constant $\xi$ in (\ref{diracdef}) appears as an integration constant.
In general, given that as we already mentioned, the dimension of $\Psi$ is $\Delta_-=2-m$, our double trace operator has dimension $4-2m$, and its coupling constant in the ultraviolet limit will be given by the value of $g(r)r^{2m}$ as $r$ goes to infinity.
To follow the flow now, we can either fix the physics in the infrared, equivalent to fixing the value of $g$ for small $r$, and observe the flow as we move towards the ultraviolet for different values of the intensity of the magnetic field $b$, or fix the physics in the ultraviolet, equivalent to fixing the value of $g$ for large $r$, and see how the flow goes as we lower the energy, again, for different values of $b$. One subtlety is that, since we are not working on pure AdS, the energy scale is not directly given by $r$ but, for the particular form of our metric, it should be given by $\mu=U^{1/2}$. Consequently, working at a fixed energy scale, means working at slightly different radios.
We start with the first of these alternatives and depict the results in figures (\ref{fir}) to (\ref{coup}).
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{fIRfixed.png}
\caption{$f$ as function of the energy scale $\mu$ for $b=\{0, 679, 1681, 2863, 4180, 5608, 7130, 8735, 10415, 12164\}$, where increasing values of $b$ are further to the right with the first plot on the left given by the analytic result for the pure AdS case. All the plots share the same value for $f$ at a particular infrared energy scale.}
\label{fir}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{gIRfixed.png}
\caption{g as function of the energy scale $\mu$ for $b=\{0, 679, 1681, 2863, 4180, 5608, 7130, 8735, 10415, 12164\}$, where increasing values of $b$ are further to the right with the first plot on the left given by the analytic result for the pure AdS case. In the inset we show how for each value of $b$, $\mu^2 g$ approaches a different constant that corresponds to the coupling of the gauge theory in the ultraviolet fixed point, that has been normalized with respect to the value $\xi_0$ in pure AdS. All the plots share the same value for $g$ at a particular infrared energy scale.}
\label{gir}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{coupling.png}
\caption{The coupling constant of the gauge theory in the ultraviolet fixed point as a function of the intensity of the magnetic field with the value of $g$ fixed to a constant at a particular infrared energy scale for all values of $b$.}
\label{coup}
\end{figure}
In figure (\ref{fir}) and (\ref{gir}) we respectively depict $f$ and $g$ as functions of the energy scale for the values of $b=\{0, 679, 1681, 2863, 4180, 5608, 7130, 8735, 10415, 12164\}$. The first line to the left of both plots is the $b=0$ analytic result for either $g_0$ given by (\ref{gsolads}), or $f$ given by
\begin{equation}
f_0=\frac{4-\xi^2r^{-4m}}{4+\xi^2r^{-4m}}.\label{fsolads}
\end{equation}
We will just make the obvious observation here that if we fix the physics in the infrared, the presence of the magnetic field makes the transition to the other fixed point to happen at a higher energy scale, and leave a more extensive discussion for latter. In (\ref{coup}) we plot, as a function of $b$, the value that the coupling constant $\xi$ takes at the ultraviolet fixed point, obtained as $\xi=$lim$_{r\to\infty} g(r)r^{2m}$ for the flow with the corresponding value of $b$. This function is monotonic in $b$, but far from linear.
The result of the second alternative, that of fixing physics in the ultraviolet, is depicted in figures (\ref{fuv}) and (\ref{guv}) that are analogous to (\ref{fir}) and (\ref{gir}) with the same values for $b$. In this case we do not show a plot like (\ref{coup}) because the value of $\xi$ has precisely been kept the same for all values of $b$ in the ultraviolet fixed point.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{fUVfixed.png}
\caption{$f$ as function of the energy scale $\mu$ for $b=\{0, 679, 1681, 2863, 4180, 5608, 7130, 8735, 10415, 12164\}$, where increasing values of $b$ are further to the left with the first plot on the right given by the analytic result for the pure AdS case. All the plots share the same value for $f$ at a particular ultraviolet energy scale.}
\label{fuv}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{gUVfixed.png}
\caption{g as function of the energy scale $\mu$ for $b=\{0, 679, 1681, 2863, 4180, 5608, 7130, 8735, 10415, 12164\}$, where increasing values of $b$ are further to the left with the first plot on the right given by the analytic result for the pure AdS case. All the plots share the same value for $g$ at a particular ultraviolet energy scale.}
\label{guv}
\end{figure}
This time the plots of the analytic results for $b=0$ lie to the right of the plots for higher values of $b$. Consistent with our observation about the transition to the ultraviolet fixed point happening at higher energy scales for higher values of $b$ when things are fixed in the infrared fixed point, here we notice that when we keep things fixed in the ultraviolet point, the transition to the infrared theory happens at lower energy scales for higher values of $b$.
\subsection{Dependence on the renormalization scheme}
\label{Scheme}
The calculations in the previous subsection have been carried out in a particular renormalization scheme, which in \cite{Balasubramanian:2012hb} is refereed to as "maximal", since all contact terms have been removed. To draw any meaningful conclusions we need to determine the effect that a change of scheme could have in our results.
A change of scheme is a redefinition of the operators and the coupling constants of a theory at short distances, and consistently, in \cite{Balasubramanian:2012hb} it was shown that the difference between the scheme we use and others, like the minimal scheme, is given by the addition of contact terms, that is, $\delta-$function singularities at coincident points. In \cite{Balasubramanian:2012hb} it was also shown that the inclusion of these contact terms in momentum space is given by the addition of analytic functions on the boundary term. For the fermionic theory we are working with, these additions, and some more general ones, were considered in \cite{Laia:2011wf}, reaching the conclusion that they could be reabsorbed by allowing $g$ and $f$ to depend on the $k^\mu$ in (\ref{eq:8}).
Now that we know what a change of scheme amounts to, let us determine the repercussions of performing one.
We see that the behavior of $f$ and $g$ with respect to $r$ is unchanged, since even if $f$ and $g$ are invested with a dependence on $k^\mu$, equations (\ref{34}) and (\ref{fflow}) remain the same, as they are differential equations on $r$.
As noticed in \cite{Balasubramanian:2012hb}, another consequence of adding these contact terms is that the Dirichlet boundary conditions that in the previous subsection were satisfied at the radius dual to the energy scale, would have to be modified to be mixed, Newman and Dirichlet, boundary conditions to recover the particular solutions we studied here. This implies that the assumption that $g$ provides the coupling constant of the double trace operator while its expectation value is read from the derivative of $g$ is not necessarily valid and some mixing in this relationship is expected. As pointed out in \cite{Balasubramanian:2012hb}, for this mixed boundary conditions energy is not conserved, which can be explained by the mixing of single and double trace operators. All of this put together is to say that the coupling constant $\xi$ of the double trace operators for an energy scales/radius in between fixed points is a general function of $g, f$ and their derivatives with respect to $r$, $\xi(f,f',g,g')$, and that the explicit dependence of this function on its arguments is fixed by the renormalization scheme. The behavior depicted in figures (\ref{fir}, \ref{gir}, \ref{fuv}, \ref{guv}) indicates that both $g,$ and $f$ have two regions of well defined characteristics, one for the infrared and another one for the ultraviolet, which correspond to the fixed points of the theory. Furthermore, in the same figures we see that as the intensity of the magnetic field is increased, the separation in the energy scale between the two asymptotic regions grows. Now, if we were to study the crossover from one fix point to another by using the actual coupling constant $\xi(f,f',g,g')$ in a general scheme, we would still observe that the separation in the energy scale between the asymptotic regions would increase, since it does for all the arguments of $\xi$, leaving it with no option but to follow this behavior since its dependence on them is fixed by the scheme. The previous conclusion is in agreement with the expectation from the field theory side that, since the space in which the renormalization flow occurs has only one parameter that can modify it, which is the intensity of the magnetic field, its topology should not change, since for this to happen, there should be a scheme in which the lines that represent a particular flow, should either cross, which they cannot because they are integral lines of a flow, or should fully overlap, changing the dimension of the renormalization space, which again, cannot happen\footnote{We would like to thank David Berenstein for pointing this out.}.
It is true though, that there could be a scheme in which the shape of the plots for $\xi$ differs so dramatically from figures (\ref{fir}, \ref{gir}, \ref{fuv}, \ref{guv}) that it could hide the pattern just described, or diminish it enough so that is not evident, but we would expect this to be rare. Of course the only way to fully corroborate what we have just stated is to compute a number of scheme independent quantities that would make the delay of the crossover irrefutably universal, but we will leave this calculation for the future and will provide just one example in section \ref{sec:DimRed}.
From our current results, the one that is scheme independent from the start is figure (\ref{coup}), since this coupling constant $\xi$ is obtained from the behavior close to the ultraviolet fixed point, where no ambiguity exists between the coupling and the expected value, nor between single and double trace operators, as the constant we are looking for comes from the mode in $g$ and $f$ that goes as $r^{-2m}$ as $r\rightarrow\infty$.
\section{Subluminal limiting velocity and the dimensional reduction of the gauge theory}
\label{sec:DimRed}
Even though the arguments stated in subsection \ref{Scheme} are robust enough to ensure that the behavior that we have reported so far is going to be qualitatively present in all renormalization schemes, it would of course be more satisfactory to provide an scheme independent calculation that shows that the crossover from the infrared theory to the ultraviolet one actually happens at higher energy scales as the intensity of the background field is increase.
One such calculation is to compute the amplitudes for fermion scatterings in the background we have used so far, determining first a clear distinction between low and high energy amplitudes, and then, verify that the spread in the characteristic energies for one or the other type of amplitude to occur gets larger with the intensity of the background field. This calculation, along with other dynamical ones, would be the object of future work, but for the time being, a scheme independent phenomenon we want to study to provide further evidence of our results is the dimensional reduction that a theory like the one we are working with should experience at low energies, so we proceed to explore this through the its causal structure.
The causal structure in a gauge theory is given by the conditions that have to be satisfied by the points at which two fields are evaluated so that these fields either commute for the bosonic case or anticommute for the fermionic one. The commutators or anticommutators are normally written in terms of the subtraction or addition of propagators, and hence contain relevant information of the theory. Even if the propagators themselves depend in the renormalization scheme, the causal structure does not, so determining this structure provides scheme independent information. A way to extract the causal structure in our context is to use an arbitrary renormalization scheme to compute the propagation amplitudes for the fermion fields, perform the necessary addition and find the conditions for the result to vanish. This is not the way we will proceed here, since it is much simper to determine the shape of the lightcones at each energy scale by direct inspection of the speed of light in different directions, and as we will explain below, it is equivalent.
We know in advanced that we will find a qualitatively different causal structure in the infrared and the ultraviolet limits of the theory we are working with, since the dimensional reduction that a gauge theory should undergo in the presence of a strong magnetic field has already been studied using the gauge/gravity correspondence. For instance in \cite{D'Hoker:2016wgl} a formal analysis was performed to exhibit how the operator algebra is projected to the one that a lower dimensional theory should have.
More recently, in \cite{Arean:2016het}, we performed a dynamical calculation to show that the drag force that a particle experiences when traveling in directions perpendicular to the magnetic field, increases linearly and without a bound as the intensity of the field grows bigger, while it stays bounded for propagation along the field. We obtained part of the results in \cite{Arean:2016het} by studding the motion of a string embedded in the same background used here \ref{eq:1.b}, and determining when the world sheet develops a horizon as a consequence of the dependence on the radius of the local speed of light. The results in \cite{Arean:2016het} indicate that the causal structure obtained by this dynamical calculation is determined by the shape of the lightcones at a specific radial location, making it a structure that depends on the energy scale and that can be read directly from the metric. In \cite{Arean:2016het} we did not investigate the dependence of the results in the energy scale, since it was not the objective at the time.
In what follows we will analyze how the presence of a magnetic field causes the plasma to develop a substantially subluminal limiting velocity in the directions perpendicular to it, leading to another indication of the dimensional reduction just discussed, but more importantly, we will show that the energy scale up to which this reduction is effective increases with the intensity of the background magnetic field. We need to point out that the dimensional reduction is proper of the field theory itself, as it is experienced by the plasma that provides the vacuum of our theory, made by fields of which some are charged with respect to the magnetic field, and hence, they are subject to the physics alluded in \cite{D'Hoker:2016wgl} and \cite{Arean:2016het}. The fermions we added in the present work are not charged with respect to the magnetic field, so they will be affected by the dimensional reduction through the interaction with the vacuum of the theory that is reacting to the presence of the magnetic field, and not by direct coupling.
In our case, it is important to notice that the constant magnetic field makes the dual gauge theory anisotropic by singling out the direction in which it points, and therefore the propagation of particles does not need to be isotropic. From the very simple form of the metric we are using, we see that the proper speed of light in a given direction $x_i$ at radius $r$ is given by $\tilde{c}_i(r)=\sqrt{\frac{-g_{00}(r)}{g_{x_ix_i}(r)}}$. Locally, at any point of the bulk, this effect is of course unperceivable as all observations are due exclusively to the particulars of local coordinates. Nonetheless the holographic projection makes it so that when working in the gauge theory, where coordinate velocities are used, at an energy scale $\mu$ corresponding to a certain radius $r^*$, $\tilde{c}_i(r^*)$ dictates a limiting velocity. The way in which a limiting velocity appears has already been discussed in \cite{Argyres:2006vs}, while an argument about its validity along with its computation for the case of a single quark can be found in \cite{Argyres:2008eg,Chernicoff:2008sa,Chernicoff:2011xv} and a microscopic description is done in \cite{Mateos:2007vn,Ejaz:2007hg}.
In the following few paragraphs we will show that when working at low energy scales the limiting velocity in directions perpendicular to the magnetic field are very small in comparison to the one along it, which even at those low energies approaches the speed of light.
To begin the analysis let us remember that the background we are working with transitions from the near horizon geometry (\ref{btz}), in which $V$ is a constant while $U$ and $W$ grow as $r^2$, to AdS$_5$, where, for the coordinates we are using, all the metric functions go like $r^2$. As can be seen in the logarithmic plots (\ref{logback}) the radius, and hence the dual energy scale, at which this transition occurs grows larger as the intensity of the magnetic field is increased. It is therefore possible to find an intensity for $b$ such that this transition takes place at an energy larger than the energy scale of our physical processes, so that as far as our gauge theory is concerned, this transition is not observed.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\minipage{.99\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{LogV.png}
\endminipage\hfill
\minipage{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{LogW.png}
\endminipage\hfill
\minipage{0.49\textwidth}%
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{LogU.png}
\endminipage
\caption{Logarithm of the metric functions vs. logarithm of $r$ for $b=\{ 0, 8.62,
26.81, 75.05, 207, 570, 1564, 4277, 11680, 31860, 86861\}$. $V$ in the first plot shows how it starts as a large constant close to the horizon and it transitions into going like $r^2$. $W$ in the second plot shows how it starts as $3r^2$, shown as one of the dotted lines, close to the horizon and it transitions into going like $r^2$, shown as the other dotted line. $U$ in the third plot shows how it starts in zero, behaves like $3r^2$, shown as one of the dotted lines, for some intermediate values of $r$ and then transitions into going like $r^2$, shown as the other dotted line. The radius at which the transition happens for the three metric coefficients increases with the intensity of $b$.}\label{logback}
\end{figure}
In the plot (\ref{lightcone1}) we see that by increasing $b$, the limiting velocity $\tilde{c}_\perp=\sqrt{\frac{-g_{00}(r)}{g_{xx}(r)}}=\sqrt{\frac{-g_{00}(r)}{g_{yy}(r)}}=\sqrt{U/V}$ can be kept very small for any energy scale $\mu$ by increasing the intensity of $b$. On the other hand, the plot (\ref{lightcone2}) shows that, above a certain energy scale, the limiting velocity $\tilde{c}_\parallel=\sqrt{\frac{-g_{00}(r)}{g_{zz}(r)}}=\sqrt{U/W}$ cannot be pushed significantly away from 1 regardless of how intense the magnetic field is made.
To provide a different perspective and further understand how this effect compares in different directions, we define $\mu_{ci}(s)$ to be the energy scale up to which the limiting velocity in the $i$ direction remains smaller than $s\%$ the speed of light. The inset in (\ref{lightcone1}) shows how $\mu_{c\perp}(1)$ as an example can be made arbitrarily large by increasing the intensity of the field. On the other hand, the inset in (\ref{lightcone2}) shows for instance that $\mu_{c\parallel}(98)$ cannot be made higher than a certain value by intensifying the background field.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{cperp.png}
\caption{$\tilde{c}_\perp$ as a function of the energy scale $\mu$ for $b=\{0, 4180,
10415, 17772, 25967, 34849, 44319, 54308, 64763, 75644\}$. The highest line corresponds to the $b=0$ case and increasing values of $b$ show plots that indicate the possibility of making $\tilde{c}_\perp$ as small as desired for any energy scale. The inset exhibits how the value of the energy scale below which $\tilde{c}_\perp$ is smaller than 1\% of the speed of light changes with $b$, and indicates that this energy scale grows with it, so $\tilde{c}_\perp$ can be kept as small as desired up to arbitrarily high energy scales by making $b$ more intense.}\label{lightcone1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{cpar.png}
\caption{$\tilde{c}_\parallel$ as a function of the energy scale $\mu$ for $b=\{0, 4180, 10415, 17772, 25967, 34849, 44319, 54308, 64763, 75644\}$. The highest line again corresponds to the $b=0$ case and increasing values of $b$ show plots that quickly converge to a given profile. The inset exhibits how the value of the energy scale below which $\tilde{c}_\parallel$ is smaller than 98\% of the speed of light changes with $b$, and indicates that this energy scale quickly approaches a constant as $b$ grows, so $\tilde{c}_\parallel$ gets close to the speed of light for low energy scales regardless of the intensity of $b$.}\label{lightcone2}
\end{figure}
The results mentioned in the previous paragraphs provide evidence that propagation in the gauge theory is favored in the direction of the background field with respect to those perpendicular to it, consistent with a dimensional reduction taking place. Furthermore, these results exhibit that the dimensional reduction is effective up to an energy scale that grows with the intensity of the background magnetic field, reflecting the way in which the causal structure transitions from the infrared to the ultraviolet at higher energy scales for more intense magnetic fields.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusions}
By implementing the holographic version of the Wilsonian approach to renormalization we were able to determine properties of the corresponding group flow of a thermal gauge theory in the presence of a strong constant magnetic field. In particular we found the beta function for the coupling $\xi$ of the double trace fermionic operator $\bar{\Psi}(k)\Psi(k)$, and depicted our results in plots (\ref{fir}) to (\ref{guv}), where we see that, as in the zero temperature and no magnetic field case \cite{Laia:2011wf}, the renormalization flow happens between two fixed points, one in the low energy limit and the other in the high energy one.
The effect of the background magnetic filed is quite relevant and we can extract at least three ways in which it affects the behavior as the energy scales changes and that have direct impact, for instance, on the analysis of observational data.
The first conclusion we can draw is that the separation of the theories in the energy scale is increased by the introduction of the background magnetic field and grows with its intensity. We can see this in plots (\ref{fir}) and (\ref{gir}), where physics are fixed in the infrared and we observe that the transition to the ultraviolet theory happens at an energy scale that grows with the intensity of the magnetic field. This is consistent with what is reported in figures (\ref{fuv}) and (\ref{guv}), where physics are fixed in the ultraviolet and the transition to the infrared theory happens at lower energy scales as the intensity of the background field is increased. Even though the particulars of the flow of the coupling constant are scheme dependent, the generalities of it are robust, as argued in the main of the text.
The transcendence of this effect is that if when performing a high energy collision experiment we are interested in exploring the physics of a theory that happens as an ultraviolet limit of some renormalization flow, the energy that will be necessary to inject into the system to access the relevant processes will increase if a very intense magnetic field is present.
An example of how this observation can be relevant is that in a system like the quark gluon plasma obtained in experiments like RHIC or LHC, measurements taken from events with different centralities cannot be assumed to explore physics of the theory in the same energy scale, since the magnetic field intrinsic to the collision depends on how central the collision is. The events that will provide access to the ultraviolet physics at the lowest energy possible would be those coming from central collisions.
A theoretical exploration of this effect was given in section \ref{sec:DimRed}, where we saw that an intense enough magnetic field would make the four dimensional theory inaccessible for a large range of energies and would leave a dimensionally reduced effective theory.
The second conclusion, from plot (\ref{coup}), is that the difference in the coupling constants in the infrared and ultraviolet theories increases with the intensity of the field. So if fundamental physics are fixed at a very high energy scale, the apparent coupling that will be observed in a low energy experiment will depend on whether or not a magnetic field is affecting the theory. Given that this comparison is made at the fixed point of the theory, it is scheme independent.
The third effect that we want to comment on comes from the difference in the probabilities for propagation in directions parallel and perpendicular to the magnetic field. This difference would imply that the detected ellipticity for a collision would receive an extra contribution from the non centrality through this mechanism, making it larger than anticipated if this is not taken into account. This could be of particular relevance for experiments where measurements are used to determine the Fourier component v2 of the azimuthal anisotropy. Again, the anisotropy would prevail to higher energy scales for larger background magnetic fields in a scheme independent manner.
We think our study provides three ways in which the presence of a magnetic field can pragmatically affect data analysis in high energy physics.
\acknowledgments
We would like to thank Alberto G\"uijosa for helpful discussion, particularly concerning the subluminal limiting speed. LP highly appreciates the hospitality of the Physics Department of UCSB while working on the revised version of this work, and in particular thanks David Berenstein and Mark Srednicki for helpful input about the scheme dependence of the results. We also acknowledge partial financial support from PAPIIT IN113115, UNAM.
|
\section{Key details of the eikonal approximation}
In this section, using the standard eikonal approximation for charged particles [S1],
we derive the equation for the abbreviated action $S_0\equiv S_0(\mathbf{r})$
of Weyl quasiparticles in the effective magnetic fields. We begin by making the following replacement
in the dispersion relation (1) in the main text:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{p} \to \bm{\nabla} S_0 -\frac{e}{c}\mathbf{A}_{\lambda},
\label{lens-eikonal-p-replace}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{A}_{\lambda}=\left(-yB_{\lambda}/2, xB_{\lambda}/2,0\right)$ is an effective vector potential that describes the background field
$\mathbf{B}_{\lambda}$ in the $+z$ direction. Then, we obtain the
following eikonal equation for the abbreviated action $S_0$ of Weyl quasiparticles with energy $\varepsilon$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\varepsilon &=& v_F \sqrt{(\bm{\nabla}S_0)^2+\frac{e^2}{4c^2}r_{\perp}^2B_{\lambda}^2} - \frac{\lambda e \hbar v_F B_{\lambda}}{2c}\frac{\nabla_zS_0}{(\bm{\nabla}S_0)^2+\frac{e^2}{4c^2}r_{\perp}^2B_{\lambda}^2}
\nonumber\\
&+& \frac{e^2 \hbar^2v_FB_{\lambda}^2}{8c^2} \frac{1}{\left[(\bm{\nabla}S_0)^2+\frac{e^2}{4c^2}r_{\perp}^2B_{\lambda}^2\right]^{3/2}}
-\frac{e^2 \hbar^2v_FB_{\lambda}^2}{16c^2} \frac{(\nabla_zS_0)^2}{\left[(\bm{\nabla}S_0)^2+\frac{e^2}{4c^2}r_{\perp}^2B_{\lambda}^2\right]^{5/2}},
\label{lens-eikonal-epsilon}
\end{eqnarray}
where, in view of the symmetry in the problem, we assumed that $S_0(\mathbf{r})$ depends on
$z$ and $r_{\perp}=\sqrt{x^2+y^2}$, and used
\begin{equation}
\left(\bm{\nabla}S_0-\frac{e}{c}\mathbf{A}_{\lambda}\right)^2 = (\bm{\nabla}S_0)^2 +\frac{e^2}{4c^2} r_{\perp}^2B_{\lambda}^2.
\label{lens-eikonal-eq-S0}
\end{equation}
In order to obtain an analytical solution to Eq.~(\ref{lens-eikonal-epsilon}), we will use the paraxial approximation. In other words, we will assume
that $r_{\perp}$ is small and expand the solution in powers of $r_{\perp}$. Clearly, this approximation is adequate only when the
beam of chiral quasiparticles remains close to the optical axis of the (pseudo-)magnetic lens. In
practice, of course, this condition may break down and, then, one would have to reanalyze
the problem by using numerical methods. In such a regime, various optical aberrations will
appear and further complicate the situation. While all these issues may be of real
importance for making pseudomagnetic lenses in practice, they are beyond the scope
of the conceptual study presented here.
In the case $\mathbf{B}_{\lambda}=0$, the action should describe a free quasiparticle moving
with momentum $\varepsilon/v_F$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
S_0^{\rm (free)}=\frac{\varepsilon}{v_F}\sqrt{z^2+r_{\perp}^2}\approx \frac{\varepsilon}{v_F} \left( z
+\frac{r_{\perp}^2}{2z} +O(r_{\perp}^4) \right).
\label{lens-eikonal-S0-free}
\end{equation}
In the case of a nonzero $\mathbf{B}_{\lambda}$, we seek $S_0$ in
a similar form, which is given by Eq.~(2) in the main text.
Indeed, by matching the actions at the boundaries of the (pseudo-)magnetic
lens, one can easily show that the eikonal of a quasiparticle moving in (pseudo-)magnetic
fields should also contain only even powers of $r_{\perp}$.
By keeping the terms up to quadratic order in $r_{\perp}^2$ and $B_{\lambda}$, as well as making use of the following relations:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{lens-eikonal-eqs-be}
\nabla_zS_0 &=& \frac{\varepsilon}{v_F}\left( C +\frac{r_{\perp}^2}{2} A^{\prime}(z) \right),\\
(\bm{\nabla}S_0)^2&=& (\nabla_zS_0)^2 +\left(\frac{\varepsilon r_{\perp}}{v_F}\right)^2(A(z))^2
= \left(\frac{\varepsilon}{v_F}\right)^2C^2 +\left(\frac{\varepsilon r_{\perp}}{v_F}\right)^2\left[C A^{\prime}(z)+(A(z))^2\right],
\label{lens-eikonal-eqs-ee}
\end{eqnarray}
we rewrite Eq.~(\ref{lens-eikonal-epsilon}) as
\begin{eqnarray}
&& C^4 -C^6 +\left(2-3C^2\right)r_{\perp}^2C^2\left[C A^{\prime}(z)+(A(z))^2\right]
+\frac{2\lambda B_{\lambda}}{B^{*}} \left\{C^3 +r_{\perp}^2C\left[\frac{3}{2}C A^{\prime}(z)+(A(z))^2\right]\right\} \nonumber\\
&&
+ \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{B_{\lambda}}{B^{*}}\right)^2 \left\{C^2 +r_{\perp}^2\left[ CA^{\prime}(z) -2(A(z))^2\right]\right\}
-\frac{r_{\perp}^2 eB_{\lambda}^2}{2c \hbar B^{*}} C^4=0.
\label{lens-eikonal-epsilon-2}
\end{eqnarray}
At the zeroth order in $r_{\perp}^2$, Eq.~(\ref{lens-eikonal-epsilon-2}) reduces to the following
equation:
\begin{eqnarray}
C^4 -C^6
+\frac{2\lambda B_{\lambda}}{B^{*}} C^3 + \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{B_{\lambda}}{B^{*}}\right)^2 C^2 &=& 0.
\label{lens-eikonal-epsilon-r-0}
\end{eqnarray}
This equation has four nontrivial solutions, i.e.,
\begin{eqnarray}
C^{(1)}_{\pm} &\simeq& \pm 1 + \lambda \frac{B_{\lambda}}{B^{*}} \mp \frac{5}{4}\left(\frac{B_{\lambda}}{B^{*}}\right)^2
+O\left(\frac{B_{\lambda}^3}{(B^{*})^3}\right),\\
C^{(2)}_{\pm} &\simeq& -\left(\lambda \pm \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\right) \frac{B_{\lambda}}{B^{*}} +O\left(\frac{B_{\lambda}^3}{(B^{*})^3}\right),
\label{lens-eikonal-epsilon-r-0-sol}
\end{eqnarray}
where we used an expansion in powers of the small parameter $B_{\lambda}/B^{*}$. By taking into account
that $C$ should be equal to one in the limit of vanishing fields [cf. Eqs.~(2) in the main text and (\ref{lens-eikonal-S0-free})]
we conclude that the physical solution is given by $C=C^{(1)}_{+}$.
Further, by equating the terms quadratic in $r_{\perp}$ in Eq.~(\ref{lens-eikonal-epsilon-2}), we obtain the first-order differential equation (4) in the main text for the function $A(z)$.
\section{Lens equation for the uniform fields}
In this section we present the key steps of the derivation of the lens equation in the simplest
case of uniform magnetic and pseudomagnetic fields, $B_{\lambda}=const$. In the regions $z<0$ and $z>L$, the fields are absent.
Therefore, $a_1=1$ and $a_2=0$ there and the solutions to Eq.~(4) in the main text
are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
A(z)\Big|_{z<0}&=&\frac{1}{z-z_1}, \\
A(z)\Big|_{z>L}&=&\frac{1}{z-z_2},
\label{lens-eikonal-A2-sol-1}
\end{eqnarray}
where $z_1$ and $z_2$ are the integration constants that will be fixed by the boundary conditions.
On the other hand, by solving Eq.~(4) in the main text in the region with nonzero
background fields, i.e., $0<z<L$, we
obtain the following solution:
\begin{equation}
A(z)\Big|_{0<z<L}=a_{2} \cot{\left(\frac{a_{2}}{a_1}z+\phi \right)},
\label{lens-eikonal-A2-sol-2}
\end{equation}
where $\phi $ is another integration constant that should be also determined by matching the solutions
for $A(z)$ at $z=0$ and $z=L$, i.e.,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{lens-eikonal-A2-matching-be}
-\frac{1}{z_1} &=& a_{2} \cot{\left(\phi \right)},\\
a_{2} \cot{\left(\frac{a_{2}}{a_1}L+\phi \right)} &=& \frac{1}{L-z_2}.
\label{lens-eikonal-A2-matching-ee}
\end{eqnarray}
Finally, after excluding $\phi $ from these equations, we obtain the lens
equation
\begin{equation}
(z_1 + g_{\lambda})(z_2 - h_{\lambda})=-f^2_{\lambda}.
\label{lens-eikonal-lens-eq-main-Supp}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{lens-eikonal-lens-g-app-2-method}
g_{\lambda} &=& \frac{1}{a_{2}} \cot{\left(\frac{a_{2}L}{a_1}\right)} \simeq \frac{l_{\varepsilon} B^{*}}{B_{\lambda} \left(1-\lambda B_{\lambda}/B^{*}\right)}
\cot{\left(\frac{L B_{\lambda}\left(1-\lambda B_{\lambda}/B^{*}\right)}{l_{\varepsilon} B^{*}}\right)},\\
\label{lens-eikonal-lens-f-app-2-method}
f_{\lambda} &=& \frac{1}{a_{2} \sin{\left(\frac{a_{2}L}{a_1}\right)}} \simeq \frac{l_{\varepsilon} B^{*}}{B_{\lambda} \left(1-\lambda B_{\lambda}/B^{*}\right)
\sin {\left(\frac{L B_{\lambda}\left(1-\lambda B_{\lambda}/B^{*}\right)}{l_{\varepsilon} B^{*}}\right)} },
\end{eqnarray}
and $h_{\lambda} = L+g_{\lambda}$.
\section{Lens equation for the nonuniform fields}
In this section we present the derivation of the lens equation as well as focal length
$\tilde{f}_{\lambda}$ for the nonuniform effective magnetic field
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\mathbf{B}}_{\lambda}(z) = \theta(z)\theta\left(L-z\right) \frac{\mathbf{B}_{\lambda}}{1+\left(z-L/2\right)^2/\xi^2},
\label{inhom-B-profile-Supp}
\end{equation}
neglecting the effects of the Berry curvature. In this case, we have $\varepsilon=v_Fp$
instead of Eq.~(1) in the main text. Therefore, the analog of the differential equation
(4) in the main text reads
\begin{equation}
A^{\prime}(z) +(A(z))^2 + \frac{e (\tilde{B}_{\lambda}(z))^2}{2c\hbar B^{*}} =0.
\label{inhom-B-diffeq}
\end{equation}
Taking into account the explicit form of the effective field $\tilde{B}_{\lambda}(z)$ profile (\ref{inhom-B-profile-Supp}), we obtain the following analytical solution inside the solenoid:
\begin{eqnarray}
A(z)\Big|_{0<z<L} =\frac{2c_{0} \xi F_{\lambda} + i c_{0} (L-2z)
- \left(L-2z+2i\xi F_{\lambda}\right)\exp{\left(2iF_{\lambda}\,
\mbox{arccot}\left(\frac{2\xi}{L-2z}\right)\right)}}{2 \left(\xi^2+\frac{(L-2z)^2}{4}\right)\left[\exp{\left(2iF_{\lambda}\,
\mbox{arccot}\left(\frac{2\xi}{L-2z}\right)\right)}
- ic_{0}\right]},
\label{inhom-B-eikonal}
\end{eqnarray}
where $c_{0}$ is an integration constant and
\begin{equation}
F_{\lambda}\equiv\sqrt{1+\left(\frac{\xi B_{\lambda}}{l_{\varepsilon} B^{*}}\right)^2}.
\label{inhom-lens-F}
\end{equation}
By matching the solutions outside the solenoid (\ref{lens-eikonal-A2-sol-1}) with that in Eq.~(\ref{inhom-B-eikonal})
at $z=0$ and $z=L$, we obtain the following lens equation:
\begin{equation}
(z_1 + \tilde{g}_{\lambda})(z_2 - \tilde{h}_{\lambda})=-\tilde{f}_{\lambda}^2,
\label{inhom-lens-eq}
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{h}_{\lambda} = L+\tilde{g}_{\lambda}$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{g}_{\lambda} = (L^2+4\xi^2) \frac{2\xi F_{\lambda} \cos{\left[2F_{\lambda}\, \mbox{arccot}\left(\frac{2\xi}{L}\right)\right]}
+ L \sin{\left[2F_{\lambda}\, \mbox{arccot}\left(\frac{2\xi}{L}\right)\right]}}{2\left(4\xi^2F_{\lambda}^2-L^2\right)
\sin{\left[2F_{\lambda}\, \mbox{arccot}\left(\frac{2\xi}{L}\right)\right]-8L\xi F_{\lambda} \cos{\left[2F_{\lambda}\,
\mbox{arccot}\left(\frac{2\xi}{L}\right)\right]}} },
\label{inhom-B-g}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{f}_{\lambda} = \frac{\xi \left(L^2+4\xi^2\right) F_{\lambda}}{\left(4\xi^2F_{\lambda}^2-L^2\right)
\sin{\left[2F_{\lambda}\, \mbox{arccot}\left(\frac{2\xi}{L}\right)\right]}
-4L\xi F_{\lambda} \cos{\left[2F_{\lambda}\, \mbox{arccot}\left(\frac{2\xi}{L}\right)\right]}}.
\label{inhom-B-f}
\end{eqnarray}
Further, it is easy to check that $\lim_{\xi\to\infty}\tilde{f}_{\lambda}=f_{\lambda}^{(0)}$,
where $f_{\lambda}^{(0)}$ is the solution in the case of the homogeneous field
given by Eq.~(10) in the main text. The dependence of the focal length $\tilde{f}_{\lambda} $ on the pseudomagnetic
field strength $B_5$ is presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:focal-inhom-B5-B} for $\xi=0.3\,L$ (left panel) and $\xi=L$ (right panel).
The results for a moderately large $\xi$ depicted in the right panel are almost indistinguishable from
the case of a uniform field, as it should be for a weakly varying (pseudo-)magnetic field.
On the other hand, when the (pseudo-)magnetic field is sufficiently nonuniform, i.e.,
$\xi\lesssim L$, the dependence of $\tilde{f}_{\lambda}$ on the (pseudo-)magnetic field is different.
Comparing the left and right panels in Fig.~\ref{fig:focal-inhom-B5-B}, we see that the period of the focal length oscillations increases with decreasing $\xi$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Fig4a.eps}\hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Fig4b.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{The focal length $\tilde{f}_{\lambda}$ for the nonuniform effective field (\ref{inhom-B-profile-Supp}).
While the red solid lines correspond to the quasiparticles of both chiralities at $B=0$, the blue dashed and green dotted lines represent the focal lengths for $\lambda=+$ and $\lambda=-$ at $B_0=10^{-4} B^{*}$, respectively.
The left panel represents the results at $\xi=0.3\,L$ and the right one corresponds to $\xi=L$. We set $\varepsilon=100~\mbox{meV}$ and $L=10^{-2}~\mbox{cm}$.}
\label{fig:focal-inhom-B5-B}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\begin{center}
\noindent\rule{8cm}{1pt}
\end{center}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\begin{itemize}
\item[[S1\!\!\!]] L.~D.~Landau and E.~M.~Lifshitz, {\it The Classical theory of fields.} Vol.~2 (Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 1987).
\end{itemize}
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec: intro}
Dark matter (DM) and dark energy (DE) are two of the most enigmatic observables in
current cosmology. While dark matter is assumed to be pressureless, dark energy is
believed to have large negative pressure which accelerates the present universe. Nothing
significantly more is known about the nature of either dark matter or dark
energy. It is accepted that dark matter must cluster, in order to account for
the missing-mass problem associated with individual galaxies and with galaxy clusters.
Furthermore, there are strong reasons to believe that dark matter must have already been
in place by redshifts of $z \gtrsim 10^{4}$. This is indicated by primordial fluctuations
in the cosmic microwave background (CMB), whose small amplitude ($\Delta T/T \sim
10^{-5}$) is suggestive of an equally small amplitude of primordial density fluctuations
at $z \gtrsim 10^3$. Such small fluctuations would have had difficulty in growing to the
much larger values today, $\delta\rho/\rho > {\cal O} (1)$, in a universe consisting
solely of baryons \cite{sahnicoles_95,dodelson}.
The origin of dark energy could, on the other hand, be much more recent, since there is
observational evidence to suggest that the universe commenced accelerating at $z \lesssim
{\rm few}$.
Theoretical models of dark matter usually subscribe to the view that it is made up of
hitherto undetected elementary particles called WIMPs (weakly interacting massive
particles). However, despite several decades of systematic searches by elaborate
experiments, a firm consensus on the existence of WIMPs has eluded researchers. Our
understanding of dark energy faces an even greater dilemma since its basic properties,
such as its pressure and density, have only been indirectly deduced via cosmological
observations of the expansion history, $H(z)$, or the luminosity distance, $D_L(z)$.
Consequently, it has even been suggested that both DM \& DE may owe their origin to a
modification of the laws of gravity on large scales \cite{sahni04,DE}.
In this paper, we move past the dominant paradigm of particle-like WIMP dark matter and
examine the alternative possibility that DM could have the structure of a scalar field.
Ever since the advent of Inflation, scalar field models have played an increasingly
prominent role in our understanding of the very early universe. Scalar-field
models have also been advocated to describe dark energy \cite{DE}. Recently, Kallosh and
Linde \cite{linde1} have discussed a new class of scalar-field models, called
$\alpha$-attractors \cite{linde2}, which have an attractive feature of describing an
entire family of inflationary models within a common theoretical setting. In this paper,
we show how the $\alpha$-attractors may have an even wider appeal, since they can
describe dark matter, and perhaps even dark energy.
Our paper is structured as follows: section \ref{sec:alphainf} discusses the
$\alpha$-attractor Lagrangian in the context of conformal inflation, while section
\ref{sec:alphadm} discusses the $\alpha$-attractor Lagrangian in the context of dark matter
and dark energy. Section \ref{sec:dm} explores the role of $\alpha$-attractors as dark
matter and includes a comprehensive discussion of gravitational instability.
Section \ref{sec:DE} discusses $\alpha$-attractors in the context of dark energy. A
summary of our results is presented in section \ref{sec:summary}, in which we also discuss
the possibility that the inflaton could
play the role of dark matter at late times, after preheating.
\section{Conformal inflation}\label{sec:alphainf}
In \cite{linde1}, Kallosh \& Linde drew attention to an interesting new family
of potentials which could give rise to successful inflation.
The starting point of this discovery was the observation that
the action with the Lagrangian
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal L} = \sqrt{-g}\left[ \frac{1}{2}\partial_\mu\chi\partial^\mu\chi +
\frac{\chi^2}{12}R(g) - \frac{1}{2}\partial_\mu\phi\partial^\mu\phi
-\frac{\phi^2}{12}R(g) - \frac{\tilde\lambda }{4}\left (\phi^2 - \chi^2\right )^2\right]
\, , \label{eq:1}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\chi$ and $\phi$ are scalar fields, and $\tilde\lambda$ is a dimensionless
constant, is invariant under the ${\rm O}(1, 1)$ group of transformations in the $(\chi,
\phi)$ space and also under the group of local conformal transformations. When the local
conformal gauge is fixed to
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:gauge-fix}
\chi^2-\phi^2 = 6 m_{p}^2 \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
this Lagrangian can be parameterized by
\begin{eqnarray}
\chi = \sqrt{6} m_p \cosh{\frac{\varphi}{\sqrt{6} m_p}}~, \quad \phi = \sqrt{6} m_p
\sinh{\frac{\varphi}{\sqrt{6} m_p}} \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
and reduces to
\begin{eqnarray}
L = \sqrt{-g}\left\lbrack \frac{m_{p}^2}{2} R -
\frac{1}{2}\partial_\mu\varphi\partial^\mu\varphi - 9\tilde\lambda m_{p}^4 \right\rbrack \,
, \label{eq:deS}
\end{eqnarray}
describing Einstein's gravity with the reduced Planck mass $m_p = 1/ \sqrt{8 \pi G}
\approx 2.4 \times 10^{18}$~GeV and cosmological constant $\Lambda = 9\tilde\lambda
m_{p}^2$. A conformally invariant generalization of (\ref{eq:1}) $\tilde\lambda \to
F(\phi/\chi) /9$, with an arbitrary function $F$ that deforms the ${\rm O} (1, 1)$
symmetry, results in the standard Lagrangian
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal L} = \sqrt{-g}\left\lbrack \frac{m_{p}^2}{2} R -
\frac{1}{2}\partial_\mu\varphi\partial^\mu\varphi - V (\varphi) \right\rbrack
\end{eqnarray}
with a scalar-field potential
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:pot}
V (\varphi) = m_{p}^4 F \left( \tanh{\frac{\varphi}{\sqrt{6} m_p}} \right) \, .
\end{eqnarray}
In \cite{linde1}, various canonical potentials $V(\varphi)$ were investigated in the
context of inflation. In \cite{linde2}, a family of potentials called $\alpha$-attractors
were considered following the prescription $V (\varphi) \to V \left( \varphi /
\sqrt{\alpha} \right)$ starting from canonical potentials $V (\varphi)$ in (\ref{eq:pot}).
The $\alpha$-attractors are able to parameterize a wide variety of inflationary settings
including chaotic inflation and the Starobinsky model. (The parameter $\alpha$ was
shown to be related to the curvature of the superconformal K$\ddot{\rm a}$hler metric in
\cite{linde2}.)
\section{Conformal dark matter}\label{sec:alphadm}
In this paper, we would like to demonstrate that the
theory of the previous section
can also describe dark matter and perhaps even dark energy. To this end, we first
incorporate the scalar-field Lagrangian
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal L} = \sqrt{-g}\left[ \frac{1}{2}\partial_\mu\chi\partial^\mu\chi +
\frac{\chi^2}{12}R(g) - \frac{1}{2}\partial_\mu\phi\partial^\mu\phi
-\frac{\phi^2}{12}R(g) - \frac{F (\phi/\chi)}{36 m_{p}^4}\left (\phi^2 - \chi^2\right
)^2\right] \label{eq:extended}
\end{eqnarray}
into the Standard Model (SM) of electroweak interactions respecting the local conformal
invariance. Since the only sector in the SM that breaks conformal invariance is the
kinetic and potential terms of the Higgs field $h$, we modify the relevant parts in the
minimal possible way:
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:lag-or}
{\cal L}_h = - \sqrt{- g} \left(\frac12 \partial_\mu h \partial^\mu h + \frac{h^2}{12} R
+ \frac{\lambda_h}{4} \left[ h^2 - \frac{\upsilon^2}{6 m_{p}^2} \left(\chi^2 - \phi^2 \right)
\right]^2 \right) \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\upsilon \approx 246$~GeV is the Higgs-field vacuum expectation value, and
$\lambda_h$ is its self-coupling constant. After fixing the conformal gauge as in
(\ref{eq:gauge-fix}), we obtain a theory with the Lagrangian
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:lag-eff}
{\cal L} = \sqrt{-g}\left[ \frac{m_{p}^2 - h^2/6}{2} R - \frac{1}{2} \partial_\mu \varphi
\partial^\mu \varphi - V (\varphi)
\right] + {\cal L}_{\rm SM} \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $V (\varphi)$ is given by (\ref{eq:pot}), and ${\cal L}_{\rm SM}$ is the canonical
Lagrangian of the SM fields and interactions. The term $h^2 R/12$ which enters
(\ref{eq:lag-eff}) with negative sign, and which was required to ensure the conformal
invariance of the original action (\ref{eq:lag-or}), will produce a small negative
contribution to the gravitational action, which will result in the eventual gravitational
coupling equal to $m_{p}^2 - v^2 / 6 \approx m_{p}^2$.
In the above model, the scalar field $\varphi$ interacts with the rest of
matter only via gravity. Thus, the dark matter described by such a scalar would either have coexisted with the inflaton, or it would have to
be produced, together with its perturbations, by a quantum mechanism
towards the end of the inflationary
epoch.\footnote{If we were to construct models of inflation, as done in \cite{linde1,
linde2}, we would have to provide for interaction of the inflaton field $\varphi$ with
matter fields, in order that the universe could be preheated. This could be done,
for instance,
by replacing the constant $\lambda_h$ in (\ref{eq:lag-or}) by another conformally
invariant function $G \left( \phi / \chi \right)$ such that, at the minimum of the
potential $V (\varphi)$, the function $W (\varphi) \equiv G \left(
\tanh{\frac{\varphi}{\sqrt{6} m_p}} \right)$ acquires the value $\lambda_h$. For the present
case, where the scalar field $\varphi$ represents dark matter, such a coupling seems to
be unnecessary, and perhaps not even desirable.}
Our primary focus in this paper will be on the following potentials belonging to the
$\alpha$-attractor family, following the prescription $V(\varphi) \to V \left( \varphi / \sqrt{\alpha} \right)$ in (\ref{eq:pot}):
\begin{enumerate}
\item The asymmetric {\em E-Model\/} \cite{linde2}
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\varphi) = V_0 \left ( 1 - e^{-\sqrt{\frac{2}{3 \alpha}}\frac{\varphi}{m_p}}\right )^{2n} \equiv 2V_0
\left\lbrack
\frac{\tanh{\frac{\varphi}{\sqrt{6 \alpha} m_p}}}{{1+\tanh{\frac{\varphi}{\sqrt{6 \alpha} m_p}}}} \right
\rbrack^{2n} \, . \label{eq:star}
\end{eqnarray}
which reduces to the potential associated with Starobinsky inflation \cite{star} when $\alpha=1$, $n=1$.
\item The tracker-potential\footnote{Note that the tracker potential
described by (\ref{eq:sw}) is not a member of the inflationary $\alpha$-attractor
family, which were defined to have a restricted dependence on $\tanh{\left(
\frac{\varphi}{\sqrt{6\alpha}m_p}\right)}$ in order to possess a plateau. However,
(\ref{eq:sw}) turns out to be very useful as a model of DM (and DE).}
\cite{sahni_wang}
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\varphi) = V_0 \sinh^{2n}\sqrt{\frac{2}{3 \alpha}}\frac{\varphi}{m_p} \equiv V_0\left\lbrack
\frac{\tanh^2\sqrt{\frac{2}{3 \alpha}}\frac{\varphi}{m_p}}
{{1-\tanh^2\sqrt{\frac{2}{3 \alpha}}\frac{\varphi}{m_p}}}
\right \rbrack^{n} \, . \label{eq:sw}
\end{eqnarray}
\item The {\em T-Model\/} potential \cite{linde1}
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\varphi) = V_0 \tanh^{2n}{\frac{\varphi}{\sqrt{6\alpha}m_p}} \, . \label{eq:tanh}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{enumerate}
An important feature of all of the above potentials is that
they have the same asymptotic form $V(\varphi) \sim V_0 \left( \frac{\varphi}{\sqrt{6\alpha}m_p}
\right)^{2n}$ for $\frac{\varphi}{\sqrt{6\alpha}} \ll m_p$.
It is well known that a
scalar field oscillating about the minimum of such a potential will have
the time-averaged equation of state (EOS) \cite{turner83}
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle w\rangle = \left\langle \frac{p}{\rho} \right\rangle = \frac{n-1}{n+1}~.
\label{eq:EOS}
\end{eqnarray}
Consequently, for $n=1$, the scalar field will be pressureless, just like dark matter.
For $n<1/2$, on the other hand, the EOS $\langle w\rangle <-1/3$
violates the strong energy
condition. Such a field could therefore play the role of dark energy by
causing the universe to accelerate \cite{sahni_wang}.
\section{Dark Matter}
\label{sec:dm}
The observation that a coherently oscillating scalar field could play the role of dark
matter is not new. One of the earliest DM candidates that drew on this possibility was
the axion \cite{PQ}. Indeed, after the global $U(1)$ Peccei--Quinn symmetry is
spontaneously broken, the pseudo-Goldstone boson of the broken symmetry, the axion,
begins to oscillate under the influence of the potential
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\varphi) = V_0\left\lbrack 1 - \cos{\left (\frac{\varphi}{f}\right )}\right\rbrack \, .
\label{eq:axion}
\end{eqnarray}
In the neighbourhood of the minimum of this potential, we have $V(\varphi) \simeq
\frac{1}{2}m_a^2\varphi^2$ where $m_a^2 = V_0/f^2$ is the axion mass and $f$ is the
symmetry breaking scale. For the QCD axion, the symmetry breaking scale is experimentally
bounded by $f \geq 10^9$~GeV\@. Other phenomenological models of scalar-field dark matter
have been explored in
\cite{zeldovich,DM_early,peebles99,stein99,sahni_wang,hu00,goodman,matos00}.
An important aspect of scalar-field dark matter (SFDM) is that if the scalar field mass
is small, then the Jeans length $\lambda_J$ associated with gravitational clustering can
be very large.
For the canonical massive scalar field potential
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\varphi) = \frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi^2 \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
one finds \cite{zeldovich,hu00}
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda_J = \pi^{3/4} (G\rho)^{-1/4} m^{-1/2}~.
\label{eq:jeans}
\end{eqnarray}
An oscillating scalar field with a mass of $10^{-22}$~eV would therefore have a Jeans
length of a few kiloparsec. Such a large Jeans length would inhibit gravitational
clustering on small scales thereby helping to resolve the cusp--core dilemma faced by
standard cold dark matter (CDM) in the context of dwarf spheroidal galaxies
\cite{sahni_wang,hu00,Witten}. A macroscopically large Jeans length might also ameliorate
the substructure problem in CDM\@. (Warm dark matter \cite{warm} and non-canonical scalar
fields \cite{sahni_sen16} provide another means of resolving these issues.) It is of
interest to note that oscillations in the gravitational potential associated with SFDM
can induce oscillations in the photon arrival time from millisecond pulsars. This effect
may be detectable by future experiments such as the Square Kilometer Array (SKA) pulsar
timing array \cite{pulsar} and laser interferometric gravitational wave detectors
\cite{GW}. Finally, it is interesting to note that ultra-light scalar fields (pseudo
Nambu--Goldstone bosons) arise naturally in string theory via the breaking of exact shift
symmetry \cite{Witten}.
Several of these issues have been addressed in considerable detail in \cite{Witten,fuzzy,marsh}, therefore
we do
not delve any deeper into them in this paper.
Instead, our focus will be on the class of initial conditions which can give rise to
successful models of dark matter in the context of the $\alpha$-attractors. We shall
commence our study with the canonical scalar-field potential $V = \frac{1}{2} m^2\varphi^2$
and then move on to discuss the $\alpha$-attractor family of potentials
(\ref{eq:star}), (\ref{eq:sw}) \&
(\ref{eq:tanh}).
\subsection{Dark Matter from the potential $\frac{1}{2} m^2\varphi^2$}
\label{sec:canoDM}
The canonical potential for a scalar field describing dark matter is given by
\cite{zeldovich,hu00}
\begin{eqnarray}
V = \frac{1}{2} m^2\varphi^2~.
\label{eq:chaotic}
\end{eqnarray}
For small values, $\varphi \ll m_p$, the scalar field oscillates about the minimum of
its potential at $\varphi = 0$.
As discussed earlier, the averaged equation of state during oscillations is
$\langle w_\varphi\rangle \simeq 0$ which allows the scalar field to behave like dark matter.
In order to gain a deeper appreciation of this dark-matter model, we must first turn to
the radiative epoch, prior to the period when oscillations in $\varphi$
commence.\footnote{In particle-physics models of dark matter, dark matter appeared on
the cosmological scene soon after post-inflationary preheating, together
with radiation
and other particles constituting the present universe. (Some of the particles present
after reheating might have decayed away leaving behind only a secondary relic.) In the
field-theoretic models of dark matter, such as the one under consideration in this paper,
it is conceivable that the dark-matter field could have coexisted with the Inflaton as a
spectator field, in which case it would generate a spectrum of isocurvature perturbations
\cite{liddle00}.} It is believed that the density of radiation, soon after preheating,
greatly exceeded the density of all other forms of matter in the universe. Consequently,
the expansion history at this stage can be described by the equation
\begin{eqnarray}
H^2 = \frac{8\pi G}{3}\Bigl( \rho_r + \rho_\varphi + \rho_b + \cdots \Bigr) \simeq
\frac{8\pi G}{3}\rho_r \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho_\varphi = \frac{1}{2}{\dot\varphi}^2 + V(\varphi), \qquad p_\varphi =
\frac{1}{2}{\dot\varphi}^2 - V(\varphi)~,
\end{eqnarray}
and the scalar field equation of motion is
\begin{eqnarray}
{\ddot \varphi} + 3H{\dot\varphi} + V'(\varphi) = 0~.
\label{eq:eom}
\end{eqnarray}
Since Hubble expansion is dominated by the radiation density, the scalar field
experiences enormous damping as it attempts to roll down its potential
(\ref{eq:chaotic}). In the kinetic-dominated regime $\dot \varphi^2 \gg V
(\varphi)$, the irrelevance of $V'$ relative to the first two terms on the LHS of
(\ref{eq:eom}) ensures that the kinetic energy decreases rapidly, as ${\dot\varphi}^2
\propto a^{-6}$. This regime is then followed by slow-roll, during which the
first term in (\ref{eq:eom}) can be neglected. Consequently, in a very short span of
time, the scalar field density comes to be dominated by the potential term leading to
$\rho_\varphi \simeq V(\varphi)$. Clearly, since $\varphi$ soon virtually stops
evolving, $V(\varphi)$ begins to play the role of a cosmological constant deep in the
radiative stage. Figure~\ref{fig:DMcan_velocity} illustrates this fact.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{DMquadvel.eps}
\caption{This figure demonstrates that, for $V(\varphi)=\frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi^2$, the
scalar field velocity $\dot{\varphi}$ rapidly decays in a radiation-dominated
universe. Starting at $a=10^{-15}$ and fixing the initial field value to $\varphi_i\simeq
0.06~m_p$, we show that initially large kinetic terms rapidly get diluted, becoming
irrelevant within a few $N=\log_{10} a$ values. The black, brown and green dashed curves
show the scalar-field energy density for fixed $\varphi_i$, and (lower to higher) initial
kinetic energy values. One notes that all three curves converge towards the solid red
line corresponding to $\dot{\varphi_i}=0$ by $a\sim 10^{-10}$. Consequently, the scalar
field starts behaving like cosmological constant by $z \sim 10^{10}$. (For clarity of
presentation, we do not show the baryon and dark energy density.) }
\label{fig:DMcan_velocity}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:DMcan_velocity} illustrates that starting from a redshift $z=10^{15}$, kinetic energy terms corresponding to different initial velocities
$\dot{\varphi_i}$ rapidly get damped, with the result that the scalar field begins to
behave like cosmological constant by $z\simeq 10^{10}$. This is the redshift at which we
set down initial conditions in our subsequent analysis.
The tendency of $\rho_\varphi$ to behave like a cosmological constant deep within the
radiative regime enormously influences the kind of initial conditions that need to be
imposed on the scalar field in order that the model universe resemble ours (i.e.,
with $\Omega_{0,\rm DE} \simeq \frac{2}{3}$, $\Omega_{0m} \simeq \frac{1}{3}$, $\Omega_{0
b} \simeq 0.04$, and $\Omega_{0r} \simeq 10^{-4}$). Figure~\ref{fig:can_finetune} illustrates
the enormous degree of fine-tuning associated with the initial density of the scalar
field.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.838\textwidth]{DMquad1.eps}
\caption{This figure describes the fine tuning associated with the initial scalar field
density. Commencing our integration at $a=10^{-10}$ ($z \simeq 10^{10}$), we find that
the scalar-field energy density remains frozen to its initial value all the way until $z
\sim 10^6$. The rapid decline in the radiation density from $z = 10^{10}$ to $z \sim
10^6$ reduces the damping on $\varphi$ and releases the scalar field from its frozen value.
Thereafter the scalar field begins to oscillate and behave like dark matter with
$\rho_\varphi \propto a^{-3}$. The initial scalar-field value which results in $\Omega_{0m}
\simeq 0.27$ is shown by the green point $A$. The brown color band (commencing upwards
from $C$) indicates the range of initial energy-density values which drive the universe
into an inflating (accelerating) phase that lasts until the present epoch. The narrow
green band with $\rho_i\in \big(\rho_{B},\rho_{C}\big)$ corresponds to a universe which
experiences transient acceleration. Initial values of $\rho_i < \rho_A$ result in an
insufficient amount of dark matter at the present epoch ($\Omega_{0m} < 0.27$) whereas
$\rho_A < \rho_i < \rho_{B}$ lead to too much dark matter. One, therefore, finds that,
for a given value of $m$ (in this case, $10^{-22}$\,eV), only a very narrow range
of initial values of $\varphi$ near point $A$ can lead to a current value of $\Omega_{0m}$
satisfying observational constraints. Namely, $0.057~m_p\leq \varphi_i \leq 0.062~m_p$ results in
$\Omega_{0m} = 0.27 \pm 0.03$. (For clarity of presentation, we do not show the
baryon density.)
} \label{fig:can_finetune}
\end{figure}
In constructing figure \ref{fig:can_finetune}, we chose $m=10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$. This ensures that the
scalar field starts oscillating at $z\sim 2.8\times 10^6$, after which it begins to
behave like dark matter. For $z > 10^6$, the scalar field behaves like a cosmological
constant. As remarked earlier, scalar-field dark matter with $m \sim 10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$
would cluster on scales greater than a kiloparsec \cite{hu00}. Three values of the
initial scalar-field energy density, $\rho_i$, are of relevance for the present
discussion.
\noindent (i) $\rho_i = \rho_A$. This value of the initial energy density leads to a
universe just like ours; in other words, if $\rho_i = \rho_A$ then $\Omega_{0m} \simeq
0.27$. For $m = 10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$, one finds $\rho_{A}=1.02\times 10^{-28}\,{\rm
GeV}^4$. Smaller initial values result in an insufficient amount of dark matter at the
present epoch, i.e. \, $\rho_i < \rho_A \Rightarrow \Omega_{0m} < 0.27$.
\noindent (ii) $\rho_i\in \big(\rho_{B},\rho_{C}\big)$. Initial values $\rho_i \geq
\rho_B$ lead to an accelerating (inflationary) phase (sourced by the scalar field) during
the radiative epoch. For $\rho_B \leq \rho_i \leq \rho_C$, inflation is a transient, and
the universe reverts to being radiation-dominated after the scalar field has fallen to
smaller values. Larger initial values, $\rho_i > \rho_C$, result in a universe which
inflates all the way until the present. For $m = 10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$, one finds
$\rho_{B}=5.71\times 10^{-26}\,{\rm GeV}^4$, $\rho_{C}=1.71\times 10^{-24}\,{\rm GeV}^4$.
We therefore find that the potential (\ref{eq:chaotic}) suffers from a severe fine-tuning problem
since, for any given value of $m$, there is only a \underline{very narrow range}
of $\varphi_{i}$ which will lead to currently admissible values of the matter
density $\Omega_{0m}$.
These results support the earlier findings of \cite{stein99}.\footnote{It is interesting
to note that the fine tuning which we observe is insensitive to the initial value of
${\dot\varphi}$, as demonstrated in Figure~\ref{fig:DMcan_velocity}.}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.72\textwidth]{DMquadPM.eps}
\caption{Dependence of the initial value $\varphi_i$ of the scalar field on the mass $m$ is
shown for the scalar-field potential $V(\varphi)=\frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi^2$. Three different
values of the present matter density parameter $\Omega_{0m}$ are assumed. One sees that, for a
given value of $\Omega_{0m}$, the value of $\varphi_i$ decreases with increasing $m$
according to the relation $\varphi_i \propto m^{-{1}/{4}}$. Consequently, for a fixed value
of the mass $m$, larger values of $\Omega_{0m}$ are associated with larger initial values
of $\varphi_{i}$. } \label{fig:DMquadPM}
\end{figure}
The foregoing analysis focused on a scalar field of mass $m=10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$,
which presents a lower bound on the mass of an oscillating scalar field purporting to
play the role of dark matter \cite{Witten}. However, it is important to study the effect
of varying $m$ on the initial field value $\varphi_i$ and hence on the initial energy
density $\rho_i \simeq \frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi_{i}^2$. It is straightforward to show that, if
$\varphi$ plays the role of dark matter, then $\varphi_i$ scales with the mass as $\varphi_i
\propto m^{-{1}/{4}}$ (see Appendix~\ref{app:mass}). In effect,
\begin{eqnarray}
\varphi_i=0.06\times \left(\frac{m}{10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}}\right)^{-1/4}~m_p~.
\label{eq:DMquadPM0}
\end{eqnarray}
Figure~\ref{fig:DMquadPM} illustrates this relationship for three different values of the
current dark-matter density parameter $\Omega_{0m}$. Note that a larger value of
$\Omega_{0m}$ requires a larger initial value $\varphi_i$ for a given scalar field mass $m$. The above
result can easily be translated into a relationship between $\rho_i$ and $m$ using
$\rho_i \simeq \frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi_{i}^2$.
\subsection{Dark Matter from the {\em E-Model\/}}
\label{sec:staroDM}
It is interesting that the extreme fine-tuning problem faced by the
$\frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi^2$ potential is easily alleviated if dark matter is based on the
{\em E-model}. In this case, one can write down the potential (\ref{eq:star}) with $n=1$, in the form
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\varphi) = V_0 \left ( 1 - e^{-\lambda\frac{\varphi}{m_p}}\right )^{2}~,
\label{eq:star1}
\end{eqnarray}
which closely resembles the Starobinsky model \cite{star}.
The potential (\ref{eq:star1}) exhibits three asymptotic branches (see
figure~\ref{fig:staroughpot}):
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{Tracker wing:} \quad V(\varphi) &\simeq& V_0\, e^{2\lambda|\varphi|/m_p}~, \quad
\varphi < 0\, , \quad \lambda|\varphi| \gg m_p\, ,
\label{eq:starpot1}\\
\mbox{Flat wing:} \quad V(\varphi) &\simeq& V_0\, , \quad \lambda\varphi \gg m_p \, ,
\label{eq:starpot2}\\
\mbox{Oscillatory region:} \quad V(\varphi) &\simeq& \frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi^2\, , \quad
\lambda|\varphi| \ll m_p \, , \label{eq:starpot3}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
m^2 = \frac{2V_0\lambda^2}{m_{p}^2}.
\end{eqnarray}
\label{eq:starmass}
We note that the tracker parameter $\lambda$ in the potential (\ref{eq:star1}) is related to the geometric parameter $\alpha$ in (\ref{eq:star}) by
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda=\sqrt{\frac{2}{3\alpha}}~.
\label{eq:lambda-alpha}
\end{eqnarray}
We now proceed to study the motion of the scalar field along the different branches (wings) of the
{\em E-model\/} potential.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.69\textwidth]{pot_star1.eps}
\caption{This figure schematically illustrates the {\em E-model\/} potential (\ref{eq:star1})
with $\lambda=1$.
The main features of this potential are: the exponential tracker wing for $\lambda|\varphi| \gg m_p$
($\varphi<0$),
the flat wing for $\lambda\varphi \gg m_p$, and the oscillatory region for which $\lambda|\varphi| \ll m_p$,
so that
$V \simeq \frac{1}{2} m^2\varphi^2$. }
\label{fig:staroughpot}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Evolution along the tracker wing}
\label{sec:steep}
It is well known that that, in the context of Starobinsky inflation, only the flat wing
of the potential sustains inflation since the tracker wing is much too steep to cause
accelerated expansion. For dark matter, on the other hand, it is the steep wing with $V
\sim e^{2\lambda\frac{|\varphi|}{m_p}}$ that is more useful\footnote{As mentioned earlier, the Starobinsky model of inflation corresponds to the choice $\alpha=1$ for which the left wing is not steep enough to provide tracking.}. The reason for this has to do
with the fact that a scalar field moving down a sufficiently steep potential can `track'
the cosmological background density \cite{fj97,ratra88,wang}. In the case of the
exponential potential (\ref{eq:starpot1}), if $\rho_r$ is the radiation density, then
prior to matter-radiation equality, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\rho_\varphi}{\rho_{\rm total}} = \frac{1}{\lambda^2}
\label{eq:star_track}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\rho_{\rm total} = \rho_\varphi + \rho_r$. Thus, a field rolling down the steep wing
soon follows the common evolutionary path (\ref{eq:star_track}) from a wide range of
initial conditions.
This occurs so long as $\lambda|\varphi| \gg m_{p}$. The scalar field
begins to behave like dark matter, with $\langle w \rangle \simeq 0$, once
$\varphi$
has dropped to sufficiently small values
and begins to oscillate.
The following conditions must be satisfied for this to happen \cite{sahni_wang}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda|\varphi| \ll m_p\, , \qquad m^2 \equiv V'' = \frac{2V_0\lambda^2}{m_{p}^2} =
H^2(t_*) \, .
\end{eqnarray}
This behaviour is illustrated in figure~\ref{fig:starattract} for the parameter values
$\lambda=14.5$ (corresponding to $\alpha=3.17\times 10^{-3}$) and $V_{0}=1.37\times 10^{-28}\,{\rm GeV}^{4}$. With these parameters, the
effective mass of the scalar field is $m \simeq 10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$, and the
corresponding Jeans length is about a kiloparsec. The field begins to oscillate when $m/H
\sim 1$, which corresponds to a redshift of $z\sim 3\times 10^6$.
Figure~\ref{fig:starattract} demonstrates that the fine tuning in the initial scalar
field energy density that existed for the $m^2\varphi^2$ potential has been substantially
removed. For the sake of completeness, we give below the initial energy-density values
corresponding to:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] the scaling attractor solution ($P_2$ in figure~\ref{fig:starattract}):
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho_{P_{2}}=1.46\times 10^{-13}\, \mbox{GeV}^{4}\, ,
\end{eqnarray}
\item[(ii)] the maximum and minimum values of initial density that lead to
$\Omega_{0m} \simeq 0.27$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho_{\rm max} (\equiv\rho_{P_3}) &=& 6.47\times 10^{-12}\,{\rm GeV}^{4}, \nonumber\\
\rho_{\rm min} (\equiv\rho_{P_1}) &=& 3.05\times 10^{-21}\,{\rm GeV}^{4}~,
\end{eqnarray}
which are related to the points $P_1$ and $P_3$ in figure~\ref{fig:starattract}.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{DMstarL1.eps}
\caption{This figure describes the evolution of the scalar-field energy density from $z
\simeq 10^{10}$ until $z = 0$. The scalar field commences its descent from the steep left
wing (`$A$' in figure~\ref{fig:staroughpot}) of the potential $V(\varphi) = V_0 \left ( 1 -
e^{-\lambda\varphi/m_p}\right )^{2} $. We have chosen $\lambda=14.5$ and $V_0=1.37\times
10^{-28}\,{\rm GeV}^4$, which correspond to $m = \frac{\sqrt{2V_0}\lambda}{m_{p}} \simeq
10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$. The band from $P_{1}$ to $P_{3}$ represents the range in the initial
(scalar-field) energy density that leads to a reasonable value for the dark-matter
density at the present epoch, namely $\Omega_{0m} \simeq 0.27$. Point $P_{2}$
marks the initial energy density corresponding to the attractor solution (solid red
line) to which all trajectories starting in the $P_{1}$--$P_{3}$ band converge (prior to
the commencement of oscillations in $\varphi$). This behaviour is in sharp contrast to that
of dark matter sourced by the $V(\varphi)=\frac{1}{2}m^{2}\varphi^{2}$ potential, for which
only a very narrow finely tuned range of values of the initial energy density (around
point $A$) lead to $\Omega_{0m} \simeq 0.27$. (For clarity of presentation, we do not
show the baryon density.)} \label{fig:starattract}
\end{figure}
Our results, summarized in figure~\ref{fig:starattract}, demonstrate that initial
energy-density values covering a range of more than 9 orders of magnitude at $z =
10^{10}$ converge onto the attractor scaling solution which gives rise to $\Omega_{0m}
\simeq 0.27$ at present. This range substantially increases if we place our initial
conditions at earlier times. For instance, if one sets $\{\varphi,\dot{\varphi}\}$ at the GUT
scale of $10^{14}\,{\rm GeV}$ ($z\sim 10^{26}$), then the range of initial density values
that converge to $\Omega_{0m}\simeq 0.27$ is an astonishing $82$ orders of magnitude\,!
The tracker branch of the {\em E-model\/} potential, therefore, allows a much greater freedom
in the choice of initial conditions than the $m^2\varphi^2$ potential. In particular it
permits the possibility of equipartition, according to which the density in dark matter
and radiation may have been comparable at very early times.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.78\textwidth]{DMstarVLmeff1.eps}
\caption{The tracker parameter $\lambda=\frac{2}{\sqrt{6\alpha}}$ is plotted against $V_0$ for the steep (tracker) wing of
the {\em E-model\/} potential (\ref{eq:star1}). The field begins to oscillate when $m \sim H$
where $m = \frac{\sqrt{2V_0}\lambda}{m_{p}}$. An increase in mass therefore implies an
increase in the redshift $z_{\rm osc}$ at which the scalar field begins to oscillate.
Coloured parallel lines correspond to different values of $m$ and $z_{\rm osc}$. Values
of $\lambda$ and $V_0$ which result in $\Omega_{0m}\simeq 0.24$ and $\Omega_{0m}\simeq
0.30$ are shown as parallel black lines. Their intersection with the coloured lines
describing constant values of $m$ and $z_{\rm osc}$ is marked by filled circles.
}
\label{fig:Vmeff}
\end{figure}
Our previous analysis focussed on a scalar field having an effective mass $m =
10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$. We chose this particular value of $m$ since it could help resolve
the cusp--core and substructure problems faced by standard cold dark matter (SCDM)
\cite{sahni04,Witten}. Although masses smaller than $10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$ could be
problematic for structure formation, larger values of $m$ are by no means ruled out.
Indeed, for $m \gg 10^{-15}\,{\rm eV}$, our model becomes indistinguishable from SCDM.
Since, in the {\em E-model\/}, $m$ is a composite quantity, being related to $\lambda$
and $V_0$ through (\ref{eq:starmass}), it is of interest to determine a general
relationship between $\lambda=\frac{2}{\sqrt{6\alpha}}$ and $V_0$ which would lead to the current value of the
matter density. Such a relationship has been plotted in figure~\ref{fig:Vmeff}, in which
values of $V_0$ and $\lambda$ giving rise to $\Omega_{0m} = 0.24$ and $0.30$ are shown as
black lines. One should note that each point on either of these two lines refers to a
family of initial conditions $\{\varphi_i,\dot{\varphi_i}\}$ which get funneled onto a given
$\Omega_{0m}$ by means of the attractor mechanism described in
figure~\ref{fig:starattract}.
\subsubsection{Evolution along the flat wing}
\label{sec:flat}
Next, we explore the possibility of obtaining dark matter from the flat right wing of
the {\em E-model\/} potential (\ref{eq:starpot2}). (It is this wing which is responsible for
generating inflation in the Einstein frame of the Starobinsky model.) Note that the value
of $V_0$ sets the height of the flat wing of the potential in
figure~\ref{fig:staroughpot}. The fact that the effective mass of the scalar field
depends upon $V_0$ through $m = {\sqrt{2V_0}\lambda}/{m_{p}}$ opens up several different
possibilities for initial values of the scalar field. For instance, if $m$ is held fixed
at $10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$ and the values of $\lambda$ and $V_0$ are chosen in conformity
with our previous analysis, namely $\lambda=14.5$ and $V_0=1.37\times 10^{-28}\,{\rm
GeV}^4$, then
our results, shown in figure~\ref{fig:starRfinetune}, demonstrate that, as in the case of
the $m^2\varphi^2$ potential, one encounters here a considerable fine tuning of initial
conditions.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.735\textwidth]{DMstarR1.eps}
\caption{This figure describes the possibility that the scalar field associated with dark
matter could have commenced rolling from the flat right wing (see
figure~\ref{fig:staroughpot}) of the potential $V(\varphi) = V_0 \left ( 1 -
e^{-\lambda\frac{\varphi}{m_p}}\right )^{2}$. We assume the same units as in
figure~\ref{fig:starattract}, namely $\lambda=14.5$ and $V_0=1.37\times 10^{-28}\,{\rm
GeV}^4$ which correspond to $m \simeq 10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$. The energy densities
(in units of ${\rm GeV}^{4}$) of radiation and scalar field are plotted against the scale
factor $a$. We notice that the scalar-field energy density remains pegged to its initial
value when the radiation energy density is large. Subsequently, the radiation energy
density drops, which decreases the damping in the scalar-field equation of motion
(\ref{eq:eom}). From this point onwards ($z \sim 10^6$), the scalar field is free to move
and to oscillate. Consequently, from here on it behaves like dark matter. Point $A$
describes the (fine-tuned) initial value of the scalar-field energy density which leads
to $\Omega_{0m}\simeq 0.27$. The brown band pointing upwards from point $C$ shows the
range of initial values which drive the universe into an inflationary accelerating phase
which lasts until the present epoch. Small initial values $\rho_i \ll \rho_A$ lead to an
insufficient amount of dark matter at present. (For clarity of presentation, we do not
show the baryon density.)} \label{fig:starRfinetune}
\end{figure}
For instance, the fine-tuned initial value of the scalar field density which ensures
$\Omega_{0m}=0.27$, is given by $\rho_A=3.68\times 10^{-29}\,{\rm GeV}^{4}$. If the
initial energy density of the scalar field is larger than $\rho_B =1.32\times
10^{-28}\,{\rm GeV}^{4}$, then the universe enters into an accelerating (inflationary)
phase. For values of the initial energy density between $\rho_B$ and $\rho_C=1.37\times
10^{-28}\,{\rm GeV}^{4}$, the accelerating phase is a transient, whereas for initial
energy-density values larger than $\rho_C=1.37\times 10^{-28}\,{\rm ~GeV}^{4}$ (brown
band in figure~\ref{fig:starRfinetune}) the inflationary phase lasts until the present
epoch. As in the case of the $m^2\varphi^2$ potential, initial energy-density values
smaller than $\rho_A$ result in an insufficient amount of dark matter at the current
epoch. (Note that the values of $\rho_B$ and $\rho_C$ are much
too close to be distinguished in figure~\ref{fig:starRfinetune}.)
We therefore conclude that the flat right wing of the {\em E-model\/} potential with
$\lambda=14.5$, $V_{0}=1.37\times 10^{-28}\,{\rm GeV}^{4}$ and $m=10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$
suffers from a fine-tuning problem similar to the one which afflicts the $m^2\varphi^2$
potential.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.717\textwidth]{DMstarflat1.eps}
\caption{This figure illustrates the importance of the initial velocity $\dot{\varphi_i}$
in determining the extent of dark matter at the present epoch. Again, the scalar field
rolls down the flat right wing of the {\em E-model\/} potential (\ref{eq:star1}). The height
of the potential is now somewhat lower than that in figure~\ref{fig:starRfinetune},
namely $V_0=10^{-29}\,{\rm GeV}^{4}$. Again, $m = 10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$ with $\lambda$
determined from (\ref{eq:starmass}). The comparatively lower value of $V_0$ allows the
field to commence rolling from on top of the flat potential where $V'\simeq 0$. One finds
that, for the initial value $\varphi_i=7.35\times 10^{-2}m_p$, only a highly
fine-tuned value of $\dot{\varphi_i}=\dot{\varphi_{i}}^{*}$ results in the correct value of
the dark-matter density today, namely $\Omega_{0m}\simeq 0.27$ (red curve).
Slight deviations from this value of $\dot{\varphi_i}$ result either in an
overdensity of $\Omega_{0m}>0.27$ (purple dashed line) or in an underdensity
$\Omega_{0m}<0.27$ (orange dashed line). (For clarity of presentation, we do not show the
radiation and baryon energy density.)} \label{fig:flat1}
\end{figure}
Note that the location of the initial value $\varphi_i$ on the flat wing can be crucial in
determining the fate of the universe.
For instance, if $\varphi_i$ is large enough to place the field on top of the flat wing
where $V' \simeq 0$, then
the equation of motion (\ref{eq:eom}) simplifies to
${\ddot\varphi} + 3H{\dot\varphi} \simeq 0$, which has the solution ${\dot\varphi} \propto a^{-3}$.
Thus $\varphi$ can grind to a halt en-route to the minimum of the potential.
In this case, if the initial value $\varphi_i$ is large and if ${\dot\varphi_{i}^2} \ll V_0$,
then the kinetic term will decay completely while $\varphi$ is still on the flat wing.
This can lead to eternal inflation.
This problem can be avoided if $\varphi_i$ is not too large,
and if $({\dot\varphi^2})_i \gg V_0$.
The effect of varying the initial scalar-field velocity $\dot{\varphi_i}$ on the current
dark-matter density is shown in figure~\ref{fig:flat1}. We start with a moderate initial
value $\varphi_i=7.35\times 10^{-2}m_p$, which ensures that the field does not commence
rolling from too far along the flat wing, and thereby avoids the problem of eternal
inflation. We then vary $\dot{\varphi_i}$ for a potential with $V_0=10^{-29}\,{\rm GeV}^4$.
(The corresponding value of $\lambda$ is determined from (\ref{eq:starmass}) assuming $m=
10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$.) The value of $\dot{\varphi_i}$ which gives rise to
$\Omega_{0m}=0.27$ is given by $\dot{\varphi_i}^{*}=-1.16\times 10^{-7}\,{\rm GeV}^2$ (red
line). Smaller values of $\dot{\varphi_i}$ delay the onset of oscillations in the scalar
field. This leads to a larger value of the dark-matter density at the present epoch,
$\Omega_{0m}>0.27$ (purple dashed line). A larger initial kinetic term has the opposite
effect of making the scalar field oscillate earlier, which results in a smaller value of
the dark-matter density, $\Omega_{0m}<0.27$ (orange dashed line).
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.67\textwidth]{DMstarflat5.eps}
\caption{Values of $\dot{\varphi_i}^2$ and $V_0$ resulting in $\Omega_{0m}\simeq 0.24$,
$0.27$, and $0.30$ are shown. Note that $V_0$ describes the height of the flat wing of
the potential in (\ref{fig:staroughpot}), and that larger values of $\dot{\varphi_i}^2$
correlate with smaller values of $V_0$ for a given $\Omega_{0m}$. } \label{fig:flat2}
\end{figure}
The dependence of the initial kinetic term $\dot{\varphi_i}^2$ on the height $V_0$ of the
flat wing has been numerically analyzed with the initial field value held fixed at
$\varphi_i=7.35\times 10^{-2}m_p$. Our results are shown in figure~\ref{fig:flat2}. We find
that smaller values of $V_0$ require larger values of $\dot{\varphi_i}^2$ in order to give
the same final value of $\Omega_{0m}$. This correlation is expected since one obeys the
mass relation (\ref{eq:starmass}) while varying the height $V_0$ of the potential. For
smaller $V_0$ values, an initial $\varphi_i=7.35\times 10^{-2}m_p$ sits {\em further
along\/} on the flat wing of the potential (see figure~\ref{fig:flat3}). Hence the field
requires a larger initial velocity $\dot{\varphi_i}$ in order to start oscillating at the
correct epoch ($z_{\rm osc}\sim 10^{6}$ for $m= 10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$) thereby ensuring
$\Omega_{0m}=0.27$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.665\textwidth]{DMstarflatpot1.eps}
\caption{The right wing of the {\em E-model} potential $V(\varphi)$ is shown for two values
of $V_0$.
Notice that, for a lower potential (blue), the initial value $\varphi_i$ is associated with
a point $P'$ located along the {\em flat wing\/} of $V(\varphi)$. By contrast, the same
value of $\varphi_i$ is associated with the {\em steep wing\/} $P$ of the higher potential
(red).} \label{fig:flat3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.66\textwidth]{DMstarflatV.eps}
\caption{The initial velocity $\dot{\varphi_i}$ which results in $\Omega_{0m}=0.27$ is
plotted as a function of $\varphi_i$ for three different values of the potential height
$V_0$. Notice that, for a given $V_0$, a larger value of $\varphi_i$ implies a larger
$|\dot{\varphi_i}|$. However, if $\varphi_i$ is held fixed, then $|\dot{\varphi_i}|$ decreases
with increasing $V_0$, in agreement with figure~\ref{fig:flat2}.} \label{fig:flat4}
\end{figure}
As might be expected, for a fixed value of $V_0$, the initial velocity $\dot{\varphi_i}$
required to achieve a given value of $\Omega_{0m}$ increases with an increase in the
initial field value $\varphi_i$.\footnote{We only consider fields
rolling towards the minimum of the potential, since a field moving in the opposite direction will give rise to
eternal inflation for all values of $\dot{\varphi_i}$.} This is illustrated in
figure~\ref{fig:flat4} which also shows
that the dependence of $\dot{\varphi_i}$ on $\varphi_i$ is linear.
\subsection{Dark Matter from the Tracker Model}
\label{sec:TracDM}
For $n=1$, the tracker potential (\ref{eq:sw}) can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\varphi) = V_0 \sinh^{2}\frac{\lambda\varphi}{m_p}~,
\label{eq:sw1}
\end{eqnarray}
where the parameter $\lambda$ is related to the geometric parameter $\alpha$ in (\ref{eq:sw}) by
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda=\sqrt{\frac{2}{3\alpha}}~.
\label{eq:lambda-alpha1}
\end{eqnarray}
This symmetric potential has the following branches (see
figure~\ref{fig:Trac}):
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{Two tracker wings:} \quad V(\varphi) &\simeq& V_0\,
e^{2\frac{\lambda|\varphi|}{m_p}}~, \quad \lambda|\varphi| \gg m_p \, ,
\label{eq:sw3}\\
\mbox{Oscillatory region:} \quad V(\varphi) &\simeq& \frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi^2\, , \quad
\lambda|\varphi| \ll m_p \, , \label{eq:sw4}
\end{eqnarray}
where $m^2 = 2V_0\lambda^2/m_{p}^2$ and the relation between the tracker parameter $\lambda$ and the geometric parameter $\alpha$ is given by (\ref{eq:lambda-alpha}).
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.68\textwidth]{pot_sinh1.eps}
\caption{This figure schematically illustrates the tracker potential (\ref{eq:sw1}).
The asymptotic tracker wings correspond to $\lambda|\varphi| \gg m_p$,
while, for $\lambda|\varphi| \ll m_p$, we have $V(\varphi) \simeq \frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi^2.$}
\label{fig:Trac}
\end{figure}
The potential (\ref{eq:sw1}) converges to an exponential for large values of
$\lambda|\varphi|$. It therefore has much in common with the left wing of the {\em E-model}
potential (\ref{eq:star}). The evolution of energy densities in radiation, a cosmological
constant and the scalar field is shown in figure~\ref{fig:DMtrac} for parameter values
$\lambda=48.93$ (corresponding to $\alpha=2.78\times10^{-4}$) and $V_0=1.20\times 10^{-25}\,{\rm GeV}^4$, which correspond to $m =
10^{-20}\,{\rm eV}$. For this value of $m$, the scalar field begins to oscillate at
$z\sim 3\times 10^7$.
The tracker-like properties of this potential, shown in
figure~\ref{fig:DMtrac}, ensure that initial density values covering a
range of almost 6 orders of magnitude (at $z=10^{10}$),
converge onto the attractor scaling solution which gives $\Omega_{0m}\simeq
0.27$. This range covers more than 73 orders of magnitude if one sets initial
conditions at the GUT scale of $10^{14}\,{\rm GeV}$ ($z\sim 10^{26}$).
The initial energy-density value corresponding to the scaling attractor solution $P_2$ in
figure~\ref{fig:DMtrac} is $\rho_{P_{2}}=1.28\times 10^{-14}\,{\rm GeV}^{4}$.
The maximum and minimum values of the initial energy density that lead to
$\Omega_{0m} \simeq 0.27$ are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho_{\rm max} (\equiv\rho_{P_3}) &=& 2.65\times 10^{-12}\, {\rm GeV}^{4}\, , \nonumber\\
\rho_{\rm min} (\equiv\rho_{P_1}) &=& 3.05\times 10^{-18}\, {\rm GeV}^{4}~.
\end{eqnarray}
These are related, respectively, to the points $P_1$ and $P_3$ in
figure~\ref{fig:DMtrac}.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{DMtrac.eps}
\caption{This figure describes the evolution of the density in a scalar field which
commences its descent from one of the steep tracker wings of $V(\varphi) = V_0
\sinh^{2}\frac{\lambda\varphi}{m_p} $ at $z \simeq 10^{10}$.
We choose $\lambda=\frac{2}{\sqrt{6\alpha}}=48.9$ and $V_0=1.2\times 10^{-25}\,{\rm GeV}^4$ so that $m =
\frac{\sqrt{2V_0}\lambda}{m_{p}} \simeq 10^{-20}\,{\rm eV}$. The band from $P_{1}$ to
$P_{3}$ represents the range in the initial energy-density values which converge to $\Omega_{0m}
\simeq 0.27$ at present. $P_{2}$ denotes the initial density corresponding to the
attractor solution (solid red line) to which all trajectories starting on the
$P_{1}$--$P_{3}$ band converge prior to the commencement of oscillations. (For clarity of
presentation, we do not show the baryon density.)}
\label{fig:DMtrac}
\end{figure}
The relationship between $\lambda$ and $V_0$ is similar to that shown in figure \ref{fig:Vmeff} for the steep wing of the {\em E-model\/}, therefore we do not show it here. Because of the presence of symmetric tracker wings, this model is perhaps the most robust
of the three $\alpha$-attractor potentials we have considered in providing a scalar-field
description of dark matter.
\subsection{Dark Matter from the T-Model}
\label{sec:TDM}
The T-model potential (\ref{eq:tanh})
with $n=1$ becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\varphi) = V_0 \tanh^{2}{\lambda_1\frac{\varphi}{m_p}}~
\label{eq:tanh1}
\end{eqnarray}
where the potential parameter $\lambda_1$ is related to the geometric parameter $\alpha$ by
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda_1=\frac{1}{\sqrt{6\alpha}}
\label{eq:lambda-alpha2}
\end{eqnarray}
This potential is characterized by two asymptotically flat regions
and an intermediate region in which, for $\lambda_1|\varphi| \ll 1$, the potential behaves like
$m^2\varphi^2$ (see figure~\ref{fig:T}). In other words,
\begin{eqnarray}
{\rm for} ~\lambda_1|\varphi| \gg m_p \, , \quad V(\varphi) &\simeq& V_0\, , \quad \mbox{(flat
wings)} \, , \nonumber\\
{\rm for} ~\lambda_1|\varphi| \ll m_p \, , \quad V(\varphi) &\simeq& \frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi^2\, ,
\label{eq:non-flat}
\end{eqnarray}
where $m^2 = {2V_0\lambda_{1}^{2}}/{m_{p}^2}$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.67\textwidth]{pot_tanh1.eps}
\caption{This figure schematically shows the T-model potential (\ref{eq:tanh1}).
This potential is characterized by two asymptotically flat wings (for $\lambda_1|\varphi| \gg m_p$)
and an intermediate region in which $V \sim m^2\varphi^2$ (for $\lambda_1|\varphi| \ll m_p$).
}
\label{fig:T}
\end{figure}
Clearly, the flat wings of this potential are very similar to the flat right wing of the
{\em E-model\/} potential (\ref{eq:star1}). Consequently the analysis for this model is
qualitatively similar to that done in section \ref{sec:flat}. As in that case, the
initial velocity $\dot{\varphi_i}$ plays an important role in determining the value of the
current matter density $\Omega_{0m}$. We do not repeat this analysis here, referring
instead the reader to figures \ref{fig:starRfinetune}, \ref{fig:flat1}, \ref{fig:flat2},
\ref{fig:flat3} and \ref{fig:flat4} for details. One might note that, because of the
absence of an exponential tracker wing in ({\ref{eq:tanh1}}), the initial conditions
which give rise to a realistic construct for dark matter in the T-model are less generic
than those discussed in the previous section \ref{sec:TracDM} for the tracker model.
\subsection{Gravitational Instability}
\label{sec:grav}
We demonstrated in the previous section that dark matter based on $\alpha$-attractors
could emerge from a much larger class of initial conditions than admitted by the
canonical model $\frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi^2$.
It is well known that a coherently oscillating scalar field experiences
gravitational instability \cite{Branden}.
In the case of the canonical model the associated Jeans wavenumber given by \cite{zeldovich,hu00}
\begin{eqnarray}
k_J^2 = \sqrt{2\rho}\,\frac{m}{m_p}~.
\label{eq:jeans0}
\end{eqnarray}
For small values of $m$, the large Jeans length associated with ultra-light (fuzzy) dark
matter might help resolve several shortcomings of standard CDM including the cusp--core
problem, the substructure problem, etc.\@ (see \cite{Witten} for a recent review). It
therefore becomes important to determine the Jeans length associated with the
$\alpha$-attractor family of dark-matter models (\ref{eq:star1}), (\ref{eq:sw1}) and
(\ref{eq:tanh1}). This shall be the purpose of the present section.
One first notes that, for small values of $\varphi$, the potentials corresponding to
tracker dark matter (\ref{eq:sw1}), and the T-model (\ref{eq:tanh1})
acquire a form similar to that of the anharmonic oscillator
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\varphi) = \frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi^2 + \frac{1}{4}{\lambda_0 }\varphi^4~. \label{eq:anharmonic}
\end{eqnarray}
Gravitational instability in such a potential
was analyzed in \cite{zeldovich,kamion} in the limit $\lambda_0 \varphi^2\ll m^2$.
Employing the theory of parametric resonance (see Appendix~\ref{app:instab} for details),
one obtains the following expression for the Jeans scale ($k_J = 2\pi/\lambda_J$):
\begin{eqnarray}
k_J^2 = -\frac{9}{8}{\lambda_0 }\varphi_0^2 + \sqrt{\left (\frac{9}{8}{\lambda_0
}\varphi_0^2\right )^2 + \frac{m^4 \varphi_0^2}{m_{p}^2}}~,
\label{eq:jeans scale}
\end{eqnarray}
equivalently
\begin{eqnarray}
k_J^2 = -\frac{9}{4} {\lambda_0 } \frac{\rho}{m^2} + \sqrt{\left( \frac{9}{4} {\lambda_0
} \frac{\rho}{m^2} \right)^2 + 2 \rho \frac{m^2}{m_p^2} }~,
\label{eq:jeans_anharmonic}
\end{eqnarray}
where one notes that $\rho = \frac{1}{2} m^2\varphi_0^2$, with $\varphi_0$ being the maximum
amplitude of an oscillation. As expected, (\ref{eq:jeans scale}) reduces to
(\ref{eq:jeans0}) for ${\lambda_0 } = 0$.
For small values, $\lambda_1|\varphi| \ll m_p$, the T-model potential (\ref{eq:tanh1}) reduces to
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\varphi) \simeq V_0 \left[ \left( \lambda_1\frac{\varphi}{m_p}\right)^2 - \frac{2}{3} \left(
\lambda_1 \frac{\varphi}{m_p} \right)^4 \right] \, . \label{eq:tmodel_asymp}
\end{eqnarray}
Comparing (\ref{eq:tmodel_asymp}) with (\ref{eq:anharmonic}) one finds
\begin{eqnarray}
m^2 = \frac{2V_0\lambda_1^2}{m_{p}^2}\, , \qquad {\lambda_0 } = -\frac{8}{3} \frac{V_0\lambda_1^4}{m_{p}^4}~.
\label{eq:tmodel2}
\end{eqnarray}
We note that $\lambda_1$ is related to $\alpha$ by (\ref{eq:lambda-alpha2}).
Substituting (\ref{eq:tmodel2}) into (\ref{eq:jeans scale})
and using $\rho = \frac{1}{2} m^2\varphi^2$, gives the Jeans scale in the T-model (\ref{eq:tanh1})
\begin{eqnarray}
k_J^2 = 3\frac{\lambda_1^2\rho}{m_{p}^2} + \left \lbrack \left
(3\frac{\lambda_1^2\rho}{m_{p}^2}\right )^2 + 2\rho \frac{m^2}{m_{p}^2}\right
\rbrack^{1/2}~.
\label{eq:jeans_Tmodel}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that $\lambda_1$ is not a free parameter since it enters
into the definition of $m^2$ in (\ref{eq:tmodel2}).
For small values of $\varphi$ the axion potential (\ref{eq:axion}) also has the anharmonic
form (\ref{eq:anharmonic}) with
\begin{eqnarray}
m^2=\frac{V_0}{f^2}\, , \qquad {\lambda_0 } = -\frac{1}{6}\frac{m^2}{f^2} \, .
\label{eq:axion_jeans}
\end{eqnarray}
Substituting this in (\ref{eq:jeans scale}) gives the Jeans scale in the axion model
\begin{eqnarray}
k_J^2 = \frac{3\rho}{8f^2} + \left\lbrack \left (\frac{3\rho}{8f^2}\right )^2 +2\rho
\frac{m^2}{m_{p}^2}\right \rbrack^{1/2}~.
\label{eq:jeans_axion}
\end{eqnarray}
Comparing (\ref{eq:jeans_axion}) with (\ref{eq:jeans_Tmodel}), one finds a close affinity
between the axion and the T-model, with (\ref{eq:jeans_axion}) reverting to
(\ref{eq:jeans_Tmodel}) after setting $1/8f^2 = \lambda_1^2$; also see \cite{kamion}.
Next consider tracker dark matter. The potential (\ref{eq:sw1}) in the limit $\lambda\varphi \ll 1$
takes the form
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\varphi) \simeq V_0\left\lbrack \left (\frac{\lambda\varphi}{m_{p}}\right )^2 + \frac{1}{3}\left (\frac{\lambda\varphi}{m_{p}}\right )^4\right\rbrack~.
\label{eq:sw_asymp}
\end{eqnarray}
Comparing with (\ref{eq:anharmonic}), one finds
\begin{eqnarray}
m^2 = \frac{2V_0\lambda^2}{m_{p}^2}\, , \qquad {\lambda_0} =
\frac{4}{3}\frac{V_0\lambda^4}{m_{p}^4}\, , \label{eq:sw_jeans}
\end{eqnarray}
and substitution in (\ref{eq:jeans scale}) gives the Jeans scale in the Tracker model (\ref{eq:sw1})
\begin{eqnarray}
k_J^2 = - \frac32 \lambda^2\rho + \left\lbrack \left (\frac32 \lambda^2\rho\right )^2 +
\rho \frac{m^2}{m_{p}^2}\right \rbrack^{1/2}~,
\label{eq:jeans3}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\rho = \frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi_0^2$. Note that $\lambda$ is not a free parameter since it enters
into the definition of $m^2$ in (\ref{eq:sw_jeans}).
Finally, let us consider the small argument limit of the {\em E-model\/} potential
(\ref{eq:star1})
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\varphi) \simeq V_0\left\lbrack \left (\frac{\lambda\varphi}{m_{p}}\right )^2 - \left (\frac{\lambda\varphi}{m_{p}}\right
)^3 + \frac{7}{12}\left (\frac{\lambda\varphi}{m_{p}}\right )^4\right\rbrack ~.
\label{eq:star_asymp}
\end{eqnarray}
This potential does not subscribe to the form (\ref{eq:anharmonic}) since it contains a
cubic term in $\varphi$. As shown in Appendix~\ref{app:instab}, the Jeans scale in this
model is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
k_J^2 = \left(\frac{5}{3}\frac{\mu^2\rho}{m^4}-\frac{9}{4}\frac{{\lambda_0
}\rho}{m^2}\right)+\left[\frac{2m^2}{m_{p}^2}\rho+\left(\frac{25}{9}\frac{\mu^4}{m^8}+\frac{81}{16}\frac{{\lambda_0
}^2}{m^4}-\frac{15}{2}\frac{{\lambda_0 }\mu^2}{m^6}\right)\rho^2\right]^{\frac{1}{2}}~.
\label{eq:jeans_star}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that $\mu, {\lambda_0 }$ and $m$ are not free parameters since they are related
through $m^2=\frac{2V_0\lambda^2}{m_{p}^2}$, ~ $\mu=\frac{3\lambda^3 V_0}{m_{p}^3}$,
${\lambda_0 }=\frac{7}{3}\frac{\lambda^4 V_0}{m_{p}^4}$. The fundamental parameters in
this model are $V_0$ and $\lambda=\sqrt{\frac{2}{3\alpha}}$, with $\alpha$
defined in section \ref{sec:alphadm}.
The expression for $k_{J}^2$ in each of the three $\alpha$-dark matter models
($\alpha$DM) considered by us, namely (\ref{eq:jeans_Tmodel}), (\ref{eq:jeans3}) and
(\ref{eq:jeans_star}), contains terms proportional to $\rho$ and $\rho^2$ (under a common
square root). By contrast, in the canonical $m^2\varphi^2$ model, $k_{J}^2$ is simply
proportional to $\sqrt{\rho}$, see (\ref{eq:jeans0}). Since $\rho^2$ falls off faster than $\rho$ during
expansion, it is important to study the evolution of $k_{J}^2$ in all of these dark
matter models. This has been done in figure~\ref{fig:DMkJ}, which shows $k_{J}^2$ for the
canonical $m^2\varphi^2$ model with $m=10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$, the tracker model and the {\em E-model} (both with $\lambda=14.5$). This figure shows that $k_{J}^2$ in all
three models converges to the expression (\ref{eq:jeans0}) at late times by $z \sim 10^3$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\scalebox{0.5}[0.48]{\includegraphics{DMkJ.eps}}
\caption{The evolution of the Jeans wavenumber $k_{J}^2$ is shown for the quadratic
potential (\ref{eq:jeans0}) with $m=10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$ (red curve), the Tracker model
(\ref{eq:jeans3}) (blue curve) and the asymmetric {\em E-model\/} model (\ref{eq:jeans_star}) (green
curve). (In the Tracker and {\em E} models $\lambda=14.5$ which ensures
$m=10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$. Note that, for a given value of $m$, only very fine-tuned
values of $\lambda$ ensure $\Omega_{0m} \sim 0.27$, as shown in figure~\ref{fig:Vmeff}.)
We observe that $k_{J}^2$ converges to the same value in all three dark-matter models by
$z \sim 10^{3}$. For larger values of $m$, this convergence will occur at higher redshifts.
}
\label{fig:DMkJ}
\end{figure}
Another illustration of the result discussed above is depicted in figure~\ref{fig:DMdeltakJ}
which shows the fractional difference in $k_J^2$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\Delta k_{J}^2}{k_{J}^2} = \frac{k_{J}^2\big|_{\alpha {\rm DM}} -
k_{J}^2\big\vert_{m^2\varphi^2}} {k_{J}^2\big\vert_{m^2\varphi^2}} \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
between the Tracker model and the {\em E-model} on the one hand, and the $m^2\varphi^2$
model on the other. Figures \ref{fig:DMkJ} and \ref{fig:DMdeltakJ} demonstrate that the
expression for the Jeans scale in the $m^2\varphi^2$ model, namely (\ref{eq:jeans0}),
amply suffices to describe $k_J^2$ also in the Tracker and {\em E} models for $z <
10^3$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\scalebox{0.48}[0.46]{\includegraphics{DMdeltakJ.eps}}
\caption{This figure shows the fractional difference between $k_{J}^2$ in the tracker
model (\ref{eq:jeans3}) (red curve) and the {\em E-model} (\ref{eq:jeans_star}) (blue
curve) on the one hand, and $k_{J}^2$ in the $m^2\varphi^2$ model (\ref{eq:jeans0}) on the
other ($m=10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$ is assumed). Note that the fractional difference
${\Delta k_{J}^2}/{k_{J}^2}$ between the models becomes extremely small by redshift
$z\sim 10^3$, after which the clustering properties of the tracker and {\em E} models
become indistinguishable from those of the quadratic potential. For larger values of $m$,
the value of ${\Delta k_{J}^2}/{k_{J}^2}$ drops to zero at higher redshifts.}
\label{fig:DMdeltakJ}
\end{figure}
Next we turn to the T-model (\ref{eq:tanh}). In this case, one notes that there is no
bound on the values of $\lambda_1$ and $V_0$ as long as the mass constraint relation
(\ref{eq:starmass}) is satisfied. However, the expression for the Jeans scale in this
model, namely (\ref{eq:jeans_Tmodel}), was derived under the assumption that the harmonic
limit, $\lambda_1\varphi^2\ll m^2$, is valid. This helps place an upper limit on $\lambda_1$,
namely $\lambda<71$ if $m \simeq 10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$. In figure~\ref{fig:DMkJ1}, the
Jeans scale $k_J^2$ for the T-model is shown as a function of the scale factor. This
figure shows that the expressions for $k_J^2$ in the T-model and $m^2\varphi^2$ model
converge for $z < 10^3$ (assuming identical values of $m$ in the two models). We
therefore conclude that, in all of the $\alpha$-dark matter models discussed by us, the
Jeans scale converges to that in the $m^2\varphi^2$ model, namely (\ref{eq:jeans0}), by $z
\sim 10^3$.
One also needs to draw attention to the following point. In all our dark matter models,
the scalar field begins to oscillate when $m/H \sim 1$. In other words, the scalar field
can commence oscillating (and become pressureless) once the expansion rate $H$ has
dropped below the scalar field mass $m$. Prior to this, the behaviour of $\varphi(t)$
depends upon the form of the potential. For the canonical potential $V =
\frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi^2$, the equation of state of the scalar field is $w_\varphi \simeq -1$
at early times. In
the case of tracker dark matter, $w_\varphi \simeq 1/3$ during the tracking phase, prior to
the onset of oscillations.
The EOS of matter during the pre-oscillatory epoch is likely to affect the power spectrum of dark matter perturbations. This is an important open problem to which we wish to return in a companion paper.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\scalebox{0.43}[0.41]{\includegraphics{DMkJ1.eps}}
\caption{The Jeans wavenumber $k_{J}^2$ for the T-model (\ref{eq:jeans_Tmodel}) and the
quadratic potential (\ref{eq:jeans0}) is shown as a function of $\log_{10} a$ for five
different values of $\lambda$. We find that, for all values of $\lambda_1$, the clustering
scale in the T-model converges to that in the model with $m^2\varphi^2$ potential by $z
\sim 10^3$. Note that $m=10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$ in all models.} \label{fig:DMkJ1}
\end{figure}
\section{Dark Energy}
\label{sec:DE}
\subsection{Dark Energy from the potential $V \propto \left|\varphi\right|^{2n}$}
\label{sec:DEcano}
The canonical potential\footnote{Note that this potential also plays an important role in
monodromy inflation
\cite{monodromy}.} for oscillatory dark energy is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\varphi)=V_0\left|\frac{\varphi}{m_p}\right|^{2n}\, , \qquad n<\frac{1}{2}~.
\label{eq:DEcano}
\end{eqnarray}
Once $\varphi$ commences oscillating around $\varphi = 0$, its time-averaged equation of
state becomes\footnote{DE in the context of $\alpha$-attractors has also been investigated in \cite{linder,Kostas_owen}. In \cite{Kostas_owen} $\alpha$-attractors were used to construct a model of Quintessential-Inflation, while Quintessential-Inflation in the context of oscillating DE has been discussed in \cite{sami2002,nojiri2006}.}
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle w_\varphi\rangle = \frac{n-1}{n+1}~.
\label{eq:DEEOS}
\end{eqnarray}
The oscillating scalar field can drive cosmic acceleration when $\langle w_\varphi\rangle <
-1/3$, which corresponds to $n < {1}/{2}$.
However, as we shall soon show, the
initial density of the scalar field requires a high degree of fine-tuning in order to account for the
current value of dark energy parameter $\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}} \sim 0.7$.
The following point deserves mention in a discussion of DE sourced by an oscillating
scalar field. It has been noted that such models are prone to developing a dynamical
instability \cite{kamion}. Therefore, in order to remain viable, the scalar field in
these models must begin oscillating at late times, $z_{\rm osc}<5$. This ensures that the
field oscillates only a few times before the present epoch thereby limiting the growth
of the instability \cite{dutta_scherrer}. However, the extreme case when oscillations
commence very late, $z_{\rm osc}<1$, leads to a situation in which the phase of
oscillations begins to play an important role and the time-averaged formula
(\ref{eq:DEEOS}) is no longer valid \cite{dutta_scherrer}. Taking account of these
different factors, we have chosen, for $n=0.05$, $V_0\sim 5\times 10^{-47}\,{\rm GeV}^4$,
thereby ensuring that oscillations commence by $z_{\rm osc}\sim 2$. Our results,
summarized in figure~\ref{fig:DEcan1} demonstrate that the (fine-tuned) initial value
$\rho_\varphi$ which results in $\Omega_{0, {\rm DE}}=0.69$, is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho_A=4.51\times 10^{-47}\,{\rm GeV}^4~.
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{DEcano1.eps}
\caption{This figure describes the fine tuning of the initial scalar-field energy density
associated with dark energy. Commencing our integration at $a=10^{-4}$ ($z = 10^{4}$), we
find that the scalar-field energy density remains frozen to its initial value all the way
until $z \sim 2$. Thereafter, due to the rapid decline in the matter density, the damping
on the scalar field gets lifted and $\varphi$ begins to oscillate and behave like dark
energy with $\langle w_\varphi\rangle \simeq -0.9$. The initial scalar-field energy density
which results in $\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}} \simeq 0.69$ is shown by the point $A$. Initial
values of $\rho_i < \rho_A$ lead to too little dark energy at the present epoch
($\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}} < 0.69$), whereas $\rho_i > \rho_{A}$ leads to too much dark energy
($\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}} > 0.69$). } \label{fig:DEcan1}
\end{figure}
We therefore find that the canonical potential (\ref{eq:DEcano}) suffers from a severe
fine-tuning problem since, for a given value of $n$ and $V_0$, there is only a
very narrow range of values\footnote{Note that, as in the case of canonical dark
matter in section \ref{sec:canoDM}, the fine tuning which we observe is insensitive to
the initial value of $\dot{\varphi}$. } of the initial energy density which lead to the
current value of dark energy density $\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}}$. This is very similar to the
fine tuning which afflicts dark matter with the $m^2\varphi^2$ potential,
discussed in section \ref{sec:canoDM}.
Next, we determine the effect of varying $V_0$ on the initial
field value $\varphi_i$. Figure~\ref{fig:DEcanoPM} illustrates the relationship between
$\varphi_i$ and $V_0$ for two different cases: (i) $n=0.05 \Rightarrow \langle
w_\varphi\rangle \simeq -0.9$, (ii) $n=0.1 \Rightarrow \langle w_\varphi\rangle \simeq
-0.82$. We observe that larger values of $\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}}$ requires a larger
$\varphi_i$ for a given $V_0$. (Note that ${\dot\varphi} \simeq 0$ initially, since the
motion of the dark-energy field is heavily damped, initially by radiation and then by
matter. As a result, $\rho_i \simeq V_0 \left\vert {\varphi_i}/{m_p} \right\vert^{2n}$.)
\begin{figure}[H]
\hspace{-1.2cm}
{\includegraphics[width=0.55\textwidth]{DEcano1PM.eps}}
{\includegraphics[width=0.55\textwidth]{DEcano2PM.eps}}
\caption{Dependence of the initial value of the scalar field $\varphi_i$ on $V_0$ is shown
for the canonical dark-energy potential
$V(\varphi)=V_0\left|{\varphi}/{m_p}\right|^{2n}$. The left panel ($a$) and the right
panel ($b$) correspond to $n=0.05$ and $0.1$, respectively. Three different values of the
present dark energy density $\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}}$ are assumed. One sees that, for a given
value of $\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}}$, the value of $\varphi_i$ decreases with increasing $V_0$.
Whereas for a fixed value of $V_0$, larger values of $\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}}$ are
associated with larger initial values of $\varphi_{i}$. } \label{fig:DEcanoPM}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Dark Energy from the asymmetric {\em E-Model}}
\label{sec:DEstar}
As we saw earlier, the {\em E-model} has features common to both the T-model and
tracker DE\@. We shall therefore confine our attention solely to this model in our
investigation of DE from $\alpha$-attractors since its properties will carry over to the
other two models as well. The potential
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\varphi)=V_0\left(1-e^{-\lambda\frac{\varphi}{m_p}}\right)^{2n}\, , \qquad n<\frac{1}{2} \,
, \label{eq:DEstar}
\end{eqnarray}
exhibits three asymptotic regions given by (see figure~\ref{fig:starpotDE})
\begin{eqnarray}
\mbox{tracker wing:} \quad V(\varphi) &\simeq& V_0\, e^{2n\lambda|\varphi|/m_p}~, \quad \varphi
< 0, \quad \lambda|\varphi| \gg m_p \, ,
\label{eq:DEstarpot1}\\
\mbox{flat wing:} \quad V(\varphi) &\simeq& V_0\, , \quad \lambda\varphi \gg m_p \, ,
\label{eq:DEstarpot2}\\
\mbox{oscillatory region:} \quad V(\varphi) &\simeq&
V_0\left|\frac{\varphi}{m_p}\right|^{2n}\, , \quad \lambda|\varphi| \ll m_p \, .
\label{eq:DEstarpot3}
\end{eqnarray}
The relation between $\lambda$ and $\alpha$ is given in (\ref{eq:lambda-alpha}).
We focus first on the tracker wing of the potential,
for which
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\rho_{\varphi}}{\rho_{\rm total}}=\frac{1}{n^2\lambda^2} \quad &&\mbox{during
radiation domination} \, , \label{eq:DEtrackR}\\
\frac{\rho_{\varphi}}{\rho_{\rm total}}=\frac{3}{4n^2\lambda^2} \quad &&\mbox{during matter
domination} \, . \label{eq:DEtrackM}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.68\textwidth]{pot_star2.eps}
\caption{This figure schematically illustrates the {\em E-model} potential
(\ref{eq:DEstar}) with $\lambda=1$ and $n=0.2$. The main features of this potential are:
(A) the exponential tracker wing for $\lambda|\varphi| \gg m_p$ ($\varphi<0$), (B) the flat
wing for $\lambda\varphi \gg m_p$, and the oscillatory region for which $\lambda|\varphi| \ll
m_p$, so that $V(\varphi) \simeq V_0\left|{\varphi}/{m_p}\right|^{2n}$. }
\label{fig:starpotDE}
\end{figure}
As discussed earlier, in order to evade the instabilities plaguing a cuspy potential such
as (\ref{eq:DEstarpot3}), the field must commence oscillating late, by $z_{\rm osc} < 5$.
Choosing $n=0.05 \Rightarrow \langle w_\varphi\rangle \simeq -0.9$, the values of $V_0$ and
$\lambda$ which satisfy this constraint and which also yield $\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}}=0.69$
are $V_0=2.56\times 10^{-47}\,{\rm GeV}^4$, $\lambda=60$ (hence $\alpha=1.85\times
10^{-4}$). As in the case of $\alpha$DM, we find that DE based on the {\em E-model}
converges to the late-time attractor $V(\varphi) \sim \varphi^{2n}$ from a wide range of
initial conditions. This is illustrated in figure~\ref{fig:DEstarL}. Commencing at
$a=10^{-4}$ ($z \sim 10^4$), we find that initial energy-density values spanning almost
4 orders of magnitude converges to the attractor curve (green line) yielding $\Omega_{0,
{\rm DE}}=0.69$; see the right panel of figure~\ref{fig:DEstarL}.
\begin{figure}[H]
\hspace{-2cm}
{\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{DEstarL1.eps}}
{\includegraphics[width=0.645\textwidth]{DEstarL2.eps}}
\caption{This figure describes the evolution of the energy density in radiation, matter
and a scalar field, with the latter playing the role of DE\@. The scalar field commences
its descent from the tracker wing of the potential $V(\varphi) = V_0 \left ( 1 -
e^{-\lambda\varphi/m_p}\right )^{2n}$ with $n=0.05$, $\lambda=60$ and $V_0=2.56\times
10^{-47}\,{\rm GeV}^4$. These parameter values ensure $\langle w_{\varphi}\rangle \simeq
-0.9$ and $\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}} = 0.69$. {\em Left panel (a):} The green line represents
DE which tracks the radiation and matter energy densities during the radiative
and matter-dominated epochs, respectively. The near-horizontal black line corresponds to
canonical DE (\ref{eq:DEcano}) whose fine-tuned initial value is represented by point $A$. {\em Right
panel:} The green band spanning from $P_{1}$ to $P_{3}$ shows the range in initial values of
the scalar-field density (at $z=10^{4}$) that lead to the current value
$\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}}=0.69$. $P_{2}$ marks the initial density
corresponding to the attractor solution (green line) towards which all trajectories
commencing from the $P_1$--$P_3$ band converge. This scenario is in sharp contrast to the
case of the canonical model with $V(\varphi)=V_0\left|{\varphi}/{m_p}\right|^{2n}$, shown in
figure~\ref{fig:DEcan1}, for which only finely tuned initial values of the
energy density (point $A$), lead to $\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}} \simeq 0.69$. (For clarity of
presentation, we do not show the baryon density in either panel.) } \label{fig:DEstarL}
\end{figure}
The attractor value of the initial density (marked by point $P_2$ in
figure~\ref{fig:DEstarL}) is given by $\rho_{P_2}=6.82\times 10^{-36}\,{\rm GeV}^4$,
while the maximum and minimum values of the initial density which yield $\Omega_{0, {\rm
DE}}=0.69$ are
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho_{\rm max} &=& \rho_{P_3}=3.98\times 10^{-35}~{\rm GeV}^4 \, , \\
\rho_{\rm min} &=& \rho_{P_1}=1.59\times 10^{-38}~{\rm GeV}^4~.
\end{eqnarray}
The range in the attractor $P_1$--$P_3$ band will clearly increase if we commence evolving our system of equations from a
more realistic earlier epoch. For instance, the range in the energy-density values
prescribed at the GUT scale ($z\sim 10^{26}$) which converges to $\Omega_{0, {\rm
DE}}=0.69$ covers more than $112$ orders of magnitude. The fact that such an impressively
large range of initial conditions can lead to the present universe removes the extreme
fine-tuning associated with the potential (\ref{eq:DEcano}) and makes DE from tracker
potentials more compelling.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.66\textwidth]{DEstarRflat.eps}
\caption{The initial velocity $\dot{\varphi_i}$ which results in $\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}}=0.69$
is plotted as a function of $\varphi_i$ for the flat wing of the asymmetric {\em E-model} potential
(\ref{eq:DEstar}). The parameter values are $V_0=2.56\times 10^{-47}\,{\rm GeV}^4$,
$\lambda=60$ and $n=0.05 \Rightarrow \langle w_\varphi\rangle \simeq -0.9$. Notice that a
larger initial value of the scalar field $\varphi_i$ requires a larger value of
$|\dot{\varphi_i}|$ to ensure $\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}}=0.69$. } \label{fig:DEstarflat}
\end{figure}
Turning to the flat right wing of the potential (\ref{eq:DEstar}), one notices that the
initial velocity $\dot{\varphi_i}$ plays an important role in the analysis of initial
conditions just as it did for dark matter (see section \ref{sec:flat}). Commencing on the
flat wing, a given initial value $\varphi_i$ requires a particular value of
$\dot{\varphi_i}$ in order to give rise to $\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}}=0.69$. The dependence of
the initial velocity $\dot{\varphi_i}$ on $\varphi_i$ is shown in
figure~\ref{fig:DEstarflat}. This figure shows that that a larger $\varphi_i$, associated
with a point further along the flat wing, requires a larger value of $|\dot{\varphi_i}|$ in
order to arrive at a given $\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}}$ (also see figure~\ref{fig:flat4}).
We therefore conclude that, from the viewpoint of initial conditions, the flat wing of the {\em E-model} potential
results in a less appealing model of DE as compared to the steep wing, for which one arrives at
a given $\Omega_{0,{\rm DE}}$ from a much wider class of initial conditions.
\section{Discussion}
\label{sec:summary}
In this paper, we have demonstrated that the $\alpha$-attractors, which provide
interesting models of inflation \cite{linde1,linde2}, can also lead to compelling models
of dark matter and perhaps even dark energy. It is well known that a simple scalar field
model of dark matter can be constructed from the potential usually associated with
chaotic inflation, namely $V = \frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi^2$. For an ultra-light mass of $m \sim
10^{-22}\,{\rm eV}$, this model can successfully resolve several key problems faced by
the standard cold dark matter scenario including the cusp--core issue, the problem of
substructure etc.\@ \cite{sahni_wang,hu00,Witten}. However, what is sometimes overlooked
is that this interesting model also suffers from a severe fine-tuning issue. As
demonstrated in section \ref{sec:canoDM}, for a given value of $m$, the
region of initial values of $\varphi_{i}$ which
leads to the current value of the matter density $\Omega_{0m}$ is \underline{exceedingly small}. Moreover the fine tuning discussed here is expected to carry over to other potentials with an $m^2\varphi^2$ asymptote including axionic dark matter.
This difficulty is avoided if dark matter is sourced by $\alpha$-attractors. Of the
$\alpha$-attractor models studied in sec. \ref{sec:dm}, the {\em E-model\/}
(\ref{eq:star}) and the tracker potential (\ref{eq:sw}) provide the
most versatile examples of scalar-field dark matter. In both, one arrives at the
late-time dark matter asymptote from a very wide range of initial conditions. An
important feature of the asymmetric {\em E-model\/} is the presence of a steep
non-inflationary wing of the potential in addition to the inflationary plateau,
as shown in figure \ref{fig:staroughpot}. The required steepness of the tracker wing is
supported by a small value of the geometric parameter $\alpha \leq 10^{-3}$. This is the
main difference with the Starobinsky model $R+M^2R^2$, which corresponds to $\alpha=1$.
An analogous requirement is valid for the tracker potential (\ref{eq:sw}). These two
$\alpha$-attractor models, therefore, successfully overcome the fine-tuning problems
associated with the $m^2\varphi^2$ potential.
Another important feature of $\alpha$-dark matter, shared by the
$m^2\varphi^2$ potential, is that the Jeans length associated with gravitational clustering
can be quite large. Our analysis in section \ref{sec:grav} demonstrates that, despite significant differences in dynamics, the Jeans scale in all of our DM models converges to the same late-time expression (\ref{eq:jeans0}). We therefore conclude that {\em tracker based\/}
$\alpha$-dark matter shares all of the distinctive features of {\em fuzzy\/} dark matter
(sourced by the $m^2\varphi^2$ potential), without having any of its limitations.
Finally, we would like to caution the reader that our attempt in this paper has not been
to create a unified description of inflation and dark matter based on
$\alpha$-attractors. It has been more modest. We have simply shown that the very same
potentials which characterize $\alpha$-attractors can also be used to construct
compelling models of dark matter, and perhaps even dark energy. Nevertheless, one can, in
principle, envisage the possibility that dark matter arose from the coherent oscillations
in the $\alpha$-attractor inflaton after reheating. This follows from the observation
that all of the $\alpha$-attractor potentials have a minimum near which $V \simeq
\frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi^2$, which permits the inflaton to oscillate. In the standard
scenario, the universe preheats during this oscillatory phase due to the coupling of $\varphi$
to the standard
model fields.
Preheating transfers the energy of the inflaton into new degrees of freedom
(quarks and leptons, radiation etc.\@) created during preheating.
Consequently, the value of the inflaton drops drastically from $\varphi \sim m_p$ at the
commencement of preheating to $\varphi_{\rm end} \ll m_p$ at its end. If $\varphi_{\rm end}
\neq 0$ (i.e., if preheating is not complete), then the post-preheating
oscillations of $\varphi$ will cause the inflaton density to drop as $\rho_\varphi \propto
a^{-3}$ a consequence of the fact that $\langle w_\varphi\rangle \simeq 0$. In other words,
the inflaton can now play the role of dark matter \cite{preheating,preheating1}. It is
straightforward to show that if the universe preheats to a temperature $T_r$ then, at
$z_r = T_r/T_0 - 1$, the dark-matter field must satisfy the relation
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi^2_r \simeq \rho_r(z_r) \frac{T_{0\gamma}}{T_\gamma(z_r)}\frac{\Omega_{0m}}{\Omega_{0r}},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\varphi_r \equiv \varphi(z_r)$ and $\rho_r = \sigma T_r^4$ is the radiation density immediately after preheating.
In other words
\begin{eqnarray}
\varphi_r \simeq \left\lbrack
\frac{2\rho_r(z_r)}{m^2}\frac{T_{0\gamma}}{T_\gamma(z_r)}\frac{\Omega_{0m}}{\Omega_{0r}}
\right\rbrack^{1/2}~.
\end{eqnarray}
Post-preheating
scalar field values $\varphi > \varphi_r$ will lead to an excess of dark matter,
whereas $\varphi < \varphi_r$ will result in too little dark matter at the current epoch.
A similar fine tuning of initial conditions for the $m^2\varphi^2$ potential was noted earlier in
section \ref{sec:canoDM}.
The reader might also note that our attempt in this paper has been to investigate the many
different features associated with $\alpha$DM and $\alpha$DE\@. We have intentionally
refrained from testing these models against observations, leaving this exercise to a
future paper.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
S.S.M. thanks the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), India, for
financial support as senior research fellow.
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $\mathbb{F}_{p^{n}}$ be a finite field with $p^{n}$ elements, where $p$ is a prime and $n$ is a positive integer. A polynomial
$f(x)\in\mathbb{F}_{p^{n}}[x]$ is called a permutation polynomial (PP) if the associated mapping $f:c\mapsto f(c)$ from $\mathbb{F}_{p^{n}}$ to itself is a bijection. PPs have been intensively studied in recent years due to their important applications in cryptography, coding theory and combinatorial design theory (see \cite{Ding06,dobb1999,D99,L07,QTTL13,ST05} and the references therein). Recently, the study of PPs with few terms, especially binomials and trinomials, has attached people's interest due to their simple algebraic form and additional extraordinary properties.
In \cite{WuL}, Wu and Li presented several classes of permutation trinomials over $\mathbb{F}_{5^n}$ from Niho exponents with the form of
\begin{equation}\label{eq1.1}
f(x)=x+\lambda_1 x^{s(5^k-1)+1}+\lambda_2 x^{t(5^k-1)+1},
\end{equation}
where $n=2k, 1\leq s,t\leq 5^k,$ and $\lambda_1, \lambda_2\in\{1,-1\}.$ In the same paper, they also proposed the following two conjectures, which can be used to obtain two new classes of permutation trinomials with the form \eqref{eq1.1}. More recent progress on permutation trinomials can be found in \cite{DQWYY15,Gupta2016,Hou2014,Hou2015,H15,kyureghyan2016,LQC2017,Likuanquan2016New,Linian2016,LH2016,Ma2016,Zha2017}.
\begin{conjecture}
The polynomial $f(x)=x\big(\frac{x^2-x+2}{x^2+x+2}\big)^2$ is a PP over $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ for odd $k.$
\end{conjecture}
\begin{conjecture}
Let $q=5^k,$ where $k$ is an even integer. Then $g(x)=-x\big(\frac{x^2-2}{x^2+2}\big)^{2}$ permutates $\mu_{q+1}.$
\end{conjecture}
This paper is organized as follows. In Section~\ref{preliminaries}, we introduce some basic notations and related results. In Sections~\ref{conj2} and \ref{conj1}, we prove the above two conjectures by using different tricks, such as treating the squares and non-squares separately. In Section~\ref{trapp}, we give a new class of PPs of the form $x+\gamma \textup{Tr}_{q^n/q}(x^k).$ Section~\ref{conclusion} concludes the paper.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{preliminaries}
The following notations are fixed throughout this paper.
\begin{itemize}
\item Let $q$ be a prime power, $n$ be an integer, and $\mathbb{F}_{q^n}$ be the finite field of order $q^{n}$.
\item Let $\textup{Tr}_{r}^{n}\ :\ \mathbb{F}_{q^{n}}\mapsto\mathbb{F}_{q^{r}}$ be the trace mapping defined by
$$\textup{Tr}_{r}^{n}(x)=x+x^{q^{r}}+x^{q^{2r}}+\cdots+x^{q^{n-r}},$$
where $r|n$. For $r=1$, we get the absolute trace function, which is denoted by $\textup{Tr}_{n}$.
\item Let $\overline{x}=x^q$ for any $x\in \mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$.
\end{itemize}
Now, we recall a well-known lemma which will be needed in the following sections.
\begin{lemma}\cite{Dickson1906}\label{lem2.1}
$x^2+ax+b$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{F}_{p^n},$ $p>2$, if and only if its discriminant $\Delta=a^2-4b$ is a non-square element in $\mathbb{F}_{p^n}.$
\end{lemma}
\section{Proof of Conjecture 2}\label{conj2}
In this section, we will prove the following theorem, which is a conjecture posed by Wu et al. \cite{WuL}. Let us set initially that $\mu_{q+1}=\{x\in\mathbb{F}_{q^2}: x^{q+1}=1\},$ where $q=5^k$ with $k$ being an even integer.
\begin{theorem}\cite[Conjecture 2]{WuL}\label{thm3.1}
Let $q=5^k,$ where $k$ is an even integer. Then $g(x)=-x\big(\frac{x^2-2}{x^2+2}\big)^{2}$ permutates $\mu_{q+1}.$
\end{theorem}
Before proving this conjecture, we need to show the following lemmas.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem0}
Let $q=5^k,$ where $k$ is an even integer. Then $\pm2$ are square elements in $\mathbb{F}_{q^2}.$ Moreover, $\sqrt{\pm2}\in \mathbb{F}_q.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathbb{F}_{q^2}^*=\langle \omega \rangle.$ Noting that $8|(q^2-1)$ and $-1=\omega^{\frac{q^2-1}{2}}$, we have that $2=\omega^{\frac{q^2-1}{4}}$ and $-2=\omega^{\frac{3(q^2-1)}{4}}$ are two square elements in $\mathbb{F}_{q^2}.$
Write $\sqrt{2}=\omega^{\frac{q^2-1}{8}},$ $\sqrt{-2}=\omega^{\frac{3(q^2-1)}{8}}$. Noting that $8|(q-1)$ since $k$ is an even integer. Thus
$(\sqrt{2})^{q-1}=(-1)^{\frac{q-1}{4}}=1,$ and $(\sqrt{-2})^{q-1}=(-1)^{\frac{3(q-1)}{4}}=1,$ which imply that $\sqrt{2}\in \mathbb{F}_q$, $\sqrt{-2}\in \mathbb{F}_q$.
\end{proof}
Let $\Omega_{+}=\{x^2:x\in\mu_{q+1}\}$, $\Omega_{-}=\{-x^2:x\in\mu_{q+1}\}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem1}
$\Omega_{+}\cap \Omega_{-}=\varnothing$, $\Omega_{+}\cup \Omega_{-}=\mu_{q+1}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If $\Omega_{+}\cap \Omega_{-}\neq \varnothing,$ that is $\exists x_1^2=-x_2^2$ with $x_i\in \mu_{q+1}$. We have $\big( \frac{x_1}{x_2}\big)^2=-1$, which means $\big( \frac{x_1}{x_2}\big)^4=1$. Since $\big( \frac{x_1}{x_2}\big)^{q+1}=1$, it follows that $\big( \frac{x_1}{x_2}\big)^{\gcd(4, q+1)}=1$. Hence, $\big( \frac{x_1}{x_2}\big)^2=1$, this leads to a contradiction.
Clearly, $|\Omega_{+}|=|\Omega_{-}|=\frac{q+1}{2}$. It follows that $\Omega_{+}\cup \Omega_{-}=\mu_{q+1}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem2}
$g(\Omega_{+})\subseteq \Omega_{+}$ and $g(\Omega_{-})\subseteq \Omega_{-}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
$\forall x\in \Omega_{+}$, $\exists a\in \mu_{q+1}$, s.t. $x=a^2$. We need to show $g(x)=b^2$ for some $b\in \mu_{q+1}$. In fact, $g(x)=g(a^2)=-a^2\big( \frac{a^4-2}{a^4+2}\big)^2=\Big(2a\big(\frac{a^4-2}{a^4+2}\big)\Big)^2$. Let $b=2a\big(\frac{a^4-2}{a^4+2}\big)$, noting that $\overline{a}=\frac{1}{a},$ we have
\begin{align*}
\overline{b}=2\overline{a}\big(\frac{\overline{a}^4-2}{\overline{a}^4+2}\big)=\frac{2}{a}\Big( \frac{(\frac{1}{a})^4-2}{(\frac{1}{a})^4+2} \Big)=\frac{1}{2a}\big(\frac{a^4+2}{a^4-2}\big)=\frac{1}{b}.
\end{align*}
Similarly, we have $g(\Omega_{-})\subseteq \Omega_{-}$. In fact, $\forall x\in \Omega_{-}$, $\exists a\in \mu_{q+1}$, s.t. $x=-a^2$. Since $g(x)=g(-a^2)=a^2\big( \frac{a^4-2}{a^4+2}\big)^2=-\Big(2a\big(\frac{a^4-2}{a^4+2}\big)\Big)^2$. Let $b=2a\big(\frac{a^4-2}{a^4+2}\big)$, noting that $b\in \mu_{q+1},$ we have shown $g(x)\in\Omega_{-}.$
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem3.1}
The group of equations
\begin{equation*}
\begin{cases}
xy=1,\\
x+y=\pm1
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
has no solution in $\Omega_{+},$ $\Omega_{-},$ respectively.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If not, there exist $x,y\in \Omega_{+}$ (or $\Omega_{-}$) such that the equations hold. It follows that $x^2\pm x+1=0$. So $x=\pm2\pm 2\sqrt{2}\in\mathbb{F}_q$ by Lemma \ref{lem0}.
Thus, we obtain that $x^{q-1}=1$. Since $x^{q+1}=1$. It deduces that $x^{\gcd(q-1,q+1)}=1$, that is $x=\pm1$, which is a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem3}
$g(x)$ permutes $\Omega_{+}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If the assertion would not hold, there exist $x\neq y\in\Omega_{+}$, such that $g(x)=g(y)$. Let $x=a^2$, $y=b^2$, where $a,b\in \mu_{q+1}$, and $a\neq \pm b$. Since $g(x)=g(y)$, we have $-a^2\big(\frac{a^4-2}{a^4+2}\big)^2=-b^2\big(\frac{b^4-2}{b^4+2}\big)^2$, which means that $\frac{a^5-2a}{a^4+2}=\pm\frac{b^5-2b}{b^4+2}$.
Below, we consider the two cases where $\frac{a^5-2a}{a^4+2}=\frac{b^5-2b}{b^4+2}$ and $\frac{a^5-2a}{a^4+2}=-\frac{b^5-2b}{b^4+2}$.
{\bf Case 1: $\frac{a^5-2a}{a^4+2}=\frac{b^5-2b}{b^4+2}.$}
We obtain
\begin{equation*}
(a-b)\Big(a^4b^4+2(a-b)^4+2ab(a-b)^2-4a^2b^2-4\Big)=0,
\end{equation*}
which implies that
$$a^4b^4+2(a-b)^4+2ab(a-b)^2-4a^2b^2-4=0,$$
since $a\neq b$.
Let $c=ab$, $d=a-b$, we have
$$c^4+2d^4+2cd^2-4c^2-4=0,$$
that is
$$d^4+cd^2-2(c^4+c^2+1)=0.$$
Thus, we have $d^2=2c\pm 2\sqrt{-2}(c^2-1)$, since $\Delta=-2(c^2-1)^2$ is a square in $\mathbb{F}_{q^2}.$
Now, we consider the following two subcases.
{\bf Subcase 1.1 } For the case
\begin{equation}\label{eq3.1}
d^2=2c+2\sqrt{-2}(c^2-1),
\end{equation}
raising $q$-th power of both sides of Eq. \eqref{eq3.1}, by Lemma \ref{lem0}, we get
\begin{equation*}
\overline{d}^2=2\overline{c}+2\sqrt{-2}(\overline{c}^2-1).
\end{equation*}
Since $\overline{c}=\frac{1}{c}$ and $\overline{d}=\overline{a}-\overline{b}=\frac{1}{a}-\frac{1}{b}=\frac{b-a}{ab}=\frac{-d}{c}$, we obtain
$$\frac{d^2}{c^2}=\frac{2}{c}+2\sqrt{-2}(\frac{1}{c^2}-1),$$
which implies that
\begin{equation}\label{eq3.2}
d^2=2c+2\sqrt{-2}(1-c^2).
\end{equation}
Combining Eq. \eqref{eq3.1} and Eq. \eqref{eq3.2}, we have $c^2=1$.
It follows that
\begin{equation*}
d^2=2c=
\begin{cases}
2,~ \text{if $c=1$,}\\
-2,~ \text{if $c=-1$.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
\begin{enumerate}
\item When $c=1$, $d^2=2$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq0.1}
\begin{cases}
xy=a^2b^2=c^2=1,\\
x+y=a^2+b^2=(a-b)^2+2ab=d^2+2c=-1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{lem3.1}, Eq. \eqref{eq0.1} has no solution in $\Omega_{+}$, which is a contradiction.
\item When $c=-1$, $d^2=-2$, we get
\begin{equation}\label{eq0.2}
\begin{cases}
xy=1,\\
x+y=1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{lem3.1}, Eq. \eqref{eq0.2} has no solution in $\Omega_{+}$, which is a contradiction.
\end{enumerate}
{\bf Subcase 1.2} For the case $d^2=2c-2\sqrt{-2}(c^2-1),$ we could also get a contradiction in a similar way. In fact, raising $q$-th power of both sides of $d^2=2c-2\sqrt{-2}(c^2-1)$, by Lemma \ref{lem0}, we get
\begin{equation*}
\overline{d}^2=2\overline{c}-2\sqrt{-2}(\overline{c}^2-1).
\end{equation*}
Noting that $\overline{c}=\frac{1}{c}$ and $\overline{d}=\frac{-d}{c}$, we obtain
$$\frac{d^2}{c^2}=\frac{2}{c}-2\sqrt{-2}(\frac{1}{c^2}-1),$$
which implies that
\begin{equation*}
d^2=2c-2\sqrt{-2}(1-c^2).
\end{equation*}
It follows that $c^2=1.$ The rest of the argument is exactly the same as {\bf Subcase 1.1}.
{\bf Case 2: $\frac{a^5-2a}{a^4+2}=-\frac{b^5-2b}{b^4+2}$}. The discussion is similar with {\bf Case 1}.
In fact, we have
\begin{equation*}
(a+b)\Big(a^4b^4+2(a+b)^4-2ab(a+b)^2-4a^2b^2-4\Big)=0,
\end{equation*}
which implies that
$$a^4b^4+2(a+b)^4-2ab(a+b)^2-4a^2b^2-4=0,$$
since $a\neq -b$.
Let $c=ab$, $d=a+b$, we have
$$c^4+2d^4-2cd^2-4c^2-4=0,$$
that is
$$d^4-cd^2-2(c^4+c^2+1)=0.$$
Therefore, we have $d^2=-2c\pm 2\sqrt{-2}(c^2-1)$, since $\Delta=-2(c^2-1)^2$ is a square in $\mathbb{F}_{q^2}.$
Now, we consider the following two subcases.
{\bf Subcase 2.1 } For the case
\begin{equation}\label{eq3.2.1}
d^2=-2c+2\sqrt{-2}(c^2-1),
\end{equation}
raising $q$-th power of both sides of Eq. \eqref{eq3.2.1}, by Lemma \ref{lem0}, we get
\begin{equation*}
\overline{d}^2=-2\overline{c}+2\sqrt{-2}(\overline{c}^2-1).
\end{equation*}
Since $\overline{c}=\frac{1}{c}$ and $\overline{d}=\overline{a}+\overline{b}=\frac{1}{a}+\frac{1}{b}=\frac{a+b}{ab}=\frac{d}{c}$, we obtain
$$\frac{d^2}{c^2}=\frac{-2}{c}+2\sqrt{-2}(\frac{1}{c^2}-1),$$
which implies that
\begin{equation}\label{eq3.2.2}
d^2=-2c+2\sqrt{-2}(1-c^2).
\end{equation}
Combining Eq. \eqref{eq3.2.1} and Eq. \eqref{eq3.2.2}, we have $c^2=1$.
It follows that
\begin{equation*}
d^2=-2c=
\begin{cases}
-2,~ \text{if $c=1$,}\\
2,~ \text{if $c=-1$.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $c=1$, $d^2=-2$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq0.3}
\begin{cases}
xy=1,\\
x+y=1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{lem3.1}, Eq. \eqref{eq0.3} has no solution in $\Omega_{+}$, which is a contradiction.
\item If $c=-1$, $d^2=2$, we get
\begin{equation}\label{eq0.4}
\begin{cases}
xy=1,\\
x+y=-1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{lem3.1}, Eq. \eqref{eq0.4} has no solution in $\Omega_{+}$, which is a contradiction.
\end{enumerate}
{\bf Subcase 2.2} For the case $d^2=-2c-2\sqrt{-2}(c^2-1),$ we could also get a contradiction in a similar way. In fact, raising $q$-th power of both sides of $d^2=-2c-2\sqrt{-2}(c^2-1)$, by Lemma \ref{lem0}, we get
\begin{equation*}
\overline{d}^2=2\overline{c}-2\sqrt{-2}(\overline{c}^2-1).
\end{equation*}
Noting that $\overline{c}=\frac{1}{c}$ and $\overline{d}=\frac{d}{c}$, we obtain
$$\frac{d^2}{c^2}=\frac{2}{c}-2\sqrt{-2}(\frac{1}{c^2}-1),$$
which implies that
\begin{equation*}
d^2=-2c-2\sqrt{-2}(1-c^2).
\end{equation*}
It follows that $c^2=1.$ The rest of the argument is exactly the same as {\bf Subcase 2.1}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem4}
$g(x)$ permutes $\Omega_{-}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is similar to that of Lemma \ref{lem3}. In fact, if the assertion would not hold, there exist $x\neq y\in\Omega_{-}$, such that $g(x)=g(y)$. Let $x=-a^2$, $y=-b^2$, where $a,b\in \mu_{q+1}$, and $a\neq \pm b$. Since $g(x)=g(y)$, we have $a^2\big(\frac{a^4-2}{a^4+2}\big)^2=b^2\big(\frac{b^4-2}{b^4+2}\big)^2$, which means that $\frac{a^5-2a}{a^4+2}=\pm\frac{b^5-2b}{b^4+2}$. The rest of the argument is exactly the same as Lemma \ref{lem3}, except for changing the sign of $x+y$ since $x+y=-(a^2+b^2)$, which doesn't affect the rest discussion.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm3.1}]
It can be derived directly from Lemmas \ref{lem1}, \ref{lem2}, \ref{lem3} and \ref{lem4}.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Conjecture 1}\label{conj1}
\begin{theorem}\cite[Conjecture 1]{WuL}\label{thm4.1}
The polynomial $f(x)=x\big(\frac{x^2-x+2}{x^2+x+2}\big)^2$ is a PP over $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ for odd $k.$
\end{theorem}
Before proving this conjecture, we need to show the following lemmas. Let $\Omega_{1}=\{x^2:x\in \mathbb{F}_{5^k}^{*}\}$ and $\Omega_{2}=\{2x^2:x\in\mathbb{F}_{5^k}^{*}\}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemconj1.1}
$f(x)$ is a PP on $\Omega_{1}.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If not, there exist two distinct elements $x,y\in \Omega_1$ such that $f(x)=f(y).$ Let $x=a^2$, $y=b^2,$ where $a,b\in \mathbb{F}_{5^k}^*$, and $a\neq \pm b.$ We have $f(a^2)=f(b^2)$. That is
$$a^2\big( \frac{a^4-a^2+2}{a^4+a^2+2} \big)^2=b^2\big( \frac{b^4-b^2+2}{b^4+b^2+2} \big)^2.$$
We get
$$\frac{a^5-a^3+2a}{a^4+a^2+2}=\pm \frac{b^5-b^3+2b}{b^4+b^2+2}.$$
{\bf Case 1:}
For the case
$$\frac{a^5-a^3+2a}{a^4+a^2+2}=\frac{b^5-b^3+2b}{b^4+b^2+2}.$$
After simple computations, we have
$$(a-b)\big( a^4b^4+2(a-b)^4+(a^2b^2-2ab-2)(a^2+ab+b^2)+a^3b^3-a^2b^2-2ab+4 \big)=0.$$
Let $c=ab$, $d=a-b$. Noting that $a\neq b$, we have
$$c^4+2d^4+(c^2-2c-2)(d^2-2c)+c^3-c^2-2c+4=0.$$
Simplifying the above equation gives
$$d^4-(2c^2+c+1)d^2-2c^4+2c^3-c^2+c+2=0.$$
Let $z=d^2\in\mathbb{F}_{5^k}^*$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq4.1}
z^2-(2c^2+c+1)z-2c^4+2c^3-c^2+c+2=0.
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{lem2.1}, we know $z^2-(2c^2+c+1)z-2c^4+2c^3-c^2+c+2$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ if and only if the discriminant $\Delta$ is non-square. It is easy to obtain $\Delta=2(c^2-c-2)^2.$
{\bf Subcase 1.1:}
If $c^2-c-2\neq 0,$ clearly, $\Delta$ is a non-square element in $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ since $2$ is non-square. Thus Eq. \eqref{eq4.1} has no solution in $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$.
{\bf Subcase 1.2:}
If $c^2-c-2=0,$ we have $c=2$ or $c=-1$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $c=2,$ we get $d^2=-2$. Then we have
\begin{equation}\label{eqn1}
\begin{cases}
xy=a^2b^2=c^2=-1, \\
x+y=a^2+b^2=(a-b)^2+2ab=d^2+2c=2.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
So $x,y$ are two roots of $u^2-2u-1=0.$ However, $u^2-2u-1$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ by Lemma \ref{lem0}, since the discriminant $\Delta=3$ is non-square. We get a contradiction.
\item If $c=-1$, we have $d^2=1$. Then \begin{equation}\label{eqn2}
\begin{cases}
xy=1, \\
x+y=-1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
So $x,y$ are two roots of $u^2+u+1=0.$ However, $u^2+u+1$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ by Lemma \ref{lem0}, since the discriminant $\Delta=2$ is non-square. We get a contradiction.
\end{enumerate}
{\bf Case 2:}
For the case
$$\frac{a^5-a^3+2a}{a^4+a^2+2}=-\frac{b^5-b^3+2b}{b^4+b^2+2}.$$
After simple computations, we have
$$(a+b)\big( a^4b^4+2(a+b)^4+(a^2b^2+2ab-2)(a^2-ab+b^2)-a^3b^3-a^2b^2+2ab+4 \big)=0.$$
Let $c=ab$, $d=a+b$. Noting that $a\neq -b$, we have
$$c^4+2d^4+(c^2+2c-2)(d^2+2c)-c^3-c^2+2c+4=0.$$
Simplifying the above equation gives
$$d^4-(2c^2-c+1)d^2-2c^4-2c^3-c^2-c+2=0.$$
Let $z=d^2\in\mathbb{F}_{5^k}^*$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq4.2}
z^2-(2c^2-c+1)z-2c^4-2c^3-c^2-c+2=0.
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{lem2.1}, we know $z^2-(2c^2-c+1)z-2c^4-2c^3-c^2-c+2$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ if and only if the discriminant $\Delta$ is non-square. It is easy to obtain $\Delta=2(c^2+c-2)^2.$
{\bf Subcase 2.1:}
If $c^2+c-2\neq 0,$ clearly, $\Delta$ is a non-square element in $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ since $2$ is non-square. Thus Eq. \eqref{eq4.2} has no solution in $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$.
{\bf Subcase 2.2:}
If $c^2+c-2=0,$ we have $c=-2$ or $c=1$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $c=-2,$ we get $d^2=-2$. Then we have
\begin{equation}\label{eqn1}
\begin{cases}
xy=-1, \\
x+y=-1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
So we get $x=y=2,$ which is a contradiction.
\item If $c=1$, we have $d^2=1$. Then \begin{equation}\label{eqn2}
\begin{cases}
xy=1, \\
x+y=-1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
So $x,y$ are two roots of $u^2+u+1=0.$ However, $u^2+u+1$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ by Lemma \ref{lem0}, since the discriminant $\Delta=2$ is non-square. We get a contradiction.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemconj1.2}
$f(x)$ permutates $\Omega_{2}.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
An argument similar to that of the above Lemma \ref{lemconj1.1} shows that$f(x)$ permutates $\Omega_{2}.$
In fact, if not, there exist two distinct elements $x$ and $y$ such that $f(x)=f(y).$ Let $x=2a^2$, $y=2b^2,$ where $a,b\in \mathbb{F}_{5^k}^*$, and $a\neq \pm b.$ We have $f(2a^2)=f(2b^2)$. That is
$$2a^2\big( \frac{4a^4-2a^2+2}{4a^4+2a^2+2} \big)^2=2b^2\big( \frac{4b^4-2b^2+2}{4b^4+2b^2+2} \big)^2.$$
We get
$$\frac{4a^5-2a^3+2a}{4a^4+2a^2+2}=\pm \frac{4b^5-2b^3+2b}{4b^4+2b^2+2}.$$
Next, we consider the following two cases separately.
{\bf Case 1:}
For the case
$$\frac{4a^5-2a^3+2a}{4a^4+2a^2+2}=\frac{4b^5-2b^3+2b}{4b^4+2b^2+2}.$$
After simple computations, we have
$$(a-b)\big( a^4b^4+3(a-b)^4+(3a^2b^2-3ab-4)(a^2+ab+b^2)+3a^3b^3-4a^2b^2-4ab+4 \big)=0.$$
Let $c=ab$, $d=a-b$. Noting that $a\neq b$, we have
$$c^4+3d^4+(3c^2-3c-4)(d^2-2c)+3c^3-4c^2-4c+4=0.$$
Simplifying the above equation gives
$$d^4+(c^2-c+2)d^2+2c^4-c^3-c^2-2c+3=0.$$
Let $z=d^2\in\mathbb{F}_{5^k}^*$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq4.2.1}
z^2+(c^2-c+2)z+2c^4-c^3-c^2-2c-2=0.
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{lem2.1}, we know $z^2+(c^2-c+2)z+2c^4-c^3-c^2-2c-2$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ if and only if the discriminant $\Delta$ is non-square. It is easy to obtain $\Delta=3(c^2+2c+2)^2.$
{\bf Subcase 1.1:}
If $c^2+2c+2\neq 0,$ clearly, $\Delta$ is a non-square element in $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ since $2$ is non-square. Thus Eq. \eqref{eq4.2.1} has no solution in $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$.
{\bf Subcase 1.2:}
If $c^2+2c+2=0,$ we have $c=2$ or $c=1$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $c=2,$ we get $d^2=-2$. Then we have
\begin{equation}\label{eqn2.1}
\begin{cases}
xy=1, \\
x+y=-1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
So $x,y$ are two roots of $u^2+u+1=0.$ However, $u^2+u+1$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ by Lemma \ref{lem0}, since the discriminant $\Delta=2$ is non-square. We get a contradiction.
\item If $c=1$, we have $d^2=-1$. Then \begin{equation}\label{eqn2.2}
\begin{cases}
xy=-1, \\
x+y=2.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
So $x,y$ are two roots of $u^2-2u-1=0.$ However, $u^2-2u-1$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ by Lemma \ref{lem0}, since the discriminant $\Delta=3$ is non-square. We get a contradiction.
\end{enumerate}
{\bf Case 2:}
For the case
$$\frac{4a^5-2a^3+2a}{4a^4+2a^2+2}=- \frac{4b^5-2b^3+2b}{4b^4+2b^2+2}.$$
After simple computations, we have
$$(a+b)\big( a^4b^4-2(a+b)^4-2(a^2b^2+ab+2)(a^2-ab+b^2)+2a^3b^3-4a^2b^2+4ab+4 \big)=0.$$
Let $c=ab$, $d=a+b$. Noting that $a\neq -b$, we have
$$c^4-2d^4-2(c^2+c+2)(d^2+2c)+2c^3-4c^2+4c+4=0.$$
Simplifying the above equation gives
$$d^4+(c^2+c+2)d^2+2c^4+c^3-c^2+2c-2=0.$$
Let $z=d^2\in\mathbb{F}_{5^k}^*$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq4.3.2}
z^2+(c^2+c+2)z+2c^4+c^3-c^2+2c-2=0.
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{lem2.1}, we know $z^2+(c^2+c+2)z+2c^4+c^3-c^2+2c-2$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ if and only if the discriminant $\Delta$ is non-square. It is easy to obtain $\Delta=3(c^2-2c+2)^2.$
{\bf Subcase 2.1:}
If $c^2-2c+2\neq 0,$ clearly, $\Delta$ is a non-square element in $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ since $2$ is non-square. Thus Eq. \eqref{eq4.3.2} has no solution in $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$.
{\bf Subcase 2.2:}
If $c^2-2c+2=0,$ we have $c=-1$ or $c=3$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $c=-1,$ we get $d^2=-1$. Then we have
\begin{equation}\label{eqn3.1}
\begin{cases}
xy=-1, \\
x+y=2.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
So $x,y$ are two roots of $u^2-2u-1=0.$ However, $u^2-2u-1$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ by Lemma \ref{lem0}, since the discriminant $\Delta=3$ is non-square. We get a contradiction.
\item If $c=3$, we have $d^2=-2$. Then \begin{equation}\label{eqn3.2}
\begin{cases}
xy=1, \\
x+y=-1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
So $x,y$ are two roots of $u^2+u+1=0.$ However, $u^2+u+1$ is irreducible over $\mathbb{F}_{5^k}$ by Lemma \ref{lem0}, since the discriminant $\Delta=2$ is non-square. We get a contradiction.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm4.1}]
Noting that $\Omega_{1}\cap \Omega_{2}=\varnothing$, $\Omega_{1}\cup \Omega_{2}=\mathbb{F}_{5^k}^{*}$. Clearly, $f(\Omega_{1})\subseteq \Omega_{1}$ and $f(\Omega_{2})\subseteq \Omega_{2}.$ It is sufficient to prove that $f(x)$ permutates $\Omega_{1},\Omega_{2},$ respectively. Then, it can be derived directly from Lemmas \ref{lemconj1.1} and \ref{lemconj1.2}.
\end{proof}
\section{PPs of the form $x+\gamma \textup{Tr}_{n}(x^k)$}\label{trapp}
In \cite{kyureghyan2016}, the authors computed all PPs over fields $\mathbb{F}_{q^n}$ of the form $x+\gamma \textup{Tr}_{n}(x^k)$ with $\gamma\in \mathbb{F}_{q^n}^*,$ $n>1$ and $q^n<5000.$ They gave several families of PPs, which explain almost all PPs of this form. However, the following five examples arising in their computation are not covered:
\begin{example}\label{ex5.1}
$q=7,~ n=2, ~k=10, ~\gamma^4=1.$
\end{example}
\begin{example}\label{ex5.2}
$q=9,~ n=2,~ k=33,~ \gamma^2-\gamma=1.$
\end{example}
\begin{example}\label{ex5.3}
$q=27, ~n=2,~ k=261,~ (\gamma-1)^{13}=\gamma^{13}.$
\end{example}
\begin{example}\label{ex5.4}
$q=9,~n=3, ~k=\{11, 19, 33, 57\},~ \gamma^4=-1.$
\end{example}
\begin{example}\label{ex5.5}
$q=49,~ n=2,~ k=385, ~\gamma^5=-1.$
\end{example}
In the following theorem, we generalize Examples \ref{ex5.2} and \ref{ex5.3} into a new infinite class.
\begin{theorem}
Let $q=3^r$ with $r \geq 2$, and $n=2,$ $k=3^{2r-1}+3^r-3^{r-1}.$
Then $f(x)=x+\gamma \textup{Tr}_{2}(x^k)$ is a PP over $\mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$, where $\gamma\in \mathbb{F}_{q^{2}}$ satisfying $(\gamma-1)^{\frac{q-1}{2}}=\gamma^{\frac{q-1}{2}}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We will show that $f(x)=a$ has a unique nonzero solution for each $a\in \mathbb{F}_{q^2}$. That is, for the equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pp1}
x+\gamma (x^k+\overline{x}^k)=a,
\end{equation}
there exists a unique solution $x\in
\mathbb{F}_{q^2}.$
Raising both sides of Eq. \eqref{eq:pp1} to the $3$-th power, noting that $\overline{x}^q=x^{q^2}=x,$ we get
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pp2}
x^{3}+\gamma^3 (x\overline{x}^2+\overline{x}x^2)=a^3,
\end{equation}
Since $(\gamma-1)^{\frac{q-1}{2}}=\gamma^{\frac{q-1}{2}},$ we can easily obtain $\gamma \in \mathbb{F}_q.$ Raising both sides of Eq. \eqref{eq:pp2} to the $q$-th power
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pp3}
\overline{x}^{3}+\gamma^3 (\overline{x}x^2+x\overline{x}^2)=\overline{a}^3.
\end{equation}
By Eq. \eqref{eq:pp2} and Eq. \eqref{eq:pp3}, we have $(x-\overline{x})^3=(a-\overline{a})^3.$ Since $\textup{gcd}(3,q^2-1)=1,$ we get
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pp4}
\overline{x}=x+\overline{a}-a.
\end{equation}
Substituting Eq. \eqref{eq:pp4} into Eq. \eqref{eq:pp2}, after some simple computation, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pp5}
x^3+\Big(\frac{\gamma}{1-\gamma}\Big)^3(\overline{a}-a)^2x=\Big(\frac{a}{1-\gamma}\Big)^3.
\end{equation}
Therefore, $x$ is a solution of Eq. \eqref{eq:pp1} if and only if it is a solution to following equations
\begin{equation}\label{eqs1}
\left\{
\begin{array}{rcl}
x^3+\Big(\frac{\gamma}{1-\gamma}\Big)^3(\overline{a}-a)^2x&=&\Big(\frac{a}{1-\gamma}\Big)^3, \\[1.0ex]
\overline{x}-x&=&\overline{a}-a.
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
Next, we will prove that Eq. \eqref{eqs1} has at most one solution. If it has two distinct solutions, denoted by $x_1,x_2.$ By $\overline{x_1}-x_1=\overline{a}-a=\overline{x_2}-x_2,$ we get $\overline{x_1-x_2}=x_1-x_2,$ that is $x_1-x_2\in \mathbb{F}_q.$ Write $c=x_1-x_2\in \mathbb{F}_{q}^*,$ we have $x_2+c, x_2, x_2-c$ are three solutions to the first equation of Eq. \eqref{eqs1}. Then, we obtain $c^2=\Big(\frac{\gamma}{\gamma-1}\Big)^3(\overline{a}-a)^2.$ Note that $Y=\{\gamma\in \mathbb{F}_{q^2} |(\gamma-1)^{\frac{q-1}{2}}=\gamma^{\frac{q-1}{2}}\}\subset \mathbb{F}_q^{*}.$ Let $z=\frac{\gamma}{\gamma-1},$ we have $Z=\{z \in \mathbb{F}_{q^2} | z^{\frac{q-1}{2}}=1\}=\langle \omega^{2(q+1)} \rangle \setminus\{1\}\subset \mathbb{F}_q^{*},$ where $w$ is a primitive element of $\mathbb{F}_{q^2}.$
Thus we have $c=\pm d(\overline{a}-a),$ where $d=w^{3j(q+1)} \in \mathbb{F}_q$ for some $j.$ Below, we consider the two cases where $c=d(\overline{a}-a)$ and $c=-d(\overline{a}-a)$.
{\bf Case 1: }
Raising both sides of $c=d(\overline{a}-a)$ to the $q$-th power, we have $\overline{c}=d(a-\overline{a})=-c,$ which leads to a contradiction since $c\in \mathbb{F}_{q}^*.$
{\bf Case 2: }
Raising both sides of $c=-d(\overline{a}-a)$ to the $q$-th power, we have $\overline{c}=-d(a-\overline{a})=-c,$ which leads to a contradiction since $c\in \mathbb{F}_{q}^*.$
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
When $q=9,~ n=2,~ k=33,$ the condition on $\gamma$ in the above theorem is a little different from $\gamma^2-\gamma=1.$ Noting that $(\gamma-1)^4=\gamma^4$ implies $(\gamma+1)(\gamma^2-\gamma-1)=0.$ It follows that $\gamma=-1$ is also a suitable solution, which is contained in a class of PPs proposed in \cite{kyureghyan2016}.
\end{remark}
\section{Conclusion}\label{conclusion}
This paper demonstrates some new results on permutation polynomials. We prove two conjectures on permutation polynomial proposed recently by Wu and Li \cite{WuL}. Moreover, we give a new class of trinomial PPs of the form $x+\gamma \textup{Tr}_{n}(x^k)$, which generalizes two examples of \cite{kyureghyan2016}, namely, Examples \ref{ex5.2} and \ref{ex5.3}.
One question remains at the end of this paper: How to extend Examples \ref{ex5.1}, \ref{ex5.4} and \ref{ex5.5} to infinite classes? If it can be solved, we would have a complete understanding on PPs over fields $\mathbb{F}_{q^n}$ of the form $x+\gamma \textup{Tr}_{n}(x^k)$ with $\gamma\in \mathbb{F}_{q^n}^*,$ $n>1$ and $q^n<5000.$ Due to this, we propose the following problem:
\begin{problem}
Is it possible to extend Examples \ref{ex5.1}, \ref{ex5.4} and \ref{ex5.5} to infinite classes with the form $x+\gamma \textup{Tr}_{n}(x^k)$?
\end{problem}
|
\section{Introduction}
While quantum chromodynamics (QCD) is well understood at high energies, where perturbation theory is reliable due to asymptotic freedom, the low energy sector remains a challenging open problem in theoretical Physics. In the infrared region, perturbation theory breaks down and non-perturbative techniques are needed. A full control of the infrared regime of QCD would provide a fundamental understanding of the confinement of quarks and gluons, a goal not achieved till now.
Different approaches which take into account non-perturbative effects in QCD were devised in the last decades, see \cite{Alkofer:2000wg,Binosi:2009qm,Greensite:2011zz,Brambilla:2014jmp,Deur:2016tte}. Up to now, the interplay of such approaches was able to produce non-trivial results. Though, a complete consistent picture of the mechanism behind colour confinement is still lacking.
One approach to deal with the confinement problem is the non-perturbative study of the correlation functions of the theory. Functional techniques based on the Dyson-Schwinger equations and on the functional renormalization group as well as numerical lattice simulations have been employed in the analysis of the infrared behavior of the correlation functions. In particular, the two-point gluon correlation function has been object of very intensive investigations. In fact, the infrared structure of two-point gluon correlation function, e.g. the gluon propagator, turns out to encode important features which are interpreted as signals of confinement. For instance, lattice numerical simulations as well as computations based on the Dyson-Schwinger equations show that the gluon propagator exhibits a violation of the reflection positivity. As such, it cannot be associated with a physical excitation of the spectrum of the theory. This property is interpreted as a manifestation of confinement, see \cite{vonSmekal:1997ohs,vonSmekal:1997ern,Cucchieri:2004mf,Dudal:2013yva,Cornwall:2013zra}. One has to keep in mind that the gluon propagator is a gauge-dependent quantity. Nevertheless, it still contains important information about such (un)physical elementary fields, being the simplest correlation function one might compute. In the last decade, the gluon propagator has been studied in great detail in the Landau gauge, due to its special features, namely the transversality of the propagator itself and the important property of having a useful lattice formulation which has allowed for a numerical study of the gluon propagator on large lattices. More precisely, the most recent lattice simulations point towards an infrared suppressed gluon propagator which attains a finite value at zero momentum in four and three space-time dimensions, while it vanishes at zero momentum in two space-time dimensions. One says that in three and four dimensions the gluon propagator is of decoupling/massive type, while in two dimensions it is of scaling type, see \cite{Maas:2011se,Cucchieri:2007rg,Aguilar:2008xm,Fischer:2008uz,Maas:2008ri,Cucchieri:2009zt,Maas:2007uv}.
Besides the aforementioned functional and numerical lattice approaches, an analytical framework which takes into account the existence of the Gribov copies \cite{Gribov:1977wm} occurring in the Faddeev-Popov quantization of gauge theories has received increasing interest in the recent years. The so-called Refined Gribov-Zwanziger setup captures the effects of the spurious gauge copies as well as of additional non-perturbative effects related to the existence of dimension two-condensates, giving rise to an effective infrared action, the Refined Gribov-Zwanziger action, yielding a gluon propagator of the decoupling type which is in very good agreement with the most recent lattice data in both four and three space-time dimensions. In two dimensions, infrared singularities forbid the formation of the dimension two-condensates and the refinement does not take place. As a consequence, the gluon propagator turns out to be of the scaling type. In this paper, we focus on the Refined Gribov-Zwanziger formulation. An extensive review of the developments of this framework is presented in Sect.~\ref{overviewRGZ}.
Nonetheless, in QCD, in addition of the pure gluon sector, one has to face also the complex issue of quark confinement, to which different strategies have been devoted, see \cite{Greensite:2011zz,Brambilla:2014jmp}. As far as the Refined Gribov-Zwanziger framewrok is concerned, a possible mechanism to take into account matter confinement was proposed in \cite{Capri:2014bsa,Dudal:2013vha,Palhares:2016wqn,Capri:2016aqq} in the Landau gauge. More precisely, as it will be reviewed in Sect.~\ref{overviewRGZ}, within the Refined Gribov-Zwanziger approach in the Landau gauge, the non-perturbative effect of the Gribov copies is accounted for by restricting the domain of integration in the functional integral to a certain region $\Omega$, called the Gribov region, which is defined by demanding that the Faddeev-Popov operator $\EuScript{M}(A)$ is strictly positive, so that it is invertible within $\Omega$. Such a restriction enables us to eliminate a large set of copies. In practice, the restriction to $\Omega$ is achieved by adding to the starting Faddeev-Popov action an additional non-local term, known as the horizon function, which contains the inverse of the operator $\EuScript{M}(A)$. It is precisely the addition of this additional long-range term which is responsible for the infrared modifications of the gluon propagator, which turns out to be a confining propagator, exhibiting complex poles and lacking the K{\"a}ll{\'e}n-Lehmann representation. Remarkably, the non-local horizon function can be cast in local form through the addition of a suitable set of auxiliary fields. The resulting action is multiplicatively renormalizable to all orders.
The proposal made in \cite{Capri:2014bsa,Dudal:2013vha,Palhares:2016wqn,Capri:2016aqq} consists in generalizing the introduction of the non-local horizon function to the matter sector, in complete analogy with the gluon sector. Moreover, as in the gluon sector, the non-local matter coupling term can be cast in local form, giving rise to a fully local and renormalizable action. In \cite{Capri:2014bsa,Dudal:2013vha,Palhares:2016wqn,Capri:2016aqq}, this prescription was implemented for scalar fields in the adjoint representation of the gauge group and for spinor fields in the fundamental representation. The whole procedure was carried out in the Landau gauge, for which the Refined Gribov-Zwanziger setup was well established, see also \cite{Capri:2015pfa} and references therein for the maximal Abelian gauge.
Very recently, the Refined Gribov-Zwanziger framework has been extended to the class of the linear covariant and Curci-Ferrari gauges \cite{Capri:2015ixa,Capri:2016aqq,Capri:2015nzw,Pereira:2016fpn,Capri:2016gut}, allowing, in particular, to establish the independence from the gauge parameter of the gauge invariant correlation functions as well of the poles of the transverse part of the gluon propagator. In the light of such developments, it seems natural to ask ourselves how matter fields should be coupled to the Refined Gribov-Zwanziger action in such gauges. This is precisely the aim of the present work.
The paper is organized is follows: Sect.~\ref{overviewRGZ} contains an overview of the Refined Gribov-Zwanziger action, covering the Landau, the linear covariant, the Curci-Ferrari as well as the maximal Abelian gauge. After that, in Sect.~\ref{noscalaradjoint}, we describe the non-perturbative coupling of scalar fields in the adjoint representation of the gauge group within the Refined Gribov-Zwanziger action in the aforementioned gauges. Subsequently, in Sect.~\ref{npspinor}, we work out the non-perturbative coupling of quark fields and its consequences on the propagator. Finally, we collect our conclusions. To keep the paper self-contained as much as possible, we have added two appendices devoted to the details of our construction as well as to the conventions used throughout the paper.
\section{Overview of the non-perturbative BRST invariant formulation of the Refined Gribov-Zwanziger framework}\label{overviewRGZ}
In this section, we review the recently proposed BRST invariant formulation of the Refined Gribov-Zwanziger action in linear covariant \cite{Capri:2015ixa,Capri:2015nzw}, Curci-Ferrari \cite{Pereira:2016fpn} and maximal Abelian gauges \cite{Capri:2015pfa}. For the benefit of the reader, we start with a brief overview of the Gribov problem in the Landau gauge for which the Refined Gribov-Zwanziger action was originally constructed.
\subsection{The Gribov problem in the Landau gauge} \label{gribovlandau}
Let us consider Yang-Mills theory in $d$ Euclidean dimensions with $SU(N)$ gauge group quantized in the Landau gauge, namely $\partial_{\mu}A^{a}_{\mu}=0$. The Faddeev-Popov procedure results in the gauge-fixed action:
\begin{equation}
S_{\mathrm{FP}}=\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\frac{1}{4}F^{a}_{\mu\nu}F^{a}_{\mu\nu}+b^{a}\partial_{\mu}A^{a}_{\mu}+\bar{c}^{a}\partial_{\mu}D^{ab}_{\mu}(A)c^{b}\right)\,,
\label{ov1}
\end{equation}
with the field strength $F^{a}_{\mu\nu}$ and the covariant derivative $D^{ab}_{\mu}$ in the adjoint representation of the gauge group given by
\begin{eqnarray}
F^{a}_{\mu\nu}&=&\partial_{\mu}A^{a}_{\nu}-\partial_{\nu}A^{a}_{\mu}+gf^{abc}A^{b}_{\mu}A^{c}_{\nu}\,,\nonumber\\
D^{ab}_{\mu}&=&\delta^{ab}\partial_{\mu}-gf^{abc}A^{c}_{\mu}\,.
\label{ov2}
\end{eqnarray}
The parameter $g$ stands for the gauge coupling\footnote{The coupling $g$ is dimensionless in $d=4$.} and $f^{abc}$ are the real and totally antisymmetric structure constants of the gauge group. The fields $(\bar{c}^{a}, c^a)$ denote the Faddeev-Popov ghosts, while $b^a$ is the Lagrange multiplier implementing the Landau gauge condition. Nevertheless, as investigated by Gribov in \cite{Gribov:1977wm}, the action \eqref{ov1} is plagued by the existence of gauge copies, {\it i.e.} equivalent gauge configurations which still obey the gauge condition. This fact can be observed very concretely by considering a gauge field configuration $A^{a}_{\mu}$ which satisfies the Landau gauge condition and another gauge field $A'^{a}_{\mu}$ which is connected to $A^{a}_{\mu}$ by an infinitesimal gauge transformation:
\begin{equation}
A'^{a}_{\mu}=A^{a}_{\mu}-D^{ab}_{\mu}\xi^b\,,
\label{ov3}
\end{equation}
with $\xi^a$ being the infinitesimal gauge parameter of the transformation. If the Landau gauge condition were ideal, \textit{i.e.} if it were selecting only one representative $A^a_\mu$ per gauge orbit\footnote{A gauge orbit of a given configuration $A^a_\mu$ is the set of all gauge fields related to $A^{a}_{\mu}$ by a gauge transformation.}, then $A'^{a}_{\mu}$ would not obey anymore the Landau gauge condition, $\partial_{\mu}A'^{a}_{\mu}\neq 0$. Therefore, from eq.\eqref{ov3} we should have
\begin{equation}
\partial_{\mu}A'^{a}_{\mu}=\partial_\mu A^{a}_{\mu} -\partial_{\mu}D^{ab}_{\mu}\xi^b = -\partial_{\mu}D^{ab}_{\mu}\xi^b \neq 0\,,
\label{ov4}
\end{equation}
where the condition $\partial_{\mu}A^{a}_{\mu}= 0$ was employed. Hence, eq.\eqref{ov4} shows that if the Faddeev-Popov operator $\EuScript{M}^{ab}(A)\equiv-\partial_{\mu}D^{ab}_{\mu}(A)$ develops zero-modes, then the Landau gauge is not ideal. Gribov proved in \cite{Gribov:1977wm} that the operator $\EuScript{M}^{ab}(A)\equiv-\partial_{\mu}D^{ab}_{\mu}(A)$ does exhibit in fact zero-modes. As a consequence, a residual gauge symmetry remains even after the implementation of \eqref{ov1}. The existence of such spurious configurations known as Gribov copies is the so-called \textit{Gribov problem}. For a pedagogical review of this subject, we refer to \cite{Sobreiro:2005ec,Vandersickel:2012tz,Vandersickel:2011zc,Pereira:2016inn}. Let us emphasize that the previous argument is restricted to Gribov copies generated by infinitesimal gauge transformations. Finite gauge transformations were considered in \cite{vanBaal:1991zw}.
The aforementioned discussion on the existence of the Gribov problem might induce the reader to think that this is a particular pathology of the Landau gauge or of a subclass of gauges, which can be circumvented by a suitable choice of a more appropriate gauge condition. Nevertheless, it was proved by Singer in \cite{Singer:1978dk} that this is not the case. In fact, it turns out that the Gribov problem has to do with the non-trivial topological structure of Yang-Mills theories.
In order to deal with the Gribov copies in the path integral measure, Gribov proposed in \cite{Gribov:1977wm} the restriction of the path integral domain to a smaller region $\Omega$ in field space, known as the Gribov region, defined as
\begin{equation}
\Omega = \left\{A^{a}_{\mu}\,,\,\partial_{\mu}A^{a}_{\mu}=0\,\Big|\,\EuScript{M}^{ab}(A)>0\right\}\,,
\label{ov5}
\end{equation}
namely, $\Omega$ is the set of gauge fields which satisfy the Landau gauge condition and for which the Faddeev-Popov operator is strictly positive. The boundary $\partial\Omega$, where the first vanishing eigenvalue of the Faddeev-Popov operator shows up, is called the first Gribov \textit{horizon}. We should mention that, although the region $\Omega$ is free from infinitesimal Gribov copies, it still contains additional copies \cite{vanBaal:1991zw} related to finite gauge transformations. A smaller region, contained inside $\Omega$ and known as the Fundamental Modular Region, exists and turns out to be fully free from Gribov ambiguities. However, unlike the Gribov region $\Omega$, a practical way to implement the restriction of the domain of integration in the functional integral to the Fundamental Modular Region has not yet been achieved so far. Therefore, we stick to the Gribov region $\Omega$ which displays important properties: \textit{i)} it is bounded in all directions in field space; \textit{ii)} it is convex; \textit{iii)} all gauge orbits cross it at least once. These properties were proven in a rigorous fashion in \cite{Dell'Antonio:1991xt} and give a well defined support to original Gribov's proposal of restricting the functional integral to $\Omega$. Such restriction is effectively implemented through the addition of an extra term into the action \eqref{ov1}, as shown independently by Gribov and Zwanziger, \cite{Gribov:1977wm,Zwanziger:1989mf,Capri:2012wx}, {\it i.e.}
\begin{equation}
\EuScript{Z}=\int_{\Omega} \left[\EuScript{D}A\right]\delta(\partial_{\mu}A^{a}_{\mu})|\mathrm{det}(\EuScript{M}^{ab})|\mathrm{e}^{-S_{\mathrm{YM}}}=\int \left[\EuScript{D}A\right] \left[\EuScript{D}c\right] \left[\EuScript{D}\bar{c}\right]\left[\EuScript{D}b\right]\mathrm{e}^{-S_{\mathrm{FP}}-\gamma^4H(A)+dV\gamma^4(N^2-1)}\,,
\label{ov6}
\end{equation}
where $H(A)$ is known as the \textit{horizon} function, being given by
\begin{equation}
H(A)=g^2\int {\textrm{d}}^dx{\textrm{d}}^dy~f^{abc}A^{b}_{\mu}(x)\left[\EuScript{M}^{-1}(A)\right]^{ad}(x,y)f^{dec}A^{e}_{\mu}(y)\,.
\label{ov7}
\end{equation}
In expression \eqref{ov6}, $V$ is the space-time volume and $\gamma$ is a parameter with the dimension of a mass, known as the \textit{Gribov parameter}. It is not a free parameter, being determined in a self-consistent way through the so-called horizon condition, {\it i.e.}
\begin{equation}
\langle H(A)\rangle=dV(N^2-1)\,,
\label{ov8}
\end{equation}
where the expectation value $\langle\ldots\rangle$ is taken with respect to the modified measure given by eq.\eqref{ov6}.
As is apparent from eq.\eqref{ov7}, the presence of the inverse of the Faddeev-Popov operator makes the horizon function a non-local quantity. Nevertheless, it can be cast in local form by the introduction of a suitable set of auxiliary fields, namely a pair of commuting $(\varphi^{ab}_{\mu},\bar{\varphi}^{ab}_{\mu})$ and of anticommuting $(\omega^{ab}_{\mu},\bar{\omega}^{ab}_{\mu})$ fields. Written in terms of these new fields, the Gribov-Zwanziger action $S_{\mathrm{GZ}}$ is expressed as
\begin{equation}
S_{\mathrm{GZ}}=S_{\mathrm{FP}}-\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\varphi}^{ac}_{\mu}\EuScript{M}^{ab}{\varphi}^{bc}_{\mu}-\bar{\omega}^{ac}_\mu\EuScript{M}^{ab}\omega^{bc}_\mu+gf^{adl}\bar{\omega}^{ac}_\mu\partial_\nu\left(\varphi^{lc}_\mu D^{de}_\nu c^e\right)\right)+\gamma^{2}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~gf^{abc}A^{a}_{\mu}(\varphi+\bar{\varphi})^{bc}_\mu\,,
\label{ov9}
\end{equation}
and eq.\eqref{ov6} takes the form
\begin{equation}
\EuScript{Z}=\int \left[\EuScript{D}\mu_{\mathrm{GZ}}\right]\mathrm{e}^{-S_{\mathrm{GZ}}+dV\gamma^4(N^2-1)}\,,
\label{ov10}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\left[\EuScript{D}\mu_{\mathrm{GZ}}\right]=\left[\EuScript{D}A\right] \left[\EuScript{D}c\right] \left[\EuScript{D}\bar{c}\right]\left[\EuScript{D}b\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\varphi\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\bar{\varphi}\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\omega\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\bar{\omega}\right]\,.
\label{ov11}
\end{equation}
Remarkably, the action $S_{\mathrm{GZ}}$ is local and renormalizable to all orders in perturbation theory \cite{Zwanziger:1989mf}. Hence, the Gribov-Zwanziger action is an effective framework which implements the restriction of the domain of integration in the path integral to the Gribov region $\Omega$ in a renormalizable and local way.
The Gribov-Zwanziger action has many interesting and non-trivial properties. For our present purposes, we focus on a few of them. First, the gluon propagator computed out of \eqref{ov9} is suppressed in the deep infrared regime and attains a vanishing value at zero-momentum, a result which is at odds with the divergent perturbative behavior. This propagator is said to be of the scaling type. Also, it violates reflection positivity and, therefore, gluons cannot be interpreted as excitations of the physical spectrum, being thus confined. The ghost propagator, however, is enhanced in the strong coupling regime, diverging as $1/k^4$ for $k\approx 0$. Another property of the Gribov-Zwanziger action \eqref{ov9} is that it breaks the BRST symmetry, given by the following transformations,
\begin{align}
sA^{a}_{\mu}&=-D^{ab}_{\mu}c^b\,, &&sc^a=\frac{g}{2}f^{abc}c^bc^c\,, \nonumber\\
s\bar{c}^a&=b^{a}\,, &&sb^{a}=0\,, \nonumber\\
s\varphi^{ab}_{\mu}&=\omega^{ab}_{\mu}\,, &&s\omega^{ab}_{\mu}=0\,, \nonumber\\
s\bar{\omega}^{ab}_{\mu}&=\bar{\varphi}^{ab}_{\mu}\,, &&s\bar{\varphi}^{ab}_{\mu}=0\,.
\label{ov12}
\end{align}
in an explicit way, namely
\begin{equation}
sS_{\mathrm{GZ}}=\gamma^{2}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~gf^{abc}\left(-D^{ad}_{\mu}c^{d}(\varphi+\bar{\varphi})^{bc}_\mu+A^{a}_{\mu}\omega^{bc}_{\mu}\right)\,.
\label{ov13}
\end{equation}
Being proportional to $\gamma^2$, the BRST breaking is a soft breaking. It becomes relevant in the non-perturbative infrared region. Though, it does not affect the deep ultraviolet region, so that the perturbative results are recovered.
More recently, it has been realized that the localizing fields $(\varphi,\bar{\varphi},\omega,\bar{\omega})$ develop their own dynamics and non-trivial additional effects are generated. In particular, it has been shown that dimension-two condensates, $\langle A^{a}_{\mu}A^{a}_{\mu}\rangle$ and $\langle\bar{\varphi}^{ab}_{\mu}\varphi^{ab}_{\mu}-\bar{\omega}^{ab}_{\mu}\omega^{ab}_{\mu}\rangle$, are dynamically generated \cite{Dudal:2007cw,Dudal:2008sp,Dudal:2011gd,Gracey:2010cg}, {\it i.e.}
\begin{equation}
\langle A^{a}_{\mu}A^{a}_{\mu}\rangle \propto \gamma^2\;, \,\,\,\, \,\,\,\,\,\,\langle\bar{\varphi}^{ab}_{\mu}\varphi^{ab}_{\mu}-\bar{\omega}^{ab}_{\mu}\omega^{ab}_{\mu}\rangle\propto \gamma^2\,.
\label{ov14}
\end{equation}
Taking into account the existence of such dimension-two condensates from the beginning, gives rise to the so-called Refined Gribov-Zwanziger action, which is expressed as
\begin{equation}
S_{\mathrm{RGZ}}=S_{\mathrm{GZ}}+\frac{m^2}{2}\int{\textrm{d}}^dx~A^{a}_{\mu}A^{a}_{\mu}-M^2\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\varphi}^{ab}_{\mu}\varphi^{ab}_{\mu}-\bar{\omega}^{ab}_{\mu}\omega^{ab}_{\mu}\right)\,,
\label{ov15}
\end{equation}
where, much alike the Gribov parameter $\gamma^2$, the massive parameters $(m^2,M^2)$ are not independent, being determined by suitable gap equations obtained through the evaluation of the effective potential for the condensates $\langle A^{a}_{\mu}A^{a}_{\mu}\rangle$ and $\langle\bar{\varphi}^{ab}_{\mu}\varphi^{ab}_{\mu}-\bar{\omega}^{ab}_{\mu}\omega^{ab}_{\mu}\rangle$, see \cite{Dudal:2011gd}.
The addition of the dimension-two operators, $A^{a}_{\mu}A^{a}_{\mu}$ and $(\bar{\varphi}^{ab}_{\mu}\varphi^{ab}_{\mu}-\bar{\omega}^{ab}_{\mu}\omega^{ab}_{\mu})$, does not spoil the renormalizability of the refined action \eqref{ov15}. Notably, taking into account these additional non-perturbative effects, changes the gluon and ghost propagators. For instance, the gluon propagator displays now a decoupling/massive behavior, exhibiting a finite non-vanishing value at zero-momentum, while being still suppressed in the deep infrared sector. The ghost propagator, however, is not enhanced anymore in the strong coupling and, for $k\approx 0$, it behaves as $1/k^2$. Such behavior of the gluon and ghost propagator is in very good agreement with the most recent lattice simulations in the Landau gauge, see \cite{Cucchieri:2007rg,Cucchieri:2008fc,Maas:2008ri,Cucchieri:2011ig,Oliveira:2012eh,Duarte:2016iko}.
An interesting property of the refinement of the Gribov-Zwanziger action is that its occurrence depends on the space-time dimension $d$. In particular, for $d=3,4$, the formation of dimension-two condensates is dynamically favoured and the Gribov-Zwanziger action is naturally refined \cite{Dudal:2008sp,Dudal:2008rm}. Nevertheless, in $d=2$, infrared singularities prevent the introduction of such operators and the refinement does not take place. In particular, this implies that, for $d=3,4$, the gluon propagator is of decoupling type, while in $d=2$, it is of scaling type \cite{Dudal:2008xd}. Remarkably, this phenomenon was observed by recent lattice numerical simulationsn \cite{Cucchieri:2009zt,Dudal:2012hb}. It is worth mentioning that, considering the Gribov-Zwanziger action as an effective action with an energy scale ultraviolet cutoff, it is possible to show that, at the strong coupling, the refinement is also favored in $d>4$, \cite{Guimaraes:2016okb}.
For completeness, we display the form of the tree-level gluon propagator in\footnote{Due to the different values of $d$, one should keep in mind the different meanings of the space-time indices and mass dimensions.} $d=3,4$
\begin{equation}
\langle A^a_\mu(k) A^b_\nu(-k) \rangle_{d=3,4} = \delta^{ab} \frac{k^2 + M^2}{(k^2+m^2)(k^2+M^2) + 2g^2N \gamma^4} \left( \delta_{\mu\nu} - \frac{k_\mu k_\nu}{k^2} \right)\,,
\label{ov16}
\end{equation}
and in $d=2$,
\begin{equation}
\langle A^a_\mu(k) A^b_\nu(-k) \rangle_{d=2} = \delta^{ab} \frac{k^2 }{k^4 + 2g^2N \gamma^4} \left( \delta_{\mu\nu} - \frac{k_\mu k_\nu}{k^2} \right)\,.
\label{ov17}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Going beyond the Landau gauge and the non-perturbative BRST symmetry: linear covariant gauges} \label{beyondLandau}
Although not peculiar to the Landau gauge, Gribov copies are very difficult to be handled when one chooses a different gauge condition. The main reason is that in the Landau gauge, the transversality of the gauge field ensures that the Faddeev-Popov operator $\EuScript{M}^{ab}$ is Hermitean. As such, this operator has a real spectrum which meaningfully allows for a definition of a Gribov region $\Omega$, where it is positive. Nevertheless, in general, the Faddeev-Popov operator is not Hermitean. The lack of such a property hinders a direct and clear definition of what would be the Gribov region in gauges different from the Landau gauge. There are two notable examples of gauge choices which also possess a Hermitean Faddeev-Popov operator: the maximal Abelian and Coulomb gauges. For such gauges, an explicit construction of the Gribov-Zwanziger action and its refinement was performed, see \cite{Dudal:2006ib,Capri:2006cz,Capri:2008ak,Capri:2008vk,Capri:2010an,Gongyo:2013rua,Capri:2015pfa,Grotowski:1999ay,Zwanziger:2006sc,Burgio:2008jr,Reinhardt:2008pr,Golterman:2012dx,Guimaraes:2015bra,Burgio:2016nad}. Despite of this fact, these gauges have their own peculiarities and the development of the Refined Gribov-Zwanziger scenario for them is not at the same level as in the Landau gauge.
A natural extension of the Landau gauge, which preserves Lorentz and color covariance, is given by the so-called linear covariant gauges, whose corresponding gauge condition is written as
\begin{equation}
\partial_{\mu}A^{a}_{\mu}=\alpha b^a\,,
\label{npbrst1}
\end{equation}
with $\alpha$ a non-negative gauge parameter and $b^a$ being, at this level, a given function. Clearly, if one sets $\alpha=0$, the Landau gauge is recovered. Infinitesimal Gribov copies in these gauges are characterized by the zero-modes equation,
\begin{equation}
\EuScript{M}^{ab}_{\mathrm{LCG}}(A)\xi^b=-\delta^{ab}\partial^2\xi^b+gf^{abc}A^{c}_{\mu}\partial_{\mu}\xi^b+gf^{abc}(\partial_{\mu}A^{c}_{\mu})\xi^b = 0\,,
\label{npbrst2}
\end{equation}
where, in contrast to Landau gauge, $\partial_{\mu}A^{a}_{\mu}\neq0$ in general. It is precisely the fact that the gauge field is not purely transverse in these gauges that spoils the Hermiticity of $\EuScript{M}^{ab}_{\mathrm{LCG}}$.
The lack of Hermiticity makes the definition of the analogue of the Gribov region in linear covariant gauges very difficult. The first strategy to circumvent this technical difficulty was to take $\alpha$ as an infinitesimal parameter \cite{Sobreiro:2005vn}, namely, the linear covariant gauge is taken as a small perturbation of the Landau gauge. As a consequence, it was proven in \cite{Sobreiro:2005vn} that, in this situation, one can restrict the transverse component of the gauge field $A^{T,a}_{\mu}=(\delta_{\mu\nu}-\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}/\partial^2)A^{a}_{\nu}$ to the Gribov region $\Omega$ in the domain of integration in the path integral and \textit{all} infinitesimal Gribov copies are removed. In \cite{Capri:2015pja}, it was pointed out that the same strategy works for finite values of $\alpha$ with the exception of pathological infinitesimal Gribov copies, corresponding to zero modes which are not smooth functions of the gauge parameter $\alpha$. Hence, modulo a certain subclass of pathological copies, the restriction of the domain of integration in the path integral to the region where the transverse component belongs to $\Omega$ removes the infinitesimal Gribov copies. The resulting action was expressed in local form \cite{Capri:2015pja} and its renormalizability proof to all orders in perturbation theory was achieved in \cite{Capri:2016aif}. We also refer to \cite{Moshin:2015gsa}.
Nevertheless, the presence of the gauge parameter $\alpha$ allows for an explicit check of the gauge independence of correlation functions of gauge invariant operators. In standard perturbation theory, this is controlled by the BRST symmetry. However, the soft breaking of the BRST symmetry in the (refined) Gribov-Zwanziger setup gives rise to non-trivial complications for such a task. Nevertheless, recently, in \cite{Capri:2015ixa}, a reformulation of the Gribov-Zwanziger action in the Landau gauge in terms of a transverse and gauge invariant field\footnote{We refer to Appendix~A of \cite{Capri:2015ixa} for the construction of the gauge invariant field $A^{h,a}_{\mu}$.}, see \cite{Zwanziger:1990tn,Lavelle:1995ty,Lavelle:2011yc}, $A^{h,a}_{\mu}$, with $\partial_{\mu}A^{h,a}_{\mu}=0$, and its generalization to linear covariant gauges was proposed. In this new formulation, the Gribov-Zwanziger enjoys an exact nilpotent BRST symmetry, which is a direct consequence of the gauge invariance of $A^{h,a}_\mu$ and which enables us to establish the independence from the parameter $\alpha$ of the gauge invariant correlation functions, and this even in the presence of the Gribov horizon.
As shown in Appendix~A of \cite{Capri:2015ixa}, the gauge invariant field\footnote{We write it in the matrix notation $A^{h}_{\mu}=A^{h,a}_{\mu}T^a$, with $T^a$ the generators of $SU(N)$.} $A^{h}_{\mu}$ is expressed as an infinite series in powers of $A_\mu$, namely
\begin{equation}
A^{h}_{\mu}=\left(\delta_{\mu\nu}-\frac{\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}}{\partial^2}\right)\left(A_{\nu}-ig\left[\frac{1}{\partial^2}\partial A,A_\nu\right]+\frac{ig}{2}\left[\frac{1}{\partial^2}\partial A,\partial_{\nu}\frac{1}{\partial^2}\partial A\right]+\mathcal{O}(A^3)\right)\,,
\label{npbrst3}
\end{equation}
which, albeit transverse and gauge invariant, is a non-local expression. Upon a suitable redefinition of the field $b^a$, $b^a \rightarrow b^{h,a}$ \cite{Capri:2015ixa}, with the introduction of the gauge invariant field $A^{h,a}_{\mu}$, the resulting Gribov-Zwanziger action in linear covariant gauges is written as \cite{Capri:2015ixa}
\begin{equation}
\tilde{S}^{\mathrm{LCG}}_{\mathrm{GZ}}=S_{\mathrm{YM}}+\int{\textrm{d}}^dx\left(b^{h,a}\partial_{\mu}A^{a}_{\mu}-\frac{\alpha}{2}b^{h,a}b^{h,a}+\bar{c}^{a}\partial_{\mu}D^{ab}_{\mu}(A)c^{b}\right)+\gamma^4H(A^h)\,,
\label{npbrst4}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
H(A^h)=g^2\int {\textrm{d}}^dx{\textrm{d}}^dy~f^{abc}A^{h,b}_{\mu}(x)\left[\EuScript{M}^{-1}(A^h)\right]^{ad}(x,y)f^{dec}A^{h,e}_{\mu}(y)\,,
\label{npbrst5}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\EuScript{M}^{ab}(A^h)=-\delta^{ab}\partial^2+gf^{abc}A^{h,c}_{\mu}\partial_{\mu}\,,\,\,\,\,\mathrm{with}\,\,\,\,\,\partial_{\mu}A^{h,a}_{\mu}=0\,.
\label{npbrst6}
\end{equation}
Before proceeding, one should note that the horizon function $H(A^h)$ has now two sources of non-localities: the first one is related to the inverse of the operator $\EuScript{M}(A^h)$, which is similar to the non-locality of the horizon function in the Landau gauge, see eq.\eqref{ov7}. The second source of non-locality is associated with the field $A^{h}_{\mu}$ itself, see eq.\eqref{npbrst3}. In order to localize the first type of non-locality present in \eqref{npbrst5}, one proceeds as in the Landau gauge and introduces the set of auxiliary fields $(\bar{\varphi},\varphi,\bar{\omega},\omega)^{ab}_{\mu}$, which gives rise to the following action\footnote{We omit the vacuum term $-dV\gamma^{4}(N^2-1)$.}
\begin{eqnarray}
S^{\mathrm{LCG}}_{\mathrm{GZ}}&=& S_{\mathrm{YM}} + \int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(b^{h,a}\left(\partial_{\mu}A^{a}_{\mu}-\frac{\alpha}{2}b^{h,a}\right)+\bar{c}^{a}\partial_{\mu}D^{ab}_{\mu}c^{b}\right)\nonumber\\
&+&\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\varphi}^{ac}_{\mu}\left[\EuScript{M}(A^h)\right]^{ab}\varphi^{bc}_{\mu}-\bar{\omega}^{ac}_{\mu}\left[\EuScript{M}(A^h)\right]^{ab}\omega^{bc}_{\mu}+g\gamma^2f^{abc}A^{h,a}_{\mu}(\varphi+\bar{\varphi})^{bc}_{\mu}\right)\,.
\label{npbrst7}
\end{eqnarray}
Some properties of \eqref{npbrst7} are listed: \textit{i)} The action $S^{\mathrm{LCG}}_{\mathrm{GZ}}$ is non-local due to the presence of the field $A^h_{\mu}$; \textit{ii)} In the limit $\alpha\rightarrow 0$, {\it i.e.} $\partial_\mu A^a_\mu=0$, one has that $A^h_{\mu}\rightarrow A^{T}_{\mu}$ and the action \eqref{npbrst8} is equivalent to \eqref{ov9}, the Gribov-Zwanziger action in the Landau gauge; \textit{iii)} The action \eqref{npbrst7} enjoys an exact nilpotent BRST symmetry defined by the following transformations,
\begin{align}
sA^{a}_{\mu}&=-D^{ab}_{\mu}c^b\,, &&sc^a=\frac{g}{2}f^{abc}c^bc^c\,, \nonumber\\
s\bar{c}^a&=b^{h,a}\,, &&sb^{h,a}=0\,, \nonumber\\
s\varphi^{ab}_{\mu}&=0\,, &&s\omega^{ab}_{\mu}=0\,, \nonumber\\
s\bar{\omega}^{ab}_{\mu}&=0\,, &&s\bar{\varphi}^{ab}_{\mu}=0\,,\nonumber \\
sA^{h,a}_\mu &=0\,,
\label{npbrst8}
\end{align}
with
\begin{equation}
s S^{\mathrm{LCG}}_{\mathrm{GZ}} = 0 \;. \label{exact_brst}
\end{equation}
Up to now, we have presented a BRST invariant non-local action, eq.\eqref{npbrst7}, which restricts the domain of integration in the path integral to a region free from a large set of Gribov copies. Moreover, as reported in \cite{Capri:2016aqq}, this action can be fully localized by means of the introduction of additional auxiliary fields. In particular, the localization procedure worked out in \cite{Capri:2016aqq} relies on the introduction of an auxiliary Stueckelberg-type field $\xi^a$, namely
\begin{equation}
h=\mathrm{e}^{ig\xi^a T^a}\equiv \mathrm{e}^{ig\xi}.
\label{npbrst11}
\end{equation}
The field $A^h_{\mu}=A^{h,a}_{\mu}T^{a}$ is expressed in terms of the local field $\xi^a$ as
\begin{equation}
A^{h}_{\mu}=h^{\dagger}A_{\mu}h+\frac{i}{g}h^{\dagger}\partial_{\mu}h\,.
\label{npbrst12}
\end{equation}
An important feature of $A^h$, as defined by \eqref{npbrst12}, is that it is gauge invariant, that is
\begin{equation}
A^{h}_{\mu} \rightarrow A^{h}_{\mu} \;,
\end{equation}
as can be explicitly seen through a gauge transformation parametrized by the $SU(N)$ matrix $V$
\begin{equation}
A_\mu \rightarrow V^{\dagger} A_\mu V + \frac{i}{g} V^{\dagger} \partial_ \mu V
\;, \qquad h \rightarrow V^{\dagger} h \;, \qquad h^{\dagger} \rightarrow h^{\dagger} V \;.
\end{equation}
Although non-polynomial, the field $A^{h}_\mu$ \eqref{npbrst12} is now a local field and can be expanded in terms of $\xi^a$, yielding
\begin{equation}
(A^{h})^{a}_{\mu}=A^{a}_{\mu}-D^{ab}_{\mu}\xi^{b}-\frac{g}{2}f^{abc}\xi^{b}D^{cd}_{\mu}\xi^{d}+\mathcal{O}(\xi^{3})\,.
\end{equation}
Also, we must impose that the local field $A^{h}_{\mu}$, eq.\eqref{npbrst12}, is transverse, namely, $\partial_{\mu}A^{h}_{\mu}=0$. Solving the transversality condition for the local field $\xi^a$ field, we obtain back the non-local expression for $A^{h}_{\mu}$ of eq.\eqref{npbrst3}, see Appendix~A of \cite{Capri:2015ixa}. Therefore, besides introducing the field $\xi^a$, we should enforce the transversality of $A^h_\mu$ by means of a Lagrange multiplier $\tau^a$, a task which can be accomplished by introducing in the action the term
\begin{equation}
S_\tau = \int {\textrm{d}}^dx~\tau^a\partial_\mu (A^{h}_{\mu})^a\,.
\label{npbrst13}
\end{equation}
We are now ready to write down the local and non-perturbative BRST invariant Gribov-Zwanziger action in the linear covariant gauges, \textit{i.e.}
\begin{eqnarray}
S^{\mathrm{loc}}_{\mathrm{GZ}}&=& S_{\mathrm{YM}}+\int{\textrm{d}}^dx\left(b^a\partial_{\mu}A^{a}_{\mu}-\frac{\alpha}{2}b^a b^a+\bar{c}^a\partial_{\mu}D^{ab}_{\mu}(A)c^b\right)+\int{\textrm{d}}^dx~\tau^a\partial_\mu (A^{h}_{\mu})^a\nonumber\\
&-&\int{\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\varphi}^{ac}_{\mu}\left[\EuScript{M}(A^h)\right]^{ab}\varphi^{bc}_{\mu}-\bar{\omega}^{ac}_{\mu}\left[\EuScript{M}(A^h)\right]^{ab}\omega^{bc}_{\mu}+g\gamma^2 f^{abc}(A^{h}_{\mu})^a(\bar{\varphi}+\varphi)^{bc}_{\mu}\right)\,.
\label{npbrst14}
\end{eqnarray}
The local action turns out to be renormalizable to all orders in perturbation theory \cite{Capri:2017}, while implementing the restriction of the domain of integration in the path integral to a region free from a large set of Gribov copies in the linear covariant gauges in a BRST-invariant way. Such a feature allows for a well-defined Slavnov-Taylor identity, through which the gauge parameter independence of gauge-invariant correlation functions can be established. An extensive analysis of these properties was carried out in \cite{Capri:2016aqq} and \cite{Capri:2016gut}.
As discussed in Subsect.~\ref{gribovlandau}, the action \eqref{npbrst14} needs to be further refined, due to the dynamical formation of dimension two condensates. This fact was exploited in \cite{Capri:2015nzw} where it was verified that, as in the Landau gauge, the refinement of the Gribov-Zwanziger action occurs in $d=3,4$, while in $d=2$ it is forbidden due to the presence of infrared singularities which prevent the formation of the dimension two condensates. Hence, in $d=3,4$, the action \eqref{npbrst14} is replaced by its refined version
\begin{equation}
S^{\mathrm{loc}}_{\mathrm{GZ}} \,\, \longrightarrow \,\, S^{\mathrm{loc}}_{\mathrm{RGZ}} = S^{\mathrm{loc}}_{\mathrm{GZ}} + \frac{m^2}{2}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~(A^{h}_\mu)^a(A^{h}_\mu)^a - M^2\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\varphi}^{ab}_{\mu}\varphi^{ab}_{\mu}-\bar{\omega}^{ab}_{\mu}{\omega}^{ab}_{\mu}\right)\,.
\label{npbrst15}
\end{equation}
The tree-level gluon propagator computed out of \eqref{npbrst15} is given by
\begin{equation}
\langle A^{a}_{\mu}(k)A^{b}_{\nu}(-k)\rangle_{d=3,4}=\delta^{ab}\left[\frac{k^2+M^2}{(k^2+m^2)(k^2+M^2)+2g^2\gamma^4N}\left(\delta_{\mu\nu}-\frac{k_{\mu}k_{\nu}}{k^2}\right)+\frac{\alpha}{k^2}\frac{k_{\mu}k_{\nu}}{k^2}\right]\,,
\label{npbrst16}
\end{equation}
being in very good agreement with the most recent lattice data \cite{Cucchieri:2009kk,Cucchieri:2011pp,Bicudo:2015rma}. Although the transverse part of the propagator might acquire loop corrections, the longitudinal sector is exact to all orders, a consequence of the BRST symmetry. It is worth mentioning that this propagator has a decoupling/massive behavior in $d=3,4$, while in $d=2$ it is of scaling type due to the absence of refinement, see \cite{Capri:2015nzw}. For completeness, the local Refined Gribov-Zwanziger action, eq.\eqref{npbrst15}, is invariant under the nilpotent BRST transformations
\begin{align}
sA^{a}_{\mu}&=-D^{ab}_{\mu}c^b\,, &&sc^a=\frac{g}{2}f^{abc}c^bc^c\,, \nonumber\\
s\bar{c}^a&=b^{h,a}\,, &&sb^{h,a}=0\,, \nonumber\\
s\varphi^{ab}_{\mu}&=0\,, &&s\omega^{ab}_{\mu}=0\,, \nonumber\\
s\bar{\omega}^{ab}_{\mu}&=0\,, &&s\bar{\varphi}^{ab}_{\mu}=0\,,\nonumber \\
s h^{ij}& = -ig c^a (T^a)^{ik} h^{kj} \;, && sA^{h,a}_\mu =0\,, \nonumber \\
s\tau^a& =0\,, && s^2=0 \,,
\label{npbrst16a}
\end{align}
from which the BRST transformation of the field $\xi^a$, eq.\eqref{npbrst11}, can be evaluated iteratively, giving
\begin{equation}
s \xi^a= - c^a + \frac{g}{2} f^{abc}c^b \xi^c - \frac{g^2}{12} f^{amr} f^{mpq} c^p \xi^q \xi^r + O(g^3) \;.
\label{eqsxi}
\end{equation}
It is instructive to check here explicitly the BRST invariance of $A^h$. For this, it is better to employ a
matrix notation for the fields, namely
\begin{eqnarray}
sA_\mu &=& -\partial_\mu c + ig [A_\mu, c] \;, \qquad s c = -ig c c \;, \nonumber \\
s h & =& -igch \;, \qquad sh^{\dagger} = ig h^{\dagger} c \;, \label{mbrst}
\end{eqnarray}
with $A_\mu = A^a_\mu T^a$, $c=c^a T^a$, $\xi=\xi^a T^a$. From expression \eqref{npbrst12} we get
\begin{eqnarray}
s A^h_\mu & = & ig h^{\dagger} c \;A_\mu h + h^{\dagger} (-\partial_\mu c + ig [A_\mu, c]) h -ig h^{\dagger} A_\mu \;c h - h^{\dagger} c \partial_\mu h + h^{\dagger} \partial_\mu(c h) \nonumber \\
&=& igh^{\dagger} c A_\mu h - h^{\dagger} (\partial_\mu c ) h +ig h^{\dagger} A_\mu \;c h - ig h^{\dagger} c \;A_\mu h -ig h^{\dagger} A_\mu c h - h^{\dagger} c \partial_\mu h + h^{\dagger} (\partial_\mu c) h + h^{\dagger} c \partial_\mu h \nonumber \\
&=& 0 \;. \label{sah}
\end{eqnarray}
Finally, we have
\begin{equation}
s S^{\mathrm{loc}}_{\mathrm{RGZ}} = 0 \;. \label{exr}
\end{equation}
It is important to emphasize that, in the action \eqref{npbrst15}, the massive parameters $(\gamma,m,M)$ are coupled to BRST invariant expressions which are easily verified to be not BRST exact, {\it i.e.} cannot be expressed as pure $s$-variations. This fact ensures that these parameters are not akin to gauge parameters, having a physical meaning. As such, they will be present in the gauge-invariant correlation functions. Also, they are not free, being determined by their own gap equations as discussed in \cite{Dudal:2008sp,Dudal:2011gd}.
\subsection{Curci-Ferrari gauge} \label{CFgauge}
In \cite{Pereira:2016fpn}, it was argued that the Gribov problem in the Curci-Ferrari gauge is intimately related to the existence of copies in the linear covariant gauges. By a suitable shift of the $b$-field, it was shown that the copies equation is the same in both gauges. As such, the issue of the Gribov copies can be handled in the same way and the implementation of the restriction of the domain of integration in the path integral is obtained by the introduction of the same horizon function \eqref{npbrst5}. As discussed in \cite{Pereira:2016fpn}, the Gribov-Zwanziger action in the Curci-Ferrari gauge is
\begin{eqnarray}
S^{\mathrm{CF}}_{\mathrm{GZ}}&=& S_{\mathrm{YM}}+\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left[b^{h,a}\partial_{\mu}A^{a}_{\mu}+\bar{c}^{a}\partial_{\mu}D^{ab}_{\mu}c^{b}-\frac{\alpha}{2}b^{h,a}b^{h,a}+\frac{\alpha}{2}gf^{abc}b^{h,a}\bar{c}^{b}c^{c}
+\frac{\alpha}{8}g^{2}f^{abc}f^{cde}\bar{c}^{a}\bar{c}^{b}c^{d}c^{e}\right] \nonumber\\
&+&\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\varphi}^{ac}_{\mu}\left[\EuScript{M}(A^h)\right]^{ab}\varphi^{bc}_{\mu}-\bar{\omega}^{ac}_{\mu}\left[\EuScript{M}(A^h)\right]^{ab}\omega^{bc}_{\mu}+g\gamma^2f^{abc}A^{h,a}_{\mu}(\varphi+\bar{\varphi})^{bc}_{\mu}\right)+\int{\textrm{d}}^dx~\tau^a\partial_\mu (A^{h}_{\mu})^a\,.
\label{npbrst17}
\end{eqnarray}
As in the case of the linear covariant gauges, this theory suffers from non-perturbative instabilities which give rise to the dynamical formation of condensates in $d=3,4$. Therefore, expression \eqref{npbrst17} is refined by the inclusion of the same operators as in eq.\eqref{npbrst15} \textit{i.e.}
\begin{equation}
S^{\mathrm{CF}}_{\mathrm{GZ}} \,\, \longrightarrow \,\, S^{\mathrm{CF}}_{\mathrm{RGZ}} = S^{\mathrm{CF}}_{\mathrm{GZ}} + \frac{m^2}{2}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~(A^{h}_\mu)^a(A^{h}_\mu)^a - M^2\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\varphi}^{ab}_{\mu}\varphi^{ab}_{\mu}-\bar{\omega}^{ab}_{\mu}{\omega}^{ab}_{\mu}\right)\,.
\label{npbrst18}
\end{equation}
This action is invariant under the BRST transformations of eq.\eqref{npbrst16a}. The resulting tree-level gluon propagator coincides with that given in expression \eqref{npbrst16}. Nevertheless, since the Curci-Ferrari gauge is non-linear\footnote{The non-linearity of the Curci-Ferrari gauge can be appreciated through the fact that, upon elimination of the Lagrange multiplier field $b^a$, a quartic ghost interaction term shows up.}, it does not enjoy the same set of Ward identities as the linear covariant gauges. A particular consequence of this fact is that, unlike the case of the linear covariant gauge, the longitudinal part of the propagator is now affected by quantum corrections.
\subsection{Maximal Abelian gauge (MAG)}
In order to construct the BRST-invariant (Refined) Gribov-Zwanziger action in the MAG, let us first set our conventions for this gauge. To avoid unnecessary complications, we restrict ourselves to the case of the gauge group $SU(2)$. In this case, the gauge field $A_\mu=A^a_\mu T^a$ can be decomposed into diagonal and off-diagonal components, as
\begin{equation}
A_\mu = A^{a}_\mu T^a = A^{\alpha}_\mu T^\alpha + A^3_{\mu}T^3\,,
\label{mag1}
\end{equation}
with $\alpha=\left\{1,2\right\}$ denoting the indices corresponding to the off-diagonal components. The diagonal generator $T^3\equiv T$ belongs to the Cartan subalgebra of $SU(2)$. Therefore, the following commutation relations hold:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left[T^a,T^b\right]&=&i\epsilon^{abc}T^c\,,\nonumber\\
\left[T^\alpha,T^\beta\right]&=&i\epsilon^{\alpha\beta 3}T^3\equiv i\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}T\,,\nonumber\\
\left[T^\alpha,T\right]&=&-i\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}T^\beta\,,\nonumber\\
\left[T,T\right]&=&0\,,
\label{mag2}
\end{eqnarray}
with $\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}= \epsilon^{\alpha\beta 3}$ being the totally antisymmetric symbol. The explicit decomposition of the field strength $F^a_{\mu\nu}$ yields
\begin{eqnarray}
F^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} &=& \mathcal{D}^{\alpha\beta}_\mu A^{\beta}_\nu-\mathcal{D}^{\alpha\beta}_\nu A^{\beta}_\mu\,,\nonumber\\
F_{\mu\nu} &=& \partial_\mu A_\nu - \partial_\nu A_\mu + g\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}A^{\alpha}_\mu A^{\beta}_\nu\,,
\label{mag3}
\end{eqnarray}
with $\mathcal{D}^{\alpha\beta}_\mu$ being the covariant derivative defined with respect to the Abelian component $A_\mu=A_\mu^3$, namely
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{D}^{\alpha\beta}_\mu=\delta^{\alpha\beta}\partial_\mu-g\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}A_{\mu}\,.
\label{mag4}
\end{equation}
By means of eq.\eqref{mag3}, we can express the Yang-Mills action as
\begin{equation}
S_{\mathrm{YM}}=\frac{1}{4}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(F^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu}F^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu}+F_{\mu\nu}F_{\mu\nu}\right)\,,
\label{mag5}
\end{equation}
which is left invariant under the following infinitesimal gauge transformations,
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta A^{\alpha}_\mu &=& -\mathcal{D}^{\alpha\beta}_\mu \xi^\beta - g\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}A^{\beta}_{\mu}\xi\,,\nonumber\\
\delta A_\mu &=& -\partial_\mu \xi - g\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}A^{\alpha}_\mu \xi^\beta\,.
\label{mag6}
\end{eqnarray}
The MAG is defined by the gauge conditions,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{D}^{\alpha\beta}_\mu A^{\beta}_{\mu} &=& 0\,,\nonumber\\
\partial_\mu A_\mu &=& 0\,,
\label{mag7}
\end{eqnarray}
giving rise to the following Faddeev-Popov operator $\mathcal{M}^{\alpha\beta}(A)$:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}^{\alpha\beta}(A) = - \mathcal{D}^{\alpha \delta}_\mu \mathcal{D}^{\delta \beta}_\mu - g^2\epsilon^{\alpha\delta}\epsilon^{\beta\sigma}A^{\delta}_\mu A^{\sigma}_{\mu}\,.
\label{mag8}
\end{equation}
The gauge fixed Yang-Mills action in the MAG is written as
\begin{equation}
S^{\mathrm{FP}}_{\mathrm{MAG}} = S_{\mathrm{YM}}+\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(b^\alpha \mathcal{D}^{\alpha\beta}_\mu A^\beta_\mu - \bar{c}^{\alpha}\mathcal{M}^{\alpha\beta}(A)c^\beta + g\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}\bar{c}^{\alpha}(\mathcal{D}^{\alpha\delta}_{\mu}A^{\delta}_{\mu})c+b\partial_\mu A_\mu +\bar{c}\partial_\mu (\partial_\mu c + g\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}A^\alpha_\mu c^\beta)\right)\,.
\label{mag9}
\end{equation}
As discussed in \cite{Capri:2015pfa}, an analogous of the Gribov region $\Omega$ of the Landau gauge can be introduced in the MAG. More precisely, the Gribov region $\Omega_{\mathrm{MAG}}$ for the MAG is defined by
\begin{equation}
\Omega_{\mathrm{MAG}} = \left\{\,A^\alpha_\mu\,,\,A_\mu\,;\,\mathcal{D}^{\alpha\beta}_\mu A^{\beta}_\mu=0\,,\,\partial_\mu A_\mu=0\,\Big|\,\mathcal{M}^{\alpha\beta}(A^h)>0\,\right\}\,.
\label{mag9.1}
\end{equation}
As in the case of the Landau gauge, the restriction of the domain of integration in the path integral to the region $\Omega_{\mathrm{MAG}}$ can be achieved in a BRST-invariant way by the introduction of the following horizon function
\begin{equation}
H_{\mathrm{MAG}}(A^h)=g^2\int {\textrm{d}}^dx {\textrm{d}}^dy~ A^{h,3}_\mu (x) \epsilon^{\alpha\beta}\left[\mathcal{M}^{-1}(A^h)\right]^{\alpha\delta}(x,y)\epsilon^{\delta\beta}A^{h,3}_\mu (y)\,,
\label{mag10}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{M}^{\alpha\beta}(A^h)$ means
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}^{\alpha\beta}(A^h) = - \mathcal{D}^{\alpha \delta}_\mu (A^h) \mathcal{D}^{\delta \beta}_\mu (A^h) - g^2\epsilon^{\alpha\delta}\epsilon^{\beta\sigma}A^{h,\delta}_\mu A^{h,\sigma}_{\mu}\,,
\label{mag11}
\end{equation}
and $\mathcal{D}^{\alpha\beta}_\mu (A^h) = \delta^{\alpha\beta}\partial_\mu - g\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}A^{h,3}_\mu$. The Gribov-Zwanziger action in the MAG is thus given by
\begin{equation}
\tilde{S}^{\mathrm{MAG}}_{\mathrm{GZ}} = S^{\mathrm{FP}}_{\mathrm{MAG}} + \gamma^4 H_{\mathrm{MAG}}(A^h)\,.
\label{mag12}
\end{equation}
As before, expression \eqref{mag12} has two sort of non-localities encoded in the horizon function $H_{\mathrm{MAG}}(A^h)$. In complete analogy with the procedure described in Subsect.~\ref{beyondLandau}, it is possible to cast the action \eqref{mag12} in a local fashion. The resulting local action is expressed by
\begin{eqnarray}
S^{\mathrm{MAG}}_{\mathrm{GZ}} &=& S^{\mathrm{FP}}_{\mathrm{MAG}} - \int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\varphi}^{\alpha\delta}_{\mu}\mathcal{M}^{\alpha\beta}(A^h)\varphi^{\beta\delta}_\mu-\bar{\omega}^{\alpha\delta}_\mu\mathcal{M}^{\delta\beta}(A^h)\omega^{\delta\beta}_\mu-g\gamma^2\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}A^{h,3}_{\mu}(\varphi+\bar{\varphi})^{\alpha\beta}_{\mu}\right)\nonumber\\
&+& \int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\tau^\alpha\partial_\mu A^{h,\alpha}_\mu+\tau \partial_\mu A^{h,3}_\mu\right)\,.
\label{mag13}
\end{eqnarray}
This action is invariant under the following BRST tranformations,
\begin{align}
sA^{\alpha}_{\mu}&=-(\mathcal{D}^{\alpha\beta}_{\mu}c^\beta+g\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}A^{\beta}_{\mu}c)\,, &&sA_\mu=-(\partial_\mu c+g\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}A^{\alpha}_{\mu}c^{\beta})\,, \nonumber\\
sc^\alpha &=g\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}c^{\beta}c\,, &&sc=\frac{g}{2}\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}c^{\alpha}c^{\beta}\,, \nonumber\\
s\bar{c}^{\alpha}&=b^\alpha\,, &&s\bar{c}=b\,, \nonumber\\
s\bar{\omega}^{\alpha\beta}_{\mu}&=0\,, &&s\bar{\varphi}^{\alpha\beta}_{\mu}=0\,,\nonumber \\
s\omega^{\alpha\beta}_{\mu}&=0\,, &&s\varphi^{\alpha\beta}_\mu=0\,,\nonumber \\
s\tau^{\alpha} &=0\,, &&s\tau=0\,,\nonumber \\
sA^{h,\alpha}_\mu &=0\,, &&sA^{h,3}_\mu = 0\,,
\label{mag14}
\end{align}
with
\begin{equation}
s S^{\mathrm{MAG}}_{\mathrm{GZ}} = 0 \;. \label{exmag}
\end{equation}
As in the case of the gauges discussed before, the Gribov-Zwanziger action in the MAG also suffers from non-perturbative instabilities and dimension two condensates are dynamically generated in $d=3,4$, while, in $d=2$, their formation is invalidated by infrared singularities. Therefore, as in the case of the previous gauges, the Gribov-Zwanziger action in the MAG does not refine in $d=2$. We refer to \cite{Capri:2015pfa} for a detailed discussion of this feature. The Refined Gribov-Zwanziger action in $d=3,4$ in the MAG is written as
\begin{equation}
S^{\mathrm{MAG}}_{\mathrm{GZ}}\,\longrightarrow\,S^{\mathrm{MAG}}_{\mathrm{RGZ}}= S^{\mathrm{MAG}}_{\mathrm{GZ}} + \frac{m^2_{\mathrm{diag}}}{2}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~A^{h,3}_{\mu}A^{h,3}_{\mu}+ \frac{m^2_{\mathrm{off}}}{2}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~A^{h,\alpha}_{\mu}A^{h,\alpha}_{\mu}-M^2\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\varphi}^{\alpha\beta}_{\mu}\varphi^{\alpha\beta}_{\mu}-\bar{\omega}^{\alpha\beta}_{\mu}\omega^{\alpha\beta}_{\mu}\right)\,,
\label{mag15}
\end{equation}
where the mass parameters $(m^2_{\mathrm{diag}}, m^2_{\mathrm{off}}, M^2)$ reflect the existence of the dimension-two condensates $\langle A^{h,3}_{\mu}A^{h,3}_{\mu} \rangle$, $\langle A^{h,\alpha}_{\mu}A^{h,\alpha}_{\mu} \rangle$, $\langle \bar{\varphi}^{\alpha\beta}_{\mu}\varphi^{\alpha\beta}_{\mu}-\bar{\omega}^{\alpha\beta}_{\mu}\omega^{\alpha\beta}_{\mu} \rangle$.
The diagonal gluon propagator is given by
\begin{equation}
\langle A_\mu (k)A_\nu (-k)\rangle = \left(\delta_{\mu\nu}-\frac{k_\mu k_\nu}{k^2}\right)\frac{k^2+M^2}{k^4+(m^2_{\mathrm{diag}}+M^2)k^2+M^2 m^2_{\mathrm{diag}}+4g^2\gamma^4}\,,
\label{mag16}
\end{equation}
while the off-diagonal gluon propagator is
\begin{equation}
\langle A^{\alpha}_\mu (k) A^{\beta}_\nu (-k)\rangle = \left(\delta_{\mu\nu}-\frac{k_\mu k_\nu}{k^2}\right)\frac{\delta^{\alpha\beta}}{k^2+m^{2}_{\mathrm{off}}}\,.
\label{mag17}
\end{equation}
From expression \eqref{mag17}, we see that the off-diagonal gluon propagator displays a Yukawa type behavior. Lattice simulations give support to this result, see \cite{Bornyakov:2003ee,Mendes:2008ux,Gongyo:2012jb,Gongyo:2013sha}. Moreover, this behavior is in agreement with the Abelian dominance scenario \cite{Ezawa:1982bf}, where off-diagonal gluons should acquire a dynamical mass, reponsible for their decoupling at low energy. On the other hand, the diagonal gluon propagator \eqref{mag16} is of the refined Gribov type. As such, it is infrared suppressed and attains a non-vanishing value for $k=0$, in agreement with the lattice studies \cite{Bornyakov:2003ee,Mendes:2008ux,Gongyo:2012jb,Gongyo:2013sha}. The diagonal gluon propagator also displays reflection positivity violation, a feature which is interpreted as a signal of confinement. Again, this result is in agreement with the Abelian dominance scenario.
\section{Non-perturbative coupling of scalar fields in the adjoint representation} \label{noscalaradjoint}
In this section, we generalize the construction of \cite{Capri:2014bsa} to linear covariant, Curci-Ferrari and maximal Abelian gauges. To begin with, we consider scalar fields in the adjoint representation of\footnote{In the case of the MAG, we restrict ourselves to $SU(2)$ for simplicity.} $SU(N)$. The idea proposed in \cite{Capri:2014bsa} consists in the introduction of a term akin to the horizon function for the matter sector, which provides a non-perturbative coupling between matter fields and the gauge sector. Although for the gluon sector the horizon function has a clear geometrical meaning, implementing the restriction of the domain of integration in the path integral to the Gribov region, the introduction of an analogous term in the matter sector does not yet exhibit the same well defined geometric support. Nevertheless, recently, it was observed that such a non-perturbative coupling between matter and gauge fields could be motivated through the dimensional reduction of higher-dimensional Yang-Mills theory, see \cite{Guimaraes:2016okb}. More precisely, upon reduction of a five dimensional Yang-Mills to the four dimensional theory \cite{Guimaraes:2016okb}, a non-perturbative coupling between the scalar field corresponding to the fifth component of the gauge connection and the four dimensional gauge field shows up, being precisely of the type introduced in \cite{Capri:2014bsa}. As we shall see, this prescription gives rise to non-perturbative matter fields propagators which turn out to be in good agreement with lattice data, whenever available.
\subsection{Linear covariant and Curci-Ferrari gauges} \label{scalarLCGCF}
Let us consider the standard action of scalar fields in the adjoint representation of $SU(N)$, minimally coupled with the gauge sector, {\it i.e.}
\begin{equation}
S_{\mathrm{scalar}}=\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left[\frac{1}{2}(D^{ab}_\mu \phi^{b})(D^{ac}_\mu \phi^c)+\frac{m^2_\phi}{2}\phi^a \phi^a + \frac{\lambda}{4!}(\phi^a\phi^a)^2\right]\,.
\label{scalarlcg1}
\end{equation}
Of course, expression \eqref{scalarlcg1} is left invariant by BRST transformations \eqref{npbrst8}, with the scalar field $\phi^a$ transforming as
\begin{equation}
s \phi = ig [\phi, c] \;, \qquad \phi = \phi^a T^a \;,
\end{equation}
where $\{ T^a \}$ stand for the generators of $SU(N)$ in the adjoint representation.
Making use of the Stueckelberg field $\xi$, eq.\eqref{npbrst11}, a BRST invariant scalar field is constructed as follows \cite{Capri:2016aqq}:
\begin{equation}
\phi^h = h^{\dagger} \phi h \;, \qquad h=e^{ig\,\xi^{a}T^{a}} \;.
\end{equation}
To first order, we get
\begin{equation}
\phi^{h,a} = \phi^a + g f^{abc} \xi^b \phi^c + O(\xi^2) \;. \label{fophi}
\end{equation}
It is easy to verify that $\phi^h$ is left invariant by the BRST transformations, {\it i.e.}
\begin{equation}
s \phi^h = 0\,.
\end{equation}
The prescription introduced in \cite{Capri:2014bsa} amounts to introduce the following non-local BRST invariant term to the scalar action \eqref{scalarlcg1},
\begin{equation}
\EuScript{H}(\phi^h)=g^2\int {\textrm{d}}^dx {\textrm{d}}^dy~f^{abc}\phi^{h,b}(x)\left[\EuScript{M}^{-1}(A^h)\right]^{ad}(x,y)f^{dec}\phi^{h,e}(y)\,,
\label{scalarlcg2}
\end{equation}
where $\left( \EuScript{M}(A^h) \right)^{ad}$ stands for the Faddeev-Popov operator of eq.\eqref{npbrst6}.
It is almost immediate to realise that expression \eqref{scalarlcg2} shares great similarity with the horizon function of the gluon sector, eq.\eqref{npbrst5}. In fact, as already mentioned, expression \eqref{scalarlcg2} can be obtained through the dimensional reduction of higher-dimensional Yang-Mills theory \cite{Guimaraes:2016okb}.
The action of the scalar field with the addition of the non-perturbative coupling \eqref{scalarlcg2} is given by
\begin{equation}
S^{\phi} = \int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left[\frac{1}{2}(D^{ab}_\mu \phi^{b})(D^{ac}_\mu \phi^c)+\frac{m^2_\phi}{2}\phi^a \phi^a + \frac{\lambda}{4!}(\phi^a\phi^a)^2\right] + \sigma^4 \EuScript{H}(\phi^h)\,,
\label{scalarlcg4}
\end{equation}
where the massive parameter $\sigma$ plays the same role of the Gribov parameter $\gamma$. Again, due to the presence of the operator $\EuScript{M}^{-1}$ in expression \eqref{scalarlcg2}, the action \eqref{scalarlcg4} is non-local. Moreover, it turns out to be possible to cast the action $S^{\phi}$ in local form following the same procedure adopted in the previous sections for the localization of the Gribov-Zwanziger action. To that purpose, we introduce a set of auxiliary fields $(\bar{\eta},\eta, \bar{\theta},\theta)^{ab}$ akin to Zwanziger's localizing fields in such a way that
\begin{equation}
\sigma^4\EuScript{H}(\phi^{h})\,\longrightarrow\,-\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\eta}^{ac}\EuScript{M}^{ab}(A^h)\eta^{bc}-\bar{\theta}^{ac}\EuScript{M}^{ab}(A^h)\theta^{bc}-g\sigma^2f^{abc}\phi^{h,c}(\bar{\eta}+\eta)^{ab}\right)\,.
\label{scalarlcg5}
\end{equation}
The fields $(\bar{\eta},\eta)$ are commuting while $(\bar{\theta},\theta)$ are anti-commuting. Integrating out these fields in the functional integration gives back the non-local expression \eqref{scalarlcg2}.
Therefore, the local scalar field action non-perturbatively coupled to the gauge sector is expressed by
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{S}^{\phi}_{\mathrm{loc}} &=& \int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left[\frac{1}{2}(D^{ab}_\mu \phi^{b})(D^{ac}_\mu \phi^c)+\frac{m^2_\phi}{2}\phi^a \phi^a + \frac{\lambda}{4!}(\phi^a\phi^a)^2\right]\nonumber\\
&-&\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\eta}^{ac}\EuScript{M}^{ab}(A^h)\eta^{bc}-\bar{\theta}^{ac}\EuScript{M}^{ab}(A^h)\theta^{bc}-g\sigma^2f^{abc}\phi^{h,c}(\bar{\eta}+\eta)^{ab}\right)\,.
\label{scalarlcg8}
\end{eqnarray}
One should keep in mind that in expression \eqref{scalarlcg8}, both $A^h_\mu$ and $\phi^h$ are expressed in terms of the Stueckelberg field $\xi^a$ and are thus local fields, albeit non-polynomial.
As it happens in the gauge sector of the Gribov-Zwanziger action, the non-local mass term \eqref{scalarlcg2} entails non-perturbative instabilities which give rise to the dimension two condensates, $\langle \phi^{h,a} \phi^{h,a} \rangle$ and $\langle \bar{\eta}^{ab}\eta^{ab}-\bar{\theta}^{ab}\theta^{ab} \rangle$, akin to those of the Refined Gribov-Zwanziger action. It is worth to proceed by evaluating those condensates at first order, a task which can be accomplished by introducing the operators
\begin{equation}
J\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~\phi^{h,a}\phi^{h,a}\,\,\,\,\,\,\mathrm{and}\,\,\,\,\,\,-\tilde{J}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\eta}^{ab}\eta^{ab}-\bar{\theta}^{ab}\theta^{ab}\right)\,,
\label{scalarlcg9}
\end{equation}
in expression \eqref{scalarlcg8}, where $(J,\tilde{J})$ are constant sources. Thus, we define the action $\Sigma(J,\tilde{J})$ by
\begin{equation}
\Sigma(J,\tilde{J}) = \tilde{S}^{\phi}_{\mathrm{loc}} + J\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~\phi^{h,a}\phi^{h,a}-\tilde{J}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\eta}^{ab}\eta^{ab}-\bar{\theta}^{ab}\theta^{ab}\right)\,.
\label{scalarlcg10}
\end{equation}
To first order, the condensates $\langle \phi^{h,a} \phi^{h,a} \rangle$ and $\langle \bar{\eta}^{ab}\eta^{ab}-\bar{\theta}^{ab}\theta^{ab} \rangle$ can be obtained by taking the derivatives of the one-loop vacuum energy $\mathcal{E}^{(1)}$ with respect to the sources $(J,\tilde{J})$, and setting them to zero, where
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{e}^{-V\mathcal{E}^{(1)}}=\int \left[\EuScript{D}\mu\right]\mathrm{e}^{-\Sigma^{(2)}(J,\tilde{J})}\,.
\label{scalarlcg12}
\end{equation}
$\Sigma^{(2)}(J,\tilde{J})$ denotes the quadratic part of \eqref{scalarlcg10}, while the path integral measure is expressed as
\begin{equation}
\left[\EuScript{D}\mu\right]=\left[\EuScript{D}A\right]\left[\EuScript{D}b\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\bar{c}\right]\left[\EuScript{D}c\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\bar{\omega}\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\omega\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\bar{\varphi}\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\varphi\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\xi\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\tau\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\phi\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\bar{\eta}\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\eta\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\bar{\theta}\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\theta\right]\,.
\label{scalarlcg13}
\end{equation}
At one-loop order, the vacuum energy is easily evaluated, being given by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{E}^{(1)} = \frac{(N^2-1)}{2}\int \frac{{\textrm{d}}^dp}{(2\pi)^d}\mathrm{ln}\left(p^2+m^2_\phi+2J+\frac{2Ng^2\sigma^4}{p^2+\tilde{J}}\right)\,,
\label{scalarlcg14}
\end{equation}
where dimensional regularization has been employed. Therefore, at first order, for the condensates we get
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle \phi^{h,a} \phi^{h,a} \rangle &=& \frac{\partial\mathcal{E}^{(1)}}{\partial J}\Big|_{J=\tilde{J}=0}=-(N^2-1)\int\frac{{\textrm{d}}^dk}{(2\pi)^d}\frac{m^2_\phi}{k^4+m^2_\phi k^2+2Ng^2\sigma^4}\nonumber\\
&-&2Ng^2\sigma^4(N^2-1)\int \frac{{\textrm{d}}^dk}{(2\pi)^d}\frac{1}{k^2}\frac{1}{k^4+m^2_\phi k^2+2Ng^2\sigma^4}\,,\nonumber\\
\langle \bar{\eta}^{ab}\eta^{ab}-\bar{\theta}^{ab}\theta^{ab}\rangle &=& -\frac{\partial \mathcal{E}^{(1)}}{\partial \tilde{J}}\Big|_{J=\tilde{J}=0}= (N^2-1)Ng^2\sigma^4\int \frac{{\textrm{d}}^dk}{(2\pi)^d}\frac{1}{k^2}\frac{1}{k^4+m^2_\phi k^2 + 2Ng^2\sigma^4}\,.
\label{scalarlcg15}
\end{eqnarray}
One sees that the one-loop result already shows non-vanishing expressions for the condensates $\langle \phi^{h,a} \phi^{h,a} \rangle$ and $\langle \bar{\eta}^{ab}\eta^{ab}-\bar{\theta}^{ab}\theta^{ab} \rangle$. Remarkably, the contributions coming from the introduction of the non-perturbative mass term \eqref{scalarlcg2} to the standard scalar field action are ultraviolet convergent. Interesting to note, very much alike the refinement of the Gribov-Zwanziger action, infrared singularities show up in the integrals \eqref{scalarlcg15}, preventing the formation of such condensates in $d=2$. As in the case of the gluon sector, in $d=3,4$, the effects of the existence of the condensates $\langle \phi^{h,a} \phi^{h,a} \rangle$ and $\langle \bar{\eta}^{ab}\eta^{ab}-\bar{\theta}^{ab}\theta^{ab} \rangle$ can be taken into account by refining the matter action as:
\begin{equation}
\tilde{S}^{\phi}_{\mathrm{loc}}\,\longrightarrow\, S^{\phi}_{\mathrm{loc}} = \tilde{S}^{\phi}_{\mathrm{loc}} + \tilde{m}^2_\phi\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~\phi^{h,a}\phi^{h,a}-\rho^2\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\eta}^{ab}\eta^{ab}-\bar{\theta}^{ab}\theta^{ab}\right)\,,
\label{scalarlcg16}
\end{equation}
where the parameters $(\tilde{m}^2_\phi, \rho^2)$ have dynamical origin and can be obtained through the evaluation of the effective potential for $\langle \phi^{h,a} \phi^{h,a} \rangle$ and $\langle \bar{\eta}^{ab}\eta^{ab}-\bar{\theta}^{ab}\theta^{ab} \rangle$. Furthermore, in the case of $d=2$, due to the absence of condensates, the action remains the original one given by eq.\eqref{scalarlcg8}.
After these considerations, we can compute the tree-level scalar field propagator for different values of $d$. In $d=2$, we have
\begin{equation}
\langle \phi(k)\phi(-k)\rangle_{d=2} = \delta^{ab}\frac{k^2}{k^4+m^2_\phi k^2+2Ng^2\sigma^4}\,,
\label{scalarlcg17}
\end{equation}
while in $d=3,4$,
\begin{equation}
\langle \phi(k)\phi(-k)\rangle_{d=3,4} = \delta^{ab}\frac{k^2+\rho^2}{k^4+(m^2_\phi+\tilde{m}^2_\phi+\rho^2) k^2+(m^2_\phi+\tilde{m}^2_\phi)\rho^2+2Ng^2\sigma^4}\,.
\label{scalarlcg18}
\end{equation}
In analogy with the case of gluon propagator, the scalar field propagator attains a finite value at zero momentum in $d=3,4$ while in $d=2$ it vanishes at $k=0$. In both cases the scalar propagator is infrared suppressed. Also, at the tree-level, there is no $\alpha$-dependence as it is apparent from eqs.\eqref{scalarlcg17} and \eqref{scalarlcg18}. Hence, the Landau limit $\alpha=0$ is trivial and agrees with the results reported in \cite{Dudal:2008sp}. Also, the propagators \eqref{scalarlcg17} and \eqref{scalarlcg18} violate reflection positivity, a feature which is interpreted as a signal of confinement. We see thus that the introduction of the non-perturbative matter coupling \eqref{scalarlcg2} has the effect of confinining the scalar matter fields.
It is worth here to add some further remarks on the specific case of $d=2$, eq.\eqref{scalarlcg17}. One should keep in mind that expression \eqref{scalarlcg17} is a consequence of the first-order absence of the condensate $\langle \bar{\eta}^{ab}\eta^{ab}-\bar{\theta}^{ab}\theta^{ab} \rangle$, as it follows from eq.\eqref{scalarlcg15}. Though, we underline that this is only a first order analysis. As such, expression \eqref{scalarlcg17} would retain its validity at this order. Willing to make an all order statement, a higher loop analysis of the condensate
$\langle \bar{\eta}^{ab}\eta^{ab}-\bar{\theta}^{ab}\theta^{ab} \rangle$ would be required, a matter which is well beyond the aim of the present paper.
Although the available lattice simulations \cite{Maas:2011yx} point towards a similar behavior for the scalar field propagator in the infrared for different values of $d=4,3,2$ in the Landau gauge, in order to make a comparison with the lattice data in $d=2$ a detailed analysis of the higher order condensate $\langle \bar{\eta}^{ab}\eta^{ab}-\bar{\theta}^{ab}\theta^{ab} \rangle$ would definitively be needed.
Finally, as dicussed in Subsect.~\ref{CFgauge}, the Gribov problem in the Curci-Ferrari and linear covariant gauges can be treated by means of a formal equivalence. As such, the non-perturbative matter term, eq.\eqref{scalarlcg2}, in both gauges is the same. Therefore, the scalar field action non-perturbatively coupled to the gauge sector is given by \eqref{scalarlcg8}. Clearly, at first order, all the computations presented in this section remain valid for the Curci-Ferrari gauges, namely, the calculation of the vacuum energy and of the scalar field propagator. Of course, taking into account higher loops contributions, the non-linear character of the Curci-Ferrari gauges will show up giving results which will differ from those of the linear covariant gauges. Since this is beyond the scope of the present work, we limit ourselves to the first order computations already presented in the case of linear covariant gauges, which retain their validity also in the Curci-Ferrari gauges.
\subsection{Maximal Abelian gauge}
In the case of the MAG, although the prescription is the same, care is due to the decomposition of color indices into diagonal and off-diagonal ones. Firstly, we express the minimally coupled scalar field action in a color decomposed fashion, namely
\begin{eqnarray}
S_{\mathrm{scalar}} &=& \int {\textrm{d}}^dx~\frac{1}{2}\left\{(\partial_{\mu}\phi^\alpha)(\partial_{\mu}\phi^\alpha)+(\partial_\mu \phi)(\partial_\mu \phi) - 2g\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}\left[(\partial_\mu \phi)\phi^\alpha A^\beta_\mu-(\partial_\mu\phi^\alpha)\phi A^\beta_\mu+(\partial_\mu\phi^\alpha)\phi^\beta A_\mu\right]\right.\nonumber\\
&+&\left.g^2\left[A^{\alpha}_{\mu}A^{\alpha}_{\mu}(\phi^\beta\phi^\beta+\phi\phi)+A_\mu A_\mu\phi^\alpha\phi^\alpha - A^{\alpha}_\mu A^{\beta}_\mu\phi^a\phi^b-2A_\mu \phi A^\alpha_\mu \phi^\alpha\right]\right\}+\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\frac{m^2_\phi}{2}(\phi^\alpha\phi^\alpha+\phi \phi)\nonumber\\
&+& \int {\textrm{d}}^dx\frac{\lambda}{4!}\left[(\phi^\alpha\phi^\alpha)^2+2\phi^\alpha\phi^\alpha\phi^2+\phi\phi\phi\phi\right]\,,
\label{scalarmag1}
\end{eqnarray}
with $\phi\equiv\phi^3$.
As in the case of linear covariant and Curci-Ferrari gauges, the non-perturbative matter coupling is obtained through the addition, in the scalar field action, of a non-local term which shares great similarity with the corresponding horizon function of the gluon sector in the MAG, eq.\eqref{mag10}, {\it i.e.}
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{H}(\phi^h) = g^2\int {\textrm{d}}^dx {\textrm{d}}^dy~\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}\phi^{h,3}(x)\left[\mathcal{M}^{-1}(A^h)\right]^{\alpha\delta}(x,y)\epsilon^{\delta\beta}\phi^{h,3}(y)\,,
\label{scalarmag3}
\end{equation}
where the Faddeev-Popov operator $\mathcal{M}(A^h)$ is now given by eq.\eqref{mag11}. The scalar field action supplemented with the non-perturbative coupling \eqref{scalarmag3} becomes
\begin{equation}
S^\phi_{\mathrm{MAG}} = S_\mathrm{scalar}+\sigma^4\mathcal{H}(\phi^h)\,.
\label{scalarmag4}
\end{equation}
The parameter $\sigma$ has mass dimension and is the analogue of the Gribov parameter $\gamma$ in the matter sector. As before, the non-local action \eqref{scalarmag4} can be cast in local form by means of the introduction of auxiliary fields and of a Stueckelberg field, also used to localize $A^h_\mu$. In local form, the action \eqref{scalarmag4} is written as
\begin{equation}
\tilde{S}^\phi_{\mathrm{MAG-loc}} = S_\mathrm{scalar}-\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\eta}^{\alpha\delta}\mathcal{M}^{\alpha\beta}(A^h)\eta^{\beta\delta}-\bar{\theta}^{\alpha\delta}\mathcal{M}^{\alpha\beta}(A^h)\theta^{\beta\delta}-g\sigma^2\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}\phi^{h,3}(\bar{\eta}+\eta)^{\alpha\beta}\right)\,,
\label{scalarmag5}
\end{equation}
with $\phi^h=h^\dagger \phi h$.
As pointed out in Subsect.~\ref{scalarLCGCF}, the auxiliary localizing fields $(\bar{\eta},\eta,\bar{\theta},\theta)^{\alpha\beta}$ develop their own dynamics and give rise to the dynamical formation of condensates. This is in very much analogy with the refinement of the Gribov-Zwanziger action. In order to explicitly check the existence of such condensates to first order, we proceed as before and introduce the following operators to \eqref{scalarmag5},
\begin{equation}
J\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~\phi^{h,3}\phi^{h,3}\,\,\,\,\,\,\mathrm{and}\,\,\,\,\,\,-\tilde{J}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\eta}^{\alpha\beta}\eta^{\alpha\beta}-\bar{\theta}^{\alpha\beta}\theta^{\alpha\beta}\right)\,,
\label{scalarmag6}
\end{equation}
where $J$ and $\tilde{J}$ are constant sources. This gives rise to
\begin{equation}
\Sigma (J,\tilde{J}) = \tilde{S}^\phi_{\mathrm{MAG-loc}}+J\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~\phi^{h,3}\phi^{h,3}-\tilde{J}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\eta}^{\alpha\beta}\eta^{\alpha\beta}-\bar{\theta}^{\alpha\beta}\theta^{\alpha\beta}\right)\,.
\label{scalarmag7}
\end{equation}
Our aim is to compute the following condensates at one-loop order:
\begin{equation}
\langle \phi^{h,3}(x) \phi^{h,3}(x)\rangle \,\,\,\,\,\,\mathrm{and}\,\,\,\,\,\, \langle \bar{\eta}^{\alpha\beta}(x)\eta^{\alpha\beta}(x) - \bar{\theta}^{\alpha\beta}(x)\theta^{\alpha\beta}(x)\rangle\,.
\label{scalarmag8}
\end{equation}
This is achieved by taking the derivatives with respect to $J$ and $\tilde{J}$ of the vacuum energy $\mathcal{E}$, defined by
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{e}^{-V\mathcal{E}(J,\tilde{J})} = \int \left[\EuScript{D}\mu\right]\mathrm{e}^{-S^{\mathrm{loc}}_{\mathrm{RGZ}}-\Sigma (J,\tilde{J})}\,,
\label{scalarmag9}
\end{equation}
and setting the sources to zero at the end, namely
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle \phi^{h,3}(x) \phi^{h,3}(x)\rangle &=& \frac{\partial\mathcal{E}(J,\tilde{J})}{\partial J}\Big|_{J=\tilde{J}=0}\,,\nonumber\\
\langle \bar{\eta}^{\alpha\beta}(x)\eta^{\alpha\beta}(x) - \bar{\theta}^{\alpha\beta}(x)\theta^{\alpha\beta}(x)\rangle &=& - \frac{\partial\mathcal{E}(J,\tilde{J})}{\partial \tilde{J}}\Big|_{J=\tilde{J}=0}\,.
\label{scalarmag10}
\end{eqnarray}
The measure of the path integral \eqref{scalarmag9} is written as
\begin{equation}
\left[\EuScript{D}\mu\right]=\left[\EuScript{D}A\right]\left[\EuScript{D}b\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\bar{c}\right]\left[\EuScript{D}c\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\bar{\omega}\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\omega\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\bar{\varphi}\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\varphi\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\xi\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\tau\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\phi\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\bar{\eta}\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\eta\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\bar{\theta}\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\theta\right]\,.
\label{scalarmag11}
\end{equation}
At one-loop order, we should take the quadratic part of\footnote{For the moment, we can ignore the contribution from $S^{\mathrm{loc}}_{\mathrm{RGZ}}$, which is $(J,\tilde{J})$-independent.} $\Sigma (J,\tilde{J})$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\Sigma^{(2)}(J,\tilde{J}) &=& \int {\textrm{d}}^dx \left\{\frac{1}{2}\left[(\partial_{\mu}\phi^{\alpha})(\partial_{\mu}\phi^{\alpha})+(\partial_\mu \phi)(\partial_\mu \phi)\right]+\frac{m^2_\phi}{2}\phi^\alpha \phi^\alpha + \frac{m^2_\phi}{2}\phi\phi\right\}\nonumber\\
&-&\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(-\bar{\eta}^{\alpha\delta}\delta^{\alpha\beta}\partial^2\eta^{\beta\delta}+\bar{\theta}^{\alpha\delta}\delta^{\alpha\beta}\partial^2\theta^{\beta\delta}-g\sigma^2\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}\phi^{h,3}(\bar{\eta}+\eta)^{\alpha\beta}\right)\nonumber\\
&+& J\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~\phi^{h,3}\phi^{h,3}-\tilde{J}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\eta}^{\alpha\delta}\eta^{\alpha\beta}-\bar{\theta}^{\alpha\beta}\theta^{\alpha\beta}\right)\,.
\label{scalarmag12}
\end{eqnarray}
Integrating the auxiliary fields $(\tau^\alpha,\tau)$ which enforce the transversality condition of $A^{h,a}=(A^{h,\alpha}_\mu, A^h_\mu)$, we see that the gauge-invariant scalar field $\phi^{h,a}=(\phi^{h,\alpha}, \phi^{h,3})$ can be expressed as in eq.\eqref{fophi} with $\xi^a = \frac{\partial A^a}{\partial^2}$.
Since we want to maintain the action $\Sigma^{(2)}$ to the quadratic order in the fields, we see that $\phi^{h,a}\approx \phi^a$. Hence, the $(J,\tilde{J})$-dependent part of the one-loop order vacuum energy $\mathcal{E}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{E}^{(1)}(J,\tilde{J}) = \frac{1}{2}\int \frac{{\textrm{d}}^dk}{(2\pi)^d}~\mathrm{ln}\left(k^2+m^2_\phi+2J+\frac{4g^2\sigma^4}{k^2+\tilde{J}}\right)\,.
\label{scalarmag13}
\end{equation}
This implies,
\begin{equation}
\langle \phi^{h,3}\phi^{h,3}\rangle_{\mathrm{1-loop}} = - \int \frac{{\textrm{d}}^dk}{(2\pi)^d}\frac{m^2_\phi}{k^4+m^2_\phi k^2+4g^2\sigma^4}-4g^2\sigma^4\int \frac{{\textrm{d}}^d k}{(2\pi)^d}\frac{1}{k^2}\frac{1}{k^4+m^2_\phi k^2 + 4g^2\sigma^4}\,,
\label{scalarmag14}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\langle\bar{\eta}^{\alpha\beta}\eta^{\alpha\beta}-\bar{\theta}^{\alpha\beta}\theta^{\alpha\beta}\rangle_{\mathrm{1-loop}}=2g^2\sigma^4\int \frac{{\textrm{d}}^dk}{(2\pi)^d}\frac{1}{k^2}\frac{1}{k^4+m^2_\phi k^2+4g^2\sigma^4}\,.
\label{scalarmag15}
\end{equation}
Eq.\eqref{scalarmag15} shows that, at the one-loop level, the condensate of auxiliary fields, $\langle\bar{\eta}^{\alpha\beta}\eta^{\alpha\beta}-\bar{\theta}^{\alpha\beta}\theta^{\alpha\beta}\rangle_{\mathrm{1-loop}}$, is ultraviolet convergent. For $d=3,4$, such a condensate is perfectly well-defined in the infrared region and can be safely introduced. In $d=2$, an infrared singularity at $k=0$ turns out to appear. This is in agreement with the refining condensates in the Gribov-Zwanziger setup. From eq.\eqref{scalarmag14}, we see that the condensate $\langle \phi^{h,3}\phi^{h,3}\rangle$ has two contributions: one proportional to $\tilde{m}^{2}_{\mathrm{diag}}$ which exists irrespective of the presence of $\sigma$ and the other one proportional to $\sigma^4$. The former contains an ultraviolet divergence which can be taken into account by the standard renormalization techniques while the latter is ultraviolet convergent and free from infrared divergences in $d=3,4$. In $d=2$, an infrared singularity appears preventing the introduction of this condensate. We must emphasize that this condensate does not affect the qualitative behavior of the initial theory.
Therefore, in $d=2$, the scalar field action non-perturbatively coupled with the gauge sector is given by \eqref{scalarmag5}, while in $d=3,4$ the condensates $\langle\bar{\eta}^{\alpha\beta}\eta^{\alpha\beta}-\bar{\theta}^{\alpha\beta}\theta^{\alpha\beta}\rangle$ and $\langle \phi^{h,3}\phi^{h,3}\rangle$ have to be taken into account, giving rise to the following refined action
\begin{eqnarray}
S^\phi_{\mathrm{MAG-loc}} &=& S_\mathrm{scalar}-\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\eta}^{\alpha\delta}\mathcal{M}^{\alpha\beta}(A^h)\eta^{\beta\delta}-\bar{\theta}^{\alpha\delta}\mathcal{M}^{\alpha\beta}(A^h)\theta^{\beta\delta}-g\sigma^2\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}\phi^{h,3}(\bar{\eta}+\eta)^{\alpha\beta}\right)\nonumber\\
&+& \frac{\mu^{2}_{\mathrm{diag}}}{2}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~\phi^{h,3}\phi^{h,3}-\rho^2\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\eta}^{\alpha\beta}\eta^{\alpha\beta}-\bar{\theta}^{\alpha\beta}\theta^{\alpha\beta}\right)\,.
\label{scalarmag16}
\end{eqnarray}
From the actions \eqref{scalarmag16} and \eqref{scalarmag5} we can compute the tree-level Abelian component of the scalar field propagator. The expressions in $d=2$ and $d=3,4$ are, respectively,
\begin{equation}
\langle \phi(k) \phi(-k)\rangle_{d=2} = \frac{k^2}{k^4 + m^2_\phi k^2+4g^2\sigma^4}\,,
\label{scalarmag17}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\langle \phi(k) \phi(-k)\rangle_{d=3,4} = \frac{k^2+\rho^2}{k^4 + (m^2_\phi+\mu^2_{\mathrm{diag}}+\rho^2)k^2+(m^2_\phi+\mu^2_{\mathrm{diag}})\rho^2+4g^2\sigma^4}\,.
\label{scalarmag18}
\end{equation}
From eq.\eqref{scalarmag17} and \eqref{scalarmag18}, we see that the propagator of the Abelian component of the scalar field displays the same features observed for the tree-level propagator of the scalar field in the linear covariant and Curci-Ferrari gauges, eqs.\eqref{scalarlcg17},\eqref{scalarlcg17}.
\section{Generalization of the non-perturbative matter coupling for quark fields} \label{npspinor}
In the previous section, we have presented a prescription for the non-perturbative coupling of scalar fields in the adjoint representation of the gauge group with the gauge sector. Such a coupling arises from the introduction of a non-local term which shares great similarity with the corresponding horizon term introduced in the gluon sector to implement the restriction of the domain of integration to the Gribov region. Interestingly, this term naturally appears through the dimensional reduction of higher-dimensional Yang-Mills theory \cite{Guimaraes:2016okb}.
In the present section we follow the same reasoning for the case of fermionic matter fields in the fundamental representation of the gauge group. This case is particularly important since it allows us to obtain an analytic non-perturbative expression of the quark field propagator. As before, we divide the analysis in two subsections for linear covariant/Curci-Ferrari gauges and for the maximal Abelian gauge. We have collected our conventions regarding spinors and related issues in Appendix~A.
\subsection{Linear covariant and Curci-Ferrari gauges} \label{spinorLCGCF}
Let us begin by considering the Dirac action in Euclidean space minimally coupled with the gauge sector,
\begin{equation}
S_{\mathrm{Dirac}} = \int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left[\bar{\psi}^{I}\gamma_\mu D^{IJ}_{\mu}\psi^{J}-m_\psi \bar{\psi}^{I} \psi^{I}\right]\,,
\label{spinorlcg1}
\end{equation}
where capital latin indices $\left\{I,J,\ldots\right\}$ stand for the fundamental representation of $SU(N)$. The covariant derivative $D^{IJ}_{\mu}$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
D^{IJ}_\mu = \delta^{IJ}\partial_\mu - ig(T^a)^{IJ}A^{a}_\mu\,,
\label{spinorlcg2}
\end{equation}
with $T^a$ the generators of $SU(N)$ in the fundamental representation. In strict analogy to what has been proposed in Sect.~\ref{noscalaradjoint}, the non-perturbative fermion matter coupling is introduced by adding to the Dirac action the non-local term
\begin{equation}
\EuScript{H}(\psi^h) = -g^2\int {\textrm{d}}^dx {\textrm{d}}^dy~\bar{\psi}^{h,I}(x)(T^a)^{IJ}\left[\EuScript{M}^{-1}(A^h)\right]^{ab}(x,y)(T^b)^{JK}\psi^{h,K}(y)\,,
\label{spinorlcg3}
\end{equation}
with $\left( \EuScript{M}(A^h) \right)^{ad}$ given by eq.\eqref{npbrst6} and where the gauge-invariant spinor $\psi^h$ is defined as
\begin{equation}
\psi^{h,I} = \psi^{I} - ig\frac{1}{\partial^2}(\partial_\mu A^a_\mu)(T^a)^{IJ}\psi^{J}+\mathcal{O}(A^2)\,.
\label{spinorlcg4}
\end{equation}
Employing the Stueckelberg field $\xi^a$, the all order BRST invariant spinor field $\psi^h$ is obtained as
\begin{equation}
\psi^{h} = h^\dagger \psi = \mathrm{e}^{-ig\xi^a T^a}\psi\,.
\label{spinorlcg5}
\end{equation}
From
\begin{equation}
s h^{\dagger} = ig h^{\dagger} c \;, \qquad s \psi = -ig c \psi \;, \label{hp}
\end{equation}
it immediately follows that $\psi^{h}$ is BRST invariant, namely
\begin{equation}
s \psi^h = 0 \;. \label{inph}
\end{equation}
Solving the transversality condition $\partial_\mu A^{h,a}_\mu = 0$ for the Stueckelberg field $\xi^a$ and plugging it in eq.\eqref{spinorlcg5}, see Appendix~A of \cite{Capri:2015ixa}, we reobtain expression \eqref{spinorlcg4}. Hence, following the prescription discussed in \cite{Capri:2014bsa,Capri:2016aqq}, the fermionic action non-perturbatively coupled to the gauge sector is given by
\begin{equation}
S^{\psi} = S_{\mathrm{Dirac}}+M^3\EuScript{H}(\psi^h)\,,
\label{spinorlcg6}
\end{equation}
where $M$ is the analogue of the Gribov parameter $\gamma$ for the fermionic sector.
The term $\EuScript{H}(\psi^h)$ is non-local due to the inverse of $\EuScript{M}(A^h)$, eq.\eqref{npbrst6}. Nevertheless, the action \eqref{spinorlcg6} can be localized in complete analogy with the localization of the Gribov-Zwanziger action by means of the introduction of commuting spinor fields $(\bar{\theta},\theta)^{aI}$ as well as of anti-commuting ones $(\bar{\lambda},\lambda)^{aI}$. The local form of expression \eqref{spinorlcg3} is given by
\begin{equation}
M^3\EuScript{H}(\psi^h)\,\longrightarrow\,\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\theta}^{aI}\EuScript{M}^{ab}(A^h)\theta^{bI}-\bar{\lambda}^{aI}\EuScript{M}^{ab}(A^h)\lambda^{bI}-gM^{3/2}\bar{\lambda}^{aI}(T^a)^{IJ}\psi^{h,J}+gM^{3/2}\bar{\psi}^{h,I}(T^a)^{IJ}\lambda^{aJ}\right)\,,
\label{spinorlcg7}
\end{equation}
which, upon integration over the auxiliary fields $(\bar{\theta},\theta)^{aI}$ and $(\bar{\lambda},\lambda)^{aI}$, gives back the non-local quantity of eq.\eqref{spinorlcg3}
Therefore, the local action with the non-perturbative coupling between fermionic matter and the gauge sector is expressed as
\begin{equation}
\tilde{S}^{\psi}_{\mathrm{loc}} = S_{\mathrm{Dirac}} + \int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\theta}^{aI}\EuScript{M}^{ab}(A^h)\theta^{bI}-\bar{\lambda}^{aI}\EuScript{M}^{ab}(A^h)\lambda^{bI}-gM^{3/2}\bar{\lambda}^{aI}(T^a)^{IJ}\psi^{h,J}+gM^{3/2}\bar{\psi}^{h,I}(T^a)^{IJ}\lambda^{aJ}\right)\,.
\label{spinorlcg8}
\end{equation}
As extensively discussed in the present work, the presence of the parameter $M$, akin to the Gribov parameter $\gamma$, and of the quadratic coupling between the auxiliary localizing fields and the corresponding matter field give rise to a dynamical and non-perturbative instability, resulting in the formation of condensates. Again, we present the one-loop computation which hints the existence of such condensates. To do so, we introduce the following operators
\begin{equation}
-J\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~\bar{\psi}^{h,I}\psi^{h,I}\,\,\,\,\,\,\mathrm{and}\,\,\,\,\,\,\tilde{J}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\theta}^{aI}\theta^{aI}-\bar{\lambda}^{aI}\lambda^{aI}\right)\,,
\label{spinorlcg9}
\end{equation}
into the action \eqref{spinorlcg8}, yielding
\begin{equation}
\Sigma (J,\tilde{J}) = \tilde{S}^{\psi}_\mathrm{loc}-J\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~\bar{\psi}^{h,I}\psi^{h,I}+\tilde{J}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\theta}^{aI}\theta^{aI}-\bar{\lambda}^{aI}\lambda^{aI}\right)\,.
\label{spinorlcg10}
\end{equation}
We aim at computing the following condensates:
\begin{equation}
\langle \bar{\psi}^{h,I}(x)\psi^{h,I}(x)\rangle\,\,\,\,\,\,\mathrm{and}\,\,\,\,\,\,\langle \bar{\theta}^{aI}(x)\theta^{aI}(x)-\bar{\lambda}^{aI}(x)\lambda^{aI}(x)\rangle\,,
\label{spinorlcg11}
\end{equation}
which can be obtained by taking taking the derivatives with respect to $(J,\tilde{J})$ of the vacuum energy\footnote{We restrict ourselves to the contributions relevant for our purposes.} $\mathcal{E}(J,\tilde{J})$ at one-loop order,
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{e}^{-V\mathcal{E}^{(1)}} = \int \left[\EuScript{D}\mu\right]\mathrm{e}^{-\Sigma^{(2)}(J,\tilde{J})}\,,
\label{spinorlcg12}
\end{equation}
with $\Sigma^{(2)}(J,\tilde{J})$ the quadratic part of $\Sigma(J,\tilde{J})$, namely
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle \bar{\psi}^{h,I}(x)\psi^{h,I}(x)\rangle &=& -\frac{\partial\mathcal{E}^{(1)}}{\partial J}\Big|_{J=\tilde{J}=0}\,,\nonumber\\
\langle \bar{\theta}^{aI}(x)\theta^{aI}(x)-\bar{\lambda}^{aI}(x)\lambda^{aI}(x)\rangle &=& \frac{\partial\mathcal{E}^{(1)}}{\partial \tilde{J}}\Big|_{J=\tilde{J}=0}\,.
\label{spinorlcg13}
\end{eqnarray}
Explicitly, $\Sigma^{(2)}(J,\tilde{J})$ is written as
\begin{eqnarray}
\Sigma^{(2)}(J,\tilde{J}) &=& \int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left[\bar{\psi}^{I}\gamma_\mu \partial_\mu\psi^I-m_\psi\bar{\psi}^I\psi^I+\bar{\lambda}^{aI}\partial^2\lambda^{aI}-\bar{\theta}^{aI}\partial^2\theta^{aI}-gM^{3/2}\bar{\lambda}^{aI}(T^a)^{IJ}\psi^{J}+gM^{3/2}\bar{\psi}^{I}(T^a)^{IJ}\lambda^{aJ}\right.\nonumber\\
&-&\left.J\bar{\psi}^{I}\psi^{I}+\tilde{J}(\bar{\theta}^{aI}\theta^{aI}-\bar{\lambda}^{aI}\lambda^{aI})\right]\,.
\label{spinorlcg14}
\end{eqnarray}
Performing the path integral over the auxiliary localizing fields yields the following expression
\begin{equation}
\int \left[\EuScript{D}\bar{\psi}\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\psi\right]\mathrm{exp}\left\{\int \frac{{\textrm{d}}^dk}{(2\pi)^d}\bar{\psi}^{I}(k)\left[\delta^{IJ}\gamma_\mu(ik_\mu)+\delta^{IJ}(m_\psi+J)+g^2M^3\frac{(T^a)^{IK}(T^a)^{KJ}}{k^2+\tilde{J}}\right]\psi^{J}(-k)\right\}\,.
\label{spinorlcg15}
\end{equation}
Making use of the relation
\begin{equation}
(T^a)^{IK}(T^a)^{KJ}=\delta^{IJ}\frac{N^2-1}{2N}\,,
\label{spinorlcg16}
\end{equation}
and performing the path integral over $(\bar{\psi},\psi)$, one obtains
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{det}\left\{\delta^{IJ}\left[\gamma_\mu (ik_\mu)+\left(m_\psi + J+g^2M^3\frac{N^2-1}{2N}\frac{1}{p^2+\tilde{J}}\right)\mathds{1}\right]\right\}\,.
\label{spinorlcg17}
\end{equation}
After simple manipulations and employing the identity
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{det}(i\gamma_\mu k_\mu+A\mathds{1}) = \mathrm{det}^{1/2}\left(k^2\mathds{1}+A^2\mathds{1}\right)\,,
\label{spinorlcg18}
\end{equation}
one ends up with
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{e}^{-V\mathcal{E}^{(1)}}=\left\{\mathrm{det}\left[k^2\mathds{1}+\left(m_\psi+J+g^2M^3\frac{N^2-1}{2N}\frac{1}{k^2+\tilde{J}}\right)^2\mathds{1}\right]\right\}^{(N^2-1)/2}\,.
\label{spinorlcg19}
\end{equation}
From \eqref{spinorlcg19} it is immediate to extract the vacuum energy $\mathcal{E}^{(1)}$, which is written as
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{E}^{(1)}(J,\tilde{J})=-2(N^2-1)\int\frac{{\textrm{d}}^dk}{(2\pi)^d}\mathrm{ln}\left[k^2+\left(m_\psi+J+g^2M^3\frac{N^2-1}{2N}\frac{1}{k^2+\tilde{J}}\right)^2\right]\,.
\label{spinorlcg20}
\end{equation}
Finally, we are ready to compute the expectation values \eqref{spinorlcg13}, by differentiating \eqref{spinorlcg20} with respect to the sources $(J,\tilde{J})$ as in \eqref{spinorlcg13}. One obtains,
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle \bar{\psi}^{I}\psi^I\rangle_{\mathrm{1-loop}} &=& 4(N^2-1)m_\psi\int \frac{{\textrm{d}}^d k}{(2\pi)^d}\frac{k^4}{k^6+\left(m_\psi k^2+g^2M^3\frac{N^2-1}{2N}\right)^2}\nonumber\\
&-&g^2M^3\frac{(N^2-1)^2}{N}\int \frac{{\textrm{d}}^d k}{(2\pi)^d}\frac{m^2_\psi+\left(g^2M^3\frac{N^2-1}{2N}\right)^2\frac{1}{k^4}+g^2M^3m_\psi\frac{N^2-1}{n}\frac{1}{k^2}}{k^6+\left(m_\psi k^2+g^2M^3\frac{N^2-1}{2N}\right)^2}\,,
\label{spinorlcg21}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{equation}
\langle \bar{\theta}^{aI}\theta^{aI}-\bar{\lambda}^{aI}\lambda^{aI}\rangle_{\mathrm{1-loop}} = 2g^2M^3\frac{(N^2-1)^2}{N}\int \frac{{\textrm{d}}^dk}{(2\pi)^d}\frac{m_\psi+g^2M^3\frac{N^2-1}{2N}\frac{1}{k^2}}{k^6+\left(m_\psi k^2+g^2M^3\frac{N^2-1}{2N}\right)^2}\,,
\label{spinorlcg22}
\end{equation}
where the prescriptions of the dimensional regularization were employed. In $d=4$, we see from eq.\eqref{spinorlcg21} that the contribution which is directly proportional to the parameter $M$ is perfectly ultraviolet convergent. This is in agreement with the fact that the introduction of the non-local term of the type of eq.\eqref{spinorlcg3} does not introduce any new ultraviolet divergence \cite{Capri:2015mna}. From eq.\eqref{spinorlcg22}, we easily see that the one-loop contribution to the condensate $\langle \bar{\theta}^{aI}\theta^{aI}-\bar{\lambda}^{aI}\lambda^{aI}\rangle$ is non-vanishing and ultraviolet convergent. These results show explicitly, already at one-loop order, that the introduction of the non-perturbative matter coupling \eqref{spinorlcg22} contributes definitively to the formation of such condensates.
As usual, the dynamical formation of those condensates can be taken into account from the beginning by refining the matter sector in the following way
\begin{equation}
\tilde{S}^{\psi}_{\mathrm{loc}}\,\longrightarrow\, {S}^{\psi}_{\mathrm{loc}} = \tilde{S}^{\psi}_{\mathrm{loc}} -\tilde{m}_{\psi}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~\psi^{h,I}\psi^{h,I} + \rho^2\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left( \bar{\theta}^{aI}\theta^{aI}-\bar{\lambda}^{aI}\lambda^{aI} \right)\,.
\label{spinorlcg23}
\end{equation}
Finally, one can compute the quark field propagator at tree level from the refined action \eqref{spinorlcg23}. The result is
\begin{equation}
\langle \bar{\psi}^{I}(-p)\psi^{J}(p)\rangle = - \delta^{IJ}\frac{-i\gamma_\mu p_\mu+\left(M_\psi+g^2M^3\frac{(N^2-1)}{2N}\frac{1}{p^2+\rho^2}\right)}{p^2+\left(M_\psi+g^2M^3\frac{(N^2-1)}{2N}\frac{1}{p^2+\rho^2}\right)^2}\,,
\label{spinorlcg24}
\end{equation}
with $M_\psi = m_\psi + \tilde{m}_\psi$.
The propagator \eqref{spinorlcg24} is the same as the one computed in the Landau gauge \cite{Capri:2014bsa}, {\it i.e.} $\alpha=0$. Of course, higher orders correction will, eventually, introduce some $\alpha$-dependence in \eqref{spinorlcg24}. In the particular case of $\alpha = 0$, the propagator \eqref{spinorlcg24} fits well recent lattice data, see \cite{Capri:2014bsa} and references therein. To the best of our knowledge, there are no available numerical simulations of the quark propagator in linear covariant gauges. Hence, our result could be a motivation for such an endeavour in the near future.
As described in the case of scalar fields, the generalization of the present construction to the case of the Curci-Ferrari gauges is straightforward. In particular, the results obtained here also hold in the Curci-Ferrari gauge, which differs from the linear covariant gauges by non-linear terms which do not contribute to the order we are dealing with. In particular, the quark propagator at the tree-level remains the same as in eq.\eqref{spinorlcg24}.
\subsection{Maximal Abelian gauge}
In this subsection, we proceed with the analysis of the non-perturbative coupling of quark matter fields in the maximal Abelian gauge case. In full analogy with the case of the scalar matter field, eq.\eqref{scalarmag3}, for the non-perturbative BRST invariant coupling in the quark sector we write
\begin{equation}
\EuScript{H}_{\mathrm{MAG}}(\psi^h)=-g^2\int {\textrm{d}}^dx {\textrm{d}}^dy~\bar{\psi}^{h,I}(x)(T^\alpha)^{IJ}\left[\mathcal{M}^{-1}(A^h)\right]^{\alpha\beta}(x,y)(T^\beta)^{JK}\psi^{h,K}(y)\,,
\label{spinormag1}
\end{equation}
where the gauge-invariant field $\psi^h$ is defined by eq.\eqref{spinorlcg5}, while the Faddeev-Popov operator in the maximal Abelian gauge, $\mathcal{M}^{\alpha\beta}$, is given by eq.\eqref{mag8}. The non-perturbative coupling of quark matter fields with the gauge sector in the maximal Abelian gauge is thus given by
\begin{equation}
S^{\psi} = S_{\mathrm{Dirac}} + M^3\EuScript{H}_{\mathrm{MAG}}(\psi^h)\,,
\label{spinormag2}
\end{equation}
where, as before, the parameter $M$ plays an analogue role of the Gribov parameter $\gamma$ in the matter sector. As exhaustively discussed in the previous sections, the non-local quark matter term \eqref{spinormag1} can be localized by means of auxiliary fields. The gauge-invariant field $\psi^h$ can be written in local form in the same manner described in Subsect.~\ref{spinorLCGCF}. On the other hand, a pair of commuting $(\bar{\theta},\theta)^{\alpha I}$ and anticommuting $(\bar{\lambda},\lambda)^{\alpha I}$ fields are introduced in order to localize $\EuScript{H}_{\mathrm{MAG}}(\psi^h)$, namely,
\begin{equation}
M^3\EuScript{H}_{\mathrm{MAG}}(\psi^h)\,\longrightarrow\, \int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\theta}^{\alpha I}\mathcal{M}^{\alpha\beta}(A^h)\theta^{\beta I}-\bar{\lambda}^{\alpha I}\mathcal{M}^{\alpha \beta}(A^h)\lambda^{\beta I}-gM^{3/2}\bar{\lambda}^{\alpha I}(T^{\alpha})^{IJ}\psi^{h,J}+gM^{3/2}\bar{\psi}^{h,I}(T^\alpha)^{IJ}\lambda^{\alpha J}\right)\,.
\label{spinormag3}
\end{equation}
Therefore, the action of quark matter fields coupled with the gauge sector in a non-perturbative way is expressed, in local form, as
\begin{equation}
\tilde{S}^{\psi}_{\mathrm{MAG-loc}} = S_{\mathrm{Dirac}} + \int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\theta}^{\alpha I}\mathcal{M}^{\alpha\beta}(A^h)\theta^{\beta I}-\bar{\lambda}^{\alpha I}\mathcal{M}^{\alpha \beta}(A^h)\lambda^{\beta I}-gM^{3/2}\bar{\lambda}^{\alpha I}(T^{\alpha})^{IJ}\psi^{h,J}+gM^{3/2}\bar{\psi}^{h,I}(T^\alpha)^{IJ}\lambda^{\alpha J}\right)\,.
\label{spinormag4}
\end{equation}
At this stage, it is not unexpected to predict that, again, the action \eqref{spinormag4} suffers from dynamical non-perturbative instabilities, giving rise to the formation of condensates. The procedure to explicit check the existence of such codensates goes exactly along the same lines of the previous case, namely: constant sources $J$ and $\tilde{J}$ are coupled to the composite operators $\bar{\psi}^{h,I}\psi^{h,I}$ and $(\bar{\theta}^{\alpha I}\theta^{\alpha I}-\bar{\lambda}^{\alpha I}\lambda^{\alpha I})$, \textit{i.e.}
\begin{equation}
-J\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~\bar{\psi}^{h,I}\psi^{h,I}\,\,\,\,\,\,\mathrm{and}\,\,\,\,\,\,\tilde{J}\int{\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\theta}^{\alpha I}\theta^{\alpha I}-\bar{\lambda}^{\alpha I}\lambda^{\alpha I}\right)\,,
\label{spinormag5}
\end{equation}
which are introduced in the action \eqref{spinormag4}, giving rise to
\begin{equation}
\Sigma (J,\tilde{J}) = \tilde{S}^{\psi}_{\mathrm{MAG-loc}} -J\int {\textrm{d}}^dx~\bar{\psi}^{h,I}\psi^{h,I}+\tilde{J}\int{\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\theta}^{\alpha I}\theta^{\alpha I}-\bar{\lambda}^{\alpha I}\lambda^{\alpha I}\right)\,.
\label{spinormag6}
\end{equation}
The condensates are obtained by taking derivatives of the vacuum energy $ \mathcal{E} $ corresponding to the action \eqref{spinormag6} with respect to the sources $J$ and $\tilde{J}$, and setting them to zero, \textit{i.e.}
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle \bar{\psi}^{h,I}(x){\psi}^{h,I}(x)\rangle &=& - \frac{\partial \mathcal{E}}{\partial J}\Big|_{J = \tilde{J} = 0}\,,\nonumber\\
\langle \bar{\theta}^{\alpha I}(x)\theta^{\alpha I}(x)-\bar{\lambda}^{\alpha I}(x)\lambda^{\alpha I}(x) \rangle &=& \frac{\partial \mathcal{E}}{\partial \tilde{J}}\Big|_{J = \tilde{J} = 0}\,,
\label{spinormag7}
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{e}^{-V\mathcal{E}} = \int \left[\EuScript{D}\bar{\psi}\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\psi\right]\left[\EuScript{D}\mu\right]\mathrm{e}^{-\Sigma (J,\tilde{J})}\,.
\label{spinormag8}
\end{equation}
At one-loop order, using the same techniques presented in Sect.~\ref{noscalaradjoint} and Subsect.~\ref{spinorLCGCF}, one obtains
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{E}^{(1)}(J,\tilde{J}) = -4 \int \frac{{\textrm{d}}^d k}{(2\pi)^d}\mathrm{ln}\left[k^2+\left(m_\psi+J+\frac{g^2 M^3}{2}\frac{1}{k^2+\tilde{J}}\right)^2\right]\,.
\label{spinormag9}
\end{equation}
Plugging eq.\eqref{spinormag9} into eq.\eqref{spinormag7}, one immediately gets
\begin{equation}
\langle \bar{\psi}^{h,I}(x) {\psi}^{h,I}(x)\rangle = 8\int \frac{{\textrm{d}}^dk}{(2\pi)^d}\frac{m_\psi k^4}{k^6+(m_\psi k^2 + \frac{g^2 M^3}{2})^2}-g^2 M^3 \int \frac{{\textrm{d}}^d k}{(2\pi)^d}\frac{\frac{g^2 m_\psi M^2}{k^2}+\frac{g^4 M^6}{4k^4}}{k^6+(m_\psi k^2 + \frac{g^2 M^3}{2})^2}
\label{spinormag10}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\langle \bar{\theta}^{\alpha I}(x)\theta^{\alpha I}(x)-\bar{\lambda}^{\alpha I}(x)\lambda^{\alpha I}(x) \rangle = 4g^2 M^3 \int \frac{{\textrm{d}}^dk}{(2\pi)^d}\frac{m_\psi+\frac{g^2 M^3}{2}\frac{1}{k^2}}{k^6+\left(m_\psi k^2 + \frac{g^2 M^3}{2}\right)^2}\,.
\label{spinormag11}
\end{equation}
Once again, one notices that the contributions proportional to $M$ are ultraviolet finite. As such, we find already at one-loop order that such condensates are non-vanishing, due to the introduction of the non-perturbative coupling \eqref{spinormag1} in the quark matter sector. We should emphasize that, unlike the case of the linear covariant and Curci-Ferrari gauges, the condensate of the auxiliary fields, $ \langle \bar{\theta}^{\alpha I}(x)\theta^{\alpha I}(x)-\bar{\lambda}^{\alpha I}(x)\lambda^{\alpha I}(x) \rangle$, is purely diagonal. This is a direct consequence of the decomposition into diagonal and off-diagonal indices of the maximal Abelian gauge. Finally, as before, the dynamical generation of the condensates \eqref{spinormag7} can be taken into account by the refinement of the quark action, {\it i.e.}
\begin{equation}
\tilde{S}^{\psi}_{\mathrm{MAG-loc}}\,\longrightarrow\, S^{\psi}_{\mathrm{MAG-loc}} = \tilde{S}^{\psi}_{\mathrm{MAG-loc}} - \tilde{m}_{\psi}\int {\textrm{d}}^dx \bar{\psi}^{h,I}\psi^{h,I}+\rho^2\int {\textrm{d}}^dx\left(\bar{\theta}^{\alpha I}\theta^{\alpha I}-\bar{\lambda}^{\alpha I}\lambda^{\alpha I} \right)\,.
\label{spinormag12}
\end{equation}
Out of the action \eqref{spinormag12}, one can compute the tree-level quark propagator, which is given by
\begin{equation}
\langle \bar{\psi}^{I}(-k) \psi^{J}(k)\rangle = -\delta^{IJ}\frac{-i\gamma_\mu k_\mu+\left(M_\psi+\frac{g^2M^3}{2}\frac{1}{k^2+\rho^2}\right)}{k^2+\left(M_\psi+\frac{g^2M^3}{2}\frac{1}{k^2+\rho^2}\right)^2}\,.
\label{spinormag13}
\end{equation}
Quite importantly, the tree-level quark propagator \eqref{spinormag13} is in qualitative agreement with the very recent lattice results reported in \cite{Schrock:2015pna}. Such an agreement works as a highly non-trivial check of the non-perturbative matter coupling proposed here.
\section{Conclusions}
In this work, we have extended the non-perturbative gauge-matter coupling proposed in \cite{Capri:2016aqq,Capri:2014bsa} to linear covariant, Curci-Ferrari and maximal Abelian gauges. In particular, we have investigated the coupling of scalar fields in the adjoint representation of the gauge group as well as of quark fields in the fundamental representation.
The non-perturbative nature of the proposal relies on the introduction of an additional term in which the matter fields are coupled to the inverse of the operator $\EuScript{M}(A^h)$, whose existence is ensured by the restriction of the domain of integration in the functional integral to the Gribov region. As discussed in details throughout the paper, this additional term in the matter fields shares great similarity with the horizon function introduced in the pure gauge sector in order to implement the restriction to the Gribov region. Albeit non-local, the resulting action can be cast in local form by the introduction of auxiliary fields which, as in the case of the localizing Zwanziger fields of the pure gauge sector, develop their own dynamics giving rise to the formation of condensates, as explicitly checked through one-loop computations. Moreover, the condensates arising in the matter sector can be taken into account through an effective action which looks much alike the Refined Gribov-Zwanziger action which accounts for the existence of similar condensates in the gluon sector. Out of this action, the tree-level propagators for matter fields were analysed, giving rise to reflection positivity violating propagators. As in the case of the gluon propagator, the positivity violation is taken as a signal that colored matters fields are confined too.
We emphasize that the final effective action which encodes the non-perturbative effects of the matter sector is invariant under BRST transformations. This was achieved by the introduction of the suitable gauge-invariant fields $A^h$, $\phi^h$ and $\psi^h$, see \cite{Capri:2015ixa,Capri:2016aqq,Capri:2015nzw,Pereira:2016fpn,Capri:2016gut}, which, albeit local, are non-polynomial in the auxiliary Stueckelberg type field $\xi^a$. Nevertheless, such variables as well as the proposed non-perturbative matter coupling give rise to a local ation which can be proven to be renormalizable to all orders, see \cite{Fiorentini:2016rwx,Capri:2017}.
The present work can give rise to several future investigations among which we quote: \textit{i)} as done in the pure gauge sector \cite{Capri:2016gut}, we are now ready for a detailed analysis of the Nielsen identities, in the case of linear covariant gauges, to investigate the independence of the poles of the matter field propagator from the gauge parameter $\alpha$; \textit{ii)} use the gauge-invariance of $A^h$, $\phi^h$ and $\psi^h$ to explore the Landau-Khalatnikov-Fradkin tranformations, as briefly discussed in \cite{Capri:2016gut} for the gluon sector, and analyse how gauge-matter correlators depend on the gauge parameter $\alpha$, while checking out how the results compare with those obtained through the aforementioned Nielsen identitites; \textit{iii)} study of how the presence of the Higgs mechanism can drive the transition between the confining and de-confining regimes in a BRST invariant fashion, \textit{iv)} investigate how the present proposal generalizes to supersymmetric gauge theories, \textit{v)} stimulate different groups from other approaches such as lattice simulations and Dyson-Schwinger equations to study two-point functions of matter fields away from Landau gauge. As in the gluon sector, the interplay between different approaches in the study of non-perturbative correlation functions will certainly be very successful.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cient\'{i}fico e Tecnol\'{o}gico (CNPq-Brazil) and The Coordena\c c\~ao de Aperfei\c coamento de Pessoal de N\'ivel Superior (CAPES) are acknowledged.
|
\section{Introduction}
Together with a person's gender, age and race, their weight status is a publicly visible signal that can have profound influence on many aspects of their life. Most obviously, it can affect their health as having a larger BMI is linked to an increased risk of both cardio-vascular diseases and diabetes, though not necessarily in a straight-forward manner \cite{meigs2006body}. However, other aspects of the burden imposed by obesity come in the form of ``fat shaming'' and other forms of ``sizeism''. For example, obesity is related to a lower income\footnote{\url{http://www.forbes.com/sites/freekvermeulen/2011/03/22/the-price-of-obesity-how-your-salary-depends-on-your-weight/}} and part of the reason seems to be due to weight-based discrimination \cite{puhletal08ijo}. Even among health professionals ``sizeism'' is so prevalent that it has become a health hazard as, when faced with overweight patients, care providers stop to look for alternative explanations for a medical condition~\cite{doi:10.1080/21604851.2016.1213066}.
For these reasons, researchers from a variety of backgrounds are interested in studying obesity from all angles.
To obtain data, traditionally, a person would have to accurately self-report their body-mass index (BMI) or would have to see a doctor to have it measured.
In this paper, we propose a new pipeline using state-of-the-art computer vision techniques to infer a person's BMI from social media images, such as their profile picture. We show that the performance in distinguishing for a given pair the more overweight person is similar to human performance.
\section{Related Work}
Being overweight can lead to a range of negative consequences with the most direct ones concerning health. Given this importance, recent studies in psychology and sociology investigate how humans perceive health from profile pictures. \cite{coetzeeetal09perception} showed that facial adiposity (i.e., perception of weight in the face) was a significant predictor of the perceived health. Furthermore, they showed that perceived facial adiposity was significantly associated with cardiovascular health and reported infections, and hence, an important and valid cue to actual health. In a similar study, \cite{hendersonetal16ptrsl} explored the effect of a variety of facial characteristics on humans' health judgment. They found that facial features such as skin yellowness, mouth curvature and shape were correlated positively whereas facial shape associated with adiposity was correlated negatively with impression of health.
In light of these studies, \cite{webermejova16dh} took a crowdsourcing approach to understand health judgments of humans in a body-weight-inference task from profile pictures. However, since the judgment of whether a picture ``is overweight'' is a rather subjective task, their work suffered from the bias of human annotators to falsely equate ``overweight'' with ``abnormal.'' To eliminate such limitations, \cite{wenguo13ivc} showed that it is indeed feasible to some degree to predict BMI from face images automatically using computational techniques. Their approach relied on detecting a number of fiducial points in each face image and computing hand-crafted geometric facial features to train a regression model for BMI prediction. Their dataset, however, comprised exclusively passport-style frontal face photos with clean background, and hence, the performance of their BMI prediction model is uncertain for noisy social media pictures.
\section{Faces with BMI Data}
To ensure that our system works with noisy, often low quality social media pictures, such as profile pictures, we used the set of annotated images from the VisualBMI project\footnote{\url{http://www.visualbmi.com/}}. These images are, in turn, collected from Reddit posts that link to the imgur.com service. Examples of the underlying Reddit posts can be found in the ``progresspics'' sub-Reddit\footnote{\url{https://www.reddit.com/r/progresspics/}}. The VisualBMI dataset comprises a total of 16,483 images containing a pair of ``before'' and ``after'' images, annotated with gender, height and previous and current body weights. We manually went through all of the image URLs, and cropped the faces. We ignored all the images except the ones with two faces, since we only had previous and current body weights. After the manual cleaning process, we were left with 2103 pairs of faces, with corresponding gender, height and previous and current body weights. Then for each pair, we computed the previous BMI and current BMI. The BMI is defined as (body mass in kg) / (body height in m)${}^2$.
This led to a total of 4206 faces with corresponding gender and BMI information. Of these, seven were in the underweight range (16 $<$ BMI $\le$ 18.5), 680 were normal (18.5 $<$ BMI $\le$ 25), 1151 were overweight (25 $<$ BMI $\le$ 30), 941 were moderately obese (30 $<$ BMI $\le$ 35), 681 were severely obese (35 $<$ BMI $\le$ 40) and 746 were very severely obese (40 $<$ BMI). The dataset contained 2438 males and 1768 females. Figure~\ref{fig:bmiexamples} shows a selection of the faces that were used for training and evaluating our system.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{dataset_vis.jpg}\caption{Examples of the cleaned images used for model training. The black bars have been added to respect user privacy, but the model is learned on the original, public images.}\label{fig:bmiexamples}
\end{figure}
\section{Face-to-BMI System}
In this section, we describe our Face-to-BMI system starting with (i) the computer vision architecture used for building the prediction model, and then (ii) the details of the evaluation and comparison with human performance. Our pre-trained models and scripts for using them can be downloaded for academic research purposes at \url{http://face2bmi.csail.mit.edu}.
\subsection{Computer Vision Architecture}
Many computer vision tasks have greatly benefited from the recent advances in deep learning \cite{Parkhi15,krizhevsky2012imagenet,simonyan2014very} and here we also utilize such models for the Face-to-BMI problem. The features learned in deep convolutional networks are proven to be transferable and quite effective when used in other visual recognition tasks \cite{yosinski2014transferable,girshick2014rich}, particularly when training samples are limited and learning a successful deep model is not feasible due to overfitting. For instance, \cite{ozbulak2016transferable} shows the success of this transfer for age and gender recognition tasks performed on face images. Considering that we also have limited training examples, we adopted a transfer learning approach.
Our BMI prediction system is composed of two stages: (i) deep feature extraction, and (ii) training a regression model.
For feature extraction we use two well-known deep models, one trained on general object classification (i.e., VGG-Net \cite{simonyan2014very}) and the other trained on a face recognition task (i.e., VGG-Face \cite{Parkhi15}). Both of these models are deep convolutional models with millions of parameters, and trained on millions of images. The features from the \emph{fc6} layer are extracted for each face image in our training set. For the BMI regression, we use epsilon support vector regression models \cite{smola1997support} due to its robust generalization behavior. The models are trained on the 3368 training images and tested on 838 test images from the VisualBMI dataset. We make sure that the same individual does not exist in both training and test sets (e.g., before and after images). The performance of both of our models are shown in Table~\ref{tab:face2bmi_performance}. As also pointed out by \cite{ozbulak2016transferable}, the features extracted from a more relevant model, i.e., VGG-Face, perform better compared to the VGG-Net features. Due to its superiority we use VGG-Face features in our Face-to-BMI system.
To see if our system could also be used for tracking weight changes for a single person, rather than comparing across people, we also defined a different train-test split. We first randomly selected 838 unique individuals from our dataset. For each of these individuals, we randomly selected one of the two corresponding before-after face photos and added them to a new test set. All the remaining pictures were added to the new training set. In this way, every person that has a face image in test set also had a face image in the training set. We kept the training and test sizes the same to ensure a fair comparison. Our model achieved 0.68 correlation, compared to 0.65 in the across-people setup, suggesting that our system benefits from having a history of images to train on for the individual it is making a prediction for.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\toprule
\textbf{Model} & \textbf{Male} & \textbf{Female} & \textbf{Overall} \\
\midrule
Face-to-BMI -- VGG-Net & 0.58 & 0.36 & 0.47 \\
Face-to-BMI -- VGG-Face & 0.71 & 0.57 & 0.65 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{The Pearson $r$ correlations on the test set for the BMI prediction task, broken down by gender. Note that VGG-Face features yield a much better performance.}
\label{tab:face2bmi_performance}
\end{table}
\subsection{Human Evaluation}
We conduct a simple experiment to compare our Face-to-BMI system's performance to that of humans. Given face images for two individuals, each ``contestant,'' i.e., machine and human, is required to tell which one is more overweight. Note that our system was not trained for this specific binary classification task though and a dedicated system might perform better.
For evaluation, we collect a total number of 900 pairs. This is obtained by using only samples coming from the test set, chosen such that pairs are equally distributed in gender subcategories (`male vs.\ male', `female vs.\ female' and `female vs.\ male') and BMI difference between individuals within a pair. Concretely, we randomly collect
300 `male vs.\ male' pairs consisting in 15 subsets of 20-pairs each, such that, for each subset $S_i$, with $i\in\{0,\hdots,14\}$, all pairs $(a,b)\in S_i$ satisfy:
$$(0.5 + i) < |\mathrm{BMI}_a - \mathrm{BMI}_b| \leq (1.5 + i) $$
\noindent We also collect 300 `female vs.\ female' and `female vs.\ male' pairs following the same strategy. In the latter case, we also assure that half of the pairs correspond to males being more overweight and vice-versa.
Furthermore, we try to balance the overall BMI distribution across the whole spectrum, from thin to obese.
On the human side, we perform the aforementioned questionnaire through Amazon Mechanical Turk\footnote{\url{http://mturk.com}}. Each question is shown to three unique users gathering a total of 2700 answers. The human performance is then obtained using all the answers together and represented as the accuracy. We did not apply a majority voting approach as we wanted to evaluate the performance of an\emph{individual} human. On the machine side, for each question we compare the system output of each individual included in the pair to obtain an answer.
Figure~\ref{fig:hvsf2bmi} depicts the results of comparison broken down by the pair's gender type and the absolute BMI difference between individuals of each pair. The overall performance difference between human and machine is less than $2\%$, but when looking at different gender subcategories, there is a bigger gap the `male vs.\ male' comparisons, $\sim 5\%$.
Humans slightly outperform the machine for small BMI differences, and there is almost no performance difference for larger BMI differences.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{human_evaluation.png}
\caption{Human vs.\ Face-to-BMI comparison broken down by gender and absolute BMI difference between individuals of each pair.}
\label{fig:hvsf2bmi}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion}
\subsection{Algorithmic Bias}
As demographic groups differ in their BMI distribution, it is likely that, e.g., the race and the BMI are not independent attributes in the visualBMI data.
This could then mean that our system perpetuates existing stereotypes. For example, as African Americans have higher obesity rates in the US population, an automated system might learn a prior probability that increases the likelihood of a person to be labeled as obese simply based on their race.
To test if our system is biased in outputting a higher BMI for a picture solely due to the person's gender or race, we paired users with a similar BMI, i.e., difference $<$ 1.0, but a different gender or race. Furthermore, these pairs were constructed such that, in aggregate, each demographic group had the same number of (slightly) higher BMIs. For pairs with such close BMIs, an unbiased tool should pick members of either group 50\% of the time. Hence we check if our tool creates a distribution in the output that differs statistically significantly from 50-50.
For 2000 male-female pairs from the test set the tool predicted a higher BMI for females in 1037 cases, $p=.05$. Though the evidence is inconclusive, it is possible that our system is slightly biased against females. To test for racial bias we did not have a sufficient number of pairs in the test set and hence had to include examples from the training set. For 2000 White-African American pairs, our tool predicted a higher BMI for Whites in 1085 cases, $p<.05$, hinting at a small bias against Whites.
\subsection{Ethical Considerations}
Historically, 19th century phrenology\footnote{\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrenology}} studied the potential link between the shape of skull and moral attributes, applying a pseudo-scientific methodology to justify racism. Recently, researchers in China have started to predict if a face belongs to a criminal
which, they claim, they can detect with better-than-random accuracy. However, their work is largely being viewed both as unethical and as scientifically flawed \cite{biddle2016}.
Going beyond moral attributes and the shape of the skull, psychologists have indeed shown that using only facial information it is possible for a person to perform better than random chance at guessing another's personality \cite{BJOP:BJOP254}, an observation at the heart of physiognomy\footnote{\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiognomy}}. Over the last couple of years, there has been a growing body of work that successfully applies computer vision techniques to automatically infer a person's personality in particular from images shared on social media \cite{Nie2016,Dhall2016,Guntuku:2015:OPY:2813524.2813528,DBLP:conf/icwsm/LiuPSMU16}.
Most of the methods mentioned above work ``better than random guessing'' but, when applied to a single individual, are still highly unreliable. This is partly because concepts such as personality are inherently vague and partly because the connection to facial features is weak.
This caveat also largely applies to our tool which, despite a performance similar to humans, is still noisy at the individual level. However, at the \emph{population} level it can be used to detect relative trends as long as it is not biased in a systematic way. In other words, result of the form ``the average BMI for group X is larger than for group Y'' are far more robust than results of the form ``this individual from group X has a higher BMI than this other individual from group Y''. This distinction also applies to the BMI which is useful for studying population health but has shortcomings when used as a tool for individual health \cite{daniels2009use,prentice2001beyond}.
\section{Conclusions}
In this work, we apply the most recent computer vision techniques to obtain a novel Face-to-BMI system. The performance of this tool is on par to that of humans for distinguishing the more overweight person when presented with a pair of profile images. We discuss issues related to algorithmic bias and ethical considerations when inferring information from a person's profile image. To limit the potential of abuse while allowing others to replicate and build on our results, we make our pre-trained models only available to academic researchers after describing the intended use.
In future work, we will apply our method to social media profile pictures to model population-level obesity rates. Preliminary results show that both regional and demographic differences in BMI are reflected in large amounts of Instagram profile pictures.
|
\section{Introduction \label{sec_intro}}
No problem is more central to astrophysics than understanding how stars are born, live, and die. This cycle is responsible for enriching the cosmos in heavy elements from the Big Bang to the present and largely determines the luminosity, spectral energy distribution, and morphology of galaxies over cosmic time. Supernova remnants (SNRs), which represent the ashes from one generation of stars and provide the raw material for another, provide an important window through which we can view the stellar cycle. For investigating the overall SNR population, we must look to nearby galaxies, where SNRs can be readily studied free from the foreground extinction that plagues most of the SNRs in the Milky Way, and where all the objects are effectively at the same distance.
M83 (NGC\,5236) is a classic grand-design SAB(s)c spiral galaxy with a starburst nucleus, active star formation along the arms, and prominent dust lanes \citep{elmegreen98}. It has played host to six recorded supernovae (SNe) in the past century, ranking behind only NGC\,6946 (with nine) and the far more distant NGC\,3690 and NGC\,4303 (seven each) \citep{barbon99}. At a distance of 4.61 Mpc \citep{saha06}, M83 is close enough to be studied effectively with current generations of telescopes (1\arcsec\,=\,22 pc), and it is nearly face-on. Hence, M83 arguably provides the most comprehensive view of any galaxy where such active star formation and destruction are taking place. The integrated effects of this active star formation process are manifest through the generally high metallicity and the chemical abundance gradients measured by spectroscopy of \ion{H}{2}\ regions across the $\sim$10\arcmin\ diameter bright optical disk \citep{{bresolin02}, {pilyugin06a}, {pilyugin10}, {bresolin16}}. A fainter and much more extended disk is seen in \ion{H}{1}\ and in GALEX ultraviolet imaging data \citep{{huchtmeier81}, {thilker05}, {bigiel10}}.
Five of the six historical SNe in M83 have types of either Ib, II, or IIP, all of which result from core-collapse of massive stars \citep{{barbon99}, {williams15}}. Simple extrapolation from the recent past thus leads us to expect that there must have been dozens of core-collapse SNe in M83 within the past millennium. In addition, there should be many more older SNRs, since they typically remain visible for tens of thousands of years, depending on local conditions in the interstellar medium (ISM) around each object. These considerations have led us and collaborators to undertake extensive multi-wavelength studies of M83, one important goal of which has been to identify SNRs in M83 and to characterize them---both individually and as a population.
Imaging studies by ourselves and others have identified numerous supernova remnants (SNRs) in M83. The most commonly used technique for optically identifying SNR candidates is to find nebulae with strong [\ion{S}{2}]\,\lamlam 6716,6731 emission relative to {H$\alpha$}\ in digital images. This criterion has long proved effective for discriminating SNRs, especially evolved ones dominated by matter swept up from the interstellar medium, from other types of nebulae. Its physical basis stems from the fact that the supernova blast wave rapidly heats and ionizes material entering the shock; this is followed by gradual cooling and recombination. Emission from this cooling tail is characterized by forbidden lines from a range of ionization states, including S$^+$.
By contrast, in photo-ionized regions radiation from embedded hot stars maintains a higher ionization state; sulfur exists mainly as S$^{++}$, and the [\ion{S}{2}]\ emission lines are relatively weak. SNRs typically have [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratios $\gtrsim 0.4$, while \ion{H}{2}\ regions typically have [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}$\: \lesssim 0.2$ \citep[e.g.][]{mathewson72,dodorico80,levenson95,blair97,matonick97}.
The first search for SNRs in M83 was carried out by \citet[][hereinafter BL04]{blair04}. They used the [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ line ratio in CCD images to identify 71 emission nebulae as probable SNRs in M83, and then conducted follow-up longslit spectroscopy of 25 of these candidates, confirming 23. BL04 also carried out a separate search for [\ion{O}{3}]-bright nebulae in order to identify ejecta-dominated SNRs, similar to Cas A \citep[e.g.,][]{kirshner77, fesen01}
in our Galaxy or 1E 0102-7219 in the Small Magellanic Cloud \citep[e.g.,][]{dopita84, blair00}.
Such young remnants as these in M83 would likely be unresolved at ground-based resolution (e.g., at the distance of M83, Cas A would have a diameter of only 0\farcs 15) and could be confused with planetary nebulae. Extended nebulae with high ratios of [\ion{O}{3}]\mbox{$\:\lambda\ $} 5007 to {H$\alpha$}\ are likely to be normal ISM-dominated SNRs with high enough shock velocities to excite [\ion{O}{3}], or perhaps nebulae excited by early-type Wolf-Rayet stars. BL04 noted 36 nebulae with an [\ion{O}{3}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio between 0.25 and 0.80, almost half of which were also on their list of SNR candidates with high [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratios. The only bona fide ejecta-dominated SNR confirmed as part of this survey was the remnant of the historical SN\,1957D, recovered as a faint, unresolved [\ion{O}{3}]\ nebula at the SN position \citep{long89}.
\citet[hereinafter D10]{dopita10} reported the results from an imaging study, carried out with the Wide Field Camera 3 (WFC3) on the {\it Hubble} Space Telescope, of a single $162\arcsec \times 162\arcsec$ field in M83 that included the complex nuclear region and part of one spiral arm. They identified 60 SNR candidates that are relatively bright in both [\ion{S}{2}]\ and [\ion{O}{2}] $\lambda 3727$\ relative to {H$\alpha$}, only 12 of which had been identified by BL04. In addition, D10 identified six (slightly) extended nebulae with [\ion{O}{3}]\ emission that they suggested might be young, ejecta-dominated SNRs, one compact [\ion{O}{3}]\ nebula with a corresponding X-ray source that they regarded as a very strong candidate to be an ejecta-dominated SNR, and the possible counterpart to SN1968L deep within the complex starburst nuclear region.
Subsequently, \citet [][hereinafter B12]{blair12} reported on a comprehensive search for SNRs in M83 from emission-line imaging of the entire bright optical disk of M83 using the 6.5m Magellan-I telescope and the IMACS instrument under conditions of exceptional seeing ($\lesssim 0\farcs 5$). They found a total of 225 SNR candidates with [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ line ratios $> 0.4$\@, including all but three of the faintest candidates from BL04.
B12 also carried out a search based on the [\ion{O}{3}]\,\mbox{$\:\lambda\ $} 5007:{H$\alpha$}\ ratio, similar to that of BL04 but with better sensitivity and angular resolution, that led to the identification of 46 additional [\ion{O}{3}]-selected objects. In order to weed out planetary nebulae, B12 required that these objects have either (1) associated X-ray emission, based on the the {\em Chandra} ACIS survey by \citet[][hereinafter SW03]{soria03} or a preliminary analysis of data from our much deeper {\em Chandra} ACIS survey \citep[hereinafter L14]{long14}; and/or (2) a spatial extent large enough to be resolved (size $\gtrsim 0\farcs 6 \approx 13$ pc).
Most recently, \citet[hereinafter B14]{blair14} reported results from a survey of M83 from {\em HST}, much more extensive that that of D10 and comprising seven WFC3 fields. In that paper, we focused narrowly on one topic: the population of {\em young}\ SNRs---those whose sizes (mostly $< 0\farcs 5$) make them difficult to fully characterize from the ground. Analysis of both optical and IR ([\ion{Fe}{2}]\ 1.644 $\mu$m) emission-line images led to a list of 63 candidates, of which 37 had previously been included in the B12 and/or D10 catalogs. Further analysis of the {\em Chandra} ACIS data led to identification of 26 of the 63 objects as soft X-ray sources, a further indicator of youthful vigor in SNRs.
Here we describe the results of a spectroscopic study of dozens of SNR candidates in M83, carried out using the Gemini Multi-Object Spectrograph (GMOS) on the 8.2m Gemini South telescope in April 2011, plus additional GMOS spectra from April-June 2015.
We have previously described the spectra from two objects of singular interest: SN\,1957D, in \citet{long12} where we reported the discovery of X-ray emission from this remnant of the historical SN; and a second apparently very young SNR that we have designated B12-174a \citep[close neighbor to object 174 in the B12 catalog,][]{blair15}. B12-174a must be under 100 years old, based on its small size and very broad emission lines that indicate high-velocity ejecta, but no historical evidence of its explosion has so far been discovered.
The present paper is organized as follows: Section 2 reports the target selection, observations, and data reduction. Section 3 summarizes our results---line fluxes and other data for 140 SNR candidates. Section 4 provides an analysis of the observations and a brief discussion, and a summary follows in Section 5.
\section{Observations and Data Reduction \label{sec_obs}}
We used the Gemini Multi-Object Spectrograph (GMOS) on the 8.2m Gemini-South telescope to obtain all the spectra reported here. Most were obtained in a classically scheduled observing run on 2011 April 7-9 (UT).
In advance of this run, we designed seven custom masks, each with 20-30 slitlets, whose positions we determined from our 2009 Magellan IMACS images, together with short $R$-band pre-images of several M83 fields taken with GMOS earlier in 2011 as part of the spectroscopy program.
We selected objects from the lists of SNR candidates in D10 and in a preliminary version of the catalog that later appeared in B12.
Slitlets in one or more of our seven masks were placed on 107 distinct SNR candidates, including ones with a range of sizes, galactocentric radii, and ISM environments (locations in arms and in
inter-arm regions).\footnote{Exceptions are the very outermost regions of the galaxy, where the sparse population would have made less efficient use of the $5\farcm 5 \times 5\farcm 5$ GMOS field, and the innermost nuclear region, where source confusion and the high star density would have made sky subtraction difficult.}
We later obtained spectra for two additional masks (which we refer to as masks 8 and 9 for simplicity) in a queue-scheduled program (GS-2015A-Q-90) during the 2015A semester. For this program we concentrated especially on small-diameter objects, many of which we had by then identified in the {\it HST}/WFC3 images (D10, B14), though we also included several additional objects from the B12 lists. In the 2011 and 2015 runs together we obtained spectra of 140 different SNR candidates.
Figure \ref{fig.galaxy} shows all the objects from the B12, D10, and B14 catalogs, and highlights those for which we obtained spectra (red boxes). In addition to the SNR candidates, we also placed a number of slitlets on prominent \ion{H}{2}\ regions and bright planetary nebulae for comparison purposes.
For all the spectra we used GMOS-S with the 600 lines\,mm$^{-1}$ grating designated G5323 and a GG455 cut-off filter to block second-order spectra. The detector in 2011 was a mosaic of e2v CCD chips, binned $\times 2$ in the spatial direction (for a scale of 0\farcs 146 pixel$^{-1}$) and $\times 4$ in the dispersion direction.
The dispersion was 1.84 \AA\, pixel$^{-1}$ (binned), resulting in coverage of the spectral range of at least {H$\beta$}\ through [\ion{S}{2}]\lamlam 6716,\,6731 for virtually all the objects.\footnote{The wavelength coverage naturally varied with slitlet position in the dispersion direction.} Our masks had slitlet widths from 1\farcs 25 to 1\farcs 75, with wider slits used for the larger objects, and lengths of 6\arcsec\ or longer to permit local background sky subtraction.
In 2011, at least three frames at different wavelength settings were taken with each mask, in order to eliminate cosmic rays and to cover wavelength gaps between chips. For calibration, we took quartz flats and CuAr arc frames immediately before or after the science exposure(s) with each mask and wavelength setting, as well as longslit spectra of a number of spectrophotometric standard stars from the list of \citet{hamuy92}.
During the 2015A semester, the e2v CCDs in GMOS-S had been replaced with a mosaic of Hamamatsu CCDs. Unfortunately, one of these chips soon developed a problem with one of the amplifiers that resulted in data loss from a portion of the detector. To work around the amplifier problem, we used five widely spaced wavelength settings in order to bridge over sections of the detector where data were missing, and took a set of three frames at each setting to eliminate cosmic rays.
We again used 2 (spatial) $\times 4$ (dispersion) binning; both the spatial scale and dispersion were essentially identical to that of the earlier chips. A journal of the science observations from both 2011 and 2015 appears in Table \ref{obs_log}.
The data were processed using standard procedures for bias subtraction, flat-fielding, wavelength calibration, and flux calibration from the {\tt gemini} package in IRAF.\footnote{IRAF is distributed by the National Optical Astronomy Observatory, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation.} During the processing, the 2-D spectra from different slitlets were separated; we examined each of these individually to determine the optimum background sky subtraction region. Many of the objects are located in regions with bright surrounding galactic background (both continuum and emission lines) from M83, so the ability to subtract a representative local background in the immediate vicinity of each object is important for obtaining accurate spectra. Finally, we extracted one-dimensional spectra by summing rows containing each object using an algorithm that allows for a small linear slope from the blue to the red end of each spectrum.
Tables \ref{table-SNR} and \ref{table-O3} list all the SNR candidates for which we obtained spectra. In both tables, column 1 gives the object name from the B12, B14, and/or D10 lists; column 2 provides some alternative names for the objects, columns 3 and 4 give the position; column 5 the diameter (assuming a distance to M83 of 4.61 Mpc). Most of the objects lie within the footprint of the WFC3 observations, and for the great majority of these we measured the diameters from the WFC3 images. For candidates in the outer galaxy, plus a few low-surface-brightness ones within the WFC3 footprint, we used the Magellan images instead, adjusted for seeing. Column 6 gives the galactocentric distance; and column 7 notes objects that were detected in the {\em Chandra} ACIS X-ray survey by \citet{long14}. Column 8 gives the mask and slitlet number used for extracting the one-dimensional spectra. Several objects were observed with more than one mask; listed here is the one with the highest signal-to-noise ratio. As an indication that the sample with spectra is representative of the overall population of SNR candidates in M83, we show histograms of number vs.\ diameter in Fig.~\ref{fig_histograms}a and of number vs.\ galactocentric distance in Fig.~\ref{fig_histograms}b. The singular exception is that we purposely ignored the crowded central starburst region since spectra in this region would have been too confused.
\section{Results}
Among all nine masks, we have obtained spectra for 140 possible SNRs: 127 of the 271 SNRs and candidates cataloged by B12 (108 of these [\ion{S}{2}]-selected, their Table 2; 19 [\ion{O}{3}]-selected, their Table 3), plus seven candidates from D10 (five [\ion{S}{2}]-selected, their Table 2; two [\ion{O}{3}]-selected, their Table 4) that are not duplicated in the B12 list, plus six additional objects identified in the full WFC3 survey (B14).
Taking all the objects together, whether previously confirmed or not and whether identified from Magellan or WFC3 data, there are a total of 118 [\ion{S}{2}]-selected (probably ISM-dominated) and 22 [\ion{O}{3}]-selected objects. In this last grouping, we have included the young ejecta-dominated object B12-174a (which met criteria for selection based on both its [\ion{S}{2}]\ and [\ion{O}{3}]\ lines) and the remnant of SN1957d with the [\ion{O}{3}]-selected group for the purposes of the subsequent discussion.
Since the regions covered by different masks overlap considerably, several of the objects were observed with more than one mask. In cases with multiple spectra of the same object, we present here the results for the one with the best signal-to-noise (where one is clearly superior), or have combined the multiple spectra (where two or more have comparable signal-to-noise). In Fig.~\ref{fig_multiple_spectra} we show several typical examples of our background-subtracted and extracted one-dimensional spectra.
For all the 1-D spectra, we performed Gaussian fits to the prominent emission lines---{H$\beta$}, [\ion{O}{3}]\,\lamlam 4959, 5007, [\ion{O}{1}]\lamlam 6300, 6363, [\ion{N}{2}]\lamlam\,6548, 6583, {H$\alpha$}, and [\ion{S}{2}]\lamlam 6716, 6731---where we fit the central wavelength, integrated flux (relative to the local continuum), and FWHM for each line. We give the fluxes obtained for most of these lines (not including [\ion{O}{3}]\ \mbox{$\:\lambda\ $} 4959, [\ion{O}{1}] \mbox{$\:\lambda\ $} 6363, or [\ion{N}{2}] \mbox{$\:\lambda\ $} 6548, all of whose fluxes relative to the stronger member of their respective doublets are determined by atomic physics) in Table \ref{table-snr-flux} for the [\ion{S}{2}]-selected objects and Table \ref{table-O3-flux} for the [O III]-selected objects.
We do not quote uncertainties for the line fluxes in Tables \ref{table-snr-flux} and \ref{table-O3-flux}. Although our fitting routine does give a formal error, in most cases the actual uncertainty is limited by systematic errors in subtracting the night sky and galaxy background in our two-dimensional spectra from slitlets that are typically only 6\arcsec-10\arcsec\ long. Such effects are most significant for lines that are present in the diffuse night sky and/or in much of the M83 disk: {H$\alpha$}, {H$\beta$}, and [\ion{O}{1}] \lamlam 6300, 6363.
Given this, the best way to estimate the overall uncertainty is to compare completely independent spectra of the same object. For 16 of our [\ion{S}{2}]-selected SNRs, we obtained independent spectra from slits on two or more different masks, so we can compare these results. Even though the integrated flux values in Table \ref{table-snr-flux} represent only a fraction of the total flux for objects that are considerably larger than the slit width, the {\em relative} fluxes should still be accurate, so we have compared several line flux ratios for independent spectra of the same object by calculating the rms dispersion in each line ratio for all 16 objects with multiple spectra, with the result shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_errors}. We find that for the strong lines---[\ion{O}{3}] \mbox{$\:\lambda\ $} 5007, {H$\alpha$}, [\ion{N}{2}], and [\ion{S}{2}]---the dispersion is $< 20\%$ of the ratio value in virtually all cases, and is $<10\%$ in most cases involving remnants with {H$\alpha$}\ flux $\gtrsim 10^{-16} \:{\rm erg\:cm^{-2}\:s^{-1}}$. Extrapolating from these examples, we estimate that the uncertainty in fluxes for these lines in Tables~\ref{table-snr-flux} and \ref{table-O3-flux} is no worse than than 10-20\%. For the fainter lines, [\ion{O}{1}]\ in many cases and {H$\beta$}\ in some, the uncertainty is probably larger. Flux values that are likely to have large uncertainties are preceded by an ``$\sim$'' symbol in Tables \ref{table-snr-flux} and \ref{table-O3-flux}.
In addition to the SNRs and candidates that are the focus of our study, we also obtained spectra of several \ion{H}{2}\ regions. Table \ref{h2_regions} lists the \ion{H}{2}\ regions and Table \ref{table-HII-flux} shows extracted fluxes for the \ion{H}{2}\ regions, which are used in some of the comparisons below.
\subsection{Comparison between Images and Spectra}
Before examining the results from our survey, we first check for systematic effects by comparing the emission-line fluxes measured from our spectra with those from our narrow-band imaging with either Magellan/IMACS (B12), or WFC3 (B14).\footnote{Partially as a result of this comparison, we discovered a significant systematic error in the B12 line fluxes. We have corrected this in an Erratum, \citet{blair17}, and have used those corrected fluxes for the comparison here. As noted in that Erratum, the corrected fluxes are also consistent with several independent data sets.} Fig.~\ref{fig:flux_comp_trio}, shows this comparison for the {H$\alpha$}, [\ion{S}{2}], and [\ion{O}{3}]\ lines for all the SNR candidates. For both [\ion{S}{2}]\ and [\ion{O}{3}], the correlation is good: many objects are close to the line of equal flux, and the majority have flux values from spectroscopy only a little below those from imaging, $0.5\,F_{image} \le F_{spectra} \le F_{image}$. This is just as expected, since in many cases the extent of the object was greater than the slit width, especially including seeing effects which could cause loss of flux. For {H$\alpha$}, the correlation is less good because the interference filter used for our Magellan/IMACS imaging (which comprises the vast majority of the objects) was centered near 6552 \AA, and thus admitted much of the light in the [\ion{N}{2}]\,\lam6548 line, while the {H$\alpha$}\ line was displaced from the transmission peak (see B12 for further discussion). Furthermore, for objects in confused regions such as spiral arms or near the nucleus, obtaining an accurate measure of the local sky background was difficult and added uncertainty to the flux measurements from imaging in all three lines.
\subsection{Confirming Bona Fide SNRs: [\ion{S}{2}]-Selected Objects}
One of the goals of this work is to identify which of the SNR candidates we have observed can be confirmed as genuine. The chief criterion is the [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio, for which only spectra can give an accurate value (since narrow-band images include some or all of the [\ion{N}{2}]\ \lamlam 6548, 6583 flux along with {H$\alpha$}).
In Fig.~\ref{fig_s2ha_vs_flux} we plot the [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio as a function of {H$\alpha$}\ flux for various classes of objects in our survey. For the ISM-dominated candidates---those that were selected on the basis of high [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ in our narrow-band images---the spectra confirm that this ratio exceeds 0.4, the usual threshold for shock-heated gas, in the vast majority of cases. The remainder of this section discusses only this group; we return to the [\ion{O}{3}]-selected objects in the following section.
An additional criterion for confirming SNR candidates is the existence of [\ion{O}{1}] \lamlam 6300, 6363 emission, since neutral oxygen is even less likely to be found in photo-ionized regions than S$^+$. We find that [\ion{O}{1}] \mbox{$\:\lambda\ $} 6300 is clearly present in the spectra from 110 of the 118 ISM-dominated candidates.
Further characteristics of many, though not all SNRs are the existence of [\ion{Fe}{2}] \mbox{$\:\lambda\ $} 1.644$\mu$m emission and/or X-ray emission. The infrared fields of our {\em HST} WFC3 survey of M83 (D10, B14) included 103 of the 118 [\ion{S}{2}]-selected candidates, of which 56 have obvious coincident 1.644$\mu$m emission in continuum-subtracted F164N images. We will discuss our WFC3 IR survey of M83 more quantitatively in a future publication.
For only 15 of the ISM-dominated objects is the [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio measured from spectroscopy smaller than 0.4. We have re-examined the Magellan images, those from WFC3 where the object lies in the survey field, the two-dimensional spectra, and the {\em Chandra} images for all 15 of these, and also for four additional objects where the [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio is only slightly over 0.4. Almost all of these 19 objects show strong evidence of being SNRs that are contaminated by \ion{H}{2}\ emission---objects either within or adjacent to \ion{H}{2}\ regions---so that the SNR and \ion{H}{2}\ emission could not be separated on the GMOS slit. All but four of the 19 have clear [\ion{O}{1}]\mbox{$\:\lambda\ $} 6300 emission, and
nine of them have [\ion{Fe}{2}]\mbox{$\:\lambda\ $} 1.644 $\mu$m emission detected in our WFC3 IR fields. Seven of the 19 have coincident soft X-ray sources in our {\em Chandra} survey (L14)\footnote{We only report coincidences between optical SNR candidates and the L14 survey; it is possible that a more thorough approach to measuring the X-ray emission at the positions of SNR candidates might turn up additional coincidences at lower statistical significance.}
For only one object, number 48 from Table 3 of B14 = B14-48, does detailed examination fail to find evidence that the object is a SNR. This object has a [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio of only 0.06 in the WFC3 images, and 0.13 in its GMOS spectrum. (It was included in the B14 list largely because of its strong [\ion{O}{3}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio.) We conclude that it is probably {\em not} a SNR, but instead is a compact \ion{H}{2}\ region, and we exclude it from consideration in the discussion that follows. For one additional object, B12-119, the evidence that it is a bona fide SNR is somewhat questionable: [\ion{S}{2}]/H$\alpha \approx 0.37$; [\ion{O}{1}]\ emission appears to be present at only marginal significance; and there is no detected [\ion{Fe}{2}]\ or X-ray emission. Nevertheless, since its [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio is enhanced relative to the vast majority of \ion{H}{2}\ regions, we retain it as a probable SNR in the subsequent discussion.
\subsection{[\ion{O}{3}]-selected Objects}
Also plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig_s2ha_vs_flux} are the 22 objects listed in Table \ref{table-O3} that were selected on the basis of a high ratio of [\ion{O}{3}] \mbox{$\:\lambda\ $} 5007 to {H$\alpha$}\ flux in narrow-band imaging studies. The primary purpose of their selection, and of targeting them for spectra, was to search for possible young, ejecta-dominated, or oxygen-rich SNRs like Cas A, where spectra might show broad lines indicating high ejecta velocities. One such object was indeed found, B12-174a \citep{blair15}.
Also included in the [\ion{O}{3}]-selected group is the SN1957D remnant, long recognized as an O-rich SNR. Of the other 20 objects in this group, none turned out to have the broad emission lines that characterize ejecta-dominated SNRs.
While the vast majority of H~II regions in M83 have weak or no [\ion{O}{3}]\ with respect to H$\beta$, there exists a small subset of compact emission nebulae with stronger [\ion{O}{3}]\ emission that are either PNe or compact, high-excitation \ion{H}{2}\ regions (perhaps associated with W-R stars in some cases). One object selected from the [\ion{O}{3}]\ image even turned out to be a background QSO.
Thus, while objects like Cas A or the SN1957D remnant do indeed have high [\ion{O}{3}]/{H$\alpha$}\ line ratios, the vast majority of [\ion{O}{3}]-bright objects have other identifications, with the stronger than typical [\ion{O}{3}]\ emission resulting from photo-ionization. We conclude that using the [\ion{O}{3}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio from images to search for ejecta-dominated SNRs is not very efficient, and results in a large number of ``false positives." We address the question of why M83 has fewer ejecta-dominated remnants than might be expected in Sec.~4.1.
\subsection{Reddening and Emission-Line Ratios} \label{sec:reddening}
The {H$\beta$}:{H$\alpha$}\ ratio, plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig_hbha_vs_r}, gives a measure of the reddening, and shows that all our SNR candidates suffer from some degree of local reddening in M83 itself, in addition to the Galactic foreground value of $E(B-V)=0.059$ \citep{schlafly11}, though the internal reddening generally becomes smaller at larger galactocentric radii. The range of reddening values is similar to that found for \ion{H}{2}\ regions in M83 by \citet{bresolin02} and \citet{bresolin05}.
The reddening is quite uncertain in many cases, due primarily to the difficulty of cleanly subtracting the {H$\alpha$}\ and {H$\beta$}\ lines in the two-dimensional spectra where there is frequently \ion{H}{2}\ emission along much of the slit. Hence in Tables \ref{table-snr-flux} and \ref{table-O3-flux} we report the {\em measured}, rather than dereddened fluxes. We note that the most physically important ratios, [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}, [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}, [\ion{S}{2}] \mbox{$\:\lambda\ $} 6716:\mbox{$\:\lambda\ $} 6731, and [\ion{O}{3}]/{H$\beta$}, the wavelength baselines are quite short, hence these are relatively insensitive to uncertainty in the reddening. One might suspect that X-ray detected SNRs would tend toward lower values of E(B-V), but we have checked and there is no indication that this is the case.
\section{Emission Line Diagnostics and Comparison with Shock Models}
The relative intensities of various emission lines in both SNRs and \ion{H}{2}\ regions have long been used, in conjunction with the appropriate models, as diagnostics for the chemical abundances and physical conditions in these nebulae. A prime example is the [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio, which has often been used as a proxy for the N/H abundance (with appropriate scaling) in both types of nebulae. This is because the N$^+$ ionization potential is close to that of hydrogen, and hence both species populate approximately the same regions \citep[e.g.,][]{blair82}. In galaxies where both have been observed, a plot showing [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ vs. galactocentric distance (GCD) typically shows parallel tracks for \ion{H}{2}\ regions and SNRs, with SNRs offset to higher values of the ratio. (The [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio is enhanced in SNRs for the same reason that [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ is enhanced, Sec.~1.) In galaxies with abundance gradients, one usually sees a general decrease in the [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio with increasing GCD, albeit with significant scatter that may me due to factors such as varying shock conditions \citep{blair97, gordon98, lee15} in additional to observational errors.
In Fig.~\ref{fig_n2_s2_vs_gcd} we show [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio and [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio for the
SNRs as a function of GCD. M83 is unusual among local spirals in that its mean abundance levels are not only high, but are {\em uniformly} high over the bright optical disk, with only a slight metallicity gradient over the bright optical disk \citep{bresolin02, bresolin09}.
Fig.~\ref{fig_n2_s2_vs_gcd} also includes data for the \ion{H}{2}\ regions (open circles) for which we have spectra (Table \ref{h2_regions}). The \ion{H}{2}\ regions show little evidence of a radial gradient in either the [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ or [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio, and the scatter is small. The different between the \ion{H}{2}\ region sample and the SNRs (filled circles) is quite striking. As in other galaxies, the SNRs have significantly higher ratios, but the scatter of the M83 SNR data is quite large.
Fig.~\ref{fig_s2ha_vs_flux} shows that our \ion{H}{2}\ region sample covers approximately the same range of {H$\alpha$}\ fluxes as the SNR sample, so this is not a signal-to-noise effect. The dashed lines in Fig.~\ref{fig_n2_s2_vs_gcd} show least-squares fits that suggest some decline with GCD in both line ratios for the SNRs, but given the scatter this is only minimally significant. Potential reasons for this large scatter in line ratios will be discussed below, but it likely indicates both varying shock conditions and real abundance variations among the objects being observed.
S$^+$ also has a similar ionization potential to N$^+$ and H, and hence all generally exist together in the same region behind SNR shocks. While the [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio may have some sensitivity to the S/H abundance, it is also more susceptible to varying shock conditions than [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}. For instance, the [\ion{S}{2}]\ doublet ratio, \lam6716/\lam6731, is a well-known indicator of electron density. The density sensitivity arises from the collisional de-excitation of the \lam6716 line relative to \lam6731, which impacts the ratio of the two lines, but also reduces the total strength of [\ion{S}{2}]\ relative to {H$\alpha$}.
To the extent that the S/H abundance varies among objects, it may arise due to differential grain destruction releasing S from grains (as opposed to N which is not refractory).
Despite these differences, it is an observational fact that the [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio and [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio are correlated at some level in SNRs. Fig.~\ref{fig_n2_s2_galaxies} shows this correlation for confirmed SNRs in M83 and for those in three other nearby spiral galaxies with good spectrophotometry: M31 \citep{galarza99}, M33 \citep{gordon98}, and M81 \citep{lee15}. The data for all the galaxies show the correlation, but the mean value is higher in M83 and the range seen in the M83 data is considerably larger than for the other galaxies, as is the scatter in values (especially at the high end of the correlation). The excess is particularly high for the [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio, reaching more than a factor of two above the comparison galaxies. These trends are generally consistent with the idea that the metallicity of M83 are significantly higher than in the other galaxies, which in turn is consistent with the high abundances inferred for M83 by other methods \citep[][who use several diagnostics to derive O abundance as a proxy for overall metallicity]{bresolin16}.
Hence, both the large range of observed values of these ratios and the large scatter at a given value of the ratios in M83 need to be understood.
Since both the [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ and [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratios have {H$\alpha$}\ in the denominator, we first examine whether some systematic effect may lead to low {H$\alpha$}\ flux values. Since there is some {H$\alpha$}\ emission present over much of the galactic disk, it is possible that over- or under-subtracted background emission along the slitlets is responsible for some of the observed scatter. Since it is difficult to evaluate the effects of background subtraction on the entire set of observations, we have instead inspected two smaller subsets of the data as a check on the background subtraction.
The first was to select a random sample of 15 objects from various slit masks and assess the characteristics and quality of the subtraction, by using {\sc DS9} to inspect the 2-D spectra both before and after background subtraction. The sample included both bright and faint objects, isolated ones, and and ones with confused background emission.
Only a few objects with the most variation in {H$\alpha$}\ background strength along the spatial dimension showed any significant uncertainty in the subtraction at {H$\alpha$}\ at the SNR position. Thus, while a small fraction of the individual objects may have confusion from structured overlying emission, no overall systematic effect was evident.
The second check was to inspect the 15 objects with the highest ratios. If these objects are faint, or ones in highly confused backgrounds, perhaps systematic over-subtraction of background {H$\alpha$}\ might lead to high ratios. Display of the 2-D spectra showed no apparent systematic effects, and furthermore that several of these objects are well detected isolated objects with little possible uncertainty in the background subtraction. The extended high-ratio regime seen for both the [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio and [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio the M83 objects must be a real effect.
\subsection{Insights from Comparison to Shock Models}
Much of what we know from shock-model calculations is due to grids of models at solar or sub-solar abundances, where other parameters like the magnetic field strength or electron densities are held constant \citep[e.g.,][]{raymond79, dopita84, hartigan87, dopita96}.
In this abundance regime, we have come to understand certain properties of the models that can be applied to observations. For instance, in these models, the behavior of a line ratio such as [\ion{O}{3}]/{H$\beta$}\ typically increases smoothly as the shock velocity increases from below 100 $\:\rm{\,km\,s^{-1}}$ to 200 $\:\rm{\,km\,s^{-1}}$, that is, as the shocks are able to ionize more and more of the oxygen to and above O$^{++}$. Thus the [\ion{O}{3}]/{H$\beta$}\ line ratio has become a surrogate for shock velocity (at least as to whether it is above or below $\sim 100 \:\rm{\,km\,s^{-1}}$).
The case of M83 is somewhat different situation because of the high metallicity, since few previous shock model grids cover the relevant high abundance regime. The most sophisticated and relevant models in the literature are those of \citet{allen08} produced using the {\sc Mappings III} code. The model grids provided by these authors cover a significant range of parameter space that includes a grid of models at twice solar abundance, near that of M83. However, the shock velocity range covered (100 - 1000 $\:\rm{\,km\,s^{-1}}$) may not be entirely appropriate. For example, a number of our objects have low [\ion{O}{3}]/{H$\beta$}\ values that probably indicate shocks well below 100 $\:\rm{\,km\,s^{-1}}$. On the upper end, velocities above $\sim$300 $\:\rm{\,km\,s^{-1}}$ are not relevant; otherwise we would see evidence of line broadening in the spectra. Nonetheless, the trends seen in these model grids provide some insights into our observations.
There are other factors that limit the applicability of shock models to our data. Spectra of extragalactic SNRs gather light from most or all of each object, which averages over fine scale differences that must be present. Also, shock models themselves necessarily involve a number of variables, many of which are mildly if at all constrained by observations (e.g., magnetic field strength, pre-shock ionization conditions, in addition to shock velocity, pre-shock density, and of course, abundances). Hence, one does not normally expect to match observed line intensities in detail for a given object. Figure 19 of \citet{allen08} shows how some of the line ratios change as some of these parameters are varied, though the models do not extend to the lowest observed values of [\ion{O}{3}]/{H$\beta$}.
In Fig.~\ref{fig_o3_hb_galaxies} we show line ratio plots for [\ion{O}{3}]/{H$\beta$}\ as a function of [\ion{N}{2}]\lam6583/{H$\alpha$},\footnote{Here we use only the \lam6583 line of [\ion{N}{2}], following the usual convention for such diagrams; other plots involving [\ion{N}{2}]\ in this paper use the sum of the two lines \lamlam6548,6583.} [\ion{O}{1}]\lam6300/{H$\alpha$}, and [\ion{S}{2}]\lamlam6716, 6731/{H$\alpha$}---for SNRs in M83, and also for those in M31 and M81---that can be used in comparison with a number of the diagnostic plots shown in \citet{allen08} \citep[see also][]{veilleux87}.
The most striking feature of these plots is that M83 has many objects with higher [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratios than either of the other galaxies, as also seen in Fig.~\ref{fig_n2_s2_galaxies}.
Comparison to \citet{allen08} Fig.~21 shows the effect of increasing abundances, with only the highest-abundance model grids extending to the high [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ values observed in M83.
Some of observed variation in line ratios is also expected from varying shock conditions; however, the model sets in Allen et al. cannot explain the high values and large range in [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio by varying either the shock velocity or the pre-shock density.
For example, using the 2$\times$ solar model grid from Allen et al.~and a likely range of 100 -- 300 $\:\rm{\,km\,s^{-1}}$ for the models shows a range in [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratio from 0.2 -- 0.9, while the observed values extend up to 3 or more in the extreme cases. The [\ion{N}{2}]/[\ion{S}{2}]\ ratio shows some variation over this same velocity range, dropping from 1.4 at 100 $\:\rm{\,km\,s^{-1}}$ to 0.9 at 300 $\:\rm{\,km\,s^{-1}}$. Significantly less variation in this ratio is seen for varying the density (over the same shock velocity range). Hence, relatively modest changes in the important line ratios are expected due to varying shock conditions. To summarize then, some of the scatter in [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ for M83 seen in Fig.~\ref{fig_n2_s2_galaxies} may arise from variable shock conditions, but it appears likely that a high and variable N/H abundance is required to explain the observations. This is a strong confirmation of the generally high metallicity in M83, with the range in the observed ratio likely reflecting enhanced and variable N abundances {\em locally} in the circumstellar material surrounding many of the individual SNRs.
There are some indications that the abundances in the twice solar models begin to have some unexpected impacts on relative line intensities. For example, the twice solar models show [\ion{O}{3}]/{H$\beta$}\ as already being strong at 100 $\:\rm{\,km\,s^{-1}}$ and {\em decreasing} dramatically to 200 $\:\rm{\,km\,s^{-1}}$ and above, which is exactly opposite to the lower abundance models over this same range. Also, more salient to the above discussion, the ratio of [\ion{N}{2}]/[\ion{S}{2}]\ varies by over 40\% from 100 -- 300 $\:\rm{\,km\,s^{-1}}$ shocks, whereas this ratio is nearly constant for lower abundance sets over the same velocity range. As abundances increase, the balance of energy transfer and cooling being carried by the various ions must be changing in ways that are different from the lower-abundance models.
From even this cursory comparison, it seems likely that the elevated abundances may contribute both to the high ratios and to the observed scatter of line ratios we observe in M83.
Figures 32 and 34 of \citet{allen08} show their 2$\times$ solar abundance grids projected onto the same line ratio plots as shown in the middle and right panels of Fig.~\ref{fig_o3_hb_galaxies}. Allen et al.\ apply these models to AGN situations where one attempts to separate shocked emission from photoionized regions, but they should apply to SNR shocks as well. The majority of the SNRs in all three galaxies plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig_o3_hb_galaxies} lie within the classical shock-heated region toward the upper right in these diagrams, but a significant number of objects appear toward the lower left region nominally ascribed to \ion{H}{2}\ regions. However, note that the model grids extend significantly down into the nominally photoionized regions of the plots at lower left. (Presumably lower shock velocities might extend even further into this regime.) Here again, we see evidence that at the higher abundances assumed in these models some of the traditional expectations begin to break down. We encourage further investigation of the properties of shock models at elevated abundances that can further elucidate this interesting and so far little-explored region of parameter space.
\subsection{Ramifications}
The high metallicity of M83 has ramifications for the massive stars that are the precursors to many of the SNRs we have observed. It has long been known that abundances affect both the momentum transfer and mass loss in the stellar winds of massive stars \citep[e.g.,][]{vink01, kudritzki02}, though the situation is complicated \citep{smith14}.
While most such studies consider only solar abundances and below, the trends with increasing abundance are clear, with higher abundances giving rise to significantly stronger and more massive winds. Coupling this with the hot, high pressure ISM in M83 that was inferred from X-ray data (Long et al. 2014), one might expect this wind mass loss to be constrained to the region immediately surrounding the star, so that when it explodes, the expanding shock would see enhanced density. This is consistent with the high observed electron densities we report above.
High and variable N abundances in particular might be expected to arise from such a scenario. As massive stars move beyond H-burning to CNO cycle nucleosynthesis, N becomes enhanced in the atmosphere and hence in the resulting wind \citep[e.g.,][]{{massey00, maeder14}}. Cas A in our Galaxy is one familiar example of a massive star that exploded with highly enhanced N abundances at its surface (since the fastest moving outer emission knots show high N abundances; Fesen 2001). Depending on the mass of the precursor star, the amount of mass lost in the wind, and the exact stage at which the SN occurs, one might expect a range of resulting N/H values in the medium surrounding the explosion sites of different stars. Such a scenario may be at least partially responsible for the wide range of [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratios we observe.
In retrospect, it is interesting to extend this idea to observed SNR populations in other galaxies. As noted at the beginning of section 4, the observed [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratios in other galaxies show significant scatter in addition to possible gradients with GCD
(see Fig.~9 of Blair \& Long 1997 for NGC~300 and NGC~7793; Fig.~13 of Gordon et al. 1998 for M33; Fig.~21c of Lee et al. 2015 for M31 and M81). While the SNR populations in these other galaxies may not be as dominated by core-collapse remnants as that in M83, they still have sufficient star formation and massive star populations that a significant fraction of their SNRs arise from core-collapse events. Thus it seems possible that some of the observed scatter in these galaxies may also arise from local N abundance variations, as opposed to observational scatter and/or variation in shock parameters for the individual objects involved. Perhaps the more extreme situation we have found in M83 was needed in order to reveal this phenomenon.
\section{The Paucity of Young, Ejecta-Dominated Remnants}
As the host to at least six, and probably seven (counting B12-174a) supernovae within less than a century, we might expect M83 to harbor dozens of SNRs under 1000 years in age. We would also expect the vast majority of the SNe to have been core-collapse events, like all the ones with spectra recorded during outburst. These are the events that give rise to ejecta-dominated remnants---ones like Cas A \citep[in our Galaxy; age $\sim$335 years,][]{thorstensen01}, E0102--7219 \citep[in the SMC; age $\sim$2000 years,][] {finkelstein06}, or even N132D \citep[in the LMC, which at age $\sim 3000$ years and a diameter of 25 pc still shows evidence of high-velocity O-rich ejecta,][]{morse96}. All of these objects have spectra that show broad ($\gtrsim 1000 \:\rm{\,km\,s^{-1}}$) emission lines from oxygen and other heavy elements characteristic of SN ejecta.
Yet we find very few objects with these characteristics in M83: only the remnant of SN1957D \citep[][and references therein]{long12}, and B12-174a, discovered in our survey \citep{blair15}. There can be at most a very few other possible examples, all very small-diameter objects identified in our WFC3 survey (B14) but with no confirming optical spectra to date. We {\em do} have spectra from over a third of the smallest-diameter (and hence likely youngest) SNRs in our survey, all of which appear to be normal ISM-dominated ones; we address the nature of these in Sec.~5.3.
\subsection{What would known Ejecta-dominated SNRs look like in M83?}
Suppose that analogs to the known ejecta-dominated SNRs {\em were} present in M83; what would they look like, and should we have detected them? In Table~\ref{table_osnrs} we give the properties of the handful of such objects, which are also known as oxygen-rich SNRs (OSNRs) because [\ion{O}{3}]\mbox{$\:\lambda\ $} 5007 is typically the strongest line in their optical spectrum. There are only three in the Galaxy: Cas A, G292.0+1.8, and Puppis A; three in the Magellanic Clouds: E0102--72.3, N132D, and B0540--69.3; plus the extremely luminous SNR in NGC4449.
For a direct comparison, we also include in Table~\ref{table_osnrs} SN1957D (in M83), and the Crab Nebula, since it is also the young remnant of a core-collapse SN; though dominated by synchrotron radiation, it also shows emission lines from SN ejecta.
If an M83 analog of Cas A, which at $\sim 335$ years of age has an [\ion{O}{3}]\ luminosity of $\sim 2 \times 10^{36}\:{\rm erg\:s^{-1}}$, and high ratios of both [\ion{O}{3}]/{H$\alpha$}\ and [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}, it should have been detected in our survey. Furthermore, it would be very bright in both X-ray and radio bands and have been detected in both of those. The extraordinary SNR NGC4449-1 has truly extreme luminosities in [\ion{O}{3}], X-rays, and radio; an analog in M83 would have attracted attention even in the earliest resolved surveys.
The Crab Nebula should also have been detected, both as a radio and an X-ray source. It is a moderately strong source of optical emission lines (in addition to its synchrotron continuum), so we would have targeted it for a spectrum, and would probably have detected a Crab analog in M83. Puppis A is bright enough in optical, X-ray and radio bands that it would have been detected, but since the great majority of its optical flux stems from bright radiative filaments of shocked circumstellar material (CSM), it is unlikely that we would have found the much fainter fast ejecta knots from a Puppis A analog in M83, even in a high signal-to-noise spectrum. Analogs of E0102--7219 or N132D might have been detected, but this is not guaranteed.\footnote{While the brightest optical emission from N132D is its outer ``horseshoe" of shocked CSM, the inner ring of shocked ejecta comprises about one-third of the total [\ion{O}{3}]\ flux; it should have been detected in WFC3 images (provided, of course, that the source was located within the footprint of the WFC3 fields).} The [\ion{O}{3}]\ flux from both would, with even the minimal absorption for M83, have placed them in the faintest quartile of our [\ion{O}{3}]-selected objects (Table~\ref{table-O3-flux}). Higher absorption, or location within a confused region, would likely have precluded their detection in our survey. G292.0+1.8 is bright enough in X-rays that an analog in M83 would probably have been detected in the {\em Chandra} X-ray survey \citep{long14}. But in [\ion{O}{3}], even the unabsorbed flux from G292 is fainter than all but one of the objects in Table~\ref{table-O3-flux}. Despite the fact that it has essentially no {H$\alpha$}\ emission, our optical survey would have detected a G292.0+1.8 analog in M83 only if it were completely isolated, with minimal absorption. Our survey would surely not have detected B0540--69.3 were it in M83.
There can be little doubt that Cas A-like objects are extremely under-represented in M83 compared with the number of core-collapse SN events. More generally, the paucity of Cas A-like SNRs in M33, M31, and other nearby galaxies, now conclusively including M83, can only mean that Cas A is an exceptional object and not the normal expectation for core-collapse SNRs from massive stars.
\subsection{Why so few?}
Surely many core-collapse SNe have occurred in M83, so we must ask what their remnants must be like, and why so few are ejecta-dominated. Two possibilities are associated with their environment: (1) For SNe that occur in extremely tenuous surroundings, the resulting blast wave will have little to interact with, will produce only weak reverse shocks propagating into the ejecta, and hence any optical emission will be extremely faint.
This can happen in situations where multiple SNe have exploded. The remnant from the first SN would be visible, but subsequent SNRs would be expanding into the evacuated cavity created by the first explosion.
(2) Perhaps more plausible for M83 is the opposite extreme: that many SNe have exploded in dense environments and have evolved rapidly into their radiative phase, in which case fast-moving ejecta knots will be visible for far less than 1000 years. A high-density environment can occur as ejecta run into strong winds from the SN progenitors, or into a dense circumstellar shell---both the result of rapid mass loss at different stages prior to the explosion. The location of many of the M83 SNRs in young clusters and \ion{H}{2}\ regions likely indicates a generally dense local environment which may also contribute to rapid SNR evolution in these cases.
A closer look at the known ejecta-dominated SNRs supports the role of surrounding winds and/or shells, and may provide additional insight into why such remnants are so rare.
Several, and perhaps all of them, are ones where the ejecta are expanding into a pre-SN stellar wind from the progenitor, or into a cavity carved out by such winds. The clearest case is for Cas A, where the light-echo spectrum of the actual SN that shows it to have been a Type IIb event \citep{rest08b, krause08a}. These are produced from the collapse of the helium core of a red supergiant that had lost most of its hydrogen envelope before exploding, so the ejecta expand into the stellar wind from the pre-SN star \citep{chevalier03, orlando16}. The extreme luminosity of NGC4449-1 has been best explained by its expansion into a dense and extensive circumstellar environment produced by winds from its massive progenitor, possibly with additional contributions due to winds from other massive stars in the surrounding dense OB cluster \citep{milisavljevic08}.
For G292.0+1.8 and E0102--7219, the fact that fast knots of ejecta are expanding ballistically 2000-3000 years after the explosion requires that they must be expanding into low-density cavities---ones evacuated by pre-SN winds. In both cases there is an outer shell of X-ray emission where the SN blast wave is interacting with the circumstellar material. As with Cas A, this interaction also leads to the reverse shock that excites the dense fragments of ejecta, producing the optical emission.
For both Puppis A and N132D, spectra of the outer radiative filaments show them to be very high in nitrogen; these too are likely overtaking winds enriched by dredged-up nitrogen. These stripped-envelope SNe---types Ib and Ic---are relatively rare compared to their cousins, types II and IIL, that explode with their envelopes more or less intact; the recent review by \citet{smartt09} indicates that together SN Ib and Ic comprise only $\sim $20-30\% of core-collapse events.
So perhaps the fraction of core-collapse SNe that give rise to ejecta-dominated remnants is relatively small. And given the dense environments in which most are located, the ones that are produced likely evolve rapidly to the point that the ejecta knots slow, dissipate, and merge with more normal-abundance material, leading to the large number of ISM-dominated SNRs that are present in M83, even at very small diameters.
\subsection{What are the small-diameter SNRs that we {\em do} see?}
Although we do not see SNRs with the characteristics of Cas A, our total SNR candidate list now contains 41 objects with {\em HST}-measured diameters smaller than $0\farcs 5$ (11 pc), including SN 1957D and B12-174a.
Of the 117 confirmed [\ion{S}{2}]-selected SNRs with spectra (Table \ref{table-SNR}), 22 are in this small-diameter group. What are they?
We show spectra from three of these in Fig.~\ref{fig_spectra_hi_density}; none of these, and indeed none of the 22, has lines appreciably broader than the instrumental width. (For comparison, the lower trace in Fig.~\ref{fig_spectra_hi_density} shows B12-174a, which {\em does} have broad lines.) But all 22 show fairly high densities, as measured from the [\ion{S}{2}]\ $\lambda 6716/\lambda6731$ ratio.\footnote{Also in the $D < 11$ pc range are SN1957D and B12-174a, which {\em do} have broad lines and hence high velocities. We have not included either of these in the Fig.~\ref{fig_density_vs_diam} plot since for both of them the high velocities preclude measurements of the [\ion{S}{2}]\ ratio.}
Fig.~\ref{fig_density_vs_diam} shows a plot of the [\ion{S}{2}]\ density ratio for all of the [\ion{S}{2}]-selected SNRs plotted as a function of SNR diameter. The dashed lines provide fiducials for the implied electron densities, with higher densities indicated by smaller values of the ratio. There is a general trend of higher density among smaller diameter SNRs; among the 22 smallest, all have [\ion{S}{2}]\ ratios measurably different from the low-density limit, and a few approach the high-density limit. Of course, these are the densities in the post-shock zone where S$^+$ is formed, which is compressed by a factor of $\sim$50 from the pre-shock value, depending on variables such as magnetic field strength and other parameters \citep[e.g.,][eq. 8]{dopita79}. Thus, most of these small-diameter objects have inferred pre-shock densities of 10 -- 30 cm$^{-3}$ or more, much higher than typical ISM densities. Since emissivity goes as density squared, these densities refer to the densest pre-shock regions, and this strongly suggests SNRs that are expanding into local density-enhanced regions. The densities in the hot X-ray emitting regions would, of course, be much lower than these values.
What conditions are required to detect these small ISM-dominated SNRs? In order to be ISM-dominated, the SNR must, by definition, have swept up enough material so that the optical emission from the SNR is not dominated by ejecta emission. Most of the SNRs in M83 will have arisen from core-collapse SNe, and so we expect from 5 to 15 $M_\sun$ of highly-processed material to have been ejected in the SN\@. In order that emission from a SNR be dominated by optical emission from unprocessed material, the forward shock of the SNR must be propagating either into dense material from a pre-SN wind or into a very dense interstellar medium. As a fiducial number, if we assume a SN ejects $10M_\sun$ of material and that the SN shock is propagating into a uniform-density ISM, then to have swept up $10M_\sun$ of material at a diameter of 10 pc, the density of the ISM must be about 0.8\,cm$^{-3}$, certainly not excessive.
At a diameter of 10 pc, a SNR from an explosion energy of 10$^{51}$ ergs that has reached the Sedov phase would have a primary shock velocity of about 2000 $\:{\rm km\:s^{-1}}$ and an age of 1000 yrs if expanding into an ISM with density 1 cm$^{-3}$; or 650 $\:{\rm km\:s^{-1}}$ and 3000 yrs if the density were 10 cm$^{-3}$. Essentially no optical emission would arise from this gas, since the cooling time behind the primary shock exceeds the age of the SNR.
Instead, the optical emission would most likely be arising from slower secondary shocks propagating into dense clumps, and as a result we would expect the velocity broadening of the the optical lines to be much less than the velocity of the primary shock. For \ion{H}{2}\ regions, the filling factor of dense clumps is of order 1\%, and the densities in the clumps are of order $100\;{\rm cm}^{-3}$ \citep{gutierrez10}. Once a SNR has reached the Sedov phase, the optical luminosity of a SNR is expected to grow with time, and to be largest once it is in the radiative phase. This favors the detection of SNRs propagating into dense media. An extreme example is the small (16 pc), bright SNR N49, which is located near a dense cloud in the LMC \citep[e.g.,][]{dopita16}. Many of the small SNRs in M83 are likely to be objects of this sort.
In retrospect, our hope to identify large numbers of ejecta-dominated SNRs based on a simple extrapolation of the properties of the few of these we know about was probably naive. Only a small fraction of SNe likely produce such remnants, and the numerous small objects that we do find in M83, while perhaps chronologically young, seem to be ``biologically'' old---dominated by swept-up material from the dense environments in which the explosions occurred.
\section{Summary}
We have obtained spectra of 140 SNR and SNR candidates in M83. These spectra obtained constitute a representative sample of the 283 emission nebulae identified on the basis of strong [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratios from imaging with Magellan and HST, as well as a set of objects suggested to be SNRs on the basis of strong [\ion{O}{3}]\ emission. Our main conclusions are as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Nearly all of the emission nebulae identified as SNRs on the basis of large [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratios in imaging have similarly high [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ ratios in their spectra. We have spectroscopically confirmed that 117 objects in M83 are indeed SNRs---the largest uniform sample with spectra in any galaxy. Only one of the [\ion{S}{2}]-selected candidates has been ruled out as a SNR.
\item None of the 22 [\ion{O}{3}]-bright objects (selected in hopes of finding ejected-dominated, O-rich SNRs) for which we have spectra remains as a good SNR candidate, except the small emission nebula identified with the historical SN 1957D \citep{long12} and the recently discovered B12-174a \citep{blair15}.
\item The [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ and [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ line ratios of the SNRs in M83 are quite high compared to the values found for SNRs in other spiral galaxies. The higher values are probably due to the overall metal abundance in M83, and possibly to local enhancements as well.
The values for these ratios also exceed predictions based on shock models, possibly due to the limited extent to which these models have explored parameter space of gas with super-solar abundances. Further modeling in this regime would be valuable.
Both [\ion{S}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ and [\ion{N}{2}]/{H$\alpha$}\ decrease modestly with galactocentric radius, but with a scatter that is larger than the overall trend. No other trends of line ratios with galactocentric radius are apparent.
\item Although there are 68 SNRs in the spectroscopic sample with diameters less than 21 pc, or 1\arcsec, none shows evidence either of broad lines or of interaction with highly enriched ejecta, except the remnant of SN1957D and B12-174a, which, as we have reported in \citet{blair15}, is most likely a the remnant of a SN that exploded within the last 100 years but that was not reported by contemporary observers. Most of the other small-diameter SNRs are most likely ones that have evolved rapidly following their origin as SNe exploding in relatively dense interstellar environments, similar to N49 in the LMC \citep{dopita16}.
\item A few, but certainly not all, of the handful of known ejecta-dominated SNRs would probably have been detected in our survey had they been located in M83.
While many dozens of core-collapse SNe must have occurred in M83 over the past millennium, few of these can have produced SNRs like Cas A or E0102--7219. We attribute this in part to the fact that these known ejecta-dominated remnants resulted from stripped-envelope progenitors, where the ejecta expand into a wind from the pre-SN star. Such progenitors produce SNe of Type Ib/c, which represent only a small fraction of core-collapse SNe.
In addition, it appears that many of the SNRs in M83 are likely expanding in high-density environments, where remnants evolve rapidly to the point where they are dominated by swept-up material rather than by ejecta. Others may have exploded in regions where earlier SNRs have evacuated the surrounding region, resulting in very faint SNRs.
\end{enumerate}
\acknowledgements
PFW and WPB acknowledge the excellent observing support from the staff at the Gemini South Observatory, where the observations reported here were obtained.
PFW and WPB are grateful for both observing and travel support for the Gemini observations from the Gemini office at NOAO.
The Gemini Observatory is operated by Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under a cooperative agreement with the NSF on behalf of the Gemini partnership: the National Science Foundation (UnitedStates), the Science and Technology Facilities Council (United Kingdom), the National Research Council (Canada), CONICYT (Chile), the Australian Research Council (Australia),Minist\'{e}rio da Ci\^{e}ncia, Tecnologia e Inova\c{c}\~{a}o (Brazil) and Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnologia e Innovaci\'{o}n Productiva (Argentina). In particular, we wish to thank Marcel Bergmann for assistance in refining routines for 1-D spectral extraction.
PFW is grateful for the hospitality of the Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Australian National University, and to valuable discussions with Michael Dopita, during early stages of this work. PFW also acknowledges financial support from the National Science Foundation
through grant AST-0908566 and from NASA through grant HST-GO-12513.03.
WPB acknowledges support from the Dean of the Krieger School of Arts and Sciences and the Center for Astrophysical Sciences at JHU during this work.
Support for this work was also provided by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
through {\it Chandra}\ Grant Number G01-12115, issued by the {\it Chandra}\ X-ray Observatory Center,
which is operated by the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory
for and on behalf of NASA under contract NAS8-03060\@.
\facility{Gemini:South (GMOS)},
\facility{Magellan:Baade (IMACS)},
\facility{HST (WFC3)}
\bibliographystyle{apj}
|
\section{Introduction}
In \cite{alsalam,Bachhaus,Bencheikh} the authors used different methods to show that the orthogonal polynomials defined by a generating function of the form $F(xt-\alpha t^2)$ are the ultraspherical and Hermite polynomials. On the other hand, the author in \cite{anshelev} found (even if $F$ is a formal power series) that the orthogonal polynomials are the ultraspherical, Hermite and Chebychev polynomials of the first kind. Motivated by the problem, posed in \cite{anshelev}, of describing (all or just orthogonal) polynomials with generating functions $F(xU(t)-R(t))$ we have generalized in \cite{meskzahaf} the above results by proving the following:
\begin{theorem} \cite{meskzahaf}\label{thmm0}
Let $F(t)=\sum_{n\geq 0}\alpha_nt^n$ and $R(t)=\sum_{n\geq
1}R_nt^n/n$ be formal power series where $\{\alpha_n\}$ and
$\{R_n\}$ are complex sequences with $\alpha_0=1$ and $R_1=0$.
Define the polynomial set $\{P_n\}_{n\geq 0}$ by
\begin{equation}\label{gf00}
F(xt-R(t))=\sum_{n\geq 0}\alpha_nP_n(x)t^n.
\end{equation}
If this polynomial set (which is automatically monic) satisfies the three-term recursion
relation
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gf6}
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
xP_n(x)=P_{n+1}(x)+\beta_nP_n(x)+\omega_nP_{n-1}(x),\quad n\geq
0,\\
P_{-1}(x)=0,\;\;P_0(x)=1
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray}
where $\{\beta_n\}$ and $\{\omega_n\}$ are complex sequences,
then we have:\\
a) If $R_2=0$ and $\alpha_n\neq 0$ for $n\geq 1$, then $R(t)=0$, $F(t)$ is arbitrary and $F(xt)=\sum_{n\geq 0}\alpha_nx^nt^n$
generates the monomials $\{x^n\}_{n\geq 0}$.\\
b) If $\alpha_1R_2\neq 0,$ then $R(t)=R_2t^2/2$ and the polynomial sets $\{P_n\}_{n\geq 0}$ are the rescaled ultraspherical, Hermite and Chebychev polynomials of the first kind.
\end{theorem}
Note that, the polynomials in Theorem 1 which satisfy a three term recursion with complex coefficients are not necessary orthogonal with respect to a moment functional $\mathcal{L}$, i.e. for all non negative integers $m,n$; $\mathcal{L}(P_m(x)P_n(x))=0$ if $m\neq n$ and $\mathcal{L}(P^2_n(x))\neq 0$, see Definition 2.2 in \cite{Chihara}.
\begin{remark}$\text{ }$\\
a) A polynomial set PS, $\{P_n\}_{n\geq 0}$, is such that $degree(P_n)=n$,\; $n\geq 0$.\\
b) A PS is called a monic PS if $P_n(x)=x^n+\cdots$, for $\; n\geq 0$.\\
c) The choice $\alpha_0=1$ and $R_1=0$ comes from the fact that the generating function $\gamma_1+\gamma_2F((x+R_1)t-R(t))=\gamma_1+\gamma_2\sum_{n\geq 0}\alpha_nP_n(x+R_1)t^n$, with $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ constants, is also of type \eqref{gf00}.
\end{remark}
In the present paper, we are interested in monic PSs generated by \eqref{gf00} (with $F(t)$ and $R(t)$ as in Theorem 1) and satisfying higher order recurrence relations \eqref{dorth0}. For this purpose, we adopt the following definitions:
\begin{definition}\label{def1}
Let $d\in \mathbb{N}$. A PS $\{Q_n\}_{n\geq 0}$ is called a $d$-polynomial set $d$-PS if its corresponding monic PS $\{P_n\}_{n\geq 0}$, defined by $P_n(x)=(\lim_{x\rightarrow+\infty}x^{-n}Q_n(x))^{-1}Q_n(x)$, $n\geq 0$, satisfies the $(d+1)$-order recurrence relation:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{dorth0}
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
xP_n(x)=P_{n+1}(x)+\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}P_{n-l}(x),\quad n\geq
0,\\
P_0(x)=1,\;\;P_{-l}(x)=0,\;\;1\leq l\leq d
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation}\label{dorth01}
\{\gamma_{n}^{l}\}_{n\geq 0}, 0\leq l\leq d, \text{are complex sequences}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{dorth02}
\{\gamma_{n}^{d}\}_{n\geq d} \;\text{is not the null sequence, for}\;\; d\geq 1.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}\label{def2}
Let $\{P_n\}_{n\geq 0}$ be a $d$-PS. If the PS of the derivatives $\{(n+1)^{-1}P_{n+1}^{'}\}_{n\geq 0}$ is also a $d$-PS, then $\{P_n\}_{n\geq 0}$ is called a classical $d$-PS.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}\label{def3}\cite{MaroniDouak}
Let $\omega=\exp(2i\pi/(d+1))$, where $i^2=-1$.
The PS $\{P_n\}_{n\geq 0}$ is called $d$-symmetric if it fulfils:
\begin{equation}\label{dorth03}
P_n(\omega x)=\omega^nP_n(x),\;n\geq 0.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}\text{In Definition~\ref{def1}:}\\
a) For $d\geq 1$, the first terms $\{\gamma_{n}^{l}\}_{0\leq n<l\leq d}$ of the sequences $\{\gamma_{n}^{l}\}_{n\geq 0}$, $1\leq l\leq d$, are arbitrary.\\
b) For $d=0$, \eqref{dorth0} becomes $xP_n(x)=P_{n+1}(x)+\gamma_{n}^{0}P_{n}(x), n\geq 0,$ with $P_0(x)=1$. Here $\{\gamma_{n}^{0}\}_{n\geq 0}$ can be the null sequence, so the set of monomials is a $0$-PS.
\end{remark}
An interesting class of $d$-PSs characterized by \eqref{dorth0}, with the additional condition $\gamma_{n}^{d}\neq 0$ for $n\geq d$, are the $d$-orthogonal polynomial sets $d$-OPSs \cite{Maroni,Iseghem}. In this context, the authors in \cite{Bencheikh} generalized the result stated in \cite{alsalam,Bachhaus} by showing the following:
\begin{theorem}\cite{Bencheikh}\label{thmm1}
The only $d$-OPSs generated by $G((d+1)xt-t^{d+1})$ are the classical d-symmetric polynomials.
\end{theorem}
Another contribution concerns $d$-OPSs with generating functions of Sheffer type, i.e. of the form $A(t)\exp(xH(t))$. We have
\begin{theorem}\cite{Varma}\label{thmm2}
Let $\rho_d(t)=\sum_{k=0}^{d}\tilde{\rho}_kt^k$ be a polynomial of degree d $(\tilde{\rho}_d\neq 0)$ and $\sigma_{d+1}(t)=\sum_{k=0}^{d+1}\tilde{\sigma}_kt^k$ be a polynomial of degree less than or equal to $d + 1$.
The only PSs, which are $d$-orthogonal and also Sheffer PS, are generated by
\begin{equation}\label{dorth002}
\exp\left(\int_{0}^{t}\frac{\rho_d(s)}{\sigma_{d+1}(s)}ds\right)\exp\left(x\int_{0}^{t}\frac{1}{\sigma_{d+1}(s)}ds\right)=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}P_n(x)\frac{t^n}{n!}
\end{equation}
with the conditions
\begin{equation}\label{dorth0002}
\tilde{\sigma}_0(n\tilde{\sigma}_0-\tilde{\rho}_d)\neq 0,\;\; n\geq 1.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
Note that Theorem 3 characterizes also the $d$-OPSs with generating functions of the form $F(xH(t)-R(t))$ with $F(t)=\exp(t)$, since $A(t)\exp(xH(t))=F(xH(t)-R(t))$ where $R(t)=-\ln(A(t))$. For $H(t)=t$ we meet the Appell case with the Hermite $d$-OPSs \cite{Douak96} generated by $\exp(xt-\bar{\rho}_{d+1}(t))$ where $\bar{\rho}_{d+1}(t)$ is a polynomial of degree $d+1$.
As a consequence of the results obtained in this paper, we give some generalizations of Theorems 1, 2 and the Appell case in Theorem 3 (see also \cite{Douak96}) to $d$-PS generated by \eqref{gf00}.
After this short introduction, we give in section 2 some results for $d$-PSs generated by \eqref{gf00}. Then in section 3 we show that the only $d$-symmetric $d$-PSs generated by \eqref{gf00} are the classical d-symmetric polynomials. For this later case, we give in section 4 the $(d+1)$-order recurrence relation \eqref{dorth0} and the expression of $F(t)$ by means of hypergeometric functions.
\section{Some general results}
The results in this section concern all $d$-PSs generated by \eqref{gf00}. The central result is Proposition 2 below from which the other results arise. First we have
\begin{proposition}\label{prop1}\cite{meskzahaf}
Let $\{P_n\}_{n\geq 0}$ be a PS generated by \eqref{gf00}.
Then we have
\begin{equation}\label{gf1}
\alpha_n xP'_n(x)-\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}R_{k+1}\alpha_{n-k}P'_{n-k}(x)=n\alpha_nP_n(x), \;\; n\geq 1.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
Secondly
\begin{proposition}\label{prop2}
Let $\{P_n\}$ be a $d$-PS generated by \eqref{gf00} and satisfying \eqref{dorth0}, \eqref{dorth01} and \eqref{dorth02}, with $\alpha_n\neq 0$ for $n\geq 1$. Putting $$a_n=\frac{\alpha_n}{\alpha_{n+1}}, \;(n\geq
0)\text{ and } c_{n}^{l}=\frac{\alpha_n}{\alpha_{n-l}}\,\gamma_{n}^{l},\;\; (1\leq l\leq d,\;\;n\geq l),$$
then we have:
a)
\begin{equation}\label{gf9}
\gamma_{n}^{0}=0,\;\;\text{ for } n\geq 0.
\end{equation}
b)
\begin{equation}\label{gf10}
\gamma_{n}^{1} =\frac{R_2}{2}(na_n-(n-1)a_{n-1}),\;\;\text{ for } n\geq 1.
\end{equation}
or equivalently
\begin{equation}\label{cgf10}
c_{n}^{1} =\frac{R_2}{2}\left(n\frac{a_n}{a_{n-1}}-(n-1)\right),\;\;\text{ for } n\geq 1.
\end{equation}
c)
\begin{equation}\label{gf11}
c_{n}^{2} =\frac{R_3}{3}\left((n-1)\frac{a_n}{a_{n-2}}-(n-2)\right),\;\;\text{ for } n\geq 2.
\end{equation}
d.i)
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gfd11}
\frac{k+1}{n-k+1}a_{n-k}c_n^k &=&R_{k+1}\left(a_n-\frac{n-k}{n-k+1}a_{n-k}\right)
+\sum_{l=1}^{k-2}R_{k-l}\left(\frac{n+2}{n-l+1} \,c_n^l-\frac{n-k+l+1}{n-k+l+2}\,c_{n-k+l+1}^{l}\right)\nonumber\\
&&-\sum_{l=1}^{k-2}\frac{l+1}{n-l+1}c_{n}^{l}c_{n-l}^{k-l-1}-\sum_{l=1}^{k-2}\frac{R_{l+1}R_{k-l}}{n-l+1},\;\;\; 3\leq k\leq d,\;\;n\geq k.
\end{eqnarray}
d.ii)
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gfd12}
&& R_{k+1}\left(a_n-\frac{n-k}{n-k+1}a_{n-k}\right)
+\sum_{l=1}^{d}R_{k-l}\left(\frac{n+2}{n-l+1} \,c_n^l-\frac{n-k+l+1}{n-k+l+2}\,c_{n-k+l+1}^{l}\right)\nonumber\\
&&-\sum_{l=k-1-d}^{d}\frac{l+1}{n-l+1}c_{n}^{l}c_{n-l}^{k-l-1}=\sum_{l=1}^{k-2}\frac{R_{l+1}R_{k-l}}{n-l+1},\;\;\; d+1\leq k\leq 2d+1,\;\;n\geq k.
\end{eqnarray}
d.iii)
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gfd13}
&& R_{k+1}\left(a_n-\frac{n-k}{n-k+1}a_{n-k}\right)
+\sum_{l=1}^{d}R_{k-l}\left(\frac{n+2}{n-l+1} \,c_n^l-\frac{n-k+l+1}{n-k+l+2}\,c_{n-k+l+1}^{l}\right)\nonumber\\
&&=\sum_{l=1}^{k-2}\frac{R_{l+1}R_{k-l}}{n-l+1},\;\;\; k\geq 2d+2,\;\;n\geq k.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By differentiating \eqref{dorth0} we get
\begin{equation}\label{gf2}
xP'_n(x)+P_n(x)=P'_{n+1}(x)+\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}P_{n-l}'(x).
\end{equation}
Then by making the operations $n\alpha_n
Eq\eqref{gf2}+Eq\eqref{gf1}$ and $Eq\eqref{gf1}-\alpha_n
Eq\eqref{gf2}$ we obtain, respectively,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gf3}
(n+1)\alpha_nxP'_n(x)=n\alpha_n\left(P'_{n+1}(x)+\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}P_{n-l}'(x)\right)+\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}R_{k+1}\alpha_{n-k}P'
_{n-k}(x)
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gf4}
(n+1)\alpha_n
P_n(x)=\alpha_n\left(P'_{n+1}(x)+\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}P_{n-l}'(x)\right)-\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}R_{k+1}\alpha_{n-k}P'
_{n-k}(x).
\end{eqnarray}
Inserting \eqref{gf1} in the left-hand side of the equation $Eq\eqref{gf4}$ multiplied by $x$ we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{xgf4}
(n+1)\alpha_n\left(P_{n+1}+\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}P_{n-l}(x)\right)=\alpha_n\left(xP'_{n+1}(x)+\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}xP_{n-l}'(x)\right)-\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}R_{k+1}\alpha_{n-k}xP_{n-k}'(x).
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{gf4} and \eqref{gf3} respectively in the left hand side and right hand side of \eqref{xgf4} we get
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\frac{n+1}{n+2}\alpha_n\left(P_{n+2}'(x)+\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n+1}^{l}P_{n+1-l}'(x)\right)-\frac{n+1}{n+2}\frac{\alpha_n}{\alpha_{n+1}}\sum_{k=1}^{n}R_{k+1}\alpha_{n+1-k}P_{n+1-k}'(x)\nonumber\\
&&+(n+1)\alpha_n\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}\frac{1}{n+1-l}P_{n+1-l}'(x)
+(n+1)\alpha_n\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}\frac{1}{n+1-l}\sum_{l'=0}^{d}\gamma_{n-l}^{l'}P_{n-l-l'}'(x)\nonumber\\
&&-(n+1)\alpha_n\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}\frac{1}{n+1-l}\frac{1}{\alpha_{n-l}}\sum_{k=1}^{n-l-1}R_{k+1}\alpha_{n-l-k}P_{n-k-l}'(x)=
\frac{n+1}{n+2}\alpha_n\left(P_{n+2}'(x)+\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n+1}^{l}P_{n+1-l}'(x)\right)\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{1}{n+2}\frac{\alpha_n}{\alpha_{n+1}}\sum_{k=1}^{n}R_{k+1}\alpha_{n+1-k}P_{n+1-k}'(x)+\alpha_n\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}\frac{n-l}{n+1-l}P_{n+1-l}'(x)\nonumber\\
&&+\alpha_n\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}\frac{n-l}{n+1-l}\sum_{l'=0}^{d}\gamma_{n-l}^{l'}P_{n-l-l'}'(x)+\alpha_n\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}\frac{1}{n+1-l}\frac{1}{\alpha_{n-l}}\sum_{k=1}^{n-l-1}R_{k+1}\alpha_{n-l-k}P_{n-l-k}'(x)\nonumber\\
&&-\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}R_{k+1}\frac{n-k}{n+1-k}\alpha_{n-k}P_{n+1-k}'(x)-\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}R_{k+1}\frac{n-k}{n+1-k}\alpha_{n-k}\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n-k}^{l}P_{n-k-l}'(x)\nonumber\\
&&-\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}R_{k+1}\frac{1}{n+1-k}\sum_{k'=1}^{n-k-1}R_{k'+1}\alpha_{n-k-k'}P_{n-k-k'}'(x).
\end{eqnarray}
It follows that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{xgf5}
&&-\frac{\alpha_n}{\alpha_{n+1}}\sum_{k=1}^{n}R_{k+1}\alpha_{n+1-k}P_{n+1-k}'(x)+\alpha_n\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}\frac{l+1}{n+1-l}P_{n+1-l}'(x)+\alpha_n\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}\frac{l+1}{n+1-l}\sum_{l'=0}^{d}\gamma_{n-l}^{l'}P_{n-l-l'}'(x)\nonumber\\
&&-(n+2)\alpha_n\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}\frac{1}{n+1-l}\frac{1}{\alpha_{n-l}}\sum_{k=1}^{n-l-1}R_{k+1}\alpha_{n-l-k}P_{n-k-l}'(x)=-\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}R_{k+1}\frac{n-k}{n+1-k}\alpha_{n-k}P_{n+1-k}'(x)\nonumber\\
&&-\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}R_{k+1}\frac{n-k}{n+1-k}\alpha_{n-k}\sum_{l=0}^{d}\gamma_{n-k}^{l}P_{n-k-l}'(x)
-\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}R_{k+1}\frac{1}{n+1-k}\sum_{k'=1}^{n-k-1}R_{k'+1}\alpha_{n-k-k'}P_{n-k-k'}'(x)
\end{eqnarray}
a) By comparing the coefficients of $P_{n+1}'(x)$ in the both sides of \eqref{xgf5} we obtain
$$\frac{1}{n+1}\alpha_n\gamma_{n}^{0}=0,\;\; \text{ for } n\geq0,$$
and then $$\gamma_{n}^{0}=0,\;\; \text{ for } n\geq0.$$
b) Equating the coefficients of $P'_{n}(x)$ in the both sides of the
equation \eqref{xgf5} gives
$$\frac{2}{n}\alpha_n\gamma_n^1=R_2\frac{\alpha_n}{\alpha_{n+1}}\alpha_n-R_2\frac{n-1}{n}\alpha_{n-1},\quad \text{ for } n\geq 1,$$
which can be written as
$$\gamma _n^1=na_n-(n-1)a_{n-1},\;\;\text{ for } n\geq 1.$$
Now by equating the coefficients of $P'_{n+1-k}(x)$ for $k\geq 2$ in the both sides of the equation \eqref{xgf5} we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{dgf12}
&&\frac{k+1}{n+1-k}\alpha_n\gamma_{n}^{k}+R_{k+1}\alpha_{n-k}\frac{n-k}{n+1-k}-R_{k+1}\frac{\alpha_n}{\alpha_{n+1}}\alpha_{n+1-k}+\alpha_n\sum_{l=1}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}\frac{l+1}{n+1-l}\sum_{l'=1}^{d}\gamma_{n-l}^{l'}\delta_{l+l'}^{k-1}\nonumber\\
&&-(n+2)\alpha_n\sum_{l=1}^{d}\gamma_{n}^{l}\frac{1}{n+1-l}\sum_{k'=1}^{n-l-1}R_{k'+1}\frac{\alpha_{n-l-k'}}{\alpha_{n-l}}\delta_{l+k'}^{k-1}+\sum_{k'=1}^{n}R_{k'+1}\alpha_{n-k'}\frac{n-k'}{n+1-k'}\sum_{l=1}^{d}\gamma_{n-k'}^{l}\delta_{k'+l}^{k-1}\nonumber\\
&&+\sum_{k''=1}^{n}R_{k''+1}\frac{1}{n+1-k''}\sum_{k'=1}^{n-k''}R_{k'+1}\alpha_{n-k'-k''}\delta_{k'+k''}^{k-1}=0,\;\;\text{for } n\geq k.
\end{eqnarray}
then by taking $k=2$ in \eqref{dgf12} we retrieve c) and by considering $3\leq k\leq d$, $d+1\leq k\leq 2d+1$ and $k\geq 2d+2$ we obtain d.i.), d.ii.) and d.iii.) respectively.
\end{proof}
In the following corollaries we adopt the same conditions and notations as in Proposition \ref{prop2}.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor1}
If $R_2=R_3=\cdots=R_{d+1}=0$ and $\alpha_n\neq 0$ for $n\geq 1$, then $R(t)=0$, $F(t)$ is arbitrary and $F(xt)=\sum_{n\geq 0}\alpha_nx^nt^n$
generates the monomials $\{x^n\}_{n\geq 0}$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
As $R_1=R_2=\cdots=R_{d+1}=0$, it is enough to show by induction that $R_n=0$ for $n\geq d+2$.
For $n=1,2,...,d+2$, the equation \eqref{gf1} gives $P_1(x)=x$, $P_2(x)=x^2,...,P_{d+1}(x)=x^{d+1}$ and $P_{d+2}(0)=\frac{-R_{d+2}\alpha_1}{(d+2)\alpha_{d+2}}$. But according to equation \eqref{dorth0}, for $n=d+1$, $P_{d+2}(0)=0$ and then $R_{d+2}=0$.
Now assume that $R_k=0$ for $d+2\leq k\leq n-1$. According to \eqref{gf1} we have, for $d+2\leq k\leq n-1$, $P_k(0)=0$ and $P_n(0)=-\frac{R_n\alpha_1}{n\alpha_n}$.
On other hand, by the shift $n\rightarrow n-1$ in \eqref{dorth0} we have $P_n(0)=0$ and thus $R_n=0$. As $R(t)=0$, the generating function \eqref{gf00} reduces to $F(xt)=\sum_{n\geq 0}\alpha_nx^nt^n$ which generates the monomials with $F(t)$ arbitrary.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor2}
If $R_{d+2}=R_{d+3}=\cdots=R_{2d+2}=0$ then $R(t)=R_2t^2/2+R_3t^3/3+\cdots+R_{d+1}t^{d+1}/(d+1)$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
We will use \eqref{gfd13} and proceed by induction on
$k$ to show that $R_k=0$ for $k\geq 2d+3$. Indeed $k=2d+2$ and $n=2d+2$
in \eqref{gfd13} leads to $a_{2d+2}R_{2d+3}=0$ and since $a_n\neq 0$ we get $R_{2d+3}=0$.
Suppose that $R_{2d+3}=R_{2d+4}=\cdots=R_{k}=0$, then for $n=k$ the
equation \eqref{gfd13} gives $a_{k}R_{k+1}=0$ and finally $R_{k+1}=0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor03}
If $R_{\kappa+d+1}=\cdots=R_{\kappa+1}=R_{\kappa}=R_{\kappa-1}=\cdots=R_{\kappa-d}=0$ for some $\kappa\geq 3d+3$, then
$R_{d+2}=R_{d+3}=\cdots=R_{2d+2}=0$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
$\bullet$ Let $k=\kappa$ in \eqref{gfd13}, then for $n\geq \kappa$ the
fraction $\sum_{l=1}^{\kappa-2}\frac{R_{l+1}R_{\kappa-l}}{n-l+1}$, as function of integer $n$, is
null even for real $n$. So,
\begin{equation}
\lim_{x\to l-1}(x-l+1)\sum_{s=1}^{\kappa-2}\frac{R_{s+1}R_{\kappa-s}}{x-s+1}=R_{l+1}R_{\kappa-l}=0,\;\text{for}\; 1\leq l \leq \kappa-2
\end{equation}
which is $R_{d+2}R_{\kappa-d-1}=0$ when $l=d+1$. Supposing $R_{d+2}\neq 0$ leads to
$R_{\kappa-d-1}=0$. So $R_{\kappa+d}=R_{\kappa+d-1}=\cdots=R_{\kappa-d}=R_{\kappa-d-1}=0$ and with the
same procedure we find $R_{\kappa-d-2}=0$. Going so on till we arrive at $R_{d+2}=0$ which contradicts $R_{d+2}\neq 0$.
$\bullet$ By taking successively $k=\kappa +r, \kappa +r-1,...,\kappa$ in \eqref{gfd13}, for $1\leq r\leq d$, we find
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&R_{l+1}R_{\kappa+r-l}=0 \text { for } 1\leq l \leq \kappa+r-2,\\
&&R_{l+1}R_{\kappa+r-1-l}=0 \text{ for } 1\leq l \leq \kappa+r-3,\\
&&\qquad\qquad\vdots\\
&&R_{l+1}R_{\kappa-l}=0 \text{ for } 1\leq l \leq \kappa-2.
\end{eqnarray*}
If $R_{d+2+r}\neq 0$ then by taking $l=d+1+r$ we get $R_{\kappa-d-1}=R_{\kappa-d-2}=\cdots=R_{\kappa-d-r-1}=0$. So $R_{\kappa+d-r}=R_{\kappa+d-r-1}=\cdots=R_{\kappa-d-r-1}=0$ and with the
same procedure we find $R_{\kappa-d-r-2}=R_{\kappa-d-r-3}=\cdots=R_{\kappa-d-2r-2}=0$. Going so on till we arrive at $R_{d+2+r}=0$ which contradicts $R_{d+2+r}\neq 0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor5}
If $a_n$ is a rational function of $n$ then $R_{d+2}=R_{d+3}=\cdots=R_{2d+2}=0$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
From \eqref{cgf10}, \eqref{gf11} and \eqref{gfd11} observe that $c_n^l$ will also be a rational function of $n$. Then it follows that, in \eqref{gfd13}, two fractions are equal for natural numbers $n\geq k$, $k\geq 2d+2$, and consequently will be for real numbers $n$. If we denote by $N_s(G(x))$ the number of singularities of a rational function
$G(x)$ then we can easily verify, for all rational functions $G$ and $\tilde{ G}$ of $x$ and a constant $a\neq 0$, that:
a) $N_s(G(x+a))=N_s(G(x))$,
b) $N_s(aG(x))=N_s(G(x))$,
c) $N_s(G(x)+\tilde{ G}(x))\leq N_s(G(x))+N_s(\tilde{ G}(x))$.
Using property a) of $N_s$ we have $$N_s\left(\frac{n-k}{n-k+1}a_{n-k}\right)=N_s\left(\frac{n}{n+1}a_{n}\right) \text{ and } N_s\left(\frac{n-k+l+1}{n-k+l+2}\,c_{n-k+l+1}^{l}\right)=N_s\left(\frac{n}{n+1} \,c_n^l\right).$$
According to properties b) and c) of $N_s$, the $N_s$ of the left-hand side of \eqref{gfd12} is finite and independent of $k$. Thus, the right-hand side of \eqref{gfd12} has a finite number of
singularities which is independent of $k$. As consequence there exists a $k_1\geq 3d+3$ for which $R_{l+1}R_{k-l}=0$
for all $k \geq k_1-d-1$ and $k_1-d-1\leq l\leq k$. According to Corollary~\ref{cor1}, there exists a $k_0$ such that $2\leq k_0\leq d+1$ and $R_{k_0}\neq 0$. So, taking successively
$k=k_0+l$ with $l=k_1+d,k_1+d-1,...,k_1-d-1$ we get
$R_{k_1+d+1}=R_{k_1+d}=\cdots=R_{k_1-d}=0$. Then, by Corollary~\ref{cor03} we have $R_{d+2}=R_{d+3}=\cdots=R_{2d+2}=0$.
\end{proof}
The fact that $a_n$ is a rational function of $n$ means that $F(\epsilon z)=\sum_{n\geq
0}\alpha_n(\epsilon z)^n$ (where $\epsilon$ is the quotient of the leading coefficients of the numerator and the denominator of $a_n$) is a generalized hypergeometric series, i.e. of the form:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{F01}
{}_{p}F_{q}\left(
\begin{array}{llll}
\left(\mu_l\right)_{l=1}^p\\
\left(\nu_l\right)_{l=1}^q
\end{array};z\right)={}_{p}F_{q}\left(
\begin{array}{llll}
\mu_1,\mu_2,&...,&\mu_p\\
\nu_1,\nu_2,&...,&\nu_q
\end{array};z\right)=\sum_{n\geq 0}\frac{(\mu_1)_n(\mu_2)_n\cdots(\mu_p)_n}{(\nu_1)_n(\nu_2)_n\cdots(\nu_q)_n}\frac{z^n}{n!}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\left(\mu_l\right)_{l=k}^p$ denotes the array of complex parameters $\mu_k,\mu_{k+1},...,\mu_p$, and if $k>p$ we take the convention that $\left(\mu_l\right)_{l=k}^p$ is the empty array. The symbol $(\mu)_n$ stands for the shifted factorials, i.e.
\begin{equation}
(\mu)_0=1,\;\;(\mu)_n=\mu(\mu+1)\cdots(\mu+n-1),\;\;n\geq 1.
\end{equation}
As an interesting consequence, from Corollary~\ref{cor5} and Corollary~\ref{cor2} we state the following result, which can be interpreted as a generalization of the Appell case in the above Theorem 3 (see also \cite{Douak96}):
\begin{theorem}\label{th4}
Let $\{P_n\}$ be a $d$-PS generated by \eqref{gf00} with $F(z)$ a generalized hypergeometric series. Then $R(t)=R_2t^2/2+R_3t^3/3+\cdots+R_{d+1}t^{d+1}/(d+1)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
$F(z)=\sum_{n\geq 0}\alpha_nz^n$ has the form \eqref{F01}. Then $a_n=\alpha_n/\alpha_{n+1}$ is a rational function of $n$, since $(\mu)_{n+1}/(\mu)_{n}=n+\mu$. The use of Corollary~\ref{cor5} and Corollary~\ref{cor2} completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor06}
Let $R(t)=R_2t^2/2+R_3t^3/3+\cdots+R_{d+1}t^{d+1}/(d+1)$. Then,\\
i) If $R_{d+1}=0$ we have $c_{n+d}^{d}c_{n}^{d}=0$, for $n\geq d+1$.\\
ii) If $R_{d+1}\neq 0$ then
\begin{equation}\label{gf111a}
c_{n}^{d} =\frac{R_{d+1}}{d+1}\left((n+1)\frac{b_{n-d}}{b_n}-(n-d)\right),\;\;\text{ for } n\geq d+1,
\end{equation}
where $b_{md+r}=(b_{d+r}-b_{r})m+b_{r},\;for\; m\geq 0,\; 1\leq r\leq d$.\\
iii) The $\{c_{n}^{m}\}_{1 \leq m \leq d-1}$ can be calculated recursively by solving the following $d$-order linear difference equations:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gfd122}
&&\frac{1}{n-m+1}\left(R_{d+1}(n+2)-(n-d)c_{n-m}^{d}\right)\,c_n^{m}-\frac{1}{n-d+1}\left(R_{d+1}(n-d)+(d+1)c_{n}^{d}\right)\,c_{n-d}^{m}+\nonumber\\
&&+\sum_{l=m+1}^{d}R_{m+d+1-l}\left(\frac{n+2}{n-l+1} \,c_n^l-\frac{n-m-d+l}{n-m-d+l+1}\,c_{n-m-d+l}^{l}\right)
-\sum_{l=m+1}^{d-1}\frac{l+1}{n-l+1}c_{n}^{l}c_{n-l}^{m+d-l}\nonumber\\
&&=\sum_{l=m}^{d-1}\frac{R_{l+1}R_{m+d+1-l}}{n-l+1},\;\;\; 1\leq m\leq d-1,\;\;n\geq m+d+1.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}\\
\textbf{The proof of i)} \\
Put $k=2d+1$ in \eqref{gfd12} to get the following Riccati equation for $\{c_{n}^{d}\}$:
\begin{equation}\label{gfd123}
R_{d+1}\left((n+2)\,c_n^d-(n-d)\,c_{n-d}^{d}\right)-(d+1)c_{n}^{d}c_{n-d}^{d}-R_{d+1}^{2}=0,\;\;for\; n\geq 2d+1.
\end{equation}
By taking $R_{d+1}=0$ in \eqref{gfd123}, i) follows immediately.\\
\textbf{The proof of ii)} \\
Substituting \eqref{gf111a} in \eqref{gfd123} we find the $2d$-linear homogeneous equation
\begin{equation}\label{gfd124}
b_n-2b_{n-d}+b_{n-2d}=0,\;\;for\; n\geq 2d+1.
\end{equation}
By writing $n=md+r$, where $m,r$ are natural numbers with $1\leq r \leq d$, the equation \eqref{gfd124} can be solved by summing twice to find that\\
$$b_{md+r}=(b_{d+r}-b_{r})m+b_{r},\;for\; m\geq 0,\; 1\leq r\leq d.$$
\textbf{The proof of iii)} \\
Since $d+1\leq k\leq 2d+1$ we have $R_{k+1}=0$ and $R_{k-l}=0$ for $l\leq k-2-d$. So, we can write \eqref{gfd12} as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gfd125}
&&\sum_{l=k-d}^{d}R_{k-l}\left(\frac{n+2}{n-l+1} \,c_n^l-\frac{n-k+l+1}{n-k+l+2}\,c_{n-k+l+1}^{l}\right)+R_{d+1}\left(\frac{n+2}{n-k+d+2} \,c_n^{k-1-d}-\frac{n-d}{n-d+1}\,c_{n-d}^{k-1-d}\right)\nonumber\\
&&-\sum_{l=k-d}^{d-1}\frac{l+1}{n-l+1}c_{n}^{l}c_{n-l}^{k-l-1}-\frac{k-d}{n-k+d+2}c_{n}^{k-1-d}c_{n-k+1+d}^{d}-\frac{d+1}{n-d+1}c_{n}^{d}c_{n-d}^{k-1-d}=\nonumber\\
&&=\sum_{l=k-1-d}^{k-2}\frac{R_{l+1}R_{k-l}}{n-l+1},\;\;\; d+1\leq k\leq 2d+1,\;\;n\geq k.
\end{eqnarray}
Putting $m=k-d-1 \neq 0$ in \eqref{gfd125} and rearranging we obtain \eqref{gfd122}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In the case of $d$-OPSs, in Corollary~\ref{cor06} the polynomial $R(t)$ is of degree $d+1$. Otherwise (i.e. $R_{d+1}=0$), we have a contradiction with the regularity conditions $\gamma_{n}^d\neq 0$, for $n\geq d$.
\end{remark}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor02}
The $d$-PS is classical if and only if $R(t)=R_2t^2/2+R_3t^3/3+\cdots+R_{d+1}t^{d+1}/(d+1)$ with $R_{d+1}\neq 0$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}\text{ }\\
1) Assume that the $d$-PS is classical. From \eqref{gf3} and Definition~\ref{def2} we have $R_{k+1}=0$ for $d+1\leq k\leq n-1$. We get $R(t)$ by taking $n\geq 2d+2$ and using Corollary~\ref{cor2}. Now we show that $R_{d+1}\neq 0$. Equation \eqref{gf3} becomes
\begin{equation}\label{clas1}
xQ_n(x)=Q_{n+1}(x)+\sum_{l=1}^{d}\tilde{\gamma}_{n}^{l}Q_{n-l}(x),\quad n\geq 0,
\end{equation}
where $Q_n(x)=(n+1)^{-1}P'_{n+1}(x)$ and
\begin{equation}\label{clas2}
\tilde{\gamma}_{n}^{l}=\frac{n+1-l}{n+2}\left(\gamma_{n+1}^{l}+\frac{R_{l+1}\alpha_{n+l-1}}{(n+1)\alpha_{n+1}}\right), \quad n\geq d.
\end{equation}
From \eqref{gf111a}, if $R_{d+1}=0$ then $\gamma_{n+1}^{d}=0$, and \eqref{clas2} gives $\tilde{\gamma}_{n}^{d}=0$, for $n\geq d$. So, $\{Q_n\}$ is not a $d$-PS which contradicts the fact that $\{P_n\}$ is classical (see Definition~\ref{def2}).
2) Assume that $R(t)=R_2t^2/2+R_3t^3/3+\cdots+R_{d+1}t^{d+1}/(d+1)$ with $R_{d+1}\neq 0$ , then the PS of the derivatives $\{Q_n\}$ satisfy \eqref{clas1} and are generated by $F'(xt-R(t))=\sum_{n\geq 0}(n+1)\alpha_{n+1}Q_n(x)t^n$. Using Corollary~\ref{cor06} we find that $\tilde{c}_{n}^{d}:=(n+1)\alpha_{n+1}\tilde{\gamma}_{n}^{d}/((n-d+1)\alpha_{n-d+1})$ satisfies \eqref{gfd123}. And according to the same expression \eqref{gfd123}, we should have, if $c_{n}^{d}=0$ or $\gamma_{n}^{d}=0$ (for $n\geq d+1$), $R_{d+1}=0$. Therefore, there exists for $\tilde{c}_{n}^{d}$, since $R_{d+1}\neq 0$, a $n_0\geq d+1$ such that $\tilde{c}_{n_0}^{d}\neq 0$ or $\tilde{\gamma}_{n_0}^{d}\neq 0$. This means that $\{P_n\}$ is classical.
\end{proof}
\section{The $d$-symmetric case}
The main result of this section is the following:
\begin{theorem}\label{Th5}
If $\{P_n\}$ is a $d$-symmetric $d$-PS generated by \eqref{gf00} then $R(t)=R_{d+1}t^{d+1}/(d+1)$.
\end{theorem}
Theorem~\ref{Th5} generalizes Theorem~\ref{thmm0} and Theorem~\ref{thmm1} mentioned above. Its proof is quite similar to that of Theorem~\ref{thmm0} in \cite{meskzahaf} and it requires the following Lemmas.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lem1}
If $\{P_n\}$ is a $d$-symmetric $d$-PS generated by \eqref{gf00} then
\begin{equation}\label{dsym0}
R(t)=\sum_{k\geq 1}\frac{R_{k(d+1)}}{k(d+1)}t^{k(d+1)}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\{P_n\}$ be a $d$-symmetric $d$-PS satisfying \eqref{dorth0} and generated by \eqref{gf00}.
Then it has, according to Definition~\ref{def3}, the property
\begin{equation}\label{dsym}
P_n(\omega x)=\omega ^nP_n(x),
\end{equation}
where $\omega=\exp(2\pi i/(d+1))$. It follows that \eqref{dorth0} becomes \cite{MaroniDouak}
\begin{eqnarray}
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
xP_n(x)=P_{n+1}(x)+\gamma_n^d P_{n-d}(x),\quad n\geq
0,\\
P_{-n}(x)=0,\;\;1\leq n\leq d,\;\;\text{and }P_0(x)=1.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray}
Let us show that $R_k=0$ when $k$ is not a multiple of $d+1$. First we replace $x$ by $\omega x$ in \eqref{gf1} and use \eqref{dsym} with $P'_n(\omega x)=\omega^{n-1}P'_n(x) $ to get
\begin{equation}\label{gfdsym}
\alpha_n xP'_n(x)-\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}R_{k+1}\alpha_{n-k}\omega^{-k-1}P'_{n-k}(x)=n\alpha_nP_n(x), \;\; n\geq 2.
\end{equation}
Subtracting \eqref{gfdsym} from \eqref{gf1} gives
\begin{equation}
\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}R_{k+1}\alpha_{n-k}(1-\omega^{-k-1})P'_{n-k}(x)=0,\;\;n\geq 2
\end{equation}
which leads to
$$R_{k}\alpha_{n-k+1}(1-\omega^{-k})=0,\;\; \text{for }2\leq k\leq n,\;\;n\geq 2.$$
Since $\omega^{k}\neq 1$, provided $k$ is not a multiple of $d+1$, gives the result.
\end{proof}
By Lemma~\ref{Lem1} and putting $T_k=R_{k(d+1)}$ for $k\geq 0$, the equations in Proposition~\ref{prop2} simplify to particular forms. Indeed, from \eqref{cgf10}, \eqref{gf11} and \eqref{gfd11} we get
\begin{equation}\label{cdn}
c_n^d=\frac{T_{1}}{d+1}\left((n-d+1)\frac{a_n}{a_{n-d}}-(n-d)\right),\;\;\text{for } n\geq d.
\end{equation}
The equation \eqref{gfd12}, with $k=2d+1$, becomes
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gfdsym12}
&& T_{2}\left(a_n-\frac{n-2d-1}{n-2d}a_{n-2d-1}\right)
+T_{1}\left(\frac{n+2}{n-d+1} \,c_n^d-\frac{n-d}{n-d+1}\,c_{n-d}^{d}\right)\nonumber\\
&&-\frac{d+1}{n-d+1}c_{n}^{d}c_{n-d}^{d}=\frac{T_{1}^2}{n-d+1},\;\;n\geq 2d+1,
\end{eqnarray}
which by \eqref{cdn} takes the form
\begin{equation}\label{gf1102}
\frac{(d+1)T_{2}}{T_{1}^2}\left(1-\frac{n-2d-1}{n-2d}\frac{a_{n-2d-1}}{a_{n}}\right)=\frac{n+1}{a_n}-\frac{2(n-d+1)}{a_{n-d}}+\frac{n-2d+1}{a_{n-2d}},\;\;\text{
for } n\geq 2d+1.
\end{equation}
Finally, the equation \eqref{gfd13} simplifies to
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gfd1313}
&& T_{k+1}\left(a_n-\frac{n-k(d+1)-d}{n-k(d+1)-d+1}a_{n-k(d+1)-d}\right)
+T_{k}\left(\frac{n+2}{n-d+1} \,c_n^d-\frac{n-k(d+1)+1}{n-k(d+1)+2}\,c_{n-k(d+1)+1}^{d}\right)\nonumber\\
&&=\sum_{l=0}^{k-1}\frac{T_{l+1}T_{k-l}}{n-l(d+1)-d+1},\;\;\; k\geq 2,\;\;n\geq k(d+1)+d.
\end{eqnarray}
This equation will be denoted by $E_k(n)$ in below.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lem3}
If $T_{2}=0$ then $R(t)=T_{1}t^{d+1}/(d+1)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
According to Corollary \ref{cor2}, if $T_2=R_{2(d+1)}=0$ then $R(t)=T_{1}t^{d+1}/(d+1)$, since in this case we have $R_{d+2}=R_{d+3}=\cdots=R_{2d+1}=0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{cor3}
If $T_{m}=T_{m+1}=0$ for some $m\geq 3$, then
$T_2=0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
$T_{m}=T_{m+1}=0$ means that $R_{(d+1)m}=R_{(d+1)(m+1)}=0$. Also by Lemma~\ref{Lem1}, we have $R_{(d+1)m+d}=R_{(d+1)m+d-1}=\cdots=R_{(d+1)m+1}=0$ and $R_{(d+1)m-1}=R_{(d+1)m-2}=\cdots=R_{(d+1)m-d}=0$ which represents the condition of corollary~\ref{cor03} with $\kappa=(d+1)m\geq 3(d+1)$ and therefore gives $R_{2d+2}=T_2=0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{cor6}
If $T_{\kappa}=T_m=0$ for some $\kappa\neq m\geq 3$, then
$T_2=0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is similar to that of Corollary~7 in \cite{meskzahaf}. Let assume that $T_{\kappa+1}\neq 0$ and $T_{m+1}\neq 0$, since if not, we apply Corollary~\ref{cor3}. When $m> \kappa$ and by using \eqref{gfd1313}, the following operations
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\left[E_{\kappa}(n+(d+1)m+d)/T_{\kappa+1}-E_{m}(n+(d+1)m+d)/T_{m+1}\right]\nonumber\\
&&-\left[E_{\kappa}(n)/T_{\kappa+1}-E_{m}(n+(d+1)(m-\kappa)+d)/T_{m+1}\right]
\end{eqnarray}
give
\begin{equation}
\left(\frac{n}{n+1}-\frac{n+(d+1)(m-\kappa)}{n+(d+1)(m-\kappa)+1}\right)a_n=Q(n)
\end{equation}
where $Q(n)$ is a rational function of $n$. Consequently, $a_n$ is a rational function of $n$ and by Corollary~\ref{cor5} we have $T_2=0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{cor7}
The following equality is true for $k\geq 3\hbox{ and } n\geq k(d+1)+2d+1.$
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gfd23}
T_{k-1}D_{k+1}(a_n-\tilde{
a}_{n-k(d+1)-2d-1})-T_{k+1}D_{k}(a_{n-d-1}-\tilde{
a}_{n-k(d+1)-d})=\sum_{l=1}^{k-1}\frac{V_{k,l}}{n-l(d+1)-d+1},
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{itemize}
\item $D_{k,l}=T_kT_{k-l+1}-T_{k+1}T_{k-l}$.
\item $D_{k}=D_{k,1}=T_k^2-T_{k+1}T_{k-1}$.
\item
$V_{k,l}=\frac{T_1}{2}\left(T_lT_{k+1}D_{k-1,l-1}-T_{l+1}T_{k-1}D_{k,l}\right)$.
\item $\tilde{ a}_n=\frac{n}{n+1}a_n$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Just by making the following combinations it is easy to get \eqref{gfd23}:
\begin{equation*}
T_{k+1}\left(T_{k-1}E_k(n)-T_{k}E_{k-1}(n-d-1)\right)-T_{k-1}\left(T_kE_{k+1}(n)-T_{k+1}E_k(n-d-1)\right).
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
To prove Theorem~\ref{Th5} it is sufficient, according to Lemma~\ref{Lem3}, to show that $T_2=0$. To this end, we will consider three cases:\\
{\bf\textit { Case 1:}} There exists $k_0\geq 3$ such that $D_k\neq 0$ for $k\geq k_0$.\\
Considering Lemma~\ref{cor6}, we can choose $\tilde{k}\geq k_0$ such that $T_{k}\neq 0$ for $k\geq \tilde{k}-1$. Let define, for $k\geq \tilde{k}$, $\bar{D}_{k}=\frac{D_{k}}{T_{k-1}T_{k}}$ and $\bar {E}_k(n)$ be the equation \eqref{gfd23} divided by $T_{k-1}T_{k}T_{k+1}$. By making the operations
\begin{equation*}
\left[\bar{D}_{k-1}\bar{E}_k(n+d+1)-\bar{D}_k\bar{E}_{k-1}(n)\right]+\left[\bar{D}_{k+1}\bar{E}_{k-1}(n-d-1)-\bar{D}_{k}\bar{E}_k(n)\right]
\end{equation*}
we get, for $k\geq \tilde{k}+1$, the equation
\begin{equation}\label{Dk101}
{a}_{n+d+1}-{a}_{n-2(d+1)}-\tilde{D}_k({a}_n-{a}_{n-d-1})=\sum_{l=1}^{k}\frac{{W}_{k,l}}{n-(d+1)l+2}:=Q_k^{(1)}(n),
\end{equation}
where $W_{k,l}$ is independent of $n$ and
$$\tilde{D}_k=\frac{\bar{D}_{k}^2+\bar{D}_{k}\bar{D}_{k-1}+\bar{D}_{k}\bar{D}_{k+1}}{\bar{D}_{k-1}\bar{D}_{k+1}}.$$
Similarly, by the operations
\begin{equation}\label{Dk2.1}
\left[\bar{D}_{k}\bar{E}(k,n+d+1)-\bar{D}_{k+1}\bar{E}(k-1,n+d+1)\right]+\left[\bar{D}_{k}\bar{E}(k-1,n)-\bar{D}_{k-1}\bar{E}(k,n)\right]
\end{equation}
and the shift $n\rightarrow n+(d+1)k-1$ in \eqref{Dk2.1} we
obtain
\begin{equation}\label{Dk3}
\tilde{a}_{n+d+1}-\tilde{a}_{n-2(d+1)}-\tilde{D}_k(\tilde{a}_n-\tilde{a}_{n-d-1})=\sum_{l=1}^{k}\frac{\widetilde{W}_{k,l}}{n+(d+1)l-d}:=\widetilde{Q}_k^{(1)}(n),
\end{equation}
where $\widetilde{W}_{k,l}$ is independent of $n$.
Now, for $k\neq \kappa\geq \tilde{k}+1$, the equations
\eqref{Dk101} and \eqref{Dk3} give, respectively,
\begin{equation}\label{Dk2}
(\tilde{D}_{\kappa}-\tilde{D}_{k})(a_n-a_{n-d-1})=Q_k^{(1)}(n)-Q_{\kappa}^{(1)}(n)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{Dk4}
(\tilde{D}_{\kappa}-\tilde{D}_k)\left(\frac{n}{n+1}a_n-\frac{n-d-1}{n-d}a_{n-d-1}\right)=\widetilde{Q}_k^{(1)}(n)-\widetilde{Q}_{\kappa}^{(1)}(n).
\end{equation}
If $\tilde{D}_k\neq \tilde{D}_{\kappa}$ for some $k\neq \kappa\geq
\tilde{k}+1$, then by \eqref{Dk2} and \eqref{Dk4} we can
eliminate $a_{n-d-1}$ to get that $a_n$ is a rational function of
$n$. So, by Corollary~\ref{cor5}, we have $T_2=0$.
If $\tilde{D}_k= D$ for $k\geq \tilde{k}+1$, then
\eqref{Dk101} and \eqref{Dk3} become, respectively,
\begin{equation}\label{Dk6}
a_{n+d+1}-a_{n-2(d+1)}-D(a_n-a_{n-d-1})=Q_k^{(1)}(n)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{Dk66}
\frac{n+d+1}{n+d+2}a_{n+d+1}-\frac{n-2d-2}{n-2d-1}a_{n-2(d+1)}-D\left(\frac{n}{n+1}a_n-\frac{n-d-1}{n-d}a_{n-d-1}\right)=\widetilde{Q}_k^{(1)}(n).
\end{equation}
The combinations
$\left((n+d+2)Eq\eqref{Dk66}-(n+d+1)Eq\eqref{Dk6}\right)/(d+1)$ and
$((n-2d-1)Eq\eqref{Dk66}-(n-2d-2)Eq\eqref{Dk6})/(d+1)$ give, respectively,
\begin{equation}\label{Dk8}
\frac{3a_{n-2d-2}}{n-2d-1}-D\left(-\frac{a_n}{n+1}+\frac{2a_{n-d-1}}{n-d}\right)=Q_k^{(3)}(n)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{Dk9}
\frac{3a_{n+d+1}}{n+d+2}-D\left(\frac{2a_n}{n+1}-\frac{a_{n-d-1}}{n-d}\right)=Q_k^{(4)}(n).
\end{equation}
By shifting $n\rightarrow n+d+1$ in \eqref{Dk8} we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{Dk10}
\frac{3a_{n-d-1}}{n-d}-D\left(-\frac{a_{n+d+1}}{n+d+2}+\frac{2a_{n}}{n+1}\right)=Q_k^{(3)}(n+d+1).
\end{equation}
The coefficients $a_{n+d+1}$ and $a_{n-d-1}$ can be eliminated by the operations
$D\times Eq\eqref{Dk9}-3\,Eq\eqref{Dk10}$ and $3\,Eq\eqref{Dk9}-D\times Eq\eqref{Dk10}$ leaving us with
\begin{equation}\label{Dk11}
\frac{6D-2D^2}{n+1}a_n+\frac{D^2-9}{n-d}a_{n-d-1}=Q_k^{(5)}(n)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{Dk12}
\frac{9-D^2}{n+d+2}a_{n+d+1}-\frac{6D-2D^2}{n+1}a_{n}=Q_k^{(6)}(n).
\end{equation}
Finally, the shifting $n\rightarrow n-d-1$ in \eqref{Dk12} leads to
\begin{equation}\label{Dk13}
\frac{9-D^2}{n+1}a_{n}-\frac{6D-2D^2}{n-d}a_{n-d-1}=Q_k^{(6)}(n-d-1)
\end{equation}
and the operation $(6D-2D^2)Eq\eqref{Dk11}+(D^2-9)Eq\eqref{Dk13}$ gives
\begin{equation}\label{Dk14}
[(6D-2D^2)^2+(D^2-9)^2]a_n=Q_k^{(7)}(n).
\end{equation}
According to manipulations made above, $Q_k^{(7)}(n)$ is a
rational function of $n$. As consequence, if $D\neq 3$, $a_n$ is a rational function of $n$ and then $T_2=0$.
Now, we explore the case $D=3$. According to the left-hand sides of \eqref{Dk9} and \eqref{Dk10}, we have%
\begin{equation*}
Q_{k}^{(3)}\left( n+d+1\right) =Q_{k}^{(4)}\left( n\right),
\end{equation*}%
which can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{Eq77}
(n+2d+2)Q_{k}^{(1)}\left( n+d+1\right)-(n-2d-2)Q_{k}^{(1)}\left(
n\right) =\left( n+2d+3\right)
\widetilde{Q}_{k}^{(1)}\left( n+d+1\right)-\left( n-2d-1\right)
\widetilde{Q}_{k}^{(1)}\left( n\right).
\end{equation}%
By using, from \eqref{Dk101} and \eqref{Dk3}, the expressions of $Q_{k}^{(1)}(n)$ and $\widetilde{Q}_{k}^{(1)}(n)$ with $W_{k,k+1}=\widetilde{W}_{k,k+1}=W_{k,0}=\widetilde{W}_{k,0}=0$ we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Eq7a}
\sum_{l=0}^{k}\frac{((d+1)l+2d)W_{k,l+1}-((d+1)l-2d-4)W_{k,l}}{n-(d+1)l+2}=\sum_{l=0}^{k}\frac{(d+1)((2-l)\widetilde{W}_{k,l}-(l+2)\widetilde{W}_{k,l+1})}{n+(d+1)l+1}.
\end{eqnarray}
Observe that in \eqref{Eq7a} the singularities of the left hand side are different from those of the right hand side. So,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Eq7aa}
((d+1)l+2d)W_{k,l+1}-((d+1)l-2d-4)W_{k,l}=(2-l)\widetilde{W}_{k,l}-(l+2)\widetilde{W}_{k,l+1}=0,\;(0\leq l\leq k),
\end{eqnarray}
and by induction on $l$, all the $W_{k,l}$ and $\widetilde{W}_{k,l}$ are null. Thus, \eqref{Dk101} reads
\begin{equation}\label{Dk6a}
a_{n+d+1}-a_{n-2(d+1)}-3(a_n-a_{n-d-1})=0.
\end{equation}
For $n=(d+1)m+r$, $m\geq 0$ and $0\leq r\leq d$, the solutions of \eqref{Dk6a} have the form
\begin{equation}\label{Dk6aa}
a_{(d+1)m+r}=C_{0,r}+C_{1,r}m+C_{2,r}m^2,
\end{equation}
where $C_{0,r}, C_{1,r}$ and $C_{2,r}$ are constants. So, by Corollary~\ref{cor5} we get $T_2=0$.\\
{\bf\textit { Case 2:}} There exists $k_{0}\geq 3$ such that $D_{k}=0$ for $k\geq k_{0}$.\\
Suppose that $D_k= T_k^2-T_{k-1}T_{k+1}=0$ for all $k\geq k_0$.
First, notice that if there exists a $k_1\geq k_0$ such that $T_{k_1}=0$, then $T_{k_1-1}T_{k_1+1}=0$. Then, $T_{k_1-1}=0$ or $T_{k_1+1}=0$ and by Corollary~\ref{cor3}, $T_2=0$. We have also $T_{k_0-1}\neq 0$, otherwise $T_{k_0}=0$ and by Corollary~\ref{cor3}, $T_2=0$.
Now, for $T_k\neq 0$ $(k\geq k_0-1)$, we have
\begin{equation}
\frac{T_{k+1}}{T_{k}}=\frac{T_{k}}{T_{k-1}}=\frac{T_{k_{0}}}{T_{k_{0}-1}}.
\label{Eq0.4}
\end{equation}%
This means that
\begin{equation}\label{Eq1.4}
T_{k}=\left( \frac{T_{k_{0}}}{T_{k_{0}-1}}\right)^{k-k_{0}}T_{k_{0}}=ab^{k}
\end{equation}%
where $a=T_{k_{0}-1}^{k_{0}}/T_{k_{0}}^{k_{0}-1}\neq 0$ and $b=T_{k_{0}}/T_{k_{0}-1}\neq 0$.\\
The substitution $T_{k}=ab^{k}$ in \eqref{gfd1313} for $k\geq k_{0}$\ leads to the equation%
\begin{eqnarray}
&& b\left(a_n-\frac{n-k(d+1)-d}{n-k(d+1)-d+1}a_{n-k(d+1)-d}\right)
+\frac{n+2}{n-d+1} \,c_n^d-\frac{n-k(d+1)+1}{n-k(d+1)+2}\,c_{n-k(d+1)+1}^{d}\nonumber\\
&&=\frac{b^{-k}}{a}\sum_{l=0}^{k-1}\frac{T_{l+1}T_{k-l}}{n-l(d+1)-d+1}=Q_{k}\left( n\right) . \label{Eq4}
\end{eqnarray}
Let denote (\ref{Eq4}) by $\widetilde{E}\left( k,n\right)$ and make the
subtraction $\widetilde{E}\left( k+1,n+d+1\right) -\widetilde{E}\left( k,n\right)$ to get
\begin{equation}
b\left( a_{n+d+1}-a_{n}\right)
+\frac{n+d+3}{n+2}c_{n+d+1}^d-\frac{n+2}{n-d+1} \,c_n^d=Q_{k+1}\left(n+d+1\right) -Q_{k}\left( n\right) .
\label{Eq11}
\end{equation}%
On the right hand side of (\ref{Eq11}) we have, for $k\geq k_{0}$, the expression
\begin{eqnarray}
\widetilde{Q}_{k}\left( n\right) &:=&Q_{k+1}\left(n+d+1\right) -Q_{k}\left( n\right)
=\frac{b^{-k-1}}{a}\sum_{l=0}^{k}\frac{T_{l+1}T_{k+1-l}}{n+d+1-l(d+1)-d+1}-\frac{b^{-k}}{a}\sum_{l=0}^{k-1}\frac{T_{l+1}T_{k-l}}{n-l(d+1)-d+1}\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{b^{-k-1}}{a}\sum_{l=0}^{k}\frac{T_{l+1}T_{k+1-l}}{n-l(d+1)+2}-\frac{b^{-k}}{a}\sum_{l=1}^{k}\frac{T_{l}T_{k+1-l}}{n-l(d+1)+2}\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{b^{-k-1}}{a}\frac{T_{k+1}T_{1}}{n+2}+\frac{b^{-k-1}}{a}\frac{%
T_{k}\left( T_{2}-bT_{1}\right) }{n-d+1}+\frac{b^{-k-1}}{a}\sum_{l=2}^{k}\frac{T_{k+1-l}\left(T_{l+1} -bT_{l}\right)}{n-l(d+1)+2}\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{T_{1}}{n+2}+\frac{T_{2}-bT_{1}}{b(n-d+1)}+\frac{b^{-k-1}}{a}\sum_{l=2}^{k}\frac{T_{k+1-l}\left(T_{l+1} -bT_{l}\right)}{n-l(d+1)+2}.
\end{eqnarray}
from which we deduce
\begin{eqnarray}
\widetilde{Q}_{k+1}\left( n\right)
&=&\frac{T_{1}}{n+2}+\frac{T_{2}-bT_{1}}{b(n-d+1)}+\frac{b^{-k-2}}{a}\sum_{l=2}^{k+1}\frac{T_{k+2-l}\left(T_{l+1} -bT_{l}\right)}{n-l(d+1)+2}
.
\end{eqnarray}
Now since the left hand side of equation (\ref{Eq11}) is independent of $k$, it follows
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{Q}_{k+1}\left( n\right) -\widetilde{Q}_{k}\left(n\right) =\frac{b^{-k-2}}{a}\sum_{l=2}^{k}\frac{\left( T_{k-l+2}-bT_{k-l+1}\right)\left( T_{l+1}-bT_{l}\right) }{n-l(d+1)+2}=0.
\end{equation}
As a result, for $2\leq l\leq k$ and $k\geq k_{0}$, we have
\begin{equation}
\left( T_{k-l+2}-bT_{k-l+1}\right)\left( T_{l+1}-bT_{l}\right)
=0.
\end{equation}
Let take $k=2\left( k_{0}-2\right) -1$ and $l=k_{0}-2$\ to get
$\left(
T_{k_{0}-1}-bT_{k_{0}-2}\right) ^{2}=0$ and then
$T_{k_{0}-1}=bT_{k_{0}-2},$ (or equivalently $D_{k_0-1}=0$).
Thus, the equations \eqref{Eq0.4} and \eqref{Eq1.4} are valid for $k=k_{0}-1$ and by induction we arrive at $T_{4}=bT_{3},$ (or equivalently $D_{4}=0$). For $k=4$, the right-hand side of \eqref{gfd23} is null. Consequently, $V_{4,2}=0$ and using $T_5=T_4^2/T_3$ (from $D_{4}=0$) we get $D_3=0$. On the other side (when $T_2\neq 0$) we can write
$$T_{k}=\left(\frac{T_3}{T_2}\right)^{k-2}T_{2}=ab^k,\;\;\text{for } k\geq 2,$$
where $b=T_3/T_2\neq 0$ and $a=T_2^3/T_3^2\neq 0$. Therefore, the equation \eqref{Eq4} reads
\begin{eqnarray}
&& b\left(a_n-\frac{n-k(d+1)-d}{n-k(d+1)-d+1}a_{n-k(d+1)-d}\right)
+\frac{n+2}{n-d+1} \,c_n^d-\frac{n-k(d+1)+1}{n-k(d+1)+2}\,c_{n-k(d+1)+1}^{d}\nonumber\\
&&=\frac{T_1}{n-(d+1)k+2}+\frac{T_1}{n}+\sum_{l=1}^{k-2}\frac{ab}{n-l(d+1)-d+1},\;\; k\geq 2 \hbox{ and } n\geq (d+1)k+d.\label{gf1222}
\end{eqnarray}
When $n=(d+1)k+d$ and $n=(d+1)(k+1)$, the equation \eqref{gf1222} gives
\begin{equation}\label{gf12222}
ba_{(d+1)k+d}+\frac{(d+1)k+d+2}{(d+1)k+1}c_{(d+1)k+d}^d=\frac{d+1}{d+2}c_{d+1}^d+\frac{T_1}{d+2}+\frac{T_1}{(d+1)k+d}+\sum_{l=1}^{k-2}\frac{ab}{(d+1)(k-l)+1}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
ba_{(d+1)(k+1)}+\frac{(d+1)(k+1)+2}{(d+1)(k+1)-d+1}c_{(d+1)(k+1)}^d=\frac{a_1b}{d+1}&+&\frac{d+2}{d+3}c_{d+2}^d+\frac{T_1}{d+3}+\frac{T_1}{(d+1)(k+1)}\nonumber\\&+&\sum_{l=1}^{k-2}\frac{ab}{(d+1)(k+1-l)-d+1}\label{gf12223}
\end{eqnarray}
respectively. Let take $n=(d+1)N+d$ in \eqref{gf1222} and use \eqref{gf12222} to obtain the expression
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\frac{d+1}{d+2}c_{d+1}^d+\frac{T_1}{d+2}+\frac{T_1}{(d+1)N+d}+\sum_{l=1}^{N-2}\frac{ab}{(d+1)(N-l)+1}\nonumber\\
&&-\frac{(d+1)(N-k)b}{(d+1)(N-k)+1}a_{(d+1)(N-k)}-\frac{(d+1)(N-k+1)}{(d+1)(N-k)+d+2}c_{(d+1)(N-k+1)}^d\nonumber\\
&&=\frac{T_1}{(d+1)(N-k)+d+2}+\frac{T_1}{(d+1)N+d}+\sum_{l=1}^{k-2}\frac{ab}{(d+1)(N-l)+1}.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
In this last equality let put $N-k$ instead of $k$ to get
\begin{eqnarray}
&&-\frac{b(d+1)k}{(d+1)k+1}a_{(d+1)k}-\frac{(d+1)(k+1)}{(d+1)(k+1)+1}c_{(d+1)(k+1)}^d=\nonumber\\&=&-\frac{(d+1)}{d+2}c_{d+1}^d-\frac{T_1}{d+2}-\sum_{l=1}^{N-2}\frac{ab}{(d+1)(N-l)+1}+\frac{T_1}{(d+1)k+d+2}+\sum_{l=1}^{N-k-2}\frac{ab}{(d+1)(N-l)+1}\nonumber\\
&=&-\frac{d+1}{d+2}c_ {d+1}^d-\frac{T_1}{d+2}+\frac{T_1}{(d+1)k+d+2}-\sum_{l=2}^{k+1}\frac{ab}{(d+1)l+1}.\label{gf12224}
\end{eqnarray}
After defining
$A_1=\frac{a_1}{d+1}+\frac{d+2}{(d+3)b}c_{d+2}^d+\frac{T_1}{(d+3)b}$
, $A_2=-\frac{d+1}{d+2}\frac{c_ {d+1}^d}{b}-\frac{T_1}{(d+2)b}$ and $A_3=\frac{T_1}{b}$, the operation $$\frac{1}{(d+1)(k+1)+2}\left(\frac{(d+1)(k+1)}{(d+1)(k+1)+1}\,Eq\eqref{gf12223}+\frac{(d+1)(k+1)+2}{(d+1)(k+1)-d+1}\,Eq\eqref{gf12224}\right)$$
leads to
\begin{eqnarray}\label{an_tel}
&&\frac{(d+1)(k+1)}{((d+1)(k+1)+2)((d+1)(k+1)+1)}\,a_{(d+1)(k+1)}-\frac{(d+1)k}{((d+1)k+2)((d+1)k+1)}a_{(d+1)k}=\nonumber\\
&=&{\frac {-A_{{1}}d+dA_{{3}}-A_{{3}}}{ \left( (d+1)k+d+2 \right) d}}+{
\frac {2\,A_{{1}}-A_{{3}}}{(d+1)k+d+3}}+{\frac {A_{{2}}d+A_{{3}}}{
\left( (d+1)k+2 \right) d}}\nonumber\\
&& +\left(\frac{2}{ (d+1)k+d+3 }- \frac{1}{ (d+1)k+d+2}\right)\sum _{l=1}^{k-2}{\frac {a}{ \left( d+1 \right) \left( k+1-l \right)
-d+1}}\nonumber\\
&&-\frac{1}{ \left(
d+1 \right) \left( k+1 \right) -d+1 }\sum _{l=2}^{k+1}{\frac {a}{ \left( d+1 \right) l+1}}
\nonumber\\
&=&{\frac {-A_{{1}}d+dA_{{3}}-A_{{3}}}{ \left( (d+1)k+d+2 \right) d}}+{
\frac {2\,A_{{1}}-A_{{3}}}{(d+1)k+d+3}}+{\frac {A_{{2}}d+A_{{3}}}{
\left( (d+1)k+2 \right) d}}\nonumber\\
&& +\left(\frac{2}{ (d+1)k+d+3 }- \frac{1}{ (d+1)k+d+2}\right)\sum _{l=2}^{k-1}{\frac {a}{ \left( d+1 \right) \left( l+1 \right)
-d+1}}\nonumber\\
&&-\frac{1}{ \left(
d+1 \right) \left( k+1 \right) -d+1 }\sum _{l=2}^{k+1}{\frac {a}{ \left( d+1 \right) l+1}}
\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{ B_1}{k+\frac{d+3}{d+1}}+\frac{B_2}{k+\frac{d+2}{d+1}}+\frac { B_3}{k+\frac{2}{d+1}}+\frac{a}{(d+1)^2}\left(\frac{2}{ k+\frac{d+3}{d+1} }- \frac{1}{ k+\frac{d+2}{d+1} }\right) \Psi \left( k+\frac{2}{d+1} \right) \nonumber\\
&&-\frac{a}{
(d+1)^2 }\frac{1}{k+\frac{2}{d+1} }\Psi\left( k+2+\frac{1}{d+1} \right),
\end{eqnarray}
where the Digamma function $\Psi(x)$ as well as the short notations $B_1=\frac{2{A_1}-{ A_3}}{d+1}-\frac{2a}{(d+1)^2}\Psi\left(2+\frac{2}{d+1}\right)$, $B_2=\frac{-dA_1+(d-1)A_3}{d(d+1)}+\frac{a}{(d+1)^2}\Psi\left(2+\frac{2}{d+1}\right)$ and $B_3=\frac{ dA_2+ A_3}{d(d+1)}+\frac{a}{(d+1)^2}\Psi\left(2+\frac{1}{d+1}\right)$ are introduced.
Taking $$U_k=\frac{(d+1)k}{((d+1)k+2)((d+1)k+1)}a_{(d+1)k}$$ and
\begin{eqnarray}
G(k+1)
&=&\frac{ B_1}{k+\frac{d+3}{d+1}}+\frac{B_2}{k+\frac{d+2}{d+1}}+\frac { B_3}{k+\frac{2}{d+1}}+\frac{a}{(d+1)^2}\left(\frac{2}{ k+\frac{d+3}{d+1} }- \frac{1}{ k+\frac{d+2}{d+1} }\right) \Psi \left( k+\frac{2}{d+1} \right) \nonumber\\
&&-\frac{a}{
(d+1)^2 }\frac{1}{k+\frac{2}{d+1} }\Psi\left( k+2+\frac{1}{d+1} \right).\end{eqnarray}
then \eqref{an_tel} can be written in compact form as
$$U_{k+1}-U_k=G(k+1).$$
The later recurrence is easily solved to give $$U_k=U_3+\sum^{k}_{j=4}G(j).$$
By using the formula $\Psi(j+1)=\Psi(j)+1/j$
and the relations \cite[Theorems 3.1 and 3.2]{milgram}
\begin{equation}
\sum_{l=0}^{k}\frac{\Psi(l+\alpha)}{l+\beta}+\sum_{l=0}^{k}\frac{\Psi(l+\beta+1)}{l+\alpha}=\Psi(k+\alpha+1)\Psi(k+\beta+1)-\Psi(\alpha)\Psi(\beta),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\sum_{j=0}^{k}\frac{\Psi(j+\beta)}{j+\beta}=\frac{1}{2}\left[\Psi\, '(k+\beta+1)-\Psi\,'(\beta)+\Psi(k+\beta+1) ^2-\Psi(\beta)^2\right],
\end{equation}
we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{a2kasympt}
U_k&=&\frac{(d+1)k}{((d+1)k+2)((d+1)k+1)}a_{(d+1)k}=B_{{1}}\Psi \left( k+{\frac {d+3}{d+1}} \right) + B_{{2}}\Psi \left( k+{\frac {d+2}{d+1}}
\right) + B_{{3}}\Psi
\left( k+\frac{2}{ d+1} \right) \nonumber\\
&& +{\frac {2a}{ \left( d+1 \right)
\left((d+1) k+2\right) }}+\frac{a}{\left( d+1 \right) ^{
2}} \left( \Psi'
\left( k+{\frac {d+3}{d+1}} \right) + \left( \Psi \left( k+{\frac {d+3}{d+1}}
\right) \right) ^{2}\right) \nonumber\\
&& -\frac{a }{\left( d+1 \right) ^{
2}} \Psi
\left( k+\frac{2} { d+1 } \right) \Psi \left( k+{\frac {d
+2}{d+1}} \right)+\delta_2,
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
\delta_2&=&\frac{a }{\left( d+1 \right) ^{
2}} \Psi \left(\frac{ 2}{d+1} \right)
\Psi \left( {\frac {d+2}{d+1}} \right) - B_{{1}}\Psi \left( {
\frac {d+3}{d+1}} \right) - B_{{2}}\Psi \left( {\frac {d+2}{d+1}} \right)
-B_{{3}}\Psi \left( \frac{2}{ d+1 } \right)-\\
&&{\frac {a}{d+1}} -\frac{a}{\left( d+1 \right) ^{
2}}\Psi' \left( {\frac {d+3}{
d+1}}\right) - \frac{a }{\left( d+1 \right) ^{
2}} \left( \Psi \left( {\frac {d+3}{d+1}}
\right) \right) ^{2}-G(1)-G(2)-G(3)+U_3.
\end{eqnarray*}
From \eqref{a2kasympt} we deduce the asymptotic behaviour of $a_{(d+1)k}$ as
$k\to\infty$:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{a2kk}
\,a_{(d+1)k}&=&\left(\delta _{1}\left(k +\frac{3}{d+1}+
\frac{2}{(d+1)^2k}\right)+{\frac {a \left( d+2 \right) }{ \left( d+1 \right) ^{2}}}+\frac12{\frac
{a \left( d+4 \right) }{ \left( d+1 \right) ^{3}k}}+\frac16 {\frac {ad
\left( d+2 \right) }{ \left( d+1 \right) ^{4}{k}^{2}}}-\frac14 {\frac {a
d \left( d+2 \right) }{ \left( d+1 \right) ^{5}{k}^{3}}}
+\cdots\right)\ln(k)\nonumber\\
&+&\delta
_{2}(d+1)k+\delta _{3}+\frac{\delta _{4} }{k}+\frac{\delta _{5}
}{k^{2}}+\frac{\delta_6}{k^3}+\cdots
\end{eqnarray}
where coefficients $\delta _{i}$ are defined by (higher terms are omitted)
\begin{eqnarray}\nonumber
&&\delta _{1}=(d+1)(B_1+B_2+B_3),\\\nonumber
&&\delta_3={\frac { {d}^{2}+d +4 }{d+1}}B_{{1}}+{\frac { {
d}^{2} +3}{d+1}} B_{{2}}-{\frac { d-3 }{d+1
}}B_{{3}}+3\,\delta_{{2}}+\,{\frac {3}{d+1}}\,a
,
\\\nonumber
&&\delta_4={\frac { 5\,{d}^{2}+4\,d+47 }{ 6\left( d+1
\right) ^{2}}} B_{{1}}+{\frac { 8\,{d}^{2}+d+41 }{
6\left( d+1 \right) ^{2}}}B_{{2}}-{\frac { {d}^{2}+8\,d-41
}{6 \left( d+1 \right) ^{2}}}B_{{3}}+{\frac {2}{
d+1}}\delta_{{2}}+{\frac { 9\,d+13 }{2 \left( d+1 \right) ^{3}
}}\,a
,
\\\nonumber
&&\delta_5={\frac { {d}^{2}+2\,d+9 }{6 \left( d+1
\right) ^{3}}}B_{{1}}-\,{\frac { {d}^{3}+2\,{d}^{2}-9 }{ 6\left( d+1 \right) ^{3}}} B_{{
2}}+{\frac { {d}^{2}+2\,d+9
}{ 6\left( d+1 \right) ^{3}}}B_{{3}}+\,{\frac { {d}^{3}+5
\,{d}^{2}-2\,d +6 }{12 \left( d+1 \right) ^{4}}}\,a,
\\\nonumber
&&\delta_6={\frac { {d}^{2}+2\,d-19 }{60
\left( d+1 \right) ^{2}}}B_{{1}}+{\frac { {d}^{3}+18
\,{d}^{2}+13\,d-19 }{ 60\left( d+1 \right) ^{3}}}B_{{2}}+{\frac { {d}^{2}+2\,d-19 }{ 60\left( d+1
\right) ^{2}}}B_{{3}}-{\frac {7\,{d}^{3}+20\,{d}^{2}-11\,d-8
}{ 24\left( d+1 \right) ^{5}}}\,a
,\\\nonumber
&&\quad\vdots \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
At this level we should remark that $\lim_{k\to \infty}a_{2k}=\infty$ for all
$\delta_i$, $i=1,2,3,...,$ since $a\neq 0$. Recall that
$c_n^d=\frac{T_1}{d+1}\left((n-d+1)\frac{a_n}{a_{n-d}}-(n-d)\right),\;\;\text{for } n\geq d
$, then the
equation \eqref{gf12222} can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{phi}
a_{(d+1)k+d}\left(b+\frac{T_1}{d+1}\frac{(d+1)k+d+2}{a_{(d+1)k}}\right)=\phi(k),
\end{equation}
where $$\phi \left( k\right)
=\frac{T_1}{d+1}\frac{((d+1)k)((d+1)k+d+2)}{(d+1)k+1}-bA_2+\frac{bA_3}{(d+1)k+d}+\sum_{l=2}^{k-1}\frac{ab}{(d+1)l+1},
$$
and the equation \eqref{gf12223} can be written
\begin{equation}\label{phitild}
a_{(d+1)(k+1)}\left(b+\frac{T_1}{d+1}\frac{(d+1)(k+1)+2}{a_{(d+1)k+1}}\right)=\tilde{\phi}(k),
\end{equation}
where $$\tilde{\phi} \left( k\right)
=\frac{T_1}{d+1}\frac{((d+1)(k+1)+2)((d+1)k+1)}{(d+1)k+2}+bA_1+\frac{bA_3}{(d+1)(k+1)}+\sum_{l=3}^{k}\frac{ab}{(d+1)l-d+1}.
$$
From \eqref{phi} and \eqref{phitild} we have
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{a_{(d+1)(k+1)+d}}=
\frac{1}{\phi \left( k+1\right) }\left(
b+\frac{T_1}{d+1}\frac{(d+1)(k+1)+d+2}{a_{(d+1)(k+1)}}\right)
\label{e3d}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{a_{(d+1)k+1}}=\frac{d+1}{T_1}\frac{1}{(d+1)(k+1)+2}\left(\frac{\tilde{\phi} (k)}{a_{(d+1)(k+1)}}-b\right),
\label{e4d}
\end{equation}
which give an explicit formula for $a_{(d+1)(k+1)+d}$ and $a_{(d+1)k+1}$.
$\bullet$ If we suppose $\lim_{k\to\infty} \frac{a_{(d+1)k}}{(d+1)k}=\infty ,$ then from \eqref{e3d} and \eqref{e4d} we deduce on one side%
\begin{equation}
\lim_{k\to\infty} \frac{(d+1)(k+2)}{a_{(d+1)(k+1)+d}}=\lim_{k\to\infty}
\frac{(d+1)(k+2)}{\phi \left( k+1\right) }\left(
b+\frac{T_1}{d+1}\frac{(d+1)(k+1)+d+2}{a_{(d+1)(k+1)}}\right)=\frac{(d+1)b}{T_{1}}
\label{e1}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\lim_{k\to\infty} \frac{(d+1)(k+1)+2}{a_{(d+1)k+1}}=\lim_{k\to\infty}
\frac{d+1}{T_1}\left(\frac{\tilde{\phi} (k)}{a_{(d+1)(k+1)}}-b\right)=-\frac{(d+1)b}{T_{1}}.
\label{e11}
\end{equation}
On the other side, for $n=(d+1)k+2d+1$, \eqref{gf1102} reads
\begin{equation}\label{e2}
\frac{(d+1)T_2}{T_1^2}\left(1\!-\!\frac{(d+1)k}{(d+1)k+1}\frac{a_{(d+1)k}}{a_{(d+1)(k+1)+d}}\right)\!=\!\frac{(d+1)(k+2)}{a_{(d+1)(k+1)+d}}\!-\!\frac{2((d+1)(k+1)+1)}{a_{(d+1)(k+1)}}\!+\!\frac{(d+1)k+2}{a_{(d+1)k+1}}.
\end{equation}
Under the assumption $T_2\neq 0$, \eqref{e2} admits the limit $\infty =0$, as $k\to\infty$, which exhibit a contradiction.
$\bullet$ Now if $\lim_{k\to\infty} \frac{a_{(d+1)k}}{(d+1)k}=\eta_{1}\neq 0,$ then from \eqref{e3d} and \eqref{e4d} we have
\begin{equation}
\lim_{k\to\infty} \frac{(d+1)(k+2)}{a_{(d+1)(k+1)+d}}\!=\!\lim_{k\to\infty}
\frac{(d+1)(k+2)}{\phi \left( k+1\right) }\left(
b\!+\!\frac{T_1}{d+1}\frac{(d+1)(k+1)+d+2}{a_{(d+1)(k+1)}}\right)\!=\!
\frac{(d+1)b}{T_{1}}\!+\!\frac{1}{\eta_1}
:=\eta _{2},
\label{e3}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\lim_{k\to\infty} \frac{(d+1)(k+1)+2}{a_{(d+1)k+1}}=\lim_{k\to\infty}
\frac{d+1}{T_1}\left(\frac{\tilde{\phi} (k)}{a_{(d+1)(k+1)}}-b\right)=\frac{1}{\eta_1}-\frac{(d+1)b}{T_{1}}=\frac{2}{\eta_1}-\eta_2.
\label{e31}
\end{equation}
By taking the limit in (\ref{e2}) we obtain,
\[
\frac{(d+1)T_2}{T_1^2}\left( 1-{\eta _{1}}{\eta_{2}}\right) =\eta _{2}-\frac{2}{\eta _{1}}+\left(\frac{2}{\eta_1}-\eta_2\right)=0.
\]
If $\eta _{2}=0,$ we have the contradiction $T_2=0$. But if $\eta _{2}\neq 0 ,$ then $\eta _{2}=1/\eta _{1}$. From (\ref{e3}) we get $
(d+1)b/T_{1}+1/\eta_1=\eta _{2}$, which gives the contradiction $b=0$.\\
$\bullet$ Finally if $\lim_{k\to\infty} \frac{a_{(d+1)k}}{(d+1)k}=0,$ then according to \eqref{a2kk}, we have
$\delta_1=\delta_2=0$ and
\begin{eqnarray}\label{a2kkk}
a_{(d+1)k}&=&\frac{((d+1)k+2)((d+1)k+1)}{(d+1)k}\left(B_{{1}}\Psi \left( k+{\frac {d+3}{d+1}} \right) + B_{{2}}\Psi \left( k+{\frac {d+2}{d+1}}
\right) -(B_1+ B_{{2}})\Psi
\left( k+\frac{2}{ d+1} \right)\right. \nonumber\\
&& +{\frac {2a}{ \left( d+1 \right)
\left((d+1) k+2 \right) }}+\frac{a}{\left( d+1 \right) ^{
2}} \left( \Psi'
\left( k+{\frac {d+3}{d+1}} \right) + \left( \Psi \left( k+{\frac {d+3}{d+1}}
\right) \right) ^{2}\right) \nonumber\\
&& \left.-\frac{a }{\left( d+1 \right) ^{
2}} \Psi
\left( k+\frac{2} { d+1 } \right) \Psi \left( k+{\frac {d
+2}{d+1}} \right)\right),
\nonumber\\
&=&\!\left({\frac {a \left( d+2 \right) }{ \left( d+1 \right) ^{2}}}+\frac12{\frac
{a \left( d+4 \right) }{ \left( d+1 \right) ^{3}k}}+\frac16 {\frac {ad
\left( d+2 \right) }{ \left( d+1 \right) ^{4}{k}^{2}}}-\frac14 {\frac {a
d \left( d+2 \right) }{ \left( d+1 \right) ^{5}{k}^{3}}}
+\cdots\right)\ln(k)\!+\!\delta _{3}\!+\!\frac{\delta _{4} }{k}\!+\!\frac{\delta _{5}
}{k^{2}}\!+\!\frac{\delta_6}{k^3}+\cdots.
\end{eqnarray}
Let write the equation \eqref{e2} as
\begin{equation}\label{e20}
\frac{(d+1)T_2}{T_1^2}\left(1\!-\!\frac{(d+1)k}{(d+1)k+1}\frac{a_{(d+1)k}}{a_{(d+1)(k+1)+d}}\right)\!-\!\frac{(d+1)(k+2)}{a_{(d+1)(k+1)+d}}\!+\!\frac{2((d+1)(k+1)+1)}{a_{(d+1)(k+1)}}\!-\!\frac{(d+1)k+2}{a_{(d+1)k+1}}\!=\!0.
\end{equation}
After multiplying the both sides of the equation \eqref{e20} by $\phi(k+1)a_{(d+1)(k+1)}$ and using \eqref{a2kkk}, \eqref{e3d} and \eqref{e4d}, we get, as $k\to \infty$,
\begin{equation}
\lambda_1 \ln(k)^2+\lambda_2 \ln(k)+\lambda_3 +\cdots=0
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lambda_1 &=&\left( -\frac { \left( d+2 \right) b}{ \left( d+1 \right) ^3
T_1^2}T_2+\frac {b^2}{ \left( d+1 \right) ^2T_1} \right) a^2
\end{eqnarray*}
and\\
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lambda_2 &=&\left(\frac{ 2b ( d+2 ) a^2}{( d+1 )^3T_1^2}\Psi \left( \frac {2d+3}{d+1} \right) -3\frac { ( d+3 ) ba^2}{ ( d+1 ) ^2T_1^2}+2\frac {
bA_2 (d+2)+T_1(d+3) }{ ( d+1 ) ^2T_1^2}a \right) T_2\\
&&-\frac{2b^2a^2}{( d+1 ) ^{2}T_1}\Psi \left(\frac {2d+3}{d+1} \right) +3\frac {b^2a^2}{(d+1)T_1}-2\,\frac { ( bA_2+T_1 ) ba}{(d+1)T_1}.
\end{eqnarray*}
So, we must have $\lambda_i=0$, $i=1,2,3,...$. As $a\neq 0$ and $b\neq 0$, from $\lambda_1=0$ we get
\begin{equation}\label{T2d}
T_2={\frac { d+1 }{d+2}}bT_1,
\end{equation}
and by replacing $a=T_2/b^2$ and \eqref{T2d} in the equation $\lambda_2=0$ we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{T2d1}
\frac { d-1 }{ \left( d+2 \right) ^{3}}{T_1}^{2}=0.
\end{equation}
If $d\neq 1$, \eqref{T2d1} gives $T_1=0$ which is a contradiction. The case $d=1$ is already treated, \cite[Theorem 1]{meskzahaf}.\\
{\bf\textit { Case 3:}} For every $k_{0}\geq 3$, there exists infinitely many $k,\kappa\geq k_{0}$ such that: $D_{k}=0$ and $D_{\kappa}\neq 0$.\\
We take $k_1$ and $k_2$, $k_1\neq k_2$, with $D_{k_1}=0, D_{k_1+1}\neq 0$, $D_{k_2}=0$ and $D_{k_2+1}\neq 0$ to get from \eqref{gfd23} that
\begin{equation}
a_n-\frac{n-k_1(d+1)-2d-1}{n-k_1(d+1)-2d}a_{n-k_1(d+1)-2d-1}\;\; \text{and}\;\; a_n-\frac{n-k_2(d+1)-2d-1}{n-k_2(d+1)-2d}a_{n-k_2(d+1)-2d-1}
\end{equation}
are two rational functions of $n$.
Consequently, an analogous reasoning to that of Lemma~\ref{cor6} completes the proof.
In the next subsection we give some expressions concerning the sequence $\{\gamma_{n}^d\}_{n\geq d}$ and the power series $F(t)$. The later is expressed by hypergeometric series \eqref{F01}.
\subsection{ Expressions for $\gamma_{n}^d$ and $F(t)$}
\begin{proposition}
The $d$-symmetric $d$-PS, $\{P_n\}$, generated by \eqref{gf00} satisfies
\begin{eqnarray}\label{DD}
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
xP_n(x)=P_{n+1}(x)+\gamma_n^d P_{n-d}(x),\quad n\geq
0,\\
P_{-n}(x)=0,\;\;1\leq n\leq d,\;\;\text{and }P_0(x)=1
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{equation}\label{gm1}
\gamma_{n}^d=\frac{T_1}{d+1}\left((n-d+1)\frac{\alpha_{n-d+1}}{\alpha_{n+1}}-(n-d)\frac{\alpha_{n-d}}{\alpha_n}\right),\;\; \text{for }n\geq d,
\end{equation}
and for $n=dm+r$, $m\geq 1$, $1\leq r\leq d$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{gm2}
\gamma_{dm+r}^d=\frac{T_1}{d+1}\frac{(dm+r)!(\beta_r(m-r-1)+(d+1)b_r)}{(d(m-1)+r)!\prod_{l=1}^{r}(\beta_lm+b_l)\prod_{l=r}^{d}(\beta_l(m-1)+b_l)}
\end{equation}
with $\gamma_{d}^d=T_1d!/\prod_{l=1}^{d}b_l$, $b_l=(l+1)\alpha_{l+1}/\alpha_l$ and $\beta_l=b_{d+l}-b_l$, $1\leq l\leq d$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The equation \eqref{cdn} is
\begin{equation}\label{gf11aa}
c_{n}^{d} =\frac{\alpha_{n}}{\alpha_{n-d}}\gamma_{n}^d=\frac{T_{1}}{d+1}\left((n-d+1)\frac{a_{n}}{a_{n-d}}-(n-d)\right),\;\; \text{ for } n\geq d.
\end{equation}
As $a_n=\alpha_{n}/\alpha_{n+1}$ we get \eqref{gm1}.\\
According to Theorem~\ref{Th5} we have $R(t)=T_{1}t^{d+1}/(d+1)$. So, by Corollary~\ref{cor06} we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{gf11a}
c_{n}^{d} =\frac{\alpha_{n}}{\alpha_{n-d}}\gamma_{n}^d=\frac{T_{1}}{d+1}\left((n+1)\frac{b_{n-d}}{b_n}-(n-d)\right),\;\;\text{ for } n\geq d+1,
\end{equation}
with $b_n=(n+1)/a_n=(n+1)\alpha_{n+1}/\alpha_n$ and
\begin{equation}\label{gf11ab}
b_{md+r}=\beta_rm+b_{r},\;\text{ for }\; m\geq 0,\; 1\leq r\leq d,
\end{equation}
where $\beta_r=b_{d+r}-b_r$, for $1\leq r\leq d$.\\
The equation \eqref{gf11a} gives
\begin{equation}\label{gm3}
\gamma_{n}^d=\frac{T_{1}}{d+1}\frac{\alpha_{n-d}\left((n+1)b_{n-d}-(n-d)b_n\right)}{\alpha_{n}b_n},\;\;\text{ for } n\geq d+1.
\end{equation}
We calculate $\alpha_nb_n/\alpha_{n-d}$ by using the relation $\alpha_n=b_{n-1}\alpha_{n-1}/n=\prod_{l=0}^{n-1}b_{l}/n!$ to find
\begin{equation}\label{gm4}
\frac{\alpha_nb_n}{\alpha_{n-d}}=\frac{(n-d)!}{n!}\frac{\prod_{l=0}^{n}b_{l}}{\prod_{l=0}^{n-d-1}b_{l}}=\frac{(n-d)!}{n!}\prod_{l=n-d}^{n}b_{l}.
\end{equation}
Now for $n=md+r$, we can write
\begin{equation}\label{gm5}
\prod_{l=n-d}^{n}b_{l}=\prod_{l=r}^{d}b_{(m-1)d+l}\prod_{l=1}^{r}b_{md+l}=\prod_{l=r}^{d}(\beta_l(m-1)+b_l)\prod_{l=1}^{r}(\beta_lm+b_l)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{eqnarray}\label{gm6}
(n+1)b_{n-d}-(n-d)b_n&=&(md+r+1)b_{(m-1)d+r}-(md+r-d)b_{md+r}\nonumber\\
&=&(md+r+1)(\beta_r(m-1)+b_r)-(md+r-d)(\beta_rm+b_r)\nonumber\\
&=&\beta_r(m-r-1)+(d+1)b_r.
\end{eqnarray}
Finally, \eqref{gm1} gives $$\gamma_{d}^d=\frac{T_1\alpha_1}{(d+1)\alpha_{d+1}}=\frac{T_1}{d+1}\prod_{l=1}^{d}\frac{\alpha_l}{\alpha_{l+1}}=\frac{T_1d!}{\prod_{l=1}^{d}b_l}$$
and \eqref{gm2} follows by combining \eqref{gm4}, \eqref{gm5} and \eqref{gm6}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{propF}
If $\prod_{l=1}^{d}\beta_l\neq 0$ then $F(t)=1+F_1(t)+F_2(t)$, where
\begin{eqnarray}\label{F1}
F_1(t)=\alpha_d t^d{}_{d+1}F_{d}\left(
\begin{array}{lll}
1,&\frac{b_d}{\beta_d},&\left(\frac{b_{l+d}}{\beta_l}\right)_{l=1}^{d-1}\\
\left(\frac{l+d}{d}\right)_{l=1}^{d}&
\end{array}
;\left(\prod_{l=1}^{d}\beta_l\right)\left(\frac{t}{d}\right)^d\right)
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}\label{F2}
F_2(t)=\sum_{r=1}^{d-1}\alpha_rt^r{}_dF_{d-1}\left(
\begin{array}{lll}
\left(\frac{b_{l+d}}{\beta_l}\right)_{l=1}^{r-1},&\left(\frac{b_l}{\beta_l}\right)_{l=r}^{d}\\
\left(\frac{l}{d}\right)_{l=r+1}^{d-1},&\left(\frac{l}{d}\right)_{l=d+1}^{d+r}&
\end{array}
;\left(\prod_{l=1}^{d}\beta_l\right)\left(\frac{t}{d}\right)^d\right).
\end{eqnarray}
Furthermore, if $\tilde{\beta}_d:=b_d-\beta_d=2b_d-b_{2d}\neq 0$, then $F_1(t)$ in \eqref{F1} can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{F3}
F_1(t)=\frac{\alpha_1}{\tilde{\beta}_d}\left[{}_dF_{d-1}\left(
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{\tilde{\beta}_d}{\beta_d},&\left(\frac{b_l}{\beta_l}\right)_{l=1}^{d-1}\\
\left(\frac{l}{d}\right)_{l=1}^{d-1}&
\end{array}
;\left(\prod_{l=1}^{d}\beta_l\right)\left(\frac{t}{d}\right)^d\right)-1\right].
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Recall that $\alpha_n=\prod_{l=0}^{n-1}b_{l}/n!$. If $\prod_{l=1}^{d}\beta_l\neq 0$, then for $n=md+r$ and using the expression of $b_{md+r}$, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
\prod_{l=0}^{md+r-1}b_{l}&=&b_0b_1b_2\cdots b_{r-1}b_rb_{r+1}\cdots b_{d+r-1}\cdots b_{(m-1)d+r-1}b_{(m-1)d+r}\cdots b_{md}b_{md+1}\cdots b_{md+r-1}\nonumber\\
&=&(b_0b_1b_{2}\cdots b_{r-1}) (b_rb_{r+d}\cdots b_{r+(m-1)d})(b_{r+1}\cdots b_{r+1+(m-1)d})\cdots(b_{d+r-1}b_{2d+r-1}\cdots b_{md+r-1})\nonumber\\
&=&\prod_{l=0}^{r-1}b_l\prod_{l=r}^{d+r-1}b_lb_{l+d}\cdots b_{l+(m-1)d}\nonumber\\
&=&r!\alpha_r\prod_{l=r}^{d}b_lb_{l+d}\cdots b_{l+(m-1)d}\prod_{l=d+1}^{d+r-1}b_lb_{l+d}\cdots b_{l+(m-1)d}\nonumber\\
&=&r!\alpha_r\left(\prod_{l=r}^{d}\beta_l\right)^m\prod_{l=r}^{d}\left(\frac{b_l}{\beta_l}\right)_m\left(\prod_{l=1}^{r-1}\beta_l\right)^m\prod_{l=1}^{r-1}\left(1+\frac{b_l}{\beta_l}\right)_m\nonumber\\
&=&r!\alpha_r\left(\prod_{l=1}^{d}\beta_l\right)^m\prod_{l=r}^{d}\left(\frac{b_l}{\beta_l}\right)_m\prod_{l=1}^{r-1}\left(\frac{b_{l+d}}{\beta_l}\right)_m.
\end{eqnarray}
We have also, for $m\geq 0$ and $0\leq r\leq d-1$, the expressions \cite[Lemma 3.3]{BenRomdane}
\begin{eqnarray*}
(md+r)!=r!m!d^{dm}\prod_{l=r+1}^{d-1}\left(\frac{l}{d}\right)_m\prod_{l=d+1}^{d+r}\left(\frac{l}{d}\right)_m
\end{eqnarray*}
and
\begin{eqnarray*}
((m+1)d)!=d!d^{dm}\prod_{l=1}^{d}\left(1+\frac{l}{d}\right)_m.
\end{eqnarray*}
So,
\begin{equation}\label{F4}
\alpha_{md+r}=\frac{\alpha_r\prod_{l=1}^{r-1}\left(\frac{b_{l+d}}{\beta_l}\right)_m\prod_{l=r}^{d}\left(\frac{b_l}{\beta_l}\right)_m}{m!\prod_{l=r+1}^{d-1}\left(\frac{l}{d}\right)_m\prod_{l=d+1}^{d+r}\left(\frac{l}{d}\right)_m}\left(\left(\prod_{l=1}^{d}\beta_l\right)\left(\frac{1}{d}\right)^{d}\right)^m,\;\;\text{for}\; 1\leq r\leq d-1,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{F5}
\alpha_{md+d}=\frac{\alpha_d\prod_{l=1}^{d-1}\left(\frac{b_{l+d}}{\beta_l}\right)_m\left(\frac{b_d}{\beta_d}\right)_m}{\prod_{l=1}^{d}\left(1+\frac{l}{d}\right)_m}\left(\left(\prod_{l=1}^{d}\beta_l\right)\left(\frac{1}{d}\right)^{d}\right)^m
\end{equation}
and, if $\tilde{\beta}_d\neq 0$,
\begin{equation}\label{F6}
\alpha_{md+d}=\frac{\alpha_1}{\tilde{\beta}_d}\frac{\prod_{l=1}^{d-1}\left(\frac{b_{l}}{\beta_l}\right)_{m+1}\left(\frac{\tilde{\beta}_d}{\beta_d}\right)_{m+1}}{(m+1)!\prod_{l=1}^{d-1}\left(\frac{l}{d}\right)_{m+1}}\left(\left(\prod_{l=1}^{d}\beta_l\right)\left(\frac{1}{d}\right)^{d}\right)^{m+1}.
\end{equation}
Now, expanding $F(t)$ as
\begin{eqnarray*}
F(t)&=&\sum_{n\geq 0}\alpha_nt^n=1+\sum_{m\geq 0}\alpha_{md+d}t^{md+d}+\sum_{r=1}^{d-1}\sum_{m\geq 0}\alpha_{md+r}t^{md+r},
\end{eqnarray*}
the expressions \eqref{F1}, \eqref{F2} and \eqref{F3} follow from \eqref{F4}, \eqref{F5} and \eqref{F6}, respectively.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In proposition~\ref{propF} two expressions of $F(t)$ are given. The first, when $\prod_{l=1}^{d}\beta_l\neq 0$, Equations \eqref{F1} and \eqref{F2}, from which we can deduce the other limiting cases by tending to zero at least a constant $\beta_r$, $1\leq r\leq d$. So, we can enumerate $2^d$ expressions of $F(t)$ similar to that given in \cite[Theorem 3.1]{BenRomdane}. The second, when $\prod_{l=1}^{d}\beta_l\neq 0$ and $\tilde{\beta}_d=b_d-\beta_d\neq 0$, Equations \eqref{F3} and \eqref{F2}, seems to be a new representation of $F(t)$. Similarly, the other limiting cases can be obtained by tending to zero at least a constant $\beta_r$, $1\leq r\leq d$, and $\tilde{\beta}_d$. So, in this second representation, we can enumerate $3\cdot2^{d-1}(=2^{d}+2^{d-1})$ expressions of $F(t)$. We note that, the resulting $2^{d-1}$ expressions when $\tilde{\beta}_d\to 0$, i.e. $\beta_d\to b_d$, are special cases of the first representation when $\beta_d=b_d$. See the illustrative examples given below.
\end{remark}
\begin{example}
If $d=1$ then $R(t)=T_1t^2/2$, $b_{n}=(b_2-b_1)n+2b_1-b_2=\beta_1 n+\tilde{\beta}_1$, for $n\geq 1$, and $F(t)$, $\gamma_n^d$ have the expressions:\\
1) If $\beta_1 \neq 0$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{F7}
F(t)\equiv F^{\beta_1}(t)=1+\alpha_1 t\text{ }{}_{2}F_{1}\left(
\begin{array}{lll}
1,&\frac{b_1}{\beta_1}\\
2&
\end{array}
;\beta_1t\right)
\end{equation}
with $\gamma_1^1=T_1/b_1$ and for $n\geq 2$,
$$\gamma_n^1=\frac{T_1}{2}\frac{n(\beta_1(n-1)+2\tilde{\beta}_1)}{(\beta_1n+\tilde{\beta}_1)(\beta_1(n-1)+\tilde{\beta}_1)}.$$
The limiting case is
\begin{equation}\label{F8}
\lim_{\beta_1\to 0}F^{\beta_1}(t)=1+\alpha_1 t\text{ }{}_{1}F_{1}\left(
\begin{array}{lll}
1\\
2&
\end{array}
;b_1t\right)=1+\frac{\alpha_1}{b_1}\left(e^{b_1 t}-1\right)
\end{equation}
with $\gamma_n^1=T_1n/b_1$ for $n\geq 1$.\\
2) If $\tilde{\beta}_1\beta_1 \neq 0$, \cite{anshelev,meskzahaf},
\begin{equation}\label{F9}
F(t)\equiv F^{\beta_1,\tilde{\beta}_1}(t)=1+\frac{\alpha_1}{\tilde{\beta}_1}\left((1-\beta_1 t)^{-\frac{\tilde{\beta}_1}{\beta_1}}-1\right)\;\;\;\text{(Ultraspherical polynomials)}
\end{equation}
with
$$\gamma_n^1=\frac{T_1}{2}\frac{n(\beta_1(n-1)+2\tilde{\beta}_1)}{(\beta_1n+\tilde{\beta}_1)(\beta_1(n-1)+\tilde{\beta}_1)}, \text{ for } n\geq 1.$$
The limiting cases are
\begin{equation}\label{F10}
\lim_{\beta_1\to 0}F^{\beta_1,\tilde{\beta}_1}(t)=1+\frac{\alpha_1}{b_1}\left(e^{b_1 t}-1\right) \;\;\;\text{(Hermite polynomials)}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{F11}
\lim_{\tilde{\beta}_1\to 0}F^{\beta_1,\tilde{\beta}_1}(t)=1-\frac{\alpha_1}{\beta_1}\ln(1-\beta_1 t) \;\;\;\text{(Chebyshev polynomials of the first kind)}.
\end{equation}
Remark that \eqref{F9} and \eqref{F11} are special cases of \eqref{F7} for $\tilde{\beta}_1\beta_1 \neq 0$ and $\tilde{\beta}_1=0$,i.e. $\beta_1=b_1$, respectively. Also, \eqref{F8} is exactly \eqref{F10}, since in this case $\beta_1\to b_1$.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
For $d\geq 1$ we take $b_n=\alpha n+\beta$ for all $n\geq 1$. So, from \eqref{gf11ab} we have
$ \beta_r=d\alpha$ and, of course, $b_r=\alpha r+\beta$, for $1\leq r\leq d$. Thus, for $\alpha\beta\neq 0$, $\gamma_n^d$ becomes
\begin{equation}\label{gmm2}
\gamma_{n}^d=\frac{T_1\alpha^{-d-1}}{d+1}\frac{n!(\alpha(n-d)+(d+1)\beta)}{(n-d)!(n+\frac{\beta}{\alpha}-d)_{d+1}},\;\; n\geq d,
\end{equation}
and for $F(t)$, since $\alpha_n=\prod_{l=0}^{n-1}b_l/n!$, we obtain (see \cite{anshelev} for calculations)
\begin{equation}\label{FF9}
F(t)\equiv F^{\alpha,\beta}(t)=1+\frac{\alpha_1}{\beta}\left((1-\alpha t)^{-\beta/\alpha}-1\right).
\end{equation}
Let $\lambda=\beta/\alpha$. Then for $T_1=\alpha^{d+1}(d+1)^{-d}$ and with the change of variable $t\to (d+1)t/\alpha$ in the generating function $\left(1-\alpha(xt-T_1t^{d+1}/(d+1))\right)^{-\lambda}$, we meet the Humbert polynomials \cite{Humbert} generated by $\left(1-(d+1)xt+t^{d+1}\right)^{-\lambda}$. For $d=1$ we have the ultraspherical polynomials. \\
The limiting cases are\\
1. $\alpha \to 0$ and $\beta\neq 0$:
\begin{equation}\label{FF10}
\lim_{\alpha\to 0}F^{\alpha,\beta}(t)=1+\frac{\alpha_1}{\beta}\left(e^{\beta t}-1\right)
\end{equation}
with $\gamma_{n}^d=T_1\beta^{-d}n!/(n-d)!$, for $n\geq d$. In the generating function $\exp\left(\beta\left(xt-T_1t^{d+1}/(d+1)\right)\right)$, with $T_1=\beta^d\left((d+1)d!\right)^{-1}$ and the change of variable $t\to t/\beta$, we find the generating function $\exp\left(xt-(d+1)^{-2}t^{d+1}/d!\right)$ of the Gould-Hopper polynomials \cite{Gould} .\\
2. $\beta \to 0$ and $\alpha\neq 0$
\begin{equation}\label{FFa11}
\lim_{\beta\to 0}F^{\alpha,\beta}(t)=1-\frac{\alpha_1}{\alpha}\ln(1-\alpha t)
\end{equation}
with $\gamma_{d}^d=T_1\alpha^{-d}$ and $\gamma_{n}^d=T_1\alpha^{-d}/(d+1)$ for $n\geq d+1$.\\
Let $b=T_1\alpha^{-d}/(d+1)$. Then by the shift $n\to n+d$ in \eqref{DD}, these polynomials satisfy
\begin{eqnarray}\label{DD1}
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
P_{n+d+1}(x)=xP_{n+d}(x)-b P_{n}(x),\quad n\geq 1,\\
P_{n}(x)=x^{n},\;\;0\leq n\leq d,\;\;\text{and }P_{d+1}(x)=xP_{d}(x)-(d+1)b P_{0}(x),
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray}
where we recognise the monic Chebyshev $d$-OPS of the first kind generated by (see \cite[Theorem 5.1]{Bencheikh_C})
\begin{equation}\label{Cheby}
\frac{1-dbt^{d+1}}{1-xt+bt^{d+1}}=\sum_{n\geq 0}P_n(x)t^n.
\end{equation}
Remark that
\begin{equation}\label{Cheby1}
\int_{0}^{t}\frac{1}{t}\left(\frac{1-dbt^{d+1}}{1-xt+bt^{d+1}}-1\right)dt=-\ln\left(1-xt+bt^{d+1}\right).
\end{equation}
Then, by changing the variable $t\to \alpha t$, multiplying by $\alpha_1/\alpha$ and adding 1 in \eqref{Cheby1}, we get the generating function (with $F(t)$ as in \eqref{FFa11}),
\begin{equation}\label{Cheby2}
1-\frac{\alpha_1}{\alpha}\ln\left(1-\alpha\left(xt-\frac{T_1}{d+1}t^{d+1}\right)\right)=1+\sum_{n\geq 1}\frac{\alpha_1}{\alpha n}P_n(x)t^n.
\end{equation}
\end{example}
\begin{example}
For $d=2$ we have $R(t)=T_1t^3/3$ and from \eqref{gm2} we get, for $m\geq 1$, the two expressions
\begin{equation}
\gamma_{2m+2}^{2}=\frac{T_{1}}{3}\,{\frac { 2(m+1)( 2\,m+1 ) ( \beta_{{2}}m+3\tilde{\beta}_2 ) }{ ( \beta_1m+b_{{1}}
) ( \beta_2m+b_2 ) ( \beta_2m+\tilde{\beta}_2 ) }}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\gamma_{2m+1}^{2}=\frac{T_{1}}{3}\,{\frac {2m ( 2\,m+1 ) ( \beta_{{1}}(m-2)+3
\,b_{{1}}) }{ ( \beta_{{1}}m+b_{{1}} )
( \beta_{{1}}(m-1)+b_{{1}
} ) ( \beta_{{2}}m+\tilde{\beta}_2 ) }},
\end{equation}
with $\gamma_{2}^{2}=2T_{1}/(b_1b_2)$, $\beta_1=b_{3}-b_1$, $\beta_2=b_{4}-b_2$ and $\tilde{\beta}_2=2b_2-b_4$.\\
We enumerate the following forms of $F(t)$:
\textbf{A}. The first representation by \eqref{F1} and \eqref{F2}.\\
If $\beta_1\beta_2\neq 0$, then
\begin{eqnarray}\label{exp2_A}
F(t)=1+\alpha_2t^{2}\,{}_3F_{2}\left(
\begin{array}{lll}
1,&\frac{b_2}{\beta_2},&\frac{b_3}{\beta_1}\\
\frac{3}{2},&2
\end{array}
;\beta_1\beta_2\left(\frac{t}{2}\right)^2\right)
+\alpha_1t\;{}_2F_{1}\left(
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{b_1}{\beta_1},&\frac{b_2}{\beta_2}\\
\frac{3}{2}&
\end{array}
;\beta_1\beta_2\left(\frac{t}{2}\right)^2\right).
\end{eqnarray}
The limiting cases are obtained when: $\beta_1\to 0$, $\beta_2\to 0$ or $\left(\beta_1,\beta_2\right)\to (0,0)$.
\textbf{B}. The second representation, by \eqref{F2} and \eqref{F3}, with its limiting cases.\\
1. If $\tilde{\beta}_2\beta_1\beta_2\neq 0$ we have
\begin{eqnarray}
F(t)=1+\frac{\alpha_1}{\tilde{\beta}_2}\left[{}_2F_{1}\left(
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{\tilde{\beta}_2}{\beta_2},&\frac{b_1}{\beta_1}\\
\frac{1}{2}&
\end{array}
;\beta_1\beta_2\left(\frac{t}{2}\right)^2\right)-1\right]
+\alpha_1t\;{}_2F_{1}\left(
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{b_1}{\beta_1},&\frac{b_2}{\beta_2}\\
\frac{3}{2}&
\end{array}
;\beta_1\beta_2\left(\frac{t}{2}\right)^2\right).
\end{eqnarray}
2. If $\beta_1\to 0$:
\begin{eqnarray}
F(t)=1+\frac{\alpha_1}{\tilde{\beta}_2}\left[{}_1F_{1}\left(
\begin{array}{l}
\frac{\tilde{\beta}_2}{\beta_2}\\
\frac{1}{2}
\end{array}
;b_1\beta_2\left(\frac{t}{2}\right)^2\right)-1\right]
+\alpha_1t\;{}_1F_{1}\left(
\begin{array}{l}
\frac{b_2}{\beta_2}\\
\frac{3}{2}
\end{array}
;b_1\beta_2\left(\frac{t}{2}\right)^2\right).
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma_{2m}^{2}&=&\frac{T_{{1}}}{3b_{{1}}}\,{\frac { 2m( 2\,m-1 ) ( \beta_{{2}}(m-1)+3\,\tilde{\beta}_2 ) }{ ( \beta_{{2}}m+\tilde{\beta}_2 ) ( \beta_{{2}}(m-1)+\tilde{\beta}_2 ) }},\;\;m\geq 1\\
\gamma_{2m+1}^{2}&=&\frac{T_{1}}{b_{1}}\frac{(2m)(2m+1)}{\beta_2 m+\tilde{\beta}_2},\;\;m\geq 1,
\end{eqnarray}
3. If $\beta_2\to 0$:
\begin{eqnarray}
F(t)=1+\frac{\alpha_1}{b_2}\left[{}_1F_{1}\left(
\begin{array}{l}
\frac{b_1}{\beta_1}\\
\frac{1}{2}
\end{array}
;b_2\beta_1\left(\frac{t}{2}\right)^2\right)-1\right]
+\alpha_1t\;{}_1F_{1}\left(
\begin{array}{l}
\frac{b_1}{\beta_1}\\
\frac{3}{2}
\end{array}
;b_2\beta_1\left(\frac{t}{2}\right)^2\right).
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma_{2m}^{2}&=&\frac{T_1}{b_2}\frac{(2m)(2m-1)}{\beta_1 (m-1)+b_{1}},\;\;m\geq 1\\
\gamma_{2m+1}^{2}&=&\frac{T_{1}}{3b_2}\,{\frac {2m ( 2\,m+1 ) ( \beta_{{1}}(m-2)+3
\,b_{{1}}) }{ ( \beta_{{1}}m+b_{{1}} )
( \beta_{{1}}(m-1)+b_{{1}
} ) }}
,\;\;m\geq 1,
\end{eqnarray}
4. If $\tilde{\beta}_2\to 0$:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{exp2_4}
F(t)=1+\alpha_2 t^2{}_3F_{2}\left(
\begin{array}{lll}
1&1&1+\frac{b_1}{\beta_1}\\
2&\frac{3}{2}&
\end{array}
;\beta_1b_2\left(\frac{t}{2}\right)^2\right)
+\alpha_1t\;{}_2F_{1}\left(
\begin{array}{ll}
1&\frac{b_1}{\beta_1}\\
\frac{3}{2}&
\end{array}
;\beta_1b_2\left(\frac{t}{2}\right)^2\right).
\end{eqnarray}
with $\gamma_{2}^{2}=2T_{1}/(b_1b_2)$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma_{2m}^{2}&=&\frac{T_1}{3b_2}\frac{2(2m-1)}{(\beta_1 (m-1)+b_{1})},\;\;m\geq 2\\
\gamma_{2m+1}^{2}&=&\frac{T_{1}}{3b_{2}}\,{\frac {2 ( 2\,m+1 ) ( \beta_{{1}}(m-2)+3
\,b_{{1}}) }{ ( \beta_{{1}}m+b_{{1}} )
( \beta_{{1}}(m-1)+b_{{1}
} ) }}
,\;\;m\geq 1.
\end{eqnarray}
Clearly \eqref{exp2_4} is \eqref{exp2_A} with $\beta_2=b_2$.\\
5. If $\beta_1\to 0$ and $\beta_2\to 0$:
\begin{eqnarray}
F(t)&=&1+\frac{\alpha_1}{b_2}\left[{}_0F_{1}\left(
\begin{array}{l}
- \\
\frac{1}{2}
\end{array}
;b_1b_2\left(\frac{t}{2}\right)^2\right)-1\right]
+\alpha_1t\;{}_0F_{1}\left(
\begin{array}{l}
-\\
\frac{3}{2}
\end{array}
;b_1b_2\left(\frac{t}{2}\right)^2\right)\nonumber\\
&=&1+ \frac{\alpha_1}{b_2}\left( \cosh\left(\sqrt {b_{{1}}b_2}\,t \right)-1 +\sqrt{\frac { b_2}{b_1}}\,\sinh \left( \sqrt {b_{{1}}b_2}\,t \right)
\right).
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma_{n}^{2}&=&\frac{T_{1}}{b_{1}b_2}n(n-1),\;\;n\geq 2,
\end{eqnarray}
6. If $\beta_1\to 0$ and $\tilde{\beta}_2\to 0$:
\begin{eqnarray}
F(t)=1+\alpha_2 t^2{}_2F_{2}\left(
\begin{array}{ll}
1&1\\
2&\frac{3}{2}
\end{array}
;b_1b_2\left(\frac{t}{2}\right)^2\right)
+\alpha_1t\;{}_1F_{1}\left(
\begin{array}{l}
1\\
\frac{3}{2}
\end{array}
;b_1b_2\left(\frac{t}{2}\right)^2\right).
\end{eqnarray}
with $\gamma_{2}^{2}=2T_{1}/(b_1b_2)$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma_{2m}^{2}&=&\frac{2T_{1}}{3b_{1}b_2}(2m-1),\;\;m\geq 2\\
\gamma_{2m+1}^{2}&=&\frac{2T_{1}}{b_{1}b_2}(2m+1),\;\;m\geq 1.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{example}
{\bf Acknowledgements:} We would like to thank Dr. Yanallah Abdelkader for precious help and useful discussions.
|
\section*{English Summary}
In this article, we mimic the proof of the simplicity of the
theory ACFA of generic difference fields in order to provide a
criterion, valid for
certain theories of pure fields and fields equipped with operators,
which shows that a complete theory is simple whenever its definable
and algebraic closures are controlled by an underlying stable theory.
\section*{Introduction}
Les corps différentiellement clos, les corps séparablement clos et les
corps aux différences génériques sont des exemples de corps munis
d'opérateurs qui jouent un rôle important en théorie des modèles et
ses applications à la géométrie diophantienne. Les corps aux
différences génériques, c'est-à-dire, les modèles existentiellement
clos dans la classe des corps munis d'un automorphisme, sont un cas
particulier d'un procédé général~: étant donnée une théorie stable
$T$, on considère la classe des modèles de
\[T_\sigma = T \cup \{\text{\og $\sigma$ est un automorphisme\fg}\}.\]
\noindent Quand la sous-classe des modèles existentiellement clos de
$T_\sigma$ est élémentaire, on dénote sa théorie par $TA$. Pour une
théorie stable, l'existence de $TA$ s'avère équivalente à une finitude
imaginaire uniforme, dite NFCP, et une condition technique donn\'ee
dans \cite{BS}, valable pour toute théorie fortement minimale avec
multiplicité définissable, ce qui est le cas des corps algébriquement
clos. Ainsi, la théorie ACFA des corps aux différences génériques
existe \cite{zCheHr} et est complète lorsque l'on détermine le type
d'isomorphisme de $(\operatorname{acl}_T(\emptyset), \sigma)$. Le corps fixe d'un
modèle de ACFA est un corps parfait pseudo-algébriquement clos avec
groupe de Galois $\hat{\Z}$. Ax \cite{jA68} montre qu'un tel corps est
un corps pseudo-fini, c'est-à-dire un corps infini modèle de la
théorie des corps finis. Hrushovski \cite{eH12} étudie la classe des
corps parfaits pseudo-algébriquement clos avec groupe de Galois borné
et montre qu'ils satisfont une propriété d'amalgamation
généralisée. Il en déduit que la théorie est simple, une notion
introduite par Shelah comme généralisation de la
stabilité. L'amalgamation généralisée a été traitée par la suite de
façon homologique \cite{GKK13}. \`A partir d'une configuration de
groupe dans une théorie simple, l'amalgamation généralisée permet
d'améliorer la construction dans \cite{BTW04} pour obtenir un groupe
\emph{hyperdéfinissable} \cite{KMP06}.
Cet article est une simple réécriture (nos excuses pour le mauvais jeu
de mots), sans nouvel apport, de la démonstration de la simplicité de
ACFA réalisée dans \cite{zCheHr}. Elle a pour seul but d'isoler des
propriétés, valables dans de nombreuses théories de corps munis
d'opérateurs (partie \ref{S:ex}), qui permettent de déduire dans la
partie \ref{S:simple} la simplicité lorsque les clôtures définissables
et algébriques sont contrôlées par une théorie stable. La description
de la déviation permet de donner une démonstration uniforme de
l'élimination des imaginaires (au dessus d'une sous-structure
élémentaire nommée) pour les théories de corps précédentes.
Dans la partie \ref{S:gps}, nous étudions les groupes définissables
dans ce contexte. Une propriété supplémentaire sur la clôture
définissable, satisfaite par certaines théories de corps, entraîne que
tout groupe type-définissable connexe se plonge à l’intérieur d’un
groupe algébrique. On retrouve alors le résultat connu dans le cas
différentiel ainsi qu'une version faible de \cite[Propositions 4.2 \&
4.9]{eBfD02} pour les corps séparablement clos.
Certaines théories de corps ne rentrent pas dans ce contexte,
entre-autres les paires propres de corps algébriquement clos ou les
corps séparablement clos (ou PAC bornés) de degré d’imperfection
infini. Dans ces exemples, la non-déviation est donnée en ajoutant une
condition à l’indépendance purement algébrique. En la partie
\ref{S:paires} en annexe, on montre que la démonstration du Théorème
de l’indépendance s’adapte facilement à ce cadre.
Les auteurs tiennent à remercier Zoé Chatzidakis pour ses suggestions
et remarques. Elle a joué un rôle fondamental pour la production de
cette note. Toute incohérence ou erreur sont uniquement de la
responsabilité des auteurs. Ils remercient également le rapporteur
anonyme pour ses remarques et sa lecture détaillée, qui nous ont
permis d'améliorer les premières versions de cet article.
\section{De simples théories}\label{S:ex}
\begin{definition}\label{R:KP}
Une théorie complète est \emph{simple} si dans un (tout) modèle
suffisamment saturé, il existe une relation
ternaire $\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}$ entre sous-ensembles satisfaisant les propriétés
suivantes~:\\
\begin{description}
\item[\bf Invariance] Si $ABC \equiv A'B'C'$, alors $A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_C B$ si
et seulement si $A'\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_{C'} B'$.\\
\item[\bf Symétrie] Si $A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_C B$, alors $B\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_C A$.\\
\item[\bf Monotonie et Transitivité] $A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_C BD$ si et seulement si
$A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_C B$ et $A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_{CB} D$.\\
\item[\bf Caractère fini] $A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_C B$ si et seulement si $a\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_C b $
pour tous deux sous-uples finis $a$ de $A$ et $b$ de $B$.\\
\item[\bf Caractère local] Pour tout uple fini $a$ et tout ensemble
$B$, il existe $C\subset B$ de taille bornée par $|T|$ avec $a\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_C
B$. \\
\item[\bf Extension] Pour tous $A$, $C$ et $B$, il existe $A' \equiv_C
A$ avec $A'\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_C B$. \\
\item[\bf Théorème de l'indépendance ($3$-amalgamation)] Si $M$ est
une sous-structure élémentaire
du modèle ambiant et $A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_M B$, étant
donnés
$$c\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_M A \text { et } d\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_M B \text{ tels que } c\equiv_M d,$$
\noindent alors il existe $e\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_M AB$ avec $e\equiv_{MA} c$
et
$e\equiv_{MB} d$.
\end{description}
On dit que $A$ est \emph{indépendant} de $B$ sur $C$ si $A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_C B$.
Pour une théorie simple, la relation d'indépendance
ci-dessus est unique \cite{KP97} et coïncide avec la non-déviation.
\end{definition}
Une théorie simple est \emph{stable} si elle satisfait une version
plus forte du théorème de l'indépendance~:
\begin{description}
\item[\bf Stationnarité] Tout type sur une sous-structure
élémentaire $M$ du modèle ambiant est \emph{stationnaire}~: étant
donnés
$$c\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_M A \text { et } d\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_M A \text{ tels que } c\equiv_M d,$$
\noindent alors $c\equiv_{MA} d$.
\end{description}
La théorie des corps algébriquement clos de caractéristique $p$ fixée,
avec $p$ premier ou nul, est stable~: deux sous-corps $A$ et $B$ sont
indépendants au-dessus d'un sous-corps commun $C$ si $A$ est
algébriquement indépendant de $B$ sur $C$, ou de façon équivalente, si
les corps $\alg{C(A)}$ et $\alg{C(B)}$ sont linéairement disjoints sur
$\alg C$. Le type de $A$ sur un corps parfait $C$ est stationnaire si
et seulement si l'extension de corps $C\subset C(A)$ est régulière. En
particulier, tout type sur un ensemble algébriquement clos de
paramètres est stationnaire.
L'anneau engendré par deux corps linéairement disjoints est isomorphe
à leur produit tensoriel. De façon générale, les types stationnaires
permettent de fusionner des applications élémentaires définies sur
des sous-parties indépendantes.
\begin{lemma}\label{L:Shelah}
Soient deux
sous-structures $A$ et $B$ ayant une sous-structure commune $C$
et des applications $C$-élémentaires $f:A\to A$ et
$g:B\to B$. Si le type $\operatorname{tp}(A/C)$ est stationnaire et $\operatorname{tp}(A/B)$
ne dévie pas sur $C$, alors
l'application $f\cup g$ est $C$-élémentaire.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
On se place à l'intérieur d'un modèle monstre et on étend $g$ en un
automorphisme $\tilde g$ qui fixe $C$. Alors $\operatorname{tp}(\tilde
g(A)/B)$ ne dévie pas sur $C$. Puisque $\tilde
g(A)\equiv_C A \equiv_C f(A)$, la stationnarité de $\operatorname{tp}(A/C)$ entraîne
que $\tilde g(A)\equiv_B f(A)$. Il existe un $B$-automorphisme $h$
qui envoie $\tilde g(A)$ sur $f(A)$. La composition $h\circ \tilde g
$ étend $f\cup g$, comme souhaité.
\end{proof}
\noindent Ce lemme permet facilement d'obtenir le résultat suivant
(cf. \cite[Fact 3.5]{dP07})~:
\begin{remark}\label{R:stat_dcl}
Pour $x$, $y$ et $A$ dans un modèle d'une théorie stable, si le type
$\operatorname{tp}(xy/A)$ est stationnaire et $y$ est définissable sur
$x\cup\operatorname{acl}(A)$, alors $y$ l'est sur $x\cup A$.
\end{remark}
\begin{fact}\label{F:def}
Dans une théorie stable $T$, si $p$ est un type stationnaire sur un
sous-ensemble $A$ du modèle ambiant, alors son unique extension
non-déviante $q$ à une sous-structure élémentaire $M$ est
\emph{définissable} sur $A$~: étant donnée une formule
$\varphi(x,y)$ à paramètres dans $A$, il existe une formule
$\theta(y)$ à paramètres dans $A$ telle que pour tout uple $m$ dans
$M$,
$$\varphi(x,m) \in q \text{ si et seulement si } M \models \theta(m).$$
(La formule $\theta(y)$ ne dépend que de $p$ et $\varphi$ à équivalence près.)
\noindent Enfin, toute extension non-déviante dans $T$ d'un type
défini sur une sous-structure élémentaire $M$ du modèle ambiant est
\emph{finiment satisfaisable} dans $M$~: si $a\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_M b$, alors pour
toute formule $\varphi(x,y)$ telle que $\models\varphi(a,b)$, on a
$\models\varphi(m,b)$ pour un certain $m$ dans $M$.
\end{fact}
Une théorie du premier ordre élimine les imaginaires si, à l'intérieur
d'un modèle suffisamment saturé, chaque classe d'une relation
d'équivalence définissable sans paramètres admet l'analogue d'un corps
de définition, c'est-à-dire, un uple réel qui est fixé par tout
automorphisme si et seulement s'il fixe cette classe. Cet uple est
unique, à interdéfinissabilité près, et s'appelle le \emph{paramètre
canonique} de la classe. Toute théorie $T$ dans un langage $\LL$
admet une expansion $\Tq$ éliminant les imaginaires dans un langage
$\LLq$ à plusieurs sortes, une pour chaque quotient par une relation
d'équivalence définissable dans $T$ sans paramètres. La sorte
\emph{réelle}, obtenue en considérant le quotient par l'égalité,
s'identifie naturellement avec l'univers de la théorie $T$. Les
éléments des autres sortes sont dits \emph{imaginaires}. Les parties
finies peuvent être vues comme des éléments imaginaires. La théorie
$T$ élimine les imaginaires si tout imaginaire est interdéfinissable
avec un uple réel. Elle code les ensembles finis si elle élimine les
imaginaires correspondant aux parties finies. La théorie $T$
\emph{élimine faiblement les imaginaires} si tout imaginaire $e$ est
définissable sur un uple réel $a$, qui est algébrique sur $e$. Enfin,
elle \emph{élimine géométriquement les imaginaires} si tout imaginaire
est interalgébrique avec un uple réel. Une théorie élimine les
imaginaires dès qu'elle les élimine faiblement et code les ensembles
finis.
Dans une théorie stable qui élimine les imaginaires, tout type $p$ sur
un ensemble algébriquement clos $A$ est stationnaire. De plus, il
existe un sous-ensemble $B\subset A$ définissablement clos et minimal
tel que $p$ ne dévie pas sur $B$ et $p\restr B$ est également
stationnaire. Un tel sous-ensemble est la \emph{base canonique}
$\cb(p)$ de $p$. Nous utiliserons la notation $\cb(c/D)$ pour dénoter
la base canonique du type $\operatorname{tp}(c/\operatorname{acl}(D))$.
Par la suite, fixons une théorie complète stable $T_0$ avec
élimination des quantificateurs et des imaginaires dans un langage
$\LL_0$. L'indice $0$ fera référence à $T_0$. Ainsi, le symbole
$\indi 0$ dénote l'indépendance au sens de $T_0$, et de même pour
$\operatorname{dcl}_0$ ou $\operatorname{acl}_0$.
Dans une expansion $\LL$ du langage $\LL_0$, on considère une théorie
complète $T$ contenant $T_0^\forall$. Une $\LL_0$-structure satisfait
$T_0^\forall$ si et seulement si elle peut être plongée à l'intérieur
d'un modèle de $T_0$.
\noindent Toute $\LL$-structure est également une
$\LL_0$-structure. Ainsi, l'élimination des quantificateurs de $T_0$
entraîne que deux $0$-plongements quelconques d'un modèle $M$ de $T$
dans des modèles de $T_0$ préservent le $\LL_0$-types de toute
$\LL$-sous-structure $A$ de $M$. En particulier, au sens de $T_0$, les
clôtures définissables, respectivement algébriques, de $A$ dans chacun
des plongements sont isomorphes. On travaillera par la suite à
l'intérieur d'un modèle ambiant suffisamment saturé de $T_0$.
Nous allons lister maintenant des conditions sur les théories $T$ et
$T_0$ qui nous permettront de montrer la simplicité de $T$. Afin de
traiter également les corps séparablement clos, nous n'imposerons pas
que les structures considérées soient définissablement closes,
contrairement au cas des sous-structures géométriques \cite[Definition
2.6]{HrPi94} ou des sous-structures PAC bornées \cite[Section
2]{PP06}. Cependant, on suppose la propriété suivante~:
\begin{hyp}\label{H:dcl}
Pour tout modèle $F$ de $T$, tout élément dans $\operatorname{dcl}_0(F)$ est
$\LL_0$-inter\-défi\-nissable avec un uple de $F$.
\end{hyp}
Pour $T_0$ la théorie des corps algébriquement clos dans le langage
des anneaux, cette hypothèse est vérifiée si les modèles de $T$ sont
des corps, car $\operatorname{dcl}_0(A)$ est obtenu en ajoutant au sous-corps
engendré par $A$ les éléments purement inséparables, lorsque la
caractéristique est positive.
\begin{remark}\label{R:EIensemblefini}
Puisque $T_0$ élimine les imaginaires, l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:dcl})$
entraîne que toute partie $\LL_0$-définissable du modèle ambiant de
$T_0$ qui est $F$-invariante est codée par un uple de $F$. En
particulier, tout ensemble fini $F$-invariant est codé par un uple
de $F$. Ainsi, la théorie $T$ code les ensembles finis.
\end{remark}
Dans un modèle suffisamment saturé $F$ de $T$, étant donnée une
sous-partie $A$ de $F$, on dénote par $\sscl A$, resp. $\operatorname{dcl}(A)$ ou
$\operatorname{acl}(A)$, la sous-structure de $F$ engendrée par $A$ au sens de $T$,
resp. la clôture définissable ou algébrique de $A$ dans $F$,
c'est-à-dire, les éléments de $F$ qui sont $\LL$-définissables ou
algébriques sur $A$.
Rappelons qu'un corps de caractéristique positive est parfait s'il
contient tous les éléments purement inséparables (à l'intérieur d'une
clôture algébrique fixée). De façon analogue, une sous-structure $A$
de $F$ est dite \emph{parfaite} si $\operatorname{dcl}_0(A)\cap F=A$. Puisque la
structure $F$ est parfaite, étant donnée une sous-partie $A$, la plus
petite $\LL$-sous-structure parfaite la contenant existe, et est
appel\'ee sa \emph{clôture parfaite}, not\'ee $\operatorname{pcl}(A)$.
Puisque $\LL_0\subset \LL$, si $A\subset F$, alors
$\operatorname{pcl}(A) \subset \operatorname{dcl}(A)$ car $\operatorname{dcl}_0(A)\cap F \subset
\operatorname{dcl}(A)$. Notons que l'ensemble $\operatorname{dcl}_0(A)\cap F$ est
$\LL_0$-interdéfinissable avec $\operatorname{dcl}_0(A)$, par l'hypothèse
$(\ref{H:dcl})$. En revanche, même pour $A=\sscl A$, l'ensemble
$\operatorname{dcl}(A)$ peut être différent de $\operatorname{dcl}_0(A)\cap F$~: pour la plupart
des corps pseudo-finis avec $\LL_0 =\LL$ le langage des anneaux, la
clôture définissable coïncide avec la clôture algébrique \cite[Theorem
1.8]{oBzC16}.
\begin{remark}\label{R:dcl_inters}
Si $A$ et $B$ sont deux sous-structures parfaites de $F$, alors
$$ \operatorname{dcl}_0(A)\cap\operatorname{dcl}_0(B)=\operatorname{dcl}_0(A\cap B).$$
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
Si un élément $x$ appartient à l'intersection
$ \operatorname{dcl}_0(A)\cap\operatorname{dcl}_0(B)$, alors l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:dcl})$
entraîne qu'il existe un uple $a$ dans $A$ qui est
$\LL_0$-interdéfinissable avec $x$, car $A$ est parfait. En
particulier, l'uple $a$ appartient à $\operatorname{dcl}_0(B)\cap F=B$, puisque
$B$ est parfait. On conclut que $x$ est dans $\operatorname{dcl}_0(A\cap B)$,
comme souhaité.
\end{proof}
\begin{hyp}\label{H:acl}
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] La clôture algébrique d'une sous-partie $A\subset F$
coïncide avec la restriction à $F$ de la clôture algébrique au
sens de $T_0$ de la sous-structure $\sscl A$ engendrée par $A$ au
sens de la théorie $T$~:
$$\operatorname{acl}(A) = F \cap \operatorname{acl}_0(\sscl A).$$
\item[(ii)] Deux uples $a$ et $b$ de $F$ ont même type si et seulement
s'il existe un $\LL$-isomorphisme de leurs clôtures algébriques qui
envoie $a$ sur $b$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{hyp}
La première partie de l'hypothèse est toujours vérifiée pour une partie
définissablement close $A=\operatorname{dcl}(A)$, car $T_0$ code les
ensembles finis. Notons que toute sous-structure algébriquement close
de $F$ est parfaite.
\begin{remark}\label{R:stat}
Si $C=\operatorname{acl}(C)\subset F$, alors le type $\operatorname{tp}_0(A/C)$ d'une sous-partie
$A\subset \operatorname{dcl}_0(F)$ est stationnaire (cf. \cite[Lemma 2.8]{HrPi94}).
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
Par élimination des imaginaires de $T_0$, la base canonique
$\cb_0(A/C)$ est contenue dans $\operatorname{dcl}_0(A\cup C)\cap\operatorname{acl}_0(C) \subset
\operatorname{dcl}_0(F)\cap \operatorname{acl}_0(C)$. Par l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:dcl})$, la base
canonique est $\LL_0$-interdéfinissable avec un uple (éventuellement
infini) de $F\cap\operatorname{acl}_0(C)=C$.
\end{proof}
\begin{hyp}\label{H:qftp} Étant données deux sous-structures
parfaites $A$ et $B$ de $F$ au-dessus d'une sous-structure commune
algébriquement close $C$, si $A\indi 0_C B$, alors la sous-structure
de $F$ engendrée par $A$ et $B$ est parfaite et coïncide avec la
$\LL_0$-sous-structure engendrée par $A$ et $B$.
\noindent De plus, si $$A'\models \operatorname{qftp}(A/C) \text{ et } B'
\models \operatorname{qftp}(B/C)
\text{ avec } A'\indi 0_C B',$$ alors
$\sscl{A'B'} \models \operatorname{qftp}(\sscl{AB}/C)$.
\end{hyp}
\begin{remark}\label{R:intersections}
La première partie de cette hypothèse entraîne que
$$\langle A,B\rangle=\langle A,B\rangle_0=\operatorname{dcl}_0(A,B)\cap
F$$ \noindent et, par l'hypothèse
$(\ref{H:acl})$, $$\operatorname{acl}(A,B)=\operatorname{acl}_0(A,B)\cap F.$$
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{R:pred}
Si $T_0$ est la théorie des corps algébriquement clos en
caractéristique nulle, alors la théorie du corps ordonné $\mathbb{R}$
satisfait les hypothèses $(\ref{H:dcl})$ et $(\ref{H:acl})$. Or,
elle ne vérifie pas l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:qftp})$, puisque l'ordre de
deux éléments distincts n'est pas déterminé par leurs
relations purement algébriques.
\noindent Le même argument montre que l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:qftp})$
n'est pas valable pour la théorie d'un corps algébriquement clos
muni d'un prédicat générique \cite{zChaP}.
\end{remark}
La condition suivante apparaît dans \cite[Definition 1.9]{eH02} et
joue un rôle fondamental dans la démonstration du théorème de
l'indépendance pour $T$.
\begin{hyp}\label{H:full}
Pour toute sous-structure élémentaire $N$ de $F$, on a
\[\operatorname{acl}_0(F) = \operatorname{dcl}_0(F\cup\operatorname{acl}_0(N)).\]
\end{hyp}
Cette condition est triviale lorsque les modèles de $T$ sont
algébriquement clos au sens de la th\'eorie $T_0$, ce qui est le cas
des corps algébriquement clos munis d'opérateurs \cite{MS14}. Si $K$
est un corps séparablement clos et $T_0$ la théorie des corps
algébriquement clos de même caractéristique, alors $\operatorname{acl}_0(K)$
coïncide avec $\operatorname{dcl}_0(K)$, qui est la clôture inséparable de $K$.
\noindent Pour une partie $A$ d'un modèle de $T_0$, nous notons pour
la suite
$$\Gal(A) = \mathrm{Aut_0}(\operatorname{acl}_0(A)/A),$$ le groupe des
$\LL_0$-automorphismes élémentaires de $\operatorname{acl}_0(A)$ fixant $A$. Lorsque
$T_0$ est la théorie d'un corps algébriquement clos, on retrouve le
groupe de Galois absolu du corps parfait $\operatorname{dcl}_0(A)$.
\noindent Pour $A \subset B$ deux parties du monstre de $T_0$ et
$\pi$ la
projection naturelle de $\Gal(B)$ vers $\Gal(A)$, on a~:
\begin{itemize}
\item si $\operatorname{tp}_0(B/A)$ est stationnaire, alors $\pi$ est surjective
(par le lemme \ref{L:Shelah})~;
\item $\operatorname{acl}_0(B) = \operatorname{dcl}_0(B\cup\operatorname{acl}_0(A))$ si et seulement si $\pi$
est injective.
\end{itemize}
\begin{remark}\label{R:acl}
Si $N$ est une sous-structure élémentaire de $F$ (ou plus
généralement si $\operatorname{acl}_0(F) = \operatorname{dcl}_0(F\cup\operatorname{acl}_0(N))$ et
$\operatorname{acl}_0(N)\cap F=N$), alors pour $A \supset N$ algébriquement clos
dans $F$, on a également
\[\operatorname{acl}_0(A) = \operatorname{dcl}_0(A\cup\operatorname{acl}_0(N)),\]
et les projections de $\Gal(F)$ sur $\Gal(A)$ et de $\Gal(A)$ sur
$\Gal(N)$ sont des isomorphismes.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
Par la remarque \ref{R:stat} et l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:full})$, les
applications restrictions de $\Gal(F)$ vers $\Gal(A)$ et de
$\Gal(F)$ vers $\Gal(N)$ sont des isomorphismes. On en deduit qu'il
en est de même pour l'application de $\Gal(A)$ vers $\Gal(N)$, donc
$\operatorname{acl}_0(A) = \operatorname{dcl}_0(A\cup\operatorname{acl}_0(N))$.
\end{proof}
\begin{notation}
Par la suite, si $N$ est une sous-structure de $F$, on posera
$N\preceq_0 F$ pour indiquer que le $\LL_0$-réduit de $N$ est une
sous-structure
élémentaire du réduit de $F$ correspondant. \\
Lorsque $T_0$ est un réduit fortement minimal de $T$ et $N$ est une
sous-structure algébriquement close et infinie de $F$, alors
$N\preceq_0 F$.
\end{notation}
La démonstration de \cite[Lemma 3.18]{dP07}, simplifiée grâce à des
remarques de Zoé Chatzidakis, s'adapte facilement à notre contexte
pour donner le résultat suivant~:
\begin{lemma}\label{L:coher}
Soit $N$ une sous-structure algébriquement close contenant
une sous-structure élémentaire de $F$ telle que $N\preceq_0 F$. Si
$A$ et $ B$ sont deux sous-structures de $F$ contenant $N$ telles que
$$A \indi 0_N B,$$
alors le type $\operatorname{tp}_0(A/\operatorname{acl}_0(B))$ est finiment satisfaisable dans
$N$. En particulier, le type $\operatorname{tp}_0(A/\operatorname{acl}_0(B))$ est finiment
satisfaisable dans $\operatorname{acl}_0(N)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Le type $tp_0(A/N)$ est stationnaire par la remarque
\ref{R:stat}. Il suffit ainsi de montrer que $\operatorname{tp}_0(A/B)$ est
finiment satisfaisable dans $N$ : en effet, ce type finiment
satisfaisable s'étendra en un type sur $\operatorname{acl}_0(B)$ finiment
satisfaisable sur $N$. En particulier, ce dernier ne dévie pas sur
$N$ et est par stationnarité égal au type $\operatorname{tp}_0(A/\operatorname{acl}_0(B))$, car
$A \indi 0_N \operatorname{acl}_0(B)$.
\noindent Vérifions donc que $\operatorname{tp}_0(A/B)$ est finiment satisfaisable
dans $N$. Soit $\varphi(x,y)$ une $\LL_0$-formule à paramètres dans
$N$ et des uples $a$ dans $A$ et $b$ dans $B$ avec
$\models \varphi(a,b)$. On considère l'unique extension non-déviante
$q(y)$ de $\operatorname{tp}_0(b/N)$ à une $\LL_0$-sous-structure élémentaire $M$ du
modèle ambiant de $T_0$ contenant $Na$. Par le fait \ref{F:def}, la
$\varphi$-définition $\theta(x)$ de $q$ est définissable sur $N$. On a
alors $M \models \theta(a)$ car $b\indi 0_N a$.
\noindent Par élimination des quantificateurs de $T_0$, on peut
supposer que $\theta$ est sans quantificateurs, et donc
$F\models \theta(a)$. Puisque $N\preceq_0 F$, il existe une
réalisation $n$ de $\theta$ dans $N$. En particulier
$\models\varphi(n,b)$, comme souhaité.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}\label{P:coher}
Soient $A_1,\ldots,A_n$ et $B$ des sous-structures algébriquement
closes de $F$ indépendantes au sens de $T_0$ sur une sous-structure
algébriquement close $N$ contenant une sous-structure élémentaire
telle que $N\preceq_0 F$ ou telle que $\operatorname{acl}_0(N)$ est un modèle de
$T_0$. Alors
$$\sscl{\operatorname{acl}(A_1B),\ldots,\operatorname{acl}(A_nB)} \cap \operatorname{acl}(A_1\ldots,A_n) =
\sscl{A_1\ldots,A_n}. $$
\end{prop}
La conclusion de la proposition est la condition $(\sharp)$ présente
dans \cite[Lemma 1.5]{KMP06}. Cette condition est fondamentale pour
avoir la $n$-amalgamation réelle au-dessus d'une sous-structure
élémentaire de $F$ (voir Définition \ref{D:nAM}).
\begin{proof}
Puisque les structures $A_1,\ldots,A_n$ et $B$ sont indépendantes au
sens de $T_0$ sur $N$, on a par la remarque \ref{R:intersections}
que $\operatorname{acl}(A_iB) = \operatorname{acl}_0(A_iB) \cap F$ pour chaque $i\leq n$ et
$\operatorname{acl}(A_1\ldots,A_n) = \operatorname{acl}_0(A_1\ldots,A_n) \cap F$. En outre,
$$\sscl{\operatorname{acl}(A_1B),\ldots,\operatorname{acl}(A_nB)}=
\operatorname{dcl}_0(\operatorname{acl}(A_1B),\ldots,\operatorname{acl}(A_nB))\cap F,$$
et
$$ \operatorname{dcl}_0(A_1,\ldots,A_n)\cap F=\sscl{A_1\ldots,A_n}.$$
\noindent Soit $\alpha$ dans
$\operatorname{dcl}_0(\operatorname{acl}(A_1B),\ldots,\operatorname{acl}(A_nB)) \cap \operatorname{acl}(A_1\ldots,A_n)
$. Soit $\psi(x,y_1,\ldots,y_n)$ une $\LL_0$-formule telle que
$\models \psi(\alpha,\zeta_1,\ldots,\zeta_n)$
pour des éléments $\zeta_i$ dans $\operatorname{acl}(A_iB)= \operatorname{acl}_0(A_iB)
\cap F$, et
$$ |\{x\,|\,\psi(x,y_1,\ldots,y_n)\}|\leq 1.$$
\noindent On trouve ainsi pour chaque $1\leq i \leq n$, une
$\LL_0$-formule $\psi_i(y_i,u),$ à paramètres dans $A_i$, chacune avec
un nombre fini de réalisations, uniforme en les paramètres, telles que
$$\models \bigwedge \psi_i(\zeta_i,b), $$
pour un certain uple $b$ dans $B$.
Comme $\alpha$ appartient à $ \operatorname{acl}_0(A_1,\ldots,A_n)$, il existe une
$\LL_0$-formule $\varphi(x)$ qui isole son type
$\operatorname{tp}_0(\alpha/\operatorname{acl}_0(A_1),\ldots,\operatorname{acl}_0(A_n))$.
\noindent Or,
$$ \models \exists x \exists y_1 \ldots \exists y_n
\left(\psi(x,y_1,\ldots,y_n) \wedge
\phi(x)\wedge \bigwedge\psi_i(y_i,b) \right).$$
\noindent Cette formule appartient donc au type
$\operatorname{tp}_0(b/\operatorname{acl}_0(A_1\ldots,A_n))$. Puisque
$$B\indi 0_N A_1,\ldots,A_n,$$
\noindent alors le type $\operatorname{tp}_0(b/\operatorname{acl}_0(A_1\ldots,A_n))$ est
finiment satisfaisable dans $\operatorname{acl}_0(N)$, soit par le lemme
précédent si $N\preceq_0 F$, soit par la stabilité de $T_0$ si
$\operatorname{acl}_0(N)$ est un modèle de $T_0$. Ainsi, il existe $d$ dans
$\operatorname{acl}_0(N)$ tel que
$$\models \exists x \exists y_1 \ldots \exists y_n
\left(\psi(x,y_1,\ldots,y_n) \wedge \phi(x)\wedge
\bigwedge\psi_i(y_i,d) \right).$$ On obtient alors une réalisation
de $\phi(x)$ dans $\operatorname{dcl}_0(\operatorname{acl}_0(A_1),\ldots,\operatorname{acl}_0(A_n))$. Cette
réalisation doit être égale à $\alpha$ car $\phi$ isole son $0$-type
sur $\operatorname{acl}_0(A_1),\ldots,\operatorname{acl}_0(A_n)$.
\noindent Par l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:full})$, on en déduit que $\alpha$
appartient à $\operatorname{dcl}_0(A_1,\ldots,A_n,\operatorname{acl}_0(N))$. Puisque le type
$\operatorname{tp}_0(A_1,\ldots,A_n,\alpha/N)$ est stationnaire, la remarque
\ref{R:stat_dcl} entraîne que $\alpha$ appartient à
$$ \operatorname{dcl}_0(A_1\ldots,A_n)\cap
F= \sscl{A_1\ldots,A_n}.$$
\end{proof}
L'hypothèse suivante, qui reflète une certaine richesse des modèles de
la théorie $T$, est satisfaite par les modèles existentiellement clos
des corps algébriquement clos munis d'opérateurs considérés dans
\cite{MS14}.
\begin{hyp}\label{H:ext}
Soit $F'$ un autre modèle de $T$ contenant une sous-structure
parfaite $C'$ au-dessus d'une sous-structure commune
$A\subset F\cap F'$ parfaite dans $F$ et $F'$.
\noindent Si $\operatorname{tp}_0(C'/A)$ est stationnaire, alors pour tout
$A\subset B\subset F$, il existe une sous-structure parfaite $C$ de
$F$ contenant $A$ qui est $\LL$-isomorphe à $C'$ au-dessus de $A$ et
telle que $$C\indi 0_ A B.$$
\end{hyp}
Notons que si $\operatorname{tp}_0(C'/A)$ est stationnaire, alors
$C'\cap\operatorname{acl}_0(A) \subset \operatorname{dcl}_0(A)$. Si la théorie $T_0$ est la
théorie de purs corps algébriquement clos d'une certaine
caractéristique, et $A \subset C'$ sont des sous-corps parfaits, la
condition $C'\cap\operatorname{acl}_0(A) \subset \operatorname{dcl}_0(A)=A$
équivaut alors à ce que l'extension $C'$ sur $A$ soit régulière,
c'est-à-dire, à $C'$ et $\operatorname{acl}_0(A)$ linéairement disjoints
sur $A$. De plus, cette condition entraîne réciproquement que
le type $\operatorname{tp}_0(C'/A)$ est stationnaire, par
élimination des imaginaires dans $T_0$.
\begin{remark}\label{R:rel_acl}
L'hypothèse (\ref{H:acl}) et le $\LL$-isomorphisme entre les
structures $C'$ et $C$ ne suffisent pas pour garantir que $C$ et
$C'$ ont le même type au sens de la théorie $T$. En revanche, si
l'on se place au-dessus d'une sous-structure élémentaire commune
$N$, alors cet $\LL$-isomorphisme envoie toute sous-structure
$N \subset X' \subset C'$ qui est algébriquement close dans $F'$
vers une sous-structure $X$ algébriquement close dans $F$~; en
particulier $X$ et $X'$ ont alors le même type.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
Par la remarque \ref{R:acl}, on a $\operatorname{acl}_0(X') = \operatorname{dcl}_0(X' \cup
\operatorname{acl}_0(N))$. Notons que le $\LL$-isomorphisme entre $C'$ et $C$
induit un $\LL_0$-isomorphisme de $\operatorname{acl}_0(C')$ sur $\operatorname{acl}_0(C)$
au-dessus de $A$, puisque $\LL_0 \subset \LL$, donc on a également
$\operatorname{acl}_0(X) = \operatorname{dcl}_0(X \cup \operatorname{acl}_0(N))$. Soit $y \in \operatorname{acl}_0(X) \cap F$.
On considère un uple $x$ dans $X$ tel que $y \in \operatorname{dcl}_0(x \cup
\operatorname{acl}_0(N))$. Par la remarque \ref{R:stat}, le type $\operatorname{tp}_0(xy/N)$ est
stationnaire. La remarque \ref{R:stat_dcl} entraîne que $y$ est dans
$\operatorname{dcl}_0(x \cup N) \cap F\subset \operatorname{dcl}_0(X)\cap F$. Comme $C$ est
parfait dans $F$, et $X$ est définissablement clos au sens de
$T_0$ dans $C$, on conclut que $y$ est dans $X$ comme souhaité.
\end{proof}
Même si nos hypothèses sont assez restrictives, plusieurs théories de
corps les satisfont.
\begin{fact}\label{F:exemples}
Les théories des~:
\begin{itemize}
\item corps aux différences génériques ACFA en toute
caractéristique dans le langage des corps $\{+,-,\cdot,{}^{-1},0,1\}$
augmenté de symboles de fonctions unaires pour l'automorphisme et
pour son inverse~;
\item corps différentiellement clos, ou plus généralement corps
différentiellement clos avec $n$ dérivations qui commutent, en
caractéristique $0$~;
\item corps différence-différentiellement clos \cite{DCFA} en
caractéristique $0$, dans le langage des corps différentiels aux
différences~;
\item corps munis d'opérateurs libres en caractéristique nulle
\cite{MS14}~;
\item corps séparablement clos en caractéristique positive de degré
d'imperfection fini avec des constantes pour une $p$-base, munis des
$\lambda$-fonctions associées~;
\item corps aux différences génériques séparablement clos en
caractéristique positive de degré d'imperfection fini \cite{SCFA} avec
des constantes pour une $p$-base, munis des $\lambda$-fonctions
associées et des symboles de fonctions unaires
pour l'automorphisme et pour son inverse~;
\item corps pseudo-finis, ou plus généralement corps PAC
parfaits avec groupe de Galois borné \cite{eH02}, en
toute caractéristique dans le langage des corps augmenté de
constantes pour une sous-structure élémentaire~;
\end{itemize}
satisfont les hypothèses $(\ref{H:dcl})$, $(\ref{H:acl})$,
$(\ref{H:qftp})$, $(\ref{H:full})$ et $(\ref{H:ext})$, pour
$T_0$ la théorie des purs corps algébriquement clos de même
caractéristique dans le langage de corps $\{+,-,\cdot,{}^{-1},0,1\}$.
\end{fact}
\begin{proof}
Rappelons que l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:dcl})$ est satisfaite dès que $T$
est une théorie de corps infinis, pour $T_0$ la théorie d'un pur corps
algébriquement clos, puisque $\operatorname{dcl}_0(A)$ est obtenu en ajoutant les
éléments purement inséparables au sous-corps engendré par $A$.
L'hypothèse $(\ref{H:acl})$ a été démontrée lors de l'étude
modèle-théorique de chacune des théories considérées.
Pour l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:qftp})$, notons d'abord que le corps
engendré par deux sous-corps parfaits l'est également. Dans le cas des
corps algébriquement clos, les opérateurs définis ci-dessus sont
additifs, et leur valeur sur un produit s'obtient à partir des valeurs
sur chaque facteur. Pour les corps séparablement clos munis de
$\lambda$-fonctions, toute $\LL$-structure est $0$-relativement
définissablement close et les $\lambda$-fonctions vérifient également
les propriétés ci-dessus. Enfin, les corps PAC parfaits bornés
satisfont cette hypothèse puisque $\LL=\LL_0$.
L'hypothèse $(\ref{H:full})$ est triviale pour
tous les exemples sauf pour les corps PAC parfaits bornés, où elle
suit de \cite[Remark 1.10]{eH02}. En effet, si les groupes de
Galois sont bornés avec même quotients finis, tout épimorphisme
continu entre eux est injectif.
\noindent Il ne reste qu'à montrer l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:ext})$. Pour
les corps algébriquement clos munis d'opérateurs, les corps $A$ et
$C'$ sont alors parfaits. Ainsi, la stationnarité du type
$\operatorname{tp}_0(C'/A)$ entraîne que l'extension $A\subset C'$ est régulière.
Les opérateurs s'étendent de façon canonique au corps engendr\'e par
$B$ et $C'$, car ce dernier coïncide avec le corps de fractions du
produit tensoriel $B\otimes_A C'$ si l'on place $C'$ linéairement
disjoint de $B$ sur $A$,. Puisque $F$ est existentiellement clos et
suffisamment saturé, il contient une $\LL$-copie $C$ de $C'$ sur $A$
qui est linéairement disjointe de $B$ sur $A$, comme souhaité.
Pour les corps séparablement clos de degré d'imperfection fini avec
une $p$-base nommée, le même genre d'argument permet de montrer que
l'extension de corps $F(C')$ sur $F$ est séparable de même degré
d'imperfection, ce qui permet de trouver un $\LL$-isomorphisme $\psi$
entre $C'$ et une sous-structure $C$ de $F$ linéairement indépendante
de $B$ sur $A$. De façon analogue, on obtient le résultat pour les
corps aux différences génériques séparablement clos.
Pour les corps parfaits PAC avec groupe de Galois borné, les
sous-corps $A$ et $C'$ sont parfaits. On peut supposer que $C'$ est
linéairement disjoint de $F$ sur $A$. L'extension $F(C')$ sur $F$ est
régulière, donc la propriété PAC et la saturation donnent un
$F$-homomorphisme d'algèbres $F[B(C')]\to F$. La restriction au corps
$B(C')$ est un $B$-monomorphisme et l'image $C$ de $C'$ vérifie la
conclusion.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} Les sous-structures bornées pseudo-algébriquement
closes des modèles d'une théorie stable, considérées par Pillay et
Polkowska \cite{PP06}, satisfont toutes les hypothèses
précédentes. En effet~: en passant à une expansion conservatrice du
langage de façon à ce que toute sous-structure soit
$0$-définissablement close, pour garantir l'hypothèse
$(\ref{H:qftp})$. L'hypothèse $(\ref{H:dcl})$ correspond à ce que
la sous-structure PAC soit définissablement close, l'hypothèse
$(\ref{H:acl})$ suit des \cite[Propositions 3.12 \& 3.14]{dP07},
l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:full})$ correspond à la notion d'être bornée et
l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:ext})$ suit de la condition PAC de façon
analogue au cas des corps PAC.
De façon analogue, les structures munies d'une $G$-action
existentiellement closes de Hoffmann \cite{dH17} dans le langage
$\LL_G$, avec des symboles $\sigma_g$ et leurs inverses, pour $g$
dans $G$, satisfont toutes les hypothèses précédentes dès que la
clôture algébrique \emph{split}, qui correspond à l'hypothèse
$(\ref{H:full})$ : l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:dcl})$ est vérifiée car les
modèles sont $0$-définissablement clos par \cite[Remark 3.20]{dH17},
l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:qftp})$ est garantie dès que l'on considère une
extension conservatrice du langage $\LL$ pour que toute
sous-structure soit $0$-définissablement close, l'hypothèse
$(\ref{H:acl})$ suit de \cite[Fact 4.8 \& Lemma 4.10]{dH17}. Enfin,
l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:ext})$ suit de la démonstration du théorème de
l'indépendance \cite[Lemma 4.20]{dH17}, lorsque le type est
stationnaire (sans devoir supposer que l'ensemble de base est
algébriquement clos).
\end{remark}
\section{Une preuve simple}\label{S:simple}
Nous disposons maintenant de tous les ingrédients nécessaires pour
montrer que la stabilité de $T_0$ se transfère partiellement à la
théorie $T$. On montrera que $T$ est simple.
\begin{theorem}\label{T:simple}
Soit une théorie stable $T_0$ avec élimination des quantificateurs
et des imaginaires dans un langage $\LL_0$. Dans une expansion
$\LL \supset \LL_0$, on considère une théorie complète $T$ contenant
$T_0^\forall$. Si le couple $(T,T_0)$ satisfait les hypothèses
$(\ref{H:dcl})$, $(\ref{H:acl})$, $(\ref{H:qftp})$, $(\ref{H:full})$
et $(\ref{H:ext})$, alors la théorie $T$ est simple.
\noindent Si l'on augmente le langage $\LL$ par des constantes
pour une sous-structure élémentaire de $T$, on a la caractérisation
suivante~: $$A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_C B \text{ si et
seulement si } \sscl{AC} \indi 0_{\sscl C} \sscl{BC}.$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
On fixe un modèle $F$ suffisamment saturée de $T$ et augmente le
langage $\LL$ par des constantes pour une sous-structure élémentaire
de $T$. On pose $A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_C B $ lorsque
$\sscl{AC} \indi 0_{\sscl C} \sscl{BC}$ pour tous sous-ensembles
$A$, $B$ et $C$. Nous allons vérifier que cette relation ternaire
satisfait les propriétés de la définition \ref{R:KP}, ce qui
entraîne la simplicité de $T$ avec les constantes nommées. Par
\cite{eC99}, il suit que $T$ est également simple.
Puisque $\LL$ contient $\LL_0$ et $T_0$ est stable
avec élimination des quantificateurs, l'indépendance
ainsi définie satisfait clairement {\bf Invariance} et
{\bf Symétrie}. Le {\bf Caractère fini} est satisfait car
l'opérateur $\sscl{}$ est finitaire.
Notons que l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:acl})$ entraîne directement que
$A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_B \operatorname{acl}(B)$ et que $A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_C B $ si et seulement si
$\operatorname{acl}(AC)\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_{\operatorname{acl}(C)} \operatorname{acl}(BC) $. On pourra donc considérer des
parties algébriquement closes pour étudier l'indépendance.
Pour {\bf Monotonie et Transitivité}, on considère des parties $A$,
$B$, $C$ et $D$ algébriquement closes de $F$ telles que $C \subset
A$ et $C \subset B \subset D$. Notons que si $A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_C B$ et
$A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_{B} D$, la sous-structure $A$ est $0$-indépendante de $B$
sur $C$ et de $D$ sur $B$. Elle est donc
$0$-indépendante de $D$ sur $C$, ce qui montre un sens de
l'implication.
\noindent Supposons maintenant que $$A \indi 0_C D.$$
\noindent Alors $A\indi 0_C B$, donc $$A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_C B.$$ Par
l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:qftp})$, la structure $\sscl{AB}$ est égale à la
$0$-structure engendrée par $A$ et $B$. Puisque $$A\indi
0_{B} D,$$ \noindent on conclut que $$\sscl{AB} \indi
0_{B} D,$$ donc $A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_{B} D$, comme souhaité.
Remarquons que pour un uple fini $a$ de $F$, la $\LL$-structure
$\sscl{a}$ a cardinalité bornée par $|T|$. De plus, si $B=\sscl B$ est
une sous-structure de $F$, alors par le caractère fini de la
$0$-indépendance, pour chaque uple fini $\xi$ de $\sscl{a}$, il existe
une sous-partie $C_\xi$ de $B$ de taille bornée par $|T_0|\leq |T|$
telle que $$\xi\indi 0_{C_\xi} B.$$ Alors si l'on pose $C_1$ la
$\LL$-sous-structure engendrée par la réunion de tous les
sous-ensembles $C_\xi$, lorsque $\xi$ parcourt $\sscl{a}$, on
a $$\sscl{a}\indi 0_{C_1} B.$$ On itère cette procédure avec
$\sscl{aC_1}$, qui a aussi cardinalité bornée par $ |T|$, pour
conclure que
$$\sscl{aC_\infty} \indi 0_{C_\infty} B,$$ où $C_\infty$ est la
$\LL$-sous-structure engendrée par la réunion de tous les $C_i$. On en
déduit le {\bf Caractère local}.
Voyons maintenant que l'indépendance satisfait {\bf
Extension}. Considérons des parties algébriquement closes $A$, $B$
et $C$ de $F$ avec $C\subset A$. La remarque \ref{R:stat} donne que
$\operatorname{tp}_0(A/C)$ est stationnaire. Par l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:ext})$, il
existe $A' \models \operatorname{qftp}(A/C)$ avec $A'\indi 0_C B$. Puisque $C$
contient une sous-structure élémentaire, la remarque \ref{R:rel_acl}
et l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:acl})$ entraînent que $A'\models \operatorname{tp}(A/C)$,
comme souhaité.
Il nous reste à montrer que l'indépendance satisfait le {\bf Théorème
de l'indépendance}. Soit donc $N$ une sous-structure élémentaire de
$F$, deux parties algébriquement closes $A$ et $B$ la contenant et
indépendantes sur $N$, et deux parties algébriquement closes $C$ et
$D$ qui ont même type sur $N$ et vérifient
$$ C\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_N A \text{\qquad et \qquad} D\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_N B.$$
\noindent Par {\bf Extension}, nous pouvons supposer que $D$ est
indépendante de $A$ sur $B$. \noindent Par transitivité, les
sous-structures algébriquement closes $A$, $B$ et $D$ sont
indépendantes sur $N$. En particulier,
$$ \operatorname{acl}(AB) \indi 0_B \operatorname{acl}(BD).$$
\noindent Par l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:qftp})$, la sous-structure $E$
engendrée par $\operatorname{acl}(AB)$ et $\operatorname{acl}(BD)$ est parfaite et coïncide avec
la $\LL_0$-sous-structure engendrée par $\operatorname{acl}(AB)$ et $\operatorname{acl}(BD)$.
\noindent Vérifions maintenant que $\operatorname{tp}_0(E/\sscl{AD})$ est
stationnaire. Par l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:dcl})$, on peut supposer que sa
base canonique est contenue dans
$$E\cap\operatorname{acl}_0(AD)= E \cap \operatorname{acl}(AD) = \sscl{\operatorname{acl}(AB), \operatorname{acl}(BD)} \cap
\operatorname{acl}(AD).$$
\noindent Par la proposition \ref{P:coher}, cette intersection est
égale à $\sscl{A D}$, ce qui donne la stationnarité du type
$\operatorname{tp}_0(E/\sscl{AD})$.
\noindent Puisque
$$ A \indi 0_N C \text{\qquad et
\qquad} A \indi 0_N D,$$ l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:qftp})$ donne que
$\sscl{AD}\models \operatorname{qftp}(\sscl{AC}/N)$. Cet $\LL$-isomorphisme partiel
induit un $N$-isomorphisme entre $F$ et un autre modèle suffisamment
saturé $F_1$ de $T$ tel que $\operatorname{acl}(AC)$ est $\LL$-isomorphe avec
$\operatorname{acl}_0(AD)\cap F_1$. En particulier, nous avons l'égalité
$\operatorname{tp}_{F_1}(D/A) = \operatorname{tp}_F(C/A)$.
\noindent
L'hypothèse $(\ref{H:ext})$ nous permet d'obtenir, à l'intérieur du
modèle suffisamment saturé $F_1$, une copie $E_1$ de $E$ sur
$\sscl{AD}$ qui est $0$-indépendante de $\operatorname{acl}_0(AD)\cap F_1$.
Par la remarque \ref{R:rel_acl}, les copies de $\operatorname{acl}(AB)$ et
$\operatorname{acl}(BD)$ dans $E_1$ sont
algébriquement closes dans $F_1$. Ainsi, la copie $B_1$ de $B$
correspondante vérifie~:
$$ \operatorname{tp}_{F}(B/D) = \operatorname{tp}_{F_1}(B_1/D) \text{ et } \operatorname{tp}_{F}(B/A) =
\operatorname{tp}_{F_1}(B_1/A). $$
\noindent Par saturation, il existe $B'D'$ dans $F$ tels que
$\operatorname{tp}_{F}(B'D'/A) = \operatorname{tp}_{F_1}(B_1 D/A)$. Puisque
$\operatorname{tp}_F(B'/A) = \operatorname{tp}_{F_1}(B_1/A)= \operatorname{tp}_{F}(B/A)$, on peut supposer que
$B=B'$, ce qui permet de conclure.
\end{proof}
Les sous-structures PAC bornées d'une théorie superstable sont
supersimples \cite[Corollary 3.22]{dP07}.
Ce résultat est vérifié dès que les deux langages coïncident~:
\begin{cor}\label{C:ss}
Quand $\LL=\LL_0$ (ou plus généralement, quand $\LL$ ne contient pas
de nouveaux symboles de fonctions), si $T_0$ est superstable, alors
$T$ est supersimple.
\end{cor}
\begin{definition}\label{D:nAM}
Étant donné un entier $n\geq 2$, un \emph{problème complet de
$n$-amalgamation réelle sur une sous-structure} $E$ est la donnée
d'une famille des types $p_w(x_w)$ sur $E$ à variables réelles,
indexée par les sous-parties propres de $\{1,\ldots,n\}$, telle
que~:
\begin{itemize}
\item si $w\subset w'$, alors $p_{w'}(x_{w'})\upharpoonright x_w
\supset p_w$~;
\item si $a_w\models p_w$, alors
\begin{itemize}
\item $a_w\subset \operatorname{acl}(E,\{a_i\}_{i\in
w})$, où $a_i$ est $a_w \upharpoonright \{i\}$~;
\item l'ensemble $\{a_i\}_{i\in w}$ est $E$-indépendant.
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\noindent Une théorie simple a la propriété de $n$\emph{-amalgamation
réelle} si tout problème complet de $n$-amalgamation réelle admet un
type $p_{\{1,\ldots,n\} }$ complétant la famille et tel que les
propriétés ci-dessus sont conservées.
\end{definition}
Notons que toute théorie simple a la propriété de $3$-amalgamation
réelle sur les sous-structures élémentaires, car celle-ci est une
reformulation du théorème de l'indépendance.
En utilisant la proposition \ref{P:coher}, la démonstration ci-dessus
s'adapte facilement pour montrer le résultat suivant~:
\begin{cor}\label{C:amalg}
Pour tout entier $n$, la théorie $T$ a la propriété de
$n$-amalgamation réelle sur toute sous-structure élémentaire.
\end{cor}
\begin{remark}\label{R:Thm_Indep}
Dans le théorème \ref{T:simple}, si la théorie $T_0$ est fortement
minimale, alors le {\bf Théorème de l'indépendance} est vérifié
au-dessus de tout ensemble algébriquement clos contenant une
sous-structure élémentaire, car la proposition \ref{P:coher} est
alors valable sur un tel ensemble. En particulier, toutes les
théories de corps du fait \ref{F:exemples} satisfont le {\bf
Théorème de l'indépendance} sur toute $\LL$-sous-structure
algébriquement close contenant une sous-structure élémentaire. En
revanche, on ignore si c'est le cas pour les sous-structures bornées
pseudo-algébriquement closes d'une théorie stable quelconque
\cite{PP06}.
\end{remark}
Une traduction directe de \cite[Proposition 4.7]{eH12} donne
l'élimination des imaginaires de $T$ au-dessus d'une
sous-structure élémentaire nommée. On retrouve ainsi une
démonstration uniforme de l'élimination des imaginaires des
théories du fait \ref{F:exemples}.
\begin{cor}\label{P:WEI}
Au-dessus de constantes pour une sous-structure élémentaire, la
théorie $T$ élimine géométriquement les imaginaires. De plus, elle
élimine les imaginaires dès que le théorème d'indépendance est vrai
sur toute sous-structure algébriquement close.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Vérifions d'abord que la théorie $T$ élimine géométriquement les
imaginaires au-dessus d'une sous-structure élémentaire nommée. Soit
$e=f(a)$ un imaginaire qui est l'image d'un uple réel $a$ par une
fonction $f$ définissable sans paramètres. Posons $E$ la collection
d'éléments réels de $F$ algébriques sur $e$.
Si $a$ est algébrique sur $E$, alors on a le résultat. Sinon,
puisque $E$ est algébrique sur $e$, il suffit de montrer que $e$ est
algébrique sur $E$. Notons $A=\operatorname{acl}(E,a)$. Le lemme de Neumann
\cite{pNeu76} entraîne qu'il existe $B$ réalisant le type
$\operatorname{tp}(A/E,e)$ avec
$$A\cap B=E.$$
En particulier, l'ensemble $B$ est égal à $\operatorname{acl}(E,b)$ avec
$b\equiv_{E,e} a$, donc $f(b)=e=f(a)$. Construisons maintenant une
suite de sous-structures $\{A_i=\operatorname{acl}(E,a_i)\}_{i <\omega}$
contenant $E$, avec $A_1=A$ et $A_2=B$ telle que
$A_n A_{n+1} \equiv_E A,B$ et
$$A_{n+1} \mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_{A_n} A_1,\ldots,A_{n-1}.$$
\noindent Alors $A_i\cap A_j=E$ pour tout $i\neq j$ et
par {\bf Transitivité}
$$ A_k \mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_{A_j} A_i$$
\noindent pour tout $i<j<k$.
Un argument à la Ramsey nous permet de supposer que la suite
$\{A_i\}_{i <\omega}$ est $E$-in\-dis\-cer\-nable. L'élimination de
quantificateurs de $T_0$ entraîne que cette suite est également
$\LL_0$-indiscernable sur $E$. La stabilité de $T_0$ donne qu'elle est
totalement $\LL_0$-indiscernable.
La remarque \ref{R:stat} implique que le type $\operatorname{tp}_0(A_3/A_1)$ est
stationnaire et de même pour $\operatorname{tp}_0(A_3/A_2)$. Puisque $A_3\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_{A_2}
A_1$, la caractérisation de l'indépendance entraîne que $$A_3\indi
0_{A_2} A_1.$$ Comme $A_1A_2 A_3$ a même $T_0$-type que $A_2 A_1
A_3$, on conclut que $A_3\indi 0_{A_1} A_2$. La base canonique
$\cb_0(A_3/A_1A_2)$ est contenue dans
$\operatorname{dcl}_0(A_1)\cap\operatorname{dcl}_0(A_2)=\operatorname{dcl}_0(E)$, par la remarque
\ref{R:dcl_inters}. Ainsi
$$A_3 \indi 0_E A_1A_2,$$
\noindent ce qui entraîne que $A_3$ et $A_1$ sont $T$-indépendants
sur $E$. En particulier, l'imaginaire $e$ est algébrique sur $E$, ce
qui donne l'élimination géométrique des imaginaires.
Supposons maintenant que la théorie $T$ vérifie le {\bf Théorème de
l'indépendance} sur toute structure algébriquement close. Pour
montrer que $T$ élimine les imaginaires au-dessus de la
sous-structure élémentaire nommée, il
suffit de montrer qu'elle les élimine faiblement par la remarque
\ref{R:EIensemblefini}. L'indépendance
$$A_3 \indi 0_E A_1,$$
\noindent donne deux réalisations $\tilde a$ et $c$ du type $\operatorname{tp}(a/E)$
indépendantes sur $E$ telles que $f(c)=f(\tilde a)=f(a)=e$. On peut
supposer que $c$ est indépendant de $a$ sur $E$. Pour montrer que $e$
est définissable sur $E$, il suffit de montrer que la valeur de $f$
est constante sur toute autre réalisation du type $\operatorname{tp}(a/E)$. Sinon,
soit $d$ une réalisation avec $f(d)\neq f(a)$. Si $\tilde d$ réalise
le type $\operatorname{tp}(d/E,c)$ et est indépendante de $a$, la {\bf Transitivité}
donne que $\tilde d \mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_E a$ et $f(\tilde d)\neq f(c)=f(a)$. On peut
supposer que $d$ est indépendante de $a$. Les types $\operatorname{tp}(a/E,c)$ et
$\operatorname{tp}(d/E,a)$ sont deux extensions non-déviantes du type $\operatorname{tp}(a/E)$ et
on a $c\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_E a$. Le {\bf Théorème de l'indépendance} appliqué au
diagramme
{\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.8, text height=1ex, text depth=1ex]
\def(-4.2,0) ellipse (6 and 1){(-4.2,0) ellipse (6 and 1)}
\def(4.2,0) ellipse (6 and 1){(4.2,0) ellipse (6 and 1)}
\begin{scope}[rotate=-45, xscale=0.36, yscale=1]
\path[draw,thick] (-4.2,0) ellipse (6 and 1);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[rotate=45, xscale=0.36, yscale=1]
\path[draw,thick] (4.2,0) ellipse (6 and 1);
\end{scope}
\node (0,-5) (base) {};
\node[above=-5mm of base] (E) {$E$};
\node[above=7.8mm of E] (ind) {$\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}$};
\node[left=8mm of ind] (a) {$a$};
\node[ right =8mm of ind] (c) {$c$};
\node[left=6mm of a] (P2) {$\operatorname{tp}(d/E,a)$};
\node[right =6mm of c] (P1) {$\operatorname{tp}(a/E,c)$};
\node[below=2mm of base] (P) {$\operatorname{tp}(d/E)=\operatorname{tp}(a/E)$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{figure}}
\noindent donne une réalisation $\zeta$
indépendante de $c,a$ sur $E$ avec
$$ \zeta \models \operatorname{tp}(d/E,a) \text{ et } \zeta \models \operatorname{tp}(a/E,c).$$
\noindent En particulier $f(\zeta)\neq f(a)=f(c)= f(\zeta)$, ce qui
est une contradiction.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{R:WEI_general}
Notons que la démonstration ci-dessus s'appuie uniquement sur le
fait que $T$ est une théorie simple contenant la partie universelle
d'une théorie stable $T_0$ qui élimine les quantificateurs et les
imaginaires dans un sous-langage $\LL_0$ telle que~:
\begin{itemize}
\item la théorie $T$ satisfait les hypothèses $(\ref{H:dcl})$ et
$(\ref{H:acl})$~;
\item pour des sous-structures algébriquement closes $A$ et $B$ d'un
modèle suffisamment saturé $F$ de $T$,
$$A\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_{A\cap B} B \text{ si et seulement si } A\indi 0_{A\cap B}
B~;$$
\item la théorie $T$ vérifie le {\bf Théorème de
l'Indépendance} sur toute structure algébriquement close.
\end{itemize}
En particulier, la théorie d'un corps algébriquement clos muni d'un
prédicat générique élimine les imaginaires.
\end{remark}
Certains corps munis d'opérateurs considérés dans le fait
\ref{F:exemples} sont stables, notamment les corps différentiellement
clos et les corps séparablement clos de degré d'imperfection
fini. Dans ces deux cas, le $\LL$-type d'un uple $a$ est déterminé par
le $\LL$-type sans quantificateurs de sa clôture définissable.
\begin{cor}\label{C:stable}
Supposons que deux uples $a$ et $b$ dans $T$ ont même type dès qu'il
existe un $\LL$-isomorphisme de leurs clôtures parfaites qui envoie
$a$ sur $b$. La théorie $T$ est alors stable.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Il suffit de montrer que tout type sur un ensemble algébriquement clos
contenant une sous-structure élémentaire est stationnaire, ce qui
suit directement de l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:qftp})$ si $T$ satisfait la
propriété ci-dessus.
\end{proof}
\section{Groupes et plongements}\label{S:gps}
Tout groupe définissable dans un corps différentiellement clos se
plonge comme sous-groupe d'un groupe algébrique, ce qui a été montré
par Pillay \cite{aP97} pour répondre à une question de Kolchin. Cette
caractérisation joue un rôle important dans la théorie de Galois
différentielle des extensions de Picard-Vessiot \cite{aP98}. Kowalski
et Pillay ont obtenu un résultat similaire \cite{pKaP02}, modulo un
noyau fini, pour tout groupe connexe définissable dans un corps aux
différences générique. Il existe des résultats analogues pour décrire
les groupes définissables dans de nombreuses théories de corps, purs
ou munis d'opérateurs, par exemple dans un corps pseudo-fini
\cite{HrPi94} ou dans un corps séparablement clos \cite{mM94, eBfD02}.
Dans ce dernier cas, tout groupe définissable dans un corps
séparablement clos $L$ est définissablement isomorphe aux points
$L$-rationnels d'un groupe algébrique défini sur $L$.
Les démonstrations pour chacun de ces exemples s'appuient de façon
essentielle sur le théorème de configuration de groupe, dû à
Hrushovski \cite{eH90}, qui est une généralisation abstraite du
résultat de Weil \cite{aW55} produisant un groupe algébrique à partir
d'une loi de groupe birationnelle. La construction de Hrushovski donne
un groupe connexe constitué des germes de fonctions génériquement
définies. Même dans le cas de la théorie des corps algébriquement
clos, le groupe des germes ainsi obtenu n'est pas forcément un groupe
algébrique, mais pro-algébrique~: une limite inverse de groupes
définissables.
Soit $G$ un groupe type-définissable dans une théorie simple. Un
élément $g$ dans $G$ est \emph{générique (à gauche)} sur l'ensemble
des paramètres $A$ si $$h\cdot g \mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}} A,h$$
\noindent dès que
$$h\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}_A g.$$
\noindent Un type est générique (à gauche) si toutes ses réalisations
le sont. Les types génériques existent~: ils coïncident avec les types
dans $G$ de rang stratifié local maximal. En particulier, un type est
générique à droite si et seulement s'il l'est à gauche. Toute
extension ou restriction non-déviante d'un type générique l'est
aussi. L'inverse d'un générique est également générique. Enfin, le
produit de deux génériques indépendants l'est aussi et est indépendant
de chaque facteur. En outre, tout élément de $G$ peut s'écrire comme
le produit de deux génériques, pas forcément indépendants entre eux.
Étant donné un ensemble de paramètres $A$, la \emph{composante
connexe} $G_A^0$ de $G$ sur $A$ est l'intersection de tous les
sous-groupes $G$ d'indice borné type-définissables sur $A$. Le
sous-groupe $G_A^0$ est distingué et type-définissable sur $A$
d'indice borné. Le groupe $G$ est \emph{connexe sur} $A$ si
$G=G_A^0$. Si la théorie est stable ou supersimple, alors la
composante connexe sur $A$ d'un groupe type-définissable est
l'intersection des sous-groupes définissables d'indice fini.
\noindent Pour une théorie stable, la composante connexe ne dépend pas
de l'ensemble de paramètres choisi et elle est définissable sur le
même ensemble de paramètres que $G$. De plus, chaque classe de $G^0$
contient un seul type générique et $G$ agit par translation sur
l'ensemble des types génériques, qui sont en correspondance avec
$G/G^0$. Dans la cas d'une théorie simple, la composante connexe peut
contenir plusieurs types génériques. En revanche, on a un résultat
partiel \cite[Proposition 2.2]{PSW98}.
\begin{prop}\label{P:prod_gen}
Au-dessus d'une sous-structure élémentaire $N$, étant donnés trois
types génériques $p$, $q$ et $r$ de $G_N^0$, alors il existe deux
réalisations $g\models p$ et $h\models q$ indépendantes sur $N$
telles que $g\cdot h\models r$.
\end{prop}
Ziegler \cite[Theorem 1]{mZ04} montre une sorte de contraposée à la
proposition précédente, qui se généralise facilement au cas d'une
théorie simple \cite[lemme 1.2]{BMPW14}. Elle permet de déduire le
résultat suivant~:
\begin{lemma}\label{L:Iso}
À l'intérieur d'un modèle d'une théorie simple, soient $G_1$ et
$G_2$ deux groupes types-définissables sur une sous-structure
élémentaire $N$. Étant donnés des éléments $a_1$ et $b_1$ de $G_1$,
$a_2$ et $b_2$ de $G_2$ tels que~:
\begin{enumerate}
\item\label{I:interalg} les éléments $a_1$ et $a_2$, sont
interdéfinissables sur $N$, et de même pour $b_1$ et $b_2$, ainsi
que pour $a_1\cdot b_1$ et $a_2\cdot b_2$~;
\item les éléments $a_1$, $b_1$ et $a_1\cdot b_1$ sont indépendants
deux-à-deux sur $N$~;
\end{enumerate}
\noindent alors, l'élément $a_1$, resp.\ $a_2$, est générique dans un
translaté type-définissable sur $N$ d'un sous-groupe $H_1$
type-définissable sur $N$ de $G_1$, resp.\ $H_2$ de $G_2$.
En outre, les sous-groupes $H_1$ et
$H_2$ sont connexes et définissablement isomorphes sur $N$ .
\end{lemma}
\noindent Notons que les sous-groupes $H_1$ et $H_2$ sont uniques, à
commensurabilité près. Ce lemme s'adapte facilement au cas des groupes
$*$-définissables.
\begin{remark}\label{R:Iso}
Si nous avons des éléments seulement interalgébriques dans le lemme
précédent, alors les groupes obtenus sont définissablement
isogènes~: une correspondance à fibres finies entre deux
sous-groupes d'indice borné.
\end{remark}
Par la suite, fixons une théorie $T$ satisfaisant les hypothèses
$(\ref{H:dcl})$, $(\ref{H:acl})$, $(\ref{H:qftp})$, $(\ref{H:full})$
et $(\ref{H:ext})$ par rapport à une théorie stable $T_0$ avec
élimination des quantificateurs et des imaginaires. On travaille à
l'intérieur d'un modèle $F$ de $T$ suffisamment saturé.
\begin{prop}\label{P:isog}
Soit $G$ un groupe type-définissable sur une sous-structure
élémentaire $|T|^+$-saturée $N$ de $F$.
\begin{itemize}
\item Si $F$ est $\LL_0$-définissablement clos, alors $G$ est isogène
à un sous-groupe de $H(F)$, avec $H$ un groupe $\LL_0$-définissable
sur $N$.
\item Si $T_0$ est la théorie d'un corps algébriquement clos de
caractéristique fixée, alors $G$ est isogène à un sous-groupe de
$H(F)$, avec $H$ un groupe algébrique sur $N$.
\item Si la théorie $T$ est stable ou supersimple et
$T_0$ est la théorie d'un corps algébriquement clos de caractéristique
fixée, alors tout groupe définissable admet un sous-groupe
définissable d'indice fini qui s'envoie par un morphisme
définissable à noyau fini dans le sous-groupe des points
$F$-rationnels d'un groupe algébrique défini sur $N$.
\end{itemize}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
\noindent En prenant la composante connexe sur $N$ de $G$, on peut
supposer que $G$ est connexe sur $N$. Pour deux génériques
indépendants $a$ et $b$ du groupe $G$ sur $N$, les hypothèses
(\ref{H:acl}) et (\ref{H:qftp}) donnent l'inclusion suivante~:
$$ \operatorname{acl}(a\cdot b, N) \subset \operatorname{acl}_0(\operatorname{acl}(a, N)\cup\operatorname{acl}(b, N)).$$
\noindent En prenant trois génériques $a$, $b$ et $c$ de $G$
indépendants sur $N$, on obtient la $T_0$-configuration de groupe
suivante~:
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\scalebox{.7}{
\begin{tikzpicture}[thick,scale=1, every
node/.style={scale=1},text height=2ex,text depth=2ex]
\draw (0,4) node [above = -1mm] {$\operatorname{acl}(a, N)$} ;
\fill (0,4) circle (3pt);
\draw (2,2) node [above right] {$\operatorname{acl}(c, N)$} ;
\fill (2,2) circle
(3pt);
\draw (-2,2) node [above left] {$\operatorname{acl}(b, N)$} ;
\fill (-2,2) circle (3pt);
\draw (-4,0) node [below left] {$\operatorname{acl}(a\cdot b, N)$} ;
\fill (-4,0) circle (3pt);
\draw (4,0) node [below right ] {$\operatorname{acl}(c\cdot a, N)$} ;
\fill (4,0) circle (3pt);
\draw (0,1.33) node [below = 3mm ] {$\operatorname{acl}(c\cdot a\cdot b, N)$} ;
\fill (0,1.33) circle
(3pt);
\draw[very thick] (0,4) -- (2,2) -- (4,0) -- (0,1.33)
--
(-2,2) ;
\draw[very thick] (0,4) -- (-2,2) -- (-4,0) -- (0,1.33)
-- (2,2) ;
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\end{figure}
\noindent À partir de cette configuration, on peut construire de façon
analogue à \cite{HrPi94} un groupe connexe $\LL_0$-$*$-définissable
$H^*$ sur $N$ et deux génériques $h^*$ et $h'^*$ indépendants de $H^*$
dans $\operatorname{dcl}_0(F)$ tels que les éléments $\operatorname{acl}(a,N)$ et $h^*$ sont
$\LL_0$-interalgébriques sur $N$, et de même pour $\operatorname{acl}(b,N)$ et
$h'^*$, ainsi que pour $\operatorname{acl}(a\cdot b,N)$ et $h^*\cdot h'^*$. Par
stabilité et élimination des imaginaires de $T_0$, on peut supposer
que le groupe $H^*$ est une limite inverse de groupes
$\LL_0$-définissables sur $N$. Il existe ainsi un groupe $H$ de cette
limite inverse et deux génériques $h$ et $h'$ indépendants de $H$ tel
que $a \in \operatorname{acl}_0(h,N)$ et $h \in \operatorname{acl}_0(\operatorname{acl}(a,N)) \cap \operatorname{dcl}_0(F)$
(et de même pour $b$ relativement à $h'$, et $a\cdot b$ relativement à
$h\cdot h'$).
Quand $F$ n'est pas $\LL_0$-définissablement clos, on ne sait pas de
façon générale si les génériques $h$, $h'$ et $h\cdot h'$ tombent dans
$H(F)$ ni si ce dernier ensemble forme un sous-groupe. Par contre, si
$F$ est $\LL_0$-définissablement clos, la remarque \ref{R:Iso}
entraîne que $G$ est isogène à un sous-groupe de $H(F)$. Ce
sous-groupe peut être propre car le $\LL_0$-générique $h$ n'est pas
forcement un générique de $H$ au sens de $T$.
Si $T_0$ est la la théorie d'un corps algébriquement clos de
caractéristique positive fixée, on peut supposer que $H$ est également
connexe sur $N$. Par {\bf Caractère fini}, il existe une
sous-structure élémentaire $N_0$ de $N$ de taille $|T|$ contenant tous
les paramètres témoignant les interalgébricités ci-dessus et les
paramètres nécessaires pour définir $H$. Par saturation de $N$, il
existe une suite $\{h_i\}_{i \in \mathbb{N}}$ de $\LL_0$-génériques
indépendants de $H$ sur $N_0$ qui appartiennent au corps
$k=\operatorname{dcl}_0(F)\cap\operatorname{acl}_0(N)$.
\noindent Par la remarque \ref{R:stat}, le $\LL_0$-type d'éléments de
$\operatorname{dcl}_0(F)$ sur $N_0$ est stationnaire. L'indépendance algébrique pour
un $\LL_0$-type stationnaire est équivalente au fait que les corps
engendrés soient linéairement disjoints. Ainsi, une adaptation directe
de la démonstration du \cite[Theorem 1-B]{eB89} entraîne l'existence
d'un corps $k_0$ finiment engendré sur $N_0$ contenu dans $k$ et d'une
bijection $\LL_0$-définissable $f$ sur $k_0$ tels que
$f(h^{-1}) \in k_0(f(h))$ et $f(h\cdot h')$ appartient à
$k_0(f(h),f(h'))$ (où $h^{-1}$ est l'inverse de $h$ dans le groupe
$H$). En composant avec une certaine puissance du Frobenius, on peut
supposer que $k_0 \subset N$ et que $f(h)$ et $f(h')$ sont dans $F$.
Par le théorème de Weil \cite[Theorem 4.1]{eBfD02}, on obtient un
groupe algébrique $\tilde H$ défini sur $k_0$ et deux génériques
$\tilde h$ et $\tilde h'$ indépendants sur $N$ tel que
$a \in \operatorname{acl}_0(\tilde h,N)$ et
$\tilde h \in \operatorname{acl}_0(\operatorname{acl}(a,N)) \cap \operatorname{dcl}_0(F)$ (et de même pour $b$
relativement à $\tilde h'$, et $a\cdot b$ relativement à
$\tilde h\cdot \tilde h'$). La remarque \ref{R:Iso} entraîne à nouveau
que $G$ est isogène à un sous-groupe de $\tilde H(F)$.
Si $T$ est stable ou supersimple, la composante connexe sur $N$ d'un
groupe définissable est l'intersection des sous-groupes
$N$-définissables d'indice fini. Un argument de compacité entraîne
l'existence d'un sous-groupe définissable de $G$ d'indice fini qui se
plonge à noyau fini dans les points $F$-rationnels $H(F)$ d'un groupe
$\LL_0$-définissable. On en déduit le résultat souhaité.
\end{proof}
En supposant un certain contrôle sur la clôture
définissable, nous allons montrer comment le théorème de
Weil-Hrushovski permet de plonger définissablement tout groupe
type-définissable connexe à l'intérieur d'un groupe
$L_0$-définissable. On retrouve alors les résultats connus dans le cas
différentiel et pour les $\sigma$-groupes dont le produit est donné
par des fonctions $\sigma$-rationnelles ainsi qu'une version faible du
cas des corps séparablement clos.
\begin{prop}\label{P:WH}
Soit $G$ un groupe connexe type-définissable à paramètres dans une
sous-structure élémentaire $|T|^+$-saturée $N$ de $F$ tel que,
lorsque $a$ et $b$ sont deux génériques indépendants de $G$ sur $N$,
on a
\[\label{E:cond}
\operatorname{dcl}(a\cdot b,N) \subset \operatorname{dcl}_0(\operatorname{dcl}(a,N)\cup\operatorname{dcl}(b,N)). \tag{$\natural$}
\]
Alors, si $F$ est $\LL_0$-définissablement clos ou si $T_0$ est la
théorie des corps algébriquement clos, il existe un groupe
$\LL_0$-définissable $H$ à paramètres dans $N$ tel que le groupe $G$
se plonge définissablement dans le sous-groupe $H(F)$ constitué des
points $F$-rationnels.
\noindent Lorsque $T_0$ est la théorie d'un corps algébriquement clos
de caractéristique fixée, on peut supposer que le groupe $H$ est un
groupe algébrique.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Pour la preuve, on travaille au-dessus de la
sous-structure élémentaire $N$. Soient $a$ et $b$ deux
réalisations indépendantes du même type générique $p$ de $G$ sur $N$.
Vérifions d'abord que l'on peut supposer qu'il existe une
réalisation $c$ de $p$ indépendante de $a,b$ telle que chacun des
éléments dans $\{a,b, a\cdot b, c, b\cdot c, a\cdot b\cdot c\}$
réalise le type $p$.
\noindent Par la proposition \ref{P:prod_gen}, il existe
$x_1\models p$ indépendant de $a, b$ avec $b\cdot x_1 \models p$. De
même, il existe $x_2\models p$ indépendant de $a, b$ avec
$ a\cdot b \cdot x_2 \models p$. Le {\bf Théorème de l'indépendance}
appliqué au diagramme suivant entraîne l'existence d'un élément $c$
comme souhaité. \vskip1cm
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=.8, text height=1ex, text depth=1ex]
\def(-4.2,0) ellipse (6 and 1){(-4.2,0) ellipse (6 and 1)}
\def(4.2,0) ellipse (6 and 1){(4.2,0) ellipse (6 and 1)}
\begin{scope}[rotate=-45, xscale=0.36, yscale=1]
\path[draw,thick] (-4.2,0) ellipse (6 and 1);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[rotate=45, xscale=0.36, yscale=1]
\path[draw,thick] (4.2,0) ellipse (6 and 1);
\end{scope}
\node (0,-5) (base) {};
\node[above=-5mm of base] (E) {};
\node[above=9.2mm of E] (ind) {$\mathop{\mathpalette\Ind{}}\limits_N$};
\node[left=8mm of ind] (a) {$b$};
\node[ right =8mm of ind] (c) {$a\cdot b$};
\node[left=6mm of a] (P2) {$\operatorname{tp}(b\cdot x_1/b, N)$};
\node[right =6mm of c] (P1) {$\operatorname{tp}(a\cdot b\cdot x_2/a\cdot b, N)$};
\node[below=2mm of base] (P) {$p$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{figure}
Posons $a^*=\operatorname{dcl}(a, N)$, et de même pour $b$, $c$ et les produits
correspondants. Notons que $a^*$, $b^*$, $(a\cdot b)^*$, $c^*$,
$(c\cdot a)^*$ et $(c\cdot a\cdot b)^*$ sont des réalisations du même
$T_0$-type sur $N$, que l'on note $p_0$. Par la remarque
\ref{R:stat}, le type $p_0$ est stationnaire. Par la condition
\eqref{E:cond}, il existe une fonction $0$-définissable $f$ définie
sur $p_0^{\otimes 2}$ avec $(a\cdot b)^*=f(a^*,b^*)$. La
caractérisation de l'indépendance donne que l'uple $(a^*, b^*, c^*)$
réalise $p_0^{\otimes 3}$ et
$$ f(a^*, f(b^*,c^*))=(a\cdot b\cdot c)^*= f(f(a^*,b^*),c^*).$$
La démonstration du théorème de groupes génériquement présentés de
Hrushovski \cite[Theorem 1]{eH90} adaptée aux uples infinis
(cf. \cite[Theorem 4.1]{pKaP02}) donne un groupe
$\LL_0$-$*$-défi\-nissable $H^*$ sur $N$ tel que son générique $h^*$
est $\LL_0$-interdéfinissable avec $a^*$.
De même que précédemment, il existe alors un groupe
$\LL_0$-définissable $H$ et deux génériques $h$ et $h'$ indépendants
de $H$ tel que $a \in \operatorname{dcl}_0(h,N)$ et $h \in \operatorname{dcl}_0(a^*)$ (et de même
pour $b$ relativement à $h'$, et $a\cdot b$ relativement à
$h\cdot h'$). Si $F$ est $\LL_0$-définissablement clos, le lemme
\ref{L:Iso} entraîne que $G$ se plonge dans un sous-groupe de
$H(F)$. Si $T_0$ est la théorie d'un corps algébriquement clos de
caractéristique positive, on peut supposer comme auparavant que $H$
est un groupe algébrique défini sur $N$, tel que $h$, $h'$ et
$h\cdot h'$ sont dans $F$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{R:Sylvain}
Si $G$ n'est pas connexe et la théorie $T$ est stable ou
supersimple, le même argument que celui de la fin de la
démonstration de la proposition \ref{P:isog} entraîne l'existence
d'un sous-groupe définissable de $G$ d'indice fini qui se plonge
dans les points $F$-rationnels $H(F)$ du groupe $\LL_0$-définissable
$H$. Ceci permet de plonger sans peine $G$ définissablement dans
$H_1(F)$, pour un groupe $H_1$ aussi $\LL_0$-définissable (cf. la
démonstration de \cite[Proposition 4.9]{eBfD02}).
Dans un contexte qui nous semble similaire, l'existence de types
génériques définissables permet d'étudier les groupes définissables
dans certains corps valués enrichis \cite{sRprep}.
\end{remark}
\section{Annexe : Théorème de l'indépendance, le
retour}\label{S:paires}
L'approche des parties précédentes permet de montrer la simplicité de
certaines théories à partir de la stabilité d'une théorie ambiante
$T_0$, en vérifiant que l'indépendance dans $T_0$ induit directement
la non-déviation dans ces nouvelles théories. Certaines théories
stables (ou simples) ne rentrent pas dans ce contexte, entre-autres
les paires propres de corps algébriquement clos ou les corps
séparablement clos (ou PAC bornés) de degré d'imperfection
infini. Dans ces exemples, la non-déviation est donnée en ajoutant une
condition à l'indépendance algébrique. Cependant, nous allons voir
dans cette annexe que la démonstration du {\bf Théorème de
l'indépendance} s'adapte facilement à ce cadre. De plus, l'étude des
groupes précédente s'étend ici également sans difficulté.
On utilisera les mêmes notations que précédemment pour les théories
$T$ et $T_0$. Afin de considérer les exemples ci-dessus, la théorie
$T$ est remplacée par le diagramme élémentaire d'un modèle de $T$ (et
on augmente $\LL_0$ et $\LL$ par les constantes qui énumèrent ce
modèle).
Deux $\LL$-sous-structures $A$ et $B$ d'un modèle suffisamment saturé
$F$ de $T$ telles que leur intersection $C$ est algébriquement close,
sont \emph{$\star$-indépendantes} au-dessus de $C$ si
$$ A \indi 0_C B$$ et la $\LL$-sous-structure $\sscl{A,B}$ est
parfaite et coïncide avec $\sscl{A,B}_0 \cap F$, où $\sscl{A,B}_0$
dénote la $\LL_0$-sous-structure de $F$ engendrée par $A, B$. Plus
généralement, deux parties $X$ et $Y$ de $F$ sont
\emph{$\star$-indépendantes} au-dessus d'une structure algébriquement
close $C$ si $\operatorname{acl}(X,C)$ et $\operatorname{acl}(Y,C)$ le sont. Dans ce cas, on note
$X\indi \star_C Y$.
Dans le cas des corps séparablement clos (ou plus généralement PAC
bornés) de degré d'imperfection $e$ (avec $e$ dans $\mathbb{N}\cup\{\infty\}$)
et munis des $\lambda$-fonctions, la propriété
$\sscl{A,B} = \sscl{A,B}_0 \cap F$ équivaut à ce que l'extension $F$
sur le sous-corps engendré par $A$ et $B$ soit séparable,
c'est-à-dire, que $F^p$ et le sous-corps $A\cdot B$ engendré par $A$
et $B$ soient linéairement disjoints sur $(A\cdot B)^p$. En degré
d'imperfection fini, cette propriété est toujours vérifiée (car l'on a
ajout\'e au langage des symboles de constantes pour une $p$-base). De
la même façon, pour les paires $(K,k)$ de corps algébriquement clos
dans le langage de Delon \cite{fD12}, la propriété précédente équivaut
au fait que $k$ et le corps $A\cdot B$ engendré par $A$ et $B$ soient
linéairement disjoints au-dessus de leur intersection
$k\cap (A\cdot B)$.
Pour la théorie des automorphismes génériques de corps séparablement
clos de degré d'imperfection infini~\cite{SCFA}, la
$\star$-indépendance dans le langage $\LL_{\sigma,\lambda}$ des corps
aux différences munis des fonctions $\lambda$ correspond à la
non-déviation~\cite[Corollary 3.8]{SCFA}. Ceci est également le cas
pour la modèle compagne ${\rm SCFE}_{p,e}$ des corps $K$ séparablement
clos de caractéristique $p$ et de degré d'imperfection $e$ avec un
endomorphisme $\sigma$ non surjectif, vérifiant que
$\sigma(K)^{alg}\subset K$, dans le langage $\LL_{\sigma,\lambda}$
complété par la fonction partielle $\sigma^{-1}$ et les fonctions du
langage de Delon pour la paire $(K,\sigma(K))$~\cite[Corollary
4.16]{SCFE}.
Dans ces exemples, on vérifie directement que la $\star$-indépendance
satisfait la {\bf Transitivité}, les {\bf Caractères fini et local} et
l'{\bf Extension}. Nous allons isoler des conditions, qui nous
semblent naturelles, permettant de vérifier le {\bf Théorème de
l'indépendance} de manière unifiée. Ainsi, on retrouve le fait que
la non-déviation correspond à la description ci-dessus pour les
exemples précédents.
Puisque les $\lambda$-fonctions relatives sur une somme ou un produit
sont des expressions polynomiales sur les $\lambda$-fonctions de
chaque facteur, on vérifie facilement que les exemples ci-dessus
satisfont l'hypothèse suivante~:
\begin{hypbis}{3}\label{H:qftp_star}
Si $A\indi \star_C B$ et $A'\indi \star_C B$, avec $A'\models
\operatorname{qftp}(A/C)$, alors $$\sscl{A',B}\models \operatorname{qftp}(\sscl{A,B}/C).$$
\end{hypbis}
Par la description des types dans la théorie des paires propres de
corps algébriquement clos et dans les corps séparablement clos (ou
plus généralement PAC bornés) de degré d'imperfection infini,
l'hypothèse suivante est vérifiée~:
\begin{hypbis}{5}\label{H:ext_star}
\'Etant donné un autre modèle $F'$ de $T$ contenant une
sous-structure parfaite $C'$ au-dessus d'une sous-structure commune
$A\subset F\cap F'$ parfaite dans $F$ et $F'$, si $\operatorname{tp}_0(C'/A)$ est
stationnaire, alors il existe une sous-structure parfaite $C$ de $F$
contenant $A$ qui est $\LL$-isomorphe à $C'$ au-dessus de $A$.
\end{hypbis}
Avec ces hypothèses, on obtient le résultat suivant~:
\begin{theorem}
Si la théorie $T$ satisfait les hypothèses $(\ref{H:dcl})$,
$(\ref{H:acl})$, \textnormal{(\ref{H:qftp_star})}, $(\ref{H:full})$
et \textnormal{(\ref{H:ext_star})} par rapport à $T_0$, alors le
{\bf Théorème de l'indépendance} est vérifié par la
$\star$-indépendance dès que les propriétés de {\bf Monotonie}, {\bf
Transitivité} et {\bf Extension} sont valables pour $\indi \star$
au-dessus de parties algébriquement closes.
De plus, si $T_0$ est une théorie fortement minimale, alors $T$
satisfait le {\bf Théorème de l'indépendance} par rapport à la
$\star$-indépendance sur tout ensemble algébriquement clos.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Soit donc une sous-structure élémentaire $N$ de
$F$, deux parties algébriquement closes $A$ et $B$ la contenant et
deux parties algébriquement closes $C$ et
$D$ qui ont même type sur $N$ et vérifient
$$ C\indi \star_N A \text{\qquad et \qquad} D\indi \star_N B.$$
\noindent Par {\bf Extension}, nous pouvons supposer que $\operatorname{acl}(D,B)$
est $\star$-indépendant de $\operatorname{acl}(A,B)$ sur $B$. \noindent Par
monotonie et transitivité, les sous-structures algébriquement closes
$A$, $B$ et $D$ sont $\star$-indépendantes sur $N$ (dans le sens
précédent). En particulier,
$$ \operatorname{acl}(AB) \indi 0_B \operatorname{acl}(BD),$$
\noindent et la sous-structure $E$ engendrée par $\operatorname{acl}(AB)$ et
$\operatorname{acl}(BD)$ est parfaite et coïncide avec la $\LL_0$-sous-structure
engendrée par $\operatorname{acl}(AB)$ et $\operatorname{acl}(BD)$.
On vérifie comme auparavant que $\operatorname{tp}_0(E/\sscl{AD})$ est
stationnaire, par l'hypothèse $(\ref{H:dcl})$ et la démonstration de
la proposition \ref{P:coher}, puisque $$\operatorname{acl}(A,D)=\operatorname{acl}_0(A,D)\cap F\, ,\,
\operatorname{acl}(B,D)=\operatorname{acl}_0(B,D)\cap F \text{ et } \operatorname{acl}(A,B)=\operatorname{acl}_0(A,B)\cap F.$$
Puisque
$$ A \indi \star_N C \text{\qquad et
\qquad} A \indi \star_N D,$$ alors
$\sscl{AD}\models \operatorname{qftp}(\sscl{AC}/N)$, par l'hypothèse
\textnormal{(\ref{H:qftp_star})}. Cet $\LL$-isomorphisme partiel
induit un $N$-isomorphisme entre $F$ et un autre modèle suffisamment
saturé $F_1$ de $T$ tel que $\operatorname{acl}(AC)$ est $\LL$-isomorphe avec
$\operatorname{acl}_0(AD)\cap F_1$, avec $\operatorname{tp}_{F_1}(D/A) = \operatorname{tp}_F(C/A)$.
Ainsi, à l'intérieur du modèle suffisamment saturé $F_1$, on
obtient grâce à l'hypothèse \textnormal{(\ref{H:ext_star})} une copie $E_1$
de $E$ sur $\sscl{AD}$. Par la remarque
\ref{R:rel_acl}, les copies de $\operatorname{acl}(AB)$ et $\operatorname{acl}(BD)$ dans $E_1$
sont algébriquement closes dans $F_1$. Ainsi, la copie $B_1$ de $B$
correspondante vérifie~:
$$ \operatorname{tp}_{F}(B/D) = \operatorname{tp}_{F_1}(B_1/D) \text{ et } \operatorname{tp}_{F}(B/A) =
\operatorname{tp}_{F_1}(B_1/A). $$
\noindent Par saturation, il existe $B'D'$ dans $F$ tels que
$\operatorname{tp}_{F}(B'D'/A) = \operatorname{tp}_{F_1}(B_1 D/A)$. Puisque
$\operatorname{tp}_F(B'/A) = \operatorname{tp}_{F_1}(B_1/A)= \operatorname{tp}_{F}(B/A)$, on peut supposer que
$B=B'$, ce qui permet de conclure.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
Repulsive gravitational effects are
an essential ingredient of the Standard Cosmological Model (SCM), where they are evoked to overcome the difficulties faced by the Friedmann model, such as the horizon, flatness, and origin of the primordial density fluctuations problems \cite{GUTH_1981, LINDE_1982, ALBRECHT_STEINHARDT_1982, LINDE_1983, LINDE_2005}, as well as the observed late-time accelerated expansion of the universe \cite{RIESS_1998, PERLMUTTER_1999}. According to General Relativity (GR), when the minimal coupling principle is enforced, repulsive gravitational effects can only be generated by fluids with negative pressure. Such fluids are invariably behind inflationary models (see \cite{LINDE_2005} and references therein) and dynamical dark energy models \cite{DE_PDG_2013, COPELAND_2006, FRIEMAN_TURNER_HUTERER_2008}.
A series of attempts to overcome the cosmological singularity problem, arguably the most severe difficulty faced by the Friedmann model (see \cite{NOVELLO_BERGLIAFFA_2008} and references therein), were proposed in the past in which the alternative concept of repulsive gravitational effects generated by fields non-minimally coupled to gravity was introduced \cite{LINDE_1979,NOVELLO_SALIM_1979, NOVELLO_1980}. In \cite{LINDE_1979}, in particular, a conformally coupled Higgs-like field with a potential $V(\phi) = m^2\phi^2 + \sigma\phi^4$ ($\sigma >0$) was responsible for a reversal of the effective gravitational constant in the early universe, when the density reached a critical value $\rho_c$. Such model was later ruled-out on stability grounds, since as $\rho \to \rho_c$ the effective gravitational constant diverges, $\kappa_{eff} \to \infty$ \cite{STAROBINSKY_1981}. Despite that, this idea paved the way for inflationary models based on non-minimally coupled Higgs-like scalar fields \cite{SALOPEK_BOND_BARDEEN_1989, FAKIR_UNRUH_1990, KAISER_1995, KOMATSU_FUTAMASE_1999, BEZRUKOV_SHAPOSHNIKOV_2008, BARVINSKY_KAMENSHCHIK_STAROBINSKY_2008} (see \cite{LINDE_2005} and references therein), and was the source of other gravitational repulsion models (see \cite{HOHMANN_WOHLFARTH_2010} and references therein). As we shall see, that criticism does not apply here.
In the present work we revisit a model \cite{NOVELLO_1980}
in which ordinary matter (radiation) can generate repulsive gravitational effects by intervention of a conformally coupled scalar field. The main idea can be synthesized in the following steps:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] We assume the existence of a scalar field $\phi$ which has a quartic self interaction potential with the form $V(\phi) = m^2\phi^2 -\sigma \phi^4$ (we call attention to the relative sign);
\item[(ii)] This scalar field couples non-minimally to gravity;
\item[(iii)] We select among all possible candidates of such a coupling a conformal one;
\item[(iv)] Matter interacts with the scalar field only through gravity;
\item[(v)] The symmetry of the theory is broken by a state $\phi = \phi_0 = $ constant;
\item[(vi)] When the field is in the broken symmetry state, the net result
on the equation for the metric is to produce an effective gravitational constant which, under certain conditions, has the opposite sign of the bare Newton's
gravitational constant, provided that the energy-momentum tensor for the matter fields is traceless ($T=0$).
\item[(vii)] It will be shown that a necessary consequence of this process is that a ordinary radiation ($T=0$) dominated universe exhibits a bounce.
\end{itemize}
\section{The model}
\subsection{Non-minimally coupled scalar field}
In what follows, we adopt the space-time metric with signature $(+---)$.
The theory considered here is defined by a Lagrangian with a scalar field non-minimally (conformally) coupled to gravity
\begin{equation}
L = \sqrt{-g}\left[ \frac{1}{\kappa}R + g^{\alpha\beta}\partial_{\alpha}\phi^{\ast}\partial_{\beta}\phi - V(\phi^{\ast}\phi)
- \frac{1}{6}R\phi^{\ast}\phi + \mathcal{L}_m \right],
\label{lagrangian}
\end{equation}
where $g_{\alpha\beta}$ are the components of the metric field, $g = \mbox{det}(g_{\alpha\beta})$, $R$ is the Ricci scalar,
$\kappa = 8\pi G$ is the reduced gravitational constant ($c=\hslash = 1$), $\mathcal{L}_m$ is the matter Lagrangian density,
and the self-interaction potential of the scalar field is given by \cite{NOVELLO_1980}
\begin{equation}
V(\phi^{\ast}\phi) = m^2\phi^{\ast}\phi - \sigma(\phi^{\ast}\phi)^2 - 2V_0.
\end{equation}
We call attention for the fact that this potential differs from the usual ones employed in \cite{LINDE_1979} or in inflation models (see \cite{LINDE_2005}) by the relative sign between the mass term, $m^2\phi^{\ast}\phi$, and the quartic self-interaction term, $\sigma(\phi^{\ast}\phi)^2$.
The set of field equations obtained from the Lagrangian (\ref{lagrangian}) are
\begin{widetext}
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
R_{\alpha\beta} - \frac{1}{2}Rg_{\alpha\beta} = & -\frac{1}{{\frac{1}{\kappa} - \frac{1}{6}\phi^2}}\left[ \tau_{\alpha\beta}(\phi) + T_{\alpha\beta} \right],
\label{grav_field_eq}
\end{align}
\begin{equation}
\Box\phi + m^2\phi - 2\sigma\phi^3 + \frac{1}{6}R\phi = 0, \label{scalar_field_eq}
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
\end{widetext}
where $\Box \equiv g^{\alpha\beta}\nabla_{\alpha}\nabla_{\beta}$, $\phi^2 \equiv \phi^{\ast}\phi$, $\phi^3 = (\phi^{\ast}\phi)\phi$, $T_{\alpha\beta}$ is the energy-momentum tensor of the matter fields, and
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
\tau_{\alpha\beta}(\phi) \equiv \partial_{\alpha}\phi^{\ast}\partial_{\beta}\phi
- \frac{1}{2}\Big( \partial_{\mu}\phi^{\ast}\partial^{\mu}\phi - m^2\phi^2 + \sigma\phi^4 \Big)g_{\alpha\beta}
- \frac{1}{6}\Big( \nabla_{\alpha}\nabla_{\beta}\phi^2 - \Box\phi^2g_{\alpha\beta} \Big) - V_0 g_{\alpha\beta} \label{em_scalar}
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
is the ``improved" energy-momentum tensor of the scalar field.
Taking the trace of the field equation (\ref{grav_field_eq}),
and using equation (\ref{scalar_field_eq}), it follows that the Ricci scalar can be expressed as follows
\begin{equation}
R = m^2\phi^2 - 4V_0 + T,
\end{equation}
where $T\equiv g^{\alpha\beta}T_{\alpha\beta}$. This enables us to rewrite equation (\ref{scalar_field_eq}) in the form
\begin{equation}
\Box\phi + \left( m^2 - \frac{2}{3}V_0 + \frac{1}{6} T\right)\phi + \left(\frac{1}{6} m^2 - 2\sigma\right)\phi^3 = 0. \label{scalar_field_eq_b}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Broken symmetry and gravitational repulsion from ordinary matter}
It is clear from equation (\ref{grav_field_eq}) that in the case where the ground state of the scalar field potential vanishes, $V_0=0$,
the improved energy-momentum tensor of the scalar field $\tau_{\alpha\beta}(\phi)$
is irremediably not conserved. Following Callan et al. \cite{CALLAN_COLEMAN_JACKIW_1970}, however, we can define the conserved energy-momentum tensor
\begin{equation}
E_{\alpha\beta}(\phi) \equiv \frac{1}{{\frac{1}{\kappa} - \frac{1}{6}\phi^2}}\tau_{\alpha\beta}(\phi). \label{em_complex}
\end{equation}
We now look for a constant solutions of equation (\ref{scalar_field_eq_b})
which correspond to stable vacua of the scalar field. Clearly, equation (\ref{scalar_field_eq_b}) only admits a constant solution in the special case where the trace of the energy momentum-tensor of matter fields is a constant.
We stress the fact that the symmetry breaking process is only possible in this case,
otherwise no nontrivial ground state solution of equation (\ref{scalar_field_eq_b}) exists.
Let us concentrate, from now on, on
matter fields described by a traceless energy-momentum tensor, $T=0$.
According to expressions (\ref{em_complex})-(\ref{em_scalar}), for a constant solution $\phi=\phi_0$ the energy density $E_{00}(\phi) \equiv E(\phi)$
corresponding to the energy-momentum tensor (\ref{em_complex}) has the form
\begin{equation}
E(\phi_0) = \frac{1}{{\frac{1}{\kappa} - \frac{1}{6}\phi_0^2}}(m^2\phi_0^2 - \sigma\phi_0^4 - 2V_0). \label{energy_func}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, for $T= 0$ equation (\ref{scalar_field_eq_b}) admits, besides the trivial solution $\phi_0 = 0$, two constant solutions
\begin{equation}
\phi_0^2 = \frac{6m^2 - 4V_0}{12\sigma - m^2}. \label{relation}
\end{equation}
The constant nontrivial solutions which minimizes the energy density functional (\ref{energy_func}), and satisfies relation (\ref{relation}),
are given by
\begin{equation}
\phi_0 = \pm \frac{2\sqrt{V_0}}{m}, \ \ \ \ \sigma = \frac{m^4}{8V_0}. \label{const_sol}
\end{equation}
The resulting behavior of the energy density $E(\phi_0)$ exhibits three uncommunicating regions, two of them containing the stable local minima
at $\phi_0 = \pm 2\sqrt{V_0}/m$, to which correspond $E(\phi_0) = 0$, the other
containing two unstable maxima and a metastable minimum at $\phi_0 = 0$ (see Fig \ref{energy_fig}).
Consequently, when the energy-momentum tensor for the matter fields is traceless ($T=0$), and the field is in a non-trivial stable ground state (\ref{const_sol}), the gravitational field equation (\ref{grav_field_eq}) assumes the form
\begin{align}
R_{\alpha\beta} = -\kappa_{eff}T_{\alpha\beta} \label{grav_field_eq_2},
\end{align}
where
\begin{equation}
\kappa_{eff} \equiv \frac{1}{\frac{1}{\kappa} - \frac{1}{6}\phi_0^2} = \left(\frac{3m^2\kappa}{3m^2 - 2\kappa V_0}\right)
\end{equation}
is the renormalized gravitational constant.
The term multiplying the energy-momentum tensor of matter (ordinary radiation) in equation (\ref{grav_field_eq_2}) can, thus,
be viewed as a ``renormalized'' gravitational constant. Clearly, in the regime where the relation
\begin{equation}
\kappa V_0 > \frac{3}{2}m^2 > 0 \label{condition_mass}
\end{equation}
is satisfied ({\it i.e.} either the mass $m$ of the scalar field has to be very small, or $V_0$ has to be very large), gravity is reversed, {\it i.e.} $\kappa_{eff} < 0$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\vspace{15mm}
\includegraphics[scale=
0.8
]{ENplots.eps}
\caption{Plot of the energy density $E(\phi_0)$, for $\kappa V_0>3m^2/2>0$.
The figure shows the solutions $\phi_0 = \pm 2\sqrt{V_0}/m$ corresponding to the nontrivial stable vacua,
and also two asymptotes at $\phi_0 = \pm \sqrt{6}$ separating three uncommunicating regionsa are indicated (dashed lines).} \label{energy_fig}
\end{figure}
\section{Bouncing cosmological model}
\subsection{Scalar field induced bounce}
We now investigate what cosmological solutions are compatible with the model discussed above. We assume spatial homogeneity and isotropy, and adopt a Friedmann metric for the space-time
\begin{equation}
ds^2 = dt^2 - a^2(t)\left[ \frac{dr^2}{1- \epsilon r^2} + r^2 \big(d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta d\varphi^2\big) \right], \label{friedmann_metric}
\end{equation}
where $a(t)$ is the scale factor and $\epsilon$ determine the geometry of the spatial section. In order to be the source of the Friedmann metric (\ref{friedmann_metric}) the scalar field must depend on the cosmic time only, $\phi = \phi(t)$. We consider a radiation-dominated universe, $\rho = 3p$ ($T= 0$).
In the regime $\phi = \phi_0$ the field equations reduce to
\begin{subequations}\label{cosm_eq}
\begin{equation}
\left( \frac{\dot{a}}{a} \right)^2 + \frac{\epsilon}{a^2} = \frac{1}{3}\kappa_{eff} \rho,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\frac{\ddot{a}}{a} = -\frac{1}{6}\kappa_{eff}(\rho + 3p),
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
where $\rho(t)$ and $p(t)$ are the density and pressure of the radiation fluid. In this case, if condition (\ref{condition_mass}) holds, gravity is reversed, $\kappa_{eff}<0$, and the field equations (\ref{cosm_eq}) only admit a solution for an open spatial section $\epsilon = -1$. Form energy conservation we have $\rho(t) \propto \rho_0 a^{-4}(t)$, where $\rho_0$ is a constant, so that the system of equations (\ref{cosm_eq}) yield
\begin{equation}
\dot{a} = \sqrt{ 1 - \frac{1}{3}|\kappa_{eff}| \rho_0 a^{-2}}.
\end{equation}
This equation can be readily integrated, and we obtain the following form for the scale factor
\begin{equation}
a(t) = \sqrt{ t^2 + a_0^2}. \label{scale_fac_bounce}
\end{equation}
Therefore, the universe in this model exhibits a bounce around $t = 0$, the constant $a_0 = \sqrt{|\kappa_{eff}| \rho_0/3}$ being the minimum value attainable by the scale factor.
Interestingly, the bouncing solution obtained above coincides with a model based on a non-minimally coupled vector field proposed by one of the authors \cite{NOVELLO_SALIM_1979}, even though the two models differ considerably (see appendix A).
\section{Final Remarks}
In the present work we revisited a model \cite{NOVELLO_1980} in which a scalar field conformally coupled to gravity can generate
repulsive gravitational effects when only ordinary matter with traceless energy-momentum tensor (radiation) is coupled to gravity. It was shown that, in a radiation-dominated universe, when the scalar field is in a non-trivial ground (broken symmetry) state the only solution admissible by the field equations is a bouncing universe.
\begin{appendix}
\section{Bouncing model generated by a vector field non-minimally coupled to gravity \label{app_ns}}
We include here a short review of the bouncing cosmological model proposed in \cite{NOVELLO_SALIM_1979} and the one presented above for an easy comparison between them. The Lagrangian describing a vector field non-minimally coupled to gravity employed in \cite{NOVELLO_SALIM_1979} is
\begin{equation}
L = \sqrt{-g}\left[ \frac{1}{\kappa}R + \beta RA_{\mu}A^{\mu} - \frac{1}{4}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu} \right],
\label{lagrangian_d}
\end{equation}
where $\beta$ is a constant, and $F_{\mu\nu} = \nabla_{\mu}A_{\nu} - \nabla_{\nu}A_{\mu}$. The field equation are
\begin{widetext}
\begin{subequations} \label{field_eq_app}
\begin{align}
R_{\alpha\beta} - \frac{1}{2}Rg_{\alpha\beta} = & -\frac{1}{{\frac{1}{\kappa} + \beta A_{\mu}A^{\mu}}}\tau_{\alpha\beta}(A^{\mu}) ,
\end{align}
\begin{equation}
\nabla_{\nu}F^{\mu\nu} + \beta A^{\mu} = 0,
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
\end{widetext}
where $\tau_{\alpha\beta}(A^{\mu})$ is the improved energy-momentum tensor of the vector field.
In a Friedmann geometry determined by the metric (\ref{friedmann_metric}), making the choice $A_{\mu} = A(t)\delta^0_{\mu}$, and defining $\Omega(t) = \frac{1}{\kappa} + \beta A^2(t)$, the set of field equations (\ref{field_eq_app}) assume the form
\begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}
3\frac{\ddot{a}}{a} = -\frac{\ddot{\Omega}}{\Omega},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\frac{\ddot{a}}{a} + 2\left( \frac{\dot{a}}{a} \right)^2 + 2\frac{\epsilon}{a^2} = -\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\frac{\dot{\Omega}}{\Omega},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\Box\Omega = 0.
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
A particular solution for an open spatial section, $\epsilon = -1$, furnishes a scale factor with the form
\begin{equation}
a(t) = \sqrt{ t^2 + a_0^2},
\end{equation}
where $a_0$ is the minimum value of the scale factor. Although this is the same solution (\ref{scale_fac_bounce} ) obtained for the scalar field, the two models differs in crucial points. First, the quantity $\Omega(t)$, which is analogous to the effective gravitational constant of the model discussed in the main text, is not a constant but a function of the cosmic time (although a model similar to the one considered in the main text would arise in the special case $A_{\mu}A^{\mu} =$ constant). Second, here the non-minimally coupled vector field alone can be the source of the geometry, while in the bouncing model induced by the scalar field, in the absence of matter fields and for the scalar field in the non-trivial (broken symmetry) ground state, the gravitational field equations reduce to the vacuum Einstein equations.
\end{appendix}
\vspace{5mm}
\section*{Acknowlegments}
The authors would like to thank the Brazilian National Council of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq) and the Research Support Foundation of the State of Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ) for a grant.
|
\section{Introduction} \label{S:Intro}
In \cite{And94} and \cite{And96}, Anderson introduced the notion of log-algebraicity for rank one Drinfeld modules, inspired by earlier special cases of Thakur~\cite{Thakur92}. He demonstrated that these power series identities could be used to express values of Goss zeta and $L$-functions at $s=1$ as linear combinations of logarithms. In the present paper we investigate log-algebraic identities for Drinfeld modules of arbitrary rank over the polynomial ring $\mathbb{F}_q[\theta]$, and we prove that particular special values of Goss $L$-functions can be expressed in terms of linear combinations of Drinfeld logarithms, thus recovering and extending previous results of Taelman~\cite{Taelman12}.
We let $\mathbb{F}_q$ be a field with $q$ elements and let $A = \mathbb{F}_q[\theta]$ be the polynomial ring in a variable~$\theta$. We take
\[
A_+ = \{ a \in A \mid \textup{$a$ monic} \}, \quad
A_{i+} = \{ a \in A_+ \mid \deg a = i \}.
\]
We let $\infty$ denote the infinite place of the fraction field $K = \mathbb{F}_q(\theta)$ with valuation given by $\ord_\infty = -\deg_{\theta}$ and absolute value normalized by $|\theta|_{\infty} = q$. We take $K_\infty = \laurent{\mathbb{F}_q}{1/\theta}$ for the completion of $K$ at $\infty$, and we let~$\mathbb{C}_\infty$ denote the completion of an algebraic closure of $K_\infty$. Let $\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu K}$ be the algebraic closure of $K$ in $\mathbb{C}_{\infty}$.
For simplicity, we recall Anderson's result for the case of Carlitz module, and let us consider the special values of Goss $L$-functions for Dirichlet characters at $s=1$. Fixing an irreducible polynomial $\wp\in A_{+}$ and a Dirichlet character $\chi : A \to \overline{\mathbb{F}}_q$ modulo $\wp$, we put
\[
L(1,\chi):=\sum_{a\in A_{+}} \frac{\chi(a) }{ a}\in \mathbb{C}_{\infty}^{\times}.
\]
This special value plays the analogous role of the value at $s=1$ of the classical $L$-series for a Dirichlet character modulo a prime $p$, which is known to be a $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}$-linear combination of logarithms at certain circular units when the given Dirichlet character is nontrivial (see \cite[p.~37]{Washington}). To study such $L$-values, Anderson~\cite{And96} introduced the following power series as a kind of deformation of the $L$-value,
\[
\mathcal{L}_{C}(\beta,z):=\sum_{a\in A_{+}}\frac{a\star \beta }{a}z^{q^{\deg a}}\in \power{K[x]}{z},
\]
where $x$ and $z$ are new independent variables, $C$ denotes the Carlitz $A$-module defined in~\eqref{E:DefCarlitz}, $\beta \in K[x]$, and $a \star \beta \in K[x]$ is defined by Anderson's $\star$-operation given in \eqref{E:stardef}.
Let $\exp_{C}(z) \in \power{K}{z}$ be the Carlitz exponential function given in \eqref{E:expC}. Anderson's log-algebraicity theorem~\cite[Thm.~3]{And96} asserts that for $\beta \in A[x]$,
\begin{equation}\label{E:expCofL}
\exp_{C}\bigl( \mathcal{L}_{C}(\beta, z) \bigr)\in A[x,z].
\end{equation}
As an important consequence, by the analogue of the Hermite-Lindemann theorem of Yu~\cite{Yu86}, nonzero values of $\mathcal{L}_{C}(\beta,z)$ that specialize $x$ and $z$ at elements of $\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu K}$ are transcendental over~$K$. Using certain specializations of \eqref{E:expCofL}, Anderson derived an explicit formula for $L(1,\chi)$ in terms of the Carlitz logarithm at certain explicit algebraic points (which are analogues of the classical circular units). It follows that each $L(1,\chi)$ is transcendental over $K$ by Yu's analogue~\cite{Yu97} of Baker's theorem on linear forms in logarithms.
In this paper we consider Drinfeld $A$-modules of generic characteristic, which are defined over $A$ and have arbitrary rank. Given Anderson's formulation above it is not immediately clear how to formulate log-algebraicity results for higher rank Drinfeld modules. However, inspired by Taelman's work on special $L$-values~\cite{Taelman09}, \cite{Taelman10}, \cite{Taelman12}, we succeed in discovering the right point of view.
Fixing a Drinfeld $A$-module $\phi$ that is defined over $A$ (see \eqref{E:phidef}), Taelman~\cite{Taelman12} defined its associated special $L$-value $L(\phi/A)$, as in \eqref{E:TaelmanL}. One notes that $L(\phi/ A)$ is identical to the special value at $s=0$ of the Goss $L$-function denoted by $L(\phi^{\vee},0)$, arising from the compatible system of the Galois representations on the dual of the Tate module of $\phi$, when the Drinfeld module~$\phi$ has everywhere good reduction. Along these lines, we define the Goss $L$-function $L(\phi^{\vee},s)$ in \eqref{E:Lphidual}, making a particularly suitable choice of the local factors at the bad primes of $\phi$. In order to construct a log-algebraicity result via a twisted harmonic sum over $A_+$, we shift $s$ by $1$ in $L(\phi^{\vee},s)$ and obtain the Dirichlet series,
\[
L(\phi^{\vee},s-1) = \sum_{a \in A_+} \frac{\mu(a)}{a^s}
\]
(see \eqref{E:mudef}). We then form the power series
\[
\mathcal{L}_{\phi}(\beta,z):=\sum_{a\in A_{+}} \frac{\mu(a)(a\star \beta)(x) }{a}z^{q^{\deg a}} \in \power{K[x]}{z}
\]
for $\beta\in A[x]$, and our main theorem is as follows.
\begin{theorem:Main}
For any $\beta \in A[x]$, the power series
\[
\mathcal{E}_{\phi}(\beta,z) := \exp_{\phi} \bigl( \mathcal{L}_{\phi}(\beta,z) \bigr) \in \power{K[x]}{z},
\]
is in fact in $A[x,z]$.
\end{theorem:Main}
Fixing a Dirichlet character $\chi$ modulo a prime $\wp \in A_{+}$, we consider the following $L$-value twisted by $\chi$:
\[
L(\phi^{\vee},\chi,0):=\sum_{a\in A_{+}}\frac{\mu(a)\chi(a)}{a}\in \mathbb{C}_{\infty}^{\times}.
\]
As in the case of $L(1,\chi)$, we use Theorem~\ref{T:Main} to demonstrate that
\begin{itemize}
\item $L(\phi^{\vee},\chi,0)$ is a $\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu K}$-linear combination of Drinfeld logarithms at certain explicit algebraic points (see Corollary~\ref{C:L-log});
\item $L(\phi^{\vee},\chi,0)$ is transcendental over $K$ (see Corollary~\ref{C:Trans-L}).
\end{itemize}
Our proof of Theorem~\ref{T:Main} is rooted in Anderson's strategy~\cite{And96} as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item We prove the integrality result that the series $\mathcal{E}_{\phi}(\beta,z)$ has coefficients in $A[x]$ (see Theorem~\ref{T:Integrality}).
\item We use $\infty$-adic estimates to show that $\mathcal{E}_{\phi}(\beta,z)$ is indeed a polynomial in $z$ (see Theorem~\ref{T:Estimates}).
\end{itemize}
Although the general outline of Anderson's method is robust and, as we will see, can be used for higher ranks, the coefficients of the Dirichlet series $L(\phi^{\vee},s-1)$ given by the multiplicative function $\mu : A_+ \to A$ vary unpredictably and require careful accounting. By contrast, in the case of the Carlitz module the coefficients are identically~$1$. To better understand $\mu$, we investigate properties of the characteristic polynomial of Frobenius acting on the Tate module for the reduction of $\phi$ modulo an irreducible $f \in A_+$ and prove new congruence results modulo $f$ for the coefficients of the polynomial $\phi_f(x) \in A[x]$ defining the $f$-operation of $\phi$ (see Lemmas~\ref{L:muprops} and~\ref{L:braccongs}).
In recent years much research has been conducted on extensions of Anderson's log-algebrai\-city theorem to various settings. Angl\`es, Pellarin, Taelman, and Tavares Ribeiro~\cite{AnglesPellarinTavares16}, \cite{AnglesPellarinTavaresTAMS}, \cite{AnglesTaelman15}, \cite{AnglesTavares17}, have investigated multivariable versions of Anderson's theorem for the Carlitz module and its tensor powers with values in Tate algebras, using new versions of Taelman's class number formula, and have studied modules of special points. These results were then generalized to rank one Drinfeld modules over more general rings by Angl\`es, Ngo Dac, and Tavares Ribeiro~\cite{AnglesNgoDacTavares17}. Work of Green and the third author~\cite{GreenP} provides explicit formulas for log-algebraic identities for rank one Drinfeld modules over coordinate rings of elliptic curves. Log-algebraicity on tensor powers of the Carlitz module is investigated in~\cite{PLogAlg}. For the most part (save some results in~\cite{AnglesTavares17}, see below) these results lie in the realm of rank one, and one of the underlying goals of the present work is understand these phenomena in higher ranks.
It is important to mention that Angl\`es and Tavares Ribeiro~\cite{AnglesTavares17} considered the $z$-deformed Drinfeld module $\tilde{\phi}$ of a given Drinfeld $A$-module $\phi$ defined over the ring of integers of a finite extension of $K$, and they established an `equivariant' log-algebraicity result for $\tilde{\phi}$ in \cite[Thm.~2]{AnglesTavares17} (we note that the exponential of $\tilde{\phi}$ is not the same as the exponential of $\phi$, but they are closely related). The proof of their Theorem~2 is based on equivariant class module formulas~\cite[Prop.~4]{AnglesTavares17}, and it differs from Anderson's original methods that we study in this paper. We thank Angl\`es for clarifying these and related issues. We also thank him for sharing his ideas with us about the possibility of the connection between~\cite[Thm.~2]{AnglesTavares17} and our Theorem~\ref{T:Main}, which would require additional work beyond the scope of this paper. We further refer the reader to~\cite[Cor.~3]{AnglesTavares17}, where the authors use~\cite[Thm.~2]{AnglesTavares17} to recover Anderson's original log-algebraicity result in the case of the Carlitz module.
The paper proceeds as follows. In \S\ref{S:Notation} we review the fundamental definitions of Drinfeld $A$-modules and recall aspects of Taelman's special $L$-value formulas. In \S\ref{S:Charpoly} we discuss the reduction of Drinfeld modules and the construction of Goss $L$-series via characteristic polynomials of Frobenius. In \S\ref{S:LogAlg} we state the main log-algebraicity result (Theorem~\ref{T:Main}) and explore applications to special $L$-values (Corollaries~\ref{C:L-log} and~\ref{C:Trans-L}). The main proof is contained in \S\ref{S:Integrality} (integrality estimates) and \S\ref{S:Degrees} (degree estimates). We conclude with examples in \S\ref{S:Examples}.
\begin{acknowledgments}
We thank Bruno Angl\`{e}s for several discussions about the contents of this paper, including clarifying the connections with his joint work with Tavares Ribeiro. We also thank the referee for constructive comments that greatly improved the quality of the paper.
\end{acknowledgments}
\section{Notation and setting} \label{S:Notation}
We continue with the notation given in the introduction. Let $\tau : \mathbb{C}_\infty \to \mathbb{C}_\infty$ denote the $q$-th power Frobenius endomorphism. For any $\mathbb{F}_q$-subalgebra $R \subseteq \mathbb{C}_\infty$ we take $R[\tau]$ to be the ring of twisted polynomials in $\tau$, which are subject to the relation $\tau c = c^q \tau$ for $c \in R$.
We fix throughout a Drinfeld module $\phi : A \to A[\tau]$ of rank~$r \geq 1$ defined by
\begin{equation} \label{E:phidef}
\phi_\theta = \theta + \kappa_1 \tau + \dots + \kappa_r \tau^r, \quad \kappa_r \neq 0.
\end{equation}
For $a \in A$, we set
\begin{equation} \label{E:brac}
\phi_a = \sum_{k = 0}^{r \deg a} \brac{a}{k} \tau^k,
\end{equation}
and if $k < 0$ or $k > r \deg a$ we set $\brac{a}{k} = 0$, thus defining $\brac{a}{k} \in A$ for all $a \in A$ and $k \in \mathbb{Z}$. For an $A$-algebra $L$, we let $\phi(L)$ denote a copy of $L$ together with the $A$-module structure induced by $\phi$. See \cite[Ch.~4]{Goss}, \cite[Ch.~2]{Thakur} for more information on Drinfeld modules. For convenience we call the additive group $\GG_{\mathrm{a}}$ with scalar $A$-action a Drinfeld module of rank~$0$.
The exponential function $\exp_\phi(z) = \sum_{i \geq 0} \alpha_i z^{q^i} \in \power{K}{z}$, with $\alpha_0=1$, is defined by the condition
\begin{equation} \label{E:expfneq}
\exp_\phi(az) = \phi_a \bigl( \exp_\phi(z) \bigr), \quad \forall\, a \in A,
\end{equation}
and it induces an entire, surjective, $\mathbb{F}_q$-linear function $\exp_\phi : \mathbb{C}_\infty \to \mathbb{C}_\infty$. Its formal inverse is the logarithm function $\log_\phi(z) = \sum_{i \geq 0} \beta_i z^{q^i} \in \power{K}{z}$, which has a finite radius of convergence in $\mathbb{C}_\infty$. Formulas for the coefficients $\alpha_i$, $\beta_i$ can be found in~\cite[\S 3]{EP13}.
An irreducible polynomial $f \in A_+$ of degree $d$ is said to be a prime of good reduction for $\phi$ if $f \nmid \kappa_r$, and otherwise it is a prime of bad reduction. We let $\mathbb{F}_f$ denote the field $A/(f)$ with induced $A$-module structure, and we let $\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi} : A \to \mathbb{F}_f[\tau]$ denote the reduction of $\phi$ modulo $f$,
\begin{equation} \label{E:ophi}
\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}_\theta = \bar{\theta} + \bar{\kappa}_1 \tau + \dots + \bar{\kappa}_{r_0} \tau^{r_0}, \quad \bar{\kappa}_{r_0} \neq 0,
\end{equation}
where for $a \in A$ we take $\bar{a} \in \mathbb{F}_f$ to be its reduction modulo $f$. We note that $\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}$ is a Drinfeld module with characteristic $(f)$ of rank $r_0$ with $0 \leq r_0 \leq r$. The dependence of $r_0$ on $f$ is implied and should not lead to too much confusion. If $L / \mathbb{F}_f$ is a field extension, we take $\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}(L)$ to be $L$ with the $A$-module structure induced by $\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}$. For more information on Drinfeld modules over finite fields, see Gekeler~\cite{Gekeler91}.
For a finite $A$-module $M$ with
\[
M \cong A/(f_1) \oplus \cdots \oplus A/(f_n), \quad f_1, \dots, f_n \in A_+,
\]
as in Taelman~\cite[\S 1]{Taelman12} we set
\[
|M| := f_1 \cdots f_n,
\]
which is independent of the direct sum decomposition chosen and serves as the analogue of the cardinality of a finite abelian group. The ideal generated by $|M|$ in $A$ is the Fitting ideal of $M$ and also the Euler-Poincar\'{e} characteristic of $M$ defined in Gekeler~\cite[\S 3]{Gekeler91}.
We thus can define Taelman's $L$-value by the infinite product over irreducible $f \in A_+$,
\begin{equation} \label{E:TaelmanL}
L(\phi/A) = \prod_f \frac{|\mathbb{F}_f|}{|\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}(\mathbb{F}_f)|},
\end{equation}
for which Taelman proved the following result.
\begin{theorem}[{Taelman~\cite[Thm.~1]{Taelman12}}] \label{T:Taelman}
We have
\[
\exp_\phi \bigl( L(\phi/A) \bigr) \in A.
\]
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
Taelman's theorem is in fact more general and precise than what we state here. He proves that $L(\phi/A)$ can be expressed as the product of the order of a certain finite $A$-module (the class module) and the logarithm of a special point in $\phi(A)$. Furthermore, he works over arbitrary extensions of $A$ as well. However, as we saw in \S\ref{S:Intro}, Theorem~\ref{T:Main} provides as a corollary a new proof of Theorem~\ref{T:Taelman} as stated here. It would be interesting to see if class number formulas can also be obtained from the present log-algebraic methods.
\end{remark}
\section{Characteristic polynomials and Goss $L$-series} \label{S:Charpoly}
We continue with our Drinfeld module $\phi: A \to A[\tau]$ from \S\ref{S:Notation}, and we fix an irreducible polynomial $f \in A_+$ of degree $d$. We assume that the reduction $\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi} : A \to \mathbb{F}_f[\tau]$ has rank $r_0$ as in \eqref{E:ophi}. We review some results due to Gekeler~\cite{Gekeler83}, \cite{Gekeler91}.
Assume for the moment that $r_0 \geq 1$. Let $\lambda \in A_+$ be irreducible with $\lambda \neq f$, and let
\begin{equation} \label{E:charpoly}
P_f(x) = x^{r_0} + a_{r_0-1} x^{r_0-1} + \cdots + a_0 \in A[x]
\end{equation}
be the characteristic polynomial of the $q^d$-th power Frobenius $\tau^d$ acting on the Tate module $T_{\lambda}(\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi})$. We have the following formulation of a result of Gekeler and subsequent corollary.
\begin{theorem}[{Gekeler~\cite[Thm.~5.1]{Gekeler91}}] \label{T:Gekeler}
Suppose that the rank of $\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}$ is $r_0 \geq 1$. For the characteristic polynomial $P_f(x) \in A[x]$ in \eqref{E:charpoly}, the following hold.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(a)] For some $c_f \in \mathbb{F}_q^{\times}$, we have $a_0 = c_f^{-1} f$.
\item[(b)] The ideal $(P_f(1)) \subseteq A$ is an Euler-Poincar\'{e} characteristic for $\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}(\mathbb{F}_f)$.
\item[(c)] The roots $x_1, \dots, x_{r_0}$ of $P_f(x)$ in $\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu K}$ satisfy $\deg_{\theta} x_i \leq d/r_0$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{corollary} \label{C:Pf1}
Continuing with the hypotheses of Theorem~\ref{T:Gekeler}, the following hold.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(a)] For $1 \leq \ell \leq r_0$, we have $\deg_\theta a_{r_0-\ell} \leq \ell d/r_0$.
\item[(b)] $|\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}(\mathbb{F}_f)| = c_f P_f(1)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
We see that $a_{r_0-\ell}$ is $(-1)^{\ell}$ times the degree $\ell$ elementary symmetric polynomial in $x_1, \dots, x_{r_0}$, and so (a) follows from Theorem~\ref{T:Gekeler}(c). Now $\deg a_0 = d$ by Theorem~\ref{T:Gekeler}(a), which is strictly larger than $\ell d/r_0$ for $1 \leq \ell \leq r_0-1$, and so
\[
P_f(1) = 1 + a_{r_0-1} + \cdots + a_1 + c_f^{-1}f \in A
\]
has leading coefficient (with respect to $\theta$) equal to $c_f^{-1}$. Therefore (b) follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Determining the exact value of $c_f$ in Theorem~\ref{T:Gekeler}(a) can be intricate, but work of Hsia and Yu~\cite[Thm.~3.1]{HsiaYu00} evaluates it completely. Knowing its precise value will not be necessary for our present considerations, but on the other hand it is necessary for calculation (e.g., see \eqref{E:mufHasse}).
\end{remark}
We now define the Goss $L$-series $L(\phi,s)$ and $L(\phi^{\vee},s)$ for $\phi$ over $K$, as found in \cite{Goss83}, \cite{Goss92}, \cite[Ch.~8]{Goss}. If $r_0 \geq 1$, we let
\[
Q_f(x) = 1 + a_{r_0-1} x + \dots + a_0 x^{r_0} = x^{r_0} P_f(1/x)
\]
be the reciprocal polynomial of $P_f(x)$. If $r_0 = 0$, then we set $P_f(x) = Q_f(x) = 1$. Then as we vary over all $f \in A_+$ irreducible, the Goss $L$-function for $\phi$ over $K$ is defined by the Euler product
\begin{equation} \label{E:Lphi}
L(\phi,s) = \prod_f Q_f \bigl( f^{-s} \bigr)^{-1} = \prod_{f} \frac{1}{1 + a_{r_0-1} f^{-s} + \cdots + c_f^{-1} f^{1-r_0 s}}, \quad s \in \mathbb{Z}.
\end{equation}
For $f$ of good reduction ($f \nmid \kappa_r$), we have $r_0 = r$, and so $L(\phi,s)$ is a Goss $L$-series of degree~$r$. We postpone considerations of convergence in $K_\infty$ until Corollary~\ref{C:convergence}.
\begin{remark}
If $\phi$ has good reduction at $f$, then $P_f(x)$ is the same as the characteristic polynomial of geometric Frobenius $\sigma_f \in \Gal(K^{\mathrm{sep}}/K)$ acting on the $\lambda$-adic Tate module $T_{\lambda}(\phi)$ of $\phi$ itself (e.g., see Goss~\cite[\S 3.4]{Goss92}). For primes of bad reduction defining the Euler factors of global $L$-series is more subtle, but Gardeyn~\cite[Thm.~7.3]{Gardeyn02} has shown that the characteristic polynomial obtained through the Galois action on $T_{\lambda}(\phi)$ is an element of $A[x]$ and independent of $\lambda$ for all but finitely many $\lambda$. Moreover he worked out global $L$-factors at bad primes for Drinfeld modules~\cite[\S 8.4]{Gardeyn02}. However, the polynomials defining Gardeyn's Euler factors may not agree with $P_f(x)$ when $\phi$ has bad reduction at $f$. On the other hand, we will continue with the definition of $P_f(x)$ for all $f$, as it dovetails with Taelman's $L$-values in Theorem~\ref{T:Taelman} and the log-algebraic identities we prove in Theorem~\ref{T:Main}.
\end{remark}
Although $L(\phi,s)$ is natural to define, it is in fact the dual $L$-series $L(\phi^{\vee},s)$ that appears in Taelman's formulas \cite{Taelman09}, \cite{Taelman10}, \cite{Taelman12}. Returning to fixed $f$, if we consider instead the Frobenius action on the dual of $T_{\lambda}(\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi})$, we have characteristic polynomials of $\tau^d$ given by
\begin{align*}
P_f^{\vee}(x) &= x^{r_0} + \frac{c_f a_1}{f} x^{r_0-1} + \cdots + \frac{c_f}{f}, \\
Q_f^{\vee}(x) &= 1 + \frac{c_f a_1}{f} x + \cdots + \frac{c_f a_{r_0-1}}{f} x^{r_0-1} + \frac{c_f}{f} x^{r_0}= \frac{P_{f}(x)}{P_{f}(0)}.
\end{align*}
We set the global $L$-series
\begin{equation}\label{E:Lphidual}
L(\phi^{\vee},s) = \prod_f Q_f^{\vee} \bigl( f^{-s} \bigr)^{-1}, \quad s \in \mathbb{Z}.
\end{equation}
Now using Corollary~\ref{C:Pf1}(b), we find that
\begin{equation} \label{E:PfQf1}
\frac{|\mathbb{F}_f|}{|\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}(\mathbb{F}_f)|}=\frac{f}{c_fP_f(1)}=\frac{f}{f + c_f a_1 + \dots + c_f a_{r_0-1} + c_f}=P_f^{\vee}(1)^{-1} = Q_f^{\vee}(1)^{-1},
\end{equation}
and recalling \eqref{E:TaelmanL} we see (as observed by Taelman~\cite[Rem.~5]{Taelman12}) that~\eqref{E:PfQf1} implies
\begin{equation}
L(\phi/A) = L(\phi^{\vee},0).
\end{equation}
We now define a function $\mu: A_{+}\to A$ by requiring it to satisfy the Dirichlet series expansion
\begin{equation} \label{E:mudef}
L(\phi^{\vee},s-1) = \sum_{a \in A_+} \frac{\mu(a)}{a^s}.
\end{equation}
Notice that if we let
\[
R_f(x):=Q_{f}^{\vee}(fx) = 1 - b_1 x - b_2 f x^2 - \cdots - b_{r-1} f^{r-2}x^{r-1} - b_{r} f^{r-1} x^{r},
\]
with
\begin{equation} \label{E:belldef}
b_{\ell} = \begin{cases}
-c_f a_{\ell} & \textup{if $1 \leq \ell \leq r_0-1$}, \\
-c_f & \textup{if $\ell = r_0$}, \\
0 & \textup{if $r_0 < \ell \leq r$,}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
then
\begin{equation} \label{E:LphidualEuler}
L(\phi^{\vee},s-1) = \prod_{f} Q_f^{\vee} \bigl( f^{-(s-1)} \bigr)^{-1} = \prod_{f} R_f \bigl( f^{-s} \bigr)^{-1}.
\end{equation}
It follows that in order for \eqref{E:mudef} to hold for $f\in A_+$ irreducible, we must have for $r_0 \geq 1$
\begin{equation}
\mu(f) = b_1 = -c_f a_1,
\end{equation}
and for $r_0 = 0$,
\begin{equation}
\mu(f^m) := 0, \quad \forall\,m \geq 1.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, the expansion \eqref{E:mudef} implies that $\mu$ is multiplicative and provides a recursion at powers of irreducible polynomials. We collect the properties of $\mu$ in the following lemma, where will use the convention that $\mu(b) = 0$ for $b \in K \setminus A_+$.
\begin{lemma} \label{L:muprops}
The function $\mu : A_+ \to A$ satisfies the following properties. Fix $f \in A_+$ irreducible of degree $d$ such that $\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}$ has rank $r_0 \leq r$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(a)] $\mu$ is multiplicative.
\item[(b)] For any integer $m > -r$,
\[
\mu\bigl(f^{m+r} \bigr) = \mu(f) \mu \bigl(f^{m+r-1}\bigr) +
\sum_{\ell=2}^{r} b_{\ell} f^{\ell-1} \mu\bigl( f^{m+r-\ell} \bigr).
\]
\item[(c)] For any $a \in A_+$,
\[
\mu(fa) = \mu(f) \mu(a) + \sum_{\ell=2}^{r} b_{\ell} f^{\ell-1} \mu \biggl( \frac{a}{f^{\ell-1}} \biggr).
\]
\item[(d)] For any $m \geq 1$,
\[
\deg \mu \bigl(f^m \bigr) \leq \biggl( 1 - \frac{1}{r_0} \biggr) md.
\]
Moreover for any $a \in A_+$,
\[
\deg \mu(a) \leq \biggl( 1 - \frac{1}{r} \biggr) \deg a.
\]
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Part (a) follows from the definition of $\mu$ via the Euler product expansion in \eqref{E:LphidualEuler}. Likewise the Euler product implies that we have a generating series
\[
\sum_{m=0}^{\infty} \mu(f^m) x^m = R_f(x)^{-1} =
\frac{1}{1 - b_1 x - b_2 f x^2 - \cdots - b_{r} f^{r-1} x^{r}},
\]
and this produces the recursion in (b). Part (c) then follows by writing $a = b f^{m+r-1}$ with $\gcd(a,b) = 1$ and then using the recursion from (b). For (d) we first consider the case that $a$ is a power of $f$. We note from Corollary~\ref{C:Pf1}(a) and \eqref{E:belldef} that
\[
\deg \bigl( b_{\ell} f^{\ell-1} \bigr) \leq \frac{(r_0 - \ell)d}{r_0} + (\ell-1)d =
\ell d \biggl( 1 - \frac{1}{r_0} \biggr),
\]
and since $\mu(f) = b_1$, we have right away that
\[
\deg \mu(f) \leq d \biggl( 1 - \frac{1}{r_0} \biggr)
\]
as desired. For higher powers of $f$ we see from (b) that for $m \in \mathbb{Z}$,
\begin{multline*}
\deg \mu \bigl( f^{m+r_0} \bigr) \leq \max \bigl\{ \deg b_\ell + (\ell - 1) d + \deg \mu\bigl( f^{m + r_0 - \ell} \bigr) \bigm| 2 \leq \ell \leq r_0 \bigr\} \\
\cup \bigl\{ \deg \mu(f) + \deg \mu\bigl( f^{m+r_0-1} \bigr) \bigr\},
\end{multline*}
and so by induction we find that (d) is satisfied for powers of $f$. The final result then follows by the multiplicativity of $\mu$, using also the fact that $r_0 \leq r$ for all irreducible $f$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary} \label{C:convergence}
As functions of $s \in \mathbb{Z}$,
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(a)] $L(\phi^{\vee},s)$ converges in $K_\infty$ for $s \geq 0$;
\item[(b)] $L(\phi,s)$ converges in $K_\infty$ for $s \geq 1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Part (a) is a consequence of Lemma~\ref{L:muprops}(d), and part (b) follows similarly using Corollary~\ref{C:Pf1}(a).
\end{proof}
\section{Log-algebraicity and special $L$-values} \label{S:LogAlg}
In this section we state the main theorem of the paper, which is a version of Anderson's log-algebraicity theorem for general Drinfeld $A$-modules defined over $A$. We first recall Anderson's $\star$-operation \cite[\S 3]{And96} for the Carlitz module.
We let $C$ denote the Carlitz $A$-module, which is defined by
\begin{equation}\label{E:DefCarlitz}
C_{\theta} = \theta + \tau.
\end{equation}
For a variable $x$, we define
\[
\star : A \times K[x] \to K[x]
\]
by
\begin{equation} \label{E:stardef}
(a \star \beta)(x) := \beta(C_a(x)), \quad a \in A,\ \beta \in K[x].
\end{equation}
One checks the following properties~\cite[\S 3]{And96} for $a$, $b \in A$, $\ell \in K$, and $\beta$, $\gamma \in K[x]$:
\begin{align} \label{E:starprops1}
a \star (b \star \beta) &= (ab) \star \beta, &
a \star (\beta + \gamma) &= a \star \beta + a \star \gamma, \\
\label{E:starprops2}
a \star (\ell \beta) &= \ell(a \star \beta), &
a \star (\beta\gamma) &= (a \star \beta)(a \star \gamma).
\end{align}
It is notable that in general $(a+b) \star \beta \neq a \star \beta + b \star \beta$, so the $\star$-operation is only a monoidal operation of $A$ and not a ring operation. Also evident is that the $\star$-operation preserves $A[x]$.
We fix the Drinfeld module $\phi: A \to A[\tau]$ from \eqref{E:phidef} and the associated multiplicative function $\mu : A_+ \to A$ from \eqref{E:mudef}. For $\beta \in K[x]$, we set
\begin{equation} \label{E:Lphibeta}
\mathcal{L}_{\phi}(\beta,z) := \sum_{a \in A_+} \frac{\mu(a)\, (a \star \beta)(x)}{a} \, z^{q^{\deg a}}
\in \power{K[x]}{z},
\end{equation}
and then our main result is the following.
\begin{theorem} \label{T:Main}
For any $\beta \in A[x]$, the power series
\[
\mathcal{E}_{\phi}(\beta,z) := \exp_{\phi} \bigl( \mathcal{L}_{\phi}(\beta,z) \bigr) \in \power{K[x]}{z},
\]
is in fact in $A[x,z]$.
\end{theorem}
The proof of Theorem~\ref{T:Main} is inspired by the method of Anderson in~\cite{And96}, and it takes up \S\ref{S:Integrality}--\S\ref{S:Degrees}. The case when $\phi$ is itself the Carlitz module $C$ is a special case of Anderson's theorem~\cite[Thm.~3]{And96}. In the general case the coefficients $\mu(a)$ impose complications, which will require several intermediary results. For bounds on the degree of $\mathcal{E}_{\phi}(\beta,z)$ in $z$, see~\eqref{E:degree}.
\begin{remark}
It would be interesting to explore a proof along the lines of Thakur~\cite[\S 8.10]{Thakur} via explicit formulas for power sums, though this appears to be difficult because of the varying nature $\mu(a)$ (cf.\ Lemma~\ref{L:S1beta}).
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
It is a natural question to ask whether one can work with a similar $\star$-operation defined using another Drinfeld $A$-module instead of the Carlitz module for the series $\mathcal{L}_{\phi}(\beta,z)$, including one defined using $\phi$ itself instead of $C$. At present the authors do not know how to generalize the approach in this paper to tackle this issue and do not know what to predict as far as connections with related arithmetic points of view. However, the $\star$-operation given by the Carlitz module is the best suited for the study of $L$-values twisted by Dirichlet characters.
\end{remark}
For the remainder of this section we demonstrate how specializations of $\mathcal{E}_{\phi}(\beta,z)$ can be used to express special $L$-values in terms of $\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu K}$-linear combinations of Drinfeld logarithms at algebraic points. We start with constructions similar to Anderson~\cite[\S 4]{And96}, but see also~\cite[\S 3]{LP13}. Fixing an irreducible element $\wp \in A_+$ with $\deg \wp = d$, we let $\chi : A \to \overline{\mathbb{F}}_q$ be a Dirichlet character modulo $\wp$, and we investigate twisted $L$-series,
\[
L(\phi^{\vee},\chi,s-1) = \sum_{a \in A_+} \frac{\chi(a)\mu(a)}{a^s},
\]
especially their values at $s=1$ (similar to Corollary~\ref{C:convergence}, this series converges for $s \geq 1$). We set $\mathbf{e}(z) = \exp_{C}(\widetilde{\pi} z)$, where $\widetilde{\pi}$ is the period of Carlitz module (see \cite[\S 3.2]{Goss}, \cite[\S 2.5]{Thakur}), and for $m \geq 1$ we let
\[
\mathbf{u}_m(z) = \sum_{a \in A_+} \frac{\mu(a) \mathbf{e}(az)^m}{a} \in \power{\mathbb{C}_\infty}{z}.
\]
The connection with $L$-series arises from Anderson's dual coefficients~\cite[Prop.~10]{And96}. For $a \in A$ with $\wp \nmid a$ and for $1 \leq m \leq q^d-1$, Anderson defines $\mathbf{e}_m^*(a) \in A[\mathbf{e}(1/\wp)]$ such that for any $a$, $b$ relatively prime to $\wp$,
\[
\sum_{m=1}^{q^d-1} \mathbf{e}_m^*(a) \mathbf{e}( b/\wp)^m =
\begin{cases}
\wp & \textup{if $a \equiv b \pmod{\wp}$,} \\
0 & \textup{otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\]
{From} this orthogonality identity we find that
\begin{equation}
\sum_{\substack{n \in A_+ \\ bn \equiv a \smod{\wp}}} \frac{\mu(n)}{n}
= \frac{1}{\wp} \sum_{n \in A_+} \frac{\mu(n)}{n}
\sum_{m=1}^{q^d-1} \mathbf{e}_m^*(a) \mathbf{e} (bn/\wp)^m
= \frac{1}{\wp} \sum_{m=1}^{q^d-1} \mathbf{e}_m^{*}(a) \mathbf{u}_m ( b/\wp).
\end{equation}
Multiplying through by $\chi(a)$ and summing over $a\in \mathbb{F}_{\wp}^{\times}$ and taking $b=1$, we see that
\begin{equation}
L(\phi^{\vee},\chi,0) = \sum_{m=1}^{q^d-1} \Biggl( \frac{1}{\wp} \sum_{a \in \mathbb{F}_{\wp}^{\times}} \chi(a) \mathbf{e}_m^{*}(a) \Biggr) \mathbf{u}_m(1/\wp).
\end{equation}
If we let $\gamma_m = 1/\wp \sum_a \chi(a) \mathbf{e}_m^{*}(a)$, which Anderson terms a root number for $\wp$, then $\gamma_m \in \mathbb{F}_{\wp}(\theta,\mathbf{e}(1/\wp)) \subseteq \mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu K}$, where $\mathbb{F}_{\wp}$ is naturally viewed in $\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu K} \subseteq \mathbb{C}_{\infty}$. Furthermore,
\[
\mathbf{u}_m(1/\wp) = \sum_{a \in A_+} \frac{\mu(a)\, (a \star x^m)(\mathbf{e}(1/\wp))}{a} = \mathcal{L}_{\phi}(x^m,1)\big|_{x=\mathbf{e}(1/\wp)},
\]
which converges in $\mathbb{C}_\infty$ since $\mathbf{e}(a/\wp)$, for $a \in A_+$, ranges over a finite set. We thus see from Theorem~\ref{T:Main} that
\[
\exp_{\phi} \bigl( \mathbf{u}_m(1/\wp) \bigr) \in A[\mathbf{e}(1/\wp)],
\]
and we obtain the following result.
\begin{corollary}\label{C:L-log}
Let $\wp \in A_+$ be irreducible of degree $d$. Let $\chi : A \to \overline{\mathbb{F}}_{q}$ be a Dirichlet character modulo $\wp$. Then for some $s$, $1 \leq s \leq q^d-1$, there are elements $u_1, \dots, u_s \in \mathbb{C}_\infty$, with $\exp_\phi(u_i) \in A[\mathbf{e}(1/\wp)] \subseteq \mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu K}$, and $\gamma_1, \dots, \gamma_s \in \mathbb{F}_{\wp}\left( \theta, \mathbf{e}(1/\wp) \right)$ so that
\[
L(\phi^{\vee},\chi,0) = \sum_{m=1}^s \gamma_m u_m.
\]
\end{corollary}
\begin{remark}
Parts of this corollary are also covered by work of Fang~\cite[Thm.~1.11]{Fang15} on special $L$-values for abelian $t$-modules.
\end{remark}
\begin{corollary}\label{C:Trans-L}
Let $\phi$ be a Drinfeld $A$-module of rank $r$ defined over $A$, and let $\wp \in A_+$ be irreducible. Then for any Dirichlet character $\chi : A \to \overline{\mathbb{F}}_{q}$ modulo $\wp$, the special $L$-value $L(\phi^{\vee},\chi,0)$ is transcendental over $K$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma~\ref{L:muprops} we see that for any $a\in A_+$ of positive degree,
\[
\left\lvert \frac{\chi(a)\mu(a)}{a}\right\rvert_{\infty}\leq q^{-1/r}< 1 .
\]
Hence, $L(\phi^{\vee},\chi,0)$ is non-vanishing as $|\chi(1)\mu(1)|_{\infty}=1$. The desired result follows by combining Corollary~\ref{C:L-log} and \cite[Thm.~1.1.1]{CP11}, \cite[Thm.~1.1.1]{CP12}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
For a fixed prime $\wp$ of $A$, it is an interesting question to study the transcendence degree of $L(\phi^{\vee},\chi,0)$ with varying Dirichlet characters $\chi$ modulo $\wp$. Using the recent advance on the transcendence theory for Drinfeld modules~\cite{CP11}, \cite{CP12}, this question is related to the computation of the rank of the $A$-submodule of $\phi\bigl(A[\mathbf{e}(1/\wp)]\bigr)$ generated by the special points
\[
\exp_{\phi} \bigl( \mathbf{u}_m(1/\wp) \bigr),
\]
and one needs additional study to tackle this question (cf.~\cite{LP13} for the rank one case).
\end{remark}
\section{Integrality results} \label{S:Integrality}
This section and the next contain the proof of Theorem~\ref{T:Main}. We fix $\beta \in A[x]$, and as in the case of Anderson~\cite[Thm.~3]{And96}, we first show that the power series $\mathcal{E}_\phi(\beta,z)$ has coefficients in $A[x]$. Then in \S\ref{S:Degrees} we use $\infty$-adic estimates to show that $\mathcal{E}_\phi(\beta,z)$ is a polynomial in $z$.
Fixing an irreducible polynomial $f \in A_+$ of degree $d$, we let $A_{(f)} = \{ g \in K \mid \ord_f(g) \geq 0 \}$ be the local subring of $K$ of $f$-integral elements.
\begin{theorem} \label{T:Integrality}
Let $\beta \in A[x]$ and let $f \in A_+$ be irreducible. Then $\mathcal{E}_{\phi}(\beta,z) \in \power{A_{(f)}[x]}{z}$.
\end{theorem}
The proof of this theorem occupies the rest of this section. However, as a direct result we see that
\begin{equation} \label{E:EphiIntegral}
\mathcal{E}_{\phi}(\beta,z) \in \bigcap_f \power{A_{(f)}[x]}{z} = \power{A[x]}{z}.
\end{equation}
We establish some notation. For $\beta \in K[x]$, we set
\begin{equation} \label{E:Sidef}
S_i(\beta) = \sum_{a \in A_{i+}} \frac{\mu(a)\, (a \star \beta)(x)}{a} \in K[x]
\end{equation}
so that
\[
\mathcal{L}_{\phi}(\beta,z) = \sum_{i =0}^\infty S_i(\beta) z^{q^i}.
\]
We define $E_i(\beta) \in K[x]$ so that
\begin{equation} \label{E:Eidef}
\mathcal{E}_{\phi}(\beta,z) = \exp_{\phi}\bigl( \mathcal{L}_{\phi}(\beta,z) \bigr) = \sum_{i=0}^{\infty} E_i(\beta) z^{q^i},
\end{equation}
and thus
\begin{equation} \label{E:EiSum}
E_i(\beta) = \sum_{j=0}^i \alpha_j S_{i-j}(\beta)^{q^j}.
\end{equation}
By convention, for $i <0$ we set $S_i(\beta) = E_i(\beta)=0$. We further define
\begin{equation} \label{E:Sistardef}
S_i^{*}(\beta) := \sum_{\substack{a \in A_{i+} \\ f \nmid a}} \frac{\mu(a)\, (a \star \beta)(x)}{a}.
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma} \label{L:fSistar}
Let $\beta \in K[x]$, and let $f \in A_+$ be irreducible of degree $d$. Then
\[
f S_i^{*}(\beta) = f S_i(\beta) - f \star (\mu(f) S_{i-d}(\beta)) - \sum_{\ell=2}^r f^\ell \star (b_{\ell} S_{i-\ell d}(\beta)).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Throughout we make frequent use of~\eqref{E:starprops1}--\eqref{E:starprops2}. We see from~\eqref{E:Sistardef} that
\[
f S_i^{*}(\beta) = f \Biggl( S_i(\beta) - \sum_{\substack{a \in A_{i+} \\ f \mid a}} \frac{\mu(a)(a \star \beta)}{a} \Biggr)
= f \Biggl( S_i(\beta) - \sum_{a \in A_{(i-d)+}} \frac{ \mu(fa)((fa)\star \beta)}{fa} \Biggr),
\]
and so by Lemma~\ref{L:muprops}(c),
\begin{align*}
f S_i^{*}(\beta) &= f S_i(\beta) - \sum_{a \in A_{(i-d)+}} \sum_{\ell = 1}^r \frac{b_{\ell} \mu \bigl(a/f^{\ell-1} \bigr)}{a / f^{\ell-1}} \, ((f a) \star \beta) \\
&= f S_i(\beta) - \sum_{\ell = 1}^r \sum_{a \in A_{(i-\ell d)+}} \frac{b_\ell \mu(a)}{a} ((f^\ell a) \star \beta) \\
&= f S_i(\beta) - \sum_{\ell=1}^r f^{\ell} \star \sum_{a \in A_{(i-\ell d)+}} \frac{b_{\ell} \mu(a)}{a} (a \star \beta),
\end{align*}
where in the second equality we have used the property that $\mu(a/f^{\ell-1}) = 0$ if $f^{\ell-1} \nmid a$. The proof is complete after we recall that $b_1 = \mu(f)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{L:Eistar}
Let $\beta \in K[x]$, and let $f \in A_+$ be irreducible of degree $d$. For $i \geq 0$, let
\[
E_i^*(\beta) = \sum_{j=0}^i \alpha_j f^{q^j} S_{i-j}^{*}(\beta)^{q^j}.
\]
Then
\[
E_i^*(\beta) = \sum_{k=0}^{rd} \brac{f}{k} E_{i-k}(\beta)^{q^k} - \sum_{\ell=1}^r \sum_{k=\ell d}^{rd} \brac{b_{\ell}}{k - \ell d} \bigl( f^{\ell} \star E_{i-k}(\beta)^{q^{k-\ell d}}\bigr).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By the functional equation for $\exp_\phi(z)$ in~\eqref{E:expfneq}, we know that
\[
\phi_f \bigl(\mathcal{E}_{\phi}(\beta,z) \bigr) = \exp_{\phi} \bigl( f \mathcal{L}_{\phi}(\beta,z) \bigr).
\]
Using~\eqref{E:brac} the left side of this equation has the expansion
\[
\phi_f \bigl(\mathcal{E}_{\phi}(\beta,z) \bigr) = \sum_{i=0}^\infty \sum_{k=0}^{rd} \brac{f}{k} E_i(\beta)^{q^k} z^{q^{i+k}} = \sum_{i=0}^{\infty} \Biggl( \sum_{k=0}^{rd} \brac{f}{k} E_{i-k}(\beta)^{q^{k}} \Biggr) z^{q^i}.
\]
On the other hand for $\exp_{\phi}(f \mathcal{L}_{\phi}(\beta,z))$ we similarly find the expansion
\[
\exp_{\phi}\bigl(f \mathcal{L}_{\phi}(\beta,z) \bigr) = \sum_{i=0}^{\infty} \Biggl( \sum_{j=0}^i \alpha_j f^{q^j} S_{i-j}(\beta)^{q^j} \Biggr) z^{q^i}.
\]
Comparing the coefficients of $z^{q^i}$ we arrive at the identity for $i \geq 0$,
\begin{equation} \label{E:Esum1}
\sum_{k=0}^{rd} \brac{f}{k} E_{i-k}(\beta)^{q^k} = \sum_{j=0}^i \alpha_j f^{q^j} S_{i-j}(\beta)^{q^j}.
\end{equation}
Now since Corollary~\ref{C:Pf1}(a) and \eqref{E:belldef} imply that $\deg_{\theta} b_{\ell} \leq (1 - \ell/r)d$, it follows that $\deg_{\tau} \phi_{b_{\ell}} \leq (r-\ell)d$, and using a similar calculation to the above we have for $1 \leq \ell \leq r$,
\begin{align*}
\phi_{b_{\ell}}\bigl( \mathcal{E}_{\phi}(f^{\ell} \star \beta,z^{q^{\ell d}} ) \bigr)
&= \sum_{i=0}^\infty \Biggl( f^{\ell} \star \sum_{k=\ell d}^{rd} \brac{b_{\ell}}{k-\ell d} E_{i-k}(\beta)^{q^{k-\ell d}} \Biggr) z^{q^i}, \\
\phi_{b_{\ell}}\bigl( \mathcal{E}_{\phi}(f^{\ell} \star \beta,z^{q^{\ell d}} ) \bigr) &= \exp_{\phi}\bigl( b_{\ell} \mathcal{L}_{\phi}(f^{\ell}\star \beta,z^{q^{\ell d}}) \bigr) = \sum_{i=0}^\infty \Biggl( f^{\ell} \star \sum_{j=0}^i \alpha_j b_{\ell}^{q^j} S_{i-\ell d - j}(\beta)^{q^j} \Biggr) z^{q^i}.
\end{align*}
Thus for $1 \leq \ell \leq r$ and $i \geq 0$,
\begin{equation} \label{E:Esum2}
f^{\ell} \star \sum_{k=\ell d}^{rd} \brac{b_{\ell}}{k-\ell d} E_{i-k}(\beta)^{q^{k - \ell d}}
= f^{\ell} \star \sum_{j=0}^i \alpha_j b_\ell^{q^j} S_{i-\ell d - j}(\beta)^{q^j}.
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{E:Esum1}, \eqref{E:Esum2}, Lemma~\ref{L:fSistar}, and Lemma~\ref{L:Eistar}, we have
\begin{align*}
\sum_{k=0}^{rd} \brac{f}{k} E_{i-k}(\beta)^{q^k} -{} &\sum_{\ell=1}^r \sum_{k=\ell d}^{rd} \brac{b_{\ell}}{k-\ell d} \bigl( f^{\ell} \star E_{i-k}(\beta)^{q^{k - \ell d}} \bigr) \\
&= \sum_{j=0}^i \alpha_j \biggl( f S_{i-j}(\beta) - \sum_{\ell=1}^r b_{\ell} \bigl( f^{\ell} \star S_{i-\ell d - j}(\beta) \bigr) \biggr)^{q^j}\\
&= \sum_{j=0}^i \alpha_j f^{q^j} S_{i-j}^* (\beta)^{q^j}\\
&= E_i^*(\beta),
\end{align*}
and we are done.
\end{proof}
For polynomials $P$, $Q \in A_{(f)}[x]$, we will say that $P \equiv Q \pmod{f}$ if $P-Q \in f A_{(f)}[x]$.
\begin{lemma} \label{L:braccongs}
Let $f \in A_+$ be irreducible of degree $d$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(a)] For $0 \leq k \leq d-1$,
\[
\brac{f}{k} \equiv 0 \pmod{f}.
\]
\item[(b)] For $0 \leq k \leq rd$,
\[
\brac{f}{k} - \sum_{\ell=1}^{\lfloor k/d \rfloor} \brac{b_{\ell}}{k-\ell d} \equiv 0 \pmod{f}.
\]
\item[(c)] Let $P(x) \in A_{(f)}[x]$. For $0 \leq k \leq rd$,
\[
\brac{f}{k} P(x)^{q^k} - \sum_{\ell=1}^{\lfloor k/d \rfloor} \brac{b_{\ell}}{k - \ell d} \bigl(f^{\ell} \star P(x)^{q^{k-\ell d}} \bigr) \equiv 0 \pmod{f}.
\]
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Part (a) is a special case of (b), and is in fact well-known (e.g., see \cite[(1.4)(ii)]{Gekeler91}). Part (b) is itself a special case of (c), using $P = 1$, but we require (b) first to prove (c). Let $r_0 \leq r$ be the rank of the reduction $\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}$ modulo $f$. If $r_0 = 0$, then this implies that $\brac{f}{k} \equiv 0 \pmod{f}$ for all $0 \leq k \leq rd$, and moreover $b_\ell = 0$ for all $1 \leq \ell \leq r$, so each of (a)--(c) is trivially satisfied.
Assume $r_0 \geq 1$. Fix an irreducible $\lambda \in A_+$ with $\lambda \neq f$. We know by Gekeler~\cite[p.~190]{Gekeler91} that the natural map
\[
\End(\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}) \otimes_A A_{\lambda} \to \End_{A_{\lambda}} \bigl(T_{\lambda}(\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi})\bigr)
\]
is injective. By the Cayley-Hamilton theorem, $P_f(\tau^d) = 0$ in $\End_{A_{\lambda}} (T_{\lambda}(\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}))$, and so in $\End(\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}) \otimes_A A_{\lambda}$,
\[
\tau^{r_0 d} + \mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}_{a_{r_0-1}} \tau^{(r_0-1)d} + \dots + \mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}_{a_0} = 0.
\]
However, the left-hand side is an element of $\End_{\mathbb{F}_q}(\GG_{\mathrm{a}}/\mathbb{F}_f) \cong \mathbb{F}_f[\tau]$, and so multiplying by $\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}_{c_f}$, we have
\[
\mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}_f - \mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}_{b_1} \tau^d - \cdots - \mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}_{b_{r_0}} \tau^{r_0 d} = \mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}_f - \mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}_{b_1} \tau^d - \cdots - \mkern2.5mu\overline{\mkern-2.5mu \phi}_{b_r} \tau^{rd} = 0,
\]
which is an equality in $\mathbb{F}_f[\tau]$. Thus in $A[\tau]$,
\[
\sum_{k=0}^{rd} \brac{f}{k} \tau^k - \sum_{\ell = 1}^r \Biggl( \sum_{k=0}^{(r-\ell)d} \brac{b_{\ell}}{k} \tau^k \Biggr) \tau^{\ell d} \equiv 0 \pmod{f},
\]
and by reordering the sum, we see that
\[
\sum_{k=0}^{rd} \Biggl( \brac{f}{k} - \sum_{\ell=1}^{\lfloor k/d \rfloor} \brac{b_{\ell}}{k- \ell d} \Biggr) \tau^k \equiv 0 \pmod{f}.
\]
This can only hold if each coefficient is $0$ modulo $f$, which proves (b).
For (c) we note that (b) implies for $a \in A_{(f)}$ and $0 \leq k \leq rd$ that
\begin{equation} \label{E:bracacong}
\brac{f}{k} a^{q^k} - \sum_{\ell=1}^{\lfloor k/d \rfloor} \brac{b_{\ell}}{k-\ell d} a^{q^{k-\ell d}} \equiv 0 \pmod{f},
\end{equation}
since $a^{q^k} \equiv a^{q^{k-\ell d}} \pmod f$ for all $\ell$. By \eqref{E:starprops1}--\eqref{E:starprops2}, it suffices to prove (c) for $P = a x^i$. We recall (see \cite[\S 3.6]{Goss}) that for $\ell \geq 1$,
\[
C_{f^{\ell}}(x) \equiv x^{q^{\ell d}} \pmod{f},
\]
and so
\[
f^{\ell} \star P(x) \equiv a x^{i q^{\ell d}} \pmod{f}.
\]
For $0 \leq k \leq rd$, this congruence then implies
\begin{multline*}
\brac{f}{k} P(x)^{q^k} - \sum_{\ell=1}^{\lfloor k/d \rfloor} \brac{b_{\ell}}{k-\ell d} \bigl( f^{\ell}\star P(x)^{q^{k-\ell d}} \bigr) \\
\equiv \Biggl( \brac{f}{k} a^{q^{k}} - \sum_{\ell=1}^{\lfloor k/d \rfloor} \brac{b_{\ell}}{k- \ell d} a^{q^{k-\ell d}} \Biggr) x^{iq^k} \pmod{f},
\end{multline*}
and part (c) then follows from \eqref{E:bracacong}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{T:Integrality}]
We prove $E_i(\beta) \in A_{(f)}[x]$ by induction on $i$. We note that $E_i(\beta) = 0$ for $i <0$ and $E_0(\beta) = S_0(\beta) = \beta \in A[x]$, which establish the base cases. Now assume that $E_{j}(\beta) \in A_{(f)}[x]$ for all $j < i$.
By Lemma~\ref{L:Eistar} (and $\brac{f}{0} = f$), we have
\begin{multline*}
E_i(\beta) = \frac{1}{f} \Biggl( E_i^{*}(\beta) - \sum_{k=1}^{d-1} \brac{f}{k} E_{i-k}(\beta)^{q^k} \Biggr.
\\ \Biggl. {}- \sum_{k=d}^{rd} \biggl( \brac{f}{k} E_{i-k}(\beta)^{q^k} - \sum_{\ell=1}^{\lfloor k/d \rfloor} \brac{b_{\ell}}{k- \ell d} \bigl( f^{\ell} \star E_{i-k}(\beta)^{q^{k-\ell d}}\bigr) \biggr) \Biggr).
\end{multline*}
We consider each of the terms on the right-hand side of this equation. Recall from Lemma~\ref{L:Eistar} that
\[
\frac{1}{f} E_i^{*}(\beta) = \sum_{j=0}^i \alpha_j f^{q^j-1} S_{i-j}^*(\beta)^{q^j}.
\]
By construction in~\eqref{E:Sistardef}, $S_{i-j}^*(\beta) \in A_{(f)}[x]$. Also by \cite[Thm.~3.1]{EP13},
\[
\ord_f(\alpha_j) \geq -\ord_f \bigl( (\theta^{q^j} - \theta)(\theta^{q^j}-\theta^q) \cdots (\theta^{q^j} - \theta^{q^{j-1}} ) \bigr) = - \frac{q^j - q^{j- d\lfloor j/d \rfloor}}{q^d-1}
\geq -(q^j-1),
\]
where the middle equality follows from the fact that $\ord_f(\theta^{q^k}-\theta) = 1$ if $d \mid k$, and $0$ otherwise (e.g., see~\cite[\S 2.1]{PLogAlg}). Thus $\frac{1}{f} E_i^{*}(\beta) \in A_{(f)}[x]$ as desired.
By Lemma~\ref{L:braccongs}(a), for $1 \leq k \leq d-1$ we have that $\frac{1}{f}\brac{f}{k} \in A_{(f)}$, and by the induction hypothesis $E_{i-k}(\beta) \in A_{(f)}[x]$. Thus $\frac{1}{f} \brac{f}{k} E_{i-k}(\beta) \in A_{(f)}[x]$. For $d \leq k \leq rd$, taking $P = E_{i-k}(\beta)$ in Lemma~\ref{L:braccongs}(c) and using the induction hypothesis provides the $f$-integrality of the remaining sum.
\end{proof}
\section{Degree estimates and completion of the proof} \label{S:Degrees}
After proving Theorem~\ref{T:Integrality} the second part of Anderson's method is to estimate the $\infty$-adic size of the coefficients $E_i(\beta)$ from \eqref{E:Eidef} by defining a norm on $K[x]$ in which $A[x]$ is discrete. The essential idea is to show that their size goes to $0$ as $i \to \infty$ and then to use their integrality to prove that $E_i(\beta)=0$ for $i \gg 0$.
We recall a definition of Anderson~\cite[\S 3.5]{And96}. The Carlitz exponential is given by the power series
\begin{equation} \label{E:expC}
\exp_C(z) = z + \sum_{i=1}^\infty \frac{z^{q^i}}{(\theta^{q^i} - \theta)(\theta^{q^i} - \theta^q) \cdots (\theta^{q^i} - \theta^{q^{i-1}} )},
\end{equation}
and its period lattice $\Lambda_C = \ker \exp_C$ has the form $\Lambda_C = A\widetilde{\pi}$, where $\widetilde{\pi} \in K_{\infty}((-\theta)^{1/(q-1)})$ is called the Carlitz period (see \cite[\S 3.2]{Goss}, \cite[\S 2.5]{Thakur}). We let $\mathbb{I} = K_\infty \cdot \widetilde{\pi} \subseteq \mathbb{C}_\infty$ be the imaginary axis, which has the properties that $\mathbb{I}/\Lambda_C$ is compact and that $C_{\mathrm{tor}}=K\cdot \widetilde{\pi} \subseteq \exp_C(\mathbb{I})$, where $C_{\mathrm{tor}}$ denotes the torsion submodule of $C$. Anderson then defines for $\beta \in K[x]$,
\begin{equation} \label{E:normdef}
\norm{\beta} := \sup_{u \in \mathbb{I}}\, \bigl| \beta\bigl(\exp_C(u) \bigr) \bigr|_{\infty}
= \sup_{a \in A}\sup_{u \in \mathbb{I}}\, \bigl| (a \star \beta)\bigl( \exp_C(u) \bigr) \bigr|_{\infty},
\end{equation}
which is well-defined since by \eqref{E:stardef},
\[
\sup_{a \in A}\sup_{u \in \mathbb{I}}\, \bigl| (a \star \beta)\bigl( \exp_C(u) \bigr) \bigr|_{\infty}
= \sup_{a \in A}\sup_{u \in \mathbb{I}}\, \bigl| \beta\bigl( C_a(\exp_C(u)) \bigr) \bigr|_{\infty}
= \sup_{a \in A}\sup_{u \in \mathbb{I}}\, \bigl| \beta\bigl( \exp_C(au) \bigr) \bigr|_{\infty}.
\]
Anderson proves the following properties of $\norm{\,\cdot\,}$.
\begin{proposition}[{Anderson \cite[Prop.~2]{And96}}] \label{P:normprops}
The function $\norm{\,\cdot\,}$ defines an ultrametric norm on $K[x]$ that is invariant under the $\star$-operation. In particular, for all $\beta$, $\gamma \in K[x]$, we have $\norm{\beta} < \infty$,
\[
\norm{\beta+\gamma} \leq \max(\norm{\beta},\norm{\gamma}), \quad
\norm{\beta\gamma} \leq \norm{\beta}\norm{\gamma}, \quad
\norm{\beta} = 0\ \Rightarrow\ \beta = 0.
\]
For all $a \in A$, we have $\norm{a \star \beta} = \norm{\beta}$, and if $\xi \in C_{\mathrm{tor}}$, then $|\beta(\xi)|_{\infty} \leq \norm{\beta}$. Furthermore, the following properties hold.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(a)] If $\beta \in A[x]$ and $\norm{\beta} \leq 1$, then $\beta \in \mathbb{F}_q$.
\item[(b)] If $\beta \in A[x]$ and $\norm{\beta} < 1$, then $\beta = 0$.
\end{enumerate}
Thus the ring $A[x]$ is a discrete subspace of $K[x]$ with respect to $\norm{\,\cdot\,}$.
\end{proposition}
Recalling the defining polynomial for $\phi$ in \eqref{E:phidef}, we set
\[
d_0 := \max ( \deg \kappa_1, \dots, \deg \kappa_r ) \in \mathbb{Z}
\]
and note that $d_0 \geq 0$. For $\beta \in K[x]$, $\beta \neq 0$, we define positive $j_0(\beta) \in \mathbb{Q}$ by
\[
|\theta|_{\infty}^{j_0(\beta)} = \max( 1, \norm{\beta} ).
\]
We set $j_0(0) = 0$. We recall that Anderson~\cite[p.~188]{And96} showed that $j_0(x^m) = m/(q-1)$. Although we will not need evaluations of $j_0$ for more general $\beta$, we remark that Anderson's evaluation together with the ultrametric properties of $\norm{\,\cdot\,}$ can be used to evaluate $j_0(\beta)$ under various restrictions on the coefficients of $\beta$; for instance $j_0(\beta)=\frac{\deg(\beta)}{q-1}$ for all $\beta\in \mathbb{F}_q[x]$ (i.e., if $\beta$ has constant coefficients). Our main result of this section is the following.
\begin{theorem} \label{T:Estimates}
Let $\beta \in K[x]$. For any $i \geq 0$,
\[
\norm{E_i(\beta)} \leq |\theta|_{\infty}^{q^i(j_0(\beta) + d_0/(q-1) - i/r)}.
\]
Moreover, if $\beta \in A[x]$ and if
\[
i > r \biggl( j_0(\beta) + \frac{d_0}{q-1} \biggr),
\]
then $\norm{E_i(\beta)} < 1$ and thus $E_i(\beta) = 0$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{T:Estimates}]
Let $\beta \in K[x]$. We first estimate $\norm{S_i(\beta)}$ for $i \geq 0$ using \eqref{E:Sidef}. We see that
\begin{equation} \label{E:normSibeta}
\norm{S_i(\beta)} \leq \max_{a \in A_{i+}} \biggl\{ \biggl| \frac{\mu(a)}{a} \biggr|_{\infty} \cdot \norm{a \star \beta} \biggr\}
\leq \norm{\beta} \cdot |\theta|_{\infty}^{-\lceil i/r\rceil} \leq \norm{\beta} \cdot |\theta|_{\infty}^{-i/r},
\end{equation}
where the second inequality follows from the $\star$-invariance of $\norm{\,\cdot\,}$ and Lemma~\ref{L:muprops}(d) (noting that $\deg \mu(a)$ must be an integer). The last inequality is included for ease of use. Now by~\eqref{E:EiSum},
\begin{equation} \label{E:normEibeta}
\norm{E_i(\beta)} \leq \max_{0 \leq j \leq i} \Bigl\{ |\alpha_j|_{\infty} \cdot \norm{S_{i-j}(\beta)}^{q^j} \Bigr\}.
\end{equation}
By \cite[Thm.~3.1, Eq.~(28)]{EP13}, we see that
\[
|\alpha_j|_\infty \leq |\theta|_{\infty}^{q^j (d_0/(q-1)-j/r)},
\]
and so combining these estimates we have
\begin{align*}
\norm{E_i(\beta)} &\leq \max_{0 \leq j \leq i} \Bigl\{ \norm{\beta}^{q^j} \cdot |\theta|_{\infty}^{q^j(d_0/(q-1) - j/r - (i-j)/r)} \Bigr\} \\
&\leq \max_{0 \leq j \leq i}\, \Bigl\{ |\theta|_{\infty}^{q^j( j_0(\beta) + d_0/(q-1) - i/r)} \Bigr\} \\
&= |\theta|_{\infty}^{q^i(j_0(\beta) + d_0/(q-1) - i/r)}.
\end{align*}
Now if $\beta \in A[x]$, then $E_i(\beta) \in A[x]$ by Theorem~\ref{T:Integrality} and \eqref{E:EphiIntegral}. If $i > r(j_0(\beta) + d_0/(q-1))$, then these estimates imply $\norm{E_i(\beta)} < 1$. Proposition~\ref{P:normprops}(b) then implies $E_i(\beta) = 0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{T:Main}]
For $\beta \in A[x]$, Theorem~\ref{T:Integrality} implies that $\mathcal{E}_{\phi}(\beta,z) \in \power{A}{z}$, and Theorem~\ref{T:Estimates} implies that the coefficients $E_i(\beta)$ of $\mathcal{E}_{\phi}(\beta,z)$ are eventually $0$.
\end{proof}
\section{Examples} \label{S:Examples}
Theorem~\ref{T:Estimates} implies that
\begin{equation} \label{E:degree}
\deg_z( \mathcal{E}_\phi(\beta,z)) \leq q^{ r(j_0(\beta) + d_0/(q-1))},
\end{equation}
although we will see in this section that this bound need not be sharp. However, we find that for given $\beta \in A[x]$, the polynomial $\mathcal{E}_\phi(\beta,z) \in A[x,z]$ is effectively computable. Indeed we can calculate $E_i(\beta)$ for small~$i$ using \eqref{E:EiSum}, and thus we aim to calculate
\[
S_i(\beta) = \sum_{a \in A_{i+}} \frac{\mu(a) (a\star \beta)(x)}{a}
\]
and the coefficients $\alpha_j$ of $\exp_{\phi}(z)$. Unfortunately, direct computation of $\mu(a)$ based simply on the defining coefficients of $\phi$ and the factorization of $a$ can be complicated.
We consider cases where $\phi$ has rank $2$, and we assume $\phi_\theta = \theta + g\tau + \Delta \tau^2$, for $g$, $\Delta \in A$, and we take $\beta = x^m$, $m \geq 0$. Letting $d_0 = \max( \deg g, \deg \Delta)$, we will assume that
\begin{equation}\label{E:md0}
0 \leq m + d_0 < \tfrac{3}{2}(q-1),
\end{equation}
and since $j_0(x^m) = m/(q-1)$ by~\cite[p.~188]{And96}, we see right away from \eqref{E:degree} that
\begin{equation} \label{E:degE3}
i > 2 \quad \Rightarrow \quad E_i(x^m) =0.
\end{equation}
\begin{example} \label{Ex:one}
Continuing with the notation above, we assume further that $0 \leq m \leq q-2$ and $0 \leq m+d_0 \leq q-1$. Then we claim
\begin{equation} \label{E:cEm}
\mathcal{E}_\phi(x^m,z) = x^m z.
\end{equation}
Since $E_0(x^m) = x^m$, by \eqref{E:degE3} it remains to show that $E_1(x^m) = E_2(x^m) = 0$.
We first turn to $E_1(x^m) = S_1(x^m) + \alpha_1 S_0(x^m)^q$, and so
\[
\norm{E_1(x^m)} \leq \max\bigl( \norm{S_1(x^m)}, |\alpha_1|_{\infty} \norm{S_0(x^m)}^q \bigr).
\]
We note from~\eqref{E:normSibeta} that $\norm{S_1(x^m)} \leq \norm{x^m} \cdot |\theta|_{\infty}^{-1}$ and from~\cite[Eq.~(24)]{EP13} that $\alpha_1 = g/(\theta^q-\theta)$, and so $\deg(\alpha_1) =\deg g - q$. By our chosen inequalities,
\[
\norm{S_1(x^m)} \leq |\theta|_{\infty}^{m/(q-1) - 1} < 1,
\]
and, using that $S_0(x^m) =x^m$,
\[
|\alpha_1|_{\infty} \norm{x^m}^q \leq |\theta|_{\infty}^{d_0-q} \cdot |\theta|_{\infty}^{mq/(q-1)} = |\theta|_{\infty}^{m+d_0 - (q-1) + m/(q-1)-1} < 1.
\]
Thus $\norm{E_1(x^m)} < 1$, and so $E_1(x^m) =0$ by Proposition~\ref{P:normprops}(b). Likewise,
\[
\norm{E_2(x^m)} \leq \max \bigl( \norm{S_2(x^m)}, |\alpha_1|_{\infty} \norm{S_1(x^m)}^q, |\alpha_2|_{\infty} \norm{S_0(x^m)}^{q^2} \bigr).
\]
We see from~\eqref{E:normSibeta} that
\begin{equation} \label{E:normS2}
\norm{S_2(x^m)} \leq |\theta|_{\infty}^{m/(q-1)} \cdot |\theta|_{\infty}^{-1} < 1.
\end{equation}
Also,
\begin{equation} \label{E:normalpha1S1}
|\alpha_1|_\infty \norm{S_1(x^m)}^q \leq |\theta|_{\infty}^{d_0-q} \cdot |\theta|_{\infty}^{mq/(q-1) - q} \leq |\theta|_{\infty}^{-1} \cdot |\theta|_{\infty}^{q(m/(q-1)-1)} < 1,
\end{equation}
where the second inequality follows since $d_0 \leq q-1$. Finally, by \cite[Eq.~(24)]{EP13}, we see that $\deg(\alpha_2) \leq \max ( (q+1)d_0 - 2q^2,d_0-q^2 ) = d_0-q^2$,
and so
\begin{equation} \label{E:normalpha2S0}
|\alpha_2|_{\infty} \norm{S_0(x^m)}^{q^2} \leq |\theta|_{\infty}^{d_0 -q^2} \cdot |\theta|_{\infty}^{mq^2/(q-1)}
= |\theta|_{\infty}^{d_0-q+1} \cdot |\theta|_{\infty}^{-(q^3-1)/(q-1) + mq^2/(q-1)} < 1.
\end{equation}
Thus $\norm{E_2(x^m)} < 1$, and so $E_2(x^m)=0$.
\end{example}
\begin{example} \label{Ex:two}
If we assume instead the weaker conditions that $0 \leq m \leq q-2$ and $0 \leq d_0 \leq q$ (but still $0 \leq m + d_0 < \tfrac{3}{2} (q-1)$), then we find
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{E}_{\phi}(x^m,z) = x^m z + E_1(x^m)z^q,
\end{equation}
where it is possible that $E_1(x^m)$ is non-zero. The derivation is similar to Example~\ref{Ex:one}, and the observation is that similar estimates to~\eqref{E:normS2}--\eqref{E:normalpha2S0} can be made with only small modifications.
\end{example}
We now consider the prospect of calculating $E_i(x^m)$ (in particular $E_1(x^m)$ as in Example~\ref{Ex:two}), and so we investigate computing $\mu(a)$. For $f \in A_+$ irreducible of degree $d$, the Hasse invariant $H(\phi;f) \in A$ is defined to be the coefficient $\brac{f}{d}$ of $\tau^d$ in $\phi_f$, and utilizing results of Gekeler, Hsia, and Yu~\cite{Gekeler83}, \cite{Gekeler91}, \cite{HsiaYu00}, we observe that
\begin{equation} \label{E:mufHasse}
\mu(f) = H(\phi;f) \bmod f = \brac{f}{d} \bmod f.
\end{equation}
That is, $\mu(f)$ is the remainder of $\brac{f}{d}$ upon division by $f$. When $d=1$ and $f = \theta + c$, $c \in \mathbb{F}_q$, then this implies
\begin{equation} \label{E:mudeg1}
\mu(f) = g \bmod f = g(-c).
\end{equation}
When $d=2$ and $f = \theta^2 + c_1\theta + c_0$, $c_i \in \mathbb{F}_q$, we have
\[
\mu(f) = \bigl( (\theta^{q^2} + \theta +c_1 ) \Delta + g^{q+1} \bigr) \bmod f,
\]
and correspondingly the complexity of $\mu(f)$ grows with $d$, though it would be interesting to investigate how the methods of \cite{EP13}, \cite{EP14} might be applied to simplify it.
\begin{lemma} \label{L:S1beta}
Assume that $d_0=q$ and $0 \leq m \leq q-2$, and let $\beta = x^m$. Suppose that $g =\sum_{i=0}^q b_i \theta^i$, $b_i \in \mathbb{F}_q$. Then
\[
S_1(x^m) = \biggl( -\frac{g}{\theta^q-\theta} + b_q \biggr) x^{mq}
- \sum_{\ell=1}^m \sum_{i=q-\ell}^{q-1} (-1)^i b_i \binom{m}{\ell} \binom{\ell-1}{q-1-i} \theta^{\ell-q+i} \cdot x^{mq - \ell(q-1)}.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We first note that
\begin{align*}
S_1(x^m) &= \sum_{c \in \mathbb{F}_q} \frac{\mu(\theta+c) ((\theta+c)x + x^q)^m}{\theta+c} \\
&= \sum_{c\in \mathbb{F}_q} \sum_{i=0}^q \frac{b_i(-c)^i ((\theta+c)x + x^q)^m}{\theta+c} \\
&= \begin{aligned}[t]
b_0 &\sum_{\ell=0}^m \binom{m}{\ell} x^{\ell + q(m-\ell)} \sum_{c \in\mathbb{F}_q} (\theta+c)^{\ell-1} \\
&{}+ \sum_{i=1}^q (-1)^i b_i \sum_{\ell=0}^m \binom{m}{\ell} x^{\ell+q(m-\ell)}
\sum_{c \in \mathbb{F}_q} c^i(\theta+c)^{\ell-1},
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
where the middle equality follows from~\eqref{E:mudeg1}. It is well-known \cite[Ch.~5]{Thakur} that
\[
\sum_{c \in \mathbb{F}_q} (\theta+c)^{\ell-1} = \begin{cases}
-\dfrac{1}{\theta^q-\theta} & \textup{if $\ell=0$,} \\
0 & \textup{if $1 \leq \ell \leq q-1$,}
\end{cases}
\]
and by direct calculation we see that for $i \geq 1$ and $\ell \geq 1$,
\[
\sum_{c \in \mathbb{F}_q} c^i (\theta+c)^{\ell-1} = -\sum_{\substack{s=0 \\ (q-1) \mid (s+i) }}^{\ell-1} \binom{\ell-1}{s} \theta^{\ell-1-s}.
\]
We then observe that for $1 \leq i \leq q-1$,
\begin{equation} \label{E:deg1}
\sum_{c\in \mathbb{F}_q}\frac{c^i}{\theta+c}=(-1)^{i+1}\frac{\theta^i}{\theta^q-\theta},
\end{equation}
which follows from standard arguments (e.g., see the proof of \cite[Lem.~3.1]{EPetrov15}). We note also that $0 \leq m \leq q-2$ and $1 \leq i \leq q$ imply that $1 \leq s+i \leq 2q-3 < 2(q-1)$, so $(q-1) \mid (s+i)$ if and only if $s = q-1-i$. Taking this all together, we see that
\begin{align*}
S_1(x^m) = - \sum_{i=0}^{q-1} &\frac{b_i \theta^i}{\theta^q-\theta}\cdot x^{mq} - \frac{b_q \theta}{\theta^q-\theta} \cdot x^{mq} \\
&{}- \sum_{i=1}^{q-1} (-1)^i b_i \sum_{\ell=q-i} \binom{m}{\ell} \binom{\ell-1}{q-1-i} \theta^{\ell-q+i} \cdot x^{\ell+q(m-\ell)},
\end{align*}
from which the result follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{example}
By Lemma~\ref{L:S1beta}, if $g = \sum_{i=0}^q b_i \theta^i$ ($\deg g \leq q$), $\deg \Delta \leq q$, and $m=0$, then
\[
S_1(1) = -\frac{g}{\theta^q-\theta} + b_q,
\]
and since $\alpha_1 = g/(\theta^q-\theta)$, we have
\[
E_1(1) = S_1(1) + \alpha_1 S_0(1)^q = b_q.
\]
Therefore,
\begin{equation} \label{E:cE1}
\mathcal{E}_{\phi}(1,z) = z + b_q z^q.
\end{equation}
If we take $m=1$ and assume $q\geq 3$, then
\[
S_1(x) = \biggl(-\frac{g}{\theta^q -\theta} + b_q \biggr) x^q - b_{q-1} x,
\]
and so
\[
E_1(x) = S_1(x) + \alpha_1 S_0(x)^q = b_qx^q - b_{q-1}x.
\]
Thus
\begin{equation} \label{E:cEx}
\mathcal{E}_{\phi}(x,z) = xz + (b_q x^q - b_{q-1}x) z^q, \quad (q \geq 3).
\end{equation}
We note that the condition $m+q < \tfrac{3}{2}(q-1)$ may not be satisfied for $q \leq 5$, but in these cases \eqref{E:cE1} and \eqref{E:cEx} can be verified directly.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
We present now computations of special $L$-values for $\phi$ in terms of logarithms as in \S\ref{S:LogAlg}. Assume that $g = \sum_{i=0}^q b_i\theta^i$ ($\deg g \leq q$) and that $\deg \Delta \leq q$. By~\eqref{E:Lphibeta}, we have $L(\phi^{\vee},0) = \mathcal{L}_{\phi}(1,z)|_{z=1}$, and so by~\eqref{E:cE1},
\begin{equation}
\exp_{\phi} \bigl( L(\phi^{\vee},0) \bigr) = \mathcal{E}_{\phi}(1,z)|_{z=1} = 1 + b_q \in \mathbb{F}_q.
\end{equation}
It is tempting to write ``$L(\phi^{\vee},0) = \log_{\phi}(1 + b_q)$,'' but $1+b_q$ may not be within the radius of convergence of $\log_\phi(z)$ (see~\cite[Cor.~4.2]{EP13}, \cite[Rem.~6.11]{EP14}). Instead we will write
\[
L(\phi^{\vee},0) = \Log_{\phi}(1+b_q)
\]
to express that $L(\phi^{\vee},0)$ is a logarithm of $1+b_q$.
If we let $\chi : A \to \mathbb{F}_q$ be the Dirichlet character defined by $\chi(a) = a(0)$ and we take $\zeta =\mathbf{e}(1/\theta) = (-\theta)^{1/(q-1)}$, then
\[
\mathcal{L}_{\phi}(x,z)\big|_{x=\zeta,z=1} = L(\phi^{\vee},\chi,0) \cdot \zeta.
\]
Then for $q \geq 3$, \eqref{E:cEx} implies
\begin{equation}
\exp_{\phi} \bigl( L(\phi^{\vee},\chi,0) \cdot \zeta \bigr) = \mathcal{E}_{\phi}(x,z)\big|_{x=\zeta,z=1} = (1-b_{q-1})\zeta + b_q\zeta^q, \quad (q \geq 3),
\end{equation}
and so using the convention for $\Log_\phi$ (versus $\log_\phi$) from the previous paragraph
\[
L(\phi^{\vee},\chi,0) = \frac{1}{\zeta} \cdot \Log_{\phi} \bigl(\zeta(1-b_{q-1} -b_q\theta)\bigr).
\]
\end{example}
|
\section{Introduction and Outline}
Unitarity is one of the defining properties of quantum mechanics and quantum field theory.
The ideal concept of unitarity should be applied to the {\it whole} system, namely the entire universe.
But in practice, no one ever tries to solve the quantum mechanics of the whole system.
We always focus on small subsystems, and pretend that the rest of the world forms a {\it classical background}.
In other words, whenever we write down a practical quantum mechanical description, strictly speaking, it is always a {\it semi-classical approximation}.
From the whole system, we artificially choose a subsystem to describe by quantum mechanics, while treating the rest of the system as being classical.
Of course, such semi-classical approximation is inevitable for many practical reasons, and we are not advocating alternatives.
But since it is an approximation, it must come with a validity condition, something that warns us when it breaks down.
A common approach is to calculate semi-classical back-reactions.
There are many conservation laws which both classical and quantum physics have to obey, such as energy and momentum.
In a semi-classical model, we can demand that the quantum expectation value (from the quantum subsystem) and classical value (from the classical background) of the conserved charges are together conserved.
These ``quantum + classical'' conservation laws allow us to calculate the back-reaction of the quantum subsystem on the classical background.
Sometimes we reasoned that if the back-reactions are not significant, the semi-classical approximation is reliable.
\footnote{For example, one calculates Hawking radiation in a fixed geometry, and then use conservation of energy to argue that the black hole has to evaporate \cite{Haw74}.
Since the evaporation is so slow, it is a small correction to the fixed geometry.
Sometimes we take this as the reason to trust such semi-classical approximation.}
The smallness of such back-reactions can be a necessary condition for the validity of semi-classical models, but we should not expect it to be sufficient.
The apparently unitary evolution of a quantum state usually contains infinitely more information than all the conserved charges.
It is natural to conjecture that only a much more stringent condition can grant us the right to trust the full details of the quantum evolution in a semi-classical description.
In this paper, we will give an example to support such conjecture, and also explicitly derive the condition for which the unitary quantum evolution in the semi-classical description can be trusted.
We are inspired by Unruh's example of ``decoherence without dissipation'' \cite{Unr12}.
He had a toy-model in which two quantum subsystems can become entangled without transferring energy to each other.
We will show that similar things can happen when one of the quantum subsystems is well-approximated by a classical system.
This leads to a semi-classical approximation with little back-reactions, yet the apparently unitary evolution of the remaining quantum subsystem is an illusion.
Our particular model is about two coupled harmonic oscillators.
We focus on the situation that their frequencies are far from resonant, the second oscillator starts in a coherent state, and its energy is much larger than the first oscillator.
In this situation, the expected position of the second oscillator will remain close to what we expect from a coherent state for a long time.
Thus it is very natural to treat the it as being classical.
In such approximation, the first oscillator will have a time-dependent effective frequency, but its evolution appears to be unitary forever.
In this paper, we will show that the two oscillators can become significantly entangled, while classical back-reactions are negligible.
In other words, the evolution of the first oscillator will decohere, but within the semi-classical approximation there is no way to raise a flag.
The apparent unitarity in the semi-classical approximation is secretly lost.
We derive the time scale at which this unitarity loss happens.
Such time scale can be independently tuned from the parameters in the semi-classical approximation.
For example, in the adiabatic limit of the semi-classical model, it takes a very long time for the effective frequency for the first oscillator to change.
Most of the interesting physical questions are about what happens after the frequency change. We can easily arrange that unitarity is lost way before those interesting physical questions can be addressed.
We should emphasize that such unitarity loss does not invalidate the entire semi-classical approximation.
For example, in the adiabatic limit, we can describe the first oscillator by the eigenstates of its instantaneous effective frequency.
The occupation numbers in this basis stay the same, and that can still be true even if unitarity is lost.
The only difference is that instead of a unitary transformation,
$(|0\rangle_{w_i} + |1\rangle_{w_i}) \rightarrow (|0\rangle_{w_f} + |1\rangle_{w_f})$,
a pure state density matrix evolving into a mixed state,
$(|0\rangle_{w_i} + |1\rangle_{w_i}) (\langle0|_{w_i} + \langle1|_{w_i})
\rightarrow (|0\rangle_{w_f}\langle0|_{w_f} + |1\rangle_{w_f}\langle1|_{w_f})$.
Thus, we are not questioning the apparent success in many applications of the semi-classical approximations.
We simply point out that the apparent unitarity in semi-classical approximations might need further scrutinization.
If we believe in the existence of quantum gravity, then quantum field theory in curved space time (QFT-CST) is essentially a semi-classical approximation of that.
A few interesting calculations in QFT-CST, such as quantum fluctuations during inflation \cite{LidLyt93} and Hawking radiation from black holes \cite{Haw74}, closely resemble our simple model of a harmonic oscillator with a time-dependent frequency.
Thus our work not only points out the potential unitarity issue in QFT-CST, but it also provides a first step to address such problem.
QFT-CST is considered quite successful by many physicists.
The density perturbation of the universe is considered an observed proof to QFT-CST during inflation, and the temperature/spectrum of Hawking radiation is an essential component of black hole thermodynamics.
We wish to emphasize again that questioning the unitarity of QFT-CST is not in conflict with those widely accepted successes.
Those results of QFT-CST are analogous to predicting the occupation number in our toy model.
It is possible to lose unitarity without changing those predictions.
For inflationary perturbations, the unitarity of QFT-CST can in-principle be checked by cosmological Bell inequalities in some inflation models \cite{Mal15}.
But even for those models, the corresponding observation is still out of our reach at this moment.
For Hawking radiation, the unitarity of QFT-CST actually leads to the famous information paradox
\cite{Haw76a,AMPS}.
The opportunity to deny the apparent unitarity without changing the thermal properties of Hawking radiation provides an elegant way to resolve the paradox, as discussed in \cite{OsuPag16,BakKod17}.
The rest of the paper goes like the following.
In Sec.\ref{sec-analytic}, we write down the exact Hamiltonian and initial states for both the semi-classical model and the fully quantum model.
In the fully quantum model, we use non-degenerate perturbation theory to derive how the two oscillators can become entangled with each other.
That leads to Eq.~(\ref{eq-entangle}), which is the time scale of unitarity loss and the main result of this paper.
Technically speaking, non-degenerate perturbation theory is only marginally applicable in our case.
Degenerate perturbation theory is required to get the exact answer.
We give a physical argument for why the answer we get from non-degenerate perturbation theory is good enough.
In Sec.\ref{sec-numeric}, we use degenerate perturbation theory and numerically solve two examples.
This conforms our analytical derivation, and also reveals another interesting effect that we provide an analytical explanation in Sec.\ref{sec-Losses}.
In Sec.\ref{sec-dis}, we summarize our results and and discuss future directions.
\section{Analytical Approach}
\label{sec-analytic}
\subsection{The semi-classical model}
Consider a quantum harmonic oscillator ``$A$'' with a time-dependent natural frequency.
\begin{eqnarray}
H_A &=& \frac{P_A^2}{2} +
\left(\frac{w_0^2+w_A^2}{4} + \frac{w_0^2-w_A^2}{4}\cos w_Bt \right)X_A^2~.
\label{eq-HA}
\end{eqnarray}
Basically, the effective frequency starts as $w_0$ at $t=0$, smoothly changes to $w_A$ at $t=\pi w_B^{-1}$, and continues to oscillate between $w_0$ and $w_A$ in this manner.
Similar time-dependent Hamiltonian has been widely studied in quantum mechanics and quantum field theory for its interesting properties.
For example, there can be particle productions.
Starting in the ground state of $w_0$, the system can be excited at a later time even if the effective frequency returns to the same value.
\begin{equation}
|\phi_A(2\pi w_B^{-1})\rangle = e^{-i\int_0^{2\pi w_B^{-1}} H_A dt}|0\rangle_{w_0} =
\sum_n c_n|n\rangle_{w_0} ~,
\label{eq-unitary}
\end{equation}
where $c_{n>0}\neq0$ in general.
The main purpose of this paper is not about those interesting properties.
We are interested in a hidden assumption that is implicit when we wrote down Eq.~(\ref{eq-unitary}).
This equation clearly shows that in this model, if we start in a pure state, it will remain to be pure {\it forever}.
Namely, the evolution of this harmonic oscillator alone is unitary.
Such assumption should not be taken for granted.
We will provide a concrete example to show how it breaks down.
\subsection{The quantum model}
First of all, the apparently time-dependent Hamiltonian can be traced back to the evolution of some ``classical background''.
The particular form of Eq.~(\ref{eq-HA}) is chosen such that the time-dependent classical background is another harmonic oscillator ``$B$'' of frequency $w_B$.
\begin{equation}
x_B(t) = \sqrt{\frac{2}{m_Bw_B}} \alpha_0 \cos w_Bt~.
\label{eq-amp}
\end{equation}
Here $\alpha_0$ is a real number representing the initial amplitude of this classical harmonic oscillator.
Note that we have set the mass of oscillator $A$ to 1, but we are keeping the mass of oscillator $B$ as a parameter.
It will be a very convenient variable to adjust for us.
Putting this back into Eq.~(\ref{eq-HA}), we get
\begin{eqnarray}
H_A &=& \frac{P_A^2}{2} +
\left(\frac{w_0^2+w_A^2}{4} + \frac{w_0^2-w_A^2}{4}
\frac{x_B(t)}{\sqrt{\frac{2}{m_B w_B}}\alpha_0}\right)X_A^2~.
\label{eq-HA1}
\end{eqnarray}
Later in this paper, whenever we adjust $\alpha_0$, we will adjust $m_B$ together such that $\alpha_0^2/m_B = const.$
With this condition enforced, $\alpha_0$ is basically a free parameter for the classical model.
Both the classical amplitude of oscillator $B$ and the coupling between the two systems are unchanged when we vary $\alpha_0$.
Any value of $\alpha_0$ leads to the same time-dependent Hamiltonian for oscillator $A$.
Now, in order to study the unitarity problem, we should treat both oscillators quantum-mechanically.
That means they actually together follow a time-independent Hamiltonian.
\begin{equation}
H_{tot} = \frac{P_A^2}{2}+ \frac{P_B^2}{2m_B} + \frac{m_B w_B^2 X_B^2}{2} +
\left( \frac{w_0^2+w_A^2}{4}+ \frac{w_0^2-w_A^2}{4} \frac{X_B}{\sqrt{\frac{2}{m_B w_B}}\alpha_0}\right)X_A^2~.
\label{eq-HAB}
\end{equation}
The classical amplitude, Eq.~(\ref{eq-amp}), is replaced by the position operator acting on a coherent state of the oscillator $B$.
\begin{equation}
|\phi_B(0)\rangle = e^{-\alpha_0^2/2}
\sum_n \frac{\alpha_0^n}{\sqrt{n!}}|n\rangle_B~.
\label{eq-Bcoh}
\end{equation}
If the energy in oscillator $B$ is much larger than the combined energy in oscillator $A$ and the coupling term, then $\langle X_B \rangle$ will evolve like Eq.~(\ref{eq-amp}).
The combination of Eq.~(\ref{eq-HAB}) and (\ref{eq-Bcoh}) represents a 1-parameter family of fully quantum models parametrized by $\alpha_0$.
They all correspond to the same semi-classical model in Eq.~(\ref{eq-HA}).
However, the quantum realization of oscillator $B$ depends on $\alpha_0$.
One key difference between quantum and classical oscillators is that classical amplitudes are exact, but quantum expectation values have uncertainties.
The parameter $\alpha_0$ is the unit-less ratio between the amplitude and its uncertainty.
\begin{equation}
\alpha_0 \sim \frac{\langle X_B \rangle}{\langle \Delta X_B\rangle}~.
\label{eq-classical}
\end{equation}
Based on this property, it is probably easy to guess what values of $\alpha_0$ make the semi-classical approximation better.
We will soon see that indeed, the larger $\alpha_0$ is, the semi-classical model stays longer as a good approximation to the fully quantum model.
The unitarity question in the semi-classical model is simply an evolution problem in this fully quantum model.
If we start with a product state:
\begin{equation}
|\psi(0)\rangle_{AB} =
\left( \sum_m c_m |m\rangle_A \right)
\left( e^{-\alpha_0^2/2}
\sum_n \frac{\alpha_0^n}{\sqrt{n!}}|n\rangle_B \right)~,
\label{eq-product}
\end{equation}
how long will they stay as an approximate product state?
When will they become significantly entangled with each other?
\subsection{Non-degenerate Perturbation Theory}
\label{sec-ndpt}
One simple way to solve the evolution of the combined system is to treat it as a time-independent perturbation theory.
The unperturbed Hamiltonian is for two uncoupled harmonic oscillators.
Oscillator $B$ has frequency $w_B$, while oscillator $A$ has the mean frequency $\bar{w} = \sqrt{(w_0^2+w_A^2)/2}$.
\begin{eqnarray}
H_0 = \bar{w}
\left(a^\dagger a+\frac{1}{2}\right) + w_B\left(b^\dagger b + \frac{1}{2}\right)~.
\end{eqnarray}
Here $a$ and $b$ are the standard lowering operator for oscillators $A$ and $B$ respectively.
\begin{eqnarray}
a &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left(\bar{w}^{1/2}X_A+i \bar{w}^{-1/2}P_A \right)~, \\
b &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left[ (m_Bw_B)^{-1/2} X_B + i (m_B w_B)^{-1/2} P_B \right]~.
\end{eqnarray}
The eigenstates for the unperturbed Hamiltonian are product states of the eigenstates of the individual oscillators.
\begin{equation}
H_0 |m\rangle_A |n\rangle_B
= \left[ \bar{w}\left(m+\frac{1}{2}\right) + w_B\left(n+\frac{1}{2}\right)\right]
|m\rangle_A |n\rangle_B
\equiv E^{(0)}_{mn} |m\rangle_A |n\rangle_B~.
\end{equation}
The perturbation is the coupling between them.
\begin{eqnarray}
V = \frac{w_0^2-w_A^2}{4}\sqrt{\frac{w_B}{2}}\frac{X_B}{\alpha_0}X_A^2
= \epsilon\left(a+a^\dagger\right)^2\left(b+b^\dagger\right)~.
\end{eqnarray}
Here $\epsilon = \frac{w_0^2-w_A^2}{16\bar{w}\alpha_0}$ will be a small number when $\alpha_0$ is large.
In addition, if we $\bar{w}$ and $w_B$ are incommensurate, there will be no degeneracy in the unperturbed spectrum.
It appears that we can solve it as a standard non-degenerate, time-independent perturbation theory.
The energy eigenstates, corrected up to the first order, becomes
\begin{equation}
|\psi_{mn}\rangle = |m\rangle_A |n\rangle_B +
\epsilon \sum_{p,q} \frac{\langle p |\left(a+a^\dagger\right)^2|m\rangle_A
\langle q| \left(b+b^\dagger\right) |n\rangle_B }
{\bar{w}(m-p)+w_B(n-q)} |p\rangle_A|q\rangle_B~.
\label{eq-EigenStateCor}
\end{equation}
The eigenstate energy is corrected at the second order.
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta E_{mn} =
\label{eq-EnergyCor}
\epsilon^2 \sum_{p,q} \frac{\bigg|\langle p |\left(a+a^\dagger\right)^2|m\rangle_A
\langle q| \left(b+b^\dagger\right) |n\rangle_B\bigg|^2 }
{\bar{w}(m-p)+w_B(n-q)}~.
\end{eqnarray}
The summation of $p,q$, in both cases, only run through 6 states: $p=(m+2), m, (m-2)$ and $q=(n+1), (n-1)$.
Thus it is easy to calculate
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon^{-2} \Delta E_{mn} &=& \frac{(m+1)(m+2)(n+1)}{-2\bar{w} - w_B}
+ \frac{(2m+1)^2(n+1)}{-w_B}
\label{eq-DeltaE}
\\ \nonumber
&+& \frac{m(m-1)(n+1)}{2\bar{w}-w_B}
+ \frac{(m+1)(m+2)n}{-2\bar{w} + w_B}
+ \frac{(2m+1)^2n}{w_B} + \frac{m(m-1)n}{2\bar{w}+w_B}
\\ \nonumber
&=& \frac{m^2-4mn-m+2n}{2\bar{w}-w_B} - \frac{m^2+4mn+3m+2n+2}{2\bar{w}+w_B}
-\frac{(2m+1)^2}{w_B}~.
\end{eqnarray}
In order to describe the evolution, we can first rewrite Eq.~(\ref{eq-product}) in the perturbed eigenstate bases.
\begin{eqnarray}
|\psi(0)\rangle = \sum_{m,n} c_m e^{-\alpha_0^2/2} \frac{\alpha_0^n}{\sqrt{n!}}
\left[1 + \mathcal{O}(\epsilon) \right]|\psi_{mn}\rangle
\end{eqnarray}
Here the $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon)$ comes from the corrections to the eigenstates in Eq.~(\ref{eq-EigenStateCor}).
They are small real numbers suppressed by $\epsilon$.
The time evolution is then simply a phase in the eigenstate basis.
\begin{eqnarray}
|\psi(t)\rangle &=& \sum_{m,n} e^{-i E_{mn}t} c_m e^{-\alpha_0^2/2} \frac{\alpha_0^n}{\sqrt{n!}}
\left[1 + \mathcal{O}(\epsilon) \right]|\psi_{mn}\rangle
\\ \nonumber
&=& \sum_{m,n} e^{-i E_{mn}t} c_m e^{-\alpha_0^2/2} \frac{\alpha_0^n}{\sqrt{n!}}
\left[1 + \mathcal{O}(\epsilon) \right]|m\rangle_A|n\rangle_B~.
\end{eqnarray}
We used Eq.~(\ref{eq-EigenStateCor}) again to put it back into product state basis.
The values of $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon)$ has changed.
They are still small, but they are complex now due to the different phases.
This small correction is actually not important, because we only want to check whether it is still a product state.
For example, let us assume that initially, only $m=0$ and $2$ states are excited for oscillator $A$; $c_0=c_2=1/\sqrt{2}$ and all other $c_m=0$.
We can check whether the two oscillators are entangled by first partially projecting oscillator $A$ into these two states.
\begin{eqnarray}
|A_0\rangle_B \equiv \langle 0|_A|\psi(t)\rangle \bigg|_{\rm normalized}
&=& \sum_n e^{-i\Delta E_{0n}t}\frac{\alpha_0^n}{\sqrt{n!}}
\left[1 + \mathcal{O}(\epsilon) \right] e^{-iE^B_nt} |n\rangle_B~,
\label{eq-repeatStart} \\
|A_2\rangle_B \equiv \langle 2|_A|\psi(t)\rangle \bigg|_{\rm normalized}
&=& \sum_n e^{-i\Delta E_{2n}t}\frac{\alpha_0^n}{\sqrt{n!}}
\left[1 + \mathcal{O}(\epsilon) \right] e^{-iE^B_nt} |n\rangle_B~.
\end{eqnarray}
If these two corresponding states in $B$ are orthogonal, then a projection in $A$ also works as a projection in $B$.
That shows the two oscillators are significantly entangled
\footnote{Particle production effect will start to excite higher states in oscillator $A$.
Thus, just checking the $m=0$ and $m=2$ projections cannot show that they are maximally entangled.
Nevertheless, if the frequencies are far away from being resonant, higher states will not be excited by a lot.
These two lowest states is sufficient to show that they are significantly entangled.}.
On the other hand, if these two corresponding states in $B$ are parallel, then a projection in $A$ has no effect on $B$.
That means we still have a product state, thus the unitarity on $A$ alone is still valid.
The answer then depends on the inner product between these two states, which is a sum of complex numbers.
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle A_0|A_2\rangle
&\propto& \sum_n e^{i(\Delta E_{2n}-\Delta E_{0n})t}
\frac{\alpha_0^{2n}}{n!}
\left[1 + \mathcal{O}(\epsilon) \right]~.
\label{eq-repeatEnd}
\end{eqnarray}
This sum of $n$ is dominated by a range between $n_{min}\sim(\alpha_0^2-\alpha_0)$ and $n_{max} \sim (\alpha_0^2+\alpha_0)$.
So the basic question here is:
{\it Within this range, do we have small phase differences among the terms in the above sum?}
If the differences are small, then all terms add up coherently, and the inner product is close to one, which suggests that the two states are parallel.
On the other hand, if the differences are large, then they will cancel each other in the sum, which suggest that the two states are orthogonal.
From Eq.~(\ref{eq-EnergyCor}), we can estimate this phase change.
\begin{eqnarray}
& & (\Delta E_{2n_{max}}- \Delta E_{0n_{max}})t -
(\Delta E_{2n_{min}}- \Delta E_{0n_{min}})t
\label{eq-phase}
\\ \nonumber
&\approx& \epsilon^2
\left[ \frac{-8(n_{max}-n_{min})}{2\bar{w}-w_B} -\frac{8(n_{max}-n_{min})}{2\bar{w}+w_B} \right]t
\\ \nonumber
&=&-16\alpha_0\epsilon^2 \frac{4\bar{w}}{4\bar{w}^2-w_B^2}t
= -\frac{1}{4\alpha_0}\frac{(w_0^2-w_A^2)^2}{\bar{w}(4\bar{w}^2-w_B^2)}t~.
\end{eqnarray}
This reveals a critical time scale after which the two oscillators become entangled.
\begin{equation}
T_{ent} \sim 8\pi \alpha_0
\frac{ \bar{w} (4\bar{w}^2-w_B^2) }{(w_0^2-w_A^2)^2}~.
\label{eq-entangle}
\end{equation}
This is the main technical result of this paper.
At this time scale, the initial pure state of oscillator $A$ becomes a mixed state.
The unitarity for this oscillator alone is lost.
Recall that a coherent state has the same uncertainty as the ground state,
\begin{equation}
\langle \alpha_0 | \Delta X_B |\alpha_0\rangle = \sqrt{\frac{2}{w_B}}~.
\end{equation}
We see that $\alpha_0 = \langle X_B\rangle/\langle \Delta X_B\rangle$ is a good parameter to quantify how ``classical'' the oscillator $B$ is.
This of course makes sense.
The more ``classical'' the background is, the longer can oscillator $A$ stays unitary on its own.
However, our point here is that from the semi-classical point of view, the parameter $\alpha_0$ is an extra free parameter.
All values of $\alpha_0$ basically leads to the same semi-classical model.
Thus, there is no way, from the semi-classical model alone, to foresee this loss of unitarity.
\subsection{The need of numerical confirmation}
Although Eq.~(\ref{eq-entangle}) seems to be a very reasonable result, the derivation in the previous section cannot be used as a rigorous proof.
Non-degenerate perturbation theory requires the condition that $\Delta E_{mn}$ is small compared to the unperturbed gaps of eigen-energies.
We can see that such requirement is not satisfied if we take a closer look at Eq.~(\ref{eq-DeltaE}).
For any pair of fixed $(m,n)$, $\Delta E_{mn}$ does decrease with $\epsilon^2\propto\alpha_0^{-2}$.
However, we should recall that the relevant values of $n$ also change with $\alpha_0$.
In fact, the expectation value of energy level of a coherent state is proportional to $\alpha_0^2$.
Such dependence exactly cancels the $\epsilon$ suppression.
Thus for all relevant eigenstates $(m,n)$ in this calculation, $\Delta E_{mn}$ is comparable to the gaps of $E^{(0)}_{mn}$.
Consequently, the perturbative expansion of eigenstates in Eq.~(\ref{eq-EigenStateCor}) is also questionable.
For a smaller value of $n$, the non-degenerate perturbation theory is justified.
But as we increase to $n\sim\alpha_0^2$, it starts to break down.
In order to get the exact answer, we need degenerate perturbation theory.
Namely, we have to diagonalize the Hamiltonian without assuming it as a small perturbation from the unperturbed one.
We will do that numerically in the next section.
Here we will first point out that the results agree with Eq.~(\ref{eq-entangle}), and there is a very good reason.
If we trace back the derivation to Eq.~(\ref{eq-phase}), we can see that our conclusion did not care about the absolute correction to the energy $\Delta E_{mn}$.
It cares about the difference between two of such corrections, namely $(\Delta E_{mn_1}-\Delta E_{mn_2})$, with $|n_1-n_2|\sim\alpha_0$.
This value is small comparing to the energy gaps.
Since it is the fundamental reason behind our physical conclusion, it is not too surprising that the answer is correct.
\footnote{
Although, it is very tempting to look for the exact analytical proof for that.
We will leave that to future work.}
\section{Numerical Method}
\label{sec-numeric}
In this section, we will show two examples in which all the physical parameters are chosen to be some numerical values.
We can then directly diagonalize the Hamiltonian in Eq.~(\ref{eq-HAB}) by Mathematica.
Of course, the actual Hilbert space is infinite-dimensional, so we will truncate it down to a finite size.
First of all, we will start with $m=0$ and $m=2$, and the frequencies are not close to resonance.
That means we do not expect higher eigenstates of oscillator $A$ to be populated significantly.
We will have a cutoff $m_{Max}$ at 6 or 8 and make sure that indeed the highest state has little influence on the result.
For oscillator $B$, we limit ourselves between $n_{Min} = (\alpha_0^2-\kappa\alpha_0)$ and $n_{Max}= (\alpha_0^2+\kappa\alpha_0)$.
For the results presented in this paper, we use $\kappa=8$ which we checked that a higher value no longer changes the outcome.
In this truncated Hilbert space, we diagonalize the Hamiltonian and replace Eq.~(\ref{eq-EigenStateCor}) by the actual transformation to the true eigenstates.
\begin{eqnarray}
|\psi_{pq}\rangle &=& \sum_{m,n} \Lambda_{pq}^{mn}|m\rangle_A|n\rangle_B ~, \\
H_{tot}|\psi_{mn}\rangle &=& E_{mn}|\psi_{mn}\rangle~.
\end{eqnarray}
Note that $|\psi_{mn}\rangle$ is no longer close to $|m\rangle|n\rangle$, but the total number of eigenstates does not change.
Namely, the first subscript of $\psi$ still runs through the range of $m$, and the second subscript still runs through the range of $n$.
The time evolution is also modified to
\begin{eqnarray}
|\psi(t)\rangle &=& \sum_{m,n} c_m e^{-\alpha_0^2/2} \frac{\alpha_0^n}{\sqrt{n!}}
\sum_{pq} (\Lambda^{-1})_{mn}^{pq} e^{-iE_{pq}t} |\psi_{pq}\rangle
\\ \nonumber
&=&\sum_{m,n} c_m e^{-\alpha_0^2/2} \frac{\alpha_0^n}{\sqrt{n!}}
\sum_{pq} (\Lambda^{-1})_{mn}^{pq} e^{-iE_{pq}t}
\sum_{r,s} \Lambda_{pq}^{rs} |r\rangle_A|s\rangle_B
\\ \nonumber
&=& \sum_r |r\rangle_A \sum_s
\bigg( \sum_{m,n}\sum_{p,q}c_m e^{-\alpha_0^2/2} \frac{\alpha_0^n}{\sqrt{n!}}
(\Lambda^{-1})_{mn}^{pq} e^{-iE_{pq}t} \Lambda_{pq}^{rs}\bigg)
|s\rangle_B~.
\end{eqnarray}
We then use this to repeat the calculation from Eq.~(\ref{eq-repeatStart}) to (\ref{eq-repeatEnd}).
\subsection{The Classical Limit}
\label{sec-CL}
In our first example, we will use a fixed semi-classical model with the following parameters:
$w_0=2$, $w_A=1$, $w_B=0.5$.
The only parameter we will change is $\alpha_0$.
Different values of $\alpha_0$ correspond to different quantum models which all have the same semi-classical approximation.
Eq.~(\ref{eq-entangle}) tells us that the larger $\alpha_0$ is, the longer can oscillator $A$ stay unitary on its own.
We numerically solve $\langle A_0|A_2\rangle$ as a function of time and plot it in Fig.\ref{fig-CL}.
Plugging the values of $w_0$, $w_A$ and $w_B$ to Eq.~(\ref{eq-entangle}), we expect that after
\begin{equation}
T_{ent} \sim 43\alpha_0~,
\end{equation}
this inner-product should approach zero,
and oscillator $A$ will be significantly entangled with oscillator $B$.
We present the results of two different values of $\alpha_0$, and it shows that such prediction is quite accurate.
The more ``classical'' oscillator $B$ is, the longer will oscillator $A$ remain unitary on its own.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.8]{decohere.pdf}
\caption{The value of $|\langle A_0|A_2\rangle|^2$ as a function of time, rescaled by $\alpha_0$.
The blue dots are for $\alpha_0=10$, and the orange dots for $\alpha_0=20$.
The other parameters used here are $w_0=2$, $w_A=1$, $w_B=(1/2)$.
}
\label{fig-CL}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The readers might notice that the spread of the curves in Fig.\ref{fig-CL} is different between two different values of $\alpha_0$, and seems to have a pattern.
Indeed, in Fig.\ref{fig-highRes} we plot in higher resolution and see that $|\langle A_0|A_2\rangle|^2$ does not follow a monotonic curve.
It has small oscillations at the same frequency as the amplitude of oscillator $B$.
Our next example will shed more light on that.
Here we will can see from Fig.\ref{fig-highRes} that the classical motion of oscillator $B$ is barely affected while oscillator $A$ loses its unitarity.
Showing that such loss of unitarity is an independent effect from classical back-reactions.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.85]{decohereOscillate.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.85]{XB.pdf}
\caption{
Left: The same function $|\langle A_0|A_2\rangle|^2$ for $\alpha_0=10$ in higher time-resolution.
Right: The value of $\langle X_B\rangle$ as a function of time.
}
\label{fig-highRes}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
One may wonder whether such loss of unitarity is permanent.
After all, the decreasing behaviour of $|\langle A_0|A_2\rangle|^2$ up to $t\sim T_{ent}$ could have been part of a sinusoidal function, which could come back to $1$ at $t\sim 2T_{ent}$.
In Fig.\ref{fig-long} we extend Fig.\ref{fig-highRes} to longer time to show that the value of $|\langle A_0|A_2\rangle|^2$ stays near zero thereafter.
It is worth noting that on this longer time scale, back-reaction to the motion of oscillator $B$ becomes significant.
That undermines the validity of our truncated Hilbert space in the numerical approach.
Nevertheless, both back-reaction and spreading out more in the Hilbert space are physical reasons to support even further loss of unitarity, instead of any miraculous restoration of unitarity.
Based on the analytical result, we expect the two oscillators to stay entangled as long as the complex terms in Eq.~(\ref{eq-repeatEnd}) have incoherent phases.
Therefore, they will only become unentangled when all the phases grow to multiples to $2\pi$.
That happens when $t\sim \alpha_0 T_{ent}$, which is basically the recurrence time of this system.
Thus we are confident to say that the unitarity of oscillator $A$ alone is irrevocably lost until the much longer time scale.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.85]{decohereLong.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.85]{XBLong.pdf}
\caption{
Left: The same function $|\langle A_0|A_2\rangle|^2$ for $\alpha_0=10$ for longer time.
Right: The value of $\langle X_B\rangle$ for longer time.
}
\label{fig-long}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The Adiabatic Limit}
\label{sec-AL}
In the previous section we have shown that a gedanken ``classical limit'' exists.
One can imagine a family of quantum models that correspond to the same semi-classical approximation, and they make the approximation better and better as we tune some variable.
That however, is not always the relevant answer to important question in practice.
In the case of QFT-CST, we usually assume that the semi-classical approximation is about one unique quantum theory of gravity.
The interesting physical question is applying such approximation to different semi-classical situations.
For example, while formulating the black hole information paradox, it is customary to take the ``large black hole'' limit.
In this limit, the geometry (classical background) changes much slower than the natural frequency of the QFT modes we are analyzing (Hawking radiation).
That is basically the adiabatic limit, in which the semi-classical background varies slowly, $w_B\ll \bar{w}$.
We will explore the behaviour in such limit in this section by reducing the value of $w_B$ further.
Interestingly, we cannot simply reduce $w_B$ while holding $\alpha_0$ fixed.
The total energy of oscillator $B$ is about $(w_B\alpha_0^2)$, which gets smaller with $w_B$ if $\alpha_0$ is fixed.
As the total energy in oscillator $B$ gets smaller, the back-reactions become more significant, which is not the situation we would like to analyze.
We would like to ensure that the classical background remains ignorant to back-reactions.
Therefore, we will hold the energy of oscillator $B$ constant as we reduce $w_B$.
That means $\alpha_0\propto w_B^{-1/2}$.
From the analytical results, we can see that Eq.~(\ref{eq-entangle}) stops depending explicitly on $w_B$ when it gets small.
There is still an implicit dependence through $\alpha_0$.
\begin{equation}
T_{ent} \propto \alpha_0 \propto w_B^{-1/2}~.
\end{equation}
This does get longer as $w_B$ decreases, but the relevant physical question is to compare it to the time scale in which the background changes in the semi-classical model.
For example, in order for the effective frequency of oscillator $A$ to go from $w_0$ to $w_A$, it takes time $\pi w_B^{-1}$.
In other words, the natural time scale of the change in classical background is $T_{background}\sim w_B^{-1}$.
When $w_B\rightarrow0$, we are guaranteed to have $T_{ent}\ll T_{background}$.
Thus {\bf the unitarity of oscillator $A$ alone is always lost in this adiabatic limit!}
\footnote{Note that this is related to the fact that we fixed the total energy in oscillator $B$ while taking the limit.
So it is an example that the loss of unitarity can happen, not a proof that it generically will happen.}
Fig.\ref{fig-adiabatic} shows the numerical result as we reduce $w_B$ to support this conclusion.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 1]{AdiaCompare.pdf}
\caption{The value of $|\langle A_0|A_2\rangle|^2$ as a function of time, rescaled by $\alpha_0$.
The blue dots are for $\alpha_0=20$ and $w_B=(1/4)$.
The orange dots are for $\alpha_0=40$ and $w_B=(1/16)$.
The other parameters used here are $w_0=2$, $w_A=1$.
}
\label{fig-adiabatic}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We can see that the overall decrease of $|\langle A_0|A_2\rangle|^2$ is the same as the irrevocable loss of unitarity as we shown in the previous section.
On top of that, the oscillating behaviour becomes more obvious and prominent.
We again plot it together with the amplitude of oscillator $B$ in Fig.\ref{fig-oscillate}.
Just like in our previous examples, the back-reaction has no visible effect on the classical motion of oscillator $B$, but $|\langle A_0|A_2\rangle|^2$ is clearly being modulated by $\langle X_B\rangle$.
We will provide the analytics explanation of such behaviour in the next section.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.85]{Adia40.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.85]{Adia40XB.pdf}
\caption{
Left: The same function $|\langle A_0|A_2\rangle|^2$ for $\alpha_0=40$ and $w_B=(1/16)$.
Right: The value of $\langle X_B\rangle$.
}
\label{fig-oscillate}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Revocable and Irrevocable Losses of Unitarity}
\label{sec-Losses}
In Fig.\ref{fig-highRes} and \ref{fig-oscillate}, we can clearly see that in addition to the long-term, irrevocable loss of unitarity, there is a short-term oscillation.
Such oscillation becomes more prominent in the adiabatic limit where $w_B\ll \bar{w}$.
When $\langle X_B \rangle$ evolves to furthest away from its initial value, the two oscillators get very entangled.
When $\langle X_B \rangle$ evolves back to the initial value, the two oscillators get less entangled.
It suggests that there is a different kind of unitarity loss that is periodic and revocable to a certain extent.
Here we will provide the analytical explanation of such phenomenon.
We will show that it is different and happens on top of the irrevocable loss.
Such phenomenon is easiest to address in a slightly different basis.
Previously, for oscillator $A$, we have been using a time-independent basis $|m\rangle$ which is the occupation-number basis for its mean frequency $\bar{w}$.
In the adiabatic limit, a time-dependent basis, $|m\rangle_{w(t)}$, according to the occupation number of its instantaneous frequency $w(t)$, is far more convenient.
That is because in the semi-classical model, no particles will be produced.
That means the occupation number for the instantaneous frequency stays the same.
Strictly speaking, we will analyze a slightly different problem.
The particular initial state in the $\bar{w}$ basis,
\begin{equation}
|\phi_A(0)\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left( |0\rangle_{\bar{w}} + |2\rangle_{\bar{w}} \right)~,
\end{equation}
will have nonzero components in more than just $|0\rangle_{w(t)}$ and $|2\rangle_{w(t)}$.
Nevertheless, as long as $w_0$ and $w_A$ are not too different, it will still be dominated by low and even eigenstates.
So we can still monitor the entanglement by focusing on these two eigenstates.
In other words, we might have just chosen a different initial condition.
\begin{equation}
|\phi_A(0)\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left( |0\rangle_{w(0)} + |2\rangle_{w(0)} \right)~.
\end{equation}
This is similar enough to the previous initial condition, and such small change do not affect the main conclusion.
Other than the slightly different initial condition, there is nothing else we need to worry about.
Entanglement is an intrinsic property between the two oscillators, which will not change if we analyze the problem in a different basis.
The time evolution of the combined system, in this basis, can be written simply as
\begin{eqnarray}
|\psi(t)\rangle_{AB} &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}
\left( |0\rangle_{w(t)}|A_0(t)\rangle_B +|2\rangle_{w(t)}|A_2(t)\rangle_B \right)~.
\end{eqnarray}
$|A_0\rangle$ and $|A_2\rangle$ started as the same coherent state.
\begin{equation}
|A_0(0)\rangle = |A_2(0)\rangle = |\alpha_0\rangle \equiv
e^{-\alpha_0^2/2} \sum_{n\sim(\alpha_0^2-\alpha)}^{n\sim (\alpha_0^2+\alpha)}
\frac{\alpha_0^n}{\sqrt{n!}}|n\rangle_B~.
\label{eq-range}
\end{equation}
The question is how $\langle A_0|A_2\rangle$ evolves with time afterward.
Note that we deliberately show the effective range on the summation of $n$.
A coherent state $\alpha_0$ has the energy expectation value $E \sim w_B\alpha_0^2$ because the effective range enters at $n\sim\alpha_0^2$.
It has an energy uncertain $\Delta E \sim w_B\alpha_0$ because it is dominantly the superposition of energy eigenstates within a range $\Delta n\sim\alpha_0$.
Both the total energy and the total energy uncertainty are conserved quantities.
The state of $A$, $|n\rangle_{w(t)}$, has a time-dependent energy but no energy uncertainty.
That means without knowing other details of $|A_n(t)\rangle_B$, we know that it must retain the same energy uncertainty from the beginning, but has an opposite time-dependence in the mean energy to compensate the change in $A$.
In other words, when $w(t)$ evolves from $w_0$ to $w_A$, the corresponding state in $B$ has to be made from eigenstates in a shifted range of the same size.
\begin{equation}
|A_m(\pi w_B^{-1})\rangle_B = \sum_{n\sim[\alpha_0^2-\alpha_0 + mw_B^{-1}(w_0-w_A)]}^
{n\sim[\alpha_0^2 + \alpha_0 + mw_B^{-1}(w_0-w_A)]}
c_{mn} |n\rangle_B~.
\label{eq-rangeshift}
\end{equation}
Thus, if $w_B^{-1}(w_0-w_A) > \alpha_0$, we must have $\langle A_0(\pi w_B^{-1})|A_2(\pi w_B^{-1})\rangle\sim0$, since they do not overlap in this basis.
This is exactly the effect of ``energy carries information'' as discussed in \cite{IlgYan14}.
We do not even need to consider the phases of $c_{mn}$ to see that the two states will become orthogonal.
Thus, in addition to calculating the phases as we did earlier, this is an independent reason why the two oscillators can become entangled.
When $t=2\pi w_B^{-1}$, $w(t)$ goes back to the initial value $w_0$, and whether these two states are orthogonal follows our calculation of phases in Sec.\ref{sec-ndpt}.
If the phases are still coherent, then the two oscillators again become unentangled.
The unitarity was only temporarily lost and is revocable
\footnote{This is very similar to the situation in the Stern-Gerlach experiment that we split and then merge the two jets of particles.}.
However, after a longer time, the effect that decoheres the phases kicks in, and the unitarity of individual oscillators will be irrevocably lost.
In Fig.\ref{fig-states}, we drawn a cartoon to visualize the difference between revocable and irrevocable losses.
We represent the state of oscillator $B$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq-range}) and (\ref{eq-rangeshift}) as pictures of projections into the energy-eigenstate-basis.
We can see that these two types of losses are indeed independent and different effects.
It is easy to imagine that the same picture is not limited to our example.
Instead of the energy-eigenstate-basis, one can choose any other basis and apply this picture to all semi-classical approximations.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale = 0.5]{states.pdf}
\caption{
A cartoon for how the state of the classical background (oscillator $B$) evolves with time.
Its state is represented by the projections into energy-eigenstate-basis (grey bars).
It always stays as a very ``classical'' state, with energy uncertainty much less than the actual energy, $\Delta E \ll E$.
The energy shifts from back-reactions, $|E-E_1|$ and $|E-E_2|$, are both also much less than $E$.
However, if $|E_1-E_2|\gtrsim\Delta E$, clearly the two states become orthogonal, and the unitarity for the quantum subsystem (oscillator $A$) is secretly lost.
Even if $|E_1-E_2|\ll\Delta E$, the phases (heights and signs of the grey bars) can decohere, which will also make the two states orthogonal and destroy the subsystem unitarity.
}
\label{fig-states}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We can see that in our first example in Sec.\ref{sec-CL}, as we increase $\alpha_0$, the uncertainty in energy also increases, thus the energy shift cannot lead to the revocable loss of unitarity.
In our second example in Sec.\ref{sec-AL}, we fixed the total energy in oscillator $B$, $E_B\sim w_B \alpha_0^2$.
That reduces the energy uncertainty, $\Delta E_B \sim w_B\alpha_0 $, which makes the revocable loss of unitarity more prominent.
At the same time, decreasing $w_B$ also delays the revocable loss.
Toward the adiabatic limit, we will have $w_B^{-1}>T_{end}$ sooner or later.
The irrevocable loss will not only occur before the revocable loss, it will occur even before any finite change in the effective frequency.
Therefore, the irrevocable loss can happen without any semi-classical back-reaction.
\section{Summary and Discussion}
\label{sec-dis}
In this paper, we provided simple examples to demonstrate that unitarity in semi-classical approximations can be lost without strong back-reactions.
We derived the critical time scale at which this secret loss of unitarity happens.
We numerically demonstrated two types of unitarity loss, and provided clear physical explanations for both.
The first type is revocable, associated with energy change, and it was discussed earlier in \cite{IlgYan14}.
The second type is irrevocable until the quantum recurrence time, and it is associated with the phase coherence of the semi-classical background.
Our result suggests that extra caution is required while invoking unitarity in semi-classical approximations.
Ideally, every semi-classical approximation should come with a consistency check to see whether its apparent unitarity is valid.
Our example shows that such consistency check may have to go beyond the semi-classical approximation itself, since we needed to explicitly use the underlying quantum theory.
The revocable loss is somewhat within the scope of the semi-classical approximation, since we are simply comparing energy shifts to energy uncertainty.
The energy shifts in Eq.~(\ref{eq-rangeshift}) and Fig.\ref{fig-states} can be calculated by back-reaction.
The energy uncertainty is intrinsically quantum, but we may also picture it as a classical quantity.
At the very least, we can imagine that it has a fixed (although unknown) value.
Thus if the energy shifts from the back-reaction goes to zero, we are guaranteed to have no unitarity loss of the revocable type.
This is the trick Feynman used his Lectures to explain the double-slit interference experiment
\footnote{See \cite{BakKod17} for a quick review.}.
However, the irrevocable type of unitarity loss is about quantum phases, which is completely outside the scope of semi-classical approximations.
Unfortunately, in practice, when we use semi-classical approximations, we often do not know too much about the underlying quantum theory.
For example, in QFT-CST, we do not know the exact theory of quantum gravity.
In particular, we do not always know the quantum uncertainty of a given classical quantity, for example the curvature.
As we have demonstrated in the first example, a larger quantum uncertainty means a smaller value of $\alpha_0$, which leads to a loss of unitarity sooner.
Therefore, we should really be much more careful while invoking unitarity in QFT-CST.
Our result is only the first step toward that.
We have emphasized the correlation between the uncertainty of the background, $\Delta X_B$, and the rate of losing unitarity.
Strictly speaking, our model does not allow us to tune $\Delta X_B$ independently from $m_B$.
A few other explicit examples, such as in \cite{IlgYan14} and Feynman's Lecture, have also suggested that the uncertainty in the coupling term being directly responsible for entanglement.
Thus we think our interpretation is on the right track.
Nevertheless, the relation between $m_B$ and the loss of unitarity might still give us some new insights.
Recall that in quantum field theory, the oscillator mass of a momentum mode is actually the total integrated volume.
Such quantity depends on the IR regulator, which is not only hidden from the semi-classical point of view, but also a tricky topic from the quantum perspective.
It might suggest a connection between unitarity loss and the recent developments in the IR sector of field theory, such as soft theorems and asymptotic symmetries \cite{HeLys14,HawPer16}.
\acknowledgments
We thank Robert Jefferson, Jess Riedel, Lee Smolin, Bill Unruh, and the anonymous PRD referee for discussions.
This work is supported by the Canadian Government through the Canadian Institute for Advance Research and Industry Canada, and by Province of Ontario through the Ministry of Research and Innovation.
\bibliographystyle{utcaps}
|
\section{Introduction}
$\Lambda$ binding energies $B_\Lambda$ are basic quantities
in $\Lambda$ hypernuclei.
In 1950's the values of $B_\Lambda$ were extracted from
$\Lambda$ hypernuclei with mass $A<16$ observed in emulsion.
After 1980's, medium and heavy $\Lambda$ hypernuclei have been
produced by counter experiments such as $(\pi^+,K^+)$ reactions.
Recently accurate data of $B_\Lambda$ values in ground and excited states
of hypernuclei have been obtained by $\gamma$-ray observations and
$(e,e'K^+)$ reactions.
On the other hand, theoretical baryon-baryon interaction models have
been developed~\cite{NSC89,NSC97,ESC04,ESC08,Hol89,Reu94,Fuji07},
where $\Lambda\!N$-$\Sigma\!N$ coupling terms have been included in order to
reproduce values of $\Lambda$ single particle potentials $U_\Lambda$ values
in nuclear matter more or less realistically.
Because hyperon($Y$)-nucleon($N$) scattering data are extremely limited,
there remain remarkable ambiguities in $Y\!N$ interaction models:
Values of $U_\Lambda$ for various interaction models are substantially
different from each other.
The $Y\!N$ interactions are related intimately to the recent topic
in neutron-stars. The large observed masses of
$2M_{\odot}$~\cite{Demorest10,Antoniadis13} give a severe condition
for the stiffness of equation of state (EoS) of neutron-star matter.
The stiff EoS giving the maximum mass of $2M_{\odot}$ can be derived
from the existence of strong three-nucleon repulsion (TNR) in the
high-density region. However, the hyperon ($Y$) mixing in neutron-star
matter brings about the remarkable softening of the EoS, which
cancels the TNR effect for the maximum mass~\cite{Baldo00,Vidana00,NYT}.
This problem is known as the ``Hyperon puzzle". It is considered that
this puzzle can be solved if strong repulsions exist not only in $N\!N\!N$
cannels but also in $Y\!N\!N$ and $Y\!Y\!N$ channels~\cite{NYT}.
Recently, there have been reported the trials to extract the $\Lambda\!N\!N$
repulsions from the systematic data of $B_\Lambda$~\cite{YFYR14,Lonard14}.
In Refs.\cite{YFYR13,YFYR14}, the multi-pomeron exchange potential (MPP)
was added to the two-body baryon-baryon interaction $V_{BB}$
together with the phenomenological three-body attraction (TBA).
Then, the parameters included in MPP and TBA were determined so as to reproduce
the angular distribution of $^{16}$O+$^{16}$O scattering at $E/A=70$ MeV and
the nuclear saturation property, where the MPP contributions were decisive to
reproduce the experimental angular distribution and brought about the stiff
EoS enough to give maximum masses over $2M_{\odot}$.
$V_{BB}$ gives the potentials in $NN$ and $Y\!N$ channels, and MPP is universal
in all baryon channels. The TBA parts in $Y\!N$ channels are determined
so as to reproduce hypernuclear data reasonably.
On the basis of this ($V_{BB}$+MPP+TBA) model, it was shown that
the EoS was still stiff enough to reproduce neutron stars with $2M_\odot$
in spite of substantial softening by hyperon mixing.
The aim of this work is to investigate the $\Lambda\!N$ sectors of
the $V_{BB}$+MPP+TBA model, especially the many-body effects (MBE) given
by MPP+TBA parts, through structure calculations of $\Lambda$ hypernuclei
within the framework of the antisymmetrized molecular dynamics for hypernuclei (HyperAMD).
When we determine the MPP+TBA part so as to reproduce the experimental
values of $B_\Lambda$, it is evident that this part is dependent on
the interaction model for $V_{BB}$. In other words, it is indispensable that
reliable interaction models should be used for $V_{BB}$ in order to investigate MBE.
We start from the Nijmegen interaction models for $V_{BB}$, being reliable enough to
extract MBE in spite of remained ambiguity for reproducing values of $B_\Lambda$.
In Refs.\cite{Lonard14,Lonard15}, the strengths of $\Lambda\!N\!N$ forces
were determined by the fitting procedure to the data of $B_\Lambda$.
Their $\Lambda\!N\!N$ repulsion in the best fitting case seems to be
abnormally strong. The reason seems to be because they start from the
two-body $\Lambda\!N$ interaction with no $\Lambda\!N$-$\Sigma\!N$ term,
giving an overbinding value of $U_\Lambda$.
In our case, the $\Lambda\!N$-$\Sigma\!N$ coupling terms are included
in the Nijmegen models so that their strengths are determined to
reproduce physical observables through channel-coupling effects to
$\Lambda\!N$-$\Lambda\!N$ diagonal channels.
Then, there remains a rather small room for MBE around normal-density region,
where the MPP and TBA contributions are cancelled substantially with each other.
In our previous work~ \cite{IYR16}, referred to I, the experimental values of
$B_\Lambda$ have been reproduced systematically by the HyperAMD calculations using
a special Nijmegen model having only a very small room for MBE.
In Ref.~\cite{IYR16}, even in this case it was demonstrated that the small MBE works
to improve the fitting of $B_\Lambda$ values to experimental data.
In this work, we show that they appear more clearly in the case of using
the updated versions of Nijmegen extended-soft core (ESC) models.
This paper is organized as follows.
In the next section, the various versions of the Nijmegen models and MBE (MPP+TBA)
are explained, and the $\Lambda\!N$ $G$-matrix calculations are performed.
Different features of interaction models are discussed by showing $U_\Lambda$
values in nuclear matter.
In Sec. III, the detailed analysis for $\Lambda$ hypernuclei with $9 \le A \le 59$
are performed on the basis of HyperAMD with use of $G$-matrix interactions including MBE.
It is discussed what feature of the two-body interaction allows the existence of
strong repulsion suggested by the stiff EoS of neutron stars.
Section V summarizes this paper.
\section{$U_\Lambda$ in nuclear matter}
\label{SecII}
\subsection{Nijmegen interaction models}
The meson-theoretical models for $Y\!N$ interactions
have been developed continuously by the Nijmegen group.
In the earlier stage, they developed the hard-core models~\cite{NDF}
(NHC-D and -F) and the soft-core model (NSC89)~\cite{NSC89}.
After that, the trial started to take into account the $G$-matrix results
in the modeling of $Y\!N$ interactions.
As the first outcome of this approach, the NSC97 models~\cite{NSC97}
were proposed, where the six versions a$\sim$f were designed so as
to be of different strengths of the $\Lambda\!N$ spin-spin parts.
Then, the observed splitting energies of spin-doublet states
in $\Lambda$ hypernuclei suggested that the spin-spin strengths
of NSC97e and NSC07f were in a reasonable region.
Epoch-making development of the Nijmegen models
was accomplished by the ESC models,
in which two-meson and meson-pair exchanges are taken into account
explicitly. In the one-boson exchange (OBE) models these effects are
implicitly and roughly described by exchanges of `effective mesons'.
After some trial versions, there appeared the specific versions
ESC04a/b/c/d~\cite{ESC04}, features of which were very different
from those of the OBE models especially in $S=-2$ channels.
However, there remain some serious problems in NSC97 and ESC04 models.
The first is that the derived values of $\Lambda$ spin-orbit
splitting energies are too large in comparison with
the experimental values. The second is that the derived
$\Sigma$-nucleus potentials $U_\Sigma$ are attractive, whereas
the experimental values are indicated to be repulsive.
Furthermore, the $\Xi\!N$ interactions seem to be unreliable:
The $U_\Xi$ values derived from the NSC97 (ESC04a/b) models
are strongly (weakly) repulsive. Those for ESC04c/d are
attractive, but their partial-wave contributions
seem to be rather problematic.
These problems have been further investigated in ESC08a/b/c~\cite{ESC08} where the treatments for axial-vector and pair terms are improved, and the effects of the quark Pauli-forbidden states in the repulsive-core representation are taken into account. However, in these models the $\Xi N$ cross sections are too large. At present the possibility is investigated to replace in $U_{\Xi}$ part of the two-body attraction by a three-body force contribution.
This trial to improve the $\Xi N$ part does not affect the $NN$ and $YN(S=-1)$ parts.
Here, in order to investigate sizes of MBE needed for different interaction models,
we pick up ESC08a/b/c, ESC04a and NSC97e/f among the various the Nijmgen models.
In Ref.~\cite{IYR16}, we used ESC08c in an early stage of parameter fitting:
This version denoted as ESC08c(2012)~\cite{ESC2012}, and the recent version
as ESC08c(2014)~\cite{ESC08c1,ESC08c2,ESC08c3}. Hereafter, ESC08c(2012) and
ESC08c(2014) are denoted simply as ESC12 and ESC14, respectively.
These two versions of ESC08c are used in this work
mainly
Very recently, there is given the latest version ESC08c(2016) \cite{ESC16}, ESC16,
though it is not used in this work.
The reason why we pick up ESC04a (NSC97e/f) among ESC04a/b/c/d (NSC97a/b/c/d/f)
is because ESC04b/c/d give more attractive values of $U_\Lambda$ than ESC04a, and
NSC97a/b/c are with unreasonable spin-spin parts, not giving binding
of $^3_\Lambda$H.
One of the ideas to avoid remarkable softening of neutron-star EoS by hyperon
mixing is to assume that the strong three-body repulsions work universally
for $Y\!N\!N$, $Y\!Y\!N$ $Y\!Y\!Y$ as well as for $N\!N\!N$ \cite{NYT}.
As a model of universal repulsions among three and four baryons,
we introduce the multi-pomeron exchange potential (MPP).
Additionally to MPP, the three-baryon attraction (TBA) is assumed
phenomenologically. MPP and TBA in nucleon channels are determined
so as to reproduce the experimental angular distributions of
$^{16}$O+$^{16}$O elastic scattering ($E/A$=70 MeV) and the nuclear
saturation property. In hyperonic channels, they should be taken
consistently with hypernuclear data:
For each interaction model $V_{BB}$, MPP and TBA parts are adjusted
so as to reproduce experimental data of $B_\Lambda$ as well as possible.
The specific form of MPP is given as the $N$-body local potential by
pomeron exchange $W^{(N)}({\bf x}_1, ..., {\bf x}_N)$ \cite{YFYR13,YFYR14}
and the effective two-body potential in a baryonic medium is obtained
by integrating over the coordinates ${\bf x}_3,..., {\bf x}_N$;
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
&& V_{MPP}^{(N)}({\bf x}_1,{\bf x}_2) \\
&& = \rho_{}^{N-2}
\int\!\! d^3\!x_3 ... \int\!\! d^3\!x_N\
W^{(N)}({\bf x}_1,{\bf x}_2, ..., {\bf x}_N)
\nonumber \\
&& =g_P^{(N)} g_P^N\frac{\rho^{N-2}}{{\cal M}^{3N-4}}\cdot
\left(\frac{m_P}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\right)^3
\exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}m_P^2 r_{12}^2\right).
\label{eq:2}
\end{eqnarray}
We assume that
the dominant mechanism is triple and quartic pomeron exchange.
The values of the two-body pomeron strength $g_P$ and
the pomeron mass $m_P$ are taken from the adopted ESC model.
A scale mass ${\cal M}$ is taken as a proton mass.
TBA is assumed as a density-dependent two-body interaction
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
&& V_{TBA}(r;\rho)\\
&& = V_{0}\, \exp(-(r/2.0)^2)\, \rho\,
\exp(-\eta \rho)\, (1+P_r)/2 \ ,
\label{eq:4}
\end{eqnarray}
$P_r$ being a space-exchange operator.
There are given the three sets with different strengths of
MPP \cite{YFYR13,YFYR14}. We consider the set MPa as a guidance in this work,
where the parameters are taken as
$g_P^{(3)}=2.34$, $g_P^{(4)}=30.0$, $V_0=-32.8$ and $\eta=3.5$.
Then, the most important is whether or not such a strongly repulsion
given by these values of $g_P^{(3)}$ and $g_P^{(4)}$ is allowable in
reproducing the mass dependence of $B_\Lambda$ values.
\subsection{$G$-matrix interaction}
\label{Sec:Gmat}
We start from the channel-coupled $G$-matrix equation
for the baryon pair $B_1 B_2$ in nuclear matter~\cite{Yam10},
where $B_1B_2 = \Lambda\!N$ and $\Sigma\!N$:
\begin{eqnarray}
G_{cc_0}=v_{cc_0} + \sum_{c'}
v_{cc'} {Q_{y'} \over \omega -\epsilon_{B'_1}-\epsilon_{B'_2} +\Delta_{yy'}}
G_{c' c_0} \ ,
\label{eq:GM1}
\end{eqnarray}
where $c$ denotes a $Y\!N$ relative state $(y, T, L, S, J)$ with $y=(B_1B_2)$.
$S$ and $T$ are spin and isospin quantum numbers, respectively.
Orbital and total angular momenta are denoted by $L$ and $J$,
respectively, with ${\bf J}={\bf L}+{\bf S}$.
Then, a two-particle state is represented as $^{2S+1}L_J$.
In Eq.~(\ref{eq:GM1}), $\omega$ gives the starting energy in
the channel $c_0$.
$\Delta_{yy'}= M_{B_1}+M_{B_2}-M_{B'_1}-M_{B'_2}$ denotes
the mass difference between two baryon channels.
The Pauli operator $Q_y$ acts on intermediate nucleon states
in a channel $y=(B_1B_2)=(\Lambda\!N$ and $\Sigma\!N$).
The continuous (CON) choice is adopted for intermediate
single particle potentials in the $G$-matrix equation.
The $G$-matrix equation~(\ref{eq:GM1}) is represented in the
coordinate space, whose solutions give rise to $G$-matrix elements.
The hyperon single particle (s.p.) energy $\epsilon_Y$
in nuclear matter is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon_Y(k_Y)={\hbar^2k_Y^2 \over 2M_Y} + U_Y(k_Y) \ ,
\label{eq:GM2}
\end{eqnarray}
where $k_Y$ is the hyperon momentum.
The potential energy $U_Y$ is obtained self-consistently
in terms of the $G$-matrix as
\begin{eqnarray}
&& U_Y(k_Y) =
\nonumber
\\
&& \sum_{|{\bf k}_N|} \langle {\bf k}_Y {\bf k}_N
\mid G_{YN}(\omega=\epsilon_Y+\epsilon_N) \mid
{\bf k}_Y {\bf k}_N \rangle
\label{eq:GM3}
\end{eqnarray}
In Table~\ref{Gmat-1}, we show the potential energies $U_\Lambda$
of a zero-momentum $\Lambda$ at normal density $\rho_0$
($k_F$=1.35 fm$^{-1}$). Their $S$- and $P$-state contributions
are given by $U_\Lambda(S)$ and $U_\Lambda(P)$, respectively.
They are calculated for adopted Nijmegen models.
It is noted that the $U_\Lambda$ values for ESC08a/b, ESC14 and ESC12 are
rather similar to each other, and those for NSC97e/f (ESC04a) are less (more)
attractive due to strongly repulsive (attractive) $P$-state contributions.
As is given in \cite{ESC16}, we have $U_\Lambda=-39.6$ MeV,
$U_\Lambda(S)=-38.8$ MeV and $U_\Lambda(P)=+0.7$ MeV for ESC16.
It's $S$-($P$-) contribution is slightly less attaractive (more repulsive)
than those for ESC14.
\begin{table}
\caption{$\Lambda$ potential energies $U_\Lambda$ [MeV] at normal density
for adopted interaction models. $U_\Lambda(S)$ and $U_\Lambda(P)$
are $S$- and $P$-state contributions, respectively, in unit of MeV.}
\label{Gmat-1}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
& $U_\Lambda$ & $U_\Lambda(S)$ & $U_\Lambda(P)$ \\
\hline
ESC08a & $-40.6$ & $-39.5$ & $+0.5$ \\
ESC08b & $-39.4$ & $-37.0$ & $-0.6$ \\
ESC14 & $-40.8$ & $-39.6$ & $+0.4$ \\
ESC12 & $-40.0$ & $-40.0$ & $+1.5$ \\
ESC04a & $-43.2$ & $-38.4$ & $-3.7$ \\
NSC97e & $-37.7$ & $-40.4$ & $+4.0$ \\
NSC97f & $-34.8$ & $-39.1$ & $+5.6$ \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{UL.eps}
\caption{\small \label{UL}
(Color online) $U_\Lambda$ as a function of $k_F$.
Solid, dashed, dotted and dot-dashed curves are for
ESC14, ESC12, ESC08a and ESC08b, respectively.
}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{ULs.eps}
\caption{\small \label{ULs}
(Color online) $S$-state contributions to $U_\Lambda$
as a function of $k_F$.
Also see the caption of Fig.\ref{UL}.
}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{ULp.eps}
\caption{\small \label{ULp}
(Color online) $P$-state contributions to $U_\Lambda$
as a function of $k_F$.
Also see the caption of Fig.\ref{UL}.
}
\end{figure}
In Fig.\ref{UL}, Fig.\ref{ULs} and Fig.\ref{ULp}, respectively,
$U_\Lambda$, $U_\Lambda(S)$ and $U_\Lambda(P)$ are drawn as a function
of $k_F$ in the cases of ESC08 models.
Here, solid, dashed, dotted and dot-dashed curves are for
ESC14, ESC12, ESC08a and ESC08b.
It is found that the curves for ESC14 and ESC08a are very similar
to each other, and the main difference among those for
ESC14, ESC08a, ESC12 and ESC08b is in the $P$-state contributions.
In Fig.\ref{ULp}, the important point is that the $P$-state contributions
for ESC14 and ESC08a are almost vanishing in the region of
$k_F=1.1 \sim 1.2$ fm$^{-1}$. This feature appears also in case of ESC16,
and means that the $P$-state contributions are small for $B_\Lambda$ values
in light hypernuclei. On the other hand, there appears the repulsive
contribution substantially in the case of ESC12.
As discussed later, the sizes of $P$-state contributions are related
to a room to take MBE effects into account.
For structure calculations of $\Lambda$ hypernuclei, we derive $k_F$-dependent
effective local potentials ${\cal G}(k_F;r)$, simulating $\Lambda\!N$ $G$-matrices.
They are parameterized in a three-range Gaussian form:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal G}(k_F,r)= \sum^3_{i=1}\, (a_i+b_i k_F +c_i k_F^2) \,
\exp {(-r^2/\beta_i^2)} \ .
\label{eq:GM7}
\end{eqnarray}
The parameters $(a_i, b_i, c_i)$ are determined so as to simulate
the calculated $G$-matrix for each $^{2S+1}L_J$ state.
The procedures to fit the parameters are given in Ref.~\cite{Yam10}.
The parameters for ${\cal G}(k_F,r)$ for ESC14 are given
in Table~\ref{Gmat-2} .
It should be noted that ${\cal G}(k_F,r)$ are adjusted so as to reproduce
exactly the values of $U_\Lambda$ in nuclear matter.
Contributions from $V_{MPP}^{(3)}$, $V_{MPP}^{(4)}$ and $V_{TBA}(r;\rho)$
are taken into account by modifying the second-range parts of ${\cal G}(k_F,r)$
by $\Delta {\cal G}(k_F,r)=(a+b k_F+c k_F^2) \exp -(r/\beta_2)^2$.
\begin{table
\caption{Parameters in
${\cal G}(k_F;r)= \sum_{i=1}^3 (a_i+b_i k_F+c_i k_F^2) \exp -(r/\beta_i)^2$
for ESC14. $a_i$ [MeV], $b_i$ [MeV$\cdot$fm], $c_i$ [MeV$\cdot$fm$^2$ ], and $\beta_i$ [fm] are given for each $i$.}
\label{Gmat-2}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{ccrrr}
& $\beta_i$ & 0.50 & 0.90 & 2.00 \\
\hline
& $a_i$ & $-$3434. & 396.0 & $-$1.708 \\
$^1E$ & $b_i$ & 6937. & $-$1057. & 0.0 \\
& $c_i$ & $-$2635. & 415.9 & 0.0 \\
\hline
& $a_i$ & $-$1933. & 195.4 & $-$1.295 \\
$^3E$ & $b_i$ & 4698. & $-$732.8 & 0.0 \\
& $c_i$ & $-$1974. & 330.1 & 0.0 \\
\hline
& $a_i$ & 206.1 & 67.89 & $-$.8292 \\
$^1O$ & $b_i$ & $-$30.52 & 34.11 & 0.0 \\
& $c_i$ & 16.23 & 2.471 & 0.0 \\
\hline
& $a_i$ & 2327. & $-$254.1 & $-$.9959 \\
$^3O$ & $b_i$ & $-$2361. & 202.6 & 0.0 \\
& $c_i$ & 854.3 & $-$43.71 & 0.0 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table
\caption{Parameters $a$ [MeV], $b$ [MeV$\cdot$fm], and $c$ [MeV$\cdot$fm$^2$] in
$\Delta {\cal G}(k_F;r)= (a+b k_F+c k_F^2) \exp -(r/\beta_2)^2$
with $\beta_2=0.9$ fm
in the case of $g_P^{(3)}=2.34$, $g_P^{(4)}=30.0$ and $V_0=-21.0$.
}
\label{Gmat-3}
\vskip 0.2cm
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{crrrr}
& $^1E$ & $^3E$ & $^1O$ & $^3O$ \\
\hline
$a$ & 20.71 & 19.16 & 26.31 & 24.95 \\
$b$ & $-$51.74 & $-$49.31 & $-$73.58 & $-$71.92 \\
$c$ & 28.84 & 27.30 & 64.01 & 66.73 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}
Here, $B_\Lambda$ values in finite systems are calculated by using
$\Lambda$-nucleus potentials in which $\Lambda\!N$ $G$-matrix ${\cal G}(k_F,r)$
interactions are folded into density distributions \cite{Yam10}.
Then, in order to treat $k_F$ values included in $G$-matrix interactions,
we use the averaged-density approximation (ADA), given as,
\begin{eqnarray}
k_F = \left( \frac{3\pi^2 \langle \rho \rangle}{2} \right)^{1/3},
\langle \rho \rangle = \int d^3r \rho_N(\textbf{r}) \rho_\Lambda(\textbf{r}),
\label{ADA}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\rho_N (\textbf{r})$ and $\rho_\Lambda (\textbf{r})$ represent
the densities of the nucleons and $\Lambda$ particle, respectively.
In the next section, as well as in Ref. \cite{IYR16}, the HyperAMD is used
for structure calculations of $\Lambda$ hypernuclei based on ADA.
For spherical-core systems, it is confirmed that the present $G$-matrix
folding model and the HyperAMD give rise to similar results with each other.
Now, MPP and TBA parts are determined so that the experimental values
of $B_\Lambda$ are reproduced by calculations with the
$G$-matrix folding model and the HyperAMD.
In the cases of ESC08a/b and ESC14, the experimental data can be
reproduced well by varying only $V_{0}$ in TBA for values of
$g_P^{(3)}=2.34$ and $g_P^{(4)}=30.0$ in the MPa set, being fixed
to assure the stiffness of the neutron-star matter.
In Table~\ref{Gmat-3}, The parameters in $\Delta {\cal G}(k_F,r)$ are
given in the case of $g_P^{(3)}=2.34$, $g_P^{(4)}=30.0$ and $V_0=-21.0$,
being adequate for ESC14.
The parameters in $\Delta {\cal G}(k_F,r)$ for ESC12 are given
in Ref. \cite{IYR16}.
In the cases of ESC12 and NSC97e/f, it is needed to take
far smaller values of $g_P^{(3)}$ and $g_P^{(4)}$ for good fitting.
In the case of ESC04a, we obtain no reasonable set of
$g_P^{(3)}$, $g_P^{(4)}$ and $V_{0}$, which indicates that
the ESC04 models are inadequate to find reasonable MBE.
Table \ref{Gmat-4} gives determined values of
$g_P^{(3)}$, $g_P^{(4)}$ and $V_{0}$ and calculated values of
$\Delta B_\Lambda=
B_\Lambda(^{89}_{\ \Lambda}$Y)$-B_\Lambda(^{16}_{\ \Lambda}$O)
and $B_\Lambda(^{89}_{\ \Lambda}$Y) by the $G$-matrix folding model
for each interaction model.
Here, the values of $\Delta B_\Lambda$ are used to demonstrate
roughly the mass dependence of $B_\Lambda$ values.
The values in parentheses are obtained without
the MPP+TBA part $\Delta {\cal G}(k_F,r)$.
It should be noted that only in the case of ESC12
the calculated values reproduces well the experimental values
of $\Delta B_\Lambda$ and $B_\Lambda(^{89}_\Lambda$Y)
without contributions of $\Delta {\cal G}(k_F,r)$.
As found in Table~\ref{Gmat-1}, the order of $P$-state repulsions $U_\Lambda(P)$
is NSC97f$>$NSC97e$>$ESC12. This order corresponds to that of the attractions
$V_0$ in Table~\ref{Gmat-4}, where the stronger repulsion is needed to be cancelled by
the stronger attraction.
\begin{table}
\caption{$\Delta B_\Lambda$ [MeV] defined as $\Delta B_\Lambda=B_\Lambda(^{89}_\Lambda$Y)$-B_\Lambda(^{16}_\Lambda$O).
The experimental values of $\Delta B_\Lambda$ and
$B_\Lambda(^{89}_\Lambda$Y) are 10.7 MeV and 23.7 MeV, respectively.
Values in parentheses are calculated without MPP+TBA parts.
}
\label{Gmat-4}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{lccccc}
& $g_P^{(3)}$ & $g_P^{(4)}$ & $V_0$ & $\Delta B_\Lambda$
& $B_\Lambda(^{89}_\Lambda$Y) \\
\hline
ESC08a & 2.34 & 30.0 & $-21.0$ & 10.9 (13.3) & 24.2 (26.6) \\
ESC08b & 2.34 & 30.0 & $-29.0$ & 10.9 (12.3) & 24.1 (24.2) \\
ESC14 & 2.34 & 30.0 & $-21.0$ & 10.8 (13.2) & 24.0 (26.5) \\
ESC12 & 0.39 & 0.0 & $-5.0$ & 10.6 (10.8) & 23.9 (23.7) \\
NSC97e & 0.39 & 0.0 & $-8.0$ & 10.4 (10.1) & 24.0 (22.8) \\
NSC97f & 0.0 & 0.0 & $-13.0$ & 10.3 (8.7) & 23.8 (20.2) \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\caption{$\Delta B_\Lambda$ and $B_\Lambda(^{89}_\Lambda$Y) for ESC14 and ESC12.
Values in (a) are calculated with MPP+TBA, and values in
(b) and (c) are calculated only with MPP and TBA, respectively.
}
\label{Gmat-5}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
& $\Delta B_\Lambda$ & $B_\Lambda(^{89}_\Lambda$Y) \\
\hline
ESC14 & & \\
(a) MPP+TBA & 10.8 & 24.0 \\
(b) MPP & 7.9 & 17.9 \\
(c) TBA & 16.1 & 33.4 \\
\hline
ESC12 & & \\
(a) MPP+TBA & 10.6 & 23.9 \\
(b) MPP & 10.0 & 22.3 \\
(c) TBA & 11.4 & 25.2 \\
\hline
\quad exp & 10.7 & 23.7 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}
Table \ref{Gmat-5} gives calculated values of
$\Delta B_\Lambda$ and $B_\Lambda(^{89}_{\ \Lambda}$Y)
for ESC14 and ESC12.
Values in (a) are calculated with MPP+TBA, being the same
ones in the Table \ref{Gmat-4}.
Values in (b) and (c) are calculated only with MPP and TBA,
respectively. In the case of ESC14, values of
$\Delta B_\Lambda$ and $B_\Lambda(^{89}_{\ \Lambda}$Y)
including only MPP (TBA) are far smaller (larger) than
those including MPP+TBA. Thus, we find that the reasonable
values for MPP+TBA are owing to substantial canceling
between MPP and TBA contributions.
On the other hand, both contributions of MPP and TBA are small.
From Figs.\ref{UL}, \ref{ULs}, and \ref{ULp},
some features can be found:
One is that the results for ESC14 and ESC08a are very similar
to each other. Their even-state parts give overbinding values
of $B_\Lambda$, where the odd-state parts are weak. Then, MBE
plays a role to lift them up to experimental values.
As shown in ref.\cite{ESC16}, this feature appears also
in the case of ESC16.
On the other hand, in the case of ESC12 the even-state parts
are more attractive than those of ESC14 and ESC08a, and the strongly
repulsive odd-state parts contribute to reproduce the $B_\Lambda$ values,
and there remains only a small room for MBE to improve fitting.
Then, it is very important that the odd-state contributions are
relatively smaller than the even-state ones in low-density region.
In the case of ESC12 the mass dependence of $B_\Lambda$ values,
being estimated roughly by $\Delta B_\Lambda$, can be reproduced well
owing to this feature of odd-state contributions.
In the left (right) side of Fig.\ref{Uden},
the $U_\Lambda$ curves are given for ESC14 (ESC12),
where solid (dashed) curves are with (without) the MPP+TBA
contributions. It is found that the contribution from the MPP+TBA part
in the ESC14 case is much larger than that in the ESC12 case.
The $k_F$ dependence of $U_\Lambda$ is (not) changed significantly
by MBE in the former (latter) case.
Dot-dashed (dotted) curves in these figures show $U_\Lambda$ values
only with MPP (TBA). In the case of ESC14, the solid curve with MPP+TBA
turns out to be obtained by substantial canceling between MPP and TBA contributions.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{Uden.eps}
\caption{\small \label{Uden}
(Color online) (a) $U_\Lambda$ curves with ESC14. Solid (dashed) curve shows $U_\Lambda$
with (without) the MPP+TBA contributions. Dot-dashed (dotted) curve shows
$U_\Lambda$ only with MPP (TBA).
(b) Same as (a), but for ESC12.
}
\end{figure}
As found in Fig.\ref{UL}, the $U_\Lambda$ curve for ESC08b is
similar to that for ESC12. However, the $U_\Lambda(S)$ values
for ESC08b are considerably less attractive than that for ESC12,
and $U_\Lambda(P)$ values for ESC08b (ESC12) are attractive
(strongly repulsive). Due to this feature of ESC08b, the $B_\Lambda$
values are of rather underbinding, and the experimental values
are reproduced by adding the large attractive contributions
from the MPP+TBA parts.
In the cases of NSC97e/f, the odd-state contributions are
more repulsive than those for ESC12 and there is
no room of strong-MPP contribution.
Thus, it should be noted that a room for MBE is dependent sensitively
on the odd-state part in the $\Lambda\!N$ interaction, which has
not yet been established experimentally in the present stage.
\section{Analysis of $B_\Lambda$ values based on HyperAMD}
In this Section, we discuss how the difference in $U_\Lambda$ of the $\Lambda\!N$
two-body interactions appears and affects the MBE in the systematics of $B_\Lambda$.
As for the $V_{BB}$, we focus on ESC14 and ESC12 with MBE, because ESC08a/b are
very similar to ESC14 as demonstrated in the previous section, and ESC12 is
considerably different from ESC08a/b and ESC14 in odd states.
In this section, the calculations are performed with use of ESC14 and ESC12.
In our previous work \cite{IYR16}, based on ESC12, it was found that $B_\Lambda$ is sensitive to the structure of core nuclei, in particular core deformations. Furthermore, sophisticated treatment of $k_F$ related to core structure is also essential for quantitative discussion of $B_\Lambda$.
In the present work, we perform structure calculations based on ESC14 within the framework of HyperAMD based on ADA from $^{9}_\Lambda$Li up to $^{59}_\Lambda$Fe, being compared with the results
in Ref. \cite{IYR16}.
The $G$-matrix interaction for ESC16 in Ref.\cite{ESC16} is considered to
give the result similar to that for ESC14.
\subsection{Framework of HyperAMD}
The Hamiltonian used in this study is
\begin{align}
H = T_{N} + T_{\Lambda} - T_g + V_{NN} + V_{C} + V_{\Lambda N},
\end{align}
where $T_{N}, T_{\Lambda}$, and $T_{g}$ are the kinetic energies of the nucleons, $\Lambda$ particle, and center-of-mass motion, respectively.
$V_{NN}$ and $V_{C}$ are the effective nucleon-nucleon ($NN$) and Coulomb interactions, respectively. The Coulomb interaction $V_{C}$ is approximated by the sum of seven Gaussians. As for the $\Lambda\!N$ interaction $V_{\Lambda N}$, we use the $G$-matrix interaction discussed above.
In this study we use the Gogny D1S force \cite{Gogny1,Gogny2} as the effective $NN$ interaction $V_{NN}$.
In our previous work \cite{IYR16}, it was found that structure of the core nuclei affects the values of $B_\Lambda$.
This fact tells us that proper description of core structure is indispensable to extract information of $\Lambda N$ interaction from the $B_\Lambda$ values in a model approach.
Therefore, we need to use an appropriate effective $NN$ interaction in the HyperAMD calculation, which gives better agreement with the observed data in wide mass regions.
The Gogny D1S force is one of such effective interactions.
It is found that the AMD calculation with Gogny D1S force successfully describes core deformations and gives reasonable binding energies of the core nuclei within a few percent of deviation from the observed data.
The variational wave function of a single $\Lambda$ hypernucleus is described by the parity-projected wave function, $\Psi^\pm = \hat{P}^\pm \{ \mathcal{A} \{ \varphi_1,\ldots ,\varphi_A \} \otimes \varphi_\Lambda \}$, where
\begin{eqnarray}
\varphi_{i} \propto e^{ - \sum_{\sigma} \nu_\sigma \bigl(r_\sigma - Z_{i\sigma} \bigr)^2 } \otimes (u_i \chi_\uparrow + v_i \chi_\downarrow) \otimes (p \ {\rm or} \ n), \label{varphi}\\
\varphi_\Lambda \propto \sum_{m=1}^M c_m e^{- \sum_{\sigma} \nu_\sigma \bigl(r_\sigma - z_{m\sigma} \bigr)^2} \otimes (a_m \chi_\uparrow + b_m \chi_\downarrow).
\end{eqnarray}
Here the single-particle wave packet of a nucleon $\varphi_{i}$ is described by a single Gaussian, while that of $\Lambda$, $\varphi_\Lambda$, is represented by a superposition of Gaussian wave packets.
The variational parameters $\bm{Z}_i$, $\bm{z}_m$, $\nu_\sigma$, $u_i$, $v_i$, $a_m$, $b_m$, and $c_m$ are determined to minimize the total energy under the constraint on the nuclear quadrupole deformation $(\beta, \gamma)$, and the optimized wave function $\Psi^\pm (\beta, \gamma)$ is obtained for each given $(\beta, \gamma)$.
After the variation, we project out the eigenstate of the total angular momentum $J$ for each set of $(\beta,\gamma)$,
\begin{align}
\Psi^{J\pm}_{MK}(\beta,\gamma) &=
\frac{2J+1}{8\pi^2}\int d\Omega D^{J*}_{MK}(\Omega)R(\Omega) \Psi^\pm(\beta,\gamma).
\end{align}
The integrals over the three Euler angles $\Omega$ are performed numerically.
Then the wave functions with different values of $K$ and $(\beta,\gamma)$ are superposed (generator coordinate method; GCM):
\begin{align}
\Psi_n^{J\pm}&=\sum_p\sum_{K=-J}^{J} c_{nK} \Psi^{J\pm}_{MK}(\beta_p,\gamma_p),
\label{eq:fullGCM}
\end{align}
where $n$ represents quantum numbers other than total angular momentum and parity. The coefficients $c_{npK}$ are determined by solving the Griffin-Hill-Wheeler equation.
After the GCM calculation, we obtain both the ground and excited states of hypernuclei as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:Ex_C13L.eps}, where the present calculation nicely reproduces the observed spectra of $^{13}_\Lambda$C.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[keepaspectratio=true,width=86mm]{Ex_C13L.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Excitation spectra of $^{12}$C and $^{13}_\Lambda$C with (a) ESC12 + MBE and (b) ESC14 + MBE. Observed energy spectrum of $^{13}_\Lambda$C by the $\gamma$ ray spectroscopy experiments \cite{PRC65.034607(2002)} is also displayed.}
\label{fig:Ex_C13L.eps}
\end{figure}
In order to see the importance of describing the core deformation, we also perform the GCM calculation by using the intrinsic wave function with $\beta= 0.0$ only, namely,
\begin{align}
\Psi_n^{J\pm}&=\sum_{K=-J}^{J} c_{npK} \Psi^{J\pm}_{MK}(\beta=0.0),
\label{eq:spGCM}
\end{align}
and compare it with the usual GCM calculations given by Eq. (\ref{eq:fullGCM}), which was done in Ref. \cite{IYR16}.
The $B_\Lambda$ is calculated as the energy difference between the ground states of a hypernucleus ($^{A+1}_{\Lambda}Z $) and the core nucleus $(^{A}Z)$ as $B_\Lambda = E(^{A}Z; j^\pm) - E(^{A+1}_{\Lambda}Z; J^\pm)$, where $E(^{A}Z; j^\pm)$ and $ E(^{A+1}_{\Lambda}Z; J^\pm)$ are calculated by GCM.
We also calculate the squared overlap between the $\Psi^{J \pm}_{MK} ( \beta,\gamma)$ and GCM wave function $\Psi^{J \pm}_n$,
\begin{eqnarray}
O^{J\pm}_{MKn} ( \beta,\gamma ) = | \langle \Psi^{J \pm}_{MK} ( \beta,\gamma ) | \Psi^{J \pm}_n \rangle |^2,
\label{Overlap}
\end{eqnarray}
which is called the GCM overlap.
$O^{J\pm}_{MKn} ( \beta,\gamma )$ shows the contribution of $\Psi^{J \pm}_{MK} ( \beta,\gamma )$ to each state $J^\pm$, which is useful to estimate the deformation of each state. In this study, we regard $(\beta, \gamma)$ corresponding to the maximum value of the GCM overlap as the nuclear deformation of each state.
\subsection{Impact of MBE on mass dependence of $B_\Lambda$}
\label{BLmdgs}
\begin{table*}
\caption{
Comparison of $-B_\Lambda$ [MeV] with including MBE by MPP + TBA based on ESC12 and ESC14.
Values of $B_\Lambda$ by using ESC12 with/without MBE are taken from Ref. I \cite{IYR16}.
$k_F$ [fm$^{-1}$] value calculated under ADA are also listed together with $\langle \rho \rangle$ [fm$^{-3}$] defined by Eq. (\ref{ADA}).
Observed values $B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ are taken from Refs. \cite{NPB52.1(1973),NPA83.306(1979),PRL66.2585(1991),NPA547.369(1992),NPA639.93c(1998),PRC64.044302(2001),NPA754.3(2005),PPNP57.564(2006),PRC90.034320(2014),Gogami}.
Values of $B^{\rm exp}_\Lambda$ with dagger are explained in text.
$\chi^2$ values calculated with $B_\Lambda$ and $B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ for the hypernuclei with $(\ast)$ are also listed.
The ground state spin-parity $J^\pi$ calculated and observed are also shown.
}
\label{Tab:table1}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccccccc}
& & & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Based on ESC12 \cite{IYR16}} &
\multicolumn{4}{c}{Based on ESC14} \\
& & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$V_{BB}$ only} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{w/ MBE} &
\multicolumn{2}{c}{$V_{BB}$ only} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{w/ MBE} &
\multicolumn{2}{c}{Expt.} \\
\cline{4-5}\cline{6-7} \cline{8-9}\cline{10-11} \cline{12-13}
& $\langle \rho \rangle$ & $k_F$ & $J^\pi$ & $-B_\Lambda$ & $J^\pi$ & $-B_\Lambda$ & $J^\pi$ & $-B_\Lambda$ & $J^\pi$ & $-B_\Lambda$ & $J^\pi$ & $-B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ \\
\hline
$^{9}_\Lambda$Li$(\ast)$ & 0.072 & 1.02 & $5/2^+$ & $-7.9$ & $5/2^+$ & $-8.1$ & $5/2^+$ & $-7.6$ & $5/2^+$ & $-8.1$ & -- & $-8.50\pm0.12$\cite{NPA754.3(2005)}\\
$^{9}_\Lambda$Be & 0.060 & 0.96 & $1/2^+$ & $-7.9$ & $1/2^+$ & $-8.1$ & $1/2^+$ & $-7.7$ & $1/2^+$ & $-8.1$ & $1/2^+$ & $-6.71\pm0.04$\cite{NPB52.1(1973)}\\
$^{9}_\Lambda$B$(\ast)$ & 0.072 & 1.02 & $5/2^+$ & $-8.0$ & $5/2^+$ & $-8.2$ & $5/2^+$ & $-7.7$ & $5/2^+$ & $-8.2$ & -- & $-8.29\pm0.18$\cite{NPA754.3(2005)}\\
$^{10}_\Lambda$Be$(\ast)$ & 0.077 & 1.04 & $2^-$ & $-8.7$ & $2^-$ & $-9.0$ & $2^-$ & $-8.6$ & $2^-$ & $-9.0$ & -- & $-9.11\pm0.22$\cite{NPA547.369(1992)},\\
& & & & & & & & & & & & $-8.55\pm0.18$\cite{Gogami}\\
$^{10}_\Lambda$B$(\ast)$ & 0.075 & 1.04 & $2^-$ & $-8.9$ & $2^-$ & $-9.2$ & $2^-$ & $-8.7$ & $2^-$ & $-9.1$ & $1^-$\cite{NPA754.58c(2005),PRC41.1062(1990)} & $-8.89\pm0.12$\cite{NPB52.1(1973)}\\
$^{11}_\Lambda$B$(\ast)$ & 0.081 & 1.05 & $7/2^+$ & $-9.8$ & $7/2^+$ & $-10.1$ & $7/2^+$ & $-9.7$ & $7/2^+$ & $-10.0$ & $5/2^+$\cite{NPA242.461(1975)} & $-10.24\pm0.05$\cite{NPB52.1(1973)}\\
$^{12}_\Lambda$B$(\ast)$ & 0.083 & 1.07 & $2^-$ & $-11.0$ & $2^-$ & $-11.3$ & $2^-$ & $-11.0$ & $2^-$ & $-11.3$ & $1^-$\cite{NPA238.437(1975),NPA238.453(1975),NPA333.367(1980)} & $-11.37\pm0.06$\cite{NPB52.1(1973)},\\
& & & & & & & & & & & & $-11.38\pm0.02$\cite{PRC90.034320(2014)}\\
$^{12}_\Lambda$C$(\ast)$ & 0.086 & 1.08 & $2^-$ & $-10.7$ & $2^-$ & $-11.0$ & $2^-$ & $-10.8$ & $2^-$ & $-11.0$ & $1^-$\cite{NPA835.3(2010)} & $-10.76\pm0.19$\cite{NPA754.3(2005)}\\
$^{13}_\Lambda$C$(\ast)$ & 0.090 & 1.10 & $1/2^+$ & $-11.3$ & $1/2^+$ & $-11.6$ & $1/2^+$ & $-11.5$ & $1/2^+$ & $-11.7$ & $1/2^+$ & $-11.69\pm0.19$\cite{NPA547.369(1992)}\\
$^{14}_\Lambda$C$(\ast)$ & 0.093 & 1.11 & $0^-$ & $-12.4$ & $0^-$ & $-12.5$ & $0^-$ & $-12.4$ & $0^-$ & $-12.5$ & -- & $-12.17\pm0.33$\cite{NPA754.3(2005)}\\
$^{15}_\Lambda$N & 0.098 & 1.13 & $1/2^+$ & $-12.6$ & $1/2^+$ & $-12.9$ & $1/2^+$ & $-12.9$ & $1/2^+$ & $-12.9$ & $3/2^+$\cite{NPA754.58c(2005)} & $-13.59\pm0.15$\cite{NPB52.1(1973)}\\
$^{16}_\Lambda$O$(\ast)$ & 0.105 & 1.16 & $0^-$ & $-12.7$ & $0^-$ & $-13.0$ & $1^-$ & $-13.3$ & $1^-$ & $-13.0$ & $0^-$\cite{PRL93.232501(2004)} & $-12.96\pm0.05$\cite{NPA639.93c(1998)}$^\dag$\\
$^{19}_\Lambda$O & 0.110 & 1.18 & $1/2^+$ & $-14.0$ & $1/2^+$ & $-14.3$ & $1/2^+$ & $-14.8$ & $1/2^+$ & $-14.3$ & -- & --\\
$^{21}_\Lambda$Ne & 0.106 & 1.20 & $1/2^+$ & $-15.1$ & $1/2^+$ & $-15.4$ & $1/2^+$ & $-15.8$ & $1/2^+$ & $-15.5$ & -- & --\\
$^{25}_\Lambda$Mg & 0.116 & 1.23 & $1/2^+$ & $-15.8$ & $1/2^+$ & $-16.1$ & $1/2^+$ & $-17.0$ & $1/2^+$ & $-16.1$ & -- & --\\
$^{27}_\Lambda$Mg & 0.125 & 1.23 & $1/2^+$ & $-16.1$ & $1/2^+$ & $-16.3$ & $1/2^+$ & $-17.5$ & $1/2^+$ & $-16.2$ & -- & --\\
$^{28}_\Lambda$Si & 0.125 & 1.23 & $2^+$ & $-16.4$ & $2^+$ & $-16.6$ & $2^+$ & $-17.8$ & $2^+$ & $-16.6$ & -- & $-17.1\pm0.02$\cite{PPNP57.564(2006),PRC53.1210(1996)}$^\dag$\\
$^{32}_\Lambda$S$(\ast)$ & 0.130 & 1.24 & $0^+$ & $-17.4$ & $0^+$ & $-17.6$ & $1^+$ & $-19.4$ & $0^+$ & $-17.6$ & -- & $-18.0\pm0.5$\cite{NPA83.306(1979)}$^\dag$ \\
$^{40}_\Lambda$K & 0.136 & 1.26 & $1^+$ & $-19.2$ & $1^+$ & $-19.4$ & $1^+$ & $-21.5$ & $1^+$ & $-19.4$ & -- & --\\
$^{40}_\Lambda$Ca$(\ast)$ & 0.136 & 1.26 & $1^+$ & $-19.2$ & $1^+$ & $-19.4$ & $1^+$ & $-21.3$ & $1^+$ & $-19.3$ & -- & $-19.24\pm1.1$\cite{PRL66.2585(1991)}$^\dag$\\
$^{41}_\Lambda$Ca & 0.136 & 1.26 & $1/2^+$ & $-19.4$ & $1/2^+$ & $-19.6$ & $1/2^+$ & $-21.5$ & $1/2^+$ & $-19.5$ & -- & --\\
$^{48}_\Lambda$K & 0.141 & 1.27 & $1^+$ & $-20.1$ & $1^+$ & $-20.2$ & $1^+$ & $-22.6$ & $1^+$ & $-20.2$ & -- & --\\
$^{51}_\Lambda$V$(\ast)$ & 0.151 & 1.31 & $11/2^+$ & $-20.4$ & $11/2^+$ & $-20.4$ & $11/2^+$ & $-23.5$ & $11/2^+$ & $-20.3$ & -- & $-20.51\pm0.13$\cite{PRC64.044302(2001)}$^\dag$\\
$^{59}_\Lambda$Fe & 0.142 & 1.28 & $1/2^+$ & $-21.3$ & $1/2^+$ & $-21.4$ & $1/2^+$ & $-24.6$ & $1/2^+$ & $-21.7$ & -- & --\\
\hline
$\chi^2$ for $(\ast)$ & & & & 38.7 & & 3.61 & & 87.7 & &4.63 && \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table*}
On the basis of ESC14 and ESC12, we discuss the effects of MBE on $B_\Lambda$ values.
In Table \ref{Tab:table1}, the values of $B_\Lambda$ calculated with HyperAMD are summarized together with the experimental values of $B_\Lambda$ ($B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$).
It is noted that the values of $B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ with dagger are shifted deeper by 0.54 MeV from those reported in Refs. \cite{NPA83.306(1979),PRL66.2585(1991),NPA639.93c(1998),PRC64.044302(2001),PPNP57.564(2006)}, concerning the systematic difference of $B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ between the emulsion and $(\pi^+, K^+)$ (or $(K^-, \pi^-)$) experiments, which was pointed out by Ref. \cite{Gogami}.
In Table \ref{Tab:table1}, we also show the $\chi^2$ values calculated by using the experimental and theoretical values of $B_\Lambda$ for the hypernuclei with asterisk to see the agreement of each other.
As discussed in Ref. \cite{IYR16}, in cases of $^{9}_\Lambda$Be, $^{15}_\Lambda$N
and $^{28}_\Lambda$Si, the calculated values of $B_\Lambda$ deviate considerably from the
experimental values by the inherent reason for each system.
Therefore, we exclude these hypernuclei from the evaluation of the $\chi^2$ values.
Before the discussions on MBE, let us see the calculated values of $B_\Lambda$
without MBE ($V_{BB}$ only in Table \ref{Tab:table1}).
Comparing ESC14 with ESC12, it is seen that the $B_\Lambda$ for ESC12 without MBE
are rather close to the experimental data.
This is clearly seen in the $\chi^2$ values without MBE,
i.e. the $\chi^2$ value for ESC12 ($\chi^2 = 38.7$) is much smaller than that
for ESC14 ($\chi^2 = 87.7$).
However, this value for ESC12 is not extremely small, which indicates that there still exists
a room to improve the fitting by adding MBE.
In the case of ESC14, the calculated values of $B_\Lambda$ are deviated much from the observations.
In particular, in the medium-heavy hypernuclei, the $B_\Lambda$ values for ESC14 become larger than
those with ESC12, and overestimate the $B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ considerably.
For example, in $^{51}_\Lambda$V, the calculated value of $B_\Lambda$ for ESC14 is 23.5 MeV,
whereas $B_\Lambda = 20.4$ MeV for ESC12 (\textit{cf.} $B_\Lambda^{\rm exp} = 20.51 \pm 0.13$ MeV \cite{PRC64.044302(2001)}).
This is mainly due to the difference of the $P$-state interactions of ESC14 and ESC12.
In Fig. \ref{ULp} the $P$-state contribution for ESC14 is found to be far smaller than
that of ESC12, while the $S$-state contributions for ESC14 and ESC12 are similar to each other.
Then, the difference of the $P$-state contributions for ESC14 and ESC12 appears more clearly
in $B_\Lambda$ values of heavier hypernuclei than in those of lighter ones,
because $P$-state contributions are relatively small in light systems.
Next, let us discuss the MBE on the mass dependence of $B_\Lambda$.
From the analysis in Sec. \ref{SecII}, we use different parameter sets of MBE combined with ESC14 and ESC12, as shown in Table \ref{Gmat-4}.
In the case of ESC14, the MPP part of the MPa set ($g^{(3)}_{P} =2.34$ and $g^{(4)}_{P} = 30.0$) is used, which gives the stiff EoS of the neutron star matter.
In ESC12 with MBE, the parameters $g^{(3)}_{P}$, $g^{(4)}_{P}$ and $V_0$ are determined so as to reproduce the $B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ in $^{16}_\Lambda$O
without considering the stiffness of the EoS,
and show nice agreement with $B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ in the wide mass regions \cite{IYR16}.
As a result, the strength of the MBE part combined with ESC12 is much weaker than that with ESC14.
Hereafter, ESC14 (ESC12) combined with MBE is denoted as ESC14+MBE (ESC12+MBE).
In Table \ref{Tab:table1}, the values of $B_\Lambda$ calculated with ESC14+MBE are also summarized together with those by using ESC12+MBE taken from Ref. \cite{IYR16}.
It is found that the $B_\Lambda$ values for ESC14+MBE, as well as ESC12+MBE, reproduce
the observed data within about 200 keV in the $9 \le A \le 59$ regions except for $^{9}_\Lambda$Be,
$^{15}_\Lambda$N, and $^{28}_\Lambda$Si.
It is clearly seen that the $\chi^2$ values are reduced by including MBE ($\chi^2 = 4.63$ for ESC14+MBE and $\chi^2 = 3.61$ for ESC12+MBE), which means that the agreement of $B_\Lambda$ is improved significantly by including MBE.
Here, it has no meaning to discuss the difference in the two small $\chi^2$ values, because we did
not search these values exactly as minimum values for variation of the parameters included in MBE.
For the fine agreements of $B_\Lambda$, the MBE part plays an essential role, especially in ESC14+MBE, which is clearly seen in the comparison of $B_\Lambda$ between ESC14 and ESC14+MBE in Table \ref{Tab:table1}.
In the hypernuclei with $A \ge 16$, where the ESC14 causes overbinding of $B_\Lambda$, the MBE essentially acts as a repulsive force and shifts the $B_\Lambda$ to be close to the observed values. For example, in $^{51}_\Lambda$V, $B_\Lambda$ is shifted from 23.5 MeV to 20.3 MeV by adding MBE.
In the light hypernuclei, the MBE gives attraction.
In ESC14+MBE, the MPP repulsion acts strongly at high density or large $k_F$, which gives the stiff EoS of the neutron-star matter, and becomes weaker as $k_F$ decreases, while TBA remains at small $k_F$ regions. Thus, the MBE gives attraction in the light hypernuclei with smaller values of $k_F$.
In the case of ESC12, the MBE brings about the minor changes of $B_\Lambda$ as seen in Table \ref{Tab:table1}. This is because the MPP and TBA combined with ESC12 are much weaker than those with ESC14.
It is noted that the weak MPP in ESC12+MBE is inconsistent with the stiff EoS suggested by the massive neutron star.
It is also found that if the strong MPP included in ESC14+MBE
is combined with ESC12, the derived values of $B_\Lambda$ contradict the observed data.
Therefore, based on ESC12, there is no choice of MBE to satisfy both the observed data of $B_\Lambda$ and the stiff EoS of the neutron star matter.
This indicates that the strong repulsion suggested by the massive neutron star imposes a stringent constraint on the $\Lambda\!N$ two-body interaction models. From the results in Table \ref{Tab:table1}, we conclude that the ESC14 is one of the $\Lambda\!N$ interaction models which satisfies these conditions. As discussed in the previous section, ESC08a/b are similar to ESC14 on this point.
$P$-state interactions in ESC14 and ESC08a/b are not strongly repulsive differently from ESC12,
and do not play a role to reproduce the mass dependence of $B_\Lambda$ values. Namely, there
is a room for adding MBE with strong MPP repulsion owing to the weak $P$-state contribution.
In the light hypernuclei, as pointed out in Ref. \cite{IYR16}, it is also important to describe properly the core structure, especially deformations of the core nuclei, to reproduce $B_\Lambda$, because it can affect the $B_\Lambda$ through the $k_F$ dependence of the interaction.
In order to see the effects by core deformations, we compare the $B_\Lambda$ values calculated by performing the full-basis GCM (see Eq. (\ref{eq:fullGCM})) and spherical GCM (see Eq. (\ref{eq:spGCM})) calculations.
In Fig. \ref{fig:fig1.eps}, it is seen that $B_\Lambda$ calculated by the spherical GCM are shallower than those in the full-basis GCM calculation and deviated from $B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$, which is clearly seen in the $\chi^2$ values. In the spherical GCM calculation with ESC12+MBE, the $\chi^2$ is 171, whereas $\chi^2 = 4.63$ in the full-basis GCM calculation.
This is because spherical states make $k_F$ larger through the increase of $\langle \rho \rangle$ in Eq. (\ref{ADA}).
The difference of $B_\Lambda$ in Fig. \ref{fig:fig1.eps} is quite similar to the results with ESC12 in Ref. \cite{IYR16}.
In Tab. \ref{Tab:table1}, the spin and parity $J^\pi$ are also listed for the ground states of the hypernuclei together with those known by the experiments.
In case of the core nuclei having non-zero spin in the ground states, such as $^{11}$C and $^{10}$B, we naturally obtain the spin doublets in the corresponding hypernuclei, generated by coupling a $\Lambda$ particle with spin 1/2 to the ground states of the core nuclei.
For example, in $^{12}_\Lambda$C, we obtain the $(1^-, 2^-)$ doublet corresponding to the $^{11}$C ground-state ($3/2^-$).
In Tab. \ref{Tab:table1}, it is seen that the calculated ground-state is $J^\pi = 2^-$, which is different from the observation ($J=1^-$).
Similarly, in $^{11}_\Lambda$B, we obtain the $J^\pi = 7/2^+$ state as the ground state among the $(5/2^+, 7/2^+)$ doublet, whereas the $5/2^+$ state is the lowest in the experiment.
This discrepancy is attributed to the property of the $\Lambda N$ spin-dependent interaction, which was discussed for the series of the ESC08 interaction models in Ref. \cite{Yam10}.
In $^{12}_\Lambda$C, from the observed ground-state $1^-$, one can notice that the spin-singlet $\Lambda N$ interaction is slightly more attractive than the spin-triplet interaction.
In the present calculation, it is considered that the spin-triplet part of the $\Lambda N$ interaction is slightly strong.
Thus, the detailed properties of the spin dependence of the $\Lambda N$ interaction could affect the ordering of the ground-state doublet partners, though it has little influence on the $B_\Lambda$ curve.
Finally, we also comment on the energy change of the nuclear part by the addition of a $\Lambda$ particle, namely the rearrangement energy $\Delta E_N$.
Since $B_\Lambda$ is defined by the energy difference of the ground states between a hypernucleus and the core nucleus, it contains not only the $\Lambda$ single particle energy but also the energy changes of the core part, in which the former corresponds to the sum of the expectation values of $T_\Lambda$ and $V_{\Lambda\!N}$ and the latter is the $\Delta E_N$. Therefore, the rearrangement energy $\Delta E_N$ is defined as,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:rearr}
\Delta E_N &= \frac{\langle \Psi^{J \pm}_n | H_N | \Psi^{J \pm}_n \rangle}{\langle \Psi^{J \pm}_n | \Psi^{J \pm}_n \rangle} - E(^AZ;j^\pi),\\
H_N &= T_{N} + V_{NN} + V_{C},
\end{align}
where $\Psi^{J \pm}_n$ is the GCM wave function defined by Eq. (\ref{eq:fullGCM}).
In Table \ref{tab:EN}, we summarize $\Delta E_N$ together with the ground-state energies of the core nuclei for the several hypernuclei with the different mass regions. It is found that the rearrangements energies are in order of a few hundred keV, which are quite smaller compared with $B_\Lambda$. Furthermore, it is also seen that $\Delta E_N$ is reduced as mass number increases. This is because adding a $\Lambda$ particle cannot change the core nuclei significantly, if the core nucleus is large enough.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[keepaspectratio=true,width=86mm]{figBLmd.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) (a) Comparison of $B_\Lambda$ between full-basis GCM (solid) and spherical GCM (dashed) calculations. Open circles show observed data with mass numbers from $A=9$ up to $A=51$, which are taken from Refs. \cite{NPB52.1(1973),NPA83.306(1979),PRL66.2585(1991),NPA547.369(1992),NPA639.93c(1998),PRC64.044302(2001),NPA754.3(2005),PPNP57.564(2006),PRC90.034320(2014)}.
$B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ measured by $(\pi^+, K^+)$ and $(K^-, \pi^-)$ reactions are shifted by 0.54 MeV as explained in text. (b) Same as (a), but magnified in the $5 \le A \le 20$ region. }
\label{fig:fig1.eps}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\caption{
Rearrangement energies $\Delta E_N$ [MeV], defined by Eq. (\ref{eq:rearr}), calculated for the ground states $J^\pi$ of the hypernuclei with different mass regions by using ESC14+MBE. Calculated ($E_{\rm core}$) and observed ($E^{\rm exp}_{\rm core}$) energies of the ground states $J^\pi_{\rm core}$in the core nuclei are also listed in MeV.
}
\label{tab:EN}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{cccccc}
& $J^\pi$ & $\Delta E_N$ & $J^\pi_{\rm core}$ & $E_{\rm core}$ & $E_{\rm core}^{\rm exp}$\cite{CPC36.1287(2012)} \\
\hline
$^{9}_\Lambda$B & $5/2^+$ & 0.24 & $2^+$ & -41.5 & -37.7 \\
$^{13}_\Lambda$C & $1/2^+$ & 0.16 & $0^+$ & -92.8 & -92.2 \\
$^{28}_\Lambda$Si & $2^+$ & 0.14 & $5/2^+$ & -219.7 & -219.4 \\
$^{41}_\Lambda$Ca & $1/2^+$ & 0.03 & $0^+$ & -341.7 & -342.0 \\
$^{48}_\Lambda$K & $1^+$ & 0.03 & $1/2^+$ & -400.2 & -389.0 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{$B_\Lambda$ in $p$-states}
\label{Sec:BLmd-p}
\begin{table*}
\caption{Calculated (experimental) binding energy $B_\Lambda$ ($B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$) and excitation energy $E_x$ ($E_x^{\rm exp}$) for the $p$-states $J^\pi$ in MeV together with $\rho$ [fm$^{-3}$] and $k_F$ [fm$^{-1}$] calculated by Eqs. (\ref{ADA}).
$B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ with \dag\dag ($E_x^{\rm exp}$ with \dag\dag\dag) are calculated by using $E_x^{\rm exp}$ ($B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$) of the $p$-states and the $B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ values shown in Table \ref{Tab:table1}. }
\label{tab:p-states}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccccc}
& & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{ESC12+MBE} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{ESC14+MBE} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Exp.} \\
\cline{4-6} \cline{7-9} \cline{10-11}
& $\langle \rho \rangle$ & $k_F$ & $J^\pi$ & $-B_\Lambda$ & $E_x$ & $J^\pi$ & $-B_\Lambda$ & $E_x$ & $-B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ & $E_x^{\rm exp}$ \\
\hline
$^{12}_\Lambda$B & 0.069 & 0.92 & $3^+$ & $-2.4$ & 8.8 & $3^+$ & $-2.4$ & 8.9 & $-1.289 \pm 0.048$ \cite{PRC90.034320(2014)} & $10.24 \pm 0.05$ \cite{PRC90.034320(2014)} \\
$^{13}_\Lambda$C & 0.067 & 1.00 & $1/2^-$ & $-2.1$ & 9.5 & $1/2^-$ & $-2.4$ & 9.3 & $-0.9^{\dag\dag}$ & $10.830 \pm 0.087$ \cite{PRL86.4255(2001),PRC65.034607(2002)}\\
& & & & & & & & & $-1.96^{\dag\dag}$ & $9.73 \pm 0.14$ \cite{NPA639.93c(1998)} \\
$^{16}_\Lambda$O & 0.068 & 1.00 & $3^+$ & $-3.9$ & 9.1 & $3^+$ & $-4.0$ & 9.0 & $-2.39^{\dag\dag}$ & $10.57 \pm 0.06$ \cite{NPA639.93c(1998)} \\
$^{28}_\Lambda$Si & 0.101 & 1.14 & $3^-$ & $-8.0$ & 8.6 & $3^-$ & $-8.4$ & 8.2 & $-7.5 \pm 0.2$ \cite{PRC53.1210(1996)}$^\dag$ & $9.6^{\dag\dag\dag}$ \\
$^{51}_\Lambda$V & 0.124 & 1.22 & $11/2^-$ & $-12.7$ & 7.7 & $11/2^-$ & $-13.1$ & 7.2 & $-12.44 \pm 0.17$ \cite{PRC64.044302(2001)}$^\dag$ & 8.07$^{\dag\dag\dag}$ \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\caption{Same as Table \ref{tab:p-states} but with a correction of $k_F$ as $k'_F = ( 1 + \alpha)k_F$. }
\label{tab:p-states2}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccccc}
&& \multicolumn{4}{c}{ESC12+MBE} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{ESC14+MBE} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Exp.} \\
\cline{3-6} \cline{7-10} \cline{11-12}
& $\langle \rho \rangle$ & $k'_F$ & $J^\pi$ & $-B_\Lambda$ & $E_x$ & $k'_F$ & $J^\pi$ & $-B_\Lambda$ & $E_x$ & $-B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ & $E_x^{\rm exp}$ \\
\hline
&& \multicolumn{4}{c}{$\alpha = 0.070$} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{$\alpha = 0.070$} & & \\
$^{12}_\Lambda$B & 0.069 & 0.98 & $3^+$ & $-0.7$ & 10.6 & 0.98 & $3^+$ & $-0.8$ & 10.5 & $-1.289 \pm 0.048$ \cite{PRC90.034320(2014)} & $10.24 \pm 0.05$ \cite{PRC90.034320(2014)} \\
$^{13}_\Lambda$C & 0.067 & 1.07 & $1/2^-$ & $-0.9$ & 10.8 & 1.07 & $1/2^-$ & $-1.0$ & 10.7 & $-0.9^{\dag\dag}$ & $10.830 \pm 0.087$ \cite{PRL86.4255(2001),PRC65.034607(2002)}\\
& & & & & & & & & & $-1.96^{\dag\dag\dag}$ & $9.73 \pm 0.14$ \cite{NPA639.93c(1998)} \\
$^{16}_\Lambda$O & 0.068 & 1.07 & $0^+$ & $-2.2$ & 10.8 & 1.07 & $2^+$ & $-2.6$ & 10.4 & $-2.39^{\dag\dag}$ & $10.57 \pm 0.06$ \cite{NPA639.93c(1998)} \\
\\
&& \multicolumn{4}{c}{$\alpha = 0.020$} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{$\alpha = 0.025$} & & \\
$^{28}_\Lambda$Si & 0.101 & 1.17 & $3^-$ & $-7.4$ & 9.2 & 1.17 & $3^-$ & $-7.5$ & 9.1 & $-7.5 \pm 0.2$ \cite{PRC53.1210(1996)}$^{\dag}$ & 9.6$^{\dag\dag\dag}$ \\
\\
&& \multicolumn{4}{c}{$\alpha = 0.010$} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{$\alpha = 0.015$} & & \\
$^{51}_\Lambda$V & 0.124 & 1.24 & $11/2^-$ & $-12.3$ & 8.1 & 1.24 & $11/2^-$ & $-12.5$ & 7.8 & $-12.44 \pm 0.17$\cite{PRC64.044302(2001)}$^{\dag}$ & 8.07$^{\dag\dag\dag}$ \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table*}
Let us focus on excited $p$-states of hypernuclei,
in which the $\Lambda$ particle in $p$-orbit is bound to the ground state of the core nucleus.
In general, since the $\Lambda$ particle in $p_{1/2}$ and $p_{3/2}$ orbits can couple to the core nuclei, several $p$ states appear. In this paper, we focus on the lowest $p$ state in excitation energy for each hypernucleus.
In Sec. \ref{BLmdgs}, the HyperAMD calculation nicely reproduces the observed data of $B_\Lambda$ in the ground states of the hypernuclei using ESC12+MBE and ESC14+MBE by taking into account their structures, where the ADA treatment works well to obtain appropriate values of $k_F$ from the wave functions of the hypernuclei. In this section, we discuss the $B_\Lambda$ values in the $p$-states for the light ($^{12}_\Lambda$B, $^{13}_\Lambda$C, and $^{16}_\Lambda$O) and medium-heavy ($^{28}_\Lambda$Si and $^{51}_\Lambda$V) hypernuclei.
In these hypernuclei, the $p$-states were observed in various experiments. The $(\pi^+, K^+)$ reaction experiments show the peak structure corresponding to the $p$-states in $^{13}_\Lambda$C \cite{NPA639.93c(1998)}, $^{16}_\Lambda$O \cite{NPA639.93c(1998)}, $^{28}_\Lambda$Si \cite{PRC53.1210(1996)}, and $^{51}_\Lambda$V \cite{PRC64.044302(2001)}. In $^{13}_\Lambda$C, the excitation energy of the $p$-states was precisely measured by the $\gamma$-ray spectroscopy experiment \cite{PRL86.4255(2001),PRC65.034607(2002)}. Recently, in $^{12}_\Lambda$B, the $(e,e'K^+)$ reaction experiment was performed at Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility (JLab), which shows clear peaks regarded as the $p$-states with high resolution \cite{PRC90.034320(2014)}.
Table \ref{tab:p-states} shows the calculated values of $B_\Lambda$ and the excitation energies
$E_x$ of $p$-states with ESC12+MBE and ESC14+MBE together with the observed values.
The calculated values of $B_\Lambda$ are found to be slightly overbound by $0.3 \sim 1.1$ MeV
in comparison with the observed data. Now, let us try to modify the choice of $k_F$ values
in ADA so as to reproduce $B_\Lambda$ correctly, considering that the ADA might be changed
suitably for weak $\Lambda$ bound states:
We tune the $k_F$ value in ADA as $k'_F = (1 + \alpha)k_F$ by introducing a parameter $\alpha$,
which is taken adequately for each mass region. For the light systems with $B_\Lambda \sim$ a few MeV, we take $\alpha = 0.070$ so as to reproduce the experimental values of $B_\Lambda$ in the $p$-state of $^{13}_\Lambda$C ($B_\Lambda^{\rm exp} = 0.9$ MeV). Here, the $B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ of $^{13}_\Lambda$C is obtained by subtracting the excitation energy $E_x^{\rm exp} = 10.830 \pm 0.087$ MeV measured by the $\gamma$-ray spectroscopy \cite{PRL86.4255(2001),PRC65.034607(2002)} from the $B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ in the ground state shown in Table \ref{Tab:table1}.
The calculated values of $B_\Lambda$ and $E_x$ with $\alpha = 0.070$ are shown in Table \ref{tab:p-states2}. In the both cases with ESC12+MBE and ESC14+MBE, it is found that the $B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ and $E_x^{\rm exp}$ in $^{13}_\Lambda$C are reproduced using almost the same $\alpha$.
In Table \ref{tab:p-states2}, it is seen that the values of $B_\Lambda$ and $E_x$ calculated with $\alpha = 0.070$ are much closer to the experimental values than those without $\alpha$ in $^{12}_\Lambda$B and $^{16}_\Lambda$O.
In $^{28}_\Lambda$Si and $^{51}_\Lambda$V with stronger binding of $\Lambda$, it is found that smaller values of $\alpha$ give reasonable values of $B_\Lambda$ and $E_x$. Again, we tune $k_F$ so as to reproduce $B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ in the $p$-states of $^{28}_\Lambda$Si and determine $\alpha$ as $\alpha = 0.025$ ($\alpha = 0.020$) with ESC14+MBE (ESC12+MBE).
In $^{51}_\Lambda$V, it is also found that the $B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ and $E_x^{\rm exp}$ in the $p$-states are reproduced with $\alpha = 0.015$ ($\alpha = 0.010$) using ESC14+MBE (ESC12+MBE). These values of $\alpha$ in $^{28}_\Lambda$Si and $^{51}_\Lambda$V are much smaller than that determined in $^{13}_\Lambda$C.
Thus, larger values of $\alpha$ turn out to be needed, as $\Lambda$ bindings become weaker. It is worthwhile to point out, here, that the energy spectrum of $^{89}_{\ \Lambda}$Y can be reproduced nicely without the $\alpha$ parameter for the present $G$-matrix interactions with use of the $\Lambda$-nucleus folding model \cite{YFYR14}.
The degree of the modification of ADA by the $\alpha$ parameter is dependent on
the smallness of $B_\Lambda$.
As shown in Table \ref{tab:p-states2}, the $B^{\rm exp}_\Lambda$ values are in order of 1 MeV in $^{12}_\Lambda$B and $^{13}_\Lambda$C hypernuclei, which are much smaller than those in their ground states and the $p$-states of the medium-heavy hypernuclei.
Therefore, $p$-state $\Lambda$ particles in light hypernuclei are rather weakly bound.
Generally, in weakly bound states, since the $\Lambda$ particle distributes in broader region around the core nucleus, the $k_F$ value evaluated by Eq.(\ref{ADA}) under ADA could be smaller and then it makes the $B_\Lambda$ values larger.
The above result shows that it brings about some overbinding of $\Lambda$ to use Eq.(\ref{ADA})
naively for weakly-bound $\Lambda$ states. Then, the $\alpha$ parameter plays a role to make $k_F$
larger and correct the overdoing of increase of $B_\Lambda$ by smaller $k_F$ values.
In heavier hypernuclei with increasing $B_\Lambda$, the above effect is less important, and thus $\alpha$ can be smaller.
It is demonstrated in Table \ref{tab:p-states2} that there is a good correspondence between
the decrease of $B_\Lambda$ values and the increase of $\alpha$ values.
Thus, the present calculation reproduces the $B_\Lambda^{\rm exp}$ in $p$-states based on ADA with only a minor correction of $k_F$.
This shows the validity of the HyperAMD calculations with the $G$-matrix interactions for applying to not only the ground states but also $p$-states of $\Lambda$ hypernuclei with large mass regions.
\subsection{$^{40}_\Lambda$K and $^{48}_\Lambda$K hypernuclei}
\begin{table*}
\caption{ Calculated values of $B_\Lambda$ [MeV] for the ground and $p$-states of $^{40}_\Lambda$K and $^{48}_\Lambda$K with ESC12 + MBE and ESC14 + MBE. In the $p$-states $k_F$ calculated by ADA is tuned as $k'_F = (1 + \alpha)k_F$ using $\alpha = 0.010$ and 0.020 ($\alpha = 0.015$ and 0.025) for ESC12 + MBE (ESC14 + MBE). $\langle \rho \rangle$ [fm$^{-3}$], $k'_F$ [fm$^{-1}$] and spin-parity $J^\pi$ are also listed. }
\label{tab:K-hyper}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccccc}
& \multicolumn{5}{c}{Ground states} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{$p$-states} \\
\cline{2-6} \cline{7-11}
& $\langle \rho \rangle$ & $\alpha$ & $k'_F$ & $J^\pi$ & $-B_\Lambda$ & $\langle \rho \rangle$ & $\alpha$ & $k'_F$ & $J^\pi$ & $-B_\Lambda$ \\
\hline
\multicolumn{9}{c}{ESC14 + MBE} \\
$^{40}_\Lambda$K & 0.136 & 0.000 & 1.263 & $1^+$ & $-$19.4 & 0.109 & 0.015 & 1.191 & $2^-$ & $-$10.4 \\
& & & & & & 0.109 & 0.025 & 1.202 & $2^-$ & $-$10.1 \\
$^{48}_\Lambda$K & 0.141 & 0.000 & 1.278 & $1^+$ & $-$20.2 & 0.117 & 0.015 & 1.219 & $1^-$ & $-$11.6 \\
& & & & & & 0.117 & 0.025 & 1.231 & $1^-$ & $-$11.3 \\
\\
\multicolumn{9}{c}{ESC12 + MBE} \\
$^{40}_\Lambda$K & 0.136 & 0.000 & 1.263 & $1^+$ & $-$19.4 & 0.109 & 0.010 & 1.185 & $2^-$ & $-$10.2 \\
& & & & & & 0.109 & 0.020 & 1.196 & $2^-$ & $-$9.9 \\
$^{48}_\Lambda$K & 0.141 & 0.000 & 1.278 & $1^+$ & $-$20.2 & 0.117 & 0.010 & 1.213 & $1^-$ & $-$11.5 \\
& & & & & & 0.117 & 0.020 & 1.225 & $1^-$ & $-$11.2 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table*}
At JLab, it is planned to perform the $(e,e'K)$ reaction experiment by using $^{40}$Ca and $^{48}$Ca as the target, i.e. potassium hypernuclei ($^{40}_\Lambda$K and $^{48}_\Lambda$K) are expected to be produced \cite{JLab}.
As seen in Fig. \ref{fig:fig1.eps}, $B_\Lambda$ values were measured in several hypernuclei in this mass region. However, only a few observed data of $B_\Lambda$ are available. Furthermore, some of them have large ambiguities. For example, in $^{40}_\Lambda$Ca, the $B_\Lambda$ in the ground state has a large error (more than 1 MeV).
Since absolute energies of hypernuclei can be measured with high resolution in the spectroscopy experiment at JLab, precise values of $B_\Lambda$ will be available for not only in the ground states but also excited states in $^{40}_\Lambda$K and $^{48}_\Lambda$K.
Therefore, it is expected that the validity of the present calculation could be confirmed by comparing with the JLab experiments in heavier hypernuclei with $40 \le A < 50$.
Recently, in this mass region, the effect by the isospin dependence of $\Lambda\!N\!N$ force is discussed \cite{PED}. By the auxiliary field diffusion Monte Carlo (AFDMC) calculation \cite{PED,JLab}, it is shown that if the isospin dependence exists, it affects the $B_\Lambda$ values in neutron-rich $\Lambda$ hypernuclei such as $^{48}_\Lambda$K due to the asymmetry of the proton and neutron numbers.
In the present study, our many-body force is isospin-independent, which affects strongly
on the mass dependence of $B_\Lambda$ even in neutron-rich hypernuclei. On the other hand,
in our $\Lambda\!N$ $G$-matrix interactions, the charge-dependent components included in the ESC model
are not taken into account. On the basis of our present modeling for the $\Lambda\!N$ interaction,
we predict the values of $B_\Lambda$ in $^{40}_\Lambda$K and $^{48}_\Lambda$K in the ground and $p$-states.
In Table \ref{tab:K-hyper}, the calculated values of $B_\Lambda$ in the ground states with ESC12 + MBE and ESC14 + MBE are presented, which are taken from Table \ref{Tab:table1}, i.e. these values are calculated without modifying ADA.
It is found that the $B_\Lambda$ value in $^{48}_\Lambda $K is larger than that in $^{40}_\Lambda$K.
As seen in Fig. \ref{fig:fig1.eps}, these values are consistent with the mass dependence of $B_\Lambda$.
Therefore, the $B_\Lambda$ obtained by the present calculation becomes larger as the mass number increases.
In the calculation for the $p$-states of $^{40}_\Lambda$K and $^{48}_\Lambda$K, we introduce small parameter $\alpha$ as $k'_F = (1 + \alpha)k_F$ in the ADA treatment in the same manner as in Sec. \ref{Sec:BLmd-p}.
From the results of $^{28}_\Lambda$Si and $^{51}_\Lambda$V, it is expected that the appropriate value of $\alpha$ is in between 0.015 and 0.025 (0.010 and 0.020) in the $p$-states of $^{40}_\Lambda$K and $^{48}_\Lambda$K with ESC14 + MBE (ESC12 + MBE).
Therefore, we calculate the $B_\Lambda$ in the $p$-states using these values of $\alpha$.
The resulting values of $B_\Lambda$ in the $p$-states are also summarized in Table \ref{tab:K-hyper}.
In the case of ESC14 + MBE, it is found that the ambiguity of $B_\Lambda$ coming from the $\alpha$ parameter is only about 300 keV, and the $B_\Lambda$ values are predicted to be 10.1 MeV $\le B_\Lambda \le$ 10.4 MeV and 11.3 MeV $\le B_\Lambda \le$ 11.6 MeV for $^{40}_\Lambda$K and $^{48}_\Lambda$K, respectively.
These values are in between those in $^{28}_\Lambda$Si and $^{51}_\Lambda$V, and are increased depending on the mass number.
We find the same trend of $B_\Lambda$ with the ESC12 + MBE.
These values of $B_\Lambda$ are expected to be compared with the future experiments at JLab, which could give us useful information on properties of hyperonic many-body force.
\section{Summary}
Basic quantities in hypernuclei are $\Lambda$ binding energies $B_\Lambda$
which lead to a potential depth $U_\Lambda$ in nuclear matter.
In spite of the longstanding development of studies for $\Lambda\!N$ interactions,
values of $U_\Lambda$ derived from various interaction models are substantially
different from each other: There still remain ambiguities of models due to
lack of (accurate) $Y\!N$ scattering data.
The stiff EoS giving the neutron-star mass of $2M_{\odot}$ suggests the existence
of strongly repulsive many-body effect (MBE) in the high-density region.
On the other hand, the hyperon mixing in neutron-star matter brings about
the remarkable softening of the EoS.
In order to solve this ``Hyperon puzzle", we consider that the repulsive MBE
works also in hyperonic channels.
As a specific model for MBE, the multi-pomeron exchange repulsion (MPP)
is added to the two-body interaction together with the phenomenological three-body
attraction (TBA).
We adjust MBE so as to reproduce the observed data of $B_\Lambda$. Then,
it is evident that the strength of MBE depends on the two-body interaction model.
Even among various versions of the Nijmegen interaction models (ESC08a/b, ESC12, ESC14,
ESC04a, NSC97e/f), there are considerable differences with each other.
Especially, important is the difference among the $P$-state contributions.
In the cases of ESC14 and ESC08a/b, the $P$-state contributions are almost vanishing,
where the mass dependence of $B_\Lambda$ can be reproduced well by adding MBE with
the strong MPP repulsion assuring the stiff EoS of hyperon-mixed neutron-star matter.
In the cases of ESC12 and NSC97e/f, the $P$-state contributions are
substantially repulsive and helpful to reproduce the mass dependence of $B_\Lambda$:
There is no room to introduce the strong MPP repulsion consistently with
the experimental data. In the case of ESC04a, the $P$-state contribution is strongly
attractive, and it is difficult to reproduce the mass dependence of $B_\Lambda$
by adding the present form of MBE.
The $B_\Lambda$ values of hypernuclei with $9 \le A \le 59$ are analyzed
in the framework of HyperAMD with use of the $\Lambda\!N$ $G$-matrix interactions
derived from ESC14 and ESC12. In both cases, the calculated values of
$B_\Lambda$ reproduce the experimental data within a few hundred keV,
when MBE is taken into account.
The values of $B_\Lambda$ and $E_x$ in $p$-states also can be reproduced well
by the HyperAMD, when the ADA is modified so as to make input values of
$k_F$ slightly larger for weakly-bound $\Lambda$ states.
Though the results for ESC14 and ESC12 are quite
similar to each other, the strength of MPP repulsion included in MBE for ESC12
is far weaker than that for ESC14: The former (ESC14) is strong enough to give rise to
the stiff EoS of hyperon-mixed neutron star-matter, but the latter (ESC12) is not.
In the present, it is difficult to prove the existence of MBE including strong repulsion
on the basis of the experimental data of $B_\Lambda$, because the two-body interaction
model is not finely determined. However, we can say at least as follows:
The possible existence of the strong hyperonic repulsions suggested by the stiff EoS of
neutron stars is compatible with $\Lambda\!N$ interaction models giving
almost vanishing contributions of $P$-state interactions.
The Fortran codes ESC08c2012.f (ESC12), ESC08c2014.f (ESC14), and HNPOTESC16.f (ESC16) can be found on the permanent open-access website NN-Online: {\it http://nn-online.org}.
|
\section*{\small Introduction}
In the 1970s three groups of authors started, basically independent from each other, to reconsider Weyl's generalization of Riemannian geometry from 1918. Weyl had proposed the latter in the perspective of building a geometrically unified theory of gravitation and electromagnetism. By the end of the 1920s, after the successful reformulation of the underlying gauge idea in relativistic quantum physics, most physicists including Weyl himself had given up the idea of extending the geometry of spacetime by a ``localized'' scaling degree of freedom. It was not to be expected that half a century later researchers of the next generation would try again to give Weyl geometry a new role in the changed context of late 20th century physics. But some of them did. A group of authors, in particular F. Ehlers, F. Pirani, and A. Schild, used it as a conceptual framework for clarifying the foundations of gravity; others explored extended gravity theories in the generalized geometrical structure, and still others, like W. Drechsler and H. Tann in Munich, investigated connections between gravity and quantum physics. In several of these approaches a scalar field extending the gravitational structure played a crucial role. Although none of the attempts found an immediate broader response, many of them led to follow up papers. In the result, different research perspectives exploring questions of recent physics from a Weyl geometric viewpoint emerged, but they remained too heterogeneous for coalescing to a coherent literary tradition or even forming a common research community.
The call for papers for the Mainz conference proceedings was a splendid incentive for taking stock of the broader range of Weyl geometric investigations in physics, which took a new start in the last three decades of the 20th century. Of course the following survey cannot be complete; it rather has to be confined by specified boundaries. So this paper is restricted to the more classical parts of gravity with some, relative limited outlooks at connections to quantum theory.
{\em Not covered} in this survey is the whole range of Weyl geometric methods in Kaluza-Klein theories, in supergravity, and in string theory.
In order to facilitate the reading of the following survey, the paper starts with a very short introduction to, or a reminder of, central features of Weyl geometry and gravity (section 1.1). Because a considerable amount of the following developments utilize a scale covariant scalar field coupled to the Hilbert term similar to the one in Jordan--Brans--Dicke (JBD) gravity, the second part of the first section is devoted to a short glance at JBD theory from a Weyl geometric perspective (section 1.2). The other sections give a partly historical, partly systematic survey of the attempts for using Weyl geometric methods in recent physics.
In section 2 three different, partially overlapping, approaches of the 1970s are described. The already mentioned paper of Ehlers, Pirani and Schild (EPS) on the foundations of gravity and some follow up papers are dealt with in section 2.1. A completely different retake arose from proposals put forward by a group of Japanese physicists, M. Omote, R. Utiyama et al. and independently by P.A.M. Dirac. They investigated a scalar field coupling to the Hilbert term similar to JBD gravity, but in the scale invariant approach of Weyl geometry. Dirac's and the Japanese physicists' interpretations of the Weylian scale connection were not the same. They and their respective immediate successors had different research contexts in mind, gravity, astrophysics, cosmology and electromagnetism in Dirac's case, nuclear and elementary particle physics in Utiyama's (section 2.2). Finally, although less noticed in the wider community, a specific road to Weyl geometric structures arose in the research on gauge theories of gravity arising from the Kibble-Sciama program of deriving gravitational structures (fields) from ``localizing'' symmetries in Minkowski space, often considered from a wider perspective than that of the Poincar\'e group. In this view Weyl geometry appeared as a special case of Cartan geometry, and Weyl geometric gravity ought generically be extended by a translational connection component, viz. torsion. It is a surprising fact that these three re-starts of Weyl geometric gravity, although arising from completely different backgrounds and pursuing different goals, were undertaken and published in the short interval 1971 -- 1974, exactly the time when the basics for the standard model of elementary particle physics were established (section 2.3).
Before we come to the follow up investigations which made use of these approaches in the standard model of elementary particle physics and/or in astrophysics and cosmology, we turn towards an even more surprising recourse to Weyl geometry in attempts to geometrize quantum mechanics (QM) in the wake of the Bohmian heterodoxy (section 3). In order to make this kind of geometrization accessible to readers not versed in Bohmian quantum mechanics, the basic ideas necessary to understand the geometrization proposals are shortly resumed in section 3.1. A survey of a peculiar road towards geometrizing configurations spaces of QM by Weyl geometry, developed in the 1980s by E. Santamato's and continued after the turn to the 2010s with his colleague F. De Martini, follows (section 3.2). A more fragile idea of a Bohm-type quantization procedure in cosmology leading to a Weyl geometric framework, proposed by A. and F. Shohai and M. Golshani is the topic of section 3.3.
In section 4 we turn towards different attempts at using Weyl geometric structures (mainly scale invariance and the scale invariant affine connection) and fields (Weylian scale connection and/or an additional scale covariant scalar field) in elementary particle physics. Three interrelated questions arise naturally if one wants to bring gravity closer to the physics of the standard model (SM):
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i) ] Is it possible to bring conformal, or at least scale covariant generalizations of classical (Einsteinian) relativity
into a coherent common frame with the standard model SM?\footnote{Such an attempt seemed to be supported experimentally by the phenomenon of (Bjorken) scaling in deep inelastic
electron-proton scattering experiments. The latter indicated, at first glance, an active scaling symmetry of mass/energy in high energy physics; but it turned out to hold only approximatively and was of restricted range.}
\item[(ii)] Is it possible to embed classical relativity in a quantized theory of gravity or, the other way round, to derive classical relativity as an effective theory arising from a more fundamental quantum gravity theory at the classical level?
\end{itemize}
The fact that all the SM fields, with the only exception of the Higgs field, have conformally invariant Lagrangians, in the context of special relativity, i.e., Minkowski space, was considered among others by F. Englert and coauthors already in the mid-1970s. It cried out for investigations in a Weyl geometric perspective which then, of course, would invite generalizing the spacetime environment of all SM fields, at least in their pseudo-classical form,\footnote{SM fields are here called {\em pseudo-classical} if they are considered before, or better abstracting from, so-called second quantization. Mathematically they are classical fields (spinor fields or gauge connections), but the field components do not correspond to physically measurable quantities. Observationally relevant information can be extracted only after applying perturbative quantization methods.}
to Lorentzian or Weylian manifolds. In this context the Weylian scale connection was identified by L. Smolin at the end of the 1970s as a new, hypothetical, field which after quantization would lead to a particle with mass close to the Planck scale. Roughly ten years later this particle was found again and called a ``Weylon'' by H. Cheng (section 4.1). Again roughly a decade later the question of ``mass generation'' by breaking the scale symmetry in a Weyl geometric approach to SM fields was studied at Munich by W. Drechsler and H. Tann (section 4.2).
This question continued to attract the interest of researchers at least until the empirical detection of the Higgs boson in 2012. In the last few years in particular H. Nishino and S. Rajpoot, but not only they, have studied the question of how the symmetry of the standard model may be enhanced by a scale degree of freedom and may be broken by a peculiar interplay of an initially scale covariant scalar field and the ``Weylon''. All this was discussed at the pseudo-classical level (section 4.3).
In the recent years some authors have turned towards the difficult questions of Weyl scaling at the quantum level. A group of Italian authors, G. Codello, G. D'Orico, C Pagani, and R. Percacci brought forward new arguments with regard to the commonly shared view that scale symmetry is necessarily broken at the quantum level. They have proposed quantization procedures under which scale invariance can be preserved under quantization. H. Ohanian has recently discussed the transition between a a scale invariant phase of fields close to the Planck scale to a lower energy regime with broken scale symmetry and Einstein gravity as effective field theory (section 4.4).
The rescaling allowed in Weyl geometry may change the geometrical picture underlying our usually assumed cosmological models. Scalar fields with conformal rescaling have been in use for a long time in ``early universe'' modelling (section 5.1). They invite Weyl geometric investigations and were dominated for several decades by N. Rosen and M. Israelit, the first one an early protagonist of the Dirac approach to Weyl geometric gravity. In the last few decades also other authors jumped in with slightly different ideas (section 5.2f.). A coherent tradition with a larger group of researchers in astrophysical and cosmological studies has formed in Brazil around M. Novello. It invokes a (weak) Weyl geometric framework and has defolded its research questions for more than two decades, more stable and with a wider group of contributors than any others line of research considered in this survey (section 5.4). But the question of dark matter effects, if considered from the gravitational side, has to be measured at the successes of modified Newtonian dynamics, MOND. This remained outside the scope of the Brazilian school. First steps of reconstructing MOND-like phenomenology in a Weyl geometric approach to gravity, made recently at Wuppertal, seem sufficiently striking to include it here (section 5.3).
A survey of a side-stream issue of recent research, as it is attempted
in this paper, cannot claim to tell a coherent, perhaps even success, story. It rather
has to collect views from necessarily heterogeneous perspectives and brings
them together in one panorama. In this way it may invite for a look
backward and forward, in order to reflect on the development of methods and views in recent
mathematical and theoretical physics (section 6).
\section{\small Preliminaries: Weyl geometric gravity and Jordan-Brans-Dicke theory\label{section Preliminaries}}
\subsection{\small Weyl geometry and gravity\label{subsection Weyl geometry} }
\subsubsection{Basics of the geometrical framework}
Weyl geometry is a generalization of Riemannian geometry, arising from two insights: (i) The mathematical automorphisms of both, of Euclidean geometry and of special relativity, are the {\em similarities} (of Euclidean, or respectively of Lorentz signature) rather than the congruences. No unit of length is naturally given in Euclidean geometry, and likewise the basic structures of special relativity (inertial motion and causal structure) can be given without the use of clocks and rods.
(ii) The development of field theory and general relativity demands a conceptual implementation of this insight in a consequently {\em localized mode} (physics terminology).\footnote{In mathematical terminology, the implementation of a similarity structure happens at the {\em infinitesimal} level. A discussion, given by Weyl later in his life, of the role of mathematical and physical autormorphisms can be found in \citep{Weyl:similarity}, some aspects of it also in \citep[chap. III, sec. 14]{Weyl:PMNEnglish}.}
In a more physical language (i) and (ii) can be given the form of the postulate that fundamental field theories have to be formulated covariantly under point dependent rescalings of the basic units of measurement, while the Lagrangian densities and the dynamical laws (the ``natural laws'') are invariant under point dependent rescaling (see Dicke's postulate cited in section \ref{subsection JBD}). It remains an open question whether the resulting extension of the mathematical automorphism group of the theories may be of physical import, or whether it is purely mathematical refinement.
Based on these insights, Weyl developed what he called purely infinitesimal geometry ({\em reine Infinitesimalgeometrie}) building upon a conformal generalization of a (pseudo-) Riemannian metric $g$ with coefficient matrix $(g_{\mu \nu}) $ with (point-dependent) rescaling $\tilde{g}(x)= \Omega (x)^2 \, g(x)$ ($\Omega $ a nowherere vanishing positive function), and a scale (``length'') connection given by a real valued differential form $\varphi = \varphi_{\mu } dx^{\mu}$ \citep{Weyl:GuE,Weyl:InfGeo}. If one rescales the metric by $\Omega$ one has to {\em gauge transform} $\varphi$ by $\tilde{\varphi} = {\varphi}- d \log \Omega {} $. The {\em scale connection} $(\varphi_{\mu})$ expresses how to compare lengths of vectors (or other metrical quantities) at two infinitesimally close points, both measured in terms of a representative $(g_{\mu \nu})$ of the conformal class. The typical symmetry of the geometry, at the infinitesimal level is thus the scale extended Poincar\'e group, sometimes called the {\em Weyl group} (although the same name is used in Lie group theory in a completely different sense).
In 1918 to roughly 1921/22 it seemed clear to Weyl that this extension of Riemannian geometry can be used for unifiying gravity and electromagnetism; later he gave up this hope and considered his scale geometry as purely mathematical enterprise the most important features of which were transplanted to the $U(1)$-gauge theory of electromagnetism.\footnote{For more historical and philosophical details see, among others,
\citep{Vizgin:UFT,Goenner:UFT,Ryckman:Relativity,Scholz:Connections,Scholz:DMV}.}
In hindsight, Weyl's generalization of Riemannian geometry may be embedded in E. Cartan's even wider program of geometries with infinitesimal symmetries. In the case of the scale extended Poincar\'e group one then arrives at a Cartan-Weyl geometry with a translational Cartan connection and {\em torsion} as the typical extension of the structure.\footnote{For a modern presentation of Cartan geometry, including the Cartan-Weyl case, see, e.g., \citep[chap. 7]{Sharpe:Cartan_Spaces}; for the physical aspects of the extension studied since the 1970s \citep[chap. 8]{Blagojevic/Hehl}.}
With the exception of section \ref{subsection Cartan-Weyl} this paper will be restricted to the original form of Weyl geometry without torsion; in large parts it even deals with the most simple case of an integrable scale connection. The reasons for this restriction will become apparent below.
Metrical quantities in Weyl geometry are directly comparable only if they are measured at the same point $p$ of the manifold. Quantities measured at different points $p \neq q$ of finite, i.e., non-infinitesimal, distance can be compared metrically only after an integration of the scale connection along a path from $p$ to $q$. Weyl realized that this structure is compatible with a uniquely determined affine connection $\Gamma = (\Gamma ^{\mu }_{\nu \lambda } )$, the {\em affine connection of Weyl geometry}. If the Levi-Civita connection of the Riemannian part $g$ is denoted by ${}_g\Gamma^\mu _{\nu \lambda }$, the Weylian affine connection is given by
\begin{equation} \Gamma^{\mu }_{\nu \lambda } = {}_g\Gamma^\mu _{\nu \lambda } + \delta ^{\mu }_{\nu } \varphi _{\lambda } +
\delta ^{\mu }_{\lambda } \varphi _{\nu } - g_{\nu \lambda } \varphi^{\mu }.\label{Levi-Civita}
\end{equation}
In the following the {\em covariant derivative} with regard to $\Gamma$ will be denoted as $ \nabla = \nabla_{\Gamma }$. Similarly the curvature expressions for the Riemann tensor, Ricci tensor and scalar curvature $ Riem,\, Ric,\, R$ will denote the Weyl geometric ones. The corresponding scale gauge dependent Riemannian analogues derived from ${}_g\Gamma^\mu _{\nu \lambda }$ will be written as $_g\hspace{-0.2em}\nabla,\, _g Riem,\, _g Ric,\, _g R$. The Weylian scalar curvature, e.g., is
\begin{equation} R = \, _g\hspace{-0em}R -(n-1)(n-2)\,\varphi_{\mu} \varphi^{\mu} - 2(n-1)\, _g\hspace{-0.2em}\nabla_{\mu} \, \varphi^{\mu} \, , \label{Weylian scalar curvature}
\end{equation}
with $n$ the dimension of the manifold.
A change of scale neither changes the connection (the left hand side of (\ref{Levi-Civita})) nor the covariant derivative; only the composition from the underlying Riemannian part and the corresponding scale connection (right hand side) is shifted.
As every connection defines a unique curvature tensor, curvature concepts known from ``ordinary'' (Riemannian) differential geometry follow. The Riemann and Ricci tensors, $Riem, Ric$, are scale invariant by construction, although their expressions contain terms in $\varphi$. On the other hand, the scalar curvature involves ``lifting'' of indices by the inverse metric and is thus scale covariant of weight $-2$ (see below).
For vector and tensor fields (of dimensionful quantities) the appropriate scaling behaviour under change of the metrical scale has to be taken into account. If a field, expressed by $X$ (leaving out indices) with regard to the metrical scale $g(x)$ transforms like
$ \tilde{X}= \Omega ^k X $ with regard to the scale choice $\tilde{g}(x)$ as above, $X$ is called a {\em scale covariant} field of {\em scale weight}, or {\em Weyl weight} $w(X) := k$ (usually an integer or a fraction). It is the negative of the mass weights used in particle physics.
In general the covariant derivative, $\nabla X$, of a scale covariant quantity $X$ is no longer scale covariant; but a scale covariance can be recovered. Adding a weight dependent term solves the problem. The {\em scale covariant derivative} $D$ of $X$ is defined by $ DX := \nabla X + w(X)\varphi \otimes X $, in coordinate description
\begin{equation} D_{\mu}X^{\nu} := \nabla_{\mu} X^{\nu} + w(X)\varphi_{\mu} X ^{\nu}\; . \label{scale covariant derivative} \end{equation}
For example, the derivative $\nabla g$ is not scale covariant, but $Dg$ is -- even with the result zero:
\begin{equation} Dg=\nabla g + 2 \varphi \otimes g =0\, \label{metric compatibility}
\end{equation}
In Weyl geometry the metric is thus no longer {\em constant} with regard to the derivative $\nabla $ but {\em with regard to the scale covariant derivative $D$}. From the point of view of Riemannian geometry this appears as a ``non-metricity'' of the connection (in the literature often called ``semi-metricity''). From the Weyl geometric point of view it is nothing but the {\em metric compatibility condition} for $\Gamma$.
Here it may suffice to have recalled these basic properties. More details on Weyl geometry can be found in Weyl's original papers \citep{Weyl:GuE,Weyl:InfGeo}, those of his successors
\citep{Eddington:Relativity,Bergmann:Relativity,Dirac:1973} and more recent
literature.\footnote{Presentations of Weyl geometry can be found, among others, in
\citep{Blagojevic:Gravitation,Israelit:1999Book}, \citep[appendix A]{Drechsler/Tann} and \citep{Perlick:Diss} (difficult to access). For selected aspects see \citep{Codello_ea:2013} and \citep[sec. 4]{Ohanian:2016}. Integrable Weyl geometry is presented in \citep{Dahia_ea:2008,Romero_ea:Weyl_frames,Almeida/Pucheu:2014,Quiros:2014a}, \citep[sec. 2.1]{Scholz:2011Annalen}. Be aware of different conventions for the scale connection. Expressions for Weyl geometric derivatives and curvature quantities are derived in \citep{Gilkey_ea,Yuan/Huang:2013} and \citep[App.]{Miritzis:2004}. For a more mathematical perspective consult \citep{Folland:1970,%
Calderbank/Pedersen:1998,Gauduchon:1995,Higa:1993,Ornea:2001,Gilkey_ea}. \label{fn lit WG} }
\subsubsection{Weyl geometric gravity}
Weyl's generalization of Riemannian geometry arose with the perspective of generalizing Einstein gravity, which would allow a geometrical unification of gravity and electromagnetism \citep{Vizgin:UFT,Goenner:UFT}. Any meaningful Lagrangian in this framework underlies the constraint of scale symmetry. Because of $w(\sqrt{|g|})=4$, while the Weyl geometric scalar curvature $R$ is of weight $w(R)=-2$, Weyl could not work with the Hilbert-Einstein term but considered quadratic expressions in the curvature terms for a generalization of the gravitational Lagrangian, e.g.\footnote{As the ``most simple and natural'' expression $\alpha_2=0$ in \citep{Weyl:GuE} and $\alpha_1=0$ as the most simple example in \citep[4th ed., 5th ed.]{Weyl:RZM}.}
\begin{equation} \mathfrak{L_W}= L_W \sqrt{|g|} \quad \mbox{with}\; L_W = \alpha_1 R^{\mu}_{\; \nu \lambda \kappa} R_{\mu}^{\; \nu \lambda \kappa} + \alpha_2 \, R^2 \, . \label{Weyls grav Lagrangian}
\end{equation}
Of course, he added a term in the scale curvature $f=d\varphi$ ($f_{\mu \nu} = \partial_{\mu} \varphi_{\nu} - \partial_{\nu} \varphi_{\mu}$) looking like the Maxwell action:
\begin{equation} \mathfrak{L_f}= L_f \sqrt{|g|} \quad \mbox{with}\; L_f = - \frac{1}{4}f_{\mu \nu}f^{\mu \nu} \label{fsquare Lagrangian}
\end{equation}
Only much later -- in fact, about half a century later -- other gravitational Lagrangians with Weyl geometric scale symmetry started to be considered. They arose from the idea of a coupling between gravity, here the Weyl geometric scalar curvature $R$, and a scalar field with ``correct'' complementary weight (subsection \ref{subsection Dirac-Utiyama}).
In the period covered here we encounter two modes of Weyl geometric gravity. One is farther away from Einstein gravity and uses square curvature Lagrangians, sometimes called {\em Weyl gravity} (in the strong sense); the other is closer to Einstein gravity and works with a modified Hilbert term coupled to a scalar field, in the physics literature it is often called {\em Weyl geometric scalar tensor theory} (WST). The latter goes back to independent proposals by M. Omote and R. Utiyama on the one hand and P.A.M. Dirac on the other for making use of a scalar field modification of the Hilbert term, analogous to Jordan-Brans-Dicke theory (see section \ref{subsection Dirac-Utiyama}). Here the gravitational structure is characterized by an equivalence class of triples $(g, \varphi, \phi)$, with $g=g_{\mu\nu}dx^{\mu}dx^{\nu}$ the {\em Riemannian component} of the Weylian metric, $\varphi=\varphi_{\mu}dx^{\mu}$ its scale connection, and $\phi$ an additional scalar field.\footnote{In a way, this may be called a geometrical ``tensor-vector scalar'' theory {\em sui generis}, in which all components have geometrical meaning.}
The equivalence is given by combined rescaling transformations $g \mapsto \tilde{g} = \Omega^2 g= e^{2\omega} g, \; \varphi \mapsto \tilde{\varphi}= \varphi - d \omega ,\; \phi\mapsto \tilde{\phi}= e^{-\omega}\phi$. Because of scaling freedom, a Weylian metric with nowhere vanishing scalar curvature can be gauged to $R\doteq const$. Here, and elsewhere in this paper, $\doteq$ denotes an equality which holds only in a certain gauge specified by the context. Weyl considered this as the ``natural'' gauge, we prefer to call it the {\em Weyl gauge}.
If the scale connection is an exact form,
\begin{equation}
\varphi=-dw \, , \label{integrable scale connection}
\end{equation}
with a scalar potential $w$ scale transforming by $w\mapsto \tilde{w}=w+ \omega$, we work in an {\em integrable Weyl geometric scalar tensor} theory (IWST). Then the gravitational structure reduces to the Riemannian component of the metric plus, at face value, two scalar fields $(g,\phi=e^v,w)$ with equivalence under rescaling. As $v\mapsto\tilde{v}=v- \omega$, the sum $v+w$ is a {\em scale invariant} scalar field of the gravitational structure and the {\em only crucial} one. Because of the scale gauge freedom $\phi$, respectively $v$ or $w$, can be given any chosen value, e.g. a constant.\footnote{The dynamical consequences of this interdependence have been clarified by \citep{Israelit:1999Book,Israelit:1999matter_creation}, see section \ref{subsection Israelit}. } In the integrable case, two scale gauges are of particular importance in addition to Weyl gauge: The {\em Riemann gauge} in which the scale connection is ``integrated away'' (for $\omega={-w}$), then $\tilde{\varphi }\doteq 0$. The other one is the {\em scalar field gauge} in which the scalar field is scaled to a constant, $\tilde{\phi}(x) \doteq \phi_o = const$ (for $\omega=v$). If the value of $\phi_o $ is specified such that it hooks up to Einstein gravity, $\phi_o=(8\pi G)^{-1}$ (up to a hierarchy factor if need be), it is called {\em Einstein gauge}.\footnote{Obviously the Einstein gauge exists also in the non-integrable case.}
For a vanishing scale invariant sum,
\begin{equation}
v+w=0\, , \label{v+w=0}
\end{equation}
the scalar field $\phi$ is essentially the potential for the scale connection, more precisely,
\begin{equation} \varphi = d v= d \ln \phi \, . \label{triviality condition}
\end{equation}
Then and only then, Einstein gauge and Riemann gauge coincide and IWST reduces to Einstein gravity. The Palatini approach varying the metric and the affine connection of a Lagrange density $\mathfrak{L}=\phi^2 R \sqrt{|g|}$ independently enforces the constraint $v+w=0$ in addition to the integrability of the scale connection. This implies a reduction of a Palatini-IWST to Einstein gravity. The latter is then only re-written in scale covariant form, but without any modification of the dynamics.\footnote{Cf. sections \ref{subsection trivial}, \ref{subsection Brazilian approach}. }
If one considers IWST from the point of view of the metric-affine scheme, one better uses variational constraints like in \citep{Cotsakis/Miritzis:Palatini} rather than the Palatini approach. Then the condition (\ref{v+w=0}) is not enforced and the scalar field, respectively the integrable scale connection (\ref{triviality condition}), express an additional dynamical degree of freedom.
\subsection{\small Jordan-Brans-Dicke (JBD) gravity\label{subsection JBD}}
\subsubsection{Basics of JBD theory}
At the turn to the 1950s {\em Pascual Jordan} (Hamburg) and, a decade later, {\em Carl Brans} and {\em Robert Dicke} (Princeton) proposed a generalization of Einstein gravity by considering a varying gravitational parameter. The motivations at Hamburg and at Princeton were different, but there was a wide overlap of the ensuing theory, here abbreviated by JBD. Jordan started from an action principle \citep[p. 140]{Jordan:Schwerkraft}
\begin{equation} \mathcal{L_{J}}(\chi, g) = ( \chi R - \frac{\xi}{\chi }\partial ^{\mu} \chi\, \partial _{\mu} \chi ) \sqrt{|det\, g|} \, , \label{Lagrangian JBD} \end{equation}
with a parameter $\xi$ and a real scalar field $\chi$ functioning as a kind of spacetime dependent (reciprocal) gravitational ``constant'', $R$ here of course the Riemannian scalar curvature of the metric $g$ \citep[2nd. ed., 163, (3)]{Jordan:Schwerkraft}.\footnote{Warning: One has to check carefully the sign convention used in the definition of Riemann and scalar curvature. Jordan, e.g., used sign inverted definitions of the curvature terms with respect to those used here and in much of the present literature \citep[40]{Jordan:Schwerkraft}. In Fujii/Maeda's notation (see below) this would correspond to $\epsilon =-1$ and thus to a ``ghost'' field.}
A Lagrange term $L_m$ for classical matter could be foreseen
(e.g., \citep[equ. (6)]{Brans/Dicke}). The hypothesis of a ``varying gravitational constant'' had been brought up already more than a decade earlier by P.A.M. Dirac, when he speculated about ``large numbers'' relations in physics.\footnote{For Dirac's role in this story see \citep{Kragh:VaryingGrav}, for a larger view at JBD theory \citep{Brans:Tenacious,Brans:JBD}.}
Pauli reminded Jordan that his ``extended gravity'' allowed for a class of conformal transformations which not only affect the metric but also the scalar field,
\begin{equation} \tilde{g}_{\mu \nu} = \Omega ^2 g_{\mu \nu} \, , \quad \tilde{\chi }= \Omega ^{-2} \chi \; . \label{Pauli conformal transformations}
\end{equation}
Jordan included this generalization into the second edition of his book
\citep[2nd ed.,169]{Jordan:Schwerkraft}.\footnote{The conformal factor $\Omega $ was (unnecessarily) restricted by the condition $\Omega ^2 = \chi ^{\gamma }$ for some constant $\gamma \in \mathbb R$.}
A few years later, Robert Dicke and Carl Brans restarted the study of scale covariant scalar fields (including a classical matter term $L_m$ in (\ref{Lagrangian JBD}) \citep[8]{Brans/Dicke}. Their motivation was to formulate a theory of gravity which took account of Mach's principle as understood by D.W. Sciama.\footnote{In the 1950s Sciama had proposed to consider the possibility that the gravitational ``constant'' was related to the mass and the ``radius'' of the visible universe.}
For the two US physicists the main function of the scalar field was ``the determination of the local value of the gravitational constant'' \citep[929]{Brans/Dicke}. More clearly than in Jordan's work, the wave character of the dynamical equation of $\chi $ was emphasized by them \citep[equs. (9), (13)]{Brans/Dicke}. Moreover, they had a different view of the role of scale transformations.
Their methodological goal was a scale independent foundation of physical theories, with a ``passive'' interpretation of scale transformations in mind \citep[927]{Brans/Dicke}, while Jordan and Pauli tended to think in terms of ``active'' scale transformations of material structures. Dicke started
an article dedicated to {\em transformations of units} in GRT \citep{Dicke:1962} announcing as ``evident' the following principle:
\begin{quote}
It is evident that the particular values of the units of mass, length, and time employed are arbitrary and that the laws of physics must be invariant under a general coordinate-dependent transformation of units. \citep[2163]{Dicke:1962}
\end{quote}
That was very much in the spirit of Weyl's intentions of 1918, from which the latter had disassociated himself with the shift of his gauge idea to quantum physics Weyl discussed this new view at different occasions in the 1940s, e.g. in \citep[p. 165]{Weyl:similarity}.\footnote{Also in the English edition of {\em Philosophy of Mathematics and Natural Sciences} Weyl expressed this disassociation quite clearly, appealing to the constants of atomic physics which regulate the frequencies of spectral lines \citep[83]{Weyl:PMNEnglish}. But this was only one part of his perspective. In the appendix he argued that for a deeper insight it would be necessary to understand how the ``adaptation'' of the mass of the electron to the local field constellation is achieved \citep[288f.]{Weyl:PMNEnglish}. This was close to the intentions of his 1918 approach, although no longer a claim that the goal had been achieved. Einstein, in his later papers, agreed \citep[555f.]{Einstein/Schilpp}; see \citep{Lehmkuhl:2014}. }
It seems that Dicke ``reinvented'' the idea of scale gauge invariance of the natural laws anew. He systematically discussed the scale transformations of physical quantities, based on the (quasi-axiomatic) principle of the invariance of the velocity of light $c$ and the Planck constant $\hbar$. In particular, ``all three quantities, time, length, and reciprocal mass transform in the same way'' \citep[2164]{Dicke:1962}, i.e.,
\[ l' = \Omega \, l\, , \quad t' = \Omega \, t \, , \quad m' = \Omega ^{-1}\, m \, . \]
In this sense, Weyl's scale gauge transformations reappeared in the principles of Jordan-Brans-Dicke theory without being mentioned as such. It may be that at the time nobody but Pauli was aware of this close resemblance to Weyl's theory. Weyl's choice of (scale) gauge was translated by Dicke into the choice of a {\em frame} of measuring units, complementing the choice of a coordinate system.
In more recent papers the scalar field and the JBD parameter are written in slightly different form. With $\phi = \sqrt{2 \xi^{-1}\chi} $, scale weight $w(\phi)= -1$, and $\xi= \frac{\epsilon }{4 \omega }$ the Lagrangian (\ref{Lagrangian JBD}) turns into
\begin{equation} \mathcal{L}_{BD}= \left(\frac{1}{2} \xi \phi^2 R - \frac{1}{2}\epsilon \partial ^{\mu } \phi \, \partial _{\mu}\phi + L_{mat} \right) \sqrt{|det\, g|} \, ,\label{Lagrangian JBD Fujii/Maeda} \end{equation}
where $\text{sig}\, g = (3,1) \sim (-+++)$ and generally $\epsilon=1$, while only in exceptional cases $\epsilon = -1$ or $0$ \cite[p. 5]{Fujii/Maeda}.\footnote{ $\epsilon =1 $ corresponds to a normal field having a positive energy, in other words, not a ``ghost''. Fuji/Maeda add that $\epsilon =-1$ looks unacceptable because it seems to indicate negative energy, but ``this need not be an immediate difficulty owing to the presence of the nonminimal coupling'' (ibid.).}
In the following discussion this notation will be used as a standard.
A famous exception with $\epsilon=-1$ is the special constellation of coefficients
\begin{equation} L_{cc}= \phi^2 R + 6 \partial_{\mu}\phi \partial^{\mu}\phi \, . \label{conformal coupling}
\end{equation}
Then the Lagrangian is invariant (up to an exact differential) under conformal transformations \citep{Penrose:1965}. This case of {\em conformal coupling} allowed to study versions of gravity theory ``in which scale invariance of matter is a consistency requirement on its coupling to gravitation'' \citep{Deser:1970}. Deser considered a conformally coupled scalar field as a paradigmatic example for matter and observed that the addition of a quadratic term of the form $\frac{1}{2}\mu^2 \phi^2$, with $\mu$ a parameter of mass dimension, implies {\em breaking} of the {\em conformal symmetry}. In this case, the range $\phi$ ``must clearly be cosmological in order not to lead to a clash with observation '' \citep[p. 252]{Deser:1970}.
But in general, the three founding authors, Jordan, Brans and Dicke, considered it as evident that the ``conformal transformations'' (scale transformations) do {\em not} reduce the geometrical considerations to those of a purely conformal structure. They rather considered it as clear that JBD theory possesses a covariant derivative $\nabla$, specified by the reference metric $g$ underlying (\ref{Lagrangian JBD}) from which Jordan and Brans/Dicke started. Later this scale was called {\em Jordan frame} (although Jordan was undecided, which scale might be the ``natural''one). Because the Levi Civita connection of the Jordan frame metric determines the free fall trajectories of test particles, many authors consider this one as the ``physical frame'', the other frames then appear as mathematical auxiliary devices. On the other hand, the JBD-field $\phi$ can be scaled to a constant. Then the gravitational part of the Lagrangian looks like the Hilbert term of Einstein gravity, while the remnants of the JBD scalar field appears in additional expressions of the Lagrange density.\footnote{See, e.g., \citep[chap. 3.6]{Capozziello/Faraoni}.}
The resulting {\em Einstein frame} satisfies the Riemannian ``energy conservation'' condition for matter tensors. Since roughly the 1990s it has found an increasing number of supporters who now propose it as the proper frame for a ``physical'' interpretation of JBD gravity. But no consensus in the JBD community has been achieved; the discussion has remained undecided, to say the least, \citep{Faraoni/Nadeau,Quiros_ea:2013}.
\subsubsection{JBD in a Weyl geometric perspective}
The perspective of (integrable) Weyl geometry may help clarifying some aspects underlying this debate. Let us denote the affine connection referred to by
\begin{equation} \nabla := \, _g\hspace{-0.2em}\nabla \, , \label{JBD affine connection}
\end{equation}
where the r.h.s. expresses the Levi-Civita connection of $g$ in the JBD Lagrangian (\ref{Lagrangian JBD}). $\nabla$ is kept unaffected, i.e. {\em invariant}, under scale transformations in JBD theory. A structural view of Weyl geometry shows that the combination of a conformal structure $[g]$ of pseudo-Riemannian metrics $g$ and a specification of an invariant affine connection $\nabla$ with a compatibility condition, inbuilt here because of (\ref{JBD affine connection}), determines a Weyl structure on a differentiable manifold $M$. In this way JBD gravity may be embedded in the theoretical frame of Weyl geometry, independent of whether or not a single author knows.\footnote{See the discussion in \citep{Quiros_ea:2013} and \citep{Scholz:2016Paving}.} Usually this is not being done (see, however, section \ref{subsection trivial}).
\section{\small Contributions to Weyl geometric gravity in the 1970s and 1980s\label{section WGG 1970s}}
\subsection{\small Ehlers/Pirani/Schild and subsequent work\label{subsection EPS}}
\subsubsection{An axiomatic approach to the foundations of gravity}
Weyl already discussed the relation between the physical concept of a {\em causal structure} and the mathematical concept of a {\em conformal structure} on a differentiable manifold \citep[4th. ed., appendix I]{Weyl:RZM}. He deemed it inadequate to think of an empirical determination of the metrical coefficients $g_{\mu \nu }$ by ``rods and clocks'' and looked for another empirical specification of a Weylian metric $(g, \varphi)$.
In a note added to a letter to F. Klein\footnote{\citep{WeylanKlein:28Dez1920}} (a little later published in {\em G\"ottinger Nachrichten} as
\citep{Weyl:projektiv_konform}) he sketched an idea how this can be achieved.
Assuming his framework of the generalized ``purely infinitesimal'' geometry, Weyl showed that two of his generalized metrics which have identical conformal structure and the same projective geodesic path structure will coincide. This meant that, at least in the framework of Weyl geometry, conformal and projective path structures specify a Weylian metric uniquely.\footnote{Weyl's note \citep{Weyl:projektiv_konform} became better known by his calculation and discussion of projective and conformal curvature tensors, which followed.}
Weyl's argument on the combination of projective and conformal structure was taken up and extended by {\em J\"urgen Ehlers, Felix Pirani and Alfred Schild} (EPS in the sequel), about the same time in which Dirac studied Weyl geometry in the context of scalar tensor theories
\citep{EPS}. This paper was written for a {\em Festschrift} in the honour of J.L. Synge.
Synge had become known for his proposal to base general relativity on the behaviour of standard clocks ({\em chronometric approach}). From the foundational point of view, clocks could appear as a problematic choice, because they are realized by complicated material systems. The question arose whether more basic signal structures of gravitational theory (light rays, particle trajectories) might do the job.
Using Hilbert's words, EPS ``laid the foundations deeper'', combining Weyl's idea of 1920/21 and the recently developed mathematical language and symbolic technology of differentiable manifolds with Hilbert's axiomatic method.\footnote{See \citep{Trautman:EPS}.}
They started from three sets, $\mathcal{M}=\{p, q, \ldots\}, \, \mathcal{L}=\{L, N, \ldots\}, \,\mathcal{P}=\{P, Q, \ldots\} $, with $ \mathcal{L}, \mathcal{P} \subset \mathcal{M}$, and called the three sets respectively collections of {\em events, light rays} and {\em particles}. By postulates close to physical experimental concepts of light signal exchange between particles EPS formulated different groups of axioms in the Hilbertian style of foundations of geometry ($D_1, \ldots D_4, \, L_1, L_2, \, P_1, P_2, \, C$), which allowed them to introduce
a $C^3$ differentiable structure on $\mathcal{M}$ on which $ \mathcal{L} $ and $ \mathcal{P}$ then described smooth curves (axiom group $D$). Moreover,
a $C^2$ conformal structure was defined by $\mathcal{L}$ (axioms $L$),
and a differentiable projective path structure by $\mathcal{P}$ (axioms $P$).
With a compatibility axiom $C$, basically postulating that light rays can be approximated arbitrarily well by particle trajectories, EPS could derive their main result.\\[-1.2em]
{\thm[Ehlers/Pirani/Schild 1972] A light ray structure $\mathcal{L}$ and a set of particle trajectories $\mathcal{P}$ defined on an event set
$ \mathcal{M}$ which satisfy axioms $D, L, P, C$ endow $ \mathcal{M}$ with the structure of a ($C^3$-) differentiable manifold $M$ and a ($C^2$-) Weylian metric $[ (g,\varphi ) ]$. The latter is uniquely determined by the condition that its causal and geodesic structures coincide with $ \mathcal{L}$ and $ \mathcal{P}$ respectively. }\\[-0.8em]
EPS posed the question, how a (pseudo-)Riemannian structure of classical (Einsteinian) relativity might arise from the Weylian one. A simple additional {\em Riemannian axiom}, postulating the vanishing of the scale curvature, $d\varphi=0$, could serve the purpose. Such a postulate did not seem nonsensical, as Weyl's interpretation of the scale connection $\varphi$ as electromagnetic (e.m.) was obsolete anyhow and EPS did not adhere to it. But the authors did not exclude the possibility that a scale connection field $\varphi$ of nonvanishing scale curvature might play the role of a ``true'', although still unknown, field.
\subsubsection{Subsequent work}
The paper of Ehlers, Pirani and Schild triggered a line of investigations in the foundations of general relativity, sometimes called the {\em causal inertial approach} (Coleman/Kort\'e), sometimes subsumed under the more general search for a {\em constructive axiomatics} of GRT (Majer/Schmidt, Audretsch, L\"a\-m\-merzahl, Perlick and others). These investigations turned towards a basic conceptual analysis from the point of view of foundations of inertial geometry \citep{Coleman/Korte:inertial_conformal}, some even looking for Desargues type characterization of free fall lines \citep{Pfister:Newtons_law}.
How a kind of ``standard clocks'' can be introduced in the Weyl geometric setting without taking refuge to atomic processes, by just using the observation of light rays and inertial trajectories, was studied by
\citep{Perlick:Diss,Perlick:1987,Perlick:Observerfields}.
Another line of follow up works explored the extension of the foundational argument of the causal inertial approach to quantum physics, where particle trajectories might no longer appear acceptable as a foundational concept.
This debate was opened by \citep{Audretsch:1983}. It was soon continued by the collective work again of three authors \citep*{AGS}, cited in the sequel by AGS, and had follow up studies, among them \citep{Audretsch/Laemmerzahl}. Audretsch argued that the ``gap'' between Weylian and Riemannian geometry can ``be closed if quantum theory as a theory of matter is made part of the total scheme'' \citep[2872]{Audretsch:1983}. He postulated that quantum theory in the sense of Dirac or Klein-Gordon (K-G) fields on a Weylian manifold are compatible with the latter's geometry,
if and only if the WKB (Wentzel-Kramers-Brillouin) approximation of the Dirac (or K-G) field leads to streamlines which in the limit $\hbar \rightarrow 0 $ agree with geodesics (Audretsch's {\em compatibility condition}).
Working with scale covariant mass factors $m$ of Weyl weight $w(m)=-1$
Audretsch found that compatibility is possible only if the mass factor $m$ of the Dirac particle has vanishing covariant derivative, $\nabla_{\mu} m = 0$ in some gauge. He observed that this implied vanishing of Weyl's scale curvature
$ d \varphi = 0 $ \citep[equ. (6.14)]{Audretsch:1983} and concluded a bit rash:
\begin{quote}
{\em The consequence of the requirement is therefore that the Weyl space reduces to a Riemann space and the gap {\em [between Weylian and Riemannian geometry, ES]} described in Sec. I} {\em is closed.} \citep[2881, emph. in original]{Audretsch:1983}
\end{quote}
Because $D_{\mu}m=0$ in any gauge if $\nabla_{\mu} m$ vanishes in Riemann gauge, Audretsch had only shown that the limiting condition for streamlines of the WKB approximation of the Dirac field to classical geodesic trajectories implied {\em integrability} of the Weylian metric. The question whether this would also imply the choice of the Riemann gauge as ``physical'' was not posed; it rather was imputed as self-evident.
In the AGS paper this question was taken up again and stated carefully in the language of conformal fibre bundles for Dirac- and for
Klein-Gordon fields. AGS showed that Audretsch's compatibility condition implies the possibility to reduce the ``conformal'' group, here understood as $\mathbb R^+ \times SO(1,3)$, to the orthogonal group.
\vspace{-0.5em}
{\thm[Audretsch/G\"ahler/Straumann 1984]
A Weylian manifold $(M,[(g,\varphi)])$ of Lorentzian signature is locally integrable, iff the WKB
(Went\-zel-Kramers-Brillouin) approximation of a (locally defined) Dirac or Klein-Gordon field $\psi$ on $M$ leads to streamlines which agree with geodesics in the limit $\hbar \rightarrow 0 $.
}
The three authors formulated their consequence more carefully than Audretsch had done in his first paper. They did not claim that their investigation had completely filled the gap to Riemannian geometry.
All in all, the three authors gave a more precise and mathematically modernized presentation of Audretsch's insight. The gap between the Weylian and the Riemannian structure in the foundations of GRT was reduced but not completely closed. It could seem natural to choose the Riemann gauge of the Weyl metric in order to reduce the structure group to $SO(3,1)$, but nothing compelled to do so.
The classical interpretation of geodesics as trajectories of mass points was foreign to the field theoretic context anyhow. It was now substituted by postulating coherence between geodesic structure and the flow-lines associated to pseudo-classical quantum fields.
\subsection{\small Dirac's and Omote/Utiyama's retake of Weyl geometry\label{subsection Dirac-Utiyama}}
\subsubsection{Dirac on scale covariant ``varying'' gravity\label{subsection Dirac}}
In the 1970s {\em P.A.M. Dirac} introduced Weyl geometry into the discourse of the rising scalar-tensor theories. He was still fascinated by the of interrelation of certain constellations of large numbers in physics, the ``large number hypothesis'' \citep{Dirac:1973,Dirac:LNH}.\footnote{Dirac presented his proposal for a retake of Weyl geometry at the occasion of the symposium honouring his 70th birthday, 1972 at Trieste. This talk remained unpublished. According to \citep[p. 249 footnote]{Charap/Tait} the talk was close to his 1973 publication. For the broader historical context of this enterprise, the background in Dirac's reflection on large numbers in the 1920s, and a surprising link to geophysics see \citep{Kragh:VaryingGrav}.}
Largely following Eddington's notation and terminology \citep{Eddington:Relativity}, he introduced the readers to Weyl geometry which was no longer generally known in the younger generation of physicists. He then introduced a scalar-tensor theory of gravitation coupled in an ``oldfashioned'', i.e. outdated, way to electromagnetism. Like Weyl in 1918, he identified the potential of the electromagnetic field $F_{\mu \nu}$ with the Weylian scale curvature $f= d\varphi$
\[ F_{\mu \nu} = f_{\mu \nu} \; . \]
In the sequel I call this the {\em electromagnetic (em) dogma} .
On the other hand, he replaced Weyl's original gravity Ansatz in the Lagrangian (using square curvature terms) by a JBD-type Lagrangian using a
real scalar field $\beta$ of weight $w(\beta)=-1$. He added a biquadratic scale invariant potential term,
\begin{equation} \mathcal{L}_{Dir\, o} =- \beta^2 R + k D^{\lambda}\beta\, D_{\lambda}\beta + c \beta^4 + \frac{1}{4} f_{\mu \nu} f^{\mu \nu} \; , \label{scale invariant Dirac action} \end{equation}
with constant $k$.
For $k=6$, the scale connection terms of the Lagrangian essentially cancel (i.e., they reduce to boundary terms and thus are variationally negligible) like in (\ref{conformal coupling}). So Dirac wrote the Lagrangian in the form
\begin{equation} \mathcal{L}_{Dir\, 1} = -\beta^2\, _g\hspace{-0.1em} {R} + 6 \partial ^{\lambda}\beta\, \partial _{\lambda}\beta + c \beta^4 + \frac{1}{4} f_{\mu \nu} f^{\mu \nu} \; , \label{Dirac action} \end{equation}
known to be conformally invariant \citep{Penrose:1965}, if $_g\hspace{-0.1em}{R} $ denotes the {\em sign inverted} Riemannian scalar curvature with respect to the generally accepted convention, while in (\ref{scale invariant Dirac action}) ${R}$ is the sign inverted scalar curvature of the Weylian metric.\footnote{The qualifications ``sign inverted'' and ``generally accepted''refers to the sign convention which agrees with the coordinate free definition $Riem(Y,Z)\,X=\nabla_Y \nabla_Z X - \nabla_Z \nabla_Y X - \nabla_{[Y,Z]}X$. It is preferred in the mathematical literature including \citep[5th ed., 131]{Weyl:RZM} and also used in the majority of the more recent physics books.
The ``sign inverted'' convention in some of the physics literature goes back to Einstein, e.g. \citep[801]{Einstein:GRT1916}, who in turn may have followed Ricci and Levi-Civita. It was continued in much of the physics literature of the first half of the 20-th century, \citep[\S\, 37]{Eddington:Relativity}, \citep{Pauli:1921} up to the influential \citep[equ. (2.1.3)]{Weinberg:Cosmology_1972}. Weyl, on the other hand, used the above convention long before the coordinate free definition of the Riemann tensor was available. It seems to be dominant in the more recent literature on GRT, although Rindler speaks of a 50 \% distribution among the two conventions \citep[219]{Rindler:Relativity}. \label{fn curvature conventions}}
Dirac derived dynamical equations and Noether identities for diffeomorphisms and scale transformations.
He distinguished Riemann gauge, $\varphi =0$, which existed, of course, only for vanishing e.m. field $f_{\mu \nu}=0$, from ``Einstein gauge'' (gravitational parameter constant, $\beta =1$) and ``atomic gauge'' (Weyl's natural gauge). He warned that
``all three gauges are liable to be different'' \citep[411]{Dirac:1973}.
In a discussion at the end of his article, why one should believe in the proposed ``drastic revision of our ideas of space and time'', Dirac announced a part of his research agenda, which was {\em independent} of the large number hypothesis:
\begin{quote}
There is one strong reason in support of the theory. It appears as one of the fundamental principles of Nature that the equations expressing basic laws should be invariant under the widest possible group of transformations \ldots The passage to Weyl's geometry is a further step in the direction of widening the group of transformations underlying physical laws [in addition to general coordinate transformations, E.S.].
One now has to consider transformations of gauge as well as transformations of curvilinear coordinates and one has to take on's physical laws to be invariant under all these transformations, which imposes stringent conditions on them. \citep[418]{Dirac:1973}
\end{quote}
So far, Dirac's explanations agreed with the view of C. Brans and R. Dicke.
He followed a tendency of the time for probing possible extensions of the symmetries (automorphisms) of fundamental physics.
In distinction to Pauli's insistence on a preferred scale, taken over into the general discourse of JBD theory, Dirac argued that at least three different gauges, Riemann, Einstein, and ``atomic'' gauge, indicated by atomic clocks, had to be considered in different theoretical or observational contexts. He saw no chance of a single preferred gauge; but sometimes the ``atomic'' gauge was assumed to be identical with Weyl gauge.\footnote{Weyl had argued that the atomic clocks somehow adapt to the local field constellation via the Weylian scalar curvature.}
\subsubsection{Some remarks on Dirac's followers\label{subsection Dirac followers}}
Dirac's proposal for reconsidering Weyl geometry in a modified theory of gravity was taken up by field theorists and a few astronomers.
An immediate and often quoted paper by {\em Vittorio Canuto} and coauthors gave a broader and more detailed introduction to Dirac's view of Weyl geometry in gravity and field theory \citep{Canuto_ea}. The opening remark of the paper motivated the renewed interest in Weyl geometry with actual developments in high energy physics:
\begin{quote}
In recent years, owing to the scaling behavior exhibited in high-energy particle scattering experiments there has been considerable interest in manifestly scale-invariant theories.
\citep[1643]{Canuto_ea}
\end{quote}
With the remark on ``considerable interest in manifestly scale-invariant theories'' in high energy physics the authors referred to Bjorken scaling and, in particular, the seminal paper \citep{Callan/Coleman/Jackiw}.
But the authors were carefull not to claim field theoretic reality for Dirac's scalar function $\beta$ \citep[1645]{Canuto_ea}. They rather developed model consequences for the approach in several directions: cosmology, including ``LNH (large number hypothesis as a gauge condition'', modification of the Schwarzschild solution in the Dirac framework, consequences for planetary motion, and stellar structure. At the end the authors indicated certain heuristic links to gauge fields in high energy physics of the late 1970s.
Canuto was interested in exploring Dirac's idea that, perhaps, the gravitational units of measurement, expressed by a locally dependent parameter of gravity (in place of a constant), and a frequency change of gravitational clocks, like the period of planets revolving a star, might differ from the atomic units. This would imply a violation of the strong equivalence principle. In careful evaluations of the astrophysical data available at the beginning of the 1980s he and his coauthor {\em Itzhak Goldman} concluded that a tiny difference might still be possible \citep{Canuto/Goldman:1983}.
For some years Dirac's approach attracted also some interest from astronomers at the Geneva observatory, {\em Pierre Bouvier,
Andr\`e Maeder} and coworkers.\footnote{For Canuto and Maeder compare \citep[pp. 126ff.]{Kragh:varying_c}}
In November 1977, only a few months after the publication of \citep{Canuto_ea}, the two Geneva astronomers submitted a theoretical vindication of ``Weyl's geometry as a framework for gravitation'' to the journal {\em Astrophysics and Space Science} \citep{Bouvier/Maeder:WeylGeometry}. This paper was meant as a background for a larger research program. Maeder intended to ``build some new mechanics'' on Dirac-Weyl geometrical gravity. He conjectured that the determination of gravitating mass in gravitationally bound large systems (clusters, super clusters) on the basis of the virial theorem was affected by the ``new mechanics'' that the {\em missing mass} identified observationally around the middle of the 1970s by astronomers and astrophysicists, might vanish (ibid, 341f.).\footnote{For an illuminating historical reports on the rise of dark matter see \citep{Sanders:DarkMatter}.
From a methodological point of view Maeder's hypothesis was not so far away from the later, more pragmatic and more successful approach of modified Newtonian dynamics, MOND, by {\em Mordechai Milgrom}. }
First empirical investigations on the Coma cluster seemed to support Maeder's conjecture \citep{Maeder:CosmologyII,Maeder:LowVelocity}. But during the next years the evidence in favour of his conjecture dissolved. So the first attempt to bring Dirac's theory to bear in observational cosmology faded out at the turn to the 1980s. We come back to this issue in section \ref{subsection dark matter}.
But theory development has an open horizon. Dirac's program continued to be pursued during the following decades on the theoretical level among others by {\em Nathan Rosen} working during this time at the Technion Haifa and the University of Beer Sheva and {\em Mark Israelit}, who immigrated to Israel in 1971 and acquired his PhD at Haifa in 1975. In their continuation of the Dirac program, Rosen and Israelit sticked as far as possible to the {\em e.m.} dogma
for a non-conformally coupled scalar field, $k\neq 6$, but with a light massive (Proca-type) photon. But already in his 1982 paper Rosen discussed the possibility of interpreting $\varphi_{\mu}$ as the potential of a new, hypothetical, heavy massive boson field (see below).
During the 1990s he and Israelit shifted to the last interpretation as the preferred physical view of the Weylian scale connection.
Rosen extended Dirac's approach in several respects. He added a scale invariant mass term $\mathfrak{L}_m$ to the Lagrangian, studied the dynamical equations, the corresponding currents, the Noether relations, and revisited the question of different gauges \citep{Rosen:1982}. Although he recognized the importance of the scale covariant derivatives corresponding to our (\ref{scale covariant derivative}) for giving the Lagrange density a scale invariant form, he {\em did not } write the dynamical equations {\em scale invariantly}. The left hand side of the Einstein equation, e.g., appeared with the Einstein tensor of the Riemannian component of the Weyl metric, $_g\hspace{-0.05em}G =\, _g\hspace{-0.1em}Riem- \frac{_g\hspace{-0.08em} R}{2} g$ in the notation of our section \ref{subsection Weyl geometry}, rather than with the respective (scale invariant) Weyl geometric tensors $G= Riem - \frac{R}{2}g$. Similarly the right hand side expressions for the energy-momentum of mass and the scalar field were neither scale covariant nor scale invariant. All terms of the dynamical equations were stripped down to their Riemannian cores. This deprived the Weyl geometric framework of much of its conceptual strenght, even though the equalities were valid in every scale gauge \citep[equ. (121)]{Rosen:1982}. This remained so in all of his and Israelit's work. A scale co/invariant form for the dynamical equations was introduced only a decade later in the work of Hung Cheng and Drechsler/Tann (section \ref{subsection Drechsler/Tann}), .
Rosen also posed the question how Dirac's ``atomic gauge'', in the sense of Weyl gauge, might be made consistent with a non-integrable Weyl geometric structure in order to remove the old problem which Einstein had raised in 1918 as an objection against Weyl's generalized geometry. He tried to back the ``atomic gauge'' by introducing what he called a ``standard vector'' (field). For any timelike vector field $u$ of Weyl weight $w(u)=-1$ the norm $|u|=g(u,u)^{\frac{1}{2}}$ is scale invariant ($w|u|=2-1-1=0$). If $|u|$ is scale covariantly constant, i.e. $D|u| =0$ ($D$ the scale covariant derivative), Rosen called it a {\em standard vector} field and considered the hypothesis that atoms carry a ``standard vector'' field with them \citep[p. 220f.]{Rosen:1982}. But he was cautious enough not to declare this hypothesis as a definitive solution of the measurement problem in Weyl geometric gravity.
He found that the Noether relations due to the diffeomorphism invariance of the Lagrangian imply the equations of motion for matter, while the Noether relations induced by its scale invariance show that the scalar field equation is a consequence of the Einstein equation and the generalized ``electrodynamical'' (i.e, scale curvature) equation \citep[p. 230]{Rosen:1982}. Moreover, studying Dirac's Lagrangian (\ref{scale invariant Dirac action}) with general coefficient $k$, he realized that for the case of non-conformal coupling the scale curvature equation acquires the form of a generalized Proca equation
\begin{equation} \nabla_{\nu} f^{\mu \nu} + m^2 \varphi^{\mu}=0 \label{Rosens Proca equ}
\end{equation}
with $(m\, [ c \hbar])^2=\frac{1}{2}(6-k)$ \citep[233]{Rosen:1982}. This was consistent with Smolin's observation regarding the Weylian scale connection (cf. section \ref{subsection SM 1970s}), which Rosen apparently did not know. He concluded that in the case $k\neq 6$ two physical interpretations for the scale connection were possible: $\varphi_{\mu}$ might represent an electromagnetic field with massive photons of very small mass, or a ``meson'' field extremely weak interacting with ordinary matter.\footnote{Rosen's ``meson'' was a hypothetical massive fundamental boson, no bound state of quarks like the ones of the SM.}
He added:
\begin{quote}
These mesons could conceivably
accumulate at the center of galaxies and galaxy clusters and could provided (sic!)
the ``missing mass'' that is needed to give a closed universe. \citep[p. 234]{Rosen:1982}
\end{quote}
Rosen thus considered an early ``dark matter'' hypothesis for the Weyl field, at a time when the conditions for the present understanding of dark matter in galaxies and structure formation was just forming \citep{Sanders:DarkMatter}. He mainly related it to the missing mass for cosmological models of positive spatial curvature and alluded at best implicitly to Zwicky's early observations of a mass problem in galaxy clusters.
For cosmological investigations Rosen also considered a vanishing scale curvature. That led to an integrable Weyl geometry with the logarithm of the Dirac scalar field as the potential of the scale connection like in our equ. (\ref{triviality condition}) \citep[equ. (136)]{Rosen:1982}. Although this implies a dynamically trivial extension of Einstein gravity, Rosen found it interesting to discuss scaling effects from a geometrical point of view.
For a Robertson-Walker type metric $\overline{g}_{\mu \nu}$ of the form
\begin{equation} d\overline{s}^2 = dt^2 - \frac{a(t)^2}{a_o^2} dl^2 \, \label{Robertson Walker metric} \end{equation}
he introduced
\[ g_{\mu \nu} = \frac{a_o^2}{a(t)^2} \overline{g}_{\mu \nu} \, . \]
as the {\em cosmic gauge}. After an appropriate reparametrization of the time coordinate this led to a static Riemannian metric for the model (\ref{Robertson Walker metric}),
\[ g_{\mu \nu}: \quad ds^2 = dT^2 - dl^2\, , \]
and $\beta =\frac{a(t)}{a_o}$ \citep[234ff.]{Rosen:1982}.
He showed that the cosmological redshift $z$ of a light signal, emitted at time $T_o$ and received at $T_1$, remains invariant under rescaling. In the ``cosmic gauge'' it appears no longer due to a spatial expansion of the geometry, but to the scalar field $\beta$, with $z+1 = \frac{\beta{T_1}}{\beta(T_o)}$, or equivalently, what Rosen did not mention, due to the Weylian scale connection in the ``cosmic gauge'' (cf. subsection \ref{subsection trivial}).
\subsubsection{Omote, Utiyama and the Japanese group\label{subsection Utiyama}}
Already in 1971 and unnoticed by Dirac, a Lagrangian field theory of gravity with a scale covariant scalar field coupling to the Hilbert term like in JBD theory, but
now explicitly formulated in the framework of Weyl geometry had been formulated by {\em M. Omote}, Tokyo, \citep{Omote:1971}.\footnote{This was more than a year before the Trieste symposium at which Dirac talked about his ideas. Apparently the paper remained unknown to Dirac. A second paper by Omote followed after Dirac's publication and after Utiyama had jumped in \citep{Omote:1974}.}
A little later, and more or less
at the time of Dirac's retake of Weyl geometry {\em Ryoyu Utiyama} (Toyonaka/Osaka) headed toward a similar goal, although referring to A. Bregman's paper discussed in section \ref{subsection Cartan-Weyl} and with a main interest in elementary particle physics.\footnote{In his first paper of 1973 Omote was not mentioned; it was taken up, however, in the references of \citep{,Utiyama:1975a}.}
Different to Dirac, he left the {\em em} dogma behind and tried to understand the (nontrivial) Weylian scale connection as a new fundamental field. In a series of papers he
ventured toward its bosonic interpretation \citep{Utiyama:1973,Utiyama:1975a,Utiyama:1975II} and presented his results at the Seventh International Conference on Gravitation and Relativity (Tel Aviv, June 1974). Utiyama emphasized that a Brans-Dicke field $\phi$ of weight $-1$, imported to Weyl geometry, could serve as a kind of {\em measure field} (Utiyama's terminology) with respect to which gauge invariant measurable quantities could be expressed starting from any gauge \citep{Utiyama:1973,Utiyama:1975II}.
The import of the scalar field into a Weyl geometric structure would let it appear natural that $\phi$ is accompanied by a Weylian scale connection $\varphi$ with non-vanishing curvature (``Weyl's gauge field''). So Utiyama proposed to explore the ordinary Yang-Mills Lagrangian term for a Weylian scale connection
\begin{equation} \mathcal{L}_{\varphi}= - \varepsilon \frac{1}{4} f_{\mu \nu } f^{\mu \nu } \sqrt{|det\, g|} \quad (\mbox{here with}\; \varepsilon =1) \end{equation}
\citep[(2.4)]{Utiyama:1975II}.\footnote{Dirac included a similar scale curvature term in his Lagrangian, but did not study its consequences.}
He studied conditions under which ``Weyl's gauge field'' admitted plane wave solutions, and came to the conclusion that it would be ``tachyonic'', i.e. a field which allowed superluminal propagation of perturbations. In Utiyama's view the ``boson'' had therefore to be confined to the interior of matter particles. Nevertheless he thought that this ``unusual field $\varphi_{\mu }$ might play some role in establishing a model of a stable elementary particle'' \citep[2089]{Utiyama:1973}.
Utiyama's results were not generally accepted. {\em Kenji Hayashi} and {\em Taichiro Kugo}, two younger colleagues from Tokyo resp. Kyoto, reanalyzed his calculations and argued that, with slight adaptations of the other parameters, the sign $\varepsilon $ could just as well be switched. Then an ordinary, at least non-tachyonic, field would result \citep[340f.]{Hayashi/Kugo:1979}.\footnote{Apparently Hayashi/Kugo used different signature conventions from Utiyama, which resulted in another sign flip in $\varepsilon $. }
Even then the scale connection would still have strange physical properties. The two physicists showed, after a careful introduction of Weyl geometric spinor fields and their Lagrangians (using scale covariant derivatives), that the scale connection terms canceled. As they considered only the kinetic term of fermionic Lagrangians, no Yukawa term, in their approach neither the scalar $\phi$-field nor the scale connection $\varphi$ coupled effectively to spinor fields.\footnote{ $\phi$ and $\varphi$ not even coupled to the electromagnetic field, as Hayashi and Shirafuri showed in another paper the same year.}
At the very moment that a Weylian scale connection $\varphi$ was interpreted as a ``physical'' field beyond electromagnetism, it started to puzzle its investigators and, at first, posed more riddles than it was able to solve. It seemed not to couple to matter fields at all (Hayashi/Kugo), looked either ``tachyonic'' (Utiyama) or, as we shall see below (Smolin, Nieh, Hung Cheng), appeared to be of Planck mass, far beyond anything observable.
\subsection{\small Cartan-Weyl geometric approaches\label{subsection Cartan-Weyl}}
\subsubsection{The Cartan geometric approach to gravity}
Another input to Weyl geometric gravity came from the research tradition started by {\em Dennis Sciama} and {\em Thomas Kibble} who developed a theory of gravity by ``localizing'' the symmetries of Minkowski space, i.e., the Poincar\'e group \citep{Sciama:1962,Kibble:1961}.
They treated the ``external'' symmetries of spacetime similar to the ``internal'' ones
investigated in the gauge theories over Minkowski space in elementary particle physics (isospin, $SU_2$, later $SU_3$ and generalizations) which arose from the works of Yang/Mills and Utiyama. Without explicit recourse to Cartan they reproduced basic structures of Cartan geometry in field theoretic terms written in classical tensor calculus. The dynamical nature of the infinitesimal translations component of the ``localized'' Poincar\'e group found its expression in the asymmetry of the linear connection, viz. torsion. In the sequel different Lagrangians were investigated, and more general groups, in particular the scale extended Poincar\'e group or the affine group, were studied. In this way a broad field of {\em gauge theories of gravitation} arose \citep{Blagojevic/Hehl}.
During the 1970s several authors introduced Cartan geometric methods into this research program, particularly prolific among them {\em Andr\'e Trautman}, Warszaw, and {\em Friedrich Hehl}, Cologne.\footnote{\citep{Hehl:1970Habil,Trautman:1973,Hehl_ea:1976}. For ex-post surveys see \citep{Trautman:2006,Hehl:Dennis} and the rich reader \citep{Blagojevic/Hehl}. }
They showed that Cartan geometry offered a tailor-made geometric framework for infinitesimalizing (``localizing'' in the language of physicists) the symmetries and the currents known from Minkowski space and special relativity. About the same time also the first publications studying the scale extended Poincar\'e group, often called the {\em Weyl group},
\begin{equation}
\quad \mathfrak{W} = \mathbb R^n \rtimes (SO(1,n-1) \times \mathbb R^+) \, ,
\end{equation}
appeared.
In the global view $(\mathbb R^+, \cdot)$ operates as the {\em dilation} group on the translations and, in case of a global view, on the underlying Minkowski space $\mathbb R^{(1,3)} \cong \mathfrak{W}/ (SO(1,3) \times \mathbb R^+)$ in the case $n=4$. Under localization, or equivalently in the corresponding Cartan space, the infinitesimal groups (Lie algebras) are related in such a way that $so(1,3) \oplus \mathbb R$ operates on the infinitesimal translations, $\mathbb R^4$. $\mathbb R^4$ is ``soldered'' point dependently to the tangent spaces of the underlying differentiable space $M$ by specifying a tetrad field or more generally a {\em frame field}, i.e., a family of bases of the tangent spaces. In more recent mathematical terms this corresponds to the choice of a {\em Cartan gauge} in a Cartan space modelled after $\mathfrak{W}/ (SO(1,3) \times \mathbb R^+)$, respectively the corresponding Lie algebras \citep{Sharpe:Cartan_Spaces}. What appears in the global view as an operation on the space itself was thus reshaped, in the infinitesimalized situation, as a mere change of a Cartan gauge.
Weyl's intentions of his 1918 geometry and the ideas of Dicke and Dirac regarding unit scaling were well expressed in this approach, and at the same time extended by introducing translational curvature, {\em torsion} in Cartan's terminology.
\subsubsection{Alexander Bregmann,} \ldots
at that time working at Kyoto, inferred from \citep{Omote:1971} that localized rescaling could be separated from Weyl's geometrical interpretation of the infinitesimal length transport. He argued that the point-dependent scale transformations could be treated ``analogous to the introduction of a space-time dependence into the constant parameters of Isospin or Poincar\'e transformations''. The global scale dimensions $d$ of a physical field $X$ could then be taken over as ``Weyl weight'' (Bregman's terminology) of $X$ to the localized theory \citep[p. 668]{Bregman:1973}. He first developed a Kibble-like approach to gravity built upon the Poincar\'e group with tetrad fields $h^{\mu}_a, \; (a=0,\ldots,3$ indexing the tetrads, $\mu = 0, \ldots 3$ the coordinates). He introduced a covariant derivative in terms of tetrad coordinates allowing for torsion, and a spin connection expressed by coefficient systems of the form $A^{m n}_{\mu}$ with regard to generators $S_{mn}$ of the Lorentz group.\footnote{Notations have been slightly adapted.}
Then he went on ``to accommodate'' the Weylian scale transformations to the tetrad calculus, in particular rescaling the tetrads with weight $-1$ (ibid. pp. 675ff.)
\begin{equation} h^{\mu}_{\;\; a} \mapsto h'^{\mu}_{\;\; a} = \Omega^{-1} h^{\mu}_{\;\; a} \label{Bregman tetrad rescaling}
\end{equation}
This expressed an operation of the scale group on the tetrads, not on the tangent vectors which remained unaffected by rescaling.\footnote{For $g_{\mu \nu} = h_{\mu}^{\;\;a} h_{\nu a}$ the convention (\ref{Bregman tetrad rescaling}) boils down to $g_{\mu \nu} \mapsto g'_{\mu \nu} = \Omega^2 g_{\mu \nu}$.}
That made it necessary to extend the spin connection by a component in the Lie algebra $R$ of the scale group, i.e., a Weylian scale connection $\varphi = \varphi_{\mu}dx^{\mu}$,\footnote{Bregman, like many other of our authors, used a sign inverted convention for the scale connection form. }
\begin{equation} \hat{A}^{m n}_{\mu} = A^{m n}_{\mu} - (h_{\mu}^{\;\;m} h^{\nu n} - h_{\mu}^{\;\;n} h^{\nu m}) \varphi_{\nu} \qquad \mbox{\citep[equ. (3.6)]{Bregman:1973}.}
\end{equation}
Bregman remarked that the modified spin connection represented by $\hat{A}^{m n}_{\mu}$ is ``Weyl invariant'' and used it to define an associated scale covariant derivative $\hat{D}_{k}=h^{\mu}_{\;\;k}\hat{D}_{\mu}$ with the property $\hat{D}_{\lambda}g_{\mu \nu}=-\varphi_{\lambda}g_{\mu \nu}$, typical for a Weylian metric like in our equ. (\ref{metric compatibility}). The corresponding linear connection $\hat{\Gamma}^{\lambda}_{\mu \nu} = \Gamma^{\lambda}_{\mu \nu} + \delta^{\lambda}_{\mu}\varphi_{\nu} + \delta^{\lambda}_{\nu}\varphi_{\mu}-g_{\mu \nu} \varphi^{\lambda} $ generalized the Weylian affine connection but was no longer symmetric; it rather included the scale invariant {\em torsion} tensor
\begin{equation} T^{\lambda}_{\mu \nu}=\hat{\Gamma}^{\lambda}_{\nu \mu}-\hat{\Gamma}^{\lambda}_{\mu \nu}={\Gamma}^{\lambda}_{\nu \mu}-{\Gamma}^{\lambda}_{\mu \nu} \, .\label{Bregman torsion}
\end{equation}
In retrospect we can see in Bregman's paper a symbolism for working in a Cartan space modelled after the homogeneous space $\mathfrak{W}/(SO(1,3)\times \mathbb R^+$, later called a {\em Cartan-Weyl space} (or the other way round).\footnote{Cf. \citep{Sharpe:Cartan_Spaces}.}
This terminology was not Bregman's; he used Cartan geometric language rather parsimoniously, only with regard to the underlying Riemann-Cartan structure, modelled after $\mathfrak{P}/SO(1,3)$ with $\mathfrak{P}= \mathbb R^4 \rtimes (SO(1,3)$ the Poincar\'e group. He did not think in geometric terms about the extension of this structure by rescaling the tetrads, the physical (spinor, vector etc.) fields, the associated spin connection etc.
Bregman was more interested in showing how to form Weyl invariant Lagrangians $L$ from matter Lagrangians $L^M$ (his notation) of scale dimension $-4$ with regard to ``constant parameter scale transformations''. He noticed that many Lagrange densities studied in field theory are also invariant under all conformal transformations of the Minkowski space, including the special conformal ones (``in particular this is generally true of theories whose quantized versions are renormalizable'') and added:
\begin{quote} In our case such a wider invariance of $L^M$ implies in turn that
the Poincare gauge invariant lagrangian $L^P$ is already Weyl invariant with $L=L^P$ \citep[p. 678]{Bregman:1973}.
\end{quote}
This sharp minded remark generalized Pauli's observation that a massless Dirac-spinor field is invariant under Weyl transformations without assuming a coupling to a Weylian scale connection \citep{Pauli:1940}.
Finally Bregman gave a short discussion of an integrable scale connection with potential $\sigma$, $\varphi_{\mu}=- \partial_{\mu} \sigma$. He considered $\sigma$ as an ``independent dynamical variable'' which is ``connected to the translation or spin gauge fields'' only through the field equations (ibid. p. 687). This approach facilitated the building of Weyl invariant Lagrange densities. As an example he presented a Lagrangian, which was similar to Omote's Lagrangian (and Dirac's not yet published one) including an additional torsion term \citep[equ. (5.2)]{Bregman:1973}.\footnote{The torsion term $\frac{2}{3} T^{\alpha}_{\mu \alpha} \partial^{\mu}\sigma^2$ in Bregman's equation is not scale invariant for itself, but his whole Lagrangian density is. }
All in all, this was a remarkable paper which seems to have been underestimated in the following development.
\subsubsection{Charap/Tait}
About a year later {\em John Charap} and {\em W. Tait}, London, presented a ``gauge theory of the Weyl group'' building upon the papers \citep{Yang/Mills:1954,Utiyama:1956,Kibble:1961,Dirac:1973}, while Bregman's paper remained unnoticed by them. They introduced the Weyl group as the ``simplest possible non-trivial enlargement of the Poincar\'e group'' \citep[p. 250]{Charap/Tait}, where by ``non-trivial'' they apparently hinted at the semidirect product operation of $\mathbb R^+$ on the translations. Like Bregman before them they explored ``the consequences of demanding for a theory of matter fields that it be invariant under the transformations of the Weyl group'' (ibid.).
They started by studying the infinitesimal Weyl transformations on Minkowski space endowed with a globally Weyl invariant Lagrangian $L(\chi, \chi')$ depending on a couple of fields $\chi$ and their first derivatives (indicated by $ \chi'$). They derived the Noether relations with regard to translations, rotations and dilations without mentioning Noether.\footnote{This was characteristic for the time. Over several decades the knowledge about the invariance properties of Lagrangian field theories and the know-how of dealing with it spread with marginal or no reference at all to Noether's seminal paper \citep{Noether:1918}, cf. \citep{Kosmann:Noether}.} If the Euler-Lagrange equations for all fields are satisfied (``on shell'') conservation laws for expressions corresponding to the symmetries follow (Noether's first theorem). Most of them could easily be identified with well known physical quantities and were called {\em canonical currents}, : the { canonical energy momentum} current $_c\hspace{-0.15em}T^{\mu}_{\nu}$, the { canonical angular momentum} current $M^{\mu}_{\nu \lambda}$ and additionally a {\em canonical dilation current} $_c\hspace{-0.1em}\Delta^{\mu}$. The latter evaded an immediate physical interpretation. But in analogy to the angular momentum, which can be decomposed into an internal (spin) contribution of the fields and an external, orbital component, the dilation current could be decomposed into
\begin{equation} _c\hspace{-0.1em}\Delta{\mu} = J^{\mu} + \, _c\hspace{-0.15em}T^{\mu}_{\nu} x^{\nu}\, , \qquad J^{\mu} = \frac{\partial L}{\partial (\partial_{\mu}\chi)} w(\chi) \chi\, ,
\end{equation}
with an internal component $J^{\mu}$ (summation of the field components understood to be included) and an external one depending on the origin of the coordinate system in Minkowski space. The external component was, of course, due to the dilational operation of $\mathbb R^+$ on the underlying space. It will be interesting to see what became of these under ``localization'' of the symmetries.
In the next step Charap and Tait localized the approach following Kibble's path; i.e., they made the group operations point dependent by introducing a tetrad field $h^{\mu}_k$ and {\em gauge fields} (geometrically spoken connections), the first one with values in the Lorentz algebra, given by coefficients $A^{ij}_{\mu}$ with respect to the algebra generators $S_{ij}$, and another one with values in the real numbers, given by a system of $A_{\mu}$. This allowed to define the scale covariant derivative
\begin{equation} D_{\mu} \chi = \partial_{\mu}\chi + \frac{1}{2}A^{ij}_{\mu}S_{ij}\,\chi - A_{\mu} w(\chi)\, \chi \qquad \mbox{\citep[equ. (3.7)]{Charap/Tait}.}
\end{equation}
Like Bregman they considered Lagrange densities $\mathfrak{L}$ constructed from globally Weyl invariant ones, $L$, by substituting partial derivatives by scale covariant derivatives (``minimal coupling'' in the later physics idiom) and using the volume element $|h|^{-1}dx$ with $|h| =det(h^{\mu}_k)$. They analyzed the resulting gauge field dynamics and considered their sources, usually the ``right hand side'' of the equations, as ``modified `currents'''\footnote{$ \mathfrak{T}^k_{\mu}= \frac{\partial \mathfrak{L}}{\partial h^{\mu}_k}\, , \quad \mathfrak{S}^{\mu}_{ij}= -2 \frac{\partial \mathfrak{L}}{\partial A^{i j}_{\mu}}\, , \quad \mathfrak{D}^{\mu}= \frac{\partial \mathfrak{L}}{\partial A_{\mu}}$ \citep[p. 256, notation slightly changed]{Charap/Tait}. Compare the {\em dynamical currents} by Hehl et al. below (\ref{hypermomentum current}). For the dynamical matter energy current variational and partial derivatives usually coincide. Charap and Tait may have (wrongly) generalized this property to the other currents.}
Among the localized {\em canonical} (Noether) currents only the one referring to {\em energy-momentum } was explicitly mentioned by them. In analogy to the global case they defined
\begin{equation} \, _c\hspace{-0.1em}\mathfrak{T}^{\lambda}_{\mu} = \frac{\partial \mathfrak{L}}{\partial (\partial_{\lambda} \chi )} \partial_{\mu} \chi - \delta^{\lambda}_{\mu}\mathfrak{L}
\end{equation}
and commented upon its difference from the {\em dynamical energy momentum}, arising from variational derivation of the matter Lagrangian with respect to the gravitational field. The latter written with respect to coordinate basis as a ``world tensor'', $\mathfrak{T}^{\lambda}_{\mu}$, can be derived from the canonical energy momentum $ _c\hspace{-0.1em}\mathfrak{T}^{\lambda}_{\mu}$ by adding terms in dynamical spin and dilation quantities.\footnote{$\mathfrak{T}^{\lambda}_{\mu}= _c\hspace{-0.12em}\mathfrak{T}^{\lambda}_{\mu} - \frac{1}{2}\mathfrak{S}^{\lambda}_{ij}A^{ij}_{\mu} - \mathfrak{D}^{\lambda}A_{\mu}$ \citep[equ. (3.22)]{Charap/Tait}.}
But neither the corresponding conservation theorem nor the other Noether currents were mentioned, not even the canonical dilation current which was round the corner,
\begin{equation}
_c\hspace{-0.1em}\Delta^{\mu} = - \frac{\partial \mathfrak{L}}{\partial (\partial_{\mu} \chi )} w(\chi)\chi\, . \label{dilational Noether current}
\end{equation}
In a separate passage on the ``geometrical interpretation'' of their theory they explained how Weyl's scale geometry of 1918 was taken up by their approach and how it was generalized by including torsion. Cartan geometry was neither mentioned nor used.
\subsubsection{Hehl et al. at the Kiel conference}
In the next decade several papers on gravity in a Cartan-Weyl environment appeared; among them \citep{Kasuya:1975,Obukhov:1982,Nieh:1982}.\footnote{All of them are mentioned in \citep[chap. 8]{Blagojevic/Hehl}.} Not all of these contained new insights, nor were their statements always reliable; but they indicate a slow broadening of an interest in Weyl geometric gravity with torsion. This interest acquired a wider context with the rise of Cartan geometric {\em metric-affine} studies of gravity.
\label{metric-affine}
A general discussion of this research would go far beyond the limits of this survey.\footnote{In particular F. Hehl and his varying coauthors were active in this field, \citep{Hehl_ea:1976short,Hehl_ea:1988Weyl_group,Hehl_ea:1988Kiel,Hehl_ea:1988Skaleninvarianz,Hehl_ea:1989local_scale,Hehl_ea:1995Report}. More papers by other authors, while only a few of those just mentioned, appear in \citep[chap. 9]{Blagojevic/Hehl}.}
But at least one of the papers of this field has to be commented upon here \citep{Hehl_ea:1988Kiel}. This paper was presented by {\em Friedrich Hehl} and coauthors at the Weyl centenary conference at Kiel in 1985. It discussed a view of Cartan geometric metric-affine of gravity with particular emphasis on the Weyl group $\mathfrak{W}\subset \mathbb R^n \rtimes GL(n,\mathbb R)$ and may be taken as paradigmatic for how Weyl geometric aspects were dealt with in this research program.
In modernized language, it worked in a Cartan geometry modelled after the Klein space $\mathfrak{A}/GL(n,\mathbb R)$ with the affine group $\mathfrak{A}= \mathbb R^n \rtimes GL(n,\mathbb R)$, respectively the corresponding Lie algebras. Additionally an independently given (Lorentzian) metric $g$ was assumed. The local description involved again an $n$-frame field $h^{\mu}_a\, ({ a, \mu = 0, \ldots, n-1})$ and its dual system of forms $h_{\mu}^a$ characterizing a Cartan gauge or the translational connection. Moreover, a connection with values in the Lie algebra of the isotropy group $gl(n,\mathbb R)$ (generalizing the rotations of Cartan-Riemann geometry) was given by the coefficient system $A_{\;a\, \mu}^{b}$, and a metric of Lorentzian signature by $g_{\mu \nu} = h_{\mu}^a h_{\nu}^b\, g_{a b}$. Let the corresponding covariant derivative be denoted by $D_a$, respectively $D_{\mu}$ if transcribed to coordinate indices. Of course, in general the derivative of the metric does not vanish, $D_{\lambda}g_{\mu \nu} =- Q_{\lambda \mu \nu}$, with $Q_{\lambda \mu \nu}$ usually called the {\em non-metricity} of the derivative, which is symmetric in its last two indices.
With respect to coordinate bases the linear connection is $\Gamma_{\mu \nu}^{\lambda}= h_{\mu}^a h^{\lambda}_b A_{\;a\, \nu}^{b}$.
In the case of a symmetric $\Gamma$ it can be decomposed, $\Gamma= _g\hspace{-0.12em}\Gamma+_Q\hspace{-0.12em}\Gamma$, into its Riemannian (Levi-Civita) component $_g\hspace{-0.12em}\Gamma$ with respect to $g$ and a component due to the non-metricity $_Q\hspace{-0.12em}\Gamma$.\footnote{$ _Q\hspace{-0.12em}\Gamma^{\lambda}_{\mu \nu} = \frac{1}{2}(Q_{\mu \nu}^{\; \; \; \lambda} - Q_{\; \; \mu \nu}^{\lambda}+ Q_{\nu\; \; \mu}^{\; \; \lambda})$}
Also $Q_{\lambda \mu \nu}$ can be decomposed into a traceless part $/\hspace{-0.65em}Q_{\lambda \mu \nu}$, with regard to the last two indices, and and its trace $q_{\lambda}$. Hehl and coauthors
introduced what they now introduced as the ``celebrated Weyl vector'', the trace part $q_{\lambda}$ of the non-metricity:
\begin{equation}
q_{\lambda}=\frac{1}{ n}Q_{\lambda \nu}^{\;\;\; \nu}\, \quad \qquad \mbox{\citep[p. 252]{{Hehl_ea:1988Kiel}}}
\end{equation}
In our notation $ \varphi_{\lambda} = \frac{1}{2}q_{\lambda} $ is a {\em part of the connection} and can also be expressed by $\varphi_{\lambda}=\frac{1}{n}A^a_{\; a\, \lambda} $.
In the case of vanishing $/\hspace{-0.65em}Q$ the ``Weyl vector'' satisfies the metric compatibility condition of Weyl geometry, our equ. (\ref{metric compatibility}). Then also the linear connection $\Gamma$ coincides with the Weylian invariant affine connection. This allowed to embed Weyl geometry in the wider framework of metric-affine geometry.
In this framework the data $(h^{\mu}_a, A_{\;\;a\, \mu}^{b},g_{a b})$ were considered as dynamically independent field components of an extended theory of gravity \citep[sec. 6, notation changed]{Hehl_ea:1988Kiel}.
For a set of matter fields $\Psi$ and a matter Lagrangian $\mathfrak{L}_m$ minimally coupled to the affine-metric structure $\mathfrak{L}_m(g_{ab},h^{\mu}_a,\Psi, D_a \Psi )$ the authors defined the {\em dynamical} matter {\em hypermomentum current} of their generalized theory by the variational derivative with regard to the full isotropy connection,
\begin{equation} \Delta_{b}^{\;\; a\, \mu} = |h| \frac{\delta \mathfrak{L}_m}{\delta A_{\;a\, \mu}^{b}} \, , \qquad \mbox{with} \quad |h|=det(h^{\mu}_a) \, , \label{hypermomentum current}
\end{equation}
and decomposed it into its rotational, dilational and shear components \citep[p. 274f.]{Hehl_ea:1988Kiel}.
In the context of the talk, the dynamical {\em dilational current}
\begin{equation}
\Delta^{\mu} :=\Delta_{a}^{\; a\, \mu}= |h| \frac{\delta \mathfrak{L}_m}{\delta A_{\;a\, \mu}^{a}} =\frac{|h|}{n} \frac{\delta \mathfrak{L}_m}{\delta \varphi_{\mu}} \label{Hehl ea dilational matter current}
\end{equation}
was of particular importance. The authors conceded that the shear current was ``remote from physical experience''; but for the dilational current they saw ``supporting evidence'' in Bjorken scaling of deep inelastic scattering experiments and, on the theoretical level, in certain models of supergravity \citep[pp. 244, 275]{Hehl_ea:1988Kiel}. This was a central point for their talk. Aready in their abstract they announced:
\begin{quote}
In the light of modern developments in particle physics, this coupling of the Weyl vector to the material dilation current is an unalterable part in any viable theory of a general-relativistic type, which comprises a Weylian piece \citep[p. 241]{Hehl_ea:1988Kiel}.
\end{quote}
This thesis stood somehow in contrast to the observation of Bregman (who was cited by our authors) that for matter fields with conformally invariant Lagrangians there was no need for assuming their coupling to the scale connection (the ``Weyl vector''). But the authors gave an example of a scalar field with non-vanishing dilational current (see below).
Hehl and his coauthors analyzed the dynamics of the metric affine theory on a quite general level with, at first, no particular Lagrangian specified. They described the form of the three dynamical equations corresponding to the decomposition of the general linear group into shear, rotational, and dilational components and argued that only two of them were dynamically independent because of the interdependencies due to the relations of the second Noether theorem \citep[sec. 8]{Hehl_ea:1988Kiel}. A short discussion of specific Lagrangians followed, among them some consequences of a scale covariant ``primordial scalar field, the so-called {\em dilaton field} $\sigma(x)$'' \citep[p. 282, emph. in original]{Hehl_ea:1988Kiel} of Weyl weight $w(\sigma)=-\frac{n-2}{2}$ and the usual scale invariant quadratic kinetic term
\begin{equation}
\mathfrak{L}_{\sigma} = \frac{|h|}{2} D_{\mu}\sigma D^{\mu} \sigma \, .
\end{equation}
As a ``primordial'' field $\sigma$ was considered to be a part of the matter sector, and because of the scale covariant derivative in $\mathfrak{L}_{\sigma}$ it contributed to the matter dilational current with
\begin{equation}
\Delta^{\mu}(\sigma) = \frac{n-2}{2n}\sigma D^{\mu}\sigma \qquad \mbox{\citep[equ. (10.11)]{Hehl_ea:1988Kiel}.}
\end{equation}
But the author team warned that one should not expect easy empirical repercussions in laboratory experiments:
\begin{quote}
Local scale invariance of fundamental interactions is expected to be valid only approximately in the high energy limit of Bjorken scaling or exactly at the onset of the big bang (ibid, p. 285).
\end{quote}
They assumed a breaking of scale symmetry down to the Poincar\'e group ``after a very short time lag'' (to the big bang) and proposed a quartic potential for $\sigma$ with a symmetry breaking quadratic term similar to the Higgs potential.
In the end, their gravitational Lagrangian {\em boiled down to Einstein gravity} with cosmological constant ``plus some supplementary terms known from Poincar\'e gauge theory'' (ibid, p. 242). By the ``supplementary terms'' they apparently referred to the torsion-spin coupling which arises in Einstein-Cartan gravity. It becomes a serious modification of Einstein gravity only at extremely high mass densities.\footnote{According to later estimates the torsion-spin coupling of Einstein-Cartan gravity becomes important only close to $10^{38}$ times the density of a neutron star,
which signifies energy densities at the hypothetical grand unification scale of elementary particle interactions \citep[p. 194]{Trautman:2006}, \citep[p. 108]{Blagojevic/Hehl}.}
In the framework of Hehl et al., Weyl geometric modifications of gravity were to be expected only under even more extreme condition than for torsion. In their view, Weyl geometric effects seemed to be banned to a speculative realm close to the ``big bang'', one of the great adventure playgrounds of late 20th century physics. In the sections \ref{section SM}, \ref{section cosmology} we shall see that this need not necessarily be so, if other perspectives are taken into account. But before we turn to these researches, we have to pay attention to another road towards reviving Weyl's scale geometry. It had different roots from those of the Omote-Dirac-Utiyama and the Cartan geometric approaches discussed in this section and arose from an attempt to geometrize the dynamics of non-relativistic quantum mechanics.
\section{\small Weyl's scale connection a geometrical clue to quantum mechanics?\label{section geometrical quantum mechanics}}
\subsection{\small Bohmian mechanics as a background\label{subsection Bohm}}
\subsubsection{Bohm's ``causal'' approach to QM}
In the early 1950s {\em David Bohm} proposed an alternative approach to non-relativistic quantum mechanics (QM) with an often discussed heterodox ``causal'' interpretation of the latter.\footnote{\citep{Bohm:1952a,Bohm:1952b}}
His core idea was to reintroduce exact particle trajectories into the description of quantum systems, which were guided by a pilot wave evolving according to the Schr\"odinger equation of ordinary quantum mechanics. In this move he took up earlier ideas of {\em Louis de Broglie} on the dualism of wave and particle aspects in QM, which had been critically debated in the late 1920s. This approach was mathematically close to a hydrodynamic picture of the Schr\"odinger equation, considered by {\em Ernst Madelung} in 1926. Madelung noticed that his ``hydrodynamical'' current was subject to a non-classical term which could be interpreted as a kind of force function due to the `` `inner forces' of the continuum'' \citep[p. 323]{Madelung:1926}. Bohm extended these older ideas, among others, by an analysis of the measuring process.\footnote{Bohm realized the kinship of his approach to the earlier proposals of de Broglie only after he had finished his manuscript \citep[p. 167]{Bohm:1952a}. In a footnote added in proof he also referred to Madelung's ``similar'' approach of 1926, adding the remark ``\ldots but like de Broglie he did not carry this interpretation to a logical conclusion'' (ibid.).}
He could thus avoid to stipulate a ``collapse'' of the wave function, which was usually assumed for extracting real valued measuring values from the observables given by the Hermitian operators of QM \citep[chap. 11]{Bacciagaluppi/Valentini}.
Bohm wanted to challenge the mainstream (``Copenhagen'') interpretation of QM which he accepted as consistent but as unsatisfactory from a foundational and natural philosophic point of view. His goal was to find an {\em alternative interpretation} of QM which did not affect the dynamics, at least not ``in the domain of dimensions of the order of $10^{-13}$ cm''. It ought to permit
\begin{quote} \dots to conceive
of each individual system as being in a precisely definable state, whose changes with time are determined by definite laws, analogous to (but not identical with)
the classical equations of motion \citep[p. 167]{Bohm:1952a}.
\end{quote}
Bohm started from the observation that to any Schr\"odinger equation for a wave function $\psi(x)=a(x)e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}S(x)}$ ($x \in \mathbb R^3$) governed, e.g. in the case of a single particle of mass $m$ in an external potential $V(x)$, by the equation
\begin{equation} i \hbar \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial t} = - \frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\, \nabla^2 \psi + V(x) \psi \, ,\label{Schroedinger equ}
\end{equation}
one can associate a pair of coupled differential equations for the phase $S(x)$ of $\psi(x)$ and the probability density $\rho(x) = a(x)^2$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\qquad \qquad \frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \left( \rho \frac{\nabla S}{m} \right) &=& 0 \, , \label{Bohm continuity equ I} \\
\frac{\partial S}{\partial t} + H(x,t) &=& 0 \, , \label{Bohm Hamilton-Jacobi equ} \\
\mbox{where} \qquad H(x,t) = \frac{(\nabla S)^2}{2m} &+& V(x) - \frac{\hbar^2}{4 m}\left( \frac{\nabla^2 \rho}{\rho} - \frac{1}{2}\frac{(\nabla \rho)^2}{\rho^2} \right) \, \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
\citep[equs. (6), (7)]{Bohm:1952a}.
Equation (\ref{Bohm Hamilton-Jacobi equ}) has the form of a {\em Hamilton-Jacobi} equation for a point particle with the principal function $S$ and conjugate momenta $p_k = \partial_k S $, equivalently the velocity $v=\frac{\nabla S}{m}$. The total potential $ \tilde{V}(x) = V(x) + U(x) $ deviates from the classical $V(x)$ by
\begin{equation} U(x)= - \frac{\hbar^2}{4 m}\left( \frac{\nabla^2 \rho}{\rho} - \frac{1}{2}\frac{(\nabla \rho)^2}{\rho^2} \right) = - \frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \frac{\nabla^2 a}{a} \, . \label{Bohm quantum potential}
\end{equation}
Bohm considered $U(x)$ as a kind of {\em quantum potential} added to the classical one.
The trajectories of the Hamilton-Jacobi system have velocities $v=\frac{\nabla S}{m}$ normal to the level surfaces of constant values of $S$. Thus (\ref{Bohm continuity equ I})
acquires the form of a continuity equation for an ensemble of point particles following the family of trajectories with the density $\rho$,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \left( \rho v \right) = 0 \, . \label{Bohm continuity equ}
\end{equation}
He argued that this might be ``the nucleus of an alternative interpretation
for Schroedinger's equation'' \citep[p. 170]{Bohm:1952a}. A pair of equations similar to (\ref{Bohm Hamilton-Jacobi equ}, \ref{Bohm continuity equ}) had already been investigated by Madelung with a hydrodynamical interpretation. But Madelung was more cautious. He did not consider his equations as more fundamental than Schr\"odinger's wave mechanics, but rather as a ``model representation'' from which one could derive the essential features of the latter \citep{Madelung:1926}.\footnote{``Die hydrodynamischen Gleichungen sind also gleichwertig
mit denen von Schr\"odinger und liefern alles, was jene geben, d. h. sie
sind hinreichend, um die wesentlichen Momente der Quantentheorie der
Atome modellm\"a\ss{}ig darzustellen'' \citep[p. 325]{Madelung:1926}.}
In Bohm's alternative interpretation of the equations a quantum particle could seem to be no longer subject to the Heisenberg indeterminacy, because it appeared as though it follows a specified trajectory of the system (\ref{Bohm Hamilton-Jacobi equ}); but the Heisenberg uncertainty was implicitly preserved because only a probability satisfying (\ref{Bohm continuity equ}) could be given for a trajectory passing specified regions in the level surfaces. Via the quantum potential (\ref{Bohm quantum potential}) a wave function satisfying (\ref{Schroedinger equ}) would operate as a non-local guiding structure, a ``pilot wave'' in a terminology not used by Bohm, for the motion of the quantum particle. This was quite close to de Broglie's theory of the 1920s \citep{Bacciagaluppi/Valentini}.
Although Bohm extended de Broglie's and Madelung's view by an analysis of the measuring process, his proposal did not receive immediate positive response in the quantum physics community \citep{Myvold:Bohm}. Only in the longer run different authors took it up and pursued programs along his lines, although sometimes with a different outlook on the underlying ontology and enriched by new mathematical ideas.
Independent of differing views on ontology or mathematical techniques, they belong to common family of {\em de Broglie -- Madelung -- Bohm} ({\em dBMB}) approaches.\footnote{\citep{Passon:2015,Passon:Bohm,Duerr_Ea:Compendium}, I thank O. Passon for his helpful explanations of Bohmian mechanics. For relativistic generalizations, see, e.g., \citep{Nicolic:2005}.}
Important for our context was the stepwise extension of the Bohmian approach to relativistic quantum mechanics, in particular for {\em Klein--Gordon} particles given by a complex field of spin zero, $\psi(x)=a(x)e^{i\frac{S}{\hbar}}$. It had values in the complex numbers
like a Schr\"odinger wave function, but lived on the Minkowski space with $x=(x^0, \ldots, x^3)$. Moreover, $\psi(x)$ demanded a more intricate interpretation than Born's probability rule.
In case of an electromagnetic interaction with potential $A_{\mu}$, the wave field of a Klein-Gordon particle of mass $m$ and charge $e$ satisfies the dynamical equation
\begin{equation}
\left(\frac{\hbar}{i}\partial_{\mu} -\frac{e}{c}A_{\mu} \right) \left(\frac{\hbar}{i}\partial^{\mu} -\frac{e}{c}A^{\mu} \right) \psi = (mc)^2 \psi \label{Klein-Gordon equ}
\end{equation}
in the signature $(+---)$ of the Minkowski space ($ \partial_o= c^{-1}\partial_t$). Here the Bohmian method lead to the Hamilton-Jacobi and continuity equations
\begin{eqnarray}
\left( \partial_{\mu}S - -\frac{e}{c}A_{\mu}\right)\, \left( \partial^{\mu}S -\frac{e}{c}A^{\mu} \right) &=& m^2 c^2+ \hbar^2\, Q \, , \label{Hamilton-Jacobi Klein-Gordon}\\
\partial_{\mu}( a^2\partial^{\mu}(S -\frac{e}{c}A_{\mu})= 0 \, , \label{continuity equ Klein-Gordon}
\end{eqnarray}
with a ``quantum term'' similar to (\ref{Bohm quantum potential}).\footnote{Cf. \citep[p. 554 ]{Nicolic:2005} for vanishing {\em em} potential. }
\begin{equation}
Q= \frac{\partial_{\mu}\partial^{\mu} a}{a}\, . \label{quantum potential Klein-Gordon simple}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{A geometrization idea by de Broglie\label{subsection de Broglie}}
In his later years de Broglie himself joined in the renewed research program. Among others, he pondered about a connection between the Jacobi flow of the Klein-Gordon field and general relativity \citep[pp. 118ff.]{deBroglie:1960}. He defended a hypothesis according to which quantum particles are constituted by extremely dense tiny regions of the field, governed by unknown non-linear equations, while in the exterior of these regions the known linear equations of quantum mechanics hold. He called these regions ``singular'' and investigated whether the motion of such ``singular'' regions may follow geodesics similar to the motion of singular regions in general relativity, which had been studied by Einstein and Grommer in the 1920s.\footnote{According to de Broglie it was J.-P. Vigier who made him awar of a parallel between his hypothesis and the work of Einstein and Grommer \citep[p. 92]{deBroglie:1960}.}
In this context he considered the right hand side of (\ref{Hamilton-Jacobi Klein-Gordon}) as a kind of ``variable rest mass'' which had to be calculated in the ``immediate vicinity of the particle'' \citep[p. 116]{deBroglie:1960}:
\begin{equation} \mathfrak{M}_o= \sqrt{m_o^2 + \frac{\hbar^2}{c^2} \frac{\partial{\nu}\partial^{\nu}a}{a}}
\end{equation}
Some authors would later call $\mathfrak{M}_o$ the ``quantum mass'' of a Klein-Gordon field (see subsection \ref{subsection Shojai ea}).
De Broglie considered the trajectories $x^{\mu}(s)$ of the Hamilton-Jacobi flow of a particle ``{\em in the absence of electromagnetic and gravitational fields}'' (ibid. p. 119, emph. in original) with 4-velocity, $u^{\mu}=\frac{d}{ds}x^{\mu}$, normalized to $u_{\mu}u^{\mu}=1$,
\begin{equation}
u^{\mu} = (\mathfrak{M}_o)^{-1} \partial^{\mu} S \, .
\end{equation}
and found that they satisfy the geodesic equations of a metric $g_{\mu \nu}$ arising from the Minkowski metric $\eta_{\mu \nu}$ by conformal rescaling
\begin{equation}
g_{\mu \nu} = \frac{\mathfrak{M}_o^2}{m_o^2}\,\eta_{\mu \nu} \label{de Broglie quantum metric}
\end{equation}
He concluded:
\begin{quote}
Thus, even if the particle is not subjected to any gravitational or electromagnetic field, its possible trajectories (\ldots) are the same as if space-time possessed non-Euclidean metrics defined by [$g_{\mu\nu}$] \citep[p. 120]{deBroglie:1960}.
\end{quote}
This was an interesting geometrization argument and de Broglie did not remain the only one to ponder on a connection between the dBMB quantum mechanics and general relativity.
Here we are mainly interested in later authors who tried to make progress by attempting a geometrization of QM in the framework of Weyl geometry.
\subsection{\small Santamato's proposal for geometrizing quantum mechanics\label{subsection Santamato}}
\subsubsection{Two phases of work on the program\label{Santamato two phases}}
In the 1980s {\em Enrico Santamato}, Napoli, proposed a new approach to quantum mechanics \citep{Santamato:1984a,Santamato:1984b,Santamato:1985}. It was based on studying weak random processes of ensembles of point particles moving in a Weyl geometrically modified configuration space.
He compared his approach with that of {\em Madelung-Bohm} and the stochastic program of {\em Feyn\`es-Nelson}.\footnote{For E. Nelson's program to re-derive the quantum dynamics from classical stochastic processes and classical probability see \citep{Bacciagaluppi:Nelson}.}
While the latter dealt with stochastic (Brownian) processes, Santamato's approach was closer to the view of Madelung and Bohm because it assumed only random initial conditions, with classical trajectories given in Hamilton-Jacobi form (this explains the attribute ``weak'' above). One can read Bohm's particle trajectories as deviating from those expected in Newtonian mechanics by some ``quantum force''. Santamato found this an intriguing idea but deplored the latter's ``mysterious nature'' which ``prevents carrying out a natural and acceptable theory along this line''. He hoped to find a {\em rational explanation} for the effects of the ``quantum force'' by {\em geometry} with a modified affine connection of the system's configuration space. Then the deviation from classical mechanics would appear as the outcome of ``fundamental properties of space'' \citep[p. 216]{Santamato:1984a}, which has to be understood in the sense of {\em configuration} space, as we may add.
In his first paper paper Santamato started from a configuration space with coordinates $(q^1, \ldots, q^n)$ endowed with a Euclidean metric. More generally, his approach allowed for a general positive definite metric $g_{ij}$, and later even a metric of indefinite signature, for dealing with general coordinates of $n$-particle systems and perhaps, in a further extension, with spin. The Lagrangian of the system, and the corresponding Hamilton-Jacobi equation, contained the metric explicitly or implicitly. This Euclidean, or more generally Riemannian, basic structure was complemented by a Weylian scale connection. Santamato's central idea was that the modification of the Hamilton-Jacobi equation induced by a properly determined {\em scale connection} can be used to express the {\em quantum modification} of the classical Hamiltonian like in the Madelung-Bohm approach.
Then the quantum aspects of the systems would be geometrized in terms of the Weyl geometry, surely a striking and even beautiful idea, if it works.
Santamato thus headed towards a new program of {\em geometrical quantization sui generis}. It had nothing to do with the better known geometric quantization program initiated more than a decade earlier by J.-N. Souriau, B. Kostant and others, which was already well under way in the 1980s \citep{Souriau:1966,Kostant:1970,Simms:1978}. In the latter geometrical methods underlying the canonical quantization were studied. Starting from a {\em symplectic phase space} manifold of a classical system, the observables were ``prequantized'' in a Hermitian line bundle, and finally the Hilbert space representation of quantum mechanics was constructed on this basis.\footnote{See, e.g., \citep{Woodhouse:GeoQuant} or \citep[chaps. 22/23]{Hall:QuantumTheory}.
A classical monograph on the symplectic approach to {\em classical} mechanics is \citep{Abraham/Marsden}; but it does not discuss spinning particles. In the 1980s the symplectic approach was already used as a starting platform for (pre-)quantization to which proper quantization procedures could then hook up, see e.g. \citep{Sniatycki}. Souriau was an early advocate of this program. In his book he discussed relativistic particles with spin \citep[\S 14]{Souriau:1970}.}
Santamato's geometrization was built upon a different
structure, Weyl geometry rather than symplectic geometry, and he had rather different goals.
Like other proposals in the dBMB (de Broglie-Madelung-Bohm) family, Santamato's program did not find immediate positive response. In the following decades he
shifted the center of his research to nonlinear optics of liquid crystals and to quantum optics, even with a strong empirical component, and stopped publishing on the foundational topic.
Perhaps a critical paper by
{\em Carlos Castro Perelman}, a younger colleague who knew the program nearly from its beginnings, contributed to the extended period of interruption? Castro discussed ``a series of technical points'' which seemed important for Santamato's program from the physical point of view \citep[p. 872]{Castro:1992}.\footnote{Carlos Castro later added his mother's name Perelman to his second name. Under this name he is mentioned in the acknowledgements of \citep{Santamato:1984b}. At that time he was research assistant at the University of Texas, Austin, where he acquired his Ph.D. in 1991.}
Among the problems he mentioned were several of a more foundational than of purely technical import: {\em (i)} the problem of specifying the random intial data for the ensemble of particle paths, {\em (ii)} the Hilbert space interpretation of the theory, {\em (iii)} the relationship of Santamato's approach to the Feynman path integral quantization. He also criticized the lack of a rigorous hypothesis in the choice of the particle's Lagrangian, the non-definite character of the probability density in the case of a Klein-Gordon particle (which could appear if the foliation with respect to the principal function $S$ is not timelike), the un-understood dependence of the particle's effective mass on the Weylian scalar curvature (in the configuration space), and some other more technical points.
After the turn to the new century/millennium Santamato came back to foundational questions in close cooperation with his colleague {\em Franceso De Martini} from the University of Rome. Both had cooperated in quantum optics already for many years. In the 2010s they turned to geometrical quantization in a series of joint publications and continued the program started by Santamato three decades earlier. They showed how to deal with spinor fields in this framework, in particular with the Dirac equation \citep{DeMartini/Santamato:2013} and discussed the famous {\em Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen} (EPR) non-locality question \citep{DeMartini/Santamato:2014a,DeMartini/Santamato:2014b}. Moreover, they analyzed the helicity of elementary particles and showed that the {\em spin-statistics relationship} of relativistic quantum mechanics can be derived in their framework without invoking arguments from quantum field theory \citep{DeMartini/Santamato:2015a,DeMartini/Santamato:2015b,DeMartini/Santamato:2016a}. In this new series of papers Minkowski space formed the starting point for the construction of the configuration spaces which could be extended by internal degrees of freedom. Moreover, a transition from point dynamical Lagrangians as the dominant view to a dynamically equivalent description in terms of scale invariant field theoretic Lagrangians in two scalar fields enlarged the perspective (see below).
It is unnecessary to go into details of these often quite technical articles; here I concentrate on the basic question of the geometrization program.\footnote{Santamato and De Martini propagated the geometrical side of their research under different labels: at first they talked about ``affine quantum mechanics (AQM)'' in ``conformal differential geometry'' \citep{DeMartini/Santamato:2013}, then they shifted to ``conformal quantum geometrodynamics (CQG)'' \citep{DeMartini/Santamato:2014a,DeMartini/Santamato:2014b}. }
Here we want to see how Santamato's
intriguing idea of introducing a Weyl geometric structure on the configuration space, in order to model the Bohmian effects of quantum systems, works.
\subsubsection{The geometrization of the configuration space\label{subsection configuration space}}
Summing up, Santamato's idea was to consider dynamical systems with finite degrees of freedom, parametrized by a configuration space $V$ with parameters $q^1, \ldots , q^n$, endowed with a pseudo-Riemannian metric $g_{ij}$ which could be of any signature \citep{Santamato:1984a}. In the case of a non-relativistic $k$-particle system without inner degrees of freedom it could be the product of Euclidean 3-metrics, for relativistic particles in Minkowski space with metric $\eta = diag(-1,1,1,1)$ it was of signature $(3k,3)$ \citep{Santamato:1984b}.
In the case of a relativistic 1-particle system with spin the product of the Minkowski space $\M$ and the Lorentz group served as configuration space, $V=\M \times SO(3,1)$, where the second factor parametrizes ``hidden'' rotational degrees of freedom of the particle \citep[p. 634]{DeMartini/Santamato:2013}.
By an astute choice of coordinates $(q^1, \ldots q^{10}) =(x^{\mu}, \theta^{\alpha})$ (with $\alpha = 1, \ldots, 6$) in $V$, with generalized ``Euler angles'' $ \theta^{\alpha}$ for parametrizing $ SO(3,1) $,
the authors introduced a metric $(g_{ij})$ by a block matrix composed of the Minkowski metric $\eta_{\mu \nu}$ and a ``metric of the parameter space of the Lorentz group'' $g_{\alpha \beta}$ with signature $(+++---)$. A frame given by $e^{\mu}_a$ can be charactized by the Lorentz transformation $\theta$ which transforms the standard basis into the given one, which may now be written as $e^{\mu}_a(\theta)$.
The metric on the Lorentz group component was derived from the group operation on the frames, by measuring the Minkowski squared norm induced by infinitesimal rotations of the Euler angles (summation over all frame vectors):
\begin{eqnarray} g_{\alpha \beta}(\theta) &=& - a^2\, \eta_{\mu\rho}\eta_{\nu\sigma}\,\omega^{\mu\nu}_{\alpha}(\theta)\omega^{\rho\sigma}_{\beta}(\theta) \\
\mbox{with}\qquad \omega^{\mu\nu}_{\alpha}(\theta) &=& g^{\rho\nu} e^a_{\rho}(\theta)\, \frac{\partial}{\partial {\theta^{\alpha}}} e^{\mu}_a(\theta) \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The factor $a^2$ was not mentioned at this place and only made explicit by the authors in passing elsewhere \citep[p. 3313]{DeMartini/Santamato:2014a}. Here $a$ expressed the {\em gyromagnetic radius} of a relativistic top $a=\sqrt{6} \frac{\hbar}{mc}$ and was
important, because due to it the geometry would ``know'' about the mass of the spinning particle. For the metric they found a constant Riemannian scalar curvature $_gR=\frac{6}{a^2}= \frac{(m c)^2}{\hbar^2}$ induced from the Lorentz component \citep[p. 3313]{DeMartini/Santamato:2014a}.
This was a surprising {\em Riemannian geometrization of the configuration space} of the, up to here, non-quantum, relativistic top by a non-definite metric $g_{ij}$ of signature $(3+3, 1+3)$ with constant scalar curvature.
\subsubsection{Santamato's random processes in the 1980s}
At first, the particle motion in the configuration space had to be analyzed. Santamato characterized it as a (weak) random process described by an ensemble of trajectories $q^i(t,\omega)$ with $\omega$ ``the sample tag''\footnote{That is, $\omega\in \Omega$, the sample space of a probability triple $(\Omega,\mathfrak{F}, P)$, where $\mathfrak{F}\subset \mathfrak{P}(\Omega)$ are the random events and $P$ is a probability measure on $\Omega$.}
and a well defined and normalized probability density $\overline{\rho}(q,t)$ satisfying the
continuity equation \citep[p. 217]{Santamato:1984a}
\begin{equation} \partial_t \, \overline{\rho} + \partial_i \,\left( \overline{\rho} \, v^i\right) = 0 \, . \label{continuity equ. I}
\end{equation}
He gave a peculiar derivation for the velocity field $v^i$ of his random process associated to a given Lagrangian $L(q,\dot{q},t)$. After shifting the Lagrangian to $L^{\ast} = L + \frac{d}{dt}S$ for some sufficiently differentiable function $S(q,t),$\footnote{$L^{\ast}$ has has the same Euler-Lagrange equations as the original $L$.}
he analyzed the {\em averaged action functional}
\begin{equation} I(t_o,t_1)= E\left( \int_{t_o}^{t_1} L^{\ast}(q(t,\omega), \dot{q}(t,\omega),t) dt \right) \, \label{averaged action functional}
\end{equation}
with $E(\ldots)$ the expectation value. He looked for the minimum of $I$ under variation of $v^i=\dot{q}^i$, with respect to all random motions obeying a flow equation and satisfying given initial data. As a necessary condition for the existence of such a minimum it turned out that $S$ has to solve the {\em Hamilton-Jacobi} equation
\citep[app. A]{Santamato:1984a}
\begin{equation} \partial_t S + H(q, \nabla S,t) = 0 \, ,\label{Santamatos Hamilton-Jacobi equ}
\end{equation}
with $H(q,p,t)$ the classical Hamiltionian corresponding to $L(q,\dot{q},t)$. Then the minimizing velocity field of (\ref{averaged action functional}) is the corresponding Hamilton-Jacobi flow.
Santamato could hope that the wave equations of QM might be derivable from his random processes if a classical Lagrangian (if there is any) was modified in a convincing way. ``Convincing'' would mean for him a change of the Lagrangian by geometrical terms, where the geometry is influenced by the particle's (random) motion.
\begin{quote}
Geometry is not prescribed; rather it is determined by physical reality. In
turn, geometry acts as a ``guidance field'' for matter. \citep[p. 216]{Santamato:1984a}
\end{quote}
He argued that such a ``feedback mechanism between geometry of space and particle motion'' was ``quite analogous'' to general relativity and might lead to ``a theory that is
physically indistinguishable from traditional quantum mechanics'' (ibid.).
At this point Santamato complemented the originally
Euclidean, or more generally Riemannian, basic structure of the configuration space by a {\em Weylian scale connection}. He called it a ``vector transplantation law'' and denoted it by $\phi_k$, corresponding to our $-\varphi_k$. In the case of a non-Euclidean Riemannian component of the metric $g_{ij}$ the continuity equation for the adapted probability density $\rho={|g|}^{-\frac{1}{2}}\,\overline{\rho}$ turns into the covariant equation:
\begin{equation} \partial_t \rho + \, _g\hspace{-0.2em}\nabla\hspace{-0.1em}_i (\rho v^i) = 0 \label{continuity equ II}
\end{equation}
A classical Lagragian $L_c(q,\dot{q},t)$ on the original non-relativistic configuration space was then modified on the Weylianized space according to \\[0.2em] {\em Santamato's 1-st postulate} \citep[equ. (8)]{Santamato:1984a}:
\begin{equation}
L(q,\dot{q},t) = L_c(q,\dot{q},t) + \gamma \frac{\hbar^2}{2 m} R(q,t)\, , \qquad \mbox{with} \quad \gamma=\frac{n-2}{4(n-1)} \, , \label{Santamatos 1st postulate}
\end{equation}
where $R(q,t)$ denotes the complete Weylian scalar curvature.
With a sign inverted convention for the scalar curvature (\ref{Weylian scalar curvature}),\footnote{Cf. fn \ref{fn curvature conventions}.}
Santamato wrote it as
\begin{equation} R = \, _gR +(n-1)(n-2)\,\phi_i \phi^i - 2(n-1)\, _g\hspace{-0.2em}\nabla\hspace{-0.1em}_i \, \phi^i \, .\label{Santamatos scalar curvature I}
\end{equation}
The term in $R$ enters (\ref{Santamatos 1st postulate}) like an add on to the potential. The Hamilton-Jacobi equation of the random flow (\ref{Santamatos Hamilton-Jacobi equ}) thus becomes
\begin{equation}
\partial_t S + H_c(q, \nabla S,t)- \gamma \frac{\hbar^2}{m}R = 0 \, .\label{Santamatos Hamilton-Jacobi equ II}
\end{equation}
According to our author's program, $R$ should depend on the random process and was assumed to be time dependent.
Therefore the $\phi_k$ cannot be arbitrarily given but ought to be determined by the probability density of the matter flow in the configuration space. Santamato applied his averaged least action principle (\ref{averaged action functional}) another time and evaluated it with (\ref{Santamatos 1st postulate}) for vanishing $L_c$, i.e., for $R(q,t)$ alone, with the encouraging result (ibid. equ. (19))
\begin{equation}
\phi_i = - (n-2)^{-1}\, \partial_i \ln \rho \, . \label{Santamatos scale connection}
\end{equation}
Then the scalar curvature $ R = \, _gR +\,_{\varphi}R$ turned out to contain \citep[equ. (20)]{Santamato:1984a}
\begin{equation} \, _{\varphi}R
= \frac{1}{\gamma \sqrt{\rho}}\;\left( _g\hspace{-0.2em}\nabla\hspace{-0.1em}_i \, \partial^i \sqrt{\rho} \right) \, .\label{Santamatos scalar curvature II}
\end{equation}
This form stood in striking accord with Bohm's quantum potential (\ref{Bohm quantum potential}). Santamato jumped without hesitation from the recognition of the formal agreement to a realistic conclusion:
\begin{quote}
\ldots according to Eq. [(\ref{Santamatos scale connection})], the geometric properties of
space (\ldots) are indeed affected by the presence of the particle
itself. In turn, this alteration of geometry of space
acts on the particle through the quantum force
$f_i =\gamma \frac{\hbar^2}{m}\, \partial_i\, R$, which, according to Eq. [(\ref{Santamatos scalar curvature I})], depends
on the gauge vector and its first and second derivatives. \citep[219, equ. numbers adapted]{Santamato:1984a}
\end{quote}
This was a strong statement. It suggested a close {\em kinship of Santamato's modification} of geometry to the one in the {\em general theory of relativity} (GR), although his modification did not refer to the spacetime manifold of GR, the ``extensive medium of the world'' as Weyl liked to formulate, but to the configuration space of a dynamical system.
In his next paper Santamato derived the Klein-Gordon equation (\ref{Klein-Gordon equ}) in the same way starting from a random process. He used a configuration space arising from Minkowski space $\M$ by superimposing a Weylian scale connection (\ref{Santamatos scalar curvature I}). Including electromagnetic terms his Lagrangian for the {\em relativistic ensemble} was
\begin{equation}
L(x,\dot{x}) = \left(1+\gamma \frac{\hbar^2}{(mc)^2}R(x) \right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\, |x| + \frac{e}{mc^2} A_\mu\, \dot{x}^\mu \, , \label{Lagrangian Klein Gordon ensemble}
\end{equation}
with $R=\, _{\varphi}R$ the Weylian scalar curvature ($\,_gR=0$). Taking into account equ. (\ref{Santamatos scalar curvature II}) it followed that a complex function $\psi = \sqrt{\rho}\, e^{i S}$ constructed as usual (up to a factor $\hbar^{-1}$ in the exponent) from the flow quantities ``obeys the Klein-Gordon equation''\citep[p. 2479]{Santamato:1984b}. This was no small achievement; but Santamato did not continue his research along these lines for many years.
\subsubsection{A look at the second phase in cooperation with De Martini}
After a long interruption Santamato, now in joint work with his colleague De Martini, gave a new derivation for the Weyl geometric approach to the foundations of quantum mechanics. Moroever, in the new series of papers we find a much clearer emphasis on the underlying scale co-/invariant structure.
The paper \citep{DeMartini/Santamato:2014a} started from a field theoretic Lagrangian in a metric-affine approach (cf. pp. \pageref{metric-affine}ff.). It involved two scalar fields $\rho, \sigma$ with weights $w(\rho)=-2,\, w(\sigma)=0$ under conformal rescaling and a scalar curvature term $R$ defined with regard to a metric $g_{ij}$ and an independently defined affine (torsion free) connection $\Gamma_{ij}^k$. $\sigma$ now took over the role of the former Hamilton-Jacobi principal function $S$ \citep[equ. (1)]{DeMartini/Santamato:2014a}.
\begin{equation}
\mathfrak{L}=\rho(\partial_{\mu}\sigma\partial^{\mu} \sigma + \gamma \hbar^2 R)\sqrt{|g|}\, . \label{Lagrangian ``geometrodynamics''}
\end{equation}
Variation with regard to the scalar fields leads to the dynamical equations:
\begin{eqnarray}
\partial_{\mu}\sigma\,\partial^{\mu} \sigma + \gamma \hbar^2 R &=& 0 \label{equ 1 ``geometrodynamics''} \\
\partial_{\mu}\left(\sqrt{|g|}\, \rho\,\partial^{\mu} \sigma\right) &=& 0 \qquad \longleftrightarrow \qquad\,
_g\hspace{-0.2em}\nabla_{\mu} \left( \rho\, \partial^{\mu} \sigma \right) = 0 \label{equ 2 ``geometrodynamics''}
\end{eqnarray}
(\ref{equ 1 ``geometrodynamics''}) has the same form as the Hamilton-Jacobi equation of an uncharged Klein-Gordon field (\ref{Hamilton-Jacobi Klein-Gordon}), where the scalar curvature, up to sign, takes the place of the ``quantum potential''. (\ref{equ 2 ``geometrodynamics''}) may be read as a continuity equation for a flow with density $\rho$ and velocity given by $\partial^{\mu} \sigma$ (if timelike).
By variation with regard to the affine connection,\footnote{Compare subsection \ref{section Palatini}.}
the authors concluded that the affine connection has the Weyl geometric form (\ref{Levi-Civita}) with the scale connection as in (\ref{Santamatos scale connection}), just like the one Santamato had derived in the 1980s from his average action
principle.\footnote{A sign error in the formula of the Weyl geometric affine connection \citep[equ. (4)]{DeMartini/Santamato:2014a} notwithstanding. }
The authors did not consider a variation of the metric because they had a de Broglie--Madelung--Bohm context in mind in which the Riemannian metric of the configuration space was determined by the Lagrangian of a classical system.
They immediately turned to it by a {\em mechanical interpretation} of their scalar field theory. In the relativistic case the equations (\ref{equ 1 ``geometrodynamics''}), (\ref{equ 2 ``geometrodynamics''}) can be derived just as well as the Hamilton-Jacobi and continuity equations of a variational problem $\delta \int L\, d\tau = 0$ with
\begin{equation} L_r= \sqrt{-\gamma \hbar^2 \, R(q) g_{\mu \nu}\, \dot{q}^{\mu} \dot{q}^{\nu} }\label{Lagrangian relativistic system Santamato}
\end{equation}
This fits well to the program of geometrizing a configuration space with Riemannian metric related to a classical process, which is amended by a Weylian scale connection standing in ``backreaction'' with a solution pair $(\sigma, \rho)$ of (\ref{equ 1 ``geometrodynamics''}), (\ref{equ 2 ``geometrodynamics''}).
With $\gamma= \frac{n-2}{4(n-1)} $ like above, and $n=4$, the Weylian component of the scalar curvature is in fact\footnote{\citep[p. 3310]{DeMartini/Santamato:2014a}}
\begin{eqnarray} \, _{\varphi}R &=& \frac{1}{4 \gamma}\,\left( 2 \rho^{-1}\,_g\hspace{-0.2em}\nabla_i \partial^i \rho - \rho^{-2}\, \partial_i\rho\, \partial^i\rho \right)
= \gamma^{-1} \frac{\,_g\hspace{-0.2em}\nabla_i \partial^i \sqrt{\rho}}{ \sqrt{\rho}} \\
&=& \gamma^{-1}\, \frac{2m}{\hbar^2 } U = \gamma^{-1} Q \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $U$ and $Q$ are the additional terms (``quantum potentials'') (\ref{Bohm quantum potential}), (\ref{quantum potential Klein-Gordon simple}) on the right hand side of the Hamilton-Jacobi equations of a Schr\"odinger, respectively a Klein-Gordon particle. It has to be understood that (\ref{Lagrangian relativistic system Santamato}) holds only for relativistic particles (Klein-Gordon and Dirac), while for the non-relativistic case of a Schr\"odinger particle with $R=\, _{\varphi}R $ the Lagrangian is (\ref{Santamatos 1st postulate}).
For investigating {\em relativistic spinning} particles De Martini and Santamato
considered a point dynamics with internal degrees of freedom in the configuration space $V=\M \times SO(3,1)$ described in subsection \ref{subsection configuration space}. The Hamilton-Jacobi equation of a process governed by the Lagrangian (\ref{Lagrangian relativistic system Santamato}) plus an electromagnetic term $L_{em}$
is given by \citep[equ. (7)]{DeMartini/Santamato:2013}
\begin{equation} (\partial_{\mu}S - \frac{e}{c}A_{\mu})(\partial^{\mu} S- \frac{e}{c}A^{\mu}) + \hbar^2 \gamma R = 0 \, , \label{Hamilton Jacobi equ conformal top}
\end{equation}
where $S$ satisfies the divergence equation
\begin{equation} D_{\mu} (\partial^{\mu} S - \frac{e}{c}A^{\mu}) =0
\end{equation}
with the scale covariant derivative, here $D_{\mu} = \nabla_{\mu} -2 \phi_{\mu}$ in our weight convention with $w(g_{\mu \nu})=2$, and with $\nabla_{\mu}$ the Weyl geometric covariant derivative. For a current defined by
$ \mathfrak{j}^{\mu} = \chi^{-(n-2)}\sqrt{|g|}\,(\partial^{\mu}S - \frac{e}{c}A^{\mu})$
this boils down to an ordinary continuity equation
\begin{equation}
\partial_{\mu} \mathfrak{j}^{\mu}= 0 \, . \label{continuity equ top}
\end{equation}
Obviously $ \mathfrak{j}^{\mu}$ is scale invariant.
The transition to a complex wave function depending on all coordinates $q$ of the configuration space
\begin{equation}
\psi(q) = \sqrt{\rho}\,e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}S} \, \label{wave function top}
\end{equation}
transforms the equs. (\ref{Hamilton Jacobi equ conformal top}), (\ref{continuity equ top}) into the {\em linear differential equation} of second order
\begin{equation}
(\hat{p}^{\mu} - - \frac{e}{c}A^{\mu})(\hat{p}_{\mu} - - \frac{e}{c}A_{\mu})\,\psi + \hbar^2 \gamma \, _gR \; \psi = 0 \, ,\label{pre-Dirac equ top}
\end{equation}
where $\hat{p}$ denotes the differential operator with $\hat{p}_{\mu} = - i \hbar \partial_{\mu}$. It has the form of the Klein-Gordon equation (\ref{Klein-Gordon equ})
with a mass factor which contains only the {\em Riemannian part} of the scalar curvature, $ \hbar^2 \gamma\,\, _gR = \hbar^2 \gamma\,\frac{6}{a^2}= m^2 c^2 $. The {\em Weylian component} $_\varphi R$ is controlled via (\ref{Santamatos scale connection}) by the density of the quantum flow.
The authors commented
\begin{quote}
This is a striking result as it demonstrates that the Hamilton-
Jacobi equation, applied to a general dynamical problem can be transformed into a
linear eigenvalue equation, the foremost ingredient of the formal structure of quantum
mechanics and of the Hilbert space theory. \citep[p. 636]{DeMartini/Santamato:2013}
\end{quote}
The first step towards a reconstruction of the Hilbert space quantization of the relativistic top was achieved.
In the next step the authors analyzed the decomposition of a solution $\psi$ of (\ref{pre-Dirac equ top}) into components $\psi_{u,v}$ lying in finite dimensional representations of $SO(3,1)$ of type $D^{(u,v)}$ with $2u, 2v \in \{0, 1, 2, \dots \} $. Then $\psi_{u,v}(q)$ can be factorized into functions of the spatial variable $x$ with values in the representation space of $D^{(u,v)}$, and $\theta$-dependent representation matrices operating on the latter; in spinor notation similar to van der Waerden's symbolism:\footnote{For van der Waerdens spinor symbolism see \citep{Schneider:Diss}.}
\begin{equation} \psi_{u,v}(q) = D^{(u,v)}(\Lambda(\theta))_{\sigma'}^{\sigma}\psi_{\sigma}^{\sigma'}(x) + D^{(v,u)}(\Lambda(\theta))_{\dot{\sigma'}}^{\dot{\sigma}}\psi_{\dot{\sigma}}^{\dot{\sigma'}}(x) \,
\end{equation}
For the particular choice $u=v=\frac{1}{2}$ this leads to a pair of 2-component spinor field on Minkowski space, equivalent to a 4-component Dirac field
$\Psi(x)= \left( \begin{array}{c }
\psi_{\sigma}^{\sigma'}(x) \\
\psi_{\dot{\sigma}}^{\dot{\sigma'}}(x)
\end{array}
\right) $ in the Weyl representation. Then the equation (\ref{pre-Dirac equ top}) acquires a form which, after neglecting an extremely small term in the electromagnetic field strength,\footnote{This term, $ \frac{e^2 a^2}{c^2}(H^2-E^2)$, is comparable with the linear term in the field strenghts only under the condition of very large field strenghts, $E\sim 10^{18}\, V m^{-1}, \, H \sim 10^9\, T$. ``To have an idea how large is this field, an electron at rest is accelerated by such field up to $10^9\, GeV$ in a linear accelerator 1 m long'' \citep[p. 3315]{DeMartini/Santamato:2014a}.}
was identified by the authors as the {\em squared Dirac equation}
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathfrak{D}_+ \mathfrak{D}_- \Psi &=& \mathfrak{D}_- \mathfrak{D}_+ \Psi = 0 \, ,\label{squared Dirac equ} \\
\mbox{where} \qquad \mathfrak{D}_\pm &=& \gamma^{\mu}(p_{\mu} -\frac{e}{c} A_{\mu}) \pm m \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
with the Dirac matrices $ \gamma^{\mu}$ ($\mu = 0, \ldots, 3$) \citep[p. 639]{DeMartini/Santamato:2013}.\footnote{It remains unclear to me (E.S.) how the representation matrices of the ``Euler angles'' of configuration space are suppressed, while the change of coordinate frames in Minkowski space gets represented on the spinor fields.}
Solutions of (\ref{squared Dirac equ}) can be decomposed into a superposition of the linear Dirac equation with positive and with negative mass. The authors proposed that the negative mass contributions have to be ``disregarded as unphysical'' \citep[p. 641]{DeMartini/Santamato:2013}. Even without trying to assess this proposal, it is clear that by this model of relativistic spinning particles Santamato and De Martini had achieved a surprising step forward for the geometrization program of the dBMB approach started in the
1980s.
They did not stop here, but went on by investigating the nonlocality of EPR systems in their approach. Their considerations led to a justification of the spin-statistic relation which usually is derived by quantum field methods \citep{DeMartini/Santamato:2014a,DeMartini/Santamato:2015a}. In order not to blow our survey these derivations, although central for the content of their papers, have to be shunted here.
\subsection{\small An attempt at bridge building to gravity\label{subsection Shojai ea}}
We still have to review attempts at connecting the dBMB approach to gravity with a specific reference to Weyl geometry. Different authors tried to do so. The main thrust in this direction was developed independently of the two Italian authors by {\em Fatimah Shojai, Ali Shojai} and {\em Mehdi Golshani} working at Tehran. Another, to my taste slightly more bizarre, step in this direction was made by {\em Giorgio Papini} and {\em Robert Wood} at the occasion of a symposium honouring J.-P. Vigier \citep{Wood/Papini:1997}. Some years earlier they had tried to fix a defect of Dirac's 1972 proposal to revive Weyl's original interpretation the scale connection as the electromagnetic potential, resulting from the non-integrability of the scale connection.\footnote{Among others, this had led to the measurement problem by atomic clocks.}
Papini and Wood proposed to solve this problem by considering ``bubbles'' in the environment of atoms, in which the scale symmetry is broken, while it holds in the large, outside the ``bubble'' \citep{Wood/Papini:1992}. For the Vigier symposium they recycled their idea by establishing a connection to a dBMB approach governing the dynamics in the bubble, similar to de Broglie's proposal.
At the end of the 1990s F. and A. Shojai, sometimes coauthored by Golshani, started with investigations of their own, in which they hoped to be able to use a Bohmian approach for a peculiar way of quantizing a part of the gravitational structure \citep{Shojai/Shojai/Golshani:1998a,Shojai/Shojai/Golshani:1998b,Shojai/Shojai/Golshani:1998c,Shojai/Golshani:1998,Shojai/Shojai:2000}. To do so they used methods from scalar-tensor theories of gravity. A specific emphasis of conformal ideas brought their approach close to Weyl geometry. During a sojourn at the {\em Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics} at Potsdam they laid this connection open and proclaimed it as the correct framework of their approach \citep{Shojai/Shojai:2003}. We want to see what that meant.
In the 1980s {\em Jayant Narlikar} and {\em Thanu Padmanabhan} had started to study a simplified version of quantum gravity which was invariant under conformal changes of the metric, $g_{\mu \nu} \mapsto \Omega^2 g_{\mu \nu}$. They proposed to {\em quantize only the factor} $\Omega$, viz. the scale degree of freedom of the metric. This had the great advantage of keeping the conformal structure unaffected by the quantization and circumvented the infamous obstacle of a fuzzy causal structure, which other approaches towards quantum gravity encountered. On this basis Narlikar and Padmanabhan calculated semiclassical approximations for cosmological solutions of the Einstein equation \citep{Narlikar/Padmanabhan:1983,Padmanabhan:1989}.\footnote{In the physics literature, so also in the paper by Shojai and Golshani, $\Omega$ is often talked about as the ``conformal'' degree of freedom of the metric, or even the ``conformal structure''.The latter is clearly mistaken, the first one at least misleading. Therefore I avoid this terminology in favour of {\em scaling degree of freedom}. }
In one of their early joint papers F. Shojai and M. Golshani took this idea up. In contrast to Narlikar and Padmanabhan they attempted a Bohmian path towards quantizing the scale factor \citep{Shojai/Golshani:1998}. This was quite daring because Bohmian quantum mechanics had been developed for systems of finite degrees of freedom only. Shojai and Golshani, however, invoked the idea of de Broglie to re-interpret the ``quantum mass'' $\mathfrak{M}_o^2 = m^2 + \frac{\hbar^2}{c^2}Q$ of a Klein-Gordon system (\ref{Hamilton-Jacobi Klein-Gordon}) as a conformal modification of the Minkowski metric using $\Omega^2 = \frac{\mathfrak{M}_o^2}{m^2}=1 + \frac{\hbar^2}{m^2 c^2} \frac{\nabla_{\mu}\partial^{\mu}\sqrt{\rho}}{\sqrt{a}} $. They considered this rescaling factor as a representative for the quantum degrees of freedom of a globally defined Klein-Gordon field.
Another problem was that $\mathfrak{M}_o^2$ could become negative. The Shojais and Golshani solved it by passing over to the exponential \citep[equ. (12)]{Shojai/Golshani:1998}\,
\begin{equation}
\mathfrak{M}^2 = m^2 e^{ \frac{\hbar^2}{m^2 c^2} \frac{\nabla_{\mu}\partial^{\mu}\sqrt{\rho}}{\sqrt{a}}} \, . \label{Shojais' quantum mass}
\end{equation}
The linear approximation coincides with $\mathfrak{M}_o^2$, and the conformal factor became
\begin{equation}
\Omega^2 = \frac{\mathfrak{M}^2}{m^2}=e^{ \frac{\hbar^2}{m^2 c^2} \frac{\nabla_{\mu}\partial^{\mu}\sqrt{\rho}}{\sqrt{\rho}}} \, . \label{Shojais conformal factor}
\end{equation}
They started from a Lagrangian with Einstein-Hilbert term and a matter Lagrangian in terms of a Hamilton-Jacob function $S$ and flow density $\rho$,
\begin{equation} \mathfrak{L}_m=\frac{\hbar^2}{m}\left(\frac{\rho}{\hbar^2}\partial_{\mu}S \, \partial^{\mu}S - \frac{m^2}{\hbar^2} \rho \right)\sqrt{|g|} \,
\end{equation}
characteristic for a classical Jacobi-Hamilton system. Santamato's viewpoint (which was apparently unknown to the Tehran authors) had been that the
introduction of the quantum potential turned the corresponding dynamical system into the Hamilton-Jacobi form of a Klein-Gordon system (\ref{Hamilton-Jacobi Klein-Gordon}), (\ref{continuity equ Klein-Gordon}). The Shojais proceeded differently.
Sustained by de Broglie's argumentation they argued:
\begin{quote}
\ldots the de Broglie remark leads to the conclusion that the introduction of the quantum potential which contains the quantal behaviors of the particles is {\em equivalent} to the introduction of a conformal factor $\Omega^2 = \frac{\mathfrak{M}^2}{m^2}$ in the metric \citep[p. 683, emphasis E.S.]{Shojai/Golshani:1998}.
\end{quote}
This was a puzzling statement. De Broglie had considered a geometrization for a single particle {\em in the absence of electromagnetic and gravitational fields} (subsection \ref{subsection de Broglie}). It remained unclear whether the argument could be transferred to the case of gravitational fields and in which sense such an ``equivalence'' was to be understood.
In Santamato's geometrization of a dBMB Hamilton-Jacobi system the ``prepotential'' of a Weylian scale connection on the configuration space (\ref{Santamatos scale connection}) was $\ln \rho$, up to a constant factor. It leads to the Weylian curvature expression (\ref{Santamatos scalar curvature II}) equivalent to a Bohmian ``quantum potential'' in the dynamical equation (\ref{Santamatos Hamilton-Jacobi equ II}). De Broglie and with him the Shojais used a different geometrizaton idea. Their ``prepotential'' of the Weylian scale connection was the scale factor $\Omega$ between a classical metric and the metric describing a quantum system. In the work of our authors it was the exponential expression (\ref{Shojais conformal factor}). Following de Broglie, one had to consider geodesic flows with the implicit constraint of orthogonal initial conditions to a level surface of a related Hamilton-Jacobi principal function $S$.
The modification (\ref{Shojais' quantum mass}) of the usual ``quantum mass'' formula implies that we cannot expect equivalence in the literal sense.
Even if one wants to read the argument as a motivation for a new type of dBMB-like quantization procedure, following the de Broglie paradigm, a justification for the attempted generalization from de Broglie's case (no gravitation) to the general case considered had to be given.
But our authors did not hesitate to take this step as a starting point for investigating cosmological models in which matter fields were given in different versions of scalar tensor theories.\footnote{\citep{Shojai/Golshani:1998,Shojai/Shojai/Golshani:1998a,Shojai/Shojai/Golshani:1998b,Shojai/Shojai:2000,Shojai/Shojai:2001}.}
In the result a Klein-Gordon field appeared on large scales, rather than as a descriptor of the motion of a single quantum particle. At some places it played
the role of a matter field \citep[p. 683]{Shojai/Golshani:1998}, \citep[p. 1762]{Shojai:2000}, at others that of a ``quantum gravity'' modification of the metric field \citep[p. 2728]{Shojai/Shojai/Golshani:1998a}.
The Shojais were convinced
\begin{quote}
\ldots that the theory works for a particle as well as for a real ensemble of the particle under consideration and that it includes pure quantum gravity effects \citep[1763]{Shojai/Shojai:2000}.
\end{quote}
But it remained unclear what ``quantum gravity'' would mean here.
One of the papers dealt explicitly with conformal transformations in scalar-tensor theories \citep{Shojai/Shojai/Golshani:1998a}.\footnote{The authors made a difference between ``scale transformations'' and ``conformal transformations''. In their terminology the first operated only on the metric, while the latter rescaled all physical fields according to their weights.}
The three authors distinguished between a ``{\em background metric}'', in which they considered the quantum effects being encoded by the varying ``quantum mass'' $\mathfrak{M}$, while in a ``{\em physical metric}'' $\mathfrak{M}$ was rescaled to a constant value $\overline{m}$. Then ``some part of the curvature of space-time represent the quantum effects'' \citep[p. 2726]{Shojai/Shojai/Golshani:1998a}. Independent of the physical interpretation and reasonability of this and some other observations one might wonder whether a reformulation in Weyl geometry could at least help to clarify the mathematical side of such statements.
This is what A. and F. Shojai attempted
in \citep{Shojai/Shojai:2003} and a following preprint \citep{Shojai/Shojai:2004}. In the meantime they had adopted Dirac's theory of 1972 (see section \ref{subsection Dirac}), but did not follow Dirac's {\em em} dogma. They rather considered the scale connection as ``a part of the geometry of the space-time'', implicitly constrained in their context by the integrability condition.\footnote{The Dirac Lagrangian was stripped of the Yang-Mills term of the scale connection \citep[equ. 6]{Shojai/Shojai:2004}.}
But without much hesitation they declared that Dirac's scalar field $\beta$ in (\ref{scale invariant Dirac action}) ``represents the quantum mass field'' in the sense of their embryonic theory outlined above \citep[p. 7 preprint]{Shojai/Shojai:2003}. They did not discuss how the different Lagrangians for the Dirac field and their Klein-Gordon field could be related to each other. Only a rather opaque perturbative argument was given as to why a solution of the $\beta$-scalar field equation may be identified with an expression of the ``quantum mass'' type, $\beta \mapsto \mathfrak{M}$ \citep[p. 13f.]{Shojai/Shojai:2003}.\footnote{The claim of the possibility to identify a Dirac-type scalar field with a ``quantum mass'' field remains, in my view, an unfounded speculation; E.S.}
On the other hand, this identification allowed to clarify their discussion of different frames a little. They now considered ``different conformal frames'' as ``identical pictures of the gravitational and quantum phenomena'' (ibid., p. 9).\footnote{The authors even conventionalized this idea as a ``conformal equivalence principle''\citep[p. 10]{Shojai/Shojai:2003}, \citep[p. 63]{Shojai/Shojai:2004}.}
In the light of such open spots A. and F. Shojai's conclusion that Weyl geometry ``provides a unified geometrical framework for understanding the gravitational and quantum forces'' \citep[p. 10 preprint]{Shojai/Shojai:2003} was at least premature and reads like too grand a speculation. Not all readers had this impression. Their program found at least one active successor, {\em R. Carroll}
\citep{Carroll:quantum-potential}.\footnote{{\em Not S.} Carroll, as it sometimes erroneously appears in the bibligraphy of later papers.}
But the critical points of justification for the ``Tehran'' program seem not to be clarified in this work either.
\section{\small Scale covariance in the standard model of elementary particle physics\label{section SM}}
About the middle of the 1970s the standard model of elementary particle physics (SM) started to become widely accepted as the key to the basic structures of matter \citep[chap. 22]{Kragh:Quantum}, \citep{Pickering:Quarks}.
Besides the point dependent (localized) {\em internal} symmetries of the electroweak forces, $SU(2)\times U(1)$ and the chromodynamic symmetry of the strong forces $SU(3)$ the new paradigm of gauge field theories worked with non-localized (``global'') {\em external} symmetries of special relativity, the Lorentz group. Characteristic for the paradigm was a global but only nearly respected scale invariance of the field Lagrangians, broken only by the mass term of the Higgs field. The Higgs field $\Phi$, a scalar field with values in an isospin $\frac{1}{2}$ representation of the electroweak group, was the clue for making electroweak symmetry of elementary particles consistent with mass terms. The latter was understood as a ``spontaneous breaking'' of the electroweak symmetry and became to be known as the ``Higgs mechanism'' \citep{Borrelli:Higgs}. In this section we look at some attempts for bridging the gap between the Higgs field and the scalar field of gravity.
\subsection{\small Englert, Smolin and Cheng, 1970/80s\label{subsection SM 1970s}}
\subsubsection{A conformal approach}
One of the originators of this theory (Higgs mechanism), {\em Fran\c{cois} Englert},\footnote{See, e.g. \cite{Karaca:Higgs}.} tried to play a similar game of ``spontaneous symmetry breaking'' in gravity, here with a real valued scalar field with scale symmetry in the sense of conformal rescaling.
In a common paper written with {\em Edgar Gunzig, C Truffin} and {\em P. Windey}, the authors established an explicit link to JBD gravity \citep{Englert/Gunzig:1975}.
But in contrast to \citep{Deser:1970}, Englert and coworkers considered conformal gravity as part of the quantum field program. They assumed a ``dimensionless'', i.e. scale invariant, Lagrangian for gravitation with a square curvature term of an affine connection $\Gamma$ {\em not} bound to the metric, $\mathcal{L}_{\text{grav}} = R^2 \, \sqrt{|det\, g|} $, in addition to a Lagrangian matter term \citep{Englert/Gunzig:1975}. In consequence, the authors varied with respect to the metric $g$ and the connection $\Gamma$ independently.
``To make contact with General Relativity'' (p. 74) the authors assumed the scalar curvature as expressed by a scalar function, $R \sim \omega^2$ (they used the symbol $\varphi$ instead of $\omega$). The Euler-Lagrange equation of the affine connection resulted in a relation like (\ref{Levi-Civita}) for the Weyl geometric case, with an integrable integrable scale connection $\varphi = d \log \omega$ \citep[equs.(7), (8)]{Englert/Gunzig:1975}.
By such a specialization, their approach looked as though it was touching upon a Weyl structure. But this was not the point of view of the authors; they rather
proceeded as ``conformal'' as possible on their search for connecting paths between quantum field theory of scalar fields and general relativity.
After some tentative quantum considerations the authors came back to a ``classical phenomenological description'' of their theory \citep[76]{Englert/Gunzig:1975}. For this description they introduced a scalar field $\phi(x) =\lambda^{-1} e^{\lambda \sigma(x)}$ coupled to gravity like in our equ. (\ref{Lagrangian JBD Fujii/Maeda}), with the necessary specification $\xi = \frac{1}{6}$ in order to secure conformal symmetry \citep[equ. (16)]{Englert/Gunzig:1975}. They considered $\sigma$ to be a ``dilation field'' (sic!) which represented a ``Nambu-Goldstone boson'' coupling to the mass terms.
After some turns and twists they summed up that their original action principle
\begin{quote}
\ldots matches all the results of General Relativity at a classical level, provided
mass originates in dynamical breakdown of symmetry. Thus, the fundamental finite component fields must
be massless and of the kind currently used in gauge field theories, but without scalar mesons \citep[76]{Englert/Gunzig:1975}.
\end{quote}
In one of the following papers Englert, now with Truffin as only coauthor, studied the perturbative behaviour of his version of conformal gravity ($\xi = \frac{n-2}{4(n-1)}$) coupled to massless fermions and photons in $n \geq 4$ dimensions.\footnote{The motivation or considering $n \geq 4$ was the method of dimensional regularization for the quantization of the theory.} He came to the conclusion that anomalies arising in the calculations for non-conformal actions disappeared at the tree and 1-loop levels in their approach. The two authors took this as an indicator that gravitation might perhaps arise in a ``natural way from spontaneous breakdown of conformal invariance'' \citep[426]{Englert_ea:1976}.
\subsubsection{Smolin introduces Weyl geometry}
Englert's e. a. paper was one of the early steps into the direction (i) of our introduction.
Other authors followed and extended this view, some of them explicitly in a Weyl geometric setting, others continued to use the language of conformal geometry. The first strategy was chosen by {\em Lee Smolin} in his paper \citep{Smolin:1979}. In section 2 of the paper he gave an explicit and clear introduction to Weyl geometry.\footnote{In his bibliography he went back directly to \citep{Weyl:STM} and \citep{Weyl:GuE}; he did not quote any of the later literature on Weyl geometry. }
The ``conformally metric gravitation'', as he called it, was built upon a matter-free Lagrangian built from Weyl geometric curvature terms $R, \, Ric = (R_{\mu \nu })$, $f=(f_{\mu \upsilon })$ for scale curvature and used a gravitational Lagrangian of order two. In a slight adaptation of notation using the scale covariant Weylian derivatives $D$ it was \cite[equ. (13)]{Smolin:1979}:
\begin{eqnarray} |det\, g|^{-\frac{1}{2}} \mathcal{L}_{\text{grav}} &=& -\frac{1}{2}c \, \phi^2 R + \; [ - {e_1} R^{\mu \nu }R_{\mu \nu } - {e_2} R^2 ] \label{Smolin's Lagrangian}\\
& & + \quad \frac{1}{2}D^{\mu}\phi \,D_{\mu}\phi -\frac{1}{4g^2}f_{\mu \nu } f^{\mu \nu } - \lambda \phi^4 \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $c, e_1, e_2, g, \lambda $ are coupling coefficients.\footnote{Signs have to be taken with caution. They may depend on conventions for defining the Riemann curvature, the Ricci contraction, and the signature. Smolin, e.g., used a different sign convention for $Riem$ to the one used in this survey. Signs given here are adapted to ${signature}\, g = (3,1)$. The Riemann tensor and Ricci contraction are those usually adopted in the mathematical literature, see fn. \ref{fn curvature conventions}. }
For coefficients
of the quadratic curvature terms (in square brackets) with $e_2 = - \frac{1}{3}e_1 $, the latter is variationally equivalent (equal up to divergence) to the squared conformal curvature $C^2 = C_{\mu \nu \kappa \lambda } C^{\mu \nu \kappa \lambda }.$\footnote{This seems to have been widely known. For an explicit statement see, e.g., \citep{Hehl_ea:1996quad_curv}.}
Smolin introduced the scalar field $\phi$ not only by formal reasons (``to write a conformally invariant Lagrangian with the required properties''), but with a physical interpretations similar to those given by Englert e.a.,\footnote{\citep{Englert/Gunzig:1975} was not quoted by Smolin.}
namely ``as an order parameter to indicate the spontaneous breaking of the conformal invariance'' \citep[260]{Smolin:1979}. His Lagrangian used a modified adaptation from JBD theory, ``with some additional couplings'' between the scale connection $\varphi$ and the scalar field $\phi$. Smolin emphasized that ``these additional couplings go against the spirit of
Brans-Dicke theory'' because from the Riemannian point of view they introduced a non-vanishing divergence of the non-gravitational fields.
For low energy considerations Smolin dropped the square curvature term (square brackets in (\ref{Smolin's Lagrangian})), added an ``effective'' potential term of the scalar field $V_{\text{eff}}(\phi )$ and derived the equations of motion by varying with respect to $g, \phi, \varphi$. Results were Einstein equation, scalar field equation, and Yang-Mills equation for the scale connection.
Smolin's reduced Lagrangian contained terms in the scale connection:\footnote{In scalar field gauge with $\phi \doteq \phi_o= F$, his reduced Lagrangian (square gravitational terms dropped) was \citep[equ. (3.17)]{Smolin:1979} \[ |det\, g|^{-\frac{1}{2}} \mathcal{L}_{grav} \doteq - \frac{1}{2}c \, F^2\, _g\hspace{-1pt}R -\frac{1}{4g^2}f_{\mu \nu } f^{\mu \nu } + \frac{1}{8}(1+6c)F^2 \varphi_{\mu} \varphi^{\mu } - V_{\text{eff}}(F) \; . \]
}
\begin{equation} -\frac{1}{4g^2}f_{\mu \nu } f^{\mu \nu } + \frac{1}{8}(1+6c)F^2 \varphi_{\mu} \varphi^{\mu }
\end{equation}
That looked like a mass term for the scale connection $\varphi$, the potential of the scale curvature field $f_{\mu \nu }$ called ``Weyl field'' by Smolin. By comparison with the Lagrangian of the Proca equation in electromagnetic theory, Smolin concluded that the ``Weyl field'' has mass close to the Planck scale, given by
\begin{equation} M^2_{\varphi} = \frac{1}{4}(1+6c)F^2 \, . \end{equation}
He commented that in his Weyl geometric gravitation theory ``general relativity couples to a massive vector field'' $\varphi$. The scalar field $\phi$, on the other hand, ``may be absorbed into the scalar parts'' of $g_{\mu \nu }$ and $\varphi_{\mu}$,\footnote{It is possible to choose the scale gauge such that $\phi$ becomes constant (scalar field gauge, see section \ref{subsection Weyl geometry}.}
by a change of variables and ``remains massless'' \citep[263]{Smolin:1979}. In this way,
Smolin brought Weyl geometic gravity closer to the field theoretic frame of particle physics. He did not discuss mass and interaction fields of the SM. Morover, the huge mass of the ``Weyl field'' must have appeared irritating.
\subsubsection{Interlude}
At the time Smolin's paper appeared, the program of so-called {\em induced gravity}, entered an active phase. Its central goal was to derive the action of conventional or modified Einstein gravity from an extended scheme of standard model type quantization. Among the authors involved in this program {\em Stephen Adler} and {\em Anthony Zee} stand out. We cannot go into this story here.\footnote{ For a survey of the status of investigations in 1981 see \citep{Adler:Report_1982}; but note in particular
\citep{Zee:1982a,Zee:1983}. The topic of ``origin of spontaneous symmetry breaking'' by radiative correction was much older \citep{Borrelli:Higgs,Karaca:Higgs}. A famous paper was \citep{Coleman/Weinberg:1973}.
In fact, Zee's first publication on the subject preceded Smolin's. \citep{Zee:1979} was submitted in December 1978 and published in February 1979; \citep{Smolin:1979} was submitted in June 1979.}
Smolin's view that the structure of Weyl geometry might be suited to bring classical gravity into a coherent frame with standard model physics did not find much immediate response. But it was ``rediscovered'' at least twice (plus an independently developed conformal version). In 1987/88 Hung Cheng at the MIT, and a decade later Wolfgang Drechsler and Hanno Tann at Munich, arrived at similar insights and established an explicit extension of Weyl geometric gravity to standard model (SM) fields \citep{Cheng:1988,Drechsler/Tann,Drechsler:Higgs}. Simultaneous to Cheng, the core of the idea was once more discovered by Mosh\'e Flato (Dijon) and Ryszard R\c{a}cka (during that time at Trieste), although they formulated it in a strictly conformal framework without Weyl structure \citep{Flato/Raczka}.
Neither Cheng, nor Flato/R\c{a}cka or Drechsler/Tann seem to have known Smolin's proposal (at least Smolin was not cited by them), nor did they refer to the papers of each other.\footnote{Flato/R\c{a}cka's paper appeared as a preprint of the {\em Scuola Internazionale Superiore di Studi Avanzati}, Trieste, in 1987; the paper itself was submitted in December 1987 to {\em Physics Letters B} and published in July 1988. Cheng's paper was submitted in February 1988, published in November. Only a decade later, in March 2009, Drechsler and Tann got acquainted with the other two papers. This indicates that the Weyl geometric approach in field theory had not yet acquired the coherence of a research program with a stable communication network. }
All three approaches had their own achievements. Here we can give only give a short presentation of the main points of the work directly related to Weyl geometry.
\subsubsection{Hung Cheng and his ``vector meson''}
{\em Hung Cheng} started out from a Weyl geometric background, apparently inherited from the papers of the Japanese group of authors around Utiyama. The latter had taken up Weyl geometry in the early 1970s in a way not too different from Smolin's later approach (see section \ref{subsection Utiyama}).
Cheng extended Utiyama's theory explicitly to the electroweak sector of the SM. He replaced the complex scalar field $\phi$ by the {\em Higgs field} $\Phi $, again of weight $-1$ but now with values in an isospin $\frac{1}{2}$ representation, and coupled it to the Weyl geometric scalar curvature $R$ and postulated:\footnote{In the sequel the isospin extended scalar field will be denoted by $\Phi $.}
\begin{eqnarray} \mathcal{L}_{R} &=& \frac{1}{2} \beta \, \Phi^{\ast} \Phi R \, |det\, g|^{\frac{1}{2}} \label{Hilbert term Weyl geometric} \\
\mathcal{L}_{\Phi} &=& \quad \frac{1}{2}\tilde{D}^{\mu} \Phi^{\ast} \tilde{D}_{\mu}\Phi \, |det\, g|^{\frac{1}{2}} \; \label{phi term Weyl geometric}
\end{eqnarray}
The scale covariant derivatives were extended to a localized electroweak ({\em ew}) group $SU(2)\times U(1)$. With the usual denotation of the standard model, $W^j_{\mu} $ for the field components of the $su(2)$ part (with respect to the Pauli matrices $\sigma _j\; (j=0,1,2)$) and $B_{\mu}$ for $u(1)_Y \cong \mathbb R$ and coupling coefficients $g, g'$ the derivative read\footnote{Cheng added another coupling coefficient for the scale connection, which is here suppressed. }
\begin{equation} \tilde{D}_{\mu}\Phi = (\partial _{\mu} - \varphi_{\mu} + \frac{1}{2} i g W^j_{\mu} \sigma_j + \frac{1}{2} g'B_{\mu})\Phi \, . \label{ew covariant derivative}
\end{equation}
The sign of the kinetic term of the Higgs field (\ref{phi term Weyl geometric}) shows that Cheng supposed $sig\; g =(+ - - - )$, which agrees with his high energy context, while the sign of (\ref{Hilbert term Weyl geometric}) indicates that he used the sign inverted convention for curvature.\footnote{See fn \ref{fn curvature conventions}.}
He
added Yang-Mills interaction Lagrangians for the {\em ew} interaction fields $F$ and $G$ of the potentials $W$ (values in $su_2$), respectively $B$ (values in $u(1)_Y$), and added a scalar curvature term in $f=(f_{\mu \nu}) = d\varphi$
\begin{equation} \mathcal{L}_{\text{YM}}= -\frac{1}{4}\left( f_{\mu \nu} f^{\mu \nu} + F_{\mu \nu} F^{\mu \nu} + G_{\mu \nu} G^{\mu \nu} \right) \, |det\, g|^{\frac{1}{2}} \, . \label{Cheng's ew interaction Lagrangian} \end{equation}
Finally he introduced spin $\frac{1}{2}$ fermion fields $\psi$ with the weight convention $w(\psi)=-\frac{3}{2}$, and a Lagrangian $\mathcal{L}_{\psi}$ similar to the one formulated later by Drechsler, discussed below (\ref{Lagrangian Dirac field}).\footnote{The second term in (\ref{Lagrangian Dirac field}) is missing in Cheng's publication. That is probably not intended, but a misprint. Moreover he did not discuss scale weights for Dirac matrices in the tetrad approach.}
Thus Cheng's general relativistic scalar field $\Phi$ resembled very much the Higgs field of the SM, which at that time was still a highly hypothetical object. He
called the scale connection, respectively its curvature, {\em Weyl's meson} field. Referring to Hayashi's e.a. observation that the scale connection does not influence the equation of motion of the spinor fields, he concluded:\footnote{Remember that the $\varphi$ terms of scale covariant derivatives in the Lagrangian of spinor fields cancel.}
\begin{quote}
\ldots Weyl's vector meson does not interact with leptons or quarks. Neither does it interact with other vector mesons. The only interaction the Weyl's meson has is that with the graviton. \citep[2183]{Cheng:1988}
\end{quote}
Because of the tremendously high mass of ``Weyl's vector meson'' Cheng conjectured that even such a minute coupling might be of some cosmological import. More precisely, he wondered, ``whether Weyl's meson may account for at least part of the dark matter of the universe'' (ibid.). Similar conjectures were stated once and again over the next decades, if theoretical entities were encountered which might represent massive particles without experimental evidence. Weyl geometric field theory was not spared this fate.
\subsubsection{Can gravity do what the Higgs does? }
In the same year in which Cheng's paper appeared, {\em Mosh\'e Flato} and {\em Ryszard R\c{a}czka} sket\-ched an approach in which they put gravity into a quantum physical perspective.\footnote{More than a decade earlier Flato had sketched a covariant (``curved space'') generalization of the Wightman axioms \citep{Flato/Simon}, different from the one discussed by R. Wald in this volume. }
In our context, this paper matters because it introduced a scale covariant Brans-Dicke like field in an isospin representation similar to Hung Cheng's, but in a strictly conformal framework \citep{Flato/Raczka}.
Six years later, R. R\c{a}czka took up the thread again, now in cooperation with {\em Marek
Paw{\l}owski}. In the meantime Paw{\l}owski
had joined the research program by a paper in which he addressed the question whether gravity ``can do what the Higgs does'' \citep{Pawlowski:1990}. In a couple of preprints\footnote{
\citep{Pawlowski/Raczka:1994a,Pawlowski/Raczka:1995_0,Pawlowski/Raczka:1995} }
and two refereed papers
\citep{Pawlowski/Raczka:1994FoP,Pawlowski/Raczka:1995} the two physicists proposed a ``Higgs free model for fundamental interactions'', as they described it. This proposal was formulated in a strictly conformal setting. Although it is very interesting in itself, we cannot discuss it here in more detail.
\subsection{\small Mass generation and Weyl geometric gravity ``at Munich'', 1980/90s\label{subsection Drechsler/Tann} }
\subsubsection{1990: Drechsler and Tann}
A view closer to Cheng's establishing a connection between gravity and electroweak fields in the framework of Weyl geometry was developed a decade later by {\em Wolfgang Drechsler} and his PhD student {\em Hanno Tann} at Munich. Drechsler had been active for more than twenty years in differential geometric aspects of field theory.\footnote{For example \citep{Drechsler/Mayer:1977}.} In cooperation with {\em D. Hartley} he developed an approach of his own to Weyl geometric gravity evolving form investigations in Kaluza-Klein theories \citep{Drechsler/Hartley}.
Tann joined the activity a little later during his work on his PhD thesis \citep{Tann:Diss}, coming from a background interest in geometric properties of the de Broglie-Bohm interpretation of quantum mechanics (see section \ref{subsection Bohm}). In their joint work \citep{Drechsler/Tann}, as well as in their separate publications \citep{Tann:Diss,Drechsler:Higgs} Weyl geometric structures were used in a coherent way, clearer than in most of the other physical papers discussed up to now.
Tann studied a complex valued scalar field $\Phi$, Drechsler, and the common paper of both, investigated a scalar field with values in an isospin $\frac{1}{2}$ representation of the {\em ew} group (like Cheng) with gravitational Lagrangian
\begin{equation} \mathcal{L}_{\text{grav}} = \mathcal{L}_{R} + \mathcal{L}_{R^2} \label{Drechsler/Tann Lagrangian}
\end{equation}
where $ \mathcal{L}_{R^2} = \tilde{\alpha } R^2 \sqrt{|det\, g|} $ and $ \mathfrak{L}_{R}= \frac{1}{12} \Phi^{\ast}\Phi\, R $ \citep{Drechsler:Higgs}.
A common form of their linear gravitational Lagrangian with modified Hilbert term $ \mathfrak{L}_{R}$ and the kinetic term of the scalar field is
\begin{equation} \mathfrak{L}_{R,\Phi}= \frac{\beta}{2} \Phi^{\ast}\Phi\, R + \frac{1}{2}\,(D_{\nu}\Phi)^{\ast}\, D^{\nu}\Phi \, , \qquad \beta = \frac{1}{6}\; , \label{Lagrangian D/T}
\end{equation}
with $\Phi^{\ast}$ the adjoint (often written as $\Phi^{\dag}$) which in the case of Tann reduces to complex conjugation (often $\overline{\Phi}$), $R$ the Weyl geometric scalar curvature, signature of $g$ $(1,3)\sim(+---)$ and $D_{\nu}$ the scale covariant derivation, in Drechsler's case extended to the electroweak bundle.\footnote{\citep[equ. (372)]{Tann:Diss}, \citep[equ. (2.29)]{Drechsler:Higgs}. Both authors used coefficients like in the case of conformal coupling in Riemannian geometry, $\beta=\frac{1}{6}$.
In the Weyl geometric framework this was an unnecessary restriction, because scale covariance holds for any $\beta$. In addition, Tann wrote the modified Hilbert term with a negative sign, because the used the sign inverted convention for the Riemann tensor, see fn. \ref{fn curvature conventions}. }
In such a Lagrangian they tried to straddle the gap between the gravitational scalar field and a Higgs-like scalar field of electroweak theory.
Both authors arrived at a scale covariant expression for the (metrical) energy momentum tensor of the scalar field ($w(T)=-2$) including terms, here with factors $ \beta^{-1} $, which result from varying the scale invariant Hilbert-Einstein term:\footnote{ \citep[equ. (372)]{Tann:Diss}, \citep[equ. (2.46)]{Drechsler:Higgs}.}
\begin{eqnarray} T_{\Phi} &=& D_{(\mu } \Phi ^{\ast} D_{\nu )}\Phi - \beta^{-1} D_{(\mu } D_{\nu )} |\Phi |^2
\label{energy-momentum phi} \\
& & \quad \quad - g_{\mu \nu }
\left( \frac{1}{2}D^{\lambda }\Phi ^{\ast}D_{\lambda} \Phi - \beta^{-1} \, D^{\lambda} D_{\lambda}(\Phi ^{\ast} \Phi) + V(\Phi) \right)
\; \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Drechsler noticed that the $\beta^{-1}$ terms are identical to those introduced in \citep{Callan/Coleman/Jackiw} for ``improving'' the ``energy-momentum tensor'' of a scalar field by quantum physical considerations.
In their common paper, Drechsler and Tann introduced fermionic Dirac fields into the analysis of Weyl geometry \citep{Drechsler/Tann}. Their gravitational Lagrangian had the form (\ref{Drechsler/Tann Lagrangian}).\footnote{In the appendix Drechsler and Tann showed that the squared Weyl geometric conformal curvature $C^2 = C_{\lambda \mu \nu \rho }C^{\lambda \mu \nu \rho }$ arises from the conformal curvature of the Riemannian component $_g\hspace{-1pt}C^2$ by adding a scale curvature term: $C^2 = \, _g\hspace{-1pt}C^2 +\frac{3}{2} f_{\mu \nu }f^{\mu \nu }$ \citep[(A 54)]{Drechsler/Tann}. So one may wonder, why they did not replace the square term $ \mathcal{L}_{R^2}$ by the Weyl geometric conformal curvature term $\mathcal{L}_{\text{conf}} = \tilde{\alpha } C^2 \sqrt{|det\, g|}$. }
For the development of a Weyl geometric theory of the Dirac field,
they introduced an adapted Lagrangian
\begin{equation} \mathcal{L}_{\psi} = \frac{i}{2} \left (\psi^{\ast} \gamma ^{\mu}D_{\mu}\psi - D^{\ast}_{\mu}\psi^{\ast} \gamma ^{\mu} \psi \right) + \gamma |\Phi| \psi^{\ast}\psi \, \label{Lagrangian Dirac field} \end{equation}
with (scale invariant) coupling constant $ \gamma $ and Dirac matrices $\gamma^{\mu}$ with symmetric product $\frac{1}{2} \{ \gamma^{\mu},\gamma^{\nu} \} = g^{\mu \nu} \mathbf{1} $ \citep[(3.8)]{Drechsler/Tann}. Here the covariant derivative had to be lifted to the spinor bundle, It included an $U(1)$ electromagnetic potential $A=(A_{\mu})$,
\begin{equation} D_{\mu} \psi = \left( \partial _{\mu} + i \tilde{\Gamma} _{\mu} + \frac{i q}{\hbar c} A_{\mu} \right) \psi \; , \end{equation}
$q$ electric charge of the fermion field, $w(\psi) =-\frac{3}{2}$, $ \tilde{\Gamma} $ spin connection lifted from the Weylian affine connection.\footnote{(\ref{Lagrangian Dirac field}) can equivalently be written with a Weylianized scale covariant derivative $\overline{D}_{\mu} = \left( \partial _{\mu} + i \tilde{\Gamma} _{\mu} + w(\psi) \varphi_{\mu} + \frac{i q}{\hbar c} A_{\mu} \right)$. Because $\varphi_{\mu}$ is real, the scale connection terms $ w(\psi) \varphi_{\mu}$ in the Lagrangian cancel.}
This amounted to a (local) construction of a spin $\frac{1}{2}$ bunde. Assuming the underlying spacetime $M$ to be spin, they worked in a Dirac spin bundle $\mathcal{D}$ over the Weylian manifold $(M, [(g,\varphi )]$. Its structure group was $G= Spin(3,1) \times R^+ \times U(1) \cong Spin(3,1) \times \C^{\ast}$, where $ \C^{\ast}=\C \setminus {0}$.\footnote{One could then just as well consider a complex valued connection $z= (z_{\mu})$ with values $z_{\mu}= \varphi_{\mu} + \frac{i}{\hbar c} A_{\mu}$ in $\C= \mathfrak{Lie}(\C^{\ast})$
and weight $W(\psi)= (-\frac{3}{2}, q)$. Then $D_{\mu} \psi= (\partial _{\mu} + \tilde{\Gamma}_{\mu} + W(\psi)z_{\mu})\psi$, presupposing an obvious convention for applying $ W(\psi) z$. }
The two authors considered (\ref{Lagrangian Dirac field})
as Lagrangian of a ``massless'' theory, because the masslike factor of the spinor field $\gamma |\Phi|$ was scale invariant,\footnote{This argument is possible, but not compelling $\gamma |\Phi|$ has the correct scaling weight of mass and may be considered as such.}
and proposed to proceed to a theory with masses by introducing a ``scale symmetry breaking'' Lagrange term
\begin{equation} \mathcal{L}_{B} \sim \frac{R}{6} + (\frac{mc^2}{\hbar})^2 |\Phi|^2 \label{Lagrangian Weyl symmetry break} \end{equation}
with fixed (non-scaling) $m$ \citep[sec. 4]{Drechsler/Tann}.\footnote{ Similar already in Tann's PhD dissertation.}
But they did not associate such a transition from a (seemingly) ``massless'' theory to a massive one with any kind of hypothetical ``phase transition''.
At the end of the paper they even commented:
\begin{quote}
It is clear from the role the modulus of the scalar field plays in this theory (\ldots) that the scalar field with nonlinear selfcoupling is not a true matter field describing scalar particles. It is a universal field necessary to establish a scale of length in a theory and should probably not be interpreted as a field having a particle interpretation. \citep[1050]{Drechsler/Tann}
\end{quote}
Their interpretation of the scalar field $\Phi$ was rather geometric than that of an ordinary quantum field; but their term
(\ref{Lagrangian Weyl symmetry break}) looked ad-hoc to the uninitiated.\footnote{Note that one could just as well do without (\ref{Lagrangian Weyl symmetry break}) and proceed with fully scale covariant masses -- compare last footnote. }
\subsubsection{Drechsler on mass acquirement of electroweak bosons}
Shortly after the joint article with Tann, Drechsler extended the investigation to a gravitationally coupled electroweak theory \citep{Drechsler:Higgs}.
Covariant derivatives were lifted as $\tilde{D}$ to the electroweak bundle. It included the additional connection components and coupling coefficients $ {g}$ and $ {g}'$ with regard to $SU(2)$ and $U(1)_Y$ like in Cheng's work (\ref{ew covariant derivative}).
The Weyl geometric Lagrangian could be generalized and transferred to the electroweak bundle \citep[(2.29)]{Drechsler:Higgs},
\begin{equation} \mathcal{L} = \mathcal{L}_{\text{grav}} + \mathcal{L}_{\Phi } + \mathcal{L}_{{\psi}} + \mathcal{L}_{\text{YM}} \, , \label{total Lagrangian ew-grav} \end{equation}
with contributions
like in (\ref{Drechsler/Tann Lagrangian}), (\ref{phi term Weyl geometric}), (\ref{Lagrangian Dirac field}), and (\ref{Cheng's ew interaction Lagrangian}) ({\em ew} terms only).
Lagrangians for the fermion fields had to be rewritten similar to electromagnetic Dirac fields (\ref{Lagrangian Dirac field}) and were decomposed into the chiral left and right contributions.
In principle, Drechsler's proposal coincided with Cheng's; but he proceeded with more care and with more detailed explicit constructions.
He derived the equations of motion with respect to all dynamical variables \citep[equs. (2.35) -- (2.41)]{Drechsler:Higgs} and calculated the energy-momentum tensors of all fields ocurring in the Lagrangian.
The symmetry reduction from the electroweak group $G_{\text{ew}}$ to the electromagnetic $U(1)_{\text{em}}$ could then be expressed similar to the procedure in the standard model. $SU(2)$ gauge freedom allows to chose a (local) trivialization of the electroweak bundle such that the $\Phi$ assumes the form considered in the ordinary Higgs mechanism
\begin{equation} \hat{ \Phi} \doteq \left( \begin{array} { c} 0 \\ \phi_o \end{array} \right) \; ,
\end{equation}
where $ \Phi_o$ denotes a real valued field, and ``$\doteq$'' equality in a specific gauge. $ \hat{\Phi} $ has the isotropy group $U(1)$ considered as $U(1)_{\text{em}}$and was called the {\em electromagnetic gauge} of $\Phi$.\footnote{In other parts of the literature (e.g., the work of R\c{a}czka and Paw{\l}owski) it is called ``unitary gauge'', cf. also \citep{Flato/Raczka}. }
In two respects Drechsler went beyond what had been done before.
He {\em reconsidered the standard interpretation} of symmetry breaking by the Higgs mechanism \citep[1345f.]{Drechsler:Higgs}.
And he calculated the consequences of nonvanishing {\em electroweak curvature components} for the
{\em energy-momentum tensor } of the scalar field $\hat{\Phi}$ \citep[1353ff.]{Drechsler:Higgs}.
With regard to the first point, he made clear that he saw nothing compelling in the interpretation of symmetry reduction as ``spontaneous symmetry breaking due to a nonvanishing vacuum expectation value of the scalar field'' \citep[1345]{Drechsler:Higgs}. He analyzed the situation and came to the conclusion that
the transition from our ${\Phi}$ to $\hat{\Phi}$ is to be regarded as a ``choice of coordinates'' for the representation of the scalar field in the theory and has, in the first place, nothing to do with a ``vacuum expectation value'' of this field.\footnote{Mathematically spoken, it is a change of trivialization of the $SU(2)\times U(1)$-bundle.}
\begin{quote}
\ldots This choice is actually not a breaking of the orginal $\tilde{G}$ gauge symmetry [our $G_{\text{ew}}$, E.S.] but a different realization of it. (ibid.) \label{p Drechsler}
\end{quote}
He compared the stabilizer $U(1)_{\text{em}}$ of $\hat{\Phi}$ with the ``Wigner rotations'' in the study of the representations of the Poincar\'e group.
With regard to the second point, the energy-momentum tensor of the scalar field could be calculated roughly like
in the simpler case of a complex scalar field, (\ref{energy-momentum phi}). Different to what one knew from the pseudo-Riemannian case, the covariant derivatives $D_{\mu}\Phi$ etc. in (\ref{energy-momentum phi}) were then dependent on scale or $U(1)_{\text{em}}$ curvature.
After breaking the Weyl symmetry by a Lagrangian of form (\ref{Lagrangian Weyl symmetry break}) (ibid. sec. 3), Drechsler
calculated the curvature contributions induced by the Yang-Mills potentials of the $ew$ group and its consequences for the energy-momentum tensor $ T_{\Phi}$ of the scalar field.
Typical contributions to components of $ T_{\Phi}$ had the form of mass terms
\begin{equation} m_W^2 W^{+ \, \ast}_{\mu} W^{- \, \mu}, \; m_Z Z_{\mu}^{\ast} Z^{\mu} \, , \quad \mbox{with} \quad m_W^2 = \frac{1}{4} g^2 |\Phi_o|^2 , \;
m_Z^2 = \frac{1}{4} g_o^2 |\Phi_o|^2 \, , \label{Drechsler's mass terms}
\end{equation}
$g_o^2 = g^2 + g'^2 $, for the bosonic fields $W^{\pm}, Z$ corresponding to the generators $\tau _{\pm}, \tau _o$ of the electroweak group, \citep[1353ff.]{Drechsler:Higgs}.\footnote{$W^{\pm}_{\mu} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (W^1_{\mu} \mp i W^2 _{\mu})$, $Z_{\mu}= \cos \Theta \, W^3_{\mu} - \sin \Theta \, B_ {\mu} $. }
They are identical with the mass expressions for the $W$ and $Z$ bosons in conventional electroweak theory.
According to Drechsler, the terms (\ref{Drechsler's mass terms}) in $ T_{\Phi}$ indicate that
the`` boson and fermion mass terms appear in the total energy-momentum tensor'' through the energy tensor of the scalar field after ``breaking the Weyl
symmetry''.\footnote{One has to be careful, however. Things become more complicated if one considers the trace. In fact,
$ tr \, T_{\Phi}$ contains a mass terms of the Dirac field of form $\gamma | \Phi_o | \hat{\psi}^{\ast} \hat{\psi}$, with $\gamma$ coupling constant of the Yukawa term
($\hat{\psi }\;$ indicating electromagnetic gauge). One of the obstacles for making quantum matter fields compatible with classical gravity is the vanishing of $tr \, T_{\psi}$, in contrast to the (nonvanishing) trace of the energy momentum tensor of classical matter.
Might Drechsler's analysis indicate a way out of this impasse? -- Warning: The mass-like expressions for $W$ and $Z$ in (\ref{Drechsler's mass terms}) cancel in $tr\, T_{\Phi}$ \citep[equ. (3.55)]{Drechsler:Higgs} like in the energy-momentum tensor of the $W$ and $Z$ fields themselves.}
Drechsler and Tann studied their scalar fields (complex or Higgs-like) as possibilies for an extension of the gravitational structure of spacetime. In their scale covariant theory of mass acquirement they tried to understand how {\em mass generation} is linked to the gravitational structure. Drechsler added that in his view the scalar field ``\ldots should probably not be interpreted as a field having a particle interpretation'' \citep[1050]{Drechsler/Tann}. This was an interesting remark at a time when elementary particle physicists started to collect information on a possible scalar boson of the Higgs field. But the empirical confirmation of the existence of a Higgs-like boson was still far out of sight; it did not materialize before the LHC started to operate at a sufficient level of energy and luminosity in 2012.\footnote{See, e.g., \citep{Franklin:Higgs}.} Even so, a more indirect link between the Higgs field and gravity, in contrast to the perspective of our two authors compatible with a bosonic interpretation of the scalar field, would be an interesting point. Back in the 1990s Drechsler did not expect that the search for a bosonic quantum of Higgs type might ever be confirmed by experiment.
\subsection{\small The ``Higgs'' and Weyl scaling after 2000\label{subsection SM recent}}
In the years following the onset of the new millennium, but still before a Higgs-like boson would be observed at the LHC, different authors continued to explore the near to scale invariance of the standard model and attempted to bridge the gap between the SM and gravity, keeping as closely as possible to the original Higgs ``mechanism'' developed in the special relativistic framework. They did not adhere to a common
research program; the researchers used different geometric/conceptual frameworks and worked in differing perspectives. Weyl geometric methods did not always stand in the center of the investigations; some scientists worked with global scale invariance and unimodular gravity
\citep{Shaposhnikov_ea:2009,Shaposhnikov/Zenh"ausern:2009},
others preferred a conformal approach without making use of Weyl geometric concepts \citep{Meissner/Nicolai,Bars/Steinhardt/Turok:2014}, and some started from conformal symmetry but were mainly interested in models with radiative breaking of scale symmetry \citep{Foot_ea:2007,Foot_ea:2008,Foot_ea:2013}. A small group of authors, however, continued in the line of Weyl geometric studies (Nishino/Rajpoot, Quiros, Ohanian e.a) . They often were not aware of the whole range of studies made in the 1970s to 1990s and took up just one filament of the latter.
With few exceptions,\footnote{For an exception still standing under the spell of Drechsler/Tann, although with a consistently scale covariant approach without an explicit scale symmetry breaking term, see , e.g., \citep{Scholz:2011Annalen}.}
the majority of the mentioned authors worked with two scalar fields, a {\em Higgs-like} one $\Phi$ with values in a spin $\frac{1}{2}$ representation of the electroweak group, and a real-valued one, here denoted by $\phi$, the {\em gravitational scalar field}. Keeping track with our main theme, we shall concentrate on the last group of authors who worked in the framework of Weyl geometry.
The modified Hilbert-Weyl term and kinetic terms of the scalar fields of these authors were, up to notational conventions, of the common form
\begin{eqnarray} L_{HW} &=& -\frac{\epsilon_{sig}}{2}(\zeta_1 \phi^2 +\zeta_2 \Phi^{\dag}\Phi)R\, , \qquad \label{L HW}\\
L_{\phi}&=& \epsilon_{sig} \frac{\alpha_1}{2} D_{\nu}\phi D^{\nu}\phi\, , \qquad
L_{\Phi}= \epsilon_{sig} \frac{ \alpha_1}{2} (D_{\nu}\Phi) D^{\nu}\Phi^{\dag}\, , \label{L phi}\\
\mathfrak{L} &=& L \sqrt{|g|} \; , \qquad \quad \epsilon_{sig} = \left\{ {+1 \quad \mbox{ for}\; sig\, g = (+ - - - ) } \atop -1 \quad \mbox{ for} \; sig\, g = (- + + + ) \right.
\end{eqnarray}
(in most cases $\alpha_1=\alpha_2=1$), with Weyl geometric scalar curvature $R$ and electroweak and Weyl geometric covariant derivatives $D_{\mu}$.\footnote{In the high energy physical context, and accordingly in our section 3, signature of $g$
$=(+ - - -) $. For sign conventions regarding curvature see fn \ref{fn curvature conventions}.} A quadratic curvature term $L_{R^2}$ was added by some, not by all, authors.
Yang-Mills terms of the electroweak connections (potentials) $W$ for the $SU_2$-component, $B$ for hypercharge $U(1)$, and $\varphi$ for the scale connection with field strength $f=d\varphi$, were added,
\begin{equation} L_{YM}=-\frac{1}{4}\left( tr(W_{\mu \nu}W^{\mu \nu}) + B_{\mu\nu}B^{\mu \nu} +f_{\mu\nu}f^{\mu\nu} \right) \, . \label{L YM}
\end{equation}
Similarly Dirac kinetic terms $L_{\Psi\, kin}$ and Yukawa mass terms $L_{\Psi\, Y}$ for the different fermions $\Psi^{f g}_{i h}$, with indices taking care for the various types and properties ($f=q, l$ for quark or lepton, $g=1,2,3$ generation, $i= u, d$ (``up, down'') for the {3}-component of weak isospin, $h=R,L$ helicity) were added in a form adapted to the Weyl geometric framework. The Dirac terms could be written with or without the Weyl geometric scale connection term because, even if it is included, it finally cancels in the total expression. This had been noticed already by Hayashi and Kugo (see section \ref{subsection Dirac-Utiyama}).\footnote{See also \citep[p. 81]{Blagojevic:Gravitation}.} We need not reproduce the explicit form of the fermionic terms here, but have to keep in mind that the Yukawa terms contained the matrices with relative mass coefficients (``mass matrix'') of the SM and a {\em scale covariant} Higgs field.\footnote{For an explicit form of Dirac kinetic terms and Yukawa mass terms see, e.g., \citep[equ. (1.2)]{Nishino/Rajpoot:2009}.}
Breaking of scale invariance without an explicit mass terms of the Higgs field became the crucial points for our authors. Because of its scaling behaviour ($w(\phi)=-1$) the gravitational scalar field $\phi$ already {\em specifies a preferred scale} in which it assumes a constant value $\phi_o$ (scalar field gauge in the terminlology of section \ref{subsection Weyl geometry}):
\begin{equation} \phi(x) \doteq \phi_o = const \quad \label{scalar field gauge}
\end{equation}
This was the reason behind Utiyama calling $\phi$ a ``measuring field'' already in the 1970s.
But the question still remains how such an, at first sight only mathematical, specification may be incorporated in the material structures lying at the basis of measuring processes. In the context of the search of a connection between gravity and the {\em ew} sector of fundamental fields it seemed natural to search for a relation between the two scalar fields $\phi$ and $\Phi$. For this
a biquadratic/quartic potential in the two scalar fields, and a corresponding Lagrange term, plays a crucial role. Using the abbreviation $|\Phi|^2=\Phi^{\dag}\Phi$ it is:
\begin{eqnarray} V(\Phi, \phi) &=& \frac{\lambda_1}{4}|\Phi|^4-\frac{\mu}{2}|\Phi|^2\phi^2+ \frac{\lambda'}{4}\phi^4 \label{L V4} \\
&=&\frac{\lambda_1}{4}\left(|\Phi|^2 - \frac{ \mu}{\lambda_1}\phi^2\right)^2+ \frac{\lambda}{4}\phi^4 \, , \qquad \lambda = \lambda'-\frac{\mu^2}{\lambda_1} >0 \, ,\nonumber \\
\mathcal{L}_{V} &=& -V(\Phi, \phi) \sqrt{|g|}
\end{eqnarray}
Chromodynamics was usually not considered; our group of authors concentrated on the electroweak sector of the SM and its possible link to gravity.
\subsubsection{Nishino/Rajpoot\label{subsection Nishino/Rajpoot}}
In 2004 two theoretical high energy physicists at California State University, {\em Hitoshi Nishino } and {\em Subhash Rajpoot} posed the goal of ``extending the standard model with Weyl's scale invariance'', adding that the scale invariance is ``badly broken'' at the order of the Planck mass/energy. They made it clear that in the ``philosophy advocated in the present work \ldots the standard model Higgs is not eliminated, and is the sought for particle'' \citep[1]{Nishino/Rajpoot:2004}.
For adapting the fermionic fields to the differential geometric setting, the authors outlined the usual spinor calculus in a Weyl geometric approach with scale dependent tetrads consisting of point-dependent bases $e_a =e_a^{\mu} \,\partial_{\mu} \; (a=0, \ldots 3)$ and their dual forms, here denoted by $\vartheta^a= \vartheta^{a}_{\mu}dx^{\mu}$, and the metric $g_{\mu \nu}= \vartheta^a_{\mu}e_{a\,\nu}$.
With $g(x) \mapsto \tilde{g}=e^{2\Lambda(x)}g(x)$ the tetrads have to be rescaled like
\begin{equation} \vartheta^a_{\mu} \mapsto \tilde{ \vartheta^a_{\mu}} = e^{\Lambda(x)} \vartheta^a_{\mu} \, \qquad e_a^{\mu} \mapsto \tilde{ e}_a^{\mu} = e^{-\Lambda(x)} e_a^{\mu} \, ,
\end{equation}
that is $w(\vartheta^{a})=1, \; w(e_a)=-1$. The Weyl geometric affine connection, the corresponding spin connection, Weyl geometric covariant derivatives, and curvature expressions were developed by the two authors, although not always completely reliable.\footnote{The expression for the scalar curvature is given in the paper (and also in the later papers by the same authors) as $R=\, _g R{}\hspace{-0.2em} - 6 \nabla_{\mu}\varphi^{\mu}+ 6\varphi_{\mu}\varphi^{\mu} $, where a coupling constant $f$ introduced by the authors is here set to $f=1$ and transcribed into our notation, \citep[equ. (14)]{Nishino/Rajpoot:2004}. The correct Weyl geometric value (\ref{Weylian scalar curvature}) would be $R=\, _g{}\hspace{-0.2em} R - 6\, _g{}\hspace{-0.2em}\nabla_{\mu}\varphi^{\mu}- 6\varphi_{\mu}\varphi^{\mu} $, cf. \citep[p. 21]{Weyl:InfGeo}, \citep[equ. (A 31)]{Drechsler/Tann} and others. Because of $ \nabla_{\mu}\varphi^{\mu}= \, _g{}\hspace{-0.2em}\nabla_{\mu}\varphi^{\mu} + 4 \varphi_{\mu}\varphi^{\mu}$ this implies $ R= \, _g{}\hspace{-0.2em} R - 6 \nabla_{\mu}\varphi^{\mu}+ 18\varphi_{\mu}\varphi^{\mu}$ ! \label{fn error R}}
On this background they described a {\em two stage process} of symmetry breaking. In the first step they dealt with breaking the scale symmetry, formulated in terms of the compactified scaling group $\tilde{U}(1)$. The breaking was expressed ``by setting'' the value of the gravitational scalar field to a constant $\phi_o$
\begin{equation} \phi(x)= \phi_o \quad \mbox{with}\quad \zeta_1 \phi_o^2 = (8 \pi G)^{-1} \,,
\end{equation}
in our terminology they introduced scalar field (Einstein) gauge.
In the second step the {\em ew} symmetry was assumed to be broken ``spontaneously'' like in the special relativistic SM case ($SU_2\times U(1)_Y \mapsto U(1)_{em}$). For the first step they gave a physical interpretation which has some analogy with the Higgs ``mechanism'':
\begin{quote} At this stage the scalar field $\sigma$ [here denoted $\phi$, E.S.] becomes the Goldstone boson \ldots. The vector particle associated with $\tilde{U}(1)$ breaking, the Weylon, absorbs the Goldstone field and becomes massive with mass $M_S$ given by $M_S = \sqrt{\frac{ 3f^2}{4 \pi G_N}} \approx 0.5\times f\, M_P$ [$f$ a coupling constant of the scale connection, E.S.]. \citep[4]{Nishino/Rajpoot:2004}
\end{quote}
Then the quartic potential (\ref{L V4}) is reduced to the Higgs potential like in the SM plus a cosmological term $\frac{\lambda'}{4}\phi_o^4$. In the ground state of the Higgs field only the cosmological term survives and the transition to scalar field gauge endows the Higgs field with mass
\begin{equation} m_H \doteq \sqrt{\mu} \phi_o \, . \label{Higgs mass}
\end{equation}
After a short outline of how to adapt the parameters to the mass generation scheme of the SM the authors concluded
\begin{quote}
Our contention is that the present model presents a viable scheme in which gravity is
unified, albeit in a semi-satisfactory way, with the other interactions. (\ldots) When the
complete theory of all interactions is found, the model in its present form, it is hoped, will
serve as its low energy limit.
To conclude, we have accommodated Weyl’s scale invariance as a local symmetry in the
standard electroweak model. This inevitably leads to the introduction of general relativity. \citep[8]{Nishino/Rajpoot:2004}
\end{quote}
This paper remained in a preprint stage. Although its content seems to have been presented at different conferences it never was published in a scientific journal. The reason may have been that the authors considered it only as a first, provisional step. In the following years they extended their approach to a $SU(5)$ grand unified theory (GUT) \citep{Nishino/Rajpoot:2007} and revised their presentation by taking up an idea going back to Stueckelberg \citep{Nishino/Rajpoot:2009,Nishino/Rajpoot:2011}.
In the late 1930s {\em Ernst Stueckelberg} had introduced a massive scalar field $B$ complementing an $U(1)$ potential $A_{\mu}$ which expressed a field of electromagnetic type, but with mass (i.e. similar to a Proca field). $B$ was given a peculiar gauge behaviour involving a mass parameter $m$ under $U(1)$ gauge transformations $A_{\mu} \mapsto \tilde{A}_{\mu}= A_{\mu} + \partial_{\mu} \Lambda(x)$
\begin{equation} B(x) \mapsto \tilde{B} = B(x) + m\, \Lambda (x) \, . \label{Stueckelberg transformation}
\end{equation}
Stueckelberg's context was the search for an interaction of a scalar field with nucleons.
Transformations of type (\ref{Stueckelberg transformation}) were taken up by Pauli and others. They became to be known as {\em Stueckelberg transformations} and $B$ as {\em Stueckelberg (compensating) field}. With an appropriate $\Lambda$, the Stueckelberg field allowed to specify a peculiar gauge with $\tilde{B}=0$, {\em without breaking} the $U(1)$ symmetry which is only given a ``different realization'' (in Drechsler's terms quoted above, p. \pageref{p Drechsler}). This turned out to be crucial for the renormalizability of the theory and made the ``Stueckelberg trick'' attractive for quantizing the electromagnetic field or its relatives like Proca like fields.\footnote{The non-broken $U(1)$ symmetry is important for the BRST relations, the quantum analogue of the Noether relations. See \citep[75ff.]{Ruegg_ea:Stueckelberg}.}
The careful reader may have noted the kinship between the Stueckelberg ``trick'' for $U(1)$ and the Higgs ``mechanism'' for the electroweak group. So did Nishino/Rajpoot. Moreover, they realized that, just by taking the logarithm, the transition to the Weylian scalar field gauge can be given the form of a Stueckelberg transformation. Transliterated to our notation they introduced an exponential expression of the form\footnote{The factor $\zeta_1^{-\frac{1}{2}}$ in \citep[equ. (2.1)]{Nishino/Rajpoot:2009} was set by them to $\zeta_1=1$ while transforming the Lagrangian into their equ. (2.3). The follow up paper \citep[ second paragraph of section 2]{Nishino/Rajpoot:2011} shows that this reduction was intended. Of course, a different factor $\zeta_1$ would heavily influence the mass calculation in (\ref{mass contribution kinetic term}).}
\begin{equation} \phi(x) = \zeta_1^{-\frac{1}{2}}M_P\, e^{M_p^{-1} \beta(x) }\, .
\end{equation}
Then the scale gauge transformation $\phi \mapsto \tilde{\phi} = e^{-\Lambda}\phi$ is expressed by
\begin{equation} \beta \mapsto \tilde{\beta} + M_p \Lambda \, , \label{Stuckelberg-Nishino transformation}
\end{equation}
and the transition to scalar field gauge corresponds to $\tilde{\beta}=0$, exactly like in the case of the the Stueckelberg ``trick''.
Nishino/Rapoot thus rewrote their basic Lagrange density equivalent to our equations (\ref{L HW}, \ref{L phi}, \ref{L YM}, \ref{L V4}) in terms of the logarithmized scalar field \cite[equ. (2.3)]{Nishino/Rajpoot:2009} and normed it to scalar field gauge \citep[equ. (2.6]{Nishino/Rajpoot:2009}. Then the mass expression $m_{\varphi}$ for the scale connection field (``Weyl field'') could be read off.\footnote{Warning: Nishino/Rajpoot used the notation $\varphi$ for the Stueckelberg ``compensator'', i.e. our $\beta$, and $S_{\mu}$ for the scale connection (the potential of the ``Weyl field''), our $\varphi_{\mu}$. In order to avoid confusion the notation in the present paper has been homogenized for the authors discussed here.}
In scalar field gauge the kinetic terms (\ref{L phi}) of $\phi$ and $\Phi$ acquire forms which makes them contribute to $m_{\varphi}$. For $\phi$ it is
\begin{equation} \frac{1}{2}D_{\nu}\phi D^{\nu}\phi \doteq \frac{1}{2} (f M_p)^2 \varphi_{\nu}\varphi^{\nu} \, , \label{mass contribution kinetic term}
\end{equation}
while for $\Phi$ the contribution to the mass of $\varphi$ is $f(\Phi^{\dag}\Phi)$ (after {\em ew symmetry breaking} $f v^2$, with $v^2$ the vacuum expectation value of the operator $\Phi^{\dag}\Phi$).
In any case the contribution due to $\Phi$ is
much less than the one from $\phi$ and from the modified Hilbert term (\ref{L HW}), both of which are at the order of the Planck scale. It may safely be neglected at several orders of magnitude.\footnote{Nishino/Rajpoot did not consider the contribution of the modified Hilbert term, in contrast to Smolin and Cheng (see section \ref{subsection SM 1970s}).}
In the imaginative language of the elementary particle community Nishino and Rajpoot commented that the scalar field is ``now eaten up by the Weylon''. A little later they added, more technically:
\begin{quote} After all, the Weylon $\check{S}_{\mu}$ [our $\varphi_{\mu}$, E.S.] acquires the mass $f M_P$, the compensator $\varphi$ [our $\beta$, E.S.] is absorbed into the longitudinal component of $\check{S}_{\mu}$, and the potential terms are reduced to the Higgs potential in SM \ldots \citep[3]{Nishino/Rajpoot:2009}
\end{quote}
With this explanation they clad the mass derivation for the scale connection field in the mantle of a narrative which is widely spread in their community and usually accepted as scientifically explanatory.\footnote{Compare \citep{Stoeltzner:stories}.}
In a follow up paper, the two California State physicists came back to the topic and presented the results of some results concerning a quantized version of their theory.
They started from their Lagrangian given in terms of the logarithmized scalar field \cite[equ. (2.3)]{Nishino/Rajpoot:2009} and with modified Hilbert term
\begin{equation} L_{HW} = -\frac{1}{2}\left(\zeta_1 M_P^2\, e^{2 M_p^{-1} \beta(x) }+\zeta_2 \Phi^{\dag}\Phi\right) \, R
\end{equation}
($R$ Weylian scalar curvature written there as $\tilde{R}$).
At this point Nishino and Rajpoot left the track of Weyl geometry and decided to switch to the JBD paradigm. They considered the initial Lagrangian a ``Jordan frame'' and wanted to transform it to ``Einstein frame''.\footnote{Strictly speaking their framework does not contain any meaningful ``Jordan frame'', because their Weyl structure is not integrable, and thus the purely Riemannian representation of the affine connection presupposed in ordinary Jordan frame does not exist. Einstein frame, on the other hand, is meaningful in any Weyl geometric gravity approach with a scale covariant scalar field and corresponds to scalar field gauge (\ref{scalar field gauge}). }
For this goal they performed a ``Weyl rescaling for the vierbein or metric only'', i.e. a ``{\em field re-definition}'' which did not include the corresponding transformations of the scale covariant fields and the scale connection.\footnote{``Note that the Weyl rescaling we made is a field re-definition, but it is not a part of any local scale transformation which is defined to act not only on $g_{\mu \nu}$ but also on $\Phi$ and $\varphi$
as in (2.2) [the equation for the full gauge transformation, E.S.]'' \cite[p. 4]{Nishino/Rajpoot:2011}. \label{fn field re-definition}}
Referring to calculations in the framework of JBD theory they arrived at a reduction of the Hilbert term to a form which depends only on the Riemannian component $_g R$ of the scalar curvature. According to their calculation, the scale connection contributions drop out of the Lagrangian (but not the Yang-Mills term for the scale curvature ).\footnote{In the light of the error for the scalar curvature indicated in fn. \ref{fn error R} one may be inclined to doubt the correctness of such a complete cancellation.}
In other word, a reduction to Einstein frame form of JBD with two scalar fields and an additional Yang-Mills field was achieved \cite[equ. (2.10)]{Nishino/Rajpoot:2011}.
On this basis our authors performed a series of calculations at the quantum level. They determined (Adler-Bell-Jackiw and trace) anomalies, studied the possibility for cancelling the remaining (trace-) anomalies, considered quantum corrections to the cosmological constant, and studied the perturbative renormalizability of their model and the possible new divergences. All in all, these were remarkable results; but they were arrived at in a hybrid approach which started in a setting of Weyl geometric gravity and ended in JBD gravity, after performing an artificial and methodologically unconvincing transition by a ``field re-definition'' type of rescaling. In spite of such shortcomings the derivations were a notable step towards connecting the electroweak sector of elementary particle physics with gravitational structures, mainly formulated in a Weyl geometric framework.
\subsubsection{Hao Wei, Rong-Gen Ca, Quiros\label{subsub Quiros ea}}
H. Nishino and S. Rajpoot were not the only researchers who thought about the question how to establish a connection between gravity and the SM fields by exploiting Weyl geometric methods. Even though we have to be selective here, it has to be clear that the Weyl geometric approach continues to be alive in the era of the Higgs boson (or some close relative) being found in experimental observations.
A talk given in July 2004 by Hung Cheng at the Institute for Theoretical Physics of the Chinese Academy of Science, Beijing seems to have initiated interest in Weyl geometric methods by Chinese theoretical physicists {\em Hao Wei, Rong-Gen Cai} and others.\footnote{\cite[Acknowledgments]{Cai/Wei:2007}}
It was natural for them to take the ``Cheng-Weyl vector field'' (i.e., the Weylian scale connection with massive boson studied by Cheng in the late 1980s) and Cheng's view as their starting point for a new look at the standard model of elementary particle physics \cite{Wu:2004,Cai/Wei:2007}.
Another road was taken by {\em Israel Quiros}, at the time we are interested in here, placed at Guanajuato, Mexico. Coming from a background in Jordan-Brans-Dicke gravity and cosmology (see section \ref{subsection trivial}) he developed thoughts of his own about how ``scale invariance and broken electroweak symmetry may coexist together'' \citep{Quiros:2013}. In this conceptually clear paper he gave a nice introduction to the basic ideas of integrable Weyl geometry and showed that the scale covariance of the SM fields can not only be imported into a general relativistic framework, if Weyl geometric gravity is used, but can even be upheld after breaking the {\em ew} symmetry. One only need to accept, and to use, mass parameters $m$ which scale with weight $w(m)=-1$.
For his presentation Quiros used a simplified version of the Lagrangian (\ref{L HW}ff.) similar to the one of Nishino/Rajpoot, whose papers he probably did not yet know. He encoded the gravitational scalar field in terms of a point-dependent scalar exponent written by him as $\varphi$ -- in order to avoid confusion we shall transliterate it like above as $\beta$ -- of the factor in the Hilbert-Weyl term. Compared with our notation above he wrote
\begin{equation} \zeta_1\phi(x)^2 = M_p e^{\beta(x)} \label{simplification}
\end{equation}
and considered Weylian scale connections exclusively of the form
\begin{equation} \varphi =\varphi_{\mu} \,dx^{\mu} = d\beta \quad \Longleftrightarrow \quad \varphi_{\mu} = \partial_{\mu}\beta
\end{equation}
\citep[equ. (8)]{Quiros:2013}. This implies the restriction
\begin{equation} \phi = const \Longleftrightarrow \beta=0 \Rightarrow \varphi=0\; .
\end{equation}
In our terminology (\ref{simplification}) implies an inbuilt {\em identification of Riemann gauge and Einstein gauge}. That was probably unnoticed by the author, and is widely spread among scientists who entered into Weyl geometric methods from a JBD background. For the basically geometrical and conceptual, purposes of the paper this restriction may have been of no particular disadvantage, but the dynamical role of the scalar field was trivialized by this specialization.
\subsection{\small Towards Weyl scaling at the quantum level\label{subsection quantum level}}
\subsubsection{Scale invariant quantization procedures\label{subsection Codello et al.}}
Problems on a more fundamental have been posed by a
group of theoretical physicists working at Trieste. {\em Alessandro Codello, Giulio D'Orico, Carlo Pagani} and {\em Roberto Percacci} recently reconsidered the question of how scale invariance behaves under quantization if one approaches it with the method of the so-called ``renormalization group'' (RG) and the use of functional integral methods.
In \citep{Codello_ea:2013} they gave a report on their work and rebutted the general view that quantization necessarily leads to a breaking of (point-dependent) scale symmetry even if the classical Lagrangian is scale invariant. In a step by step argumentation they show how the
functional integrals can be given a scale invariant form by using an integrable Weyl geometric background and a gravitational scalar field $\chi$ of weight $w(\chi)=-1$, called a ``dilaton'', as external fields which are not quantized at the first stage.
They started from the basic idea that ``one can make any action Weyl-invariant by replacing all dimensionful couplings by dimensionless couplings multiplied by the powers of the dilaton'' \citep[p. 2]{Codello_ea:2013}.
Then a dimensional coupling coefficient of scaling dimension $k$, let aus say $\mu$, is turned into a coupling parameter of the form $\chi^{-k} \check{\mu}$ with a ``dimensionless'', i.e. non-scaling, constant $\check{\mu}$. The authors achieve scale covariance/invariance of the fields, respectively actions, by using Weyl geometric expression with regard to an integrable scale connection with coefficients
\begin{equation} b_{\mu} = - \chi^{-1} \partial_{\mu} \chi \qquad \mbox{\citep[p. 3]{Codello_ea:2013}\footnote{Note that the differential form $b= b_{\mu}dx^{\mu}$ is sign inverted in comparison with our conventions of section \ref{subsection Weyl geometry}. }}
\end{equation}
Like Nishino and Rajpoot they consider this as a gravitational equivalent to the ``St\"uckelberg trick''.
Their main work then consisted in showing that the Weyl invariance which is easily achievable for the classical action is left intact, in their framework, for the functional integrals, the differential equation governing the renormalization flow equation, and the UV and IR endpoints of the flow.
Classical quantum matter fields (scalar or Dirac spinors) have a vanishing trace of the energy-momentum tensor, while the expectation value of the quantized trace no longer vanishes. This so-called {\em trace anomaly} of quantization has puzzled theoretical physicists for a long time and is usually taken as a sign that scale invariance is broken at the quantum level. Our authors came to a different conclusion. They explained that, although the ``trace anomaly'' is still present in their approach, it {\em no longer signifies breaking of the local scale invariance}. The reason lies in a cancellation of the trace terms of the quantized fields a by corresponding counter-terms arising from the scalar field, the ``dilaton'' in the language of the paper.
After some comments on the quantization of the metric field, and further discussions of the difference between strictly conformal theories and the Weyl geometrically ``conformalized'' ones, the authors finished with the remark:
\begin{quote}
The present work provides a general proof that with a suitable
quantization procedure, the equivalence between conformal frames can also be maintained in the quantum theory \citep[p. 21]{Codello_ea:2013}.
\end{quote}
But they also stated clearly that their quantization procedure does not lead to new physical effects. In this sense their research shows a certain analogy to Kretschmann's view of diffeomorphism invariant re-formulations of physical theories which do not per se lead to new physical insights.
Even so, the authors have achieved to show that the extension of the mathematical automorphism group of the underlying theories (SM fields, implicitly also gravity theory) can be upheld under quantization. Whether a further enrichment of the theories delivers new insights at the quantum level will be a question for the future. Probably this can only be the case, if the scalar field and/or the scale connection acquires a dynamical role beyond its purely mathematical ``compensatory'' character in the scale transformation.
\subsubsection{Ohanian's retake of a ``spontaneous'' breaking of symmetry\label{subsection Ohanian}}
An attempt at giving the scale connection a dynamical role has been made
by {\em Hans Ohanian} from the University of Vermont. He proposed a model which connects the standard model fields with general relativity in a Weyl geometric framework. A complex scalar field $\chi$ (``dilaton'') acts as the crucial mediator. It undergoes spontaneous breaking of local scaling symmetry which the author preferred to call conformal symmetry,\footnote{Ohanian preserved the label ``scale transformation'' for a global usage in Minkowski space, where, in addition to the rescaling of the fields $X\mapsto \tilde{X} = \Omega^k X$, a space dilation $x\mapsto \tilde{x}= \Omega x$ is applied \citep[p. 25]{Ohanian:2016}.}
by a mechanism very similar to the breaking of electrodynamic $U(1)$ symmetry in a model studied by \citep{Coleman/Weinberg:1973}. If gravitational effects can be neglected, Ohanian's adaptation leads to the SM field content in flat spacetime \citep{Ohanian:2016}. If, on the other hand, gravity is taken into account, the transition from quantum to classical matter being leapfrogged, it leads to Einstein gravity as an ``effective field theory''. Regarding the conformal expression of fields Ohanian used a ``conformalization'' procedure with additional terms in the (Riemannian) scalar curvature (in place of the more natural Weyl geometric expressions).
Ohanian proposed to assimilate the result of Coleman/Weinberg by a simple substitution of coefficients and concluded:
\begin{quote}
After symmetry breaking, neither
the scalar field nor the vector field reveal themselves at the macroscopic level, and we
can ignore the effects of the Weyl gauge-vector on the transport of lengths \ldots . \citep[10f.]{Ohanian:2016}
\end{quote}
Because of the conformal coupling of the scalar fields to the {\em Riemannian} scalar curvature Ohanian found that in his approach a {\em modification of Riemannian geometry is excluded} in the long-range regime and comments:
\begin{quote}
This is in contrast to the standard Brans-Dicke theory, in which the massless scalar field makes a contribution to long-range gravitational effects, \ldots (ibid.)
\end{quote}
In the high energy, short-range, regime Weyl geometric curvature does play a role in this model, as Ohanian discussed in his section 4. Then the scale connection constitutes a ``vector'' field of its own, similar to the electromagnetic field, but with a mass term and with the dynamical current of the scale symmetry $\mathfrak{J}^{\mu}=\frac{\partial \mathfrak{L}}{\partial \varphi_{\mu}}$ as right hand side of the dynamical equation.\footnote{ $\partial_{\nu}\left(\sqrt{|g|}f^{\mu \nu} \right) =\mathfrak{J}^{\mu}$. In Ohanian's Lagrangian $\varphi$ couples only to the ``dilaton'' scalar field $\chi$. This leads to a form for the variation of the Lagrangian under scale transformations such that the dynamical current coincides with the Noether current \citep[equ. (13)]{Ohanian:2016}.}
In his outlook Ohanian conjectured that certain problematic features in the purely conformal approaches are essentially due to the lack of a a coherent metrical structure. In Weyl geometry the scale connection is the clue for making a Weylian metric consistent with conformal rescaling.
Ohanian therefore finished his paper with a remark which went right to the heart of the matter:
\begin{quote}
If the analysis of Ehlers et al. is correct, the absence of a Weyl vector and its
geometric paraphernalia is a fatal mistake -- if no Weyl vector, then no conformally
invariant theory with a geometric interpretation \citep[p. 16]{Ohanian:2016}.
\end{quote}
In this approach Ohanian proposed a model which indicated why and how a Weyl field with curvature at the short-range, high energy level looses its curvature in the low energy regime and leads to Einstein gravity in the long-range limit.
Ohanian, like many other authors, perceived the transition between the energy regimes (high -- low) exclusively in the sense of hypothetical {\em successive temporal stages} in the cosmic development. This fits in with the mainstream narrative connecting cosmology and high energy physics shortly after the big bang. Philosophically inclined reader may notice that one could interpret such kind of transition non-temporally, as a {\em structural passage between different energy levels}, present at any time and any place of the world. This would be independent of the view regarding the reality content of the big bang picture.\footnote{Physicists may well claim that, e.g., the LHC experiments are important because they explore how the world has looked like a few ``nanoseconds after the big bang''. But one need not take such stories at face value in order to appreciate the activities aiming at gaining knowledge about the respective energy levels and the transitions between them.}
\section{\small Weyl geometric models in astrophysics and cosmology since the 1990s\label{section cosmology}}
\subsection{\small The broader context: scalar fields in gravity, conformal rescaling\label{subsection cosmology conformal}}
In the 1970s JBD theory underwent a contradictory development: On the one hand, increasing precision of radar tracking observations in the planetary system showed that Einstein gravity is an extremely good description of gravity.\footnote{See C.Will's contribution to this volume.}
A tentative modification of the latter by a Brans-Dicke type scalar field has at least to be suppressed on this level, e.g. by an extremely high value of the coupling coefficient $\xi$ of the kinetic term in (\ref{Lagrangian JBD}), or may it be not adequate at all.
On the other hand, the rise of particle cosmology as a new subfield of theoretical physics opened ample space for studying models in an assumed very early phase of the universe. Here it appeared reasonable to think about modified gravity and elementary particle physics as an ensemble. A fertile environment for studying speculative models emerged, some of which were designed for combining the gravitational scalar field and a Higgs-type scalar field of elementary particle physics \citep{Kaiser:mass,Kaiser:colliding}. This environment gave new motivations and incentives for studying scalar-tensor theories, completely different from those of the 1960/70s \citep[chaps. 3, 7]{Capozziello/Faraoni}. One of the new roles rehearsed for the scalar field on this stage was that of an agent, called {\em inflaton}, which drives a hypothetical phase of very early accelerated expansion of the spacetime.
Another role arose from string theory where a new type of scalar field, a so-called {\em dilaton}, entered the stage. Originally it coupled to the trace of the (2-dimensional) stress tensor of the string. But in the form of a constraint for restoring conformal symmetry, after its breaking under quantization, the dilaton re-appeared as a source term in a classical Einstein-like equation. That gave rise to speculate about deriving Einstein gravity as an effective theory arising from string theory, with the dilaton scalar field and conformal symmetry as mediators \citep[p. 14f.]{Brans:roots}.
All in all, a vast field for studying scalar field theories in generalized theories of gravity arose.\footnote{For extensive surveys of this field see \citep{Fujii/Maeda,Capozziello/Faraoni}.} Only few authors of this field remembered Weyl geometry and took it up for their purpose. This was the case, e.g., in string models; but they remain outside the scope of this survey. They would need a study of their own; here we look at more mundane manifestations of Weyl geometry in cosmology and astrophysics during the last two decades. Because of the close kinship between Weyl geometric rescaling and conformal invariance of field theories in a Riemannian environment I here bring only a few examples for recent conformal approaches in cosmology to the mind. They are far from exhaustive and have been selected because they connect in specific ways to our core topic.
\subsubsection*{Conformal approaches in cosmology}
An unusual analysis of the ``dark'' sectors of recent cosmology was given by {\em Philip Mannheim} and {\em Demosthenes Kazanas}. They argued that the flat rotation curves of galaxies can be explained on the basis of a conformal approach to gravity \citep{Mannheim/Kazanas:1989}. In their conformal theory, a static spherically symmetric matter distribution was described by the solution of a fourth order Poisson equation
\begin{equation} \nabla ^4 B(r) = f(r)
\end{equation}
with a typical coefficient $B(r)$ proportional to $ - g_{oo}= g_{rr}^{-1} $
of a metric $ds^2 = g_{oo}dt^2 - g_{rr}dr^2 - r^2 d\Omega ^2$ (up to a conformal factor). The r.h.s. of the Poisson equation, $f(r)$, depended on the mass distribution, e.g., in a spiral galaxy. The result of a comparison of their theory with data for 11 galaxies with different behaviour of rotation curves led to a good fit and encouraged the authors to present their approach as a possible candidate for a modified gravity explanation of dark matter phenomena \citep{Mannheim/Kazanas:1989,Mannheim:1994}.
During the following years the approach was extended to the question of dark energy in a peculiar perspective. In the special case of conformally flat models, like Robertson-Walker geometries, Mannheim proposed to consider the Hilbert-Einstein Lagrangian term $-\frac{1}{12}|\phi |^2 R \sqrt{|det\, g|} $ of a conformally coupled scalar field $\phi$ as part of the {\em matter} Lagrangian. Due to this sign choice, he arrived at a version of the Einstein equation with {\em inverted } sign. He interpreted this as a kind of ``repulsive gravity'' which supposedly operates on cosmic scales in addition to the ``attractive gravity'' on smaller scales, indicated by the conformally modified Schwarzschild solution. In his eyes, such a repulsive gravity might step into the place of the dark energy of the cosmological constant term of standard gravity \citep[729]{Mannheim:2000}.
In spite of such a grave difference to Einstein gravity, Mannheim did not consider his conformal view to disagree with the standard model of cosmology and its accelerated expansion. He rather argued that his approach may lead to a more satisfying explanation of the expansion dynamics. In his view, ``repulsive gravity'' would take over the role of dark energy. Moreover he expected that a conformal approach with quadratic curvature terms may shed new light on the initial singularity and, perhaps, also on the black hole singularities inside galaxies.
A completely different approach using local conformal symmetry in particle physics and cosmology is due to {\em Izhak Bars, Paul Steinhardt} and {\em Neil Turok}. A silent background for their interest in this question seems to have been the idea of a cyclic, respectively oscillating, model of the universe, proposed a decade earlier by two of them as an alternative to the ``inflationary'' paradigm \citep{Steinhardt/Turok:2002}.
In the latter proposal the minima of the oscillation were related to some kind of speculative physics of the string and brane type.\footnote{For a historical discussion of oscillating models see \citep{Kragh:2009fascination} and, in an even wider perspective, H. Kragh's contribution to this book; C. Smeenk (this volume) nicely describes the rise of the inflationary paradigm. } In \citep{Bars/Steinhardt/Turok:2014} the three authors explored the possibility that a conformal theory of gravity and the standard model fields might suffice for understanding the bridging process between two cycles without necessarily much new speculative physics. They worked with a locally scale invariant version of the standard model, combined with gravity, similar to Nishino/Rajpoot (section \ref{subsection SM recent}), but in the framework of purely conformal geometry rather than Weyl geometry.
They considered a complex valued gravitational scalar field $\phi$, called a {\em dilaton}, in addition to the Higgs field $\Phi$, both scaling with the same weight (in our notation $w=-1$). The dilaton couples only to the Higgs field by a common biquadratic potential like in (\ref{L V4}) and to the right-handed singlet neutrinos by Yukawa terms of its own \citep[p. 6]{Bars/Steinhardt/Turok:2014}. All other masses are ``generated'' by coupling to the Higgs field like in the standard model.
The authors investigated possible general forms for locally scale invariant gravitational Lagrangians including a kinetic term for the dilaton (equ. (10), loc. cit.). They were heading towards ``a fully scale-invariant approach to all physics'' (p. 5, loc. cit.) by several reasons. At first, the ``dimensionless constants in a conformally invariant theory are logarithmically divergent as opposed to the quadratic divergence of a bare Higgs mass term'' and the recent studies of \citep{Codello_ea:2013} have shown that ``the local scale invariance survives even though there is a trace anomaly'' \citep[p. 2]{Bars/Steinhardt/Turok:2014}. Moreover, so they claimed, the conformal freedom of chosing different scale gauges makes their cosmological models geodesically complete. That was a bit cavalier, but it is not the aim of this paper to evaluate such claims critically.\footnote{The authors declared geodesic
incompleteness as ``an artifact of an unsuitable frame choice:
geodesically incomplete solutions in Einstein frame may be
completed in other frames, even though the theories are
entirely equivalent away from the singularity'' \citep[p. 13]{Bars/Steinhardt/Turok:2014}.}
More important, in our context, is to recognize the similarity in outlook between the Weyl geometric proposals for combining gravity with standard model fields in a consequently scale invariant approach and the concern of our three authors. Here a perspective on a putative ``geodesic completeness'' of cosmological models came in sight, although in a rather peculiar way, not taking into account the problem of an invariant characterization of the proper time along timelike geodesics.
This question was discussed in more detail by {\em R. Penrose} in his recent proposal for embedding the standard model of cosmology in a long cycle of iterations connected by conformal bridges between Riemannian phases of cosmic evolution \citep{Penrose:2006CCC}.
He argues that for very high energy states in the past timelike trajectories lose their physical meaning anyhow and the whole physically relevant information can be described by the structure on the lightcone. By some not yet understood processes a similar argument is imputed for states in the asymptotic future. This idea developed a purely conformal perspective of how to extend Riemann-Einstein gravity beyond the conformally compactified past and future infinities and would probably fit well to the Bars/Steinhardt/Turok approach. Both proposals assumed that it is possible to develop a meaningful physics of the bridging process between to cycles under abstraction from all those geometrical features which distinguish Weyl geometry from a purely conformal structure.
\newpage
\subsection{\small Diverse views of Weyl geometry in cosmology\label{subsection diverse views}}
\subsubsection{Continuation of Rosen's work\label{subsection Israelit}}
M. Israelit investigated Weyl geometric methods in cosmology in the first half of the 1990s together with his mentor N. Rosen. After Rosen's death in 1995 he continued publishing on his own for nearly two decades.\footnote{Isrealit died in 2015 at the age of 87. His last paper known to me is \citep{Israelit:2012}, a slightly changed version of \citep{Israelit:2010}. }
In this work the question of dark matter was studied from different perspectives, always based on geometrical fields. \citep{Israelit/Rosen:1992dm} explored the neutral massive boson interpretation of the Weylian scale connection, hinted at by Rosen already in his 1982 paper (cf. section \ref{subsection Dirac followers}). The authors assumed a ``chaotic Weylian microstructure'', constituted physically by a ``Weylon gas''.
On large distances the scale curvature effects were negligible and a Riemannian space structure arose in their approach. On this basis Rosen and Israelit started to study a hypothetical Bose-Einstein {\em Weylon gas} satisfying the equation of state $\rho = 3 p$ and its consequences for different cosmological models in Einstein gravity \citep{Israelit/Rosen:1993dm}.
In one of their next papers they turned toward the {\em scalar field} and tried to find out in which way it may contribute to dark matter ``pervading all of cosmic space'', i.e., on the largest scales, not in the sense of local inhomogeneities in galaxies (like in theories of the MOND family) and in galaxy clusters. Although in their approach the Einstein gauge ($\beta = 1$) leads to ``the usual formalism of general relativity'' \citep[p. 764]{Israelit/Rosen:1995dm} our two authors believed that different gauges with non-constant $\beta$-field might lead to new physical insight. They declared:
\begin{quote}
Although the gauge function is arbitrary, it leads to the presence of
dark matter which, in principle, can be observed. \cite[pp. 777]{Israelit/Rosen:1995dm}
\end{quote}
This was not particularly convincing, and it remained open how such observation ``in principle'' could be made
In some papers of the late 1990s and several at the beginning of the new millennium Israelit continued this research line using {\em integrable Weyl geometric} gravity. In this context he realized that even under the assumption of an integrable Weylian scale connection the resulting modification of Einstein gravity can be {\em non-trivial}, if the potential of the scale connection $w$ is different from the scalar field, respectively its logarithm \citep[chap. 7]{Israelit:1999Book}, \citep[equs. (17)f.]{Israelit:1999matter_creation} (compare our equs. (\ref{integrable scale connection}), (\ref{triviality condition})). Israelit derived the dynamical equations with regard to $g_{\mu \nu}, \varphi_{\mu}$ and $\beta$, and also the Noether relations due to diffeomorphism invariance and to the scale invariance of the Lagrange density. The latter showed that on shell of the Einstein equation the dynamical equations of the scale connection $\varphi_{\mu}$ and of the scalar field $\beta$ are equivalent.\footnote{Because of scale invariance there is, in fact, only one true scalar field degree of freedom (compare subsection \ref{subsection Weyl geometry}). \label{fn one degree of freedom}}
Israelit's aim was to explain not only dark matter but also the accelerated expansion of standard cosmology by the gravitational scalar field which he called the ``Dirac gauge function''.\footnote{\citep{Israelit:1996,Israelit:1999matter_creation,Israelit:2002Matter_creation,Israelit:2002Quintessence}; chapters 6 and 7 in his book \citep{Israelit:1999Book}. }
In these papers Israelit tried to convince his colleagues that ``cosmic matter was created by geometry'', viz. out of the energy of the gravitational scalar field \citep[p. 295]{Israelit:2002Matter_creation}. According to him, his scalar field was able to generate dark matter and the magical substrate {\em quintessence} flourishing in the mainstream narratives on the early ``history'' of the universe. These were imaginative proposals.\footnote{I doubt that they stand on a solid base, although I am unable to check them in detail (E.S.). In any case, they are too multifarious for being discussed in this survey.}
In one of his latest papers Israelit came back to considering a non-integrable Weylian scale connection, now no longer as a representative of the electromagnetic potential but again as a field with massive bosons, ``Weylons'', of spin $-1$ and mass $> 10\, MeV$. On a microlevel, so his argument, the Weyl geometric structure appears non-integrable, ``chaotic'', while on larger scale there remains an effective gauge ``vector field'' with vanishing curvature. The author concluded with the remark:
\begin{quote} `` \ldots the purpose of the present work was to show that on the basis of
the Weyl-Dirac theory one can build up a model, where conventionally matter, DM
and DE are created by geometry. This aim is achieved. \citep[sec. 8]{Israelit:2010}
\end{quote}
The ``creation'' described by Israelit did not even claim to establish a connection between geometry and the standard model fields. His discussion appeared as a reflex from afar on the cosmological mainstream in which elementary particle physicists had been so successful in occupying the debate on the ``early history'' of the universe \citep{Kaiser:mass}.
Perhaps this is one of the reasons why in none of the investigations of our last section, nor in the ones discussed in the next subsection, we find much overlap with those of Rosen and Israelit.
\subsubsection{Weyl geometric extensions of gravity: trivial or provocative?\label{subsection trivial}}
Coming from Jordan-Brans-Dicke theory, {\em Israel Quiros} got interested in Weyl geometry while still working at Santa Clara, Cuba, several years before his work mentioned in section \ref{subsub Quiros ea}. He was one of those in the JBD community who took Dicke's proposal seriously, which postulated to state natural laws in a form that does not depend on (localized) choices of measurement units \citep{Quiros_ea:JBD,Quiros:dual_geometries}.\footnote{Compare on this point \citep[pp. 86ff.]{Capozziello/Faraoni}.}
At first he developed the formulation of ``dual'' views for the interchange from Jordan to Einstein frame \citep{Quiros:unit_transformations}. A decade later, after he had moved to L\'eon, Mexico, he wrote a joint paper with three other Mexican authors, {\em Jose E. Madriz, Ricardo Garc\'{i}a-Salcedo, Tonatiuh Matos} in which the authors explained how the different frames of JBD theory may be interpreted as ``complementary geometrical descriptions of a same phenomenon'' \citep{Quiros_ea:2013}.
From there it was only a small step to entering Weyl geometric gravity. As we have seen in the last section, Quiros looked, and still looks, for a common perspective on gravity and a scale invariant formulation of SM model fields, \citep{Quiros:2014a}. In a recent paper he investigated the purely conformal approach to scale invariant Lagrangian field theories and criticized them for lacking a well defined metrical structure with a uniquely determined affine connection. He concluded
\begin{quote}
\ldots that there will be problems with a theory
which pretends to be Weyl-invariant only because the action -- and the derived field equations -- is invariant under (2) [point-dependent scale transformations, E.S.], but which is sustained by spacetimes whose geometrical structure does not share the gauge symmetry of the
action. \citep[p. 3]{Quiros:2014b}
\end{quote}
Quiros therefore pleaded for the use of Weyl geometry as an appropriate framework for his research goal.
But alas, simplifying the Lagrangian used in \citep{Quiros:2014a} he only foresaw a kinetic term for the Higgs (or a Higgs-like) field $\Phi$, not for the gravitational scalar field $\phi$ coupling to the Hilbert term. With a gravitational Lagrangian including quartic potential
\begin{equation} L_{grav} = \frac{1}{12}\phi^2 R + \lambda \phi^4 \qquad \mbox{\citep[equ. (20)]{Quiros:2014b}} \label{L grav Quiros}
\end{equation}
he found that his scalar field equation for $\phi$ reduced to the trace of the Einstein equation like in the case of conformal coupling in Riemannian geometry.
After pondering about the possibility of having ``an infinity of feasible – fully equivalent
– geometrical descriptions'' and the resulting paradoxical picture of an ``infinity of possible patterns of cosmological evolution'' he passed over to Einstein scalar-field gauge as ``simplest gauge one may choose''.
For the choice of (\ref{L grav Quiros}) as the gravitational Lagrangian this resulted in
the Hilbert action of Einstein gravity ``minimally coupled to the standard model of particles with no new physics beyond the standard model at low energies'' \citep[p. 9]{Quiros:2014b}. His following discussion reduced to the simple observation that conformal rescaling allows to scale singularities away. All this remained without new physical insights or effects; in this sense the Weyl geometric extension of gravity considered by Quiros up to 2014 remained physically trivial. But it was characterized by a conceptually clear exposition of ideas and methods, so we may hope that in the further development of Quiros' research program he will go beyond these limitations.
{\em Carlos Castro}, after the turn of the millennium working at the Centre for Theoretical Studies of Physical Systems in Atlanta, USA, had become acquainted with Weyl geometry already in the early 1990s (seee section \ref{Santamato two phases}). At that time Santamato's proposal for using Weyl's scale connection for geometrizing the quantum potential stood at the center of his interest \cite{Castro:1992}. When he became aware of the new attempts at using Weyl geometric methods in gravity and in high energy physics, he took up the Weylian thread again. His guiding questions were now how Weyl's scale geometry may be used for understanding dark energy and, perhaps, the Pioneer anomaly which at that time could still appear as a challenge for gravity theories \cite{Castro:FoP2007,Castro:2009}.\footnote{A few years later high precision numerical modelling showed that thermal effects can completely account for the observations known as the flyby anomaly of the Pioneer spacecrafts \citep{Rievers/Laemmerzahl:Pioneer}.}
Castro speculated with grand visions for his newly detected interest in Weyl geometric methods, in contrast to Quiros' more sober perspective. An even sharper contrast comes forward with regard to style. His papers lack a clear conceptual exposition; this is the reason why they are not discussed here in more detail.
Another unconventional view was put forward by the present author ({\em Erhard Scholz}, Wuppertal). His historical studies on the work of H. Weyl lead him to the impression that already the comparatively simple modification of Riemannian geometry by integrable Weyl geometry,
combined with a non-trivial scalar field extension of Einstein gravity (in the sense of our section \ref{subsection Weyl geometry} with $v+w\neq 0$), may shed new light on certain points of present day cosmology. He was glad to find some recent activities in Weyl geometric gravity among the Munich ``group'', although it went in a different direction (section \ref{subsection Drechsler/Tann}).
He found it most intriguing to see that in a Weyl geometric approach to gravity the cosmological redshift need no longer be due to an expansion of the spacelike folia of Friedmann-Robertson-Walker manifolds. This was clear because, in the transition from the Riemann gauge to Einstein gauge, the warp function may be scaled away partially or completely
\citep{Scholz:2005model_building,Scholz:2005BerlinEnglish}.\footnote{A similar argument was already given by Rosen (see section \ref{subsection Dirac followers}) and more recently by \citep[sec. 7]{Romero_ea:2012}; compare \citep[chap. 5]{Perlick:Diss}.}
Thus a part of the cosmological redshift $z$ may be due to the time component $\varphi_o$ of the scale connection, rather than to a spatial expansion of the ``universe''. The reason for this observation is the scale invariance of $z$, if scale covariant geodesics of weight $w=-1$ are used.
With regard to cosmological observers defined by a timelike geodesic flow $X$, the redshift is given by the quotient of energies $E_o, E_1$ of light signals (idealized ``photons'') at the event of emission $p_o$ and of observation $p_1$,
\begin{equation} z+1 = \frac{E_o}{E_1} = \frac{g(\gamma'(\tau_o), X(p_o))}{g(\gamma'(\tau_1), X(p_1))} \, ,
\end{equation}
where $\gamma(\tau)$ denotes the null-geodesic representing the trajectory of the signal. Because of the parametrization of the geodesics with weight $w=-1$ the quotient is scale invariant.
Although for Robertson-Walker models with non-trivial (i.e., not constant) scalar field and warp function $a(t)$ in Riemann gauge, the {\em redshift} seems to result from an expanding warp function, in Einstein scalar-field gauge it {\em may} at least partially be due to the scale connection, i.e., to a {\em field effect} of the additional component of the gravitational structure.
This effect is particular striking in certain models which appear expanding in Riemann gauge but
have a static metric in Einstein gauge \citep{Scholz:2005BerlinEnglish,Scholz:FoP}. Here the cosmological redshift in Einstein gauge turned out to be completely due to the time component of the Weylian scale connection, $H = \varphi_o$, with $H$ the Hubble parameter. Although Scholz initially overestimated the physical import of this example, it can probably be a fruitful epistemic provocation.\footnote{It was the topic of the author's talk at the Mainz conference.}
As a toy model it may continue to serve as an incentive for critically rethinking the foundations of our standard picture of the universe.
\newpage
\subsection{\small Attempts at dark matter, MOND-like\label{subsection dark matter}}
The success of {\em modified Newtonian dynamics}, MOND, since the 1980s for explaining the rotation curves of galaxies and the Tully-Fisher relation between the luminosity of spiral galaxies and their angular velocity led to diverse attempts for general relativistic generalizations \citep{Sanders:DarkMatter}. Some of them introduced non-geometrical structures, like an additional vector field in the so-called tensor-vector-scalar field theory, TeVeS; but the earliest attempt at a relativistic MOND-like theory was formulated by {\em Mordechai Milgrom} and {\em Jacob Bekenstein} in the framework of JBD gravity \citep{Bekenstein/Milgrom:1984}.
This approach worked with a non-quadratic kinetic Lagrangian for the scalar field with MOND-typical transition function; therefore its name ``relativistic a-quadratic'' rAQUAL theory. Bekenstein and Milgrom were torn between the Jordan frame and Einstein frame. In a later review paper by one of the authors the Jordan frame was declared to be the ``physical metric'', while Einstein frame was considered as the ``primitive metric'' \citep[p. 6]{Bekenstein:2004}.\footnote{Bekenstein considered it still in 2004 as ``evident'' that measurements with `` clocks and rods'' are expressed by the Jordan metric. Moreover the latter's Levi-Civita connection governs the free fall of test particles. But the dynamics does not satisfy the ``usual Einstein equation'' in Jordan frame (because of explicit terms in the scalar field). The Einstein frame represented for him the ``primitive metric'' because here the gravitational action reduces to the classical form of the Hilbert term, and the dynamics is given by the Einstein equation \citep[p. 5f.]{Bekenstein:2004}. In their common paper, Milgrom and Bekenstein used the terminology of ``dual descriptions'' working in ``gravitational units'' (Einstein frame) respectively ``atomic units'' (Jordan frame), which sounded a bit like Dirac's distinction \citep[p. 14]{Bekenstein/Milgrom:1984}.}
In this framework the MOND-like free fall of particles in an extremely weak gravitational field could be derived. This approach was not free of shortcomings, as the authors themselves remarked: Lensing effects seemed unexplainable by the approach, because the conformal change between the two ``dual'' frames seemed not to affect light-like geodesics.\footnote{In his later review paper Bekenstein qualified this point by stating that only as long as the scalar field ``\ldots contributes comparatively little to the
energy-momentum tensor, it cannot affect light deflection,
which will thus be due to the visible matter alone'' \citep[p. 6]{Bekenstein:2004}. One can read this observation the other way round: If the scalar field carries a considerable contribution to the energy-momentum it influences light deflection. }
Moreover, the scalar field allows perturbations which propagate with superluminal velocity. The authors relativized this problem, however, by adding that such perturbations probably ``cannot induce acausal effects in the behavior of particles and electromagnetic fields'', because they only relate to the conformal factor of the metric \citep[p. 14]{Bekenstein/Milgrom:1984}.
An additional critical point, not only for rAQUAL but for all theories of the original MOND family, was their inability to explain the anomalous dynamics in galaxy clusters, without assuming some additional unseen matter.
Because of the close relation between integrable Weyl geometric gravity and JBD theory, Bekenstein's and Milgrom's rAQUAL may be an interesting challenge for testing what happens if it is transformed into a scale invariant framework. In two recent papers the present author investigated this problem \citep{Scholz:2016MONDlike,Scholz:2016Clusters}. The first paper contained a Weyl geometrical reformulation of rAQUAL, at least for the so-called ``deep MOND'' regime and the upper transitional regime. Different from Bekenstein/Milgrom's view, in the Weyl geometric approach observable quantities are most directly expressed in Einstein gauge. Spacelike components of the Weylian scale connection, $\varphi_j, \, j=1,2,3$ express additional accelerations in comparison with those induced by the Riemannian part of the metric (corresponding to Newtonian ones in the weak gravity limit). In the extremely weak gravity regime two different components of additional accelerations, $ a_ {\phi},\, a_{\varphi}$, can be distinguished. The first one is part of the Riemannian acceleration, in Einstein gauge, and due to the energy density of the scalar field $\phi$; the second one results from the the Weylian scale connection $\varphi$ (in Einstein gauge). In extremely weak static gravitational constellations (i.e., order of magnitude of Newton acceleration $a_N$ close to the MOND acceleration $a_o \approx 1.2\, 10^{-10}m s^{-2}$), MOND-like phenomenology is reproduced similar to rAQUAL. But here half of the additional acceleration is due to the {\em scalar field's energy}. It thus influences the light trajectories.\footnote{Cf. last footnote.} Whether this suffices for explaining the observed lensing effects remains to be seen.
Moreover, contributions on different length scales to local inhomogeneities of the scalar field's energy density can add up to a common effect. This seems to have striking consequences for the dynamics of galaxy clusters. In a heuristic investigation of data from 17(+2) clusters\footnote{The data for 2 clusters are outliers, already from the phenomenological point of view.} our author found an encouraging agreement of accelerations predicted by the Weyl geometric scalar tensor theory with the corresponding empirical values \citep{Scholz:2016Clusters}. This was done on the basis of the observed baryonic masses alone, without assuming additional unseen, ``dark'', matter.\footnote{The famous Coma cluster which led Zwicky introduce the hypothesis of dark matter is among the galaxy clusters for which the Weyl geometric model is consistent with most recent empirical data on mass distributions and accelerations.}
Calculations with ordinary MOND, or even its relativistic generalization TeVeS, reduces the need of assuming additional hypothetical dark matter, but cannot do completely without it. R. Sanders argued that sterile neutrinos could do the job. In this context it is interesting to see how, in the Weyl geometric framework, an {\em outlandish kinetic term} of the scalar field seems to {\em suffice for explaining} the otherwise anomalous {\em dynamics of galaxy clusters}.
Of course, there remained problems: For safeguarding the dynamics on the solar system level the author invented an (ad-hoc) hypothesis postulating that scalar field inhomogeneities are suppressed in regions where the value of at least one sectional curvature of the Riemannian component exceeds a certain threshold \citep[p. 6]{Scholz:2016Clusters}. That saves the dynamics, but the origin of such a hypothetical suppression remained unclear. Moreover, the cosmological consequences of this approach are far from clear.\footnote{Unpublished calculations indicate scenarios of a cosmic evolution in agreement with many features of standard cosmology: initial singularity, large parts of the cosmological redshift due to the expansi on of spatial folia in Einstein gauge, accelerated ``late time'' expansion etc.} In spite of such shortcomings this model may be of some value for exploring the possibilities of Weyl geometric scalar fields in the realm of dark matter phenomena.
\subsection{\small The Brazilian approach\label{subsection Brazilian approach}}
A challenge to the standard big bang picture, drawing upon Weyl geometric methods, came from Brazil. Interest in Weyl geometrical approaches to cosmology have been present in the Brazilian theoretical physics community since the 1990s. The central person for this development, {\em M\'ario Novello}, acquired his doctorate in 1972 at Geneva under the supervision of J.M. Jauch. Already as a young PhD student he published a paper on Dirac spinors expressed in quaternionic calculus in a Weyl space \citep{Novello:1969}.\footnote{In this paper Novello still thought in terms of Weyl's first interpretation of the scale connection, the ``em dogma'' in the terminology above. }
Back in Brazil and working at the {\em Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Fisicas}, Rio de Janeiro, he cooperated with many international guests. In 2003 he became the founding director of the {\em Instituto de Cosmologia Relatividade e Astrofisica (ICRA)}. Due to his influence Weyl geometric ideas were introduced in the Brazilian community of theoretical physicists in the course of the 1990s. They flourished and turned into an research tradition of its own, the {\em Brazilian approach} to Weyl geometric gravity as I want to call it.
\subsubsection{A Palatini-type path to integrable Weyl geometry\label{section Palatini}}
In the early 1980s Novello and a co-author from Cologne, {\em H. Heintzmann}, reflected possible consequences for cosmology if one allows to model it in a slightly more general framework than Riemannian geometry \citep{Novello/Heintzmann:1983}. Like other authors before them, they used a {\em metric-affine } approach to gravity, presupposing a metric $g$ and an independent affine connection $\Gamma$. This allows to define curvature tensors like in Riemannian geometry, including the scalar curvature $R$. Starting from a gravitational Lagrangian which included a term of the form
\begin{equation} \mathfrak{L}_R=-e^{\omega}R\sqrt{|g|} \label{mod Hilbert term}
\end{equation}
with point-dependent function $\omega(x)$,\footnote{In this paper $\omega(x)$ was not yet introduced as a scalar field of its own, but via the square of the electromagnetic potential $A_{\mu}$, i.e., $\omega=\log{A_{\mu}A^{\mu}}$.}
metric and affine connection were varied independently according to the so-called {\em Palatini approach}. They found that the variation with regard to the connection implies
\begin{equation} \nabla_{\lambda} \,g_{\mu \nu} = - \partial_{\lambda}\omega \, g_{\mu \nu} \; . \label{Palatini relation}
\end{equation}
Our authors immediately realized that this relation can be identified with the Weyl geometrical compatibility condition of our equation (\ref{metric compatibility}) for the integrable scale connection
\begin{equation} \varphi = \frac{1}{2}d\omega \label{varphi Novello}
\end{equation}
(in our notation). This approach was not without limitations: it identified the scale gauges in which the coefficient $e^{\omega}$ of the Hilbert term in (\ref{mod Hilbert term}) becomes constant and the one in which the scale connection (\ref{varphi Novello}) vanishes. In our terminology above {\em no difference} between {\em Riemann gauge} and scalar field -- {\em Einstein gauge} could be conceived! This structural identification of the two gauges made the Palatini approach to Weyl geometric gravity a trivial extension of Einstein gravity, if the full scale invariance of the Lagrange density is observed. But such a comparison was not in the mind of our authors.
Referring to Canuto et al. and in the wake of Dirac (cf. section \ref{subsection Dirac-Utiyama}), they pondered about the possibility that atomic clocks and gravitational clocks at different places might be related by a variable factor $\omega(x)$. If $\omega(x)$ is asymptotically constant, different ``Riemannian domains'' would arise, possibly connected by ``Weyl integrable regions of space''. Moreover, the ``age'' of the universe might become ``arbitrarily large'' \citep{Novello/Heintzmann:1983}.
In the following years Novello developed broad activities in gravitation theory, elementary particle physics, and cosmology; in particular he was interested in understanding how the initial singularity of standard Riemann-Einstein cosmology can be avoided. In a joint paper with {\em Edgar Elbaz}, a colleague from France, {\em Jose M. Salim} and {\em L.A.R. Oliveira} from his group, he and his co-authors proposed an imaginative model for what they called the ``creation of the universe'' (a clause from the title of the paper) \citep{Novello/Oliveira_ea:1992}. Using some Weyl geometric features and a scalar field $\omega$, the authors were able to display a ``cosmic'' development from a flat vacuum state (described by Minkowski space) via a contracting phase, ``bouncing'' at a minimum of a scale function, to an expanding ``inflationary'' phase. Without going into details of this study we want to see how and why this paper became a classical point of reference for the Brazilian tradition in Weyl geometric methods.\footnote{In many papers of the Brazilian tradition \citep{Novello/Oliveira_ea:1992} is quoted as a starting point \citep{Salim/Sautu:1996,Oliveira/Salim/Sautu:1997,Fonseca/Romero_ea:GR_Weyl_frames,Romero_ea:2012}, to cite just a few. Sometimes it is even called the ``first approach to scalar-tensor theory in WIST'' [Weyl integrable space-time] \cite{Pucheu_ea:2016}. }
Weyl geometry was introduced, like in \citep{Novello/Heintzmann:1983}, i.e., by the Palatini method of variation (\ref{Palatini relation}). This led to an integrable Weyl geometry characterized by a scalar function $\omega (x)$, the potential of the scale connection $\varphi= \frac{1}{2} d\omega$. For Novello, Elbaz et al. the above mentioned identification of Riemann gauge and Einstein did not appear detrimental, because their goal was not a modification of Einstein gravity. They rather set out modelling semi-classical quantum ``perturbations of the system of measurement units'' described by $\delta \omega_{\lambda}$, such that
\begin{equation} \delta(\nabla_{\lambda}g_{\mu \nu})= (\delta \omega_{\lambda}) g_{\mu \nu} \; .
\end{equation}
Perturbations of such a kind are inconsistent with Riemannian geometry but consistent with Weyl geometry, as the authors noted with references to \citep{EPS,Audretsch:1983,Perlick:Observerfields}.
Like many physicists in the last third of the 20th century, they thought in terms of a time-evolution of the cosmos, here even in the sense of a {\em temporal evolution of its geometrical structure}.
They hoped to find ``a definite conceptual context \ldots for the description of such structural transitions'' during the cosmic evolution in the Weyl geometric approach \citep[p. 650]{Novello/Oliveira_ea:1992}. For this goal they considered a process
governed by the Lagrangian
\begin{equation} \mathfrak{L}_{vac} = (R+ \xi \nabla_{\nu}\partial^{\nu} \omega)\sqrt{|g|} \qquad \mbox{\citep[equ. (4.2)]{Novello/Oliveira_ea:1992},} \, \label{Lagrangian Novello ea 1992}
\end{equation}
where $\nabla_{\nu}$ is (our) notation for the Weyl geometric derivative and $R$ denotes the Weyl geometric scalar curvature.\footnote{In a side remark the authors reminded that $-2\xi \omega_{\lambda}\omega^{\lambda}$ is a variationally equivalent kinetic term, because the difference to the kinetic term in (\ref{Lagrangian Novello ea 1992}) is a total divergence \citep[p. 654]{Novello/Oliveira_ea:1992}. \label{fn equivalent kinetic term Novello ea}}
From the point of view of Weyl geometry this was a {\em hybrid approach}; the Lagrange density was not scale invariant, although Weyl geometric concepts and expressions were used. The authors considered this an advantage, because a difference between ``gravitational'' units (expressed by a point dependent gravitational ``constant'') and atomic units, originally assumed by Dirac, Canuto et al. (see section \ref{subsection Dirac}), appeared unacceptable to them. They rather assumed a broken (active) scale symmetry \citep[p. 653]{Novello/Oliveira_ea:1992}; a mere transformation of units in Dicke's sense, i.e. a passive conception of scale covariance was not their case. Understandably, they decided for Einstein gauge as the expression for the broken symmetry state. They thus
understood (\ref{Lagrangian Novello ea 1992}) as an ``effective canonical action'' of a broken underlying scale symmetric dynamics with some surviving residual Weylian terms. Guided by such kind of physical intuition the authors avoided a reduction of their approach to Einstein gravity, which would have become necessary, had they assumed full scale invariance.
The resulting dynamical equation could be expressed, without loss of content, in Riemannian terms,
\begin{equation} _g\hspace{-0.15em}R_{\mu \nu} - \frac{_g\hspace{-0.15em}R}{2}g_{\mu \nu}= \lambda^2 \omega_{\mu}\omega_{\nu} - \frac{\lambda^2}{2} \omega_{\alpha}\omega^{\alpha} g_{\mu \nu} \, , \qquad \label{Einstein equ Novello ea}
\end{equation}
with $ \lambda^2= \frac{1}{2}(4\xi - 3)$.
Then it was ``equivalent to an Einstein equation in which the WIST\footnote{WIST was (and is) the abbreviation, preferred by the Brazilian authors, for ``Weyl integrable scalar tensor theory''.}
field $\omega$ provides the source of the Riemannian curvature'' \citep[p. 655]{Novello/Oliveira_ea:1992}.
As $\omega$ was the integral of the scale connection, it had a ``purely geometrical origin'' and appeared acceptable to them, although it had strange physical properties: negative energy density, positive pressure of the same value (``stiff'' matter).
The scalar field equation derived from (\ref{Lagrangian Novello ea 1992}) and the Einstein equation (\ref{Einstein equ Novello ea}) evaluated for a homogeneous, isotropic spacetime led to a model without initial singularity. In the far past it looks like a contracting Minkowski space with a non-trivial and in this sense ``excited'' scalar field $\omega$. After a first phase of an accelerated contraction, their warp function $a(t)$ reaches a minimum value $a_o$, after which it turns into an expansionary phase. The authors interpreted the first, contracting phase as a vacuum with a geometrical scalar field excitation. Near the minimum they sketched quantum processes of photon and baryon genesis ``driven'' by the scalar field. Then an expansionary phase follows, ending in a state which, so they argued, could connect to the radiation dominated phase of the standard model of cosmology. All in all the calculations were embedded in an imaginative narrative which claimed to solve several pressing problems inherent in the standard picture of the ``hot big bang'' (no initial singularity, causal horizon and flatness problems, matter anti-matter asymmetry).
\subsubsection{Cosmological models with fluid matter}
Several follow up papers appeared, among them \citep{Salim/Sautu:1996,Oliveira/Salim/Sautu:1997}. In the first one Salim and {\em S.L. Saut\'u} added different types of ``external fields'' representing matter and its interaction to the vacuum Lagrangian (\ref{Lagrangian Novello ea 1992}). At first they dealt with an electromagnetic field and an external scalar field. Their matter terms of the Lagrangian had a scale invariant form
\citep[equ. (12)]{Salim/Sautu:1996}.\footnote{This adds flavour to the hybrid approach mentioned above.}
More important for cosmology, in the next step they adapted the Lagrangian of a perfect fluid following the trajectories of a timelike vector field to their framework.\footnote{The fluid Lagrangian was taken over from \citep{Ray:1972}.}
Here the hybrid form of the approach with the specified scale gauge was of great advantage, because it facilitated the adaptation of the fluid Lagrangian. The authors derived the dynamical equations and constraints in their framework, first in terms of the Weyl geometric derivative and curvature expressions, with particular taking care for the interaction with the geometrical scalar field $\omega$ \citep[equs. (34)-- (40)]{Salim/Sautu:1996}.
After that they rewrote the Einstein equation and the scalar field equation in Riemannian terms and derived the corresponding generalized Raychaudhuri equation for the homogeneous isotropic case (equ. (47)). Rewriting the coupling constant $\xi$ of (\ref{Lagrangian Novello ea 1992}) by $\lambda=\frac{1}{2}(4\xi -3)$ they concluded that
``\ldots depending on the sign of $\lambda$, the cosmological solution under
consideration can be non-singular and inflationary'' \citep[p. 359]{Salim/Sautu:1996}.
That was a considerable step forward and generalized the effect observed for the case of the special vacuum solution in \citep{Novello/Oliveira_ea:1992}. The authors rightly concluded:
\begin{quote}
We have shown that the Weyl integrable
geometry can be used in a natural way to geometrize a long-range scalar field. Using
a general principle to prescribe the interaction of the geometric scalar field with other
physical systems, we can describe in WIST all the classical situations studied by EGR [Einstein gravity, E.S.]. \citep[p. 359]{Salim/Sautu:1996}
\end{quote}
In their next paper the two authors, now supported by {\em Henrique P. de Oliveira}, studied ``non-singular inflationary cosmologies in Weyl integrable spacetime'' \citep{Oliveira/Salim/Sautu:1997}. To the gravitational Lagrangian (\ref{Lagrangian Novello ea 1992}) of Novello et al. they added a self-interaction potential of the scalar field $V(\omega)$ and the fluid Lagrangian of \citep{Salim/Sautu:1996}. Referring to the same parameter $\lambda$ as above, they came to the conclusion that for $\lambda >0$ the Friedmann-like solutions had strong similarities to those of Einstein gravity, while for $\lambda<0$ interesting ``novelties appear in WIST'' (p. 2835).
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\hspace*{-4em}
\includegraphics[scale=0.8,trim=0mm 70mm 0mm 110mm,clip]{phase_portrait_1.pdf}
\vspace*{-30mm}
\caption{Phase portrait (de Oliveira e.a. 1997, fig 2)}
\label{fig:phase_portrait_1}
\end{figure}
The three authors studied the qualitative behaviour of the modified Friedmann and scalar field equations of their model in the parameter plane $(x,y)$ with
\begin{equation} x= \frac{\dot{a}}{a}\, , \qquad \qquad y = \dot{\omega} \, .
\end{equation}
For vanishing potential, $V(\omega)=0$, and for an exponential potential $V(\omega)= V_o e^{\beta \omega}$ ($V_o, \beta$ constants) they found that the solutions of the Friedmann equation are generically singularity free, while the solutions with initial or final singularity are instable (see our fig. \ref{fig:phase_portrait_1}). This was a striking result. The authors commented:
\begin{quote}
Depending
on the parameter $\lambda$, we obtained non-singular models as a general feature. (\ldots)
The non-singular behaviour is explained by the violation of the strong energy condition
provided by the geometric scalar field. \citep[p. 2842f.]{Oliveira/Salim/Sautu:1997}
\end{quote}
The explanation indicates that the ``strong energy condition'' was understood in the geometrical sense ($R_{\mu\nu} V^{\mu}V^{\nu}>0$ for any timelike vector field $V^{\mu}$).\footnote{The ``physical sense'' of the strong energy condition is $T_{\mu \nu} - \frac{1}{2} tr\, T\, g_{\mu \nu}V^{\mu} V^{\nu}$. Geometrical and physical conditions are equivalent {\em in Einstein gravity}; see, e.g., \citep[p. 49]{Curiel:Energy_cond}.}
Later investigations of the Brazilian school would show that the geometrical energy condition may be violated, while the physical energy condition may still be satisfied (see below).
\subsubsection{A tension between the Palatini approach and scale invariance}
Many more papers on Weyl geometric gravity were published by the Brazilian group. Some young researchers joined the network and started to publish with colleagues from the older generation in different constellations; among them and not yet mentioned before {\em Tony S. Almeida, F.A.P. Alves, Aadriano B. Barreto, J.B. Fonseca-Neto, F.P. Poulis} and {\em Carlos Romero } (in alphabetical order). They dealt with the relationship of the Palatini variant of Weyl geometric gravity to Einstein gravity and to JBD theory, and continued to study singularity behaviour of cosmological models in their slightly extended framework.
Several of these papers \citep{Fonseca/Romero_ea:GR_Weyl_frames,Romero_ea:2012} used a Lagrangian of the form:
\begin{equation} \mathfrak{L}= e^{(1-\frac{n}{2})\omega}(R + 2 \Lambda e^{-\omega} + \kappa e^{-\omega} L_m ) \sqrt{|g|} \; , \label{Lagrangian Romero ea 2011}
\end{equation}
where the scalar curvature is to be understood in the metric-affine sense ($R=R(g,\Gamma)$). After a Palatini type variation like in the transition from (\ref{mod Hilbert term}) to (\ref{Palatini relation}) $R$ turns into the scalar curvature of a Weylian metric given by the pair $(g, \varphi =\frac{1}{2}d\omega) $.\footnote{\citep[eq. (7)]{Fonseca/Romero_ea:GR_Weyl_frames},\citep[equ. (12)]{Romero_ea:2012} }
The authors emphasized the importance of what appeared to them a ``new kind of invariance, namely with respect to Weyl transformations'' \citep[8]{Romero_ea:2012} without, however, keeping coherently to scale invariance as a guiding principle of their investigation.
Rewritten in Riemannian terms this Lagrangian acquires the form of a Brans-Dicke Lagrangian with a conformally coupled scalar field.
Not very convincingly, this was presented as a ``geometrization'' of JBD scalar fields in general and, in addition, as an argument for a compatibilty of Einstein gravity and scale invariance in the sense of Weyl geometry.\footnote{``An important conclusion (\ldots) is that general relativity can perfectly `survive' in a non-Riemannian environment'' \citep{Fonseca/Romero_ea:GR_Weyl_frames} etc.}
Such a generalization of Einstein gravity is clearly too weak to lead to interesting new features (see section \ref{subsection trivial}); it even does not allow to recuperate the Lagrangian (\ref{Lagrangian Novello ea 1992}), so important for the Brasilian tradition. Other papers thus start from a metric-affine generalization of JBD-type Lagrangian with general coupling coefficient $\omega$, written in the form
\begin{equation} \mathfrak{L}_{JBD} = e^{-\phi} (R + \omega\, \partial_{\mu}\phi \partial^{\mu}\phi) \sqrt{|g|} \; ,
\end{equation}
with $R=R(g,\Gamma)$ as above. Again the Palatini variation implied the relation (\ref{Palatini relation}) and, in this way, a motivation for specifying the metric and connection in the sense of integrable Weyl geometry \citep[equ. (2)]{Almeida/Pucheu/Romero:2014}.
But then the kinetic term, taken over without change from usual, Riemannian, Brans-Dicke theory breaks the scale invariance for general $\omega$. Accordingly the authors used a restricted Weylian scale transformation only. For the transition to the ``Einstein frame'' they transformed the quantities $ e^{-\phi}$ and $R$ only, while leaving the core expression of the kinetic term unaffected (a ``field substitution'' rather than a gauge transformation), with the result
\begin{equation} \mathfrak{L}= (\tilde{R} + \omega\, \partial_{\mu}\phi \partial^{\mu}\phi) \sqrt{|g|} ) \label{recent Brazilian Lagrangian}
\end{equation}
plus a matter action $\mathfrak{L}_m$. They were thus led back to the archetypical form (\ref{Lagrangian Novello ea 1992}) of the gravitational Lagrangian in the Brazilian tradition.\footnote{\citep[equ. (3.24)]{Almeida/Pucheu/Romero:2014}, \citep[equ. (16)]{Almeida/Pucheu:2014}; compare (\ref{Lagrangian Novello ea 1992}) in the light of fn. \ref{fn equivalent kinetic term Novello ea}.}
The tension between the Weyl geometric frame and the general methodology did not pass unnoticed by the authors. But it seems that they were prevented from resolving it, because their adherence to the Palatini method of variation and the difficulty to express the kinetic term of the scalar field in a scale invariant form without using Weyl geometric scale covariant derivatives (\ref{L phi}). In the conclusion of one of the papers they wrote `that neither the action
nor the field equations of the proposed theory are invariant
under Weyl transformations'', admitting that ``it would perhaps be desirable, at least
from the aesthetic viewpoint, that the whole theory should
exhibit Weyl invariance`'' \citep[p. 8]{Almeida/Pucheu:2014}. In another paper three of them even gave a twisted explanation why this seemingly must be so \citep[p. 39]{Almeida/Pucheu/Romero:2014}.
This is surprising, because two years earlier two of them, in this case added by Fonseca-Neto, had already noticed that the Lagrangian (\ref{recent Brazilian Lagrangian}) can be scale-transformed into the form of the general JBD Lagrangian (\ref{Lagrangian JBD Fujii/Maeda}). So they were quite close to bringing the Brazilian approach into a coherently scale invariant form;\footnote{One only needed to put the JBD Lagrangians in a Weyl geometric framework. Alternatively, if one wants to start from the Brazilian point of view, one may read the constant coefficient of the Hilbert term in (\ref{recent Brazilian Lagrangian}) as the value of a scale covariant scalar field $\chi$ in (Einstein-) scalar field gauge, $\chi_o \doteq 1$, and $\partial_{\mu}\phi \partial^{\mu}\phi$ as the scalar field gauged expression of the scale covariant kinetic term $D_{\mu}\chi D^{\mu}\chi$ with scale covariant derivative (\ref{scale covariant derivative}). }
but by some reason or other the members of the Brazilian group did not dare, or felt unable, to transcribe their approach in a scale invariant mode.
Gravitational Lagrangians of the form (\ref{recent Brazilian Lagrangian}) also played a role in recent qualitative studies of ``isotropic cosmologies in Weyl geometry'' by {\em John Miritzis} from Athens and by authors from the Brazilian network itself \citep{Miritzis:2004,Pucheu_ea:2016}. We find qualitative studies of cosmological models with or without (initial or final) singularities. The questions and results extended those of the 1990s. New glances at global singularities in the slightly extended framework described above were added \citep{Lobo/Romero_ea:singularities}. After a detailed investigation of the Raychaudhuri equation, the authors of the last mentioned paper showed that the geometrical version of the strong energy condition can be violated in the Brazilian approach, while the physical one may be maintained due to contributions of the energy-momentum of the scalar field. This was a sharp observation and may be of wider import.
\section{\small Discussion\label{section discussion}}
\subsection{\small A rich history aside the mainstream}
Our survey over the reappearance of Weyl geometry has encountered {\em four different entrance channels} through which central concepts of Weyl's scaling invariant but still fully metrical, geometry of 1918 were reintroduced into late 20th century physics. They differed in motivation and systematics; three of them were opened even twice by essentially independent research initiatives and slightly differing systematic ideas (these are characterized by an ``and'' in the following list):
\begin{itemize}
\item[1.] Axiomatic foundations of gravity: Ehlers/Pirani/Schild (section \ref{subsection EPS})
\item[2.] Scale co/invariant scalar tensor theory of gravity: Om\-ote/Utiy\-ama and Dirac (section \ref{subsection Dirac-Utiyama})
\item[3.] Cartan geometric approach: Bregman and Charap/Tait (section \ref{subsection Cartan-Weyl})
\item[4.] de Broglie-Bohm-Madelung (dBMB) approach: Santamato and Sho\-jai/Sho\-jai/Golsh\-ani (section \ref{section geometrical quantum mechanics})
\end{itemize}
The {\em first three} were initiated in the short time interval 1971--1974, and two of the openings were taken twice. Dirac's motivations for his multiple gauge approach to gravity was quite idiosyncratic and played a minor role for its reception. The broader scenario indicates an intellectual environment which let it appear natural to come back to Weyl's proposal of generalizing Riemannian geometry in a new field theoretic context. Bjorken scaling had attracted attention in the late 1960s, but was known to be only approximatively valid already at that time. So it could not have been a major driving force.\footnote{Only for the authors of \citep{Hehl_ea:1988Kiel} this appeared to be different, see section \ref{subsection Cartan-Weyl}. }
On the other hand, the field structures of elementary particle physics were just acquiring the form and status of a new, gauge theoretic standard model, due to to the renormalizability results of 't Hooft and Veltman (1972) and the experimental detection of quark binding states, called ``J-$\Psi$'' (1974). Their Lagrangians were basically (globally) scale invariant in Minkowski space, with only the mass term of the hypothetical Higgs field as a scale breaking term. This context may have strongly motivated researches which explored possible connections to gravity in an enlarged scale covariant framework. In such a wider perspective a new look at Weyl geometric generalizations of Einstein gravity must have appeared a promising perspective. In this respect it was important that the Jordan-Brans-Dicke research program of scalar tensor theories had shown already a decade earlier how one could model gravity without taking recourse to a quadratic curvature term. It was natural to do so also in a renewed Weyl geometric setting. This brought it much closer to Einstein gravity than the quadratic gravity theories studied since the time of Weyl. That was important because during this time Einstein gravity lived through a vivid phase of new empirical confirmations.\footnote{Cf. C. Will's contribution to this volume.}
The {\em fourth opening} was anchored in the completely different intellectual context of the de Broglie-Bohm program for reconsidering the foundations of quantum mechanics. Its two research lines started a decade later than the first three (Santamato),
or even two decades later (Shojai/Shojai/Golshani) which in the following will be referred to as the ``Tehran approach''. The two lines differed among each other more strongly than the respective double starts in items 2 and 3. In the 1990s the Bohmian approaches entered a latency phase (Santamato) or were just heading towards a new beginning, still developed in a JBD framework (Iranian approach). The authors of the latter started to use Weyl geometric concepts explicitly only after the turn to the new millennium.
All in all, the time until roughly 2000 was a {\em first phase of exploration} for all the approaches. For several years the immediate continuators of the Dirac line explored astrophysical consequences of Dirac's distinction of an ``atomic gauge'' and ``Einstein gauge'' (Bouvier, Maeder, Canuto et al.) or refined and extended the theory (Rosen). At first they sticked to Dirac's interpretation of the scale connection as an electromagnetic potential, the {\em em} dogma. In the 1980s such a literal allegiance of Dirac's ideas faded out. Those who continued to appeal to Dirac's approach, like Rosen and Israelit, enriched the perspective by considering the scale connection as a representative of a Proca-like massive gauge field, or saw it in a different context anyhow like Smolin. This boiled down to a merging of the modified Dirac line with the research following Omote/Utiyama's initiative (Hayashi, Kugo et al.), which intensified with the attempts to bring Weyl's scale geometry in contact with the field content of the rising standard model (see below).
On the other hand, the later researches of Rosen and those of Israelit explored a vast terrain of theoretical possibilities, many of them quite speculative, of how the energy-momentum of a Weyl geometric gravitational scalar field or a hypothetical ``Weylon gas'' might contribute to dark matter phenomena and/or to the accelerated expansion diagnosed in the usual Riemannian approach to gravity. But these studies remained on a relatively general level and remained without closer links to astrophysical or astronomical observations (section \ref{subsection Israelit}).
The {\em Cartan-Weyl geometric approach} was soon relegated to a very special case in the broader Cartan geometric metric-affine theories (Hehl et al.) or was studied in relation to Kaluza-Klein theory.\footnote{E.g. \citep{Drechsler/Hartley}.}
As the latter are not included in this survey, it disappear more or less from the range of our panorama. The foundational studies of Ehlers/Pirani/Schild, on the other hand, found a broad and continued reception and development in the philosophy of physics and remained a point of orientation for foundational studies of gravity.
For some authors (Englert, Smolin, Cheng, later Drechsler, Tann) the {\em rise of the standard model} suggested to connect Weyl geometric gravity, or at least scale covariant gravity in the case of Englert et al., with standard model fields, in particular the Higgs field.
Cheng's seminal paper of 1988 was the first relatively detailed account of the electroweak sector of the SM assimilated to a Weyl geometric context, although only on the pseudo-classical level of the theory (section \ref{subsection SM 1970s}).\footnote{Studies of QFT on Weylian manifolds, comparable to the corresponding researches for Lorentzian manifolds, discussed in R. Wald's contribution to this volume, are still a desideratum.}
Here we also find explicit references to the papers of Dirac and the Utiyama research tradition, indicating the merging of these lines mentioned above. Nearly a decade later Drechsler and Tann found much of the electroweak structure in their own development of Weyl geometry,\footnote{The two authors neither referred to the Dirac tradition in Weyl geometric gravity nor to Utiyama's; their Weyl geometric starting point was ``self-made'' \citep{Drechsler/Hartley} aside from Weyl's original papers.}
but with the peculiar idea of considering the Higgs field as a part of the gravitational structure.
In the {\em new century} this peculiar idea was superseded by the studies of Nishina and Rajpoot who continued the research opened up by Cheng and stayed closer to the mainstream expectations of a massive Higgs field which at that time was still hypothetical (section \ref{subsection Nishino/Rajpoot}). With the empirical detection of the Higgs quantum excitation (``particle'') this line was accentuated as the most realistic among the Weyl geometric approaches to SM fields. But the question how scale symmetry is related to the quantum level remains still open. Ohanian's attempt for convincing us that scale symmetry is ``spontaneously broken'' near the Planck scale and leads back to Einstein gravity developed a nice toy model (section \ref{subsection Ohanian}), but the investigations of Codello et al. show that the last word has not yet been spoken (section \ref{subsection Codello et al.})
With regard to astrophysics and cosmology the first exploratory phase of investigations, as it was called above, was superseded in the Brazilian research tradition of Weyl geometric gravity, initiated by the work of Novello et al. Although this research line has been confined to a geometrically ``hybrid'' approach which would imply a dynamically inert scalar field, if the Weyl geometric scaling symmetry would be taken seriously, this group of authors followed the physical intuition of their founding ``father'', or at least of the founding paper of the tradition \citep{Novello/Oliveira_ea:1992} which assumed an effective action of a broken underlying scale symmetry with some surviving residual Weylian terms (section \ref{subsection Brazilian approach}). This allowed to investigate concrete cosmological models which give some impression of what possibilities a Weyl geometric extension of present Riemann-Einstein cosmological models might offer.
From a different side a bridge to the family of MOND-like theories of dark matter has been established; it has widened the research horizon for the Weyl geometric extension of gravity theories even further (section \ref{subsection dark matter}).
All in all the scale covariant, and often explicitly Weyl geometric approaches to gravity, elementary particle fields, foundations of quantum mechanics, astrophysics and cosmology have developed a rich panorama of models since the 1970s. In many cases less known scientists contributed to this research. Once in while it attracted the attention of internationally renown physicists. Although the Weyl geometric perspective remained a side-stream in all of the mentioned fields up to now, it may well offer interesting challenges and openings for the future.
\subsection{\small \ldots and an open research horizon}
Our panorama has shown a variety of approaches which do yet not form a coherent research program as a whole. The Bohmian research lines, e.g., still stand separate from the other approaches, although some formal connections to the scalar fields of Dirac/Omote/Utiyama type have been established in the later phase. It is not clear, however, whether the ``Tehran'' perspective stands on solid grounds, and if so whether it can be integrated with the ``Italian'' approach into a consistent common picture. Other filaments of the whole field indicate perspectives which may reinforce each other.\footnote{The following perspectives of an ``open research horizon'' are necessarily subjective, but may be of help for orientation.}
Although cosmology has increased its observational basis in the past few decades so tremendeously, it continues to call for alternative approaches to its many conundrums. Several contributions to this volume
deal with such alternatives. The Weyl geometric approach joins this challenge, although for the time being with minor strength. The Brazilian work has made the most concrete contribution to this subject, but it is still hampered by the constraints resulting from the Palatini approach of variation (section \ref{subsection Brazilian approach}). Moreover it has not yet started to fully explore the consequences of the rescaling freedom in Weyl geometric Robertson-Walker models and the possibility that part of the cosmological redshift may be due to the scale connection rather than to a ``real'' expansion (section \ref{subsection trivial}). Such a turn towards a more field theoretic explanation of the cosmological redshift would open new vistas for the geometry of cosmological model building.
The Weyl geometric approach is clearly well suited for such investigations.
Among the most recent papers we have come across first steps towards a field quantization scheme in a Weyl geometric environment, which preserves scale symmetry at the quantum level (Codello et al., section \ref{subsection quantum level}). If this quantization procedure, or another one with the property of preserving the scale symmetry, can be extended to the complete set of standard model fields plus the Weyl geometric scale connection and the gravitational scalar field, we may arrive at a {\em modest} integration of gravity and the SM, in which only the scale degree of freedom of the metric is quantized. Bars/Steinhardt/Turok have already argued that a theory with scale symmetry at the quantum level may lead to a cancelling of the quadratically divergent terms in the radiative corrections to the Higgs mass, which constitute the hard core of the {\em naturalness problem} in present elementary particle physics.\footnote{\citep[p. 2]{Bars/Steinhardt/Turok:2014} }
This is a highly interesting observation, although still an unproven expectation. Together with the long standing speculations of the scalar field and/or the ``Weylon'' (scale connection) field as candidates for dark matter (sections \ref{subsection Dirac followers} and \ref{subsection Israelit}) the Weyl geometric approach seems to offer chances for attacking the naturalness problem of the SM and the dark matter problem jointly, essentially by extending the underlying autormorphism group of gravity and field theory. This complex of expectations has fed much of the research dynamics of the supersymmetry program; here we seem to be approaching a similar thematic complex in a more modest form. We also have seen that a classical, ``effective'' view of the gravitational field can lead to MOND-like phenomenology if also unusual kinematical terms for the scalar field are taken into account (section \ref{subsection dark matter}). We may thus look forward with interest and curiosity to see what the future research will lead to. \\[1em]
\small
\subsection*{\small Acknowledgements}
This paper owes its existence to {\em David Rowe}'s initiative in several respects. He encouraged me to present heterodox ideas on Weyl geometric methods in cosmology at the Mainz conference and invited me to rethink the case after a cool reception of the talk by the other participants. That gave me the chance to place my views in the wider range of the recent attempts for using Weyl geometric methods in physics. After an interruption of several years, an earlier first draft of this paper \citep{Scholz:2011MainzarXiv} had be to be rewritten completely for the final version of this book. The new version overlaps nicely with the wider ambit of the investigations of the interdisciplinary group {\em Epistemology of the LHC} with center at Wuppertal, generously supported by the DFG/FWF.\footnote{Preprint number ELHC\underline{\hspace{0.3em}}2017-002. } This group offers the chance for a close communication between historians and philosophers of science and colleagues from the elementary particle community.
David generously accepted the resulting oversize of the paper.
\vspace{2em}
\small
\bibliographystyle{apsr}
|
\section*{APPENDIX}
\section{Introduction} \label{intro}
Much progress has been made in learning semantically meaningful distributed
representations of individual words, also known as word embeddings
\citep{bengio2001neural, mikolov2013efficient}. On the other hand, much remains
to be done to obtain satisfying representations of phrases
and sentences. Those methods generally fall into two categories. The first
consists of universal sentence embeddings usually
trained by unsupervised learning \citep{hill-cho-korhonen:2016:N16-1}. This
includes SkipThought vectors \citep{kiros2015skip}, ParagraphVector
\citep{le2014distributed}, recursive auto-encoders
\citep{socher-EtAl:2011:EMNLP, socher2013recursive}, Sequential Denoising
Autoencoders (SDAE), FastSent \citep{hill-cho-korhonen:2016:N16-1}, etc.
The other category consists of models trained specifically for a certain
task. They are usually combined with downstream
applications and trained by supervised learning. One generally finds that
specifically trained sentence embeddings perform better than generic ones,
although generic ones can be used in a semi-supervised setting, exploiting
large unlabeled corpora. Several models have been proposed along
this line, by using recurrent networks \citep{hochreiter1997long,
chung2014empirical}, recursive networks \citep{socher2013recursive} and
convolutional networks \citep{kalchbrenner2014convolutional, dossantos2014,
kim2014convolutional} as an intermediate step in creating sentence
representations to solve a wide variety of tasks including classification and
ranking \citep{yin2015convolutional, palangi2016deep, tanEtAl:2016, DBLP:conf/asru/FengXGWZ15}.
A common approach in previous methods consists in creating a simple vector
representation by using the final hidden state of the RNN or the max (or
average) pooling from either RNNs hidden states or convolved n-grams.
Additional works have also been done in exploiting linguistic structures such as
parse and dependence trees to improve sentence representations
\citep{ma2015dependency, mou2015:EMNLP, tai-socher-manning:2015}.
For some tasks people propose to use attention mechanism on top of the CNN or LSTM model
to introduce extra source of information to guide the extraction of sentence
embedding \citep{santos2016attentive}. However, for some other tasks like
sentiment classification, this is not directly applicable since there is no such extra
information: the model is only given one single sentence as input. In those
cases, the most common way is to add a max pooling or averaging step across all
time steps \citep{lee2016sequential}, or just pick up the hidden representation
at the last time step as the encoded embedding \citep{margaritbatch}.
A common approach in many of the aforementioned methods consists of creating a
simple vector representation by using the final hidden state of the RNN or the
max (or average) pooling from either RNNs hidden states or convolved n-grams.
We hypothesize that carrying the semantics along all time steps of a recurrent
model is relatively hard and not necessary. We propose a self-attention
mechanism for these sequential models to replace the max pooling or averaging
step. Different from previous approaches, the proposed self-attention mechanism
allows extracting different aspects of the sentence into multiple vector
representations. It is performed on top of an LSTM in our sentence embedding
model. This enables attention to be used in those cases when there are no extra
inputs. In addition, due to its direct access to hidden representations from
previous time steps, it relieves some long-term memorization burden from LSTM. As a side
effect coming together with our proposed self-attentive sentence embedding,
interpreting the extracted embedding becomes very easy and explicit.
Section \ref{approach} details on our proposed self-attentive sentence
embedding model, as well as a regularization term we proposed for this model,
which is described in Section \ref{reg}. We also provide a visualization method
for this sentence embedding in section \ref{visualization}. We then evaluate
our model in author profiling, sentiment classification and textual entailment
tasks in Section \ref{exps}.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[!ht]{0.5\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{semlp.pdf}
\caption{}
\label{semlp}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[!ht]{0.25\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{annotation.pdf}
\caption{}
\label{annotation}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{A sample model structure showing the sentence embedding model
combined with a fully connected and softmax layer for sentiment analysis (a).
The sentence embedding $M$ is computed as multiple weighted sums of hidden
states from a bidirectional LSTM ($\mathbf{h_1}, ..., \mathbf{h_n}$), where the
summation weights ($A_{i1}, ..., A_{in}$) are computed in a way illustrated in
(b). Blue colored shapes stand for hidden representations, and red colored
shapes stand for weights, annotations, or input/output.}
\label{model_structure}
\end{figure}
\section{Approach} \label{approach}
\subsection{Model}
The proposed sentence embedding model consists of two parts.
The first part is a bidirectional LSTM, and
the second part is the self-attention mechanism, which provides a set of
summation weight vectors for the LSTM hidden states. These set of summation
weight vectors are dotted with the LSTM hidden states, and the resulting
weighted LSTM hidden states are considered as an embedding for the sentence.
It can be combined with, for example, a multilayer perceptron to be applied
on a downstream application. Figure \ref{model_structure} shows an example
when the proposed sentence embedding model is applied to sentiment analysis,
combined with a fully connected layer and a softmax layer. Besides using
a fully connected layer, we also proposes an approach that prunes weight
connections by utilizing the 2-D structure of matrix sentence embedding, which
is detailed in Appendix \ref{appena}. For this section, we will use Figure
\ref{model_structure} to describe our model.
Suppose we have a sentence, which has $n$ tokens, represented in a sequence of word embeddings.
\begin{equation}
S=\left( \mathbf{w_1}, \mathbf{w_2}, \cdots \mathbf{w_n} \right)
\end{equation}
Here ${ w }_{ i }$ is a vector standing for a $d$ dimentional word embedding
for the $i$-th word in the sentence. $S$ is thus a sequence represented as a
2-D matrix, which concatenates all the word embeddings together. $S$ should
have the shape $n$-by-$d$.
Now each entry in the sequence $S$ are independent with each other. To gain
some dependency between adjacent words within a single sentence, we use a
bidirectional LSTM to process the sentence:
\begin{equation}
\overrightarrow { { h }_{ t } } =\overrightarrow { LSTM } (w_{ t },\overrightarrow { { h }_{ t-1 } } )
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\overleftarrow { { h }_{ t } } =\overleftarrow { LSTM } (w_{ t },\overleftarrow { { h }_{ t+1 } } )
\end{equation}
And we concatenate each $\overrightarrow { { h }_{ t } }$ with $\overleftarrow
{ { h }_{ t } }$ to obtain a hidden state $h_t$. Let the hidden unit number for
each unidirectional LSTM be $u$. For simplicity, we note all the $n$ $h_t$s as
$H$, who have the size $n$-by-$2u$.
\begin{equation}
H=\left( \mathbf{h_1}, \mathbf{h_2},\cdots \mathbf{h_n} \right)
\end{equation}
Our aim is to encode a variable length sentence into a fixed size embedding. We
achieve that by choosing a linear combination of the $n$ LSTM hidden vectors in
$H$. Computing the linear combination requires the self-attention mechanism.
The attention mechanism takes the whole LSTM hidden states $H$ as input, and
outputs a vector of weights $\mathbf{a}$:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{a}=softmax\left( \mathbf{w_{s2}}tanh\left({ W }_{ s1 }H^T\right) \right)
\end{equation}
Here ${W}_{s1}$ is a weight matrix with a shape of $d_a$-by-$2u$. and
$\mathbf{w_{s2}}$ is a vector of parameters with size $d_a$, where $d_a$ is a
hyperparameter we can set arbitrarily. Since $H$ is sized $n$-by-$2u$, the
annotation vector $a$ will have a size $n$. the $softmax(\dot)$ ensures all the
computed weights sum up to 1. Then we sum up the LSTM hidden states $H$
according to the weight provided by $\mathbf{a}$ to get a vector representation
$\mathbf{m}$ of the input sentence.
This vector representation usually focuses on a specific component of the
sentence, like a special set of related words or phrases. So it is expected to
reflect an aspect, or component of the semantics in a sentence. However, there
can be multiple components in a sentence that together forms the overall
semantics of the whole sentence, especially for long sentences. (For example,
two clauses linked together by an "and.") Thus, to represent the overall
semantics of the sentence, we need multiple $\mathbf{m}$'s that focus on
different parts of the sentence. Thus we need to perform multiple hops of
attention. Say we want $r$ different parts to be extracted from the sentence,
with regard to this, we extend the $\mathbf{{w}_{s2}}$ into a $r$-by-$d_a$
matrix, note it as $W_{s2}$, and the resulting annotation vector $\mathbf{a}$
becomes annotation matrix $A$. Formally,
\begin{equation} \label{attention}
A=softmax\left( { W }_{ s2 }tanh\left({ W }_{ s1 }H^T\right) \right)
\end{equation}
Here the $softmax(\dot)$ is performed along the second dimension of its input.
We can deem Equation \ref{attention} as a 2-layer MLP without bias, whose
hidden unit numbers is $d_a$, and parameters are $\left\{W_{s2},
W_{s1}\right\}$.
The embedding vector $m$ then becomes an $r$-by-$2u$ embedding matrix $M$. We
compute the $r$ weighted sums by multiplying the annotation matrix $A$ and LSTM
hidden states $H$, the resulting matrix is the sentence embedding:
\begin{equation}
M=AH
\end{equation}
\subsection{Penalization term} \label{reg}
The embedding matrix $M$ can suffer from redundancy problems if the attention
mechanism always provides similar summation weights for all the $r$ hops. Thus
we need a penalization term to encourage the diversity of summation weight
vectors across different hops of attention.
The best way to evaluate the diversity is definitely the Kullback – Leibler
divergence between any 2 of the summation weight vectors. However, we found
that not very stable in our case. We conjecture it is because we are
maximizing a set of KL divergence (instead of minimizing only one, which is the
usual case), we are optimizing the annotation matrix A to have a lot of
sufficiently small or even zero values at different softmax output units, and
these vast amount of zeros is making the training unstable. There is another
feature that KL doesn't provide but we want, which is, we want each individual
row to focus on a single aspect of semantics, so we want the probability mass in the
annotation softmax output to be more focused. but with KL penalty we can’t
encourage that.
We hereby introduce a new penalization term which overcomes the aforementioned
shortcomings.
Compared to the KL divergence penalization,
this term consumes only one third of the computation.
We use the dot product of $A$ and its transpose, subtracted by an identity
matrix, as a measure of redundancy.
\begin{equation} \label{penalization_term}
P = {{ \left\| {\left( AA^T-I \right)} \right\| }_{ F }}^2
\end{equation}
Here ${\left\| \bullet \right\|}_F$ stands for the Frobenius norm of a matrix.
Similar to adding an L2 regularization term, this penalization term $P$ will be
multiplied by a coefficient, and we minimize it together with the original
loss, which is dependent on the downstream application.
Let's consider two different summation vectors $\mathbf{a^i}$ and
$\mathbf{a^j}$ in $A$. Because of the softmax, all entries within any summation
vector in $A$ should sum up to 1. Thus they can be deemed as probability masses
in a discrete probability distribution. For any non-diagonal elements $a_{ij}
(i \neq j)$ in the $AA^T$ matrix, it corresponds to a summation over
elementwise product of two distributions:
\begin{equation}
0 < a_{ij} = \sum _{ k=1 }^{ n }{ { a }_{ k }^{ i }{ a }_{ k }^{ j } } < 1
\end{equation}
where $a_k^i$ and $a_k^j$ are the $k$-th element in the $\mathbf{a^i}$ and
$\mathbf{a^j}$ vectors, respectively. In the most extreme case, where there is
no overlap between the two probability distributions $\mathbf{a^i}$ and
$\mathbf{a^j}$, the correspond $a_{ij}$ will be 0. Otherwise, it will have a
positive value. On the other extreme end, if the two distributions are
identical and all concentrates on one single word, it will have a maximum value
of 1. We subtract an identity matrix from $AA^T$ so that forces the elements on
the diagonal of $AA^T$ to approximate 1, which encourages each summation vector
$\mathbf{a^i}$ to focus on as few number of words as possible, forcing each
vector to be focused on a single aspect, and all other
elements to 0, which punishes redundancy between different summation vectors.
\subsection{Visualization} \label{visualization}
The interpretation of the sentence embedding is quite straight forward because
of the existence of annotation matrix $A$. For each row in the sentence
embedding matrix $M$, we have its corresponding annotation vector
$\mathbf{a^i}$. Each element in this vector corresponds to how much
contribution the LSTM hidden state of a token on that position contributes to.
We can thus draw a heat map for each row of the embedding matrix $M$
This way of visualization gives hints on what is encoded in each part of the
embedding, adding an extra layer of interpretation. (See Figure
\ref{age_nopnty_extend} and \ref{age_pnty_extend}).
The second way of visualization can be achieved by summing up over all the
annotation vectors, and then normalizing the resulting weight vector to sum up
to 1. Since it sums up all aspects of semantics of a sentence, it yields a
general view of what the embedding mostly focuses on. We can figure out which
words the embedding takes into account a lot, and which ones are skipped by the
embedding. See Figure \ref{age_nopnty} and \ref{age_pnty}.
\section{Related work}
Various supervised and unsupervised sentence embedding models have been
mentioned in Section \ref{intro}.
Different from those models, our proposed method uses a
new self-attention mechanism that allows it to extract different aspects of the
sentence into multiple vector-representations. The matrix structure together
with the penalization term gives our model a greater capacity to disentangle
the latent information from the input sentence. We also do not use linguistic
structures to guide our sentence representation model. Additionally, using our
method we can easily create visualizations that can help in the interpretation
of the learned representations.
Some recent work have also proposed supervised methods that use
intra/self-sentence attention. \cite{ling2015not} proposed an attention based model
for word embedding, which calculates an attention weight for each word at each
possible position in the context window. However this method cannot be extended
to sentence level embeddings since one cannot exhaustively enumerate all
possible sentences. \cite{LiuSLW16} proposes a sentence level attention which
has a similar motivation but done differently. They utilize the mean pooling
over LSTM states as the attention source, and use that to re-weight the pooled
vector representation of the sentence.
Apart from the previous 2 variants, we want to note that \cite{li2016dataset}
proposed a
same self attention mechanism for question encoding in their factoid QA model,
which is concurrent to our work. The difference lies in that their encoding is
still presented as a vector, but our attention produces a matrix representation
instead, with a specially designed penalty term. We applied the model for
sentiment anaysis and entailment, and their model is for factoid QA.
The LSTMN model \citep{cheng2016long} also proposed a very successful
intra-sentence level attention mechanism, which is later used by
\cite{Parikh2016}. We see our attention and theirs as having different
granularities. LSTMN produces an attention vector for each of its hidden states
during the recurrent iteration, which is sort of an "online updating"
attention. It's more fine-grained, targeting at discovering lexical
correlations between a certain word and its previous words. On the contrary, our
attention mechanism is only performed once, focuses directly on the semantics
that makes sense for discriminating the targets. It is less focused on
relations between words, but more on the semantics of the whole sentence that
each word contributes to. Computationally, our method also scales up with the
sentence length better, since it doesn't require the LSTM to compute an
annotation vector over all of its previous words each time when the LSTMN
computes its next step.
\section{Experimental results} \label{exps}
We first evaluate our sentence embedding model by applying it to 3 different
datasets: the Age dataset, the Yelp dataset, and the Stanford Natural Language
Inference (SNLI) Corpus. These 3 datasets fall into 3 different tasks,
corresponding to author profiling, sentiment analysis, and textual entailment,
respectively. Then we also perform a set of exploratory experiments to validate
properties of various aspects for our sentence embedding model.
\subsection{Author profiling} \label{age}
The Author Profiling
dataset\footnote{\texttt{http://pan.webis.de/clef16/pan16-web/author-profiling.html}}
consists of Twitter tweets in English, Spanish, and Dutch. For some of the
tweets, it also provides an age and gender of the user when writing the tweet.
The age range are split into 5 classes: 18-24, 25-34, 35-49, 50-64, 65+. We use
English tweets as input, and use those tweets to predict the age range of the
user. Since we are predicting the age of users, we refer to it as Age dataset
in the rest of our paper. We randomly selected 68485 tweets as training
set, 4000 for development set, and 4000 for test set. Performances are also
chosen to be classification accuracy.
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Performance Comparision of Different Models on Yelp and Age Dataset}
\label{yelpage}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\bf Models} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{\bf Yelp} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{\bf Age}
\\ \hline
BiLSTM + Max Pooling + MLP & 61.99\% & 77.40\% \\
CNN + Max Pooling + MLP & 62.05\% & 78.15\% \\
Our Model & {\bf 64.21\%} & {\bf 80.45\%} \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
We compare our model with two baseline models: biLSTM and CNN.
For the two baseline models. The biLSTM model uses a bidirectional LSTM with
300 dimensions in each direction, and use max pooling across all LSTM hidden
states to get the sentence embedding vector, then use a 2-layer ReLU output MLP
with 3000 hidden states to output the classification result. The CNN model uses
the same scheme, but substituting biLSTM with 1 layer of 1-D convolutional
network. During training we use 0.5 dropout on the MLP and 0.0001 L2
regularization. We use stochastic gradient descent as the optimizer, with a
learning rate of 0.06, batch size 16. For biLSTM, we also clip the norm of
gradients to be between -0.5 and 0.5. We searched hyperparameters in a wide
range and find the aforementioned set of hyperparameters yields the highest
accuracy.
For our model, we use the same settings as what we did in biLSTM. We also use a
2-layer ReLU output MLP, but with 2000 hidden units. In addition, our
self-attention MLP has a hidden layer with 350 units (the $d_a$ in Section
\ref{approach}), we choose the matrix embedding to have 30 rows (the $r$), and
a coefficient of 1 for the penalization term.
We train all the three models until convergence and select the corresponding
test set performance according to the best development set performance. Our
results show that the model outperforms both of the biLSTM and CNN baselines by
a significant margin.
\subsection{Sentiment analysis}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[!hb]{0.8\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{yelp_1star.png}
\caption{1 star reviews}
\label{yelp_1star}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[!hb]{0.8\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{yelp_5star.png}
\caption{5 star reviews}
\label{yelp_5star}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Heatmap of Yelp reviews with the two extreme score.}
\label{yelp_reviews}
\end{figure}
We choose the Yelp
dataset\footnote{\texttt{https://www.yelp.com/dataset\_challenge}} for
sentiment analysis task. It consists of 2.7M yelp reviews, we take the review
as input and predict the number of stars the user who wrote that review
assigned to the corresponding business store. We randomly select 500K
review-star pairs as training set, and 2000 for development set, 2000 for test
set. We tokenize the review texts by Stanford tokenizer. We use 100 dimensional
word2vec as initialization for word embeddings, and tune the embedding during
training across all of our experiments. The target number of stars is an
integer number in the range of $[1, 5]$, inclusive. We are treating the task as
a classification task, i.e., classify a review text into one of the 5 classes.
We use classification accuracy as a measurement.
For the two baseline models, we use the same setting as what we used for Author
Profiling dataset, except that we are using a batch size of 32 instead. For our
model, we are also using the same setting, except that we choose the hidden
unit numbers in the output MLP to be 3000 instead. We also observe a
significant performance gain comparining to the two baselines. (Table
\ref{yelpage})
As an interpretation of the learned sentence embedding, we use the second way
of visualization described in Section \ref{visualization} to plot heat maps for
some of the reviews in the dataset. We randomly select 5 examples of negative
(1 star) and positive (5 stars) reviews from the test set, when the model has a
high confidence ($>0.8$) in predicting the label. As shown in Figure
\ref{yelp_reviews}, we find that the model majorly learns to capture some key
factors in the review that indicate strongly on the sentiment behind the
sentence. For most of the short reviews, the model manages to capture all the
key factors that contribute to an extreme score, but for longer reviews, the
model is still not able to capture all related factors. For example, in the 3rd
review in Figure \ref{yelp_5star}), it seems that a lot of focus is spent on
one single factor, i.e., the "so much fun", and the model puts a little amount
of attention on other key points like "highly recommend", "amazing food", etc.
\begin{table}[b]
\caption{Test Set Performance Compared to other Sentence Encoding Based
Methods in SNLI Datset}
\label{snli_table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\bf Model} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{\bf Test Accuracy}
\\ \hline
300D LSTM encoders \citep{bowman2016fast} & 80.6\% \\
600D (300+300) BiLSTM encoders \citep{liu2016learning} & 83.3\% \\
300D Tree-based CNN encoders \citep{mou2015natural} & 82.1\% \\
300D SPINN-PI encoders \citep{bowman2016fast} & 83.2\% \\
300D NTI-SLSTM-LSTM encoders \citep{munkhdalai2016neural} & 83.4\% \\
1024D GRU encoders with SkipThoughts pre-training \citep{vendrov2015order} & 81.4\% \\
300D NSE encoders \citep{munkhdalai2016neuralb} & {\bf 84.6\%} \\
\hline
Our method & 84.4\% \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Textual entailment} \label{snli}
We use the biggest dataset in textual entailment, the SNLI corpus
\citep{bowman2015large} for our evaluation on this task. SNLI is a collection
of 570k human-written English sentence pairs manually labeled for balanced
classification with the labels entailment, contradiction, and neutral. The
model will be given a pair of sentences, called hypothesis and premise
respectively, and asked to tell if the semantics in the two sentences are
contradicting with each other or not. It is also a classification task, so we
measure the performance by accuracy.
We process the hypothesis and premise independently, and then extract the
relation between the two sentence embeddings by using multiplicative interactions
proposed in \cite{memisevic2013learning} (see Appendix \ref{appenb} for details),
and use a 2-layer ReLU output MLP with 4000
hidden units to map the hidden representation into classification results.
Parameters of biLSTM and attention MLP are shared across hypothesis and
premise. The biLSTM is 300 dimension in each direction, the attention MLP has
150 hidden units instead, and both sentence embeddings for hypothesis and
premise have 30 rows (the $r$). The penalization term coefficient is set to
0.3. We use 300 dimensional GloVe \citep{pennington2014glove} word embedding to
initialize word embeddings. We use AdaGrad as the optimizer, with a learning
rate of 0.01. We don't use any extra regularization methods, like dropout or L2
normalization. Training converges after 4 epochs, which is relatively fast.
This task is a bit different from previous two tasks, in that it has 2
sentences as input. There are a bunch of ways to add inter-sentence level
attention, and those attentions bring a lot of benefits. To make the comparison
focused and fair, we only compare methods that fall into the sentence
encoding-based models. i.e., there is no information exchanged between the
hypothesis and premise before they are encoded into some distributed encoding.
We find that compared to other published approaches, our method shows a
significant gain ($\ge 1\%$) to them, except for the 300D NSE encoders, which
is the state-of-the-art in this category. However, the $0.2\%$ different is
relatively small compared to the differences between other methods.
\subsection{Exploratory experiments}
In this subsection we are going to do a set of exploratory experiments to study
the relative effect of each component in our model.
\subsubsection{Effect of penalization term}
Since the purpose of introducing the penalization term $P$ is majorly to discourage
the redundancy in the embedding, we first directly visualize the heat maps of
each row when the model is presented with a sentence. We compare two identical
models with the same size as detailed in Section \ref{age} trained separately
on Age dataset, one with this penalization term (where the penalization
coefficient is set to 1.0) and the other with no penalty. We randomly select
one tweet from the test set and compare the two models by plotting a heat map
for each hop of attention on that single tweet. Since there are 30 hops of
attention for each model, which makes plotting all of them quite redundant, we
only plot 6 of them. These 6 hops already reflect the situation in all of the
30 hops.
\begin{figure}[!b]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[!hb]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{age_nopnty_extend.png}
\caption{}
\label{age_nopnty_extend}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[!hb]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{age_pnty_extend.png}
\caption{}
\label{age_pnty_extend}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[!hb]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{age_nopnty.png}
\caption{without penalization}
\label{age_nopnty}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[!hb]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{age_pnty.png}
\caption{with 1.0 penalization}
\label{age_pnty}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Heat maps for 2 models trained on Age dataset. The left column is
trained without the penalization term, and the right column is trained with
1.0 penalization. (a) and (b) shows detailed attentions taken by 6 out of 30
rows of the matrix embedding, while (c) and (d) shows the overall attention by
summing up all 30 attention weight vectors. }
\label{age_visualization_extended}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!b]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[!hb]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{yelp_nopnty.png}
\caption{Yelp without penalization}
\label{yelp_nopnty}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[!hb]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{yelp_pnty.png}
\caption{Yelp with penalization}
\label{yelp_pnty}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Attention of sentence embedding on 3 different Yelp reviews. The
left one is trained without penalization, and the right one is trained with
1.0 penalization.}
\label{yelp_visualize}
\end{figure}
From the figure we can tell that the model trained without the penalization
term have lots of redundancies between different hops of attention (Figure
\ref{age_nopnty_extend}), resulting in putting lot of focus on the word "it"
(Figure \ref{age_nopnty}), which is not so relevant to the age of the author.
However in the right column, the model shows more variations between different
hops, and as a result, the overall embedding focuses on "mail-replies spam"
instead. (Figure \ref{age_pnty})
For the Yelp dataset, we also observe a similar phenomenon. To make the
experiments more explorative, we choose to plot heat maps of overall attention
heat maps for more samples, instead of plotting detailed heat maps for a single
sample again. Figure \ref{yelp_visualize} shows overall focus of the sentence
embedding on three different reviews. We observe that with the penalization
term, the model tends to be more focused on important parts of the review. We
think it is because that we are encouraging it to be focused, in the diagonals
of matrix $AA^T$ (Equation \ref{penalization_term}).
To validate if these differences result in performance difference, we evaluate
four models trained on Yelp and Age datasets, both with and without the
penalization term. Results are shown in Table \ref{yelpage_penalization}.
Consistent with what expected, models trained with the penalization term
outperforms their counterpart trained without.
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Performance comparision regarding the penalization term}
\label{yelpage_penalization}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\multicolumn{1}{c}{\bf Penalization coefficient} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{\bf Yelp} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{\bf Age}
\\ \hline
1.0 & 64.21\% & 80.45\% \\
0.0 & 61.74\% & 79.27\% \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
In SNLI dataset, although we observe that introducing the penalization term
still contributes to encouraging the diversity of different rows in the matrix
sentence embedding, and forcing the network to be more focused on the
sentences, the quantitative effect of this penalization term is not so obvious
on SNLI dataset. Both models yield similar test set accuracies.
\subsubsection{Effect of multiple vectors}
Having multiple rows in the sentence embedding is expected to provide more abundant information about the encoded content. It makes sence to evaluate how significant the improvement can be brought by $r$. Taking the models we used for Age and SNLI dataset as an example, we vary $r$ from $1$ to $30$ for each task, and train the resulting $10$ models independently (Figure \ref{varyr}). Note that when $r=1$, the sentence embedding reduces to a normal vector form.
\begin{figure}[!b]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{r_age.pdf}
\caption{}
\label{r_age}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{r_snli0_3.pdf}
\caption{}
\label{r_snli}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Effect of the number of rows ($r$) in matrix sentence embedding. The vertical axes indicates test set accuracy and the horizontal axes indicates training epoches. Numbers in the legends stand for the corresponding values of $r$. (a) is conducted in Age dataset and (b) is conducted in SNLI dataset.}
\label{varyr}
\end{figure}
From this figure we can find that, without having multiple rows, the model performs on-par with its competitiors which use other forms of vector sentence embeddings. But there is significant difference between having only one vector for the sentence embedding and multiple vectors. The models are also quite invariant with respect to $r$, since in the two figures a wide range of values between $10$ to $30$ are all generating comparable curves.
\section{Conclusion and discussion}
In this paper, we introduced a fixed size, matrix sentence embedding with a
self-attention mechanism. Because of this attention mechanism, there is a way
to interpret the sentence embedding in depth in our model. Experimental results
over 3 different tasks show that the model outperforms other sentence embedding
models by a significant margin.
Introducing attention mechanism allows the final sentence embedding to directly
access previous LSTM hidden states via the attention summation. Thus the LSTM
doesn't need to carry every piece of information towards its last hidden state.
Instead, each LSTM hidden state is only expected to provide shorter term
context information around each word, while the higher level semantics, which
requires longer term dependency, can be picked up directly by the attention
mechanism. This setting reliefs the burden of LSTM to carry on long term
dependencies. Our experiments also support that, as we observed that our model
has a bigger advantage when the contents are longer. Further more, the notion
of summing up elements in the attention mechanism is very primitive, it can be
something more complex than that, which will allow more operations on the
hidden states of LSTM.
The model is able to encode any sequence with variable length into a fixed size
representation, without suffering from long-term dependency problems. This
brings a lot of scalability to the model: without any modification, it can be
applied directly to longer contents like paragraphs, articles, etc. Though this
is beyond the focus of this paper, it remains an interesting direction to
explore as a future work.
As a downside of our proposed model, the current training method heavily relies
on downstream applications, thus we are not able to train it in an unsupervised
way. The major obstacle towards enabling unsupervised learning in this model is
that during decoding, we don't know as prior how the different rows in the
embedding should be divided and reorganized. Exploring all those possible
divisions by using a neural network could easily end up with overfitting.
Although we can still do unsupervised learning on the proposed model by using a
sequential decoder on top of the sentence embedding, it merits more to find
some other structures as a decoder.
\subsubsection*{Acknowledgments}
The authors would like to acknowledge the developers of Theano
\citep{2016arXiv160502688short} and Lasagne. The first author would also like
to thank IBM Watson for providing resources, fundings and valuable discussions
to make this project possible, and Caglar Gulcehre for helpful discussions.
|
\section{Background}
\label{sect:Background}
In this Section we provide an introduction to Bayesian networks together with a review of some state-of-the-art methods to tackle to problem of learning their structures from a set of \textcolor{black}{observations} $D$ over the variables described in the network.
\subsection{Bayesian Graphical Models}
\label{sec:bn_preliminaries}
A Bayesian network is a statistical graphical model that succinctly represents a \emph{joint distribution} over $n$ random variables and encodes it in a \textcolor{black}{\emph{directed acyclic graph}} $G = (V, E)$ over the $n$ nodes $V$ referring to the variables and their relations $E$ (arcs in the DAG).
Given the structure of a BN, the full joint distribution of the $n$ variables can be written as the product of the conditional distributions on each variable.
In fact, an edge between pair of nodes, e.g., $A$ and $B$, denotes statistical dependence, i.e., $\Pconj{A}{B} \neq \Probab{A} \Probab{B}$, regardless of which any other variables we condition on, that is, for any other set of variables $\cal C$ it holds that \cite{koller2009probabilistic}
\textcolor{black}{\begin{equation}
\Pcond{A \wedge B}{\mathcal{C}} \neq
\Pcond{A}{\mathcal{C}} \cdot \Pcond{B}{\mathcal{C}}.
\end{equation}}
In such a DAG, the set of variables connected toward any node $X$ determines its set of ``parent'' nodes $\pi(X)$.
Moreover, the joint distribution over all the variables can be written
as $\prod_{X} \Pcond{X}{\pi(X)}$, where, if a node has no incoming edges (i.e., no parents), in the product we use its marginal probability $\Probab{X}$.
Thus, to compute the probability of any combination of values over the variables, only the conditional probabilities of each variable given its parents must be parameterized. However, even in the simplest case of binary variables, the number of parameters in each conditional probability table is locally of exponential size: namely,\\$2^{|\pi(X)|} - 1$.
Thus, the total number of parameters needed to compute the full joint distribution is of size $\sum_{X} 2^{|\pi(X)|} - 1$, which is \textcolor{black}{considerably less} than $2^n-1$ for sparse networks.
A useful property of the graphical structure is that we can define, for each variable, a set of nodes called the \emph{Markov blanket} such that, conditioned on it, this variable is independent of all the other variables in the network.
It can be proven that, for any BN, the Markov blanket consists of a node's parents, its children and the parents of the children \cite{koller2009probabilistic}.
We also point out that the usage of the symmetrical notion of conditional dependence introduces important limitations in the task of learning the structure of a BN.
As a matter of fact, we note that the two edges $A \rightarrow B$ and $B \rightarrow A$ denote equivalent dependence between $A$ and $B$.
Hence, two graphs having a different structure can model an identical set of independence and conditional independence relations (\emph{I-equivalence}).
This yields to the notion of \emph{Markov equivalence class} as a \emph{partially directed acyclic graph}, in which the edges that can take either orientation are left undirected.
It is also known that two BNs are Markov equivalent when they have the same \emph{skeleton} and the same \emph{$v$-structures}, the former being the set of edges, ignoring their direction (e.g., $A \to B$ and $B \to A$ constitute a unique edge in the skeleton) and the latter being all the edge structures in which a variable has at least two parents, but those do not share an edge (e.g., $A \rightarrow B \leftarrow C$) \cite{judea1991equivalence}.
BNs have an interesting relation to canonical boolean logical operators $\wedge$, $\vee$ and $\oplus$ and formulas over variables \cite{korsunsky2014inference,ramazzotti2016modeling}.
In fact these formulas, which are ``deterministic'' in principle, in BNs are naturally softened into \emph{probabilistic relations} to allow some degree of uncertainty or noise.
This probabilistic approach to modeling logic allows representation of qualitative relationships among variables in a way that is inherently robust to small perturbations by noise.
For instance, the phrase \emph{``in order to hear music when listening to an mp3, it is necessary and sufficient that the power is on and the headphones are plugged in"} can be represented by a probabilistic conjunctive formulation that relates power, headphones and music, in which the probability that music is audible depends only on whether power and headphones are present.
On the other hand, there is a small probability that the music will still not play (perhaps we forgot to load any songs into the device) even if both power and headphones are on, and there is small probability that we will hear music even without power or headphone (perhaps we are next to a concert and overhear that music)
\cite{korsunsky2014inference,ramazzotti2016model}.
\subsection{Approaches to Learning the Structure of a BN}
\label{sec:bn_learning}
In the the literature, there have been two initial families of methods aimed at learning the structure of a BN from data.
The methods belonging to the first family aim to explicitly \emph{capture all the conditional independence relations} encoded in the edges, and will be referred to as \emph{constraint based approaches} (\ref{sec:bn_learning_structural}).
The second family, that of \emph{score based approaches} (\ref{sec:bn_learning_score}), aims at the selection of a model that \emph{maximizes the likelihood of the data} given the model. Since both approaches lead to intractability (\textit{NP}{}-hardness) \cite{chickering1996learning,chickering2004large}, computing and verifying an exact solution is impractical.
For this reason, heuristic methods like Hill Climbing \cite{skiena1998algorithm}, Tabu Search \cite{glover1989tabu}, Simulated Annealing \cite{kirkpatrick1984optimization} and Genetic Algorithms \cite{golberg1989genetic,john1992holland} are generally employed.
These algorithms are characterized by a polynomial complexity, although they only provide asymptotic guarantees of converging to optimal solutions.
Recently, a third class of learning algorithms that takes advantage of \emph{specialized logical relations} (mentioned in the previous section) have been introduced (\ref{sec:constrained_nets}).
In the rest of this section we describe in detail some of these approaches, leaving to specific readings more detailed discussions \cite{koller2009probabilistic,korsunsky2014inference,ramazzotti2016model}.
\subsubsection{Constraint-based Approaches}
\label{sec:bn_learning_structural}
We briefly present an intuitive explanation of several common algorithms used for structure discovery by explicitly considering conditional independence relations between variables.
For more detailed explanations and analyses of complexity, correctness and stability, we refer the reader to the related references \cite{spirtes2000causation,tsamardinos2003algorithms}.
The basic idea behind this class of algorithms is to build a graph structure reflecting the independence relations in the observed data, thus matching as closely as possible the empirical distribution.
The difficulty in this approach lies in the number of conditional pairwise independence tests that an algorithm would have to perform to test all possible relations.
This number is indeed \emph{exponential}, requiring to condition on a power set, when testing for the conditional independence between two variables.
Because of this inherent intractability, this class of algorithms requires the introduction of some \emph{approximations}.
\subsubsection{Score-based Approaches}
\label{sec:bn_learning_score}
These approaches to structural learning \textcolor{black}{aim to maximize the likelihood} of a set of observed data.
Since we assume that the data are independent and identically distributed, the likelihood of the data $\mathcal{L}(\cdot)$ is simply the product of the probability of each observation.
That is,
\textcolor{black}{\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}(D) = \prod_{d\in D} \Probab{d}
\end{equation}}
for a set of observations $D$. Since we want to infer a model $\cal G$ that best explains the observed data, we define the likelihood of observing the data given a specific model $\cal G$ as:
\textcolor{black}{\begin{equation}
\mathcal{LL}(\mathcal{G},D) = \prod_{d \in D} \Pcond{d}{\mathcal{G}}\, .
\end{equation}}
However, the actual likelihood is never used in practice, as this quantity rapidly becomes very small and impossible to represent in a computer.
Instead, the logarithm of the likelihood function is usually adopted for three reasons:
\emph{(i)} the $log(\cdot)$ function is monotonic;
\emph{(ii)} log-likelihood mitigates the numerical issues caused by normal likelihood;
\emph{(iii)} it is easy to compute, because the
logarithm of a product is equal to the sum of the logs (e.g., $\log(xy) =\log x + \log y $), and the likelihood for a Bayesian network is a product of simple terms \cite{koller2009probabilistic}.
Practically, however, there is a problem in learning the network structure by maximizing log-likelihood alone.
Namely, for any arbitrary set of data, the most likely graph is always the fully connected one (i.e., all edges are present), since adding an edge can only increase the likelihood of the data.
To overcome this limitation, log-likelihood is almost always supplemented with a
\emph{regularization term} that penalizes the complexity of the model.
There is a plethora of regularization terms, some based on information theory and others on Bayesian statistics (see \cite{carvalho2009scoring} and references therein), which all serve to promote \emph{sparsity} in the learned graph structure, though different regularization terms are better suited for particular applications \cite{koller2009probabilistic,ramazzotti2016model}.
\subsubsection{Learning Logically Constrained Networks}
\label{sec:constrained_nets}
In Section \ref{sec:bn_preliminaries}, we noted that an important class of BNs captures common binary logical operators, such as $\wedge$, $\vee$, and $\oplus$.
Although the learning algorithms mentioned above can be used to infer the structure of such networks, some algorithms employ knowledge of these logical constraints in the learning process.
A widespread approach for the learning of monotonic progression networks with a directed acyclic graph (DAG) structure and \emph{conjunctive events} are \emph{Conjunctive Bayesian Networks} (see CBNs, \cite{beerenwinkel2007conjunctive}).
This approach was originally adopted to model cancer progression in terms of accumulation of drivers genes \cite{ramazzotti2015capri,caravagna2016algorithmic}, in a way closely related to the model we discuss in this work.
This model is a standard BN over Bernoulli random variables with the constraint that the probability of a node $X$ taking the value $1$ is zero if at least one of its parents has value $0$.
This defines a conjunctive relationship, in that all the parents of $X$ must be $1$ for $X$ to possibly be $1$.
Thus, this model alone cannot represent noise, which is an essential part of any real data.
In response to this, \emph{hidden CBNs} \cite{gerstung2009quantifying} were developed by augmenting the set of variables: a correspondence to a new variable $Y$ that represents the observed state is assigned to each CBN variable $X$, which captures the ``true" state.
Thus, each new variable $Y$ takes the value of the corresponding variable $X$ with a high probability, and the opposite value with a low probability, in order to model noise observations.
In this model, the variables $X$ are latent, i.e., they are not present in the observed data, and have to be inferred from the observed values for the new variables.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sect:Conclusion}
In this paper we investigated the
structure learning of Bayesian Networks aimed at modeling phenomena
driven by the monotonic accumulation of events over time. To this end,
we made use of a subclass of constrained Bayesian networks named
Suppes-Bayes Causal Networks, which include structural constraints
grounded in Suppes' theory of probabilistic causation.
While the problem of learning the structure of a Bayesian Network is
known to be intractable, such constraints allow to prune the search
space of the possible solutions, leading to a tremendous reduction of
the number of valid networks to be considered, hence taming the
complexity of the problem in a remarkable way.
We here discussed the theoretical implications of the inference
process at the different steps, also by comparing various
state-of-the-art algorithmic approaches and regularization methods.
We finally provided an in-depth study on realistically simulated data
of the effect of each inference choice, thus providing some sound
guidelines for the design of efficient algorithms for the inference of
models of cumulative phenomena.
\textcolor{black}{According to our results, none of the tested search strategies significantly outperforms the others in all the experimental settings, in terms of both sensitivity and specificity.}
Yet, we could prove that Suppes' constraints
consistently improve the inference accuracy, in all the considered
scenarios and with all the inference schemes, hence positioning SBCNs
as the new benchmark in the the efficient inference and representation
of cumulative phenomena.
\section{Introduction}
\label{sect:introduction}
\emph{Bayesian Networks} (BNs) are probabilistic graphical models
representing the relations of \emph{conditional dependence} among
random variables, encoded in \emph{directed acyclic graphs} (DAGs)
\cite{koller2009probabilistic}. In the last decades, BNs have been
effectively applied in several different fields and disciplines, such
as (but not limited to) diagnostics and predictive analytics
\cite{koller2009probabilistic}.
One of the most challenging task with BNs is that of \emph{learning}
their structure from data. Two main approaches are commonly used to
tackle this problem.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Constraint-based} techniques: mainly due to the works by
Judea Pearl \cite{pearl2009causality} and others, these approaches aim at
discovering the relations of conditional independence from the data,
using them as constraints to learn the network.
\item \emph{Score-based} techniques: in this case the problem of
learning the structure of a BN is defined as an \emph{optimization}
task (specifically, \emph{maximization}) where the search space of the
valid solutions (i.e., all the possible DAGs) is evaluated via
\emph{scores} based on a \emph{likelihood function}
\cite{koller2009probabilistic}.
\end{enumerate}
Regardless of the approach, the main difficulty in this optimization
problem is the huge number of valid solutions in the search space,
namely, all the possible DAGs, which makes this task a known \emph{NP}-hard
one in its most general instance, and even when constraining each node
to have at most two parents
\cite{chickering1996learning,chickering2004large}.
Therefore, all state-of-the-art techniques solve this task by means of
meta-heuristics
\cite{koller2009probabilistic,larranaga1996structure,teyssier2012ordering}.
Moreover, the inference is further complicated by the well-known issue of
\emph{$I$-equivalence}: BNs with even very different structures can
encode the same set of conditional independence properties\cite{koller2009probabilistic}.
Thus, any algorithm for structural
learning can converge to a set of equivalent structures rather than to
the correct one, given that the inference itself is performed by
learning the statistical relations among the variables emerging from
their induced distributions rather than the structure itself
\cite{koller2009probabilistic}.
In this paper, we investigate the application of BNs for the
characterization of a specific class of dynamical phenomena, i.e.,
those driven by the \emph{monotonic accumulation of events}. In
particular, the process being modeled/observed must imply:
\begin{enumerate}
\item a \emph{temporal ordering} among its events (i.e., the nodes in
the BN), and
\item a monotonic accumulation over time, which probabilistically
entails that the occurrence of an earlier event must be
\emph{positively correlated} to the subsequent occurrence of its
successors, leading to a \emph{significant temporal pattern}
\cite{ramazzotti2016modeling}.
\end{enumerate}
An example can be found in the dynamics of \emph{cascading failures},
that is a failure in a system of interconnected parts where the
failure of a part can trigger the failure of successive parts. These
phenomenon can happen in different contexts, such as power
transmission, computer networking, finance and biological systems.
In these scenarios, different configurations may lead to failure, but
some of them are more likely than others and, hence, can be modeled
probabilistically \cite{buldyrev2010catastrophic}.
The two particular conditions mentioned above can be very well modelled by
the notion of \emph{probabilistic causation} by Patrick Suppes
\cite{suppes1970probabilistic,hitchcock2010probabilistic},
and allow us to define a set of \emph{structural
constraints} to the BNs to be inferred, which, accordingly, have
been dubbed as \emph{Suppes-Bayes Causal Networks} (SBCNs) in
previous works \cite{bonchi2015exposing,ramazzotti2016modeling}.
SBCNs have been already applied in a number of different fields,
ranging from cancer progression inference
\cite{loohuis2014inferring,ramazzotti2015capri,caravagna2016algorithmic}
to social discrimination discovery \cite{bonchi2015exposing} and stress testing \cite{gao2017efficient}.
We specifically position our work within the aforementioned
optimization-based framework for BN structure learning. The goal of
this paper is to investigate how structure learning is influenced by
different algorithmic choices, when representing cumulative dynamical
phenomena. In particular, it is known that given a \emph{temporal
ordering} on the variables (i.e., a partially ordered set among the
events, \emph{poset} in the terminology of Bayesian networks) of a BN,
finding the optimal solution that is consistent with the ordering can
be accomplished in time $O(n^k)$, where $n$ is the number of variables
and $k$ the bounded in-degree of a node
\cite{buntine1991theory,cooper1992bayesian}. Thus, the search in the
\emph{space of orderings} can be performed way more efficiently than
the search in the \emph{space of structures}, as the search space is
much smaller, the branching factor is lower and acyclicity checks are
not necessary \cite{teyssier2012ordering,ramazzotti2016parallel}.
The determination of the right ordering
ordering
in complex dynamical phenomena is generally a difficult task, which often requires considerable domain knowledge.
However, the representation of cumulative phenomena via SBCNs \textcolor{black}{allows one to overcome this hurdle}, as Suppes' constraints dramatically reduce the search space of valid solutions, also providing a temporal ordering on the variables.
This represents a serious theoretical advancement in
structure learning of BNs for the modeling of cumulative phenomena,
which we investigate in this work with a series of synthetic
experiments.
In particular, in this paper we quantitatively assess the performance
of learning the structure of a BN when:
\begin{itemize}
\item the temporal ordering among variables is given / not given,
i.e., when Suppes' constraints are imposed / not imposed (in the
former case we deal with SBCNs);
\item different heuristic search strategies are adopted, i.e.,
\emph{Hill Climbing} (HC), \emph{Tabu Search} (TS), and
\emph{Genetic Algorithms} (GA);
\item different regularization terms are used, i.e., \emph{Bayesian
Information Criterion} (BIC) and \emph{Akaike information
criterion} (AIC).
\end{itemize}
\section{Inference of Causal Networks}
\label{sect:Method}
In this Section we present the foundations of our framework and, specifically, we define the main characteristics of the SBCNs and of some heuristic strategies for the likelihood fit.
Without losing in generality, from now on, we consider a simplified formulation of the problem of learning the structure of BNs where all the variables depicted in the graph are Bernoulli random variables, i.e., their support is $(0,1)$.
All the conclusions derived in these settings can be also directly applied to the general case where the nodes in the BN describe geneal random variables
\cite{koller2009probabilistic}.
More precisely, we consider as an input for our learning task a dataset $D$ of $n$ Bernoulli variables and $m$ cross-sectional samples.
We assume the value $1$ to indicate that a given variable has been observed in the sample and $0$ that the variable had not been observed.
\subsection{Suppes-Bayes Causal Networks}
\label{sect:approach}
In \cite{suppes1970probabilistic}, Suppes introduced the notion of \emph{prima facie causation}.
A prima facie relation between a cause $u$ and its effect $v$ is verified when the following two conditions are true.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Temporal Priority} (TP): any cause happens before its
effect.
\item \emph{Probability Raising} (PR): the presence of the cause
raises the probability of observing its effect.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{definition}[Probabilistic
Causation,~\cite{suppes1970probabilistic}]
\label{def:praising}
For any two events $u$ and $v$, occurring respectively at times
$t_u$ and $t_v$, under the mild assumptions that $0 < \Probab{u},
\Probab{v} < 1$, the event $u$ is called a \emph{prima facie cause}
of $v$ if it occurs \emph{before} and \emph{raises the probability}
of $u$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
\mathrm{(TP)} \quad t_u < t_v \\
\mathrm{(PR)} \quad \Pcond{v}{u} > \Pcond{v}{\neg u}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\noindent
The notion of prima facie causality has known limitations in the
context of the general theories of causality
\cite{hitchcock2010probabilistic}, however, this characterization
seems to appropriate to model the dynamics of phenomena driven by the
monotonic accumulation of events where a temporal order among them is
implied and, thus, the occurrence of an early event positively
correlates to the subsequent occurrence in time of a later one.
Let us now refer again to systems where cascading failure may occur:
some configurations of events, in a specific order, may be more likely
to cause a failure than others.
This condition leads to the emergence of an observable \emph{temporal
pattern} among the events captured by Suppes' definition of
causality in terms of statistical relevance, i.e., statistical
dependency.
Let us now consider a graphical representation of the aforementioned
dynamics in terms of a BN $G = (V,E)$.
Furthermore, let us consider a given node $v_i \in V$ and let us name
$\pi(v_i)$ the set of all the nodes in $V$ pointing to (and yet
temporally preceding) $v_i$. Then, the joint probability distribution
of the $n = \left\vert{V}\right\vert$ variables induced by the BN can
be written as:
\begin{equation}
\Probab{\mathit{v_1, \ldots, v_n}}
= \prod_{v_i \in V} \Probab{v_i | \pi(v_i)}
\end{equation}
When building our model, we need to constrain the characteristics of
the considered relations as depicted in the network (i.e., the arcs in
the graph), in order to account for the cumulative process above
mentioned, which, in turns, needs to be reflected in its induced
probability distribution \cite{ramazzotti2016modeling}. To this
extent, we can define a class of BNs over Bernoulli random variables
named \emph{Monotonic Progression Networks} (MPNs)
\cite{ramazzotti2016modeling,korsunsky2014inference,farahani2013learning}. Intuitively,
MPNs represent the progression of events monotonically\footnote{The
events accumulate over time and when later events occur, earlier
events are observed as well.} accumulating over time, where the
conditions for any event to happen is described by a probabilistic
version of the canonical boolean operators, i.e., conjunction
($\land$), inclusive disjunction ($\lor$), and exclusive disjunction
($\oplus$).
MPNs can model accumulative phenomena in a probabilistic fashion,
i.e., they are also modeling irregularities (noise) in the data as a
small probability $\varepsilon$ of not observing later events given
their predecessors.
Given these premises, in \cite{ramazzotti2015capri} the authors
describe an efficient algorithm (named CAPRI, see \cite{ramazzotti2015capri}
for details) to learn the structure of constrained
Bayesian networks which account for Suppes' criteria and which later
on are dubbed \emph{Suppes-Bayes Causal Networks} (SBCNs) in
\cite{bonchi2015exposing}. SBCNs are well suited to model cumulative
phenomena as they may encode irregularities in a similar way to MPNs
\cite{ramazzotti2016modeling}. The efficient inference schema of
\cite{ramazzotti2016modeling} relies on the observation (see
\cite{teyssier2012ordering}) that a way for circumventing the
intrinsic computational complexity of the task of learning the
structure of a Bayesian Network is to postulate a pre-determined
ordering among the nodes. Intuitively, CAPRI exploits Suppes' theory
to first mine an ordering among the nodes, reducing the complexity of
the problem, and then fits the network by means of likelihood
maximization.
In \cite{ramazzotti2016modeling} it is also shown that a SBCN, learned
using CAPRI, can also embed the notion of
accumulation through time as defined in a MPN, and, specifically,
conjunctive parent sets; nevertheless SBCNs can easily be generalized
to represent all the canonical boolean operators (\emph{Extended
Suppes-Bayes Causal Networks}), notwithstanding an increase of the
algorithmic complexity \cite{ramazzotti2016modeling}.
We refer the reader to \cite{ramazzotti2016modeling} for further
details and, following \cite{bonchi2015exposing}, we now formally
define a SBCN.
\begin{definition}[Suppes-Bayes Causal Network]
\label{def:scn}
\noindent
\emph{Given an input cross-sectional dataset $D$ of $n$ Bernoulli
variables and $m$ samples, the Suppes-Bayes Causal Network $SBCN =
(V,E)$ subsumed by $D$ is a directed acyclic graph such that the
following requirements hold:}
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{\textbf{[Suppes' constraints]} for each arc $(u \to v)
\in E$ involving the selective advantage relation between nodes
$u,v \in V$, under the mild assumptions that $0 < \Probab{u},
\Probab{v} < 1$}:
\begin{equation}
\Probab{u} > \Probab{v} \quad \text{and} \quad \Pcond{v}{u} >
\Pcond{v}{\neg u} \,.
\end{equation}
\item \emph{\textbf{[Simplification]} let $E'$ be the set of arcs
satisfying the Suppes' constraints as before; among all the
subsets of $E'$, the set of arcs $E$ is the one whose
corresponding graph maximizes the \textcolor{black}{
log-likelihood $\mathcal{LL}$} of the data and the
adopted regularization function $R(f)$:}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:fitness}
E = \argmax_{E \subseteq E', G =(V,E)} \mathcal{LL}(G,D) - R(f) \,.
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
Before moving on, we once again notice that the efficient
implementation of Suppes' constraints of CAPRI
does not, in general, guarantee to converge to
the monotonic progression networks as depicted before.
To overcome this
limitation, one could extend the Algorithm in
order to learn, in addition to the network structure, also the logical
relations involving any parent set, increasing the overall
computational complexity.
Once again, we refer the interested reader to the discussions provided
in \cite{ramazzotti2015capri,ramazzotti2016modeling} and, without
losing in generality, for the purpose of this work, we consider the
efficient implementation of CAPRI presented in \cite{ramazzotti2015capri}.
\textcolor{black}{It is important to remark that the evaluation of Suppes' constraints might be extended to longer serial dependence relations, by assessing, for instance, the statistical dependency involving more than two events. We here decide to evaluate pairwise conditions to keep the overall computational complexity at a minimum. However, we leave the investigation of this issue to further development of the framework}.
\subsection{Optimization and Evolutionary Computation}
\label{sec:opt-evolutionary}
The problem of the inference of SBCNs can be re-stated as an optimization problem, in which the goal is the maximization of a likelihood score.
Regardless of the strategy used in the inference process, the huge size of the search space of valid solutions makes this problem very hard to solve.
Moreover, as stated above, the \emph{general} problem of learning the structure of a BN is \textit{NP}{}-hard
\cite{chickering2004large}\footnote{We are aware of \emph{special}
formulations of the problem that are solvable in polynomial time.
Their existence points to interesting questions regarding the ``barrier'' between \textit{NP}{} problems and polynomial ones; however, these are questions beyond the scope of the present paper.}.
Because of that, state-of-the-art techniques largely rely on heuristics \cite{koller2009probabilistic}, often based on stochastic global optimization methods like Genetic Algorithms (GAs) \cite{larranaga1996structure,ramazzotti2016modeling}.
Methods for BN learning can roughly be subdivided into two categories: single individual or population-based meta-heuristics.
Hill Climbing (HC) and Tabu Search (TS) both belong to the first category.
The former is a greedy approach for the structural learning of BNs, in which new edges are attached to the current putative solution as long as they increase the likelihood score and they do not introduce any cycles in the network.
TS is a stochastic variant of HC able to escape local minima, in which solutions visited in the past are not repeated by means of a tabu list.
GAs \cite{holland1975adaptation}, a global search methodology inspired by the mechanisms of natural selection, belong to the second category.
GAs were shown to be effective for BN learning, both in the case of available and not available \emph{a priori} knowledge about nodes' ordering \cite{larranaga1996structure,ramazzotti2016modeling}.
In a GA, a population $\mathfrak{P}$ of candidate solutions (named individuals) iteratively evolves, converging towards the global optimum of a given fitness function $f$ that, in this context, corresponds to the score to be
maximized.
The population $\mathfrak{P}$ is composed of $Q$ randomly created individuals, usually represented as fixed-length strings over a finite alphabet.
These strings encode putative solutions of the problem under investigation; in the case of BN learning, individuals represent linearized adjacency matrices of candidate BNs with $K$ nodes, encoded as string of binary values whose length\footnote{Since BNs are DAGs, the representation can be reduced by not encoding the elements on the diagonal, which are always equal to zero. In such case, the strings representing the individual have length $K \times K - K$.} is $O(K^2)$.
The individuals in $\mathfrak{P}$ undergo an iterative process whereby three genetic operators---selection, crossover and mutation---are applied in sequence to simulate the evolutionary recombination process, which results in a new population of possibly improved solutions.
During the selection process, individuals from $\mathfrak{P}$ are chosen, using a fitness-dependent sampling procedure \cite{back1994selective}, and are inserted into a new temporary population $\mathfrak{P}^{'}$.
In this work we assume a ranking selection: individuals are ranked according to their fitness values and the probability of selecting an individual is proportional to its \textit{position} in the ranking.
The crossover operator is then used to recombine the structures of two promising selected parents.
We assume a single point crossover, in which the two strings encoded by the two parents are ``cut'' in the same random position and one of the resulting substrings is exchanged.
Finally, the mutation operator replaces an arbitrary symbol of an offspring, with a probability $\mathcal{P}_m$, using a random symbol taken from the alphabet.
In the case of BNs, the mutation consists in flipping a single bit of the individual according to the specified probability.
It is worth noting that in the case of ordered nodes both crossover and mutation are \emph{closed} operators, because the resulting offsprings always encode valid DAGs.
To the aim of ensuring a consistent population of individuals throughout the generations, in the case of unordered nodes the two operators are followed by a correction procedure, in which the candidate BN is analyzed to identify the presence of invalid cycles.
For further information about our implementation of GAs for the inference of BNs, including the correction phase, we refer the interested reader to \cite{ramazzotti2016modeling}.
\subsubsection*{Acknowledgments.} This work was supported in part by the ASTIL Program of
Regione Lombardia, by the ELIXIR-ITA network, and by the SysBioNet project, a MIUR initiative for the Italian Roadmap of European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI). We would like to thank for the useful discussions our colleagues
Giulio Caravagna of ICR, London, UK, Giancarlo Mauri of DISCo,
Universit\`{a} degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy, and Bud
Mishra of Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, New York
University, NY, USA.
\clearpage
\label{sect:bib}
\section*{References}
\section{Results}
\label{sect:Results}
We now discuss the results of a large number of experiments we
conducted on simulated data, with the aim of assessing the performance
of the state-of-the-art score-based techniques for the BN structure
inference, and comparing the performance of these methods with the
learning scheme defined in CAPRI.
Our main objective is to investigate how the performance is affected
by different algorithmic choices at the different steps of the
learning process.
\paragraph{Data Generation.} All simulations are performed with the
following generative models. We consider $6$ different topological
structures.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Trees}: one predecessor at most for any node, one unique
root (i.e., a node with no parents).
\item \emph{Forests}: likewise, more than one possible root.
\item \emph{Conjunctive DAGs with single root}: 3 predecessors at most
for each node, all the confluences are ruled by logical
conjunctions, one unique root.
\item \emph{Conjunctive DAGs with multiple roots}: likewise, possible
multiple roots.
\item \emph{Disjunctive DAGs with single root}: 3 predecessors at most
for each node, all the confluences are ruled by logical
disjunctions, one unique root.
\item \emph{Disjunctive DAGs with multiple roots}: likewise, possible
multiple roots.
\end{enumerate}
We constrain the induced distribution of each generative structure by
implying a cumulative model for either conjunctions or disjunctions,
i.e., any child node cannot occur if its parent set is not activated
as described for the MPN in the Method Section \ref{sect:Method}. For
each of these configurations, we generate $100$ random
structures. Furthermore, we simulate a model of noise in terms of
random observations (i.e., false positives and false negatives)
included in the generated datasets with different rates.
These data generation configurations are chosen to reflect: $(a)$
different structural complexities of the models in terms of number of
parameters, i.e., arcs, to be learned, $(b)$ different types of
induced distributions suitable to model cumulative phenomena as
defined by the MPNs (see Section \ref{sect:approach}), i.e.,
conjunction ($\land$) or inclusive disjunction ($\lor$)\footnote{Here
we stick with the efficient search scheme of CAPRI
and, for this reason, we do not consider
exclusive disjunction ($\oplus$) parent sets} and, $(c)$ situations
of reduced sample sizes and noisy data.
We here provide an example of data generation. Let now $n$ be the
number of nodes we want to include in the network and let us set
$p_{\min}=0.05$ and $p_{\max}=0.95$ as the minimum and maximum
probabilities of any node. A {\em directed acyclic graph without
disconnected components} (i.e., an instance of types $(3)$ and $(5)$
topologies) with maximum depth $\log n$ and where each node has at
most $w^\ast = 3$ parents is generated.
\begin{algorithm}[!ht]
\caption{Data generation: single source directed acyclic graphs}
\label{algo:data_generation_pseudo}
\KwIn{$n$, the number of nodes of the graph, $p_{\min}=0.05$ and
$p_{\max}=0.95$ be the minimum and maximum probabilities of any node
and $w^\ast = 3$ the maximum incoming edges per node.}
\KwResult{a randomly generated single source directed acyclic graph.}
Pick an event $r\in G$ as the root of the directed acyclic graph\;
Assign to each node $u \neq r$ an integer in the interval $[2, \lceil
{\log n} \rceil]$ representing its depth in the graph ($1$ is
reserved for $r$), ensuring that each level has at least one node\;
\ForAll{nodes $u \neq r$}{ %
Let $l$ be the level assigned to the node\;
Pick $|\Probab{u}|$ uniformly over $(0,w^\ast]$, and accordingly
define the parents of $u$ with events selected among those at which
level $l-1$ was assigned\;}
Assign $\Probab{r}$, a random value in the interval
$[p_{\min},p_{\max}]$\;
\ForAll{events $u \neq r$}{ %
Let $\alpha$ be a random value in the interval $[p_{\min},p_{\max}]$\;
Let $\pi(u)$ be the direct predecessor of $u$\;
Then assign:
\[
\Probab{u} = \alpha \Probab{x \in \pi(u)}\, ;
\]}
\KwRet{The generated single source directed acyclic graph.}
\end{algorithm}
\paragraph{Performance Assessment.} In all these configurations, the
performance is assessed in terms of:
\begin{itemize}
\item accuracy = $\frac{(TP + TN)}{(TP + TN + FP + FN)}$;
\item sensitivity = $\frac{TP}{(TP + FN)}$;
\item specificity = $\frac{TN}{(FP + TN)}$;
\end{itemize}
with $TP$ and $FP$ being the true and false positives (we mark as
positive any arc that is present in the network) and $TN$ and $FN$
being the true and false negatives (we mark negative any arc that is
not present in the network) with respect to the generative model. All
these measures are values in $[0,1]$ with results close to $1$
indicators of good performance.
\paragraph{Implementation.} In all the following experiments, the
adopted likelihood functions (i.e., the fitness evaluations) are
implemented using the \emph{bnlearn} package \cite{scutari2009learning}
written in the R language, while GA \cite{holland1975adaptation}
the \emph{inspyred} \cite{garrett2012inspyred}, \emph{networkx}
\cite{schult2008exploring} and \emph{numpy} \cite{oliphant2006guide}
packages.
\textcolor{black}{The framework for the inference of SBCNs is implemented in R and is available in the TRONCO suite for TRanslational ONCOlogy \cite{de2016tronco,antoniotti2016design}. TRONCO is available under a GPL3 license at its webpage: \href{https://sites.google.com/site/troncopackage}{https://sites.google.com/site/troncopackage} or on Bioconductor.}
\paragraph{Algorithm Settings.} We test the performance of classical
search strategies, such as Hill Climbing (HC) and Tabu Search (TS),
and of more sophisticated algorithms such Genetic Algorithms
(GA)\footnote{Further experiments on multi-objective optimization
techniques, such as \emph{Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm}
(NSGA- II), were performed, but are not shown here because of the
worse overall performance, and of the higher computational cost,
with respect to canonical GA.}.
For HC and TS, we generate data as described above with networks of
$10$ and $15$ nodes (i.e., $0/1$ Bernoulli random variables). We
generated $10$ independent datasets for each combination of the $4$
sample levels (i.e., $50$, $100$, $150$ and $200$ samples) and the $9$
noise levels (i.e., from $0\%$ to $20\%$ with step $2.5\%$) for a
total of $4,320,000$ independent datasets. The experiments were
repeated either $(i)$ including or $(ii)$ not including the Suppes'
constraints described in CAPRI \cite{ramazzotti2015capri}, and
independently using $5$ distinct optimization scores and
regularizators, namely standard $(i)$ log-likelihood
\cite{koller2009probabilistic}, $(ii)$ AIC
\cite{akaike1998information}, $(iii)$ BIC
\cite{schwarz1978estimating}, $(iv)$ BDE \cite{heckerman1995learning}
and $(v)$ K2 \cite{cooper1991bayesian}, leading to a final number of
$86,400,000$ different configurations.
\textcolor{black}{Being more precise, given an input dataset of observations $D$ and a graphical model $G$, we can define a function to evaluate the goodness of this structure given the data:
\textcolor{black}{\begin{equation}
f(G, D) = \mathcal{LL}(D|G) - \mathcal{R}(G),
\end{equation}}
where $\mathcal{LL}(\cdot)$ is the log-likelihood, while $\mathcal{R}(\cdot)$ is a regularization~term with the aim of limiting the complexity of $G$.
The \textsc{dag}\ induced by $G$ in fact defines a probability distribution over its nodes, namely $\{x_1, \ldots, x_n\}$:
\textcolor{black}{\begin{equation}
\Probab{x_1, \ldots, x_n} = \prod_{x_i=1}^n \Pcond{x_i}{\pi_i},
\end{equation}\begin{equation}
\Pcond{x_i}{\pi_i} = \boldsymbol{\theta}_{x_i\mid \pi_i},
\end{equation}}
where $\pi_i = \{ x_j \mid x_j \to x_i \in G\}$ are $x_i$'s parents in the DAG, and $\boldsymbol{\theta}_{x_i\mid \pi(x_i)}$ is a density function. Then, the log-likelihood of the graph can be defined as:
\textcolor{black}{\begin{equation}
LL(D|G) = log \Pcond{D}{G,\boldsymbol{\theta}} \, .
\end{equation}}
Then, the regularization term $\mathcal{R}(G)$ introduces a penalty for the number of parameters in the model $G$ also considering the size of the data. The above mentioned scores that we considered differ in this penalty, with AIC and BIC being Information-theoretic score and BDE and K2, Bayesian scores \cite{carvalho2009scoring}.}
While a detailed description of
these regularizators is beyond the scope of this paper, we critically
discuss the different performances granted by each strategy for the
inference of BNs.
With respect to GA we used a restricted data generation settings,
using networks of $15$ nodes, datasets of $100$ samples and $5$ noise
levels (from $0\%$ to $20\%$ with step $5\%$) for a total of $3,000$
independent datasets. We tested the GA either $(i)$ with or $(ii)$
without Suppes' constraints, using BIC regularization term, leading
to the final total of $6,000$ different configurations.
Finally, the GA was launched with a population size of $32$
individuals, a mutation rate of $p_m=0.01$ and $100$ generations.
We summarize the performance evaluation of the distinct techniques and
settings in the next Subsections and in Figures
\ref{fig:results_figure_1}, \ref{fig:results_figure_2},
\ref{fig:results_figure_3} and \ref{fig:results_figure_4}.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.00\textwidth]{images/figure_1}
\caption{Performance in terms of accuracy for the $6$ considered
structures with $15$ nodes, noise levels from $0\%$ to $20\%$ with
step $2.5\%$ and sample sizes of $50$, $100$, $150$ and $200$
samples. Here we use BIC as a regularization scheme and we consider
HC as a search stategy both for the classical case and when Suppes'
priors are applied.}
\label{fig:results_figure_1}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.00\textwidth]{images/figure_2}
\caption{Performance in terms of accuracy for directed acyclic graphs
with multiple sources and disjunctive parents (structure $vi$) of
$15$ nodes, noise levels from $0\%$ to $20\%$ with step $2.5\%$ and
sample sizes of $50$, $100$, $150$ and $200$ samples. Here we
consider HC as a search strategy both for the classical case and
when Suppes' priors are applied and \textcolor{black}{we show the results for all five regularizators introduced in the text}.}
\label{fig:results_figure_2}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{images/figure_3}
\caption{Performance in terms of accuracy for directed acyclic graphs
with multiple sources and disjunctive parents (structure $vi$) of
$15$ nodes, noise levels from $0\%$ to $20\%$ with step $2.5\%$ and
sample sizes of $50$, $100$, $150$ and $200$ samples. Here we use
BIC as a regularization scheme and we consider both HC and TB as
search strategies for the classical case and when Suppes' priors are
applied.}
\label{fig:results_figure_3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.00\textwidth]{images/figure_4}
\caption{Performance of HC, TB and GA, in terms of sensitivity and
specificity for forests (panels 1A, 1B), directed acyclic graphs
with multiple sources and conjunctive parents (panels 2A, 2B) and
directed acyclic graphs with multiple sources and disjunctive
parents (panels 3A, 3B) (configurations $(ii)$, $(iv)$ and $(vi)$)
of $15$ nodes, noise levels from $0\%$ to $20\%$ with step $5\%$ and
sample sizes of $100$ samples. Here we use BIC as a regularization
scheme for HC and TB, and for all the algorithms we either consider
(panels A) or not consider (panels B) Suppes' constraints (SC).}
\label{fig:results_figure_4}
\end{figure*}
\subsection*{Performance Assessment}
\label{sec:performance-assessment}
By looking at Figure \ref{fig:results_figure_1}, one can first
appreciate the variation of accuracy with respect to a specific search
strategy, i.e., HC with BIC, which is taken as an example of typical
behavior.
In brief, the overall performance worsens with respect to: $(i)$ a
larger number of nodes in the network, $(i)$ more complex generative
structures, and $(iii)$ smaller samples sizes / higher noise rates.
Although such a trend is intuitively expected, given the larger number
of parameters to be learned for more complex models, we here underline
the role of statistical complications, such as the presence of
\emph{spurious correlations} \cite{pearson1896mathematical} and the
occurrence of \emph{Simpson's paradox} \cite{good1987amalgamation}.
For instance, it is interesting to observe a typical decrease of the
accuracy when we compare topologies with the same properties, but
different number of roots (i.e., $1$ root vs. multiple roots). In the
former case, we expect, in fact, a lower number of arcs (i.e.,
dependencies) to be learned (on average) and, hence, we may attribute
the decrease of the performance to the emergence of spurious
correlations among independent nodes, such as the children of the
different sources of the DAG. This is due to the fact that, when
sample sizes are not infinite, it is very unlikely to observe perfect
independence and, accordingly, the likelihood scores may lead to
overfitting. The trends displayed in Figure
\ref{fig:results_figure_1} are shared by most of the analyzed search
strategies.
\paragraph{Role of the Regularization Term.} By looking at Figure
\ref{fig:results_figure_2} one can first notice that the accuracy with
no regularization is dramatically lower than the other cases, as a
consequence of the expected overfitting (in this case we compare the
performance of HC on disjunctive DAGs with multiple roots, but the
trend is maintained in the other cases). Conversely, all
regularization terms ensure the inference of sparser models, by
penalizing the number of retrieved arcs.
BDE regularization term seems to be the only exception (see Figure
\ref{fig:results_figure_2}), leading to unintuitive behaviors: in
fact, while for all the other methods the performance decreases when
higher level of noise are applied, for BDE the accuracy seems to
improve with higher noise rates.
This result might be explained by observing that given a topological
structure, structural spurious correlations may arise between a given
node and any of its undirected predecessors (i.e., one of the
predecessors of its direct parents): with higher error rates, and,
accordingly, more random samples in the datasets, all the correlations
are reduced, hence leading to a lower impact of the regularization
term.
Given these considerations, one can hypothesize that the overall trend
of BDE is due to a scarce penalization to the likelihood fit, favoring
dense networks rather than sparse ones.
\paragraph{Search Strategies.} No significant differences in the
performance between the accuracy of HC, TS and GA are observed.
However, one can observe a consistent improvement in sensitivity when
using GA (see Figures \ref{fig:results_figure_3} and
\ref{fig:results_figure_4}). This suggests different inherent
properties of the search schemes: while with HC and TB the
regularization terms, rather than the search strategy, account for
most of the inference performance, GAs are capable of returning
denser networks with better hit rates. This is probably due to GA's
random mutations, which allow jumps into areas of the search space
characterized by excellent fitness, which could not be reached by
means of greedy approaches like HC.
\paragraph{Suppes' Structural Constraints.} Finally, the most
important result, which can be observed across all the different
experiments, is that the overall performance of all the considered
search strategies is dramatically enhanced by the introduction of
Suppes' structural constraints.
In particular, as one can see, e.g., in Figure
\ref{fig:results_figure_1}, there is a constant improvement in the
inference, up to $10\%$, when Suppes' priors are used.
Even though the accuracy of the inference is affected by the noise in
the observations, in fact, the results with Suppes' priors are
consistently better than the inference with no constraints, with
respect to all the considered inference settings and to all the
performance measures.
This is an extremely important result as it proves that the
introduction of structural constraints based on Suppes' probabilistic
causation indeed simplify the optimization task, by reducing the huge
search space, when dealing with BNs describing cumulative phenomena.
|
\section{Introduction}
Although the standard model (SM) has been verified to a very high accuracy, an extension is necessary both for theoretical consistency and in order to explain experimental observations.
The minimal supersymmetric (SUSY) extension of the SM (MSSM) has played an important role in phenomenological studies for many years because it could address many fundamental issues such as the gauge hierarchy problem,
the prediction of the Higgs boson mass, and the gauge coupling unification while also providing a dark matter (DM) candidate, the lightest neutralino.
Nevertheless, the discovery of a 125 GeV Higgs boson
\cite{Aad:2012tfa, Chatrchyan:2012xdj}
has imposed some tension on the MSSM.
In order to reconcile the Higgs boson mass, large loop corrections are needed, these in general require heavy squarks (especially stops) and a large mixing, thus reintroducing a certain amount of fine-tuning to the theory~\cite{Hall:2011aa}.
Moreover, the parameter regions with maximal stop mixing which allow to obtain the observed Higgs mass potentially have a metastable electroweak vacuum,
and predict a global minimum which breaks charge and/or color symmetries
\cite{Camargo-Molina:2013sta,Blinov:2013fta,Chowdhury:2013dka}.
In scenarios where the number of free parameters is limited due to some relations at a high energy scale, heavy squarks imply heavy sleptons
\cite{Cao:2011sn,Okada:2012nr}.
Hence, the SUSY contribution to the muon anomalous magnetic dipole moment $(g-2)$ can hardly explain the discrepancy between the SM prediction and the experimental result.
This last issue is however easily resolved when allowing a larger hierarchy between the slepton and squark masses.
There have been attempts to resolve these tensions, see for example
\cite{Okada:2016wlm,Yin:2016shg,Aboubrahim:2016xuz} and references therein.
In this paper, we consider $U(1)'$ extensions of the MSSM (UMSSM) that can also improve the situation
\cite{Barger:2008jx,Belanger:2011rs,Athron:2012sq,Hirsch:2012kv,Belanger:2015cra}.
The interaction between the extra singlet superfield, whose vacuum expectation value (VEV) breaks the $U(1)'$, and the two Higgs doublets helps to increase the mass of the SM-like Higgs at the tree level.
This contribution is the same as in the next-to-MSSM (NMSSM)
\cite{Ellwanger:2014dfa,Kaminska:2014wia,Farina:2013fsa,Athron:2013ipa}.
In addition, the SM-like Higgs boson mass is also enhanced by the $U(1)'$ D-term contribution
\cite{Cvetic:1997ky,Barger:2006dh}.
Both these effects imply that the loop-induced contribution from the stop sector does not need to be large.
In this framework, as in the NMSSM, the $\mu$-term problem is solved since this term is not introduced by hand but is generated by the vacuum expectation value of the singlet after the extra gauge group $U(1)'$ is broken.
The physics origin of the $U(1)'$ group depends on the specific scenario, for instance $U(1)_{B-L}$, or inherited from some grand unified theory (GUT).
Here we are interested in the scenario where the $U(1)'$ is a remnant symmetry after the breaking of the $E_6$ GUT
\cite{Langacker:1998tc}.
This scenario is also motivated by superstring models
\cite{Cvetic:1995rj,Cvetic:1996mf}.
To account for the neutrino oscillations, we introduce in the model three generations of right-handed (RH) neutrinos. Assuming R-parity conservation, their superpartners which are weakly interacting massive particles can play the role of DM. This is in contrast with left-handed (LH) sneutrinos, which although also weakly interacting, have been ruled out as a DM candidate because
their scattering cross section onto nuclei is too large~\cite{Falk:1994es}.
This model offers two possible candidates for the DM, the ordinary neutralino and the right handed sneutrino, depending on which one is the lightest superparticle (LSP).
A special feature of models with two Abelian gauge groups $U(1) \times U(1)'$, is that a gauge kinetic mixing term can exist in the Lagrangian without violating any underlying symmetry
\cite{Holdom:1985ag,Chankowski:2006jk,Brahmachari:2014aya,Babu:1997st}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{L} & \supset & -\frac{k}{2} F^{\mu\nu} F'_{\nu\mu}.
\end{eqnarray}
Generally, even in the case that the kinetic mixing term is set to zero at some scale, it can be radiatively generated at the low energy scale due to the renormalization group (RG) evolution
\cite{delAguila:1988jz,delAguila:1987st}.
It was found that in the $U(1)_{B-L}$ case the gauge kinetic mixing effect can be
significant and impact DM observables~\cite{Fonseca:2011vn,O'Leary:2011yq,Basso:2012gz}.
DM properties in U(1) extensions of the MSSM were examined in \cite{Kalinowski:2008iq,Belanger:2011rs,Athron:2016qqb,Athron:2016gor} and
the compatibility of the UMSSM with collider and DM observables was examined in~\cite{Belanger:2015cra} where the kinetic mixing was neglected. Here we revisit and update the constraints on the parameter space of the UMSSM inspired from $E_6$ GUT, while including the kinetic mixing.
The radiatively generated kinetic mixing term depends on the particle content and the charge assignment of fields under the two $U(1)$ gauge groups.
For example, in the minimal SUSY $B-L$ model \cite{O'Leary:2011yq} the kinetic mixing parameter purely induced from the RG evolution is positive and sizable, $k \sim \mathcal{O}(1)$,
while in $E_6$ models
\cite{Babu:1996vt} the value of k at low energies can be either positive or negative.
To be completely general, we will consider that
$k$ is a free parameter set at the low energy scale.
We will show that the gauge kinetic mixing can give rise to important effects on both the mass spectrum and DM properties. For example the kinetic mixing allows for a leptophobic $Z_2$ which can more easily escape LHC constraints, gives a contribution to the mass of the Higgs boson, can shift the mass of sleptons thus providing a better agreement with the muon anomalous magnetic moment, and finally impact the DM annihilation channel.
Note that in this study we include updated constraints from the LHC searches on a heavy neutral gauge boson $Z_2$ as well as updated constraints from DM direct detection from LUX~\cite{Akerib:2016vxi}.
The structure of the paper is as follows.
In Section 2, we briefly describe the UMSSM model with gauge kinetic mixing.
The effects of the kinetic mixing term on the parameter space, the $Z_2$ coupling with matter, and the mass spectrum are shown in Section 3.
Here, benchmark analysis and results of the global parameter scan are presented with various collider constraints as well as cosmological ones taken into account.
Section 4 is devoted for conclusion.
\section{
The UMSSM with gauge kinetic mixing
}
\subsection{The model}
The UMSSM has the gauge groups $SU(3)_C \times SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y \times U(1)'$ which remain after the symmetry breaking of an $E_6$ GUT.
The particle contents of this model include
the MSSM chiral supermultiplets,
three generations of RH neutrino supermultiplets
$N^c = \{ \tilde{\nu}_R^c, \nu_R^c \}$,
the MSSM vector supermultiplets and
an additional vector supermultiplet $V' = \{ \tilde{B}' , B'_\mu \}$ corresponding to $U(1)'$ gauge group,
and a Higgs singlet superfield $S$ responsible for the $U(1)'$ breaking.
Additional chiral supermultiplets are included in an anomaly free $E_6$ theory. For simplicity, we assume that all the fields belong to the \textbf{27} representations of $E_6$ that are not listed above are heavy enough to be safely neglected at low energies.%
The $U(1)'$ charge of a chiral superfields is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{Q}' &=& \cos \theta_{E_6} \mathcal{Q}'_\chi + \sin \theta_{E_6} \mathcal{Q}'_\psi \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\theta_{E_6} \in [-\frac{\pi}{2},\frac{\pi}{2}]$ parameterizes a linear combination of two $E_6$ subgroups $U(1)_\chi$ and $U(1)_\psi$ into $U(1)'$.
The charges $\mathcal{Q}'_\chi$ and $\mathcal{Q}'_\psi$ for each chiral superfield of the model are given in Table \ref{charges}.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{math}
\begin{array}{|c|ccccccccc|}
\hline
& Q & U^c & D^c & L & N^c & E^c & H_u & H_d & S \\
\hline
\sqrt{40} \mathcal{Q}'_\chi & -1 & -1 & 3 & 3 & -5 & -1 & 2 & -2 & 0 \\
\sqrt{24} \mathcal{Q}'_\psi & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & -2 & -2 & 4 \\
\hline
\end{array}
\end{math}
\caption{$U(1)'$ charges of chiral superfields.}
\label{charges}
\end{center}
\end{table}
The superpotential of the model involves the ordinary MSSM superpotential without the $\mu$-term, and other terms describing interactions of the Higgs singlet and right handed neutrinos:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{W} &\supset&
\mathcal{W}_\text{MSSM}|_{\mu=0} + \lambda S H_u H_d + N^c \mathbf{Y_\nu} L H_u \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathbf{Y}_\nu$ is the neutrino Yukawa coupling matrix responsible for the neutrino mass generation.
After the $U(1)'$ group is broken, the $\mu$-term is generated by the singlet's VEV,
$\langle S \rangle = \frac{v_S}{\sqrt{2}}$ as
\begin{eqnarray}
\mu &=& \lambda \frac{v_S}{\sqrt{2}} \, .
\label{mu}
\end{eqnarray}
The soft SUSY breaking Lagrangian of the UMSSM reads
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{L}^\text{soft} &\supset&
\mathcal{L}^\text{soft}_\text{MSSM}|_{B_\mu=0}
- \left(
\frac{1}{2} M'_1 \tilde{B}' \tilde{B}'
+ \tilde{\nu}^c_R \mathbf{A_\nu} \tilde{L} H_u + h.c.
\right)
- \tilde{\nu}^c_R \mathbf{M^2_{\tilde{\nu}_R}} \tilde{\nu}_R \nonumber \\
&&
- m_S^2 |S|^2
- (\lambda A_\lambda S H_u H_d + h.c.) \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where new soft terms are added in comparison to the MSSM:
the $\tilde{B}'$ soft mass, $M_1'$,
the neutrino trilinear couplings, $\mathbf{A_\nu}$,
the right handed sneutrinos soft masses, $\mathbf{M^2_{\tilde{\nu}_R}}$,
the singlino mass, $m_S$,
and the Higgs trilinear coupling, $A_\lambda$.
Similar to Eq. (\ref{mu}), the MSSM $B\mu$ term is induced by the $U(1)'$ breaking:
\begin{eqnarray}
B\mu &=& \lambda A_\lambda \frac{v_S}{\sqrt{2}} \, .
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Gauge kinetic mixing}
The general gauge kinetic Lagrangian for Abelian gauge superfields is written as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{L}_\text{kinetic}^\text{gauge} &\supset&
- \int d^4 \theta
\frac{1}{4}
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
W^\alpha & W'^\alpha
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & k \\
k & 1
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
W_\alpha \\ W'_\alpha
\end{array}
\right)
+ h.c. \, ,
\label{kineticL}
\end{eqnarray}
where the off-diagonal element $k$ is the gauge kinetic mixing parameter.
The kinetic mixing matrix can be diagonalized by a rotation among the original Abelian vector superfields, ($\hat{V},\hat{V}'$):
\begin{eqnarray}
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\hat{V} \\ \hat{V}'
\end{array}
\right) &=&
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2(1+k)}} & \frac{-1}{\sqrt{2(1-k)}} \\
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2(1+k)}} & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2(1-k)}}
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
V_Y \\ V_E
\end{array}
\right) \, .
\label{rotation1}
\end{eqnarray}
For a real rotation, the kinetic mixing parameter is limited to
$-1 < k < 1$.
The rotation (\ref{rotation1}) ensures that there is no explicit kinetic mixing in the Lagrangian written in the new basis ($V_Y,V_E$).
However, the effect of the kinetic mixing term now transfers to the interactions between the Abelian vector superfields and chiral superfields.
The gauge interaction Lagrangian is
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{L}^\text{gauge}_\text{interaction} & \supset &
\int d^4 \theta
\Phi^\dagger e^{\textbf{Q} \cdot \textbf{g} \cdot\textbf{V}} \Phi \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\textbf{Q} \cdot \textbf{g} \cdot\textbf{V}
&=& \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
Y & \mathcal{Q}'
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
g_{YY} & g_{YE} \\
g_{EY} & g_{EE}
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
V_Y \\ V_E
\end{array}
\right) \, .
\label{gauge}
\end{eqnarray}
where $Y$ is the hypercharge and $\mathcal{Q}'$ the charge associated with $U(1)'$.
The gauge coupling matrix which is originally diagonal absorbs the rotation of the Abelian vector superfields, and becomes non-diagonal:
\footnote{
In our analysis in the next section, we will assume for simplicity that $g_1' = \sqrt{\frac{5}{3}} g_1.$
}
\begin{eqnarray}
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
g_{YY} & g_{YE} \\
g_{EY} & g_{EE}
\end{array}
\right)
&=& \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\frac{g_1}{\sqrt{2(1+k)}} & \frac{-g_1}{\sqrt{2(1-k)}} \\
\frac{g'_1}{\sqrt{2(1+k)}} & \frac{g'_1}{\sqrt{2(1-k)}}
\end{array}
\right) \, .
\end{eqnarray}
To simplify the gauge coupling matrix, we perform an orthogonal rotation in the space of Abelian vector superfields such that the gauge kinetic matrix remains intact:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
V_Y \\ V_E
\end{array}
\right) &=&
\frac{1}{\sqrt{g_{EE}^2 + g_{EY}^2}}
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
g_{EE} & g_{EY} \\
-g_{EY} & g_{EE}
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
V \\ V'
\end{array}
\right) \, .
\end{eqnarray}
Eq. (\ref{gauge}) is then rewritten as
\begin{eqnarray}
\textbf{Q} \cdot \textbf{g} \cdot\textbf{V}
&=& \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
Y & \mathcal{Q}'
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
g_{y} & g' \\
0 & g_{E}
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
V \\ V'
\end{array}
\right) \, ,
\label{eq:rotation}
\end{eqnarray}
in which
\begin{eqnarray}
g_y = & \dfrac{g_{YY} g_{EE} - g_{YE} g_{EY}}{\sqrt{g_{EE}^2 + g_{EY}^2}} &
= g_1 \, , \\
g' = & \dfrac{g_{YY} g_{EY} + g_{YE} g_{EE}}{\sqrt{g_{EE}^2 + g_{EY}^2}} &
= \frac{-k g_1}{\sqrt{1-k^2}} \, , \\
g_E = & \sqrt{g_{EE}^2 + g_{EY}^2} &
= \frac{g'_1}{\sqrt{1-k^2}} \, .
\label{gE-define}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that in the limit $k \rightarrow 0$, the above Abelian gauge coupling matrix becomes diagonal.
Performing matrix multiplication in Eq.~\ref{eq:rotation}, we obtain:
\begin{eqnarray}
\textbf{Q} \cdot \textbf{g} \cdot\textbf{V}
&=&
Y g_1 V + Q^p g_E V' \, ,
\label{redefinition}
\end{eqnarray}
where
the new charge $Q^p$ is defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
Q^p
&=& \mathcal{Q}' - k \frac{g_1}{g'_1} Y \, .
\label{Qp}
\end{eqnarray}
Clearly, $Y$ corresponds to the SM hypercharge and $V$ is the associated gauge superfield while the kinetic mixing induces a shift in the new charge of the chiral superfields, from $\mathcal{Q}' \to Q^p$,
and the coupling with the new Abelian superfield,
from $g_1' \to g_E$.
It is worth to note that the anomaly cancellation conditions for $\{\mathcal{Q}', Y\}$ in the underlying $E_6$ theory ensure the theory to be anomaly free for the redefined charge $Q^p$.
\subsection{Neutral gauge bosons}
The original Abelian vector superfields $(\hat{V},\hat{V}')$ are mixed to form the new ones $(V,V')$.
Their vector components $(B_\mu, B'_\mu)$ in turn mix with the third component $W^3_\mu$ of the $SU(2)_L$ gauge group to form mass eigenstates $(A_\mu, Z_{1\mu}, Z_{2\mu})$ when the gauge groups $SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y \times U(1)'$ are broken spontaneously.
The $Z$-boson mixing mass matrix is as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbf{M_{Z}^2} &=&
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
M_{ZZ}^2 & M_{ZZ'}^2 \\
M_{ZZ'}^2 & M_{Z'Z'}^2
\end{array}
\right) \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
M_{ZZ}^2 &=& \frac{1}{4} g_1^2 (v_u^2 + v_d^2) \, , \nonumber \\
M_{Z'Z'}^2 &=& g_E^2
\left[ (Q_{H_u}^p)^2 v_u^2 + (Q_{H_d}^p)^2 v_d^2
+ (Q_S^{p})^2 v_S^2
\right] \, ,
\label{mz2}\\
M_{ZZ'}^2 &=& \frac{1}{2} g_1 g_E
( Q_{H_u}^p v_u^2 - Q_{H_d}^p v_d^2 ). \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
This matrix can be diagonalized by an orthogonal rotation:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left( \begin{array}{c}
Z_1 \\
Z_2
\end{array}
\right) &=&
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\cos \alpha_Z & \sin \alpha_Z \\
-\sin \alpha_Z & \cos \alpha_Z
\end{array}
\right)
\left( \begin{array}{c}
Z^0 \\
Z'
\end{array}
\right) \, ,
\label{mzz}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\alpha_Z$ is the mixing angle defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
\sin 2\alpha_Z &=& \frac{2M_{ZZ'}^2}{M_{Z_2}^2-M_{Z_1}^2}
\label{az}
\end{eqnarray}
The physical states $Z_1$ and $Z_2$ have masses:
\begin{eqnarray}
M^2_{Z_1,Z_2} &=&
\frac{1}{2}
\left[
M^2_{ZZ} + M^2_{Z'Z'} \mp
\sqrt{ \left( M^2_{ZZ} - M^2_{Z'Z'}\right)^2 + 4 M^4_{ZZ'}}
\right]
\end{eqnarray}
In our analysis, we use the measured Z-boson mass for $M_{Z_1}$, while $M_{Z_2}$ and $\alpha_Z$ are considered as free parameters.
\subsection{Sfermions and neutralinos}
In the UMSSM, the D-term contributions to sfermion masses play an important role in forming the sparticle mass spectrum.
They modify the diagonal components of the usual MSSM sfermion mass matrices as
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta_{\tilde{f}} &=&
\frac{1}{2} g_E^2 Q^p_{\tilde{f}}
\left(
Q^p_{H_u} v_u^2 + Q^p_{H_d} v_d^2 + Q^p_S v_S^2
\right) \, ,
\label{D-term}
\end{eqnarray}
where
$\tilde{f} = \{ \tilde{q}_L^i, \tilde{u}_R^i, \tilde{d}_R^i, \tilde{l}_L^i, \tilde{\nu}_R^i, \tilde{e}_R^i \}$ with the generation index $i=\{1,2,3\}$.
Sine the redefined charges $Q^p$ and gauge coupling $g_E$ are functions of $k$, the sparticle mass spectrum also depends on the kinetic mixing parameter.
As we will see, this effect is particularly important.
While charginos are the same as in the MSSM, the neutralino sector of the UMSSM consists of six fermions.
Their masses are eigenvalues obtained from the mass matrix that is written in the basis of neutral fermionic components of the vector supermultiplets and the Higgs supermultiplets
$\psi^0 = (\tilde{B}, \tilde{W}^3, \tilde{H}_d, \tilde{H}_u, \tilde{S}, \tilde{B}')^T$ as
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbf{M_{\tilde{\chi}^0}} &=&
\left(
\begin{array}{cccccc}
M_1 & 0 & -M_{ZZ}c_\beta s_W & M_{ZZ}s_\beta s_W & 0 & 0 \\
0 & M_2 & M_{ZZ}c_\beta c_W & -M_{ZZ}s_\beta c_W & 0 & 0 \\
-M_{ZZ}c_\beta s_W & M_{ZZ}c_\beta c_W & 0 & -\mu & -\lambda \frac{v_u}{\sqrt{2}} & Q^p_{H_d}g_E v_d \\
M_{ZZ}s_\beta s_W & -M_{ZZ}s_\beta c_W & -\mu& 0 & -\lambda \frac{v_d}{\sqrt{2}} & Q^p_{H_u}g_E v_u \\
0 & 0 & -\lambda \frac{v_u}{\sqrt{2}} & -\lambda \frac{v_d}{\sqrt{2}} & 0 & Q^p_S g_E v_S \\
0 & 0 & Q^p_{H_d}g_E v_d & Q^p_{H_u}g_E v_u& Q^p_S g_E v_S & M'_1
\end{array}
\right) \, ,\nonumber \\
\end{eqnarray}
where
$c_W = \cos \theta_W , \, s_W = \sin \theta_W$,
$c_\beta = \cos \beta, \, s_\beta = \sin \beta$,
with $\tan \beta = \frac{v_u}{v_d}$.
The value of $\tan\beta$ can be derived using Eqs. (\ref{mzz}) and (\ref{az}). We have
\begin{eqnarray}
\cos^2 \beta &=&
\frac{1}{Q^p_{H_u} + Q^p_{H_d}}
\left(
\frac{\sin 2\alpha_Z \, (M_{Z_1}^2 - M_{Z_2}^2)}{v^2 g_E \sqrt{g_1^2 + g_2^2}} +
Q^p_{H_u}
\right) \, ,
\label{cosbeta}
\end{eqnarray}
in which $v^2 = v_u^2 + v_d^2$ and $g_2$ is the SU(2) coupling.
The matrix $\mathbf{Z_n}$ diagonalizing the above mass matrix determines the components of each neutralino:
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{\chi}^0_i &=& (\mathbf{Z_n})_{ij} \psi^0_j \, ,
\qquad i,j = \{1,2,3,4,5,6 \} \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
and therefore its properties.
\subsection{Higgs sector}
The tree level mass-squared matrix of CP-even Higgs bosons is a symmetric $3 \times 3$ matrix $\mathcal{M^0_+}$ with elements computed as:
\begin{eqnarray}
(\mathcal{M^0_+})_{11} &=&
\left[
\frac{g_1^2 + g_2^2}{4} + (Q^p_{H_d})^2 g_E^2
\right] v_d^2 +
\frac{\lambda A_\lambda v_S v_u}{\sqrt{2} v_d} \, ,
\nonumber \\
(\mathcal{M^0_+})_{12} &=&
-\left[
\frac{g_1^2 + g_2^2}{4} -\lambda^2 -
Q^p_{H_u} Q^p_{H_d} g_E^2
\right] v_u v_d -
\frac{\lambda A_\lambda v_S}{\sqrt{2}} \, ,
\nonumber \\
(\mathcal{M^0_+})_{13} &=&
\left[
\lambda^2 + Q^p_{H_d} Q^p_S g_E^2
\right] v_S v_d
-\frac{\lambda A_\lambda v_u}{\sqrt{2}} \, , \\
(\mathcal{M^0_+})_{22} &=&
\left[
\frac{g_1^2 + g_2^2}{4} + (Q^p_{H_u})^2 g_E^2
\right] v_u^2 +
\frac{\lambda A_\lambda v_S v_d}{\sqrt{2} v_u} \, ,
\nonumber \\
(\mathcal{M^0_+})_{23} &=&
\left[
\lambda^2 + Q^p_{H_u} Q^p_S g_E^2
\right] v_S v_u
-\frac{\lambda A_\lambda v_d}{\sqrt{2}} \, ,
\nonumber \\
(\mathcal{M^0_+})_{33} &=&
(Q^p_S)^2 g_E^2 v_S^2 +
\frac{\lambda A_\lambda v_u v_d}{\sqrt{2} v_S} \, .
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The lightest Higgs boson is the SM-like one.
Its tree level mass can be written approximately as \cite{King:2005jy}
\begin{eqnarray}
m_{h_1}^2|_\text{tree} &\simeq&
M_{ZZ}^2 \cos^2 2\beta +
\frac{1}{2} \lambda^2 v^2 \sin^2 2\beta +
g_E^2 v^2 (Q^p_{H_d} \cos^2 \beta + Q^p_{H_u}\sin^2 \beta )^2 \nonumber \\
&& - \frac{\lambda^4 v^2}{g_E^2 (Q_S^p)^2}
\left[
1 - \frac{A_\lambda \sin^2 2\beta}{2\mu} +
\frac{g_E^2}{\lambda^2}
(Q^p_{H_d} \cos^2 \beta + Q^p_{H_u}\sin^2 \beta)Q_S^p
\right]^2 \, .
\label{mh1}
\end{eqnarray}
While the second term in the above equation is the same as in the NMSSM, the last two terms only appear in the UMSSM due to the existence of $Q^p$ and $g_E$ related to the extra $U(1)'$.
Therefore the Higgs boson mass depends on the kinetic mixing parameter via these terms. Similarly the masses of $h_2$ and $h_3$ can receive large corrections due to the kinetic mixing.
There is one CP-odd Higgs $A^0$ with the mass:
\begin{eqnarray}
m_{A^0}^2|_\text{tree} &=&
\frac{\lambda A_\lambda \sqrt{2} }{\sin 2\beta} v_S
\left(
1 + \frac{v^2}{4 v_S^2} \sin^2 2\beta
\right) \, .
\end{eqnarray}
The mass of the charged Higgs bosons is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
m_{H^\pm}^2|\text{tree} &=&
M_W^2 + \frac{\sqrt{2} \lambda A_\lambda}{\sin 2\beta}v_S
-\frac{\lambda^2}{2} v^2 \, .
\end{eqnarray}
These masses also depend on $k$ through the angle $\beta$, see Eq.~\ref{cosbeta}.
\section{Analysis}
\subsection{Theoretical constraints}
In Eq. (\ref{redefinition}), we have interpreted $g_E$ as a redefined $U(1)'$ gauge coupling.
It is crucial to check under which condition this new coupling satisfies the perturbation limit:
\begin{eqnarray}
\alpha_E = \frac{g_E(k)^2}{4\pi} \lesssim 1 \, .
\label{aE}
\end{eqnarray}
Replacing with the coupling definition in Eq.~\ref{gE-define}, this condition leads to an upper bound on $k^2<1- g_1'^2/4\pi$. This constraint is weak and only excludes the regions of $k$ close to $\pm 1$.
In this model, $\tan\beta$ is not chosen as an independent parameter as in the MSSM.
It depends on the values of four other free parameters $M_{Z_2}$, $\alpha_Z$, $\theta_{E_6}$, and the kinetic mixing $k$ as expressed in Eq. (\ref{cosbeta}).
The reality condition on the angle $\beta$,
\begin{eqnarray}
0 \leq \cos^2 \beta \leq 1 \, ,
\label{consb}
\end{eqnarray}
defines the regions in the parameter space of
$\{ M_{Z_2}, \alpha_Z, \theta_{E_6}, k \}$ where
further calculations can be carried out.
In Figs \ref{cosb1}, \ref{cosb2} and \ref{cosb3}, we show the parameter regions allowed by the constraint (\ref{consb}).
For a specific choice of $\{\theta_{E_6},\alpha_Z,M_{Z_2}\}$, the kinetic mixing parameter $k$ is limited to a specific range that is usually smaller than the open range $(-1,1)$.
Thus by allowing a nonzero kinetic mixing term, the acceptable ranges for other parameters change significantly.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8.2cm]{theoretical_constraints1a.eps}
\caption{}
\label{fig:sub1}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8.2cm]{theoretical_constraints1b.eps}
\caption{}
\label{fig:sub2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Allowed regions in the $(\theta_{E_6},k)$ plane for
the case of the $Z_2$ boson mass $M_{Z_2}=3000$ GeV and various values of the angle $\alpha_Z$:
(\ref{fig:sub1}) $\alpha_Z > 0$,
(\ref{fig:sub2}) $\alpha_Z \leq 0$. }
\label{cosb1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8.2cm]{theoretical_constraints1c.eps}
\caption{}
\label{fig:sub3}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8.2cm]{theoretical_constraints1d.eps}
\caption{}
\label{fig:sub4}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Allowed regions in the $(M_{Z_2},k)$ plane for various values of $\alpha_Z$. The angle $\theta_{E_6}$ is set to 0.3 and 0.8 in (\ref{fig:sub3}) and (\ref{fig:sub4}) respectively. }
\label{cosb2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7.8cm]{theoretical_constraints1e.eps}
\caption{}
\label{fig:sub5}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7.8cm]{theoretical_constraints1f.eps}
\caption{}
\label{fig:sub6}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Allowed regions in the $(\alpha_Z,k)$ plane for various values of the $Z_2$ boson mass $M_{Z_2}$.
The angle $\theta_{E_6}$ is chosen to be 0.5 and 1.5 in (\ref{fig:sub5}) and (\ref{fig:sub6}) respectively.}
\label{cosb3}
\end{figure}
First note that $Q^p_{H_u}+Q^p_{H_d}=-\frac{4}{\sqrt{24}}\sin\theta_{E_6}$. Thus at $\theta_{E_6}=0$, there is a unique value of $k$ that satisfies Eq.~\ref{cosbeta} for each choice of $M_{Z'}$ and $\alpha_Z$. This can be seen in
Fig. \ref{cosb1} where the allowed parameter regions in the plane $(\theta_{E_6},k)$ for the case of $M_{Z_2}=3000$ GeV are depicted.
Moreover this value of $k$ is large and positive for $\alpha_Z<0$, Fig. \ref{fig:sub2}.
Given a choice of $(M_{Z_2},\alpha_Z)$, for larger values of $\theta_{E_6}$ the range of allowed values for $k$ increases.
The sign of $k$ is generally anticorrelated with that of $\alpha_Z$ for large values of the mixing to allow for a cancellation between the
two terms in Eq.~\ref{cosbeta}, except when $k \sim +1$.
Moreover $|k|$ approaches 1 as the $Z-Z'$ mixing increases.
Note that for all cases where the first term in Eq.~\ref{cosbeta} dominates, the allowed regions are symmetric with respect to a sign flip of $\theta_{E_6}$.
In Fig. \ref{cosb2}, we plot the allowed regions in the plane $(M_{Z_2},k)$ for various values of $\alpha_Z$ and two choices of $\theta_{E_6}$.
In the limit of no $Z-Z'$ mixing, $\alpha_Z\approx 0$, the range of values of $k$ become independent of $M_{Z_2}$ and are only set by the conditions $Q^p_{H_d},Q^p_{H_u} < 0$ for $\theta_{E_6} > 0$, and $Q^p_{H_d},Q^p_{H_u} > 0$ for $\theta_{E_6} < 0$.
Thus the non-zero kinetic mixing implies that regions of parameter space with small values of $\theta_{E_6}$ and small mixing $\alpha_Z$ are accessible while they were not with $k=0$~\cite{Belanger:2015cra}. However phenomenological constraints that will be discussed in the next section further restrict this region.
For non-zero mixing angles, $\alpha_Z$, larger values of $|k|$ are required to increase $g_E$ and compensate an increase in $M_{Z_2}$ in the first term in Eq.~\ref{cosbeta}.
Note that the allowed range for $k$ is quite narrow at large values of $M_{Z_2}$ and that
the allowed regions in the plane $(M_{Z_2},k)$ become much larger for $\theta_{E_6}=0.8$ than for $\theta_{E_6}=0.3$.
We also show in
Fig. \ref{cosb3} the allowed regions in the plane
$(\alpha_Z,k)$ for various values of the $Z_2$ boson mass $M_{Z_2}$.
Figs. \ref{fig:sub5} and \ref{fig:sub6} correspond to $\theta_{E_6}= 0.5$ and 1.5 respectively.
For $\theta_{E_6}= 0.5$, only a narrow range of $Z-Z'$ mixing angles are allowed for $k\approx 0$, while for $k\approx 1$ any value is allowed. Indeed in this case the first term in Eq.~\ref{cosbeta}
becomes strongly suppressed. As mentioned above, for $\theta_{E_6}\approx \pi/2$, a larger area of parameter space is theoretically consistent.
In summary, the presence of the kinetic mixing enlarges significantly the theoretically allowed regions of parameter space,
in particular regions with small values of $\theta_{E_6}$, large mixing $\alpha_Z$ and low $Z_2$ boson mass.
Moreover the large positive kinetic mixing ($k \lesssim +1$) is slightly favoured as compared to large negative ($k \gtrsim -1$) as shown in Figs. \ref{cosb1}, \ref{cosb2} and \ref{cosb3}.
Besides the above theoretical constraints, we also impose perturbative Yukawa couplings, for this we require
the Yukawa couplings to be smaller than $\sqrt{4\pi}$ at the SUSY scale.
This constraint excludes the possibilities of very small or large values of $\tan \beta$.
We also require that the width to mass ratios of Higgs particles should satisfy
$\Gamma_{h_i}/m_{h_i} < 1$.
\subsection{Phenomenological constraints}
In our analysis, various phenomenological constraints are taken into account.
For the Higgs boson mass, the combined result of the ATLAS and CMS measurements is employed
\cite{Aad:2015zhl} with a theoretical uncertainty of about 2 GeV.
The deflection $\Delta\rho$ of the electroweak $\rho$-parameter with respect to 1 is computed and compared to current upper bound \cite{Agashe:2014kda}.
We also consider the constraint on the muon anomalous magnetic moment $\Delta a_\mu$
\cite{Bennett:2006fi,Roberts:2010cj,Aoyama:2012wk}.
A variety of constraints from flavor physics are taken into account.
Observables in the $B$-meson sector that are of interest include:
the oscillation parameters
$\Delta M_s$,
$\Delta M_d$ \cite{Amhis:2014hma},
the branching ratios of the following processes:
$B^\pm \rightarrow \tau^\pm \nu_\tau$ \cite{b_taunu},
$\bar{B}^0 \rightarrow X_s \gamma$ \cite{b_sg},
$B^0_s \rightarrow \mu^+ \mu^-$ \cite{Agashe:2014kda},
$\bar{B}^0 \rightarrow X_s \ell^+ \ell^-$ at low and high dilepton invariant mass \cite{Huber:2015sra},
$b \rightarrow d \gamma$ \cite{delAmoSanchez:2010ae,Crivellin:2011ba},
$B^0_d \rightarrow \mu^+ \mu^-$ \cite{Amhis:2014hma},
$B \rightarrow X_s \nu \bar{\nu}$ \cite{Barate:2000rc},
$B^+ \rightarrow K^+ \nu \bar{\nu}$ \cite{Amhis:2014hma},
$B^0 \rightarrow K^{*0} \nu \bar{\nu}$ \cite{Amhis:2014hma},
and the ratios
$R_D = \frac{\text{BR}(B^+ \rightarrow D \tau^+ \nu_\tau)}{\text{BR}(B^+ \rightarrow D \ell^+ \nu_\ell)}$,
$R_{D^*} = \frac{\text{BR}(B^+ \rightarrow D^* \tau^+ \nu_\tau)}{\text{BR}(B^+ \rightarrow D^* \ell^+ \nu_\ell)}$ \cite{RD}.
Observables in the Kaon sector include:
the branching ratios of the processes
$K^+ \rightarrow \pi^+ \nu \bar{\nu}$ \cite{Artamonov:2008qb},
$K^0_L \rightarrow \pi^0 \nu \bar{\nu}$ \cite{Ahn:2009gb},
the mass difference $\Delta M_K$
between $K_L$ and $K_S$ \cite{Agashe:2014kda},
and the indirect CP-violation
$\epsilon_K$
in the $K - \bar{K}$ system \cite{Agashe:2014kda}.
When calculating these observables, we take into account theoretical uncertainties as well as those from CKM matrix, rare decays, and hadronic parameters.
The experimental limits of these constraints are as follows,
\begin{eqnarray}
122.1 \text{ GeV} \leq m_h \leq 128.1 \text{ GeV} \, , &&
\label{cons_mh} \\
\Delta a_\mu = a_\mu^\text{exp} - a_\mu^\text{SM}
= (24.9 \pm 8.7) \times 10^{-10} \, , &&
\label{cons_amu} \\
\Delta \rho < 8.8 \times 10^{-4} \, , &&
\label{cons_rho} \\
17.715 \text{ ps}^{-1} \leq \Delta M_s \leq 17.799 \text{ ps}^{-1} \, , & [2\sigma]&
\label{cons_Ms} \\
0.504 \text{ ps}^{-1} \leq \Delta M_d \leq 0.516 \text{ ps}^{-1} \, , & [2\sigma]&
\label{cons_Md} \\
0.70 \times 10^{-4} \leq \text{BR}(B^\pm \rightarrow \tau^\pm \nu_\tau) \leq 1.58 \times 10^{-4} \, , & [2\sigma]&
\label{cons_btaunu} \\
2.99 \times 10^{-4} \leq \text{BR}(\bar{B}^0 \rightarrow X_s \gamma) \leq 3.87 \times 10^{-4} \, , & [2\sigma]&
\label{cons_bsg} \\
1.7 \times 10^{-9} \leq \text{BR}(B^0_s \rightarrow \mu^+ \mu^-) \leq 4.5 \times 10^{-9} \, , & [2\sigma]&
\label{cons_bmumu} \\
0.84 \times 10^{-6} \leq \text{BR}(\bar{B}^0 \rightarrow X_s \ell^+ \ell^-)_\text{low} \leq 2.32 \times 10^{-6} \, , & [2\sigma]&
\label{cons_bsmumuL} \\
2.8 \times 10^{-7} \leq \text{BR}(\bar{B}^0 \rightarrow X_s \ell^+ \ell^-)_\text{high} \leq 6.8 \times 10^{-7} \, , & [2\sigma]&
\label{cons_bsmumuH} \\
2.7 \times 10^{-6} \leq \text{BR}(b \rightarrow d \gamma) \leq 25.5 \times 10^{-6} \, , & [2\sigma]&
\label{cons_bdg} \\
\text{BR}(B^0_d \rightarrow \mu^+ \mu^-) \leq 8.7 \times 10^{-10} \, , & [3\sigma]&
\label{cons_bdmumu} \\
\text{BR}(B \rightarrow X_s \nu \bar{\nu}) < 6.4 \times 10^{-4} \, , & [90\% \text{CL}]&
\label{cons_bxsnunu} \\
\text{BR}(B^+ \rightarrow K^+ \nu \bar{\nu}) < 1.6 \times 10^{-5} \, , & [90\% \text{CL}]&
\label{cons_bknunu} \\
\text{BR}(B^0 \rightarrow K^{*0} \nu \bar{\nu}) < 5.5 \times 10^{-5} \, , & [90\% \text{CL}]&
\label{cons_bksnunu} \\
0.299 \leq R_D \leq 0.495 \, , & [2\sigma]&
\label{cons_rd} \\
0.259 \leq R_{D^*} \leq 0.373 \, , & [3\sigma]&
\label{cons_rds} \\
\text{BR}(K^+ \rightarrow \pi^+ \nu \bar{\nu}) < 4.03 \times 10^{-10} \, , & [2\sigma]&
\label{cons_kpinunu} \\
\text{BR}(K^0_L \rightarrow \pi^0 \nu \bar{\nu}) < 2.6 \times 10^{-8} \, , & [90\% \text{CL}]&
\label{cons_kpi0nunu} \\
5.275 \times 10^{-3} \text{ ps}^{-1} \leq \Delta M_K \leq 5.311 \times 10^{-3} \text{ ps}^{-1} \, , & [2\sigma]&
\label{cons_deltamk} \\
2.206 \times 10^{-3} \leq \epsilon_K \leq 2.250 \times 10^{-3} \, . & [2\sigma]&
\label{cons_epsk}
\end{eqnarray}
Various constraints from direct searches for new particles at colliders are relevant for the scenarios we consider.
While scenarios with light sfermions are severely restricted by LEP, the LSP can be light enough to contribute to the $Z_1$ invisible decay width, we impose the constraint
$\Delta \Gamma_{Z_1}< 0.5$~MeV~\cite{Freitas:2014hra}.
Searches for a heavy neutral gauge boson in the dilepton and dijet channels have been performed at the LHC both at 8 TeV and 13 TeV.
We use the most recent data on the dilepton final state corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 3.2 fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV \cite{Aaboud:2016cth}.
Here, the $Z_2$ mass limit is interpolated for each specific value of $\theta_{E_6}$.
Limits from the dijet resonance searches at the LHC are obtained with the method described in Ref.~
\cite{Fairbairn:2016iuf}
using a combination of ATLAS
\cite{Aad:2014aqa,ATLAS:2015nsi}
and CMS \cite{Khachatryan:2015sja,Khachatryan:2015dcf}
dijet data at 8 TeV and 13 TeV. These constraints are included in micrOMEGAs4.3~\cite{Barducci:2016pcb}.
In the UMSSM, there are cases where the lightest chargino is long-lived, typically when the chargino is nearly pure wino or nearly pure higgsino.
For such points, we take into account the results from long-lived chargino searches at the Tevatron and the LHC.
To derive this constraint, the observed limits for the cross sections of long-lived chargino pair production at D0 \cite{Abazov:2012ina} experiment are employed in combination with
the observed limit for chargino pair production and neutralino-chargino production cross section at the ATLAS \cite{ATLAS:2014fka} experiment. We follow the procedure described in~\cite{Belanger:2015cra}.
In addition to the constraints from collider physics, we take into account those from cosmological observations.
The most recent measurement of the DM relic density by Planck experiment \cite{Ade:2015xua} reads
\begin{eqnarray}
\Omega_\text{CDM} h^2 &=& 0.1188 \pm 0.0010 \, .
\label{cons_omega}
\end{eqnarray}
In the global parameter scan, we impose only an upper bound on the DM relic density of the LSP.
Thus we implicitly assume that there could be an additional DM candidate.
For DM direct detection the LUX experiment sets the most severe constraint on the spin-independent (SI) cross section between a DM particle and nucleons
\cite{Akerib:2013tjd,Akerib:2015rjg,Akerib:2016vxi}, while PICO-60 \cite{Amole:2015pla} sets the best direct limit on the spin-dependent (SD) cross section on protons.
The SD cross section on protons is also constrained by IceCube \cite{Aartsen:2016exj} by observing the neutrino flux from DM captured in the Sun, this limit however depends on specific annihilation channels.
The UMSSM model with kinetic mixing was implemented in LanHEP version 3.2.0
\cite{Semenov:2008jy,Semenov:2010qt,Semenov:2014rea}
which produces the model files suitable for CalcHEP
\cite{Belyaev:2012qa}.
The spectrum and all the DM observables are calculated using micrOMEGAs version 4.3.1
\cite{Belanger:2011rs,Belanger:2015cra,Belanger:2014vza, Barducci:2016pcb}
with the help of UMSSMTools~\cite{DaSilva:2013jga} adapted from NMSSMTools v5.0.2 routines \cite{Ellwanger:2005dv,Domingo:2015wyn}. The latter includes in particular all flavour physics observables.
For collider observables, we use a routine of micrOMEGAs to compute the $Z_2$ limits from LHC as well as the $Z_1$ invisible width.
An interface to HiggsBounds \cite{Bechtle:2013wla} allows to test the Higgs sector of the model with respect to $95\%$ CL exclusion limits from the LEP, Tevatron and LHC experiments.
Finally the points satisfying all the above collider constraints are analysed with SModelS 1.0.4 which decomposes the signal of any BSM model into simplified topologies in order to test it against LHC bounds \cite{Kraml:2013mwa,Kraml:2014sna}.
\subsection{Benchmark analysis}
We examine the effect of the kinetic mixing on the sparticle spectrum for a benchmark set of the UMSSM inputs.
The simplified UMSSM input parameters are taken to be:
the common gaugino masses
$M_1'= M_1 = M_2 = M_3 = M_G = 3$ TeV,
the common slepton and squark soft masses
$m^0_{\tilde{l}} = 1.1$ TeV and
$m^0_{\tilde{q}} = 3$ TeV respectively,
the $Z_2$ boson mass
$M_{Z_2} = 3.8$ TeV,
the common trilinear coupling
$A_0 = 3$ TeV,
the $\mu$-parameter
$\mu = 1035.5$ GeV,
the mixing angle between two $Z$-bosons
$\alpha_Z = -0.64 \times 10^{-4}$, and
the angle
$\theta_{E_6} = 1.4$.
Note that these values of $\mu, \alpha_Z$, and
$\theta_{E_6}$ are chosen randomly such that all the phenomenological constraints, especially the 125 GeV Higgs boson mass and the DM relic abundance, can be satisfied for a suitable value of $k$.
Letting the kinetic mixing parameter to be a free input, we find that the range with $-0.742 < k < 0.399$ is theoretically acceptable.
The values outside this range are excluded by the reality condition (\ref{consb}) and the tachyonic slepton condition.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{k_slepton.eps}
\caption{Slepton masses as functions of the gauge kinetic mixing $k$.}
\label{slepton_k}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{k_squark.eps}
\caption{Squark masses as functions of the gauge kinetic mixing $k$.}
\label{squark_k}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{slepton_k}, we show the dependence of slepton masses of the first generation on the kinetic mixing parameter.
For this particular choice of inputs, the behaviors of the second and third slepton generations are very similar.
The two sfermions belonging to the LH slepton doublet,
$\tilde{\nu}^e_L$ and $\tilde{e}_L$, have masses too degenerate to be distinguished in the plot.
When increasing the kinetic mixing, the LH slepton masses increase while the RH selectron mass decrease, becoming tachyonic for $k > 0.399$. The RH sneutrino mass is nearly independent on $k$.
Fig. \ref{squark_k} shows the first generation squark masses as functions the kinetic mixing parameter.
Here, only the RH up-squark becomes heavier for larger $k$.
The other squark masses (LH up-squark, LH down-squark, and RH down-squark) decrease with the kinetic mixing parameter $k$.
As for the slepton case, the other two generations of squarks have a similar behavior as the first generation and are
therefore not shown in the figure.
The $k$-dependence of sfermion masses can be explained using Eqs. (\ref{D-term}), (\ref{gE-define}), and (\ref{Qp}).
Within the allowed range of $k$, corrections to the sfermion masses are dominantly controlled by $Q^p(k)$.
For the benchmark value $\theta_{E_6} = 1.4$, the quantity in the brackets of the right side of (\ref{D-term}) is positive.
Therefore, the D-term correction to a sfermion mass is approximately proportional to $\frac{k}{1-k^2}$ and its hypercharge $Y$.
The dependence on $k$ is therefore stronger for the sparticle with a large hypercharge $Y$. The mass increases (decreases) with $k$ for negative (positive) $Y$.
The RH sneutrino has a hypercharge $Y_{\tilde{\nu}_R}=0$, hence its mass remains almost constant.
The kinetic mixing enters the neutralino masses only through the mixing between higgsinos, singlino and bino', hence the neutralino masses are almost independent of the kinetic mixing.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{k_mh.eps}
\caption{The SM-like Higgs boson mass as a function of the gauge kinetic mixing $k$.}
\label{mh_k}
\end{figure}
The SM-like Higgs boson mass is plotted as a function of the kinetic mixing $k$ in Figs (\ref{mh_k}).
We see that the Higgs boson mass decreases with $k$ and that in the absence of kinetic mixing the mass would be much below the observed value. Thus, enabling a negative nonzero kinetic mixing, in this case $k\approx -0.7$, allows to bring the Higgs boson mass in agreement with the observed value, $m_h \sim 125$ GeV.
For illustration, we show in Tables \ref{benchmark1}, the sparticle mass spectrum as well as the constrained observables for the benchmark just discussed.
Assuming theoretical uncertainties in the calculations, we find that only the muon g-2 and $R_{D^*}$ satisfy the corresponding constraints at $3 \sigma$ level, while all other observables comply with the experimental limits at $2 \sigma$ level.
The LEP limits, the invisible $Z_1$ width, and the dilepton and dijet constraints for the $Z_2$ boson from the LHC, the constraint from long-lived chargino searches at D0 and the ATLAS experiments are all satisfied.
This benchmark is also compatible with limits on the Higgs sector obtained by Lilith and HiggsBounds as well as with limits on sparticles obtained with SModelS.
We note that the kinetic mixing induces large shifts in the heavy Higgs doublet, from $\simeq 2.5$~TeV when $k=0$ to $\simeq 5$~TeV when $k=-0.7$ while the singlet mass, $m_{h_2}$ in Table 2, remains constant. Such heavy masses are in any case out of reach of the LHC.
The DM candidate for this benchmark is a higgsino-like neutralino.
Its relic density is achieved by annihilation into gauge bosons and coannihilation with the second lightest neutralino and the chargino NLSP whose masses are almost degenerate.
The SI and SD cross sections of the DM scattering on nuclei meet the requirement from the LUX and IceCube experiments.
Since the sparticles are quite heavy, it is challenging to test this benchmark at the LHC.
However, the future XENON1T will be able to test the model via the SI interaction of the neutralino DM.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{math}
\begin{array}{ |cc||cc||cc| }
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|c||}{\text{Inputs}} &
\multicolumn{2}{c||}{\text{Mass spectrum}} &
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{\text{Observables}} \\ [0.5ex]
\hline \hline
M_G & 3000 & h_1 & 125.2 &
\Delta a_\mu & 3.182 \times 10^{-11} \\
m^0_{\tilde{l}} & 1100 & h_2 & 3800 &
\Delta \rho & 1.616 \times 10^{-6} \\
m^0_{\tilde{q}} & 3000 & h_3 & 5024 &
\Delta M_s & 16.83 \text{ ps}^{-1} \\
M_{Z_2} & 3800 & A^0 & 5024 &
\Delta M_d & 0.485 \text{ ps}^{-1} \\
A_0 & 3000 & H^\pm & 5025 &
\text{BR}(B^\pm \rightarrow \tau^\pm + \nu_\tau) & 1.070 \times 10^{-4} \\
\mu & 1035.5 & Z_2 & 3800 &
\text{BR}(\bar{B}^0 \rightarrow X_s \gamma ) & 3.347 \times 10^{-4} \\
\alpha_Z & -0.64 \times 10^{-4} & \tilde{g} & 3000 &
\text{BR}(\bar{B}_s^0 \rightarrow \mu^+ \mu^-) & 3.346 \times 10^{-9} \\
\theta_{E_6} & 1.4 & \tilde{\chi}^0_{1,2} & 1033, 1036 &
\text{BR}(\bar{B}^0 \rightarrow X_s \ell^+ \ell^-)_\text{low} & 1.671 \times 10^{-6}\\
k & -0.7 & \tilde{\chi}^0_{3,4} & 2586, 3000 &
\text{BR}(\bar{B}^0 \rightarrow X_s \ell^+ \ell^-)_\text{high} & 2.401 \times 10^{-7} \\
& & \tilde{\chi}^0_{5,6} & 3003, 5586 &
\text{BR}(b \rightarrow d \gamma) & 1.73 \times 10^{-5} \\
& & \tilde{\chi}^\pm_{1,2}& 1034, 3003 & \text{BR}(B^0_d \rightarrow \mu^+\mu^-) & 9.62 \times 10^{-11}\\
& & \tilde{\nu}^{e,\mu}_{L,R} & 1141, 1345 &
\text{BR}(B \rightarrow X_s \nu \bar{\nu}) & 2.89 \times 10^{-5} \\
& & \tilde{e},\tilde{\mu}_{L,R} & 1144, 2764 & \text{BR}(B^+ \rightarrow K^+ \nu \bar{\nu}) & 3.96 \times 10^{-6} \\
& & \tilde{\nu}^\tau_{L,R}& 1141, 1100 & \text{BR}(B^0 \rightarrow K^{*0} \nu \bar{\nu}) & 9.15 \times 10^{-6} \\
& & \tilde{\tau}_{1,2} & 1144, 2764 & R_D & 0.297 \\
& & \tilde{u},\tilde{c}_{L,R} & 3372, 2705 & R_{D^*} & 0.252 \\
& & \tilde{d},\tilde{s}_{L,R} & 3373, 3626 & \text{BR}(K^+ \rightarrow \pi^+ \nu \bar{\nu}) & 8.60 \times 10^{-11} \\
& & \tilde{t}_{1,2} & 2700, 3385 & \text{BR}(K^0_L \rightarrow \pi^0 \nu \bar{\nu}) & 2.70 \times 10^{-11} \\
& & \tilde{b}_{1,2} & 3374, 3626 &
\Delta M_K & 5.80 \times 10^{-3} \\
& & & & \epsilon_K & 1.86 \times 10^{-3} \\
& & & & \Omega h^2 & 0.1188 \\
& & & & \sigma_{SI}^{\chi-p} & 2.727 \times 10^{-10} \\
& & & & \sigma_{SD}^{\chi-p} & 1.840 \times 10^{-7} \\
\hline
\end{array}
\end{math}
\caption{The sparticle mass spectrum in GeV and the corresponding constrained observables for the given set of input parameters.}
\label{benchmark1}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Global parameter scan}
We assume that squark and slepton soft masses of the first two generations are universal,
$m_{\tilde{f}_1} = m_{\tilde{f}_2}$ where $f = \{ q,u,d,l,\nu,e \}$,
and the trilinear couplings of the first two generations are negligible.
We are thus left with 25 free parameters including the gauge kinetic mixing.
The ranges for these parameters are chosen as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
& -2000 < M_1, M_2, \mu < 2000 \text{ (GeV)} & \\
& 100 < M_3 < 4000 \text{ (GeV)} , & \\
& 10< M'_1 < 4000 \text{ (GeV)} , & \\
& 0 < m_{\tilde{q}_i}, m_{\tilde{u}_i} , m_{\tilde{d}_i} < 4000 \text{ (GeV)} , &
\quad i = \{1,2,3\} \\
& 0 < m_{\tilde{l}_i}, m_{\tilde{\nu}_j},
m_{\tilde{\nu}_{\tau R}}, m_{\tilde{e}_i} < 2000 \text{ (GeV)} , & \quad
i = \{1,2,3\}, \, j = \{1,2\} \\
& -4000 < A_\lambda, A_t, A_b, A_\tau < 4000 \text{ (GeV)} , & \\
& -10^{-3} < \alpha_Z < 10^{-3} , & \\
& 1000 < M_{Z_2} < 8000 \text{ (GeV) }, & \\
& -\frac{\pi}{2} < \theta_{E_6} < \frac{\pi}{2}, & \\
& -1 < k < 1. &
\end{eqnarray}
We have performed a random scan over this parameter region with $5\times 10^8$ points.
The particle mass spectrum and all the above constrained observables have been calculated for each point.
Only points satisfying the theoretical constraints are considered in our analysis.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{plot_k_mh1.eps}
\caption{Theoretically allowed points in the plane $(k, m_{h_1})$. Grey points are excluded by flavour constraints, LEP mass limits, invisible $Z_1$ decay width, LHC searches for a $Z_2$ boson, and searches for long-lived chargino, red points are excluded by Higgs mass constraints as well as HiggsBounds and Lilith. Green points satisfy all constraints.
}
\label{plot_k_mh}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{plot_k_mh}, a scatter plot is shown in the plane $(k,m_{h_1})$.
Looking at the density in the plot, most of the points correspond to a Higgs mass between 50 GeV and 180 GeV.
Clearly the Higgs mass in this model can be enhanced with the nonzero gauge kinetic mixing and
the effect of nonzero kinetic mixing can be quite large for $|k| \in (0.8,1.0)$.
This is due to the $U(1)'$ D-term contribution (the third term in Eq. (\ref{mh1})) proportional to the gauge coupling $g_E$ that is
greatly enhanced for large $k$.
Nevertheless, the value $m_{h_1} \simeq 125$~GeV can be obtained for any value of the kinetic mixing.
Note that the constraints from flavour physics (\ref{cons_rho})-(\ref{cons_epsk}) and $(g-2)_\mu$ (\ref{cons_amu})
are most severe in the low Higgs mass region $m_{h_1} \lesssim 80$ GeV and relatively small kinetic mixing, a region that is in any case not physically interesting.
For $m_{h_1} \simeq 125$ GeV, the constraint from $Z_2$ searches plays a very important role while the searches for long-lived chargino do not provide a significant constraint after all other phenomenological constraints are taken into account.
The impact of the $Z_2$ searches and other collider constraints is best illustrated in the plane $(k,\theta_{E_6})$, see Fig.~\ref{plot_k_tE6}.
The $Z_2$ constraint is particularly important in the region with large kinetic mixing $k \gtrsim 0.5$ due to the enhancement of the coupling $g_E$,
it has also an impact for large negative values of the kinetic mixing although for these values theoretical constraints are more important and only allow a restricted range for $\theta_{E_6}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{plot_k_te6.eps}
\caption{Allowed region in the plane $k, \theta_{E_6}$ (in green). Red points are excluded by $Z_2$ searches while grey points are excluded by all other constraints.
}
\label{plot_k_tE6}
\end{figure}
It is interesting to observe that because of the non zero kinetic mixing, the LHC constraints on the $Z_2$ mass can be significantly relaxed. Typically the current limit is around 2.8~TeV with a slight dependence on $\theta_{E_6} $. However for certain values of $\theta_{E_6}$ and $k$ the coupling of the $Z_2$ to the RH leptons is strongly suppressed due to a cancellation between the two terms in Eq.~\ref{Qp}. Hence without an increase in the coupling to LH leptons or quarks to compensate, the limit on the $Z_2$ boson mass from dileptons is relaxed and can drop below 2~TeV.
This occurs for $-1.2<\theta_{E_6}<-0.8$ and $-0.45< k<-0.15$, see Fig.~\ref{plot_k_mz2}. The lightest allowed value is found to be $M_{Z_2}=1.3$~TeV.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{plot_k_mz2.eps}
\caption{Allowed region in the plane $k, M_{Z_2}$ (in green).
The color code is the same as in Fig. \ref{plot_k_tE6}.
}
\label{plot_k_mz2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{plot_k_damu.eps}
\caption{The anomalous magnetic moment of the muon, $\Delta a_\mu$ vs the gauge kinetic mixing $k$. Green points are allowed, red points are excluded by constraints on the Higgs mass and couplings and grey points are excluded by all other flavour and collider constraints.
The green points are plotted on top of the other ones.
}
\label{plot_k_Damu}
\end{figure}
The predictions for the muon anomalous magnetic moment are presented in Fig. \ref{plot_k_Damu}. It is possible, for any value of $k$ to reproduce the
central value for for this observable, Eq.~\ref{cons_amu}. In particular $\Delta a_\mu$ can be enhanced by a relatively light $Z_2$,
this is because a small $M_{Z_2}$ implies a small Higgs singlet VEV, $v_S$, (see Eq. (\ref{mz2})) which in turn can result in a small $U(1)'$ D-term corrections to smuon masses (Eq.~\ref{D-term}).
However after taking into account the LHC constraints on the $Z_2$ boson, the number of points with $\Delta a_\mu\approx 10^{-9}$ is significantly reduced especially at large $k$. In addition the region of parameter space where the $Z_2$ mass can be relaxed does not correspond to the one leading to a large contribution to $\Delta a_\mu$.
Other constraints also restrict the allowed regions. In the flavour sector (also shown in grey in Fig.~\ref{plot_k_Damu}),
the constraints on $\Delta M_s$ (\ref{cons_Ms}) and $\Delta M_d$ (\ref{cons_Md}) are quite important but mostly for the region with low $\Delta a_\mu < 10^{-11}$.
while for $\Delta a_\mu \gtrsim 10^{-10}$, the constraints from $\bar{B}^0 \rightarrow X_s \gamma$ (\ref{cons_bsg}) are more severe. Note that
the constraints for the branching ratio of $B_d^0 \rightarrow \mu^+ \mu^-$ and $R_{D^*}$ are particularly severe and that we have used the $3\sigma$ bounds for them.
As mentioned above, the constraints on the Higgs sector (in red) have a strong impact on the parameter space, they rule out a large number of points with low $\Delta a_\mu$, but also some points at large $k$ where the prediction for $\Delta a_\mu$ is within the $2\sigma$ observed range.
It is worth noting that within our scan, there are no green points with $\Delta a_\mu \gtrsim 2 \times 10^{-9}$ in the region $|k| < 0.2$, while
we can find such green points for the regions $|k| > 0.2$.
Therefore, even after taking into account all constraints, there is some enhancement in the predicted value of the muon $g-2$ although it is small.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{plot_k_mlsp_omega.eps}
\caption{The scatter plot on the plane $(k, m_{\rm LSP})$ for the neutralino-LSP (green) and the RH sneutrino-LSP (red).
All the points satisfy the collider and flavour constraints as well as the upper bound on the relic density.}
\label{plot_k_mLSP}
\end{figure}
We now discuss dark matter observables including the relic density and DM elastic scattering cross section on nuclei. In the numerical results we consider only points that successfully predict a Higgs boson mass in the range $[122,128]$ GeV and that satisfy collider and flavour constraints. Points with a charged/colored LSP are not considered as they are disfavored by cosmological observations.
There are two posibilities for DM in this model, the lightest neutralino or the RH sneutrino, recall that the LH sneutrino LSP typically leads to
a large SI cross section on nuclei due to the exchange of a $Z_1$ boson and are thus excluded by DM direct detection experiments \cite{Falk:1994es}. We do not consider this possibility.
Fig. \ref{plot_k_mLSP} shows the scatter plot of the collider allowed points in the plane $(k, m_{\rm LSP})$, including both
the neutralino-LSP (green) as well as the RH sneutrino-LSP (red). The latter is much less likely. Moreover we observe that in the region with small $|k|$ there are more possibilities to have a heavy DM than in the region with large $|k|$.
In particular most of the points associated with a DM candidate with a mass $m_{\rm LSP} \ge 1200$~GeV have relatively small kinetic mixing $|k| \le 0.5$.
This is related to the fact that large kinetic mixing induces a shift in some of the sfermion masses and are therefore more likely to have a charged LSP and moreover
that more points are excluded by the LHC search for $Z_2$ boson due to its enhanced coupling for large $|k|$, see Fig. \ref{plot_k_tE6}.
Note that Fig.~\ref{plot_k_mLSP} shows only the points that satisfy the relic density upper bound from PLANCK, however the distribution of points
is similar without the constraint except for the region with a very light LSP.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{plot_mlsp_omega.eps}
\caption{The scatter plot on the plane $(m_{\rm LSP}, \Omega h^2)$.
The color codes are the same as in Fig. \ref{plot_k_mLSP}.
Triangles: points satisfying the muon $g-2$ limits at $2\sigma$ level and SModelS test in addition to other collider constraints.}
\label{plot_mLSP_Omega}
\end{figure}
The DM relic density for each type of DM is presented in the scatter plot of Fig. \ref{plot_mLSP_Omega}.
We find as expected that the RH sneutrino DM is typically overabundant since it is very weekly coupled to SM particles.
There are however special cases where the RH sneutrino predicts a relic density in agreement or below the PLANCK value. When the RH sneutrino mass is near $m_{h_1}/2$, the DM annihilation is enhanced by a resonance effect,
similarly when the mass is near $m_{Z_2}/2$. Considering the LHC constraint on the $Z_2$, this requires a rather heavy sneutrino DM.
Finally there is always the possibility of coannihilation with other sfermions or neutralino/chargino. The latter can occur for any mass. Although there is an impact of the gauge kinetic mixing in these scenarios since the masses of the Higgs, $Z_2$ and sfermions all depend on the kinetic mixing, in the global scan there is no direct correlation between the relic density and the kinetic mixing, and a value $\Omega h^2 \sim 0.1$ can be obtained for the whole range of $k$.
This statement also holds for neutralino DM.
The value of the relic density for neutralino DM (in green in Fig.~\ref{plot_mLSP_Omega}) features a strong dependence on the nature of the LSP.
Most of the points with overabundant DM are associated with a bino or singlino LSP while those with underabundant DM correspond to higgsino-like and wino-like LSP. These are clustered in the two strips at the bottom of Fig. \ref{plot_mLSP_Omega} that extend from 100 GeV to 2 TeV, the wino-like LSP corresponding to the points with the lower value of the relic density.
Note that we find only a few points with $\tilde{S}$-like LSP, and no point with $\tilde{B}'$-like LSP.
Other green points predicting the allowed DM relic density are either well-tempered neutralino or bino-like neutralinos with co-annihilation. They scatter in a large mass range.
For $m_{\rm LSP} \lesssim 100$ GeV, and $\Omega h^2 \lesssim 0.1$, we find that the only possibility for the neutralino LSP to have an acceptable relic density is the Higgs-resonance region where the DM mass is about half the SM-like Higgs or $Z_1$ boson mass, $m_{\rm LSP} \sim 62$ GeV or $m_{\rm LSP} \sim 45$ GeV.
Here, neutralino annihilation mainly happens via the Higgs ($Z_1$) exchange in the s-channel.
Altogether most of the points which satisfy the relic density upper bound are associated with a compressed spectra, in particular with a NLSP nearly degenerate with the LSP. Indeed such spectra is found for dominantly higgsino and wino neutralino as well as for coannihilation of neutralino or sneutrino. Because of the strong constraints from LEP on light charged particles below 100 GeV, coannihilation in this region is not possible. In addition several points (especially for sneutrino DM) are clustered around $m_{h_1}/2$, only a few points feature uncorrelated a large mass splitting between the NLSP and the LSP.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{plot_k_sigmasd.eps}
\caption{The scatter plot on the plane $(m_{DM}, \sigma_\text{SD}^\text{DM-p})$.
Grey points are excluded by the IceCube constraint.
Other colored points satisfy all collider constraints, as well as the upper limit of DM relic density from Planck and the upper limit of SD cross section from IceCube.
Blue: bino-like LSP,
red: wino-like LSP,
green: higgsino-like LSP.
Triangles are a subset of green points, and satisfy the muon $g-2$ limits at $2\sigma$ level as well as SModelS test.
Dashed pink curve: PICO upper limit.}
\label{plot_k_sigmaSD}
\end{figure}
The SD cross section for DM scattering on nuclei relevant to direct DM searches and to indirect searches with neutrino telescopes is shown in Fig. (\ref{plot_k_sigmaSD}) for all the points satisfying the collider constraints and the upper limit of DM relic density from Planck ($\Omega h^2 < 0.1208$).
Note that this figure includes only the neutralino-LSP since the sneutrino-LSP is a scalar particle and does not have SD interaction with nuclei.
To take into account the fact that neutralino DM may account only for a fraction of the DM content of the universe, we rescale the cross section for cases where DM is underabundant by $\xi = \Omega h^2/0.1188$.
In the figure, points satisfying the muon $g-2$ at $2 \sigma$ level and all other collider constraints including LHC limits from SModelS are marked by triangles.
Moreover, we impose the IceCube limit as described in Ref~\cite{Belanger:2015hra}, the points ruled out by this constraint are shown as grey dots.
The direct detection limit from PICO~\cite{Amole:2015pla} is also displayed as a pink dashed line, this limit is easily satisfied for most of the points since they
lie generally two orders of magnitude below the current limit. %
The sharp cut in the plot around 250 GeV is due to the constraint from searches for long-lived chargino.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{plot_k_sigmasi.eps}
\caption{The scatter plot on the plane $(m_{DM}, \sigma_\text{SI}^\text{DM-Xe})$.
All the points satisfy the collider constraints, as well as the upper limit of DM relic density from Planck and the upper limit of SD cross section from IceCube.
The color codes are the same as in Fig. \ref{plot_k_mLSP}.
Among these points, the triangles represent points satisfying the muon $g-2$ limits at $2\sigma$ level as well as SModelS test.
The pink, dashed pink, and brown curves indicate the upper limit set by
LUX expriment \cite{Akerib:2016vxi}, the projected XENON1T and XENONnT \cite{Aprile:2015uzo} respectively.
}
\label{plot_k_sigmaSI}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{plot_k_sigmaSI} shows the rescaled SI cross section with respect to the DM mass.
The color codes are the same as in Fig. \ref{plot_k_mLSP}.
When the LSP is the RH sneutrino, a significant fraction of the scenarios are clustered around $m_{\rm LSP} \approx m_{h_1}/2$ in order to benefit from resonance annihilation in the early universe. The points
that are further away from the resonance and that require a larger coupling to the Higgs lead to a large direct detection cross section and are excluded by LUX. Other points where the coupling to the Higgs is small predict a SI cross section that can be below the expected limit from XENONnT. Other scenarios with a RH sneutrino are ruled out by the LUX constraint, typically those that have a large coupling to the Higgs
while others that rely on co-annihilation predict a cross section orders of magnitude below the sensitivity of ton-scale experiments.
The LUX limit excludes a considerable
number of points with the neutralino-LSP (green dots).
Especially, the LUX limit rules out several of the points that are compatible with muon $g-2$ at $2\sigma$ level (triangles).
In fact, with the expected sensitivity of the ton-scale experiments (for example the projected sensitivity of XENON1T as represented by the pink dashed curve), if no DM signal is observed
it will introduce a severe tension for the model to reconcile both the muon anomalous magnetic moment
and the SI cross section between the neutralino-LSP and nuclei while satisfying all other constraints.
However, if we relax the muon $g-2$ constraint to 3$\sigma$ bounds,
there are several neutralino-LSP scenarios, as in the MSSM, which can escape the most sensitive future direct detection experiments such as XENONnT
\cite{Aprile:2015uzo}, typically they are associated with wino or higgsino LSP.
\section{Conclusions}
We have implemented the gauge kinetic mixing in the UMSSM and
have found that the kinetic mixing has an important effect on the mass spectrum and on the coupling of the $Z_2$ boson with fermions.
Especially, the mass of the SM-like Higgs boson can be significantly enhanced by an appropriate choice of the kinetic mixing.
This then impacts physical observables and has been illustrated for a benchmark point.
After applying various
theoretical and phenomenological constraints and performing a global parameter scan we have shown
that for specific values of the kinetic mixing it is possible to
relax the current constraint on the $Z_2$ boson mass ($M_{Z_2} \lesssim 2.8$ TeV) to as low as 1.3 TeV when its dilepton branching ratio is suppressed.
We have also found that the predictions for $\Delta a_\mu$ in scenarios with gauge kinetic mixing can in some cases be within $2\sigma$ of the measured value, thus releasing some of the tension on this observable. The properties of the LSP and the DM relic density have been examined, and it is found that agreement with the observed value of the relic density could be obtained for any value of the kinetic mixing. Both neutralino and RH sneutrino can be viable DM candidates. Moreover direct DM searches play an important role in ruling out large portions of the parameter space and offer good prospects of probing the model further although not completely. This is a feature shared with the MSSM. The RH sneutrino in particular can lead to very small scattering cross sections on nuclei.
The upcoming LHC runs with improved reach for the search of a $Z_2$ boson will provide further decisive tests of the model, both in the dilepton and dijet modes. The latter being crucial to probe the cases where the branching ratios of $Z_2$ into dileptons is suppressed because of the kinetic mixing.
SUSY searches are more challenging since the model often features a compressed spectra, although searches for long-lived charged particles will probe a fraction of the compressed scenarios.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The authors are grateful to Alexander Pukhov and Ursula Laa for useful discussions.
H.M.T. would like to thank LAPTh, especially Patrick Aurenche, for hospitality and support during his visit.
This work is supported by the ``Investissements d'avenir, Labex ENIGMASS" and by the French ANR, Project
DMAstro-LHC, ANR-12-BS05-006.
The work of H.M.T. is partly supported by Vietnam National Foundation for Science and Technology Development (NAFOSTED) under the grant No. 103.01-2014.22.
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $G$ be a (topologically) finitely generated profinite group. We write $c_n(G)$ to express the number of (open) subgroups of $G$ of index $n$ which are intersections of maximal subgroups of $G.$ We will say that $c_n(G)$ is polynomially bounded if there exists $\beta$ independent of $n$ such that $c_n(G)\le n^\beta$. Mann asked the following question \cite[Problem 4]{PFG}: \begin{question}\label{quedue}What are the groups for which $c_n(G)$ is polynomially bounded?
\end{question} This question is related with the discussion of a conjecture proposed by Mann in the same paper. A profinite group $G$ is positively finitely generated (PFG) if for some finite $k,$ a random $k$-tuple of elements generates $G$ with probability $P(G,k)>0.$ Mann conjectured that if $G$ is PFG, then the Dirichlet series $$P(G,s) = \sum_H \mu(H,G) |G:H|^{-s},$$ defines an analytic function on some right half-plane of $\mathbb C$ and takes the values $P(G,k)$ for (sufficiently large) $k\in \mathbb N$ (here $H$ ranges over the lattice of all open subgroups of $G$ and $\mu$ is the M\"{o}bius function associated to this lattice). To establish this, it is sufficient to verify that $P(G,s)$ converges absolutely in some right half-plane; this is the case if and only if \begin{enumerate}
\item $|\mu(H,G)|$ is bounded by a polynomial function of $|G:H|;$ \item the number $b_n(G)$ of open subgroups $H$ of index $n$ satisfying $\mu(H,G)\neq 0$ grows at most polynomially in $n.$
\end{enumerate}
As it is noticed in \cite{PFG} p. 447, if $H$ is an open subgroup of $G$ and $\mu(H,G)\neq 0$, then $H$ is an intersection of maximal subgroups, hence $b_n(G)\leq c_n(G)$ and condition (2) is satisfied if $c_n(G)$ is polynomially bounded.
A celebrated result of Mann and Shalev \cite{pmsg}
states that a profinite group is PFG if and only if it has polynomial
maximal subgroup growth (PMSG). Since $\mu(M,G)=-1$ for any maximal subgroup $M$ of $G,$ it must be $m_n(G)\leq b_n(G)\leq c_n(G)$ (where $m_n(G)$ denotes the number of
maximal subgroups of $G$ with index $n$). In particular, if $c_n(G)$ grows polynomially, then $G$ has PMSG. A natural question that arises from these considerations is the following: \begin{question}Is $c_n(G)$ polynomially bounded when $G$ has PMSG?\end{question}
In \cite{AL}, Mann's conjecture about the absolutely convergence of $P(G,s)$ has been proved in the particular case when $G$ is a finitely generated prosolvable groups (recall that every finitely generated prosolvable group $G$ has PMSG \cite[Theorem 10]{PFG}). In that paper it is proved that if $G$ is a finitely generated prosolvable, then $b_n(G)$ is polynomially bounded but is still unknown whether $c_n(G)$ is also polynomially bounded. In this paper, we want to investigate whether the methods employed in \cite{AL} to prove that $b_n(G)$ is polynomially bounded, can be adapted to study the behaviour of $c_n(G).$ The main observation in \cite{AL} is that if $G$ is a prosolvable group and $H$ is an open subgroup of $G$ with $\mu(H,G)\neq 0,$
then the maximal subgroups $M_1,\ldots,M_t$ such that
$H=M_1\cap\ldots\cap M_t$ can be chosen with the extra property that $|G:M_1|\cdots|G:M_t|=|G:H|.$ On the other hand, what is really useful to bound the sequence $b_n(G)$ is not the equality
$|G:M_1|\cdots|G:M_t|=|G:H|$ but that existence of a constant $\eta$, independent on the choice of $H,$ such that $|G:M_1|\cdots|G:M_t|\leq|G:H|^\eta.$
This suggests the following definitions:
\begin{defn}\label{defzero}
Let $G$ be a finite group and let $\eta$ be a positive real number. We say that a maximal intersection $H$ in $G$ is an $\eta$-intersection if there exists a family of maximal subgroups $M_1,\ldots,M_t$ such that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $H=M_1\cap\ldots\cap M_t$.
\item $|G:M_1|\cdots|G:M_t|\le |G:H|^{\eta}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
\begin{defn}\label{defuno}
Let $G$ be a finite group and let $\eta$ be a positive real number. We say that $G$ has the $\eta$-intersection property if every maximal intersection in $G$ is an $\eta$-intersection.
\end{defn}
\begin{defn}\label{defdue}
Let $G$ be a profinite group. We say that $G$ has the bounded intersection property if there exists a positive real number $\eta$ such that every open subgroup $H$ of $G$ which is an intersection of maximal subgroups of $G$ is an $\eta$-intersection.
\end{defn}
Clearly a profinite group $G$ has the bounded intersection property if and only if there exists a positive real number $\eta$ such that $G/N$ has the $\eta$-intersection property for every open normal subgroup $N$ of $G.$
\
The connection between the previous definitions
and Question \ref{quedue} is clarified by the following Proposition.
\begin{prop}\label{propo}Suppose that $G$ is a profinite group with polynomial
maximal subgroup growth. If $G$ has the bounded intersection properties, then there exists a constant
$\beta$ such that $c_n(G) \leq n^\beta.$ \end{prop}
Other two definitions will play a relevant role in our investigation of the bounded intersection property.
\begin{defn}
Let $G$ be a finite group, $V$ an irreducible $G$-module, $F=\End_G(V)$ and $\gamma$ a positive integer. We say that $V$ is a $\gamma$-module if, for every $F$-subspace $W$ of $V,$ there exists an $F$-subspace $W^*$ of $V$ such that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\dim_F(W^*)\leq \gamma.$
\item $C_G(W)=C_G(W^*)\cap (\cap_{M\in \mathcal M_W}M)$ where $\mathcal M_W$ is the set of the maximal subgroups of $G$ containing $C_G(W).$
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
\begin{defn}
Let $G$ be a profinite group. We say that $G$ has the bounded chief factors property if the exists a positive integer $\gamma$ such that every complemented chief factor of $G$ is a $\gamma$-module.
\end{defn}
Let $M$ be a maximal subgroup of $G$ and denote by $Y_M=\bigcap_{g\in G}M^g$ the normal core of $M$ in $G$ and by $X_M/Y_M$ the socle of the primitive permutation group $G/Y_M$ (in its action on the right cosets of $M/Y_M$ in $G/Y_M$): clearly $X_M/Y_M$ is a chief factor of $G$ and $M/Y_M$ is a complement of $X_M/Y_M$ in $G/Y_M.$ Now assume that $H$ is a maximal intersection in $G$: we will denote by $\mathcal V_H$ the set of the irreducible $G$-module which are isomorphic to $X_M/Y_M$ for some maximal subgroup $M$ of $G$ containing $H.$ We will prove:
\begin{thm}\label{thuno} Let $G$ be a finite solvable group and let $H$ be a maximal intersection in $G$. If every $V\in \mathcal V_H$ is a $\gamma$-module, then $H$ has the $(\gamma+1)$-intersection property.
\end{thm}
\begin{cor}
Let $G$ be a finite solvable group. If there exists $\gamma$ such that every complemented chief factor of $G$ is a $\gamma$-module, then $G$ has the $(\gamma+1)$-intersection property.
\end{cor}
We will also prove a converse result:
\begin{thm}\label{due}
Let $G$ be a finite solvable group. If $G$ has the $\eta$-intersection property, then every complemented chief factor is a $\lfloor \eta\cdot c\rfloor$-module, with $c\backsimeq 3.243,$ the P\'{a}lfy-Wolf constant.
\end{thm}
In particular we deduce:
\begin{thm}\label{equivalenza}A prosolvable group $G$ has the bounded intersection property if and only if it has the bounded chief factors property.
\end{thm}
Clearly if $V$ is an irreducible $G$-module and $\dim_{\End_G(V)}V\leq \gamma,$ then $V$ is a $\gamma$-module. So the following corollary is an immediate consequence of Proposition \ref{propo} and Theorem \ref{equivalenza}.
\begin{cor}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated prosolvable. If there exists $\gamma\in \mathbb N$ such that $\dim_{\End_G(V)}V\leq \gamma$ for every irreducible $G$-module $G$-isomorphic to a complemented chief factor of $G,$ then $c_n(G)$ is polynomially bounded.
\end{cor}
An application of the previous result, is the following:
\begin{cor}\label{fittingamma}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated prosolvable group. If the derived subgroup is pronilpotent, then $c_n(G)$ is polynomially bounded.
\end{cor}
In particular, we may apply Corollary \ref{fittingamma} to the class of the finitely generated prosupersolvable groups. However, even if the number of intersections of maximal subgroups in a finitely generated prosupersolvable group $G$ grows polynomially with respect to the index, it may happen that the amount of such subgroups is really ``big'' comparing with the number of subgroups of $G$ with non-zero M\"obius number. Let us denote by $\tilde \beta_n(G)$ the number of conjugacy classes of subgroups with index at most $n$ and with non-zero M\"obius number and by $\tilde \gamma_n(G)$ the number of conjugacy classes of subgroups with index at most $n$ that are intersection of maximal subgroups. In Section \ref{super} we will construct a 2-generated prosupersolvable group with the properly that $$\liminf_{n\to \infty}\frac{\tilde \beta_n(G)}{\tilde \gamma_n(G)}=0.$$
We don't know examples of prosolvable groups that don't satisfy the bounded chief factors property. A positive answer to the following intriguing question, will imply that all the prosolvable groups have the bounded chief factors property.
\begin{question} Does there exists a constant $\gamma$ such that, for every finite solvable group $G$, all the irreducible $G$-modules are $\gamma$-modules?
\end{question}
Notice that we can strengthen the definition of $\gamma$-module, setting that an irreducible $G$-module $V$ is a strong $\gamma$-module if, for every $\End_G(V)$-subspace $W$ of $V,$ there exists an $\End_G(V)$-subspace $W^*$ of $V$ such $\dim_{\End_G(V)}(W^*)\leq \gamma$ and $C_G(W)=C_G(W^*)$.
\begin{question} Does there exists a constant $\gamma$ such that, for every finite solvable group $G$, all the irreducible $G$-modules are strongly $\gamma$-modules?
\end{question}
\section{Preliminary results}
In this section we will give the proof of Proposition \ref{propo} and we will recall the main properties of the crowns of a finite solvable group. Moreover we will start to study the maximal intersections in a relevant case.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{propo}]
Since $G$ has PMSG,
there exists $\alpha$ such that, for each $n \in \mathbb N$, the
number of maximal subgroups of $G$ with index $n$ is bounded by
$n^\alpha.$
Now, for $n\neq 1$, we want to count the number of subgroups $H$ with $|G:H|=n$ which are intersections of maximal subgroups. By assumption there exists an integer $\eta$ with the property that, if we fix such an $H\le G$, then there is a family of maximal subgroups $M_1,\ldots, M_t$ such that $H=\cap_{1\le i\le t}M_i$ and $n_1\ldots n_t\le n^{\eta}$, where $n_i=|G:M_i|$. There are at most
$$1+2+\ldots +n^{\eta}=\frac{n^{\eta}(n^{\eta}+1)}{2}$$
possible factorizations of positive integers $\le n^{\eta}$ (see \cite{mado}), and for each fixed factorization $n_1\ldots n_t$, there are at most $n_i^{\alpha}$ choices for the maximal subgroup $M_i$ of index $n_i$. Therefore, there are at most $n_1^{\alpha}\ldots n_t^{\alpha}\le n^{\eta\cdot \alpha}$ choices for the family $M_1,\ldots,M_t$, and we conclude that
$$c_n(G)\le \frac{n^{\eta}(n^{\eta}+1)}{2}n^{\eta\cdot \alpha}.$$
Obviously, we always can find a constant $\beta$ such that
$$\frac{n^{\eta}(n^{\eta}+1)}{2}n^{\eta\cdot \alpha}\le n^{\beta},$$
for any $n\ge 1$, so the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
Let $G$ be a finite solvable group and let $M$ be a maximal subgroup of $G$ and denote by $Y_M=\bigcap_{g\in G}M^g$ the normal core of $M$ in $G$ and by $X_M/Y_M$ the socle of the primitive permutation group $G/Y_M$: clearly $X_M/Y_M$ is a chief factor of $G$ and $M/Y_M$ is a complement of $X_M/Y_M$ in $G/Y_M.$ Let $\mathcal M$ be the set of maximal subgroups of $G,$ let $\mathcal V$ be a set of representatives of the irreducible $G$-modules that are $G$-isomorphic to some chief factor of $G$ having a complement and,
for every $V\in \mathcal V,$ let $\mathcal M_V$ be the set of maximal subgroups $M$ of $G$ with $X_M/Y_M\cong_G V.$
Recall some results by Gasch\"utz \cite{gaz}. Given $V\in\mathcal V$, let $$R_G(A) =\bigcap_{M\in\mathcal M_V}M.$$
It turns out that $R_G(A)$ is the smallest normal subgroup contained
in $C_G(A)$ with the property that $C_G(A)/R_G(A)$ is
$G$-isomorphic to a direct product of copies of $A$ and it has a
complement in $G/R_G(A)$. The factor group $C_G(A)/R_G(A)$ is
called the $A$-crown of $G$. The non-negative integer
$\delta_G(A)$ defined by $C_G(A)/R_G(A)\cong_G A^{\delta_G(A)}$ is
called the $A$-rank of $G$ and it coincides with the number of
complemented factors in any chief series of $G$ that are
$G$-isomorphic to $A$ (see for example \cite[Section 1.3]{classes}). In particular $G/R_G(A)\cong A^{\delta_G(A)}\rtimes H,$ with $H\cong G/C_G(A).$
\begin{lemma}{\cite[Lemma 1.3.6]{classes}}\label{corona}
Let $G$ be a finite solvable group with trivial Frattini subgroup. There exists
a crown $C/R$ and a non trivial normal subgroup $D$ of $G$ such that $C=R\times D.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}{\cite[Proposition 11]{crowns}}\label{sotto} Assume that $G$ is a finite solvable group with trivial Frattini subgroup and let $C, R, D$ be as in the statement of Lemma \ref{corona}. If $HD=HR=G,$ then $H=G.$
\end{lemma}
For a fixed $V\in\mathcal V,$ we want to study which subgroups of $G$ can be obtained as intersection of maximal subgroups in $\mathcal M_V.$ Since $R_G(V)\leq M$ for every $M\in \mathcal M_V,$ we are indeed asking which subgroups of the semidirect product $G/R_G(A)\cong V^{\delta_G(H)}\rtimes G/C_G(V),$ can be obtained as intersection of maximal supplements of the socle $V^{\delta_G(H)}.$
So assume that $H$ is a solvable group acting irreducibly and faithfully on an elementary abelian $p$-group $V$ and, for a positive integer $t,$ consider the semidirect product $G=V^t\rtimes H$, where
we assume that the action of $H$ is diagonal on $V^t,$ that is, $H$ acts in the same way on each of the direct factors. The aim of the remaining part of this section is to describe which subgroups of $G$ can be obtained as intersections of maximal subgroups of $G$ supplementing $V^t.$ Notice that $M$ is a maximal in $G$ supplementing $V^t$ if and only if $M=W H^v$ with $W$ a maximal $H$-submodule of $V^t$ and $v\in V^t$.
\begin{lemma}\label{interKM}
Let $G=V^t\rtimes H$ be a finite solvable group such that $V$ is a faithful irreducible $H$-module. Let $K=W_1X$ and $M=W_2H^{v_2}$,
where $W_1$ is a proper $H$-submodule of $V^t$, $W_2$ is maximal submodule of $V^t,$ $X\leq H^{v_1}$ for some $v_1\in V^t$ and $v_2\in V^t.$
\begin{enumerate}[i)]
\item If $W_1+W_2=V^t,$ then there exists $w_1\!\in\! W_1$ such that $K\cap M=(W_1\cap W_2)X^{w_1}.$
\item If $W_1\leq W_2,$ then there exists $u\in V$ such that $K\cap M=W_1C_X(u).$
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assume $W_1+W_2=V^t$. There exist $w_1\in W_1$ and $w_2\in W_2$ such that $v_1-v_2=w_2-w_1$, or equivalently, $v_1+w_1=v_2+w_2$. Thus, we have
$$X^{w_1}\le (H^{v_1})^{w_1}=H^{v_1+w_1}=H^{v_2+w_2},$$
In particular
$$\begin{aligned}(W_1\cap W_2)X^{w_1}&\leq W_1X^{w_1}=W_1X=K,\\
(W_1\cap W_2)X^{w_1}&\leq (W_1\cap W_2)H^{v_2+w_2}\leq W_2H^{v_2+w_2}
= W_2H^{v_2}=M.
\end{aligned}$$
Moreover, let $y_1x=y_2h$ be an element of $K\cap M$ with $y_1\in W_1$, $x\in X^{w_1}$, $y_2\in W_2$ and $h\in H^{v_2+w_2}$. We have $y_1-y_2=hx^{-1}\in V^t\cap H^{v_2+w_2}=1$, so it follows that $y_1=y_2$ and $h=x$. Hence, $K\cap M\le(W_1\cap W_2)X^{w_1}$, and since we proved above the other inclusion, we have the equality, as we wanted.
Assume now that $W_1\le W_2$. We observe that
$$K\cap M=W_1X\cap W_2H^{v_2}=W_1X\cap W_2X\cap W_2H^{v_2}.$$
If $W_2X\le W_2H^{v_2}$, then
$$K\cap M=W_1X\cap W_2X\cap W_2H^{v_2}=W_1X\cap W_2X=W_1X=K$$
and we are done. So, we may assume $W_2X\not\le W_2H^{v_2}$. This, in particular, implies $W_2H^{v_1}\neq W_2H^{v_2}$ and consequently, $v_2-v_1\not\in W_2$.
Since $V^t$ is a completely reducible $H$-module, there exists an $H$-submodule $U$ of $V^t$ such that $V^t=W_2\times U$. Thus, there exists a non-trivial element $u\in U$ such that $v_2-v_1=w+u$ with $w\in W_2$. Hence, $H^{v_2-w}=H^{v_1+u}$ and
$$M=W_2H^{v_2}=W_2H^{v_2-w}=W_2(H^{v_1})^u.$$
Let us show that $K\cap M=W_1C_X(u)$. Note that $C_X(u)=C_X(u)^u\le (H^{v_1})^u$, so it is clear that $W_1C_X(u)\le K\cap M$. In order to prove the other inclusion let $w_1x=w_2h^u$ be an element of $K\cap M$ with $w_1\in W_1$, $w_2\in W_2$, $x\in X$ and $h\in H^{v_1}$. Note that $w_1x=w_2h^u=w_2[u,h^{-1}]h$, and since $H$ normalizes $U$, it follows that $[U,H]\le U$. So, $w_1-w_2-[u,h^{-1}]=hx^{-1}\in V^t\cap H^{v_1}=1$, or in other words, $w_1-w_2=[u,h^{-1}]$ and $h=x$. Moreover, $w_1-w_2=[u,h^{-1}]\in W_2\cap U=0$, so $w_1=w_2$ and $[u,h^{-1}]=[u,h]=[u,x]=0$. Therefore, $x\in C_X(u)$ and $K\cap M\le W_1C_X(u)$, so that $K\cap M =W_1C_X(u)$, and we are done.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{impor}
Let $G=V^t\rtimes H$ be a finite solvable group such that $V$ is a faithful irreducible $H$-module. Let $M_1=W_1H^{v_1},\ldots,M_n=W_nH^{v_n}$ be maximal subgroups of $G$ supplementing $V^t$, with $W_i$ a maximal $H$-submodule of $V^t$ and $v_i\in V^t$ for every $i$. Then, we have
$$\bigcap_{i=1}^nM_i=U C_{H^*}(Z)$$
where $U=\bigcap_{i=1}^nW_i$, $H^*$ is a conjugate of $H$ and $Z$ is an $\End_{H}(V)$-subspace of $V$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Set $U_j:=\bigcap_{1\le i\le j} W_i$. Reordering the maximal subgroups, we may assume
$$V^t> U_1> U_2>\ldots> U_{t^*}=\ldots=U_n=U$$
for a suitable $1\le t^*\le n$. First we prove, by induction on $j$, that for every $j\leq t^*$ there exists $w_j\in V^t$ such that
$$M_1\cap \dots \cap M_j=U_jH^{w_j}.$$ This is clear if $j=1.$ Assume $1<j\leq t^*.$ By induction $K:=M_1\cap \dots \cap M_{j-1}=U_{j-1} H^{w_{j-1}}$ for some $w_{j-1}\in V^t.$ Since $U_j=U_{j-1}\cap W_j<U_{j-1},$ we have $U_{j-1}+W_j=V^t$ and therefore, by Lemma \ref{interKM},
$$M_1\cap \dots \cap M_{j}=K\cap M_j=U_jH^{v_j}$$ for some $w_j\in V^t.$ In particular
$$M_1\cap\dots\cap M_{t^*}=UH^*$$
with $H^*$ a suitable conjugate of $H$ and $U\cong_H V^{t-t^*}.$ Now consider $0\leq i\leq n-t^*.$ We prove, again by induction, that, for every $0\leq i\leq n-t^*,$ there exists an $\End_H(V)$-subspace $Z_i$ of $V$ with
$$M_1\cap \dots \cap M_{t^*}\cap \dots\cap M_{t^*+i}=UC_{H^*}(Z_i).$$
When $i=0,$ we just take $Z_0=\{0\}.$ If $i>0,$ then by induction there exists $Z_{i-1}$ such that
$K=M_1\cap \dots \cap M_{t^*}\cap \dots\cap M_{t^*+i-1}=U C_{H^*}(Z_{i-1}).$ Since $U\leq W_{t^*+i},$ it follows from Lemma \ref{interKM} that there exists $z_i\in V$ such that
$$M_1\cap \dots\cap M_{t^*+i}=K \cap M_{t^*+i}=MC_{C_{H^*}(Z_{i-1})}(z_i)=MC_{H^*}(Z_i),$$ being
$Z_i$ the $\End_H(V)$-subspace of $V$ spanned by $Z_{i-1}$ and $z_i.$
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{possibile}
Let $G=V^t\rtimes H$ be a finite solvable group such that $V$ is a faithful irreducible $H$-module. Assume that $U$ is an intersection of maximal $H$-submodules of $V^t$, $H^*$ is a conjugate of $H$ and $Z$ is an $\End_{H}(V)$-subspace of $V.$ If $V^t/U\cong_H V^{t^*}$ and $d=\dim_{\End_{H}(V)}Z,$ then $UC_{H^*}(Z)$ can be obtained as intersection of $t^*+d$ maximal subgroups of $G$ supplementing $V^t.$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
By assumption, there exists $t^*$ maximal $H$-submodules $W_1,\dots,W_{t^*}$ of $V^t$ such that $U=W_1\cap \dots \cap W_{t^*}.$ Let $z_1,\dots,z_d$ be an $\End_H(V)$-basis of $Z.$ Let $A$ be a maximal $H$-submodule of $V^t$ containing $U:$ there exists
an $H$-submodule $B$ of $V^t$ such that $V^t= A\times B.$
It must be $B\cong_H V,$ so let $\phi: V\to B$ be an $H$-isomorphism and for every $1\leq i \leq d,$ set $b_i:=z_i^\phi.$ For every $1\leq i\leq t^*$, let $X_i:=W_iH^*$ and, for every $1\leq j\leq d$, let $Y_j:=A (H^*)^{b_j}.$ It follows from Lemma \ref{interKM}, that
$$(X_1\cap\dots\cap X_{t^*})\cap (Y_1\cap\dots\cap Y_d)=(UH^*)\cap (A C_{H^*}(Z))=UC_{H^*}(Z).\quad \qedhere$$
\end{proof}
\section{Bounded intersection and bounded chief factors properties}
In this section we will prove that in the class of prosolvable groups the bounded intersection property and the bounded chief factors property are equivalent.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thuno}]
We proceed by induction on $|G|$. We may assume $\frat(G)=1$. By Lemma \ref{corona}, we can assume there exists an irreducible $G$-module $V$ such that $C=R\times D$ with $1\neq D\cong_GV^t$, where $C=C_G(V)$, $R=R_G(V)$ and $t=\delta_G(V)$. Assume that $H$ is a maximal intersection in $G$ and that every $U\in\mathcal V_H$ is a $\gamma$-module. We want to prove that there exists a family $M_1,\dots,M_n$ of maximal subgroups of $G$ such that $H=M_1\cap \cdots \cap M_n$ and $|G:M_1|\cdots |G:M_n|\leq |G:H|^{\gamma+1}.$
First assume $D\le H.$ If $M\in\mathcal M_V,$ then $MD=G,$ hence $H\not\le M$ and consequently $V\notin\mathcal V_H.$ We may then work module $D$ and conclude by induction.
Hence we may assume $D\not\le H$. We can write
$$H=X_1\cap\ldots\cap X_{\rho}\cap Y_1\cap\ldots\cap Y_{\sigma},$$
where $X_1,\dots,X_\rho$ are maximal subgroups not containing $D$
and $Y_1,\dots,Y_\sigma$ are maximal subgroups containing $D.$
Notice also that $\{X_1,\dots,X_\rho\}\subseteq \mathcal M_V,$ and consequently
$V\in \mathcal V_H.$ We define
$$X:=X_1\cap\ldots\cap X_{\rho} \text{ and } Y:=Y_1\cap\ldots\cap Y_{\sigma}.$$
By Lemma \ref{sotto},
$R\le X_i$ for every $i$, in particular $R\le X$. By the properties of the crowns, there exists $K\le G$ such that
$$G/R=C/R\rtimes K/R\cong V^t\rtimes K/R,$$
where $V$ can be seen as an irreducible $K$-module with $C_K(V)=R.$ Note that $X/R$ is an intersection of maximal subgroups of $G/R$ supplementing $C/R\cong_{G}V^t$, so we may apply Theorem \ref{impor}: there exists an intersection $T/R$ of maximal $G$-submodules of $C/R,$ a conjugate $K^*$ of $K$ in $G$ and an $\End_G(V)$-subspace $Z$ of $V$ such that
$$X/R=T/R \rtimes C_{K^*}(Z)/R.$$ Since $V\in \mathcal V_H,$ there is an $\End_G(V)$-subspace $Z^*$ of $Z$ such that $\dim_{\End_G(V)} Z^* \leq \gamma$ and
$$C_{K^*}(Z)=C_{K^*}(Z^*)\cap (\cap_{M\in \mathcal M_Z}M)$$ where $\mathcal M_Z$ is the set of the maximal subgroups of $K^*$ containing $C_{K^*}(Z).$ We have $C/T\cong_G V^{t^*}$ for some positive integer $t^*$ and, by Theorem \ref{possibile}, there exists $\alpha\leq t^*+\gamma$ and a family $\tilde X_1,\dots,\tilde X_\alpha$ of maximal subgroups
of $G$ containing $R$ and supplementing $C$ such that
$$\tilde X_1/R\cap \dots \cap \tilde X_\alpha/R= T/R \rtimes C_{K^*}(Z^*)/R. \ \text { i.e. }\ \tilde X_1\cap \dots \cap \tilde X_\alpha=TC_{K^*}(Z^*).$$
Assume now that $\mathcal M_Z=\{M_1,\dots,M_\beta\}:$ for every $1\leq i\leq \beta,$ there exists a maximal subgroup $\tilde Y_i$ containing $C$ such that $\tilde Y_i/R = C/R \rtimes M_i/R.$ Notice that
$$\left(\cap_{1\leq i \leq \alpha} {\tilde X_i}\right)\cap \left(\cap_{1\leq j \leq \beta} {\tilde Y_j}\right) =\left(T C_{K^*}(Z^*)\right)\cap \left(C \left(\cap_{1\leq j\leq \beta} M_j\right)\right)= T C_{K^*}(Z)=X
,$$ hence
$$\tilde X_1\cap \dots \cap \tilde X_\alpha \cap \tilde Y_1\cap \dots \cap \tilde Y_\beta =X.$$
Let
$$\tilde X=\tilde X_1\cap \dots \cap \tilde X_\alpha, \quad \tilde Y = \tilde Y_1\cap \dots \cap \tilde Y_\beta \cap Y_1\cap \dots\cap Y_\sigma.$$
We have $\tilde X \cap \tilde Y = X \cap Y = H.$ Notice that $\tilde Y$ is an intersection of maximal subgroups of $G$ containing $D$, so by induction there exists $\tau$ maximal subgroups $Q_1,\dots,Q_\tau$ of $G$ such that
$$\tilde Y=Q_1\cap\dots\cap Q_\tau \quad \text { and } \quad \prod_{1\leq j\leq \tau}|G:Q_j|\leq |G:\tilde Y|^{\gamma+1}.$$
Define $D^*=D\cap X$. Thus, by the Dedekind Law, we have $T=DR\cap \tilde X=(D\cap \tilde X)R=D^*R$, and note that
$$V^{t-t^*}\cong_G T/R \cong_G D^*R/R\cong_G D^*/(D^*\cap R)\cong_G D^*.$$
Moreover $\tilde Y\ge D$ implies $\tilde X\tilde Y\geq \tilde XD$, and so $|\tilde X\tilde Y|\ge |\tilde XD|$.
Hence,
$$|\tilde X||\tilde Y|/|\tilde X\cap \tilde Y|\geq |\tilde X||D|/|\tilde X\cap D|,$$
so
$$|\tilde Y:\tilde X\cap \tilde Y|\ge |D:\tilde X\cap D|=|D:D^*|=|V|^{t^*}.$$ We have
$$H=\tilde X_1\cap \dots \cap \tilde X_\alpha\cap Q_1\cap \dots \cap Q_\tau$$
and, since $|G:X_i|=|V|$ for every $i\in \{1,\dots,\alpha\}$, $\alpha \leq t^*+\gamma$ and $t^*\geq 1,$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\prod_{i=1}^{\alpha}|G:\tilde X_i|\prod_{j=1}^{\tau}|G:Q_j|&\le |V|^{t^*+\gamma}|G:\tilde Y|^{1+\gamma}\le (|G:\tilde Y||V|^{t^*})^{1+\gamma}\\
&\le (|G:\tilde Y||\tilde Y:\tilde X\cap \tilde Y|)^{1+\gamma}\le |G:\tilde X\cap \tilde Y|^{1+\gamma}=|G:H|^{1+\gamma},
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
and\ the theorem follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{due}]
Assume that $V$ is an irreducible $G$-module $G$-isomorphic to a non-Frattini chief factor of $G$ and let $H:=G/C_G(V).$ The semidirect product $\Gamma =V\rtimes H$ is an epimorphic image of $G$, so it has the $\eta$-intersection property. Let $F=\End_G(V)$ and let $W$ be an $F$-subspace of $V.$ By Theorem \ref{possibile}, $X=C_H(W)$ is an intersection of maximal subgroups of $\Gamma,$ so there exists $n$ maximal subgroups $X_1,\dots,X_n$ of $\Gamma$ such that $X=X_1\cap\dots\cap X_n$ and $|\Gamma:X_1|\cdots |\Gamma:X_n|\leq |\Gamma:X|^\eta.$
Let $\overline X$ be the intersection of the maximal subgroups of $H$ containing $X.$ We may assume that $X_i$ contains $V$ if and only if $i>m:$ this means that for every $j\leq m$ there exists $v_j\in V$ such that $X_j=H^{v_j}$ while $X_{m+1}\cap\dots \cap X_n\geq V\rtimes \overline X.$ In particular
$$C_H(v_1,\dots,v_m)\cap \overline X = H\cap H^{v_1}\cap \dots \cap H^{v_m}\cap (V\rtimes \overline X )\subseteq X,$$
which implies that if $W^*$ is the $F$-subspace of $V$ spanned by $v_1,\dots,v_m$, then $C_H(W)=C_H(W^*)\cap (\cap_{M\in \mathcal M_W}M).$ By \cite{palfy} and \cite{wolf}, $|\Gamma|\leq |V|^c,$ so
$$|V|^m=\prod_{1\leq i \leq m}|\Gamma:X_i|\leq \prod_{1\leq i \leq n}|\Gamma:X_i|
\leq |\Gamma:X|^\eta \leq |\Gamma|^\eta \leq |V|^{c\cdot \eta}.$$ Hence $\dim_F (W^*)\leq m\leq \lfloor \eta\cdot c\rfloor.$
\end{proof}
It remains to prove Corollary \ref{fittingamma}. For this purpose, we need the following observation:
\begin{lemma}\label{facile}Assume that $G$ is a finite solvable group with nilpotent derived subgroup. If $V$ is an irreducible $G$-module $G$-isomorphic to a non-Frattini chief factor of $G,$ then $\dim_{\End_GV}V=1.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We may assume $\frat (G)=1.$ This means that $G=M\rtimes H$ where $H$ is abelian and $M=V_1\times \cdots \times V_u$ is the direct product
of $u$ irreducible non trivial $H$-modules $V_1,\dots,V_u.$ Let $F_i=\End_H(V_i)=\End_G(V_i)$: for each $i\in \{1,\dots,u\},$ $V_i$ is an absolutely irreducible $F_iH$-module
so $\dim_{F_i}V_i=1.$ Now assume that $A$ is a nontrivial irreducible $G$-module $G$-isomorphic to a complemented chief factor of $G$:
it must be $A\cong_G V_i$ for some $i$, so $|\End_G(A)|=|F_i|=|V_i|=|A|.$
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary \ref{fittingamma}]
Let $G$ be a finitely generated prosolvable group with pronilpotent derived subgroup. By Lemma \ref{facile}, every non-Frattini chief factor of $G$ is a 1-module, so, by Theorem \ref{thuno}, $G$ has the 2-intersection property. The conclusion follows from Proposition \ref{propo}.
\end{proof}
\section{Prosupersolvable groups}\label{super}
Recall that the Dirichlet Theorem on arithmetic progressions states that for any two positive coprime integers $a$ and $b$, there exist infinitely many primes which are congruent to $a$ modulo $b$. In particular, the arithmetic progression $\{1+r\cdot 2^n\mid r\in\mathbb N\}$
contains infinitely many primes. This implies that there exists a strictly ascending sequence $\{p_n\}_{n\in\mathbb N}$ of primes with the property that $2^n$ divides $p_n-1$ and $p_{n+1} > 2^n\cdot p_1\cdots p_n.$
Let $V_m$ be a 1-dimensional vector space over $\F_m$, where $\F_m$ is the field with $p_m$ elements, and $H_n:=\langle x_n\rangle$ be a cyclic group of order $2^n$ . We can define an action of $H_n$ on $V_m$, for every $m\le n$, as follows: if $v\in V_m$, then $v^{x_n}:=\zeta_mv$, where $\zeta_m$ is an element of order $2^m$ in $\F_m^*$.
Note that $C_{H_n}(V_m)=\langle x_n^{2^m}\rangle$. Consider the following finite supersolvable group:
$$G_n=(V_1\times\ldots\times V_n)\rtimes H_n.$$
Let us describe the maximal subgroups of $G_n$. Let $W=V_1\times\ldots\times V_n$ and for every $1\leq i \leq n,$ set $W_i:=V_1\times\ldots\times V_{i-1}\times V_{i+1}\times\ldots\times V_n.$
First note that $M=W\rtimes\langle x_n^2\rangle$ is the unique maximal subgroup of $G$ containing $W$.
The other maximal subgroups of $G_n$ are the semidirect products $W_i\rtimes H_n^v$ for $i\in\{1,\dots,n\}$ and $v_i\in V$, so we have precisely
$p_i$ maximal subgroups of index $p_i$ for every $1\le i\le n$.
Consider now the maximal subgroups $M_1=W_i\rtimes H_n^{v_1}$ and $M_2:=W_i\rtimes H_n^{v_2}$ with $v_1,v_2\in V_i$. If $v_1\neq v_2$, then $M_1\neq M_2$ and, by Lemma \ref{interKM}, $M_1\cap M_2=W_i\rtimes\langle x_n^{2^i}\rangle,$ since $\langle x_n^{2^i}\rangle=C_{H_n}(v)$ for every $0\neq v \in V_i.$ These considerations imply that a subgroup $H$ of $G_n$ can be expressed as intersection of maximal subgroups of $G$ if and only if it is conjugated to one of the following subgroups:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $X_J=\left(\prod_{j\notin J}V_j\right) \rtimes H_n,$ where $J$ is a non-empty subset of $\{1,\dots,n\};$ note that $|G_n:X_J|=\prod_{j\in J}p_j.$
\item $Y_J=\left(\prod_{j\notin J}V_j\right) \rtimes \langle x_n^2 \rangle,$ where $J$ is a non-empty subset of $\{1,\dots,n\};$ note that $|G_n:Y_J|=2\cdot \prod_{j\in J}p_j.$
\item $Z_{J,i}=\left(\prod_{j\notin J}V_j)\right) \rtimes \langle x_n^{2^i} \rangle,$ where $i\in \{2,\dots,n\}$ and $J$ is a subset of $\{1,\dots,n\}$ containing $i$. Note that $|G_n:Y_{Z,i}|=2^i\cdot \prod_{j\in J}p_j.$
\end{enumerate}
By \cite[Theorem 1.5]{AL}, if $K$ is a subgroup of $G$ with $\mu(K,G_n)\ne 0$, then there exists a family of maximal subgroups $M_1,\ldots,M_t$ of $G_n$ such that $K=M_1\cap \cdots\cap M_t$ and $|G_n:K|=|G_n:M_1|\cdots|G_n:M_t|$. The subgroups $Z_{J,i}$ do not have this property, hence $\mu(Z_{J,i},G_n)=0$ for all the possible choices of $J$ and $i.$ It follows that, for $n\geq 2$,
$$\begin{aligned}\tilde \gamma_{2^n\cdot p_1\cdots p_n}(G_n)&=2^n-1+2^n+(n-2)\cdot 2^{n-1}=2^{n-1}\cdot (n+2)-1,\\\tilde \beta_{2^n\cdot p_1\cdots p_n}(G_n)&\leq 2^{n+1}-1
\end{aligned}$$ and consequently
$$\frac{\tilde\beta_{2^n\cdot p_1\cdots p_n}(G_n)}{\tilde\gamma_{2^n\cdot p_1\cdots p_n}(G_n)}\leq \frac{4}{n+2}.$$ Now consider the inverse limit
$G=\varprojlim_nG_n.$ Note that $G$ is a 2-generated prosupersolvable group, with $G\cong (\prod_i V_i)\rtimes \mathbb Z_2,$ being $\mathbb Z_2$ the group of the 2-adic integer. Let $n^*=2^n\cdot p_1\cdots p_n.$ The condition
$p_{n+1} > 2^n\cdot p_1\cdots p_n$
for every $n\in \mathbb N,$ implies that if $H$ is an open subgroup of $G$ with $|G:H|>n^*,$ then $\left(\prod_{j>n}V_j\right)\rtimes \mathbb Z_2^{2^n}\leq H$ and consequently $\tilde\beta_{n^*}(G)=\tilde\beta_{n^*}(G_n)$ and
$\tilde\gamma_{n^*}(G)=\tilde\gamma_{n^*}(G_n).$ This implies
$$\liminf_{n\to \infty}\frac{\tilde \beta_n(G)}{\tilde \gamma_n(G)}\leq\liminf_{n\to \infty}\frac{\tilde\beta_{n^*}(G)}{\tilde\gamma_{n^*}(G)}
\leq \lim_{n\to \infty}\frac{4}{n+2}=0.
$$
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
It is well known that Bayesian model selection with improper
within-model prior distributions is not well-defined, owing to the
presence of an arbitrary multiplicative constant in each term of the
marginal likelihood function. Recently \citep{apd/mm:modsel} it has
been shown how this problem can be overcome if one replaces negative
log-likelihood (the {\em log score\/}) by another, homogeneous, proper
scoring rule \citep{mfp/apd/sll:plsr}---since then the arbitrary
constants do not enter into the formulae. That paper considered the
case of continuous variables and, in particular, the Hyv\"arinen
scoring rule \citep{Hyvarinen:2005es}, and showed that this approach
will generally lead to consistent selection of the correct model.
The above approach can not be applied directly when the data are
discrete, since then we need to use scoring rules specifically adapted
to the discrete case, as characterised in \citet{PLSRdiscrete}. Here we
investigate, by example, such a discrete data problem. In particular
we consider the problem of distinguishing between the Poisson and the
Negative Binomial distributions. Simulations indicate that the method
will again deliver consistent selection of the true model.
\section{Local scoring rules}
\label{sec:loc}
Let $\cX$ be a discrete sample space endowed with a structure whereby
with each $x\in\cX$ is associated a {\em neighbourhood\/}
$N_x\subseteq\cX$, containing $x$. In \citet{PLSRdiscrete} it was
shown how to define a {\em proper local scoring rule\/} $S(x,P)$ on
$\cX$, where $x\in{\cal X}$, and $P$ is a distribution over
${\cal X}$. The rule is {\em proper\/} if, for all $P$,
$S(P,Q) := {\mbox{E}}_{X\sim P}S(X,Q)$ is minimised for $Q = P$, and {\em
local\/} if $S(x,P)$ depend on $P$ only through the probabilities it
assigns to points in $N_x$. Under a condition on the neighbourhoods,
we can define an undirected graph ${\cal G}$ on $\cX$ such that we can
take $y\in N_x$ just when $x$ and $y$ are identical or are adjacent in
${\cal G}$. Then all proper local scorings can be characterised, and (on
excluding the log score, yielding what are termed {\em key local\/}
proper scoring rules) any of these will be {\em homogeneous\/} in the
sense that its value is unchanged when all probabilities in $N_x$ are
scaled by the same positive constant.
In particular, suppose the sample space ${\cal X}$ is the set $\mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0}$ of
non-negative integers, and we regard $x$ and $y$ as neighbours if and
only if they differ by at most 1. It is shown in \citet{PLSRdiscrete}
that a key local scoring rule adapted to this structure has the form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:pairrule}
S(x, P} \newcommand{\bpp}{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}) = G_{x-1}'\left\{\frac{p(x)}{p(x-1)}\right\} +
G_x\left\{\frac{p(x+1)}{p(x)}\right\} -
\frac{p(x+1)}{p(x)}\, G_x'\left\{\frac{p(x+1)}{p(x)}\right\}\quad(x=0,1,\ldots)
\end{equation}
where, for each $x\in\mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0}$, $p(x) = P(X=x)$, $G_x$ is a concave function
on $\mathbb{R}^+$, and the first term in \eqref{eq:pairrule} is absent if
$x=0$. It is clear from the way in which ratios enter
\eqref{eq:pairrule} that such a scoring rule is homogeneous.
The cumulative score \eqref{eq:pairrule} based on an {independent and identically distributed}\xspace sample
$(x_1, \ldots, x_n)$ in which the frequency of $y$ is $f_y$
$(y=0,1,\ldots)$ is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:totalscore}
\sum_{y=0}^\infty f_y G_y(v_y) + \left(f_{y+1}-f_y v_y\right) G_y'(v_y)
\end{equation}
with $v_y := p(y+1)/p(y)$. If for example we wished to fit the
Poisson model $p(x) \propto \theta^x/x!$, we might estimate $\theta$
by minimising the total empirical score
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:poissscore}
\sum_{y=0}^\infty f_y G_y\left(\frac{\theta}{y+1}\right) +
\left(f_{y+1}- \frac{f_y}{y+1}\,\theta\right) G_y'\left(\frac{\theta}{y+1}\right).
\end{equation}
In the sequel we shall use the special case of \eqref{eq:pairrule}
with
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gform0}
G_x(v) = - (x+1)^a v^{m}/m(m-1) \quad(m > 0, m\neq 1).
\end{equation}
This gives the scoring rule
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sform}
S(x,P) = \left\{
\begin{array}[c]{lr}
m^{-1}\left\{{p(1)}/{p(0)}\right\}^m & (x=0)\\
&\quad\\
\{m(m-1)\}^{-1}\left[(m-1)(x+1)^a\left\{{p(x+1)}/{p(x)}\right\}^m\right.\\
{}\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\left. - mx^a\left\{{p(x)}/{p(x-1)}\}\right)^{m-1}\right] & (x > 0).
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
\section{Bayesian Model Selection}
\label{sec:modsel}
Let ${\cal M}$ be a finite or countable class of statistical models
for the same observable $X \in{\cal X}$. Each $M\in{\cal M}$ is a
parametric family, with parameter $\theta_M \in \Theta_M$, a
$d_M$-dimensional Euclidean space; when $M$ obtains, with parameter
value $\theta_M$, then $X$ has distribution $P_{\theta_M}$, with
density function (probability mass function) $p_M( x \,|\, \theta_M)$.
Having observed data $X = x$, we wish to make inference about which
model $M\in{\cal M}$ (and possibly which parameter-value $\theta_M$)
actually generated the data.
The Bayesian approach assigns, within each model $M$, a prior
distribution $\Pi_M$, with density $\pi_M(\cdot)$ say, for its
parameter $\theta_M$. The associated {\em predictive distribution\/}
$P_M$ of $X$ (given only the validity of model $M$, but no information
on its parameter) has density function
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:preddens}
p_M(x) = \int_{\Theta_M} p_M(x \,|\, \theta_M)\, \pi_M(\theta_M)\,d\theta_M.
\end{equation}
Any function over ${\cal M}$ proportional to $p_M(x)$ (considered as a
function of $M$, for fixed $x$) supplies the {\em marginal
likelihood\/} function, $L(M)$, based on data $X=x$. In typical
asymptotic scenarios, selection of the model maximising $L(M)$, or,
equivalently, minimising the {\em log score\/}
$S_L(x, P_M) := - \log p_M(x)$, will consistently select the true
model \citep{apd:postprob}.
``Objective'' Bayesian inference attempts to use standardised
within-model priors $\Pi_M$ intended to represent ``prior ignorance''.
In many applications, such an ``ignorance prior'' for $\theta_M$ is
not a genuine distribution, but rather an ``improper'' $\sigma$-finite
but not finite measure, with a ``density'' $\pi_M(\cdot)$ that does
not have a finite integral and so can not be normalised to be a proper
probability density. Typically one writes
$\pi_M(\theta_M) \propto f_M(\theta_M)$, where $f_M$ is a given
non-integrable function and the constant of proportionality is not
specified. Even without that specification, this allows mechanical
computation of a formal within-model-$M$ posterior density
$\pi_M(\theta_M \,|\, x)$, by application of Bayes's formula:
$\pi_M(\theta_M \,|\, x) \propto p_M(x \,|\, \theta_M)\,
\pi_M(\theta_M)\propto p_M(x \,|\, \theta_M)\, f_M(\theta_M)$. This
will often yield an integrable function and hence the possibility of
normalisation to supply a genuine probability density.
However things do not work out so well when we turn to model
selection. We have, for each model $M$,
\begin{displaymath}
\pi_M(\theta_M) = c_M f_M(\theta_M),
\end{displaymath}
where $c_M$ is the unspecified proportionality constant. This formally
leads to the marginal likelihood function
\begin{displaymath}
L_M \propto c_M \, \int_{\Theta_M} p_M(x \,|\, \theta_M)\, f_M(\theta_M)\,d\theta_M.
\end{displaymath}
But since this involves the unspecified constants $c_M$, which could
vary arbitrarily with $M$, it is no longer meaningful to compare
models by means of their marginal likelihoods.
A way round this problem was proposed in \citet{apd/mm:modsel}: instead
of attempting to minimise the log score
$S_L(x, P_M) := - \log p_M(x)$, we replace that with another proper
scoring rule $S(x,P_M)$. And if that scoring rule is homogeneous, it
will simply not involve the unspecified constant $c_M$. In
\citet{apd/mm:modsel} a detailed analysis of this approach was
conducted for the case of continuous data and the Hyv\"arinen scoring
rule, and it was shown that it will typically deliver consistent
selection of the true model.
\section{Discrete model selection}
\label{sec:discsel}
We shall investigate empirically, for a simple example, the validity
of the above results when generalised to the case of discrete data.
We shall use the scoring rule \eqref{eq:sform}, and apply this to the
choice between a Poisson and a Negative Binomial model. For this
purpose we first need to compute, for each of these models separately,
the appropriate score.
\section{Poisson model}
\label{sec:bpois}
Consider the Poisson model $X \sim {\cal P}(k\Lambda)$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:pois}
p(x \,|\, \lambda) = e^{-k\lambda}(k\lambda)^x/x! \quad(x=0,1,\ldots),
\end{equation}
with conjugate prior $\Lambda \sim \Gamma(\alpha,\beta)$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gamma}
\pi(\lambda) = \frac{\beta^\alpha}{\Gamma(\alpha)}\lambda^{\alpha-1}e^{-\beta\lambda}.
\end{equation}
For propriety we require $\alpha>0$, $\beta>0$.
The predictive distribution $P$ has density function
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:poispred}
p(x) = \frac{\Gamma(\alpha+x)}{\Gamma(\alpha)x!}(1-\phi)^\alpha\phi^x
\end{equation}
with $\phi:= k/(\beta+k)$.
Then $p(x+1)/p(x) = \phi(x+\alpha)/(x+1)$, and so
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:poisform0}
S(0,P) &=& m^{-1}\alpha^m\phi^m\\
\nonumber
S(x,P) &= &\{m(m-1)\}^{-1}\left\{(m-1)\phi^m(x+1)^{a-m}(x+\alpha)^m\right.\\
\label{eq:poisform}
&&{} - \left. m\phi^{m-1}x^{a-m+1}(x+\alpha-1)^{m-1}\right\}\quad(x>0).
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Multiple observations}
\label{sec:multiple}
Suppose now we have $N$ {{independent and identically distributed}\xspace} observations $\mbox{\boldmath $X$}_N = (X_1, \ldots,
X_N)$ from the above Poisson distribution. We can apply the above
score in two different ways:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Apply direct to the sufficient statistic.
\item Apply prequentially to all observations.
\end{enumerate}
\subsubsection{Sufficient statistic}
\label{sec:suffpois}
The sufficient statistic is $T_N = \sum_{i=1}^NX_i$, with distribution
${\cal P}(Nk\Lambda)$. So the score computed this way is simply
obtained from \eqref{eq:poisform0} and \eqref{eq:poisform} on replacing $x$
by $t_N$ and $k$ by $Nk$. This gives
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:suffpoisform0}
S_N(\mbox{\boldmath $0$},P) &=& m^{-1}\alpha^m\phi_N^m\\
\nonumber
S_N(\mbox{\boldmath $x$},P) &= &\{m(m-1)\}^{-1}\left\{(m-1)\phi_N^m(t_N+1)^{a-m}(t_N+\alpha)^m\right.\\
\label{eq:suffpoisform}
&&{} - \left. m\phi_N^{m-1}t_N^{a-m+1}(t_N+\alpha-1)^{a-m+1}\right\}\quad(t_N>0)
\end{eqnarray}
where $\phi_N := Nk/(\beta+Nk)$.
\subsubsection{Prequential}
\label{sec:preqpois}
Now suppose we have already observed $\mbox{\boldmath $X$}^{n-1} = \mbox{\boldmath $x$}^{n-1}$. The
posterior distribution of $\Lambda$ is
\begin{displaymath}
\Lambda \,|\, \mbox{\boldmath $X$}^{n-1} = \mbox{\boldmath $x$}^{n-1} \sim \Gamma\left\{\alpha+t_{n-1},\beta+(n-1)k\right\}.
\end{displaymath}
So the predictive distribution of $X_n$, given the previous
observations $\mbox{\boldmath $X$}^{n-1} = \mbox{\boldmath $x$}^{n-1}$, is obtained from
\eqref{eq:poisform0} and \eqref{eq:poisform} on replacing $x$ with $x_n$,
$\alpha$ with $\alpha+t_{n-1}$, and $\beta$ with $\beta+(n-1)k$. The
incremental contribution to the prequential score is thus given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:preqpoisform0}
S_n^*(0,P) &=& m^{-1}(\phi^*_n)^m(\alpha+t_{n-1})^m\\
\nonumber
S_n^*(x_n,P) &= &\{m(m-1)\}^{-1}\left\{(m-1)(\phi_n^*)^m(x_n+1)^{a-m}(t_n+\alpha)^m\right.\\
\label{eq:preqpoisform}
&&{} - \left. m(\phi_n^*)^{m-1}x_n^{a-m+1}(t_n+\alpha-1)^{a-m+1}\right\}\quad(x_n>0)
\end{eqnarray}
with $\phi_n^* := k/(\beta+nk)$.
The total prequential score is obtained by summing this from $n=1$ to
$N$.
\subsection{Improper prior}
The usual improper prior is the formal limit with $\alpha, \beta
\downarrow 0$. In this case \eqref{eq:suffpoisform0} and \eqref{eq:suffpoisform} become:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:imp1suffpoisform0}
S_N(\mbox{\boldmath $0$},P) &=& 0\\
\nonumber
S_N(\mbox{\boldmath $x$},P) &= &\{m(m-1)\}^{-1}\left\{(m-1)(t_N+1)^{a-m}t_N^m\right.\\
\label{eq:imp1suffpoisform}
&&{} - \left. mt_N^{a-m+1}(t_N-1)^{a-m+1}\right\}\quad(t_N>0).
\end{eqnarray}
Note that the score is well-defined even when all observations are
$0$, in which case the posterior is improper.
For the prequential version, we obtain, from \eqref{eq:preqpoisform0} and
\eqref{eq:preqpoisform}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:imp1preqpoisform0}
S_n^*(0,P) &=& t_n^m/mn^m \\
\nonumber
S_n^*(x_n,P) &= &(x_n+1)^{a-m}t_n^m/mn^m \\
\label{eq:imp1preqpoisform}
&&{} - x_n^{a-m+1}(t_n-1)^{a-m+1}/(m-1)n^{m-1}\quad(x_n>0).
\end{eqnarray}
An alternative improper prior is the Jeffreys prior, having
$\alpha=1/2$, $\beta\downarrow 0$, which is easily handled similarly.
\section{Negative Binomial model}
\label{sec:negbin}
Now we consider an alternative model, the Negative Binomial $X \sim
{\cal NB}(s;\Theta)$, having
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:negbin}
p(x \,|\, \theta) = \frac{(s+x-1)!}{x!(s-1)!}(1-\theta)^s\theta^x\quad(x=0,1,\ldots),
\end{equation}
with conjugate prior $\Theta \sim \beta(p,q)$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:beta}
\pi(\theta) = \frac{\Gamma(p+q)}{\Gamma(p)\Gamma(q)} \theta^{p-1}(1-\theta)^{q-1}.
\end{equation}
For propriety we require $p>0$, $q>0$.
The predictive density is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:negbinpred}
p(x) = \frac{\Gamma(p+q)}{\Gamma(p)\Gamma(q)} \frac{(s+x-1)!}{x!(s-1)!}
\frac{\Gamma(p+x)\Gamma(q+s)}{\Gamma(p+q+s+x)}.
\end{equation}
Then
\begin{displaymath}
\frac{p(x+1)}{p(x)} = \frac{(x+s)(x+p)}{(x+1)(x+p+q+s)},
\end{displaymath}
and so we have:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:negbinomform0}
S(0,P) &=& m^{-1}(sp)^m(p+q+s)^{-m}\\
\nonumber
S(x,P) &=&\{m(m-1)\}^{-1}\left[(m-1)(x+1)^{a-m}\{(x+s)(x+p)\}^{m}(x+p+q+s)^{-m} \right.\\
\label{eq:negbinomform}
&&{} - \left. mx^{a-m+1}\{(x+s-1)(x+p-1)\}^{m-1}(x+p+q+s-1)^{-m+1}\right].
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Multiple observations}
\label{sec:multnegbin}
Again, we can handle multiple observations either by restricting to
the sufficient statistic, or by cumulating the prequential score.
\subsubsection{Sufficient statistic}
\label{sec:suffnegbinom}
The sufficient statistic is $T_N = \sum_{i=1}^NX_i$, with distribution
${\cal NB}(Ns, \Theta)$. So the score computed this way is simply
obtained from \eqref{eq:negbinomform0} and \eqref{eq:negbinomform} on replacing $x$
by $t_N$ and $s$ by $Ns$. This gives
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:suffnegbinomform0}
S_N(\mbox{\boldmath $0$},P) &=& m^{-1}(Ns p)^m(p+q+Ns)^{-m}\\
\nonumber
S_N(\mbox{\boldmath $x$},P) &=&\{m(m-1)\}^{-1}\left[(m-1)(t_N+1)^{a-m}\{(t_N+Ns)(t_N+p)\}^{m}(t_N+p+q+Ns)^{-m} \right.\\
\label{eq:suffnegbinomform}
&&{} - \left. mt_N^{a-m+1}\{(t_N+Ns-1)(t_N+p-1)\}^{m-1}(t_N+p+q+Ns-1)^{-m+1}\right].
\end{eqnarray}
\subsubsection{Prequential}
\label{sec:preqnegbinom}
Now suppose we have already observed $\mbox{\boldmath $X$}^{n-1} = \mbox{\boldmath $x$}^{n-1}$. The
posterior distribution of $\Theta$ is
\begin{displaymath}
\Theta \,|\, \mbox{\boldmath $X$}^{n-1} = \mbox{\boldmath $x$}^{n-1} \sim \beta\left\{p+t_{n-1},q+(n-1)s\right\}.
\end{displaymath}
So the predictive density of $X_n$, given the previous
observations $\mbox{\boldmath $X$}^{n-1} = \mbox{\boldmath $x$}^{n-1}$, is obtained from
\eqref{eq:negbinomform0} and \eqref{eq:negbinomform} on replacing $x$ with $x_n$,
$p$ with $p+t_{n-1}$, and $q$ with $q+(n-1)s$. The
incremental contribution to the prequential score is thus given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:preqnegbinomform0}
S^*_n(0,P) &=& m^{-1}s^m (p+t_{n-1})^m(p+q+t_{n-1}+ns)^{-m}\\
\nonumber
S^*_n(x_n,P) &=&\{m(m-1)\}^{-1}\left[(m-1)(x_n+1)^{a-m}\left\{(x_n+s)(p+t_n)\right\}^m(p+q+t_n+ns)^{-m} \right.\\
\label{eq:preqnegbinomform}
&&{} - \left. mx_n^{a-m+1}\left\{(x_n+s-1)(p+t_n-1)\right\}^{m-1}(p+q+t_n+ns-1)^{-m+1}\right].
\end{eqnarray}
The total prequential score is obtained by summing this from $n=1$ to
$N$.
\subsection{Improper prior}
The usual improper prior is the formal limit with $p, q
\downarrow 0$. In this case \eqref{eq:suffnegbinomform0} and \eqref{eq:suffnegbinomform} become:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:impsuffnegbinomform0}
S_N(\mbox{\boldmath $0$},P) &=& 0\\
\nonumber
S(x,P) &=&\{m(m-1)\}^{-1}\left\{(m-1)(t_N+1)^{a-m}t_N^{m}\right.\\
\label{eq:impsuffnegbinomform}
&&{} - \left. mt_N^{a-m+1}(t_N-1)^{m-1}\right\}.
\end{eqnarray}
The score is well-defined even when all observations are $0$, in which
case the posterior is improper.
For the prequential version, we obtain, from \eqref{eq:preqnegbinomform0} and
\eqref{eq:preqnegbinomform}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:preqnegbinomform01}
S^*_n(0,P) &=& m^{-1}s^m t_{n-1}^m(t_{n-1}+ns)^{-m}\\
\nonumber
S^*_n(x_n,P) &=&\{m(m-1)\}^{-1}\left[(m-1)(x_n+1)^{a-m}(x_n+s)^mt_n^m(t_n+ns)^{-m} \right.\\
\nonumber
&&{} - \left. mx_n^{a-m+1}(x_n+s-1)^{m-1}(t_n-1)^{m-1}(t_n +ns -1)^{-m+1}\right].\\
\label{eq:preqnegbinomform1}\quad
\end{eqnarray}
The total prequential score is obtained by summing this from $n=1$ to
$N$.
Again, similar expressions can be found using the improper Jeffreys
prior, which has $p \downarrow 0$, $q = 1/2$.
\section{Simulations}
\label{sec:sim}
We generated observations from either the Poisson distribution
\eqref{eq:pois} with $k=1$, $\lambda = 10$, or the Negative Binomial
distribution \eqref{eq:negbin} with $s=81$, $\theta = 0.1$. These
both have variance $10$, the former having mean $10$, and the latter
mean $9$. We used, as the scoring rule, the special case of
\eqref{eq:sform} having $a=m=2$, namely
\begin{displaymath}
S(x,P) =
\frac 1 2 (x+1)^2\left\{\frac{p(x+1)}{p(x)}\right\}^2 -
x^2\left\{\frac{p(x)}{p(x-1)}\right\}\delta(x > 0).
\end{displaymath}
For each generating distribution we computed the excess of the
cumulative prequential score for the wrong model over that for the
correct model. These differences are shown, as a function of
increasing data, in Figures~\ref{fig:poissfig} and \ref{fig:nbfig}
respectively. Each figure displays 10 sample sequences generated from
the indicated distribution, as well as the average taken over a sample
Areof 100 sequences.
In each case we see a clear linear upward trend, supporting the
expectation of consistent model selection, although even with 1000
observations there is a non-negligible probability of a negative
value, giving a misleading preference for the wrong model.
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]
{Negbin-Poiss_10vs100_blackwhite.pdf}
\caption{Data from Poisson distribution ${\cal P}(10)$}
\label{fig:poissfig}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]
{Poiss-Negbin_10vs100_blackwhite.pdf}
\caption{Data from Negative Binomial distribution ${\cal NB}(81;0.1)$}
\label{fig:nbfig}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conc}
We have extended the Bayesian model selection methodology of
\citet{apd/mm:modsel} to apply to problems with discrete data. We have
conducted a simulation study to compare Poisson and Negative Binomial
distributions. The results suggest that the method will consistently
select the correct model as the number of data points increases.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
\noindent Philip Dawid's research was supported through an Emeritus
Fellowship from the Leverhulme Trust.
|
\subsection{Labeled Disconnected Queries}
\label{sec:labeled-disconnected-queries}
\newcommand{\problem{\#Bipartite-Edge-Cover}}{\problem{\#Bipartite-Edge-Cover}}
We establish our main intractability result on disconnected queries
by reduction
from the \problem{\#Bipartite-Edge-Cover}{} problem on \emph{undirected} graphs:
\begin{definition}
An undirected graph is \emph{bipartite} if its vertices can be partitioned
into two classes such that no edge connects two vertices of the same class. An
\emph{edge cover} of an undirected graph is a subset of its edges such that
every vertex is incident to at least one edge of the subset.
\problem{\#Bipartite-Edge-Cover}{} is the problem, given a bipartite undirected
graph, of counting its number of edge covers.
\end{definition}
This problem was shown in~\cite{khanna2011queries} to be intractable. The result
can also be proven using Valiant's
holographic reductions~\cite{valiant2008holographic} and the results of Cai, Lu,
and Xia~\cite{cai2012holographic}, as explained
in~\cite{cstheory_tyson_williams}: see Appendix~\ref{apx:holographic}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:bipec}
\cite{khanna2011queries,cai2012holographic,cstheory_tyson_williams}
The \problem{\#Bipartite-Edge-Cover}{} problem is \#P-complete.
\end{theorem}
We can then use this result to show intractability for the simplest forms of disconnected
query graphs
(\class{\bigsqcup1WP}\xspace) on the simplest forms of probabilistic instance graphs (\class{1WP}\xspace), in the
\emph{labeled} case:
\begin{proposition}
\label{prp:l-conj_of_1WP-1WP}
\phoml{\class{\bigsqcup1WP}\xspace}{\class{1WP}\xspace} is \#P-hard.
\end{proposition}
\begin{inlineproof}
We reduce from \problem{\#Bipartite-Edge-Cover}.
Let $\Gamma = (X \sqcup Y, E)$ be an input to \problem{\#Bipartite-Edge-Cover}, i.e., a
bipartite undirected graph with parts $X$ and~$Y$;
we write $X = (x_1,\ldots,x_{n_{\mathrm{l}}})$, $Y =
(y_1,\ldots,y_{n_{\mathrm{r}}})$, $E
= (e_1,\ldots,e_m)$, and for all $1 \leq i \leq m$ we write $e_i =
(x_{l_i}, y_{r_i})$, with $1 \leq l_i \leq n_{\mathrm{l}}$ and $1 \leq
r_i \leq n_{\mathrm{r}}$.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.35\linewidth}
\begin{tikzpicture}[yscale=0.75,xscale=0.65]
\node[fill = white] at (3,3.5) {$\Gamma=(X \sqcup Y, E)$:};
\node[fill = white, name=x1] at (4,5) {$x_1$ };
\node[fill = white, name=x2] at (4,2) {$x_2$ };
\node[fill = white, name=y1] at (8,5) {$y_1$ };
\node[fill = white, name=y2] at (8,3.5) {$y_2$ };
\node[fill = white, name=y3] at (8,2) {$y_3$ };
\draw[line width = 1pt] (x1) -- (y1) node[above, pos=.6] {$e_1$};
\draw[line width = 1pt] (x1) -- (y2) node[above=-1, pos=0.45] {$e_2$};
\draw[line width = 1pt] (x1) -- (y3) node[below=1, pos=0.7] {$e_3$};
\draw[line width = 1pt] (x2) -- (y1) node[below=1, pos=0.3] {$e_4$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.05\linewidth}
\begin{tikzpicture}[yscale=0.85,xscale=0.65]
\node[fill = white] at (13,3.5) {$G$:};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.28\linewidth}
\begin{tikzpicture}[yscale=0.85,xscale=0.65]
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (14,5.5) -- (15,5.5) node[midway, above] {$C$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (15,5.5) -- (16,5.5) node[midway, above] {$L$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (16,5.5) -- (17,5.5) node[midway, above] {$V$};
\node[fill = white] at (18,5.5) {$(x_1)$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (14,4.5) -- (15,4.5) node[midway, above] {$C$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (15,4.5) -- (16,4.5) node[midway, above] {$L$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (16,4.5) -- (17,4.5) node[midway, above] {$L$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (17,4.5) -- (18,4.5) node[midway, above] {$V$};
\node[fill = white] at (19,4.5) {$(x_2)$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.28\linewidth}
\begin{tikzpicture}[yscale=0.85,xscale=0.65]
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (14,3.5) -- (15,3.5) node[midway, above] {$V$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (15,3.5) -- (16,3.5) node[midway, above] {$R$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (16,3.5) -- (17,3.5) node[midway, above] {$C$};
\node[fill = white] at (18,3.5) {$(y_1)$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (14,2.5) -- (15,2.5) node[midway, above] {$V$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (15,2.5) -- (16,2.5) node[midway, above] {$R$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (16,2.5) -- (17,2.5) node[midway, above] {$R$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (17,2.5) -- (18,2.5) node[midway, above] {$C$};
\node[fill = white] at (19,2.5) {$(y_2)$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (14,1.5) -- (15,1.5) node[midway, above] {$V$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (15,1.5) -- (16,1.5) node[midway, above] {$R$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (16,1.5) -- (17,1.5) node[midway, above] {$R$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (17,1.5) -- (18,1.5) node[midway, above] {$R$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (18,1.5) -- (19,1.5) node[midway, above] {$C$};
\node[fill = white] at (20,1.5) {$(y_3)$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{minipage}
\bigskip
\begin{tikzpicture}[yscale=0.85,xscale=0.65]
\node[fill = white] at (-1,0) {$H$:};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (0,0) -- (1,0) node[midway, above] {$C$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (1,0) -- (2,0) node[midway, above] {$L$};
\draw[dashed, line width = 1pt, ->] (2,0) -- (3,0) node[midway, above] {$V$};
\node[fill = white] at (2.5,-0.5) {$(e_1)$ };
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (3,0) -- (4,0) node[midway, above] {$R$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (4,0) -- (5,0) node[midway, above] {$C$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (5,0) -- (6,0) node[midway, above] {$L$};
\draw[dashed, line width = 1pt, ->] (6,0) -- (7,0) node[midway, above] {$V$};
\node[fill = white] at (6.5,-0.5) {$(e_2)$ };
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (7,0) -- (8,0) node[midway, above] {$R$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (8,0) -- (9,0) node[midway, above] {$R$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (9,0) -- (10,0) node[midway, above] {$C$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (10,0) -- (11,0) node[midway, above] {$L$};
\draw[dashed, line width = 1pt, ->] (11,0) -- (12,0) node[midway, above] {$V$};
\node[fill = white] at (11.5,-0.5) {$(e_3)$ };
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (12,0) -- (13,0) node[midway, above] {$R$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (13,0) -- (14,0) node[midway, above] {$R$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (14,0) -- (15,0) node[midway, above] {$R$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (15,0) -- (16,0) node[midway, above] {$C$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (16,0) -- (17,0) node[midway, above] {$L$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (17,0) -- (18,0) node[midway, above] {$L$};
\draw[dashed, line width = 1pt, ->] (18,0) -- (19,0) node[midway, above] {$V$};
\node[fill = white] at (18.5,-0.5) {$(e_4)$ };
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (19,0) -- (20,0) node[midway, above] {$R$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (20,0) -- (21,0) node[midway, above] {$C$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\centering
\caption{Illustration of the proof of Proposition~\ref{prp:l-conj_of_1WP-1WP},
for the bipartite graph $\Gamma$. Dashed edges have
probability $\frac{1}{2}$. We show (in parentheses) the edge of $\Gamma$ coded by each $V$-labeled
edge in the instance graph $H$, and the vertex of $\Gamma$ coded by each \class{1WP}\xspace{} component of the query
graph $G$.}
\label{fig:reduction_l-conj_of_1WP-1WP}
\end{figure*}
We first construct in PTIME the \class{1WP}\xspace{} probabilistic graph $(H,\pi)$:
see Figure~\ref{fig:reduction_l-conj_of_1WP-1WP} for an
illustration of the construction. Specifically,
for $1 \leq j \leq m$, we construct the following \class{1WP}\xspace{}:
\[H_{e_j} \defeq {(\xrightarrow{L})^{l_j}} \xrightarrow{V}
(\xrightarrow{R})^{r_j}.\]
The graph $H$ is then defined as: \[\xrightarrow{C} H_{e_1}
\xrightarrow{C} H_{e_2} \xrightarrow{C} \cdots \xrightarrow{C} H_{e_m} \xrightarrow{C}.\]
We define $\pi$ as follows: edges labeled by $V$ have probability
$\frac{1}{2}$ (intuitively coding whether an edge is part of the
candidate cover), all others have probability~$1$.
We then construct the query graph $G \in$ \class{\bigsqcup1WP}\xspace, coding the edge covering constraints.
For every $1 \leq i \leq n_{\mathrm{l}}$, the graph $G$ contains the \class{1WP}\xspace{} component
$\xrightarrow{C} (\xrightarrow{L})^i \xrightarrow{V}$, and
for every $1 \leq i \leq n_{\mathrm{r}}$, the graph $G$ contains the \class{1WP}\xspace{} component $\xrightarrow{V} (\xrightarrow{R})^i \xrightarrow{C}$.
It is clear that $H$ is in \class{1WP}\xspace{}, $G$ is in
\class{\bigsqcup1WP}\xspace{} and that both can be constructed in PTIME from $\Gamma$.
We now show that $\Pr(G\leadsto H)$ is exactly the
number of edge covers of $\Gamma$ divided by $2^m$, so that the
computation of the latter reduces in PTIME to the
computation of the former, concluding the proof.
To see why, we define a bijection between the subsets of edges of
$\Gamma$, seen as valuations $\nu: E \to \{0,1\}$, to the possible
worlds $H'$
of $H$ of non-zero probability. We do so in the expected way: keep
the one $V$-edge $\xrightarrow{V}$ of $H_{e_i}$ iff $\nu(e_i)=1$.
We now show that there is a homomorphism
from $G$ to $H'$ if and only if $\nu$ is an edge cover of $\Gamma$.
As the
number of $H'$'s such that there is a homomorphism from $G$ to $H'$ is exactly
$\Pr(G\hom H)\times 2^m$, this will allow us to conclude.
Indeed, if there is a homomorphism $h$ from $G$ to $H'$, then,
considering the \class{1WP}\xspace{} component in $G$ that codes the
constraint on $x_i$ (resp., on $y_i$),
its image must be of the form $\xrightarrow{C}
(\xrightarrow{L})^i \xrightarrow{V}$ (resp., $\xrightarrow{V} (\xrightarrow{R})^i \xrightarrow{C}$),
but then by construction of $H$
the $V$-fact must correspond to an edge $e$ such that $x_i$
(resp., $y_i$) is adjacent to $e$,
so that we have $\nu(e)=1$ and so $x_i$ (resp., $y_i$) is covered.
As this is true for each \class{1WP}\xspace{} component, all the vertices are covered and $\nu$ is indeed an edge cover of $\Gamma$.
Conversely, suppose that $\nu$ is an edge cover of $\Gamma$, then for
every vertex $x_i$ (resp., $y_i$) we know that there exists $1 \leq j \leq m$ such that $\nu(e_j)=1$
and $l_j = i$ (resp., $r_j = i$),
and we can use the $V$-fact corresponding to $e_j$ and the
surrounding facts to build the homomorphism as above from each
component of $G$ to~$H'$.
\end{inlineproof}
The proof of Proposition~\ref{prp:l-conj_of_1WP-1WP} crucially requires
multiple labels in the signature. Indeed, it is easy to see that, in the unlabeled
setting, a query graph in \class{\bigsqcup1WP}\xspace{} (or even in \class{\bigsqcup DWT}\xspace) is equivalent to
the longest path within the graph, and we will show further
(Proposition~\ref{prp:u-DWT-PT})
that \phomu{\class{1WP}\xspace}{\class{1WP}\xspace} (indeed, even \phomu{\class{\bigsqcup DWT}\xspace}{\class{PT}\xspace}) is PTIME.
\subsection{Unlabeled Disconnected Queries}
\label{sec:disconnected-CQs-unlabeled}
In light of this intractability result, let us now consider the unlabeled setting. We show in
Table~\ref{tab:unlabeled-conj_of} where the tractability frontier
lies. First, introducing two-wayness in both query and instance graphs
is enough to obtain an analogue of the intractability of
Proposition~\ref{prp:l-conj_of_1WP-1WP}:
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Tractability of \phomU{} for disconnected queries
(Section~\ref{sec:disconnected-CQs-unlabeled}). Results
also hold when instances are unions of the indicated classes.}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.63\linewidth}
\begin{tabular}{c|ccccc}
$\downarrow$$G$\qquad $H$$\rightarrow$ & \class{1WP}\xspace & \class{2WP}\xspace & \class{DWT}\xspace & \class{PT}\xspace & \class{Connected}\xspace \\
\hline
\class{\bigsqcup1WP}\xspace & & & & \vlineright{}&
\cellcolor{black!20!white}\ref{prp:unlabeled_1wp_on_connected}\\
\hhline{~|~|-|~|-|>{\arrayrulecolor{black!20!white}}-}\arrayrulecolor{black}
\class{\bigsqcup2WP}\xspace & \vlineright{} &
\vlineright{\cellcolor{black!20!white}\ref{prp:u-conj_of_2WP-2WP}}&
\vlineright{}&
\cellcolor{black!20!white} & \cellcolor{black!20!white} \\
\hhline{~|~|-|~|-|>{\arrayrulecolor{black!20!white}}-}\arrayrulecolor{black}
\class{\bigsqcup DWT}\xspace & & & & \vlineright{\ref{prp:u-DWT-PT}} & \cellcolor{black!20!white} \\
\hhline{~|~|-|~|-|>{\arrayrulecolor{black!20!white}}-}\arrayrulecolor{black}
\class{\bigsqcup PT}\xspace & \vlineright{}&
\vlineright{\cellcolor{black!20!white}}&
\vlineright{}&
\cellcolor{black!20!white} & \cellcolor{black!20!white} \\
\class{All}\xspace & \vlineright{} & \vlineright{\cellcolor{black!20!white}} &
\vlineright{\ref{prp:u-all-DWT}}&
\cellcolor{black!20!white} & \cellcolor{black!20!white}\\
\hhline{~|->{\arrayrulecolor{black!20!white}}->{\arrayrulecolor{black}}|-|>{\arrayrulecolor{black!20!white}}--}
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:unlabeled-conj_of}
\tabexplanation
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
\begin{proposition}
\label{prp:u-conj_of_2WP-2WP}
\phomu{\class{\bigsqcup2WP}\xspace}{\class{2WP}\xspace} is \#P-hard.
\end{proposition}
\begin{inlineproof}
We reduce, again, from the \#P-hard problem \problem{\#Bipartite-Edge-Cover}.
The idea of the reduction is similar to that used in the proof of Proposition~\ref{prp:l-conj_of_1WP-1WP}, but we face the additional difficulty of not being allowed to use labels.
Fortunately, we can use two-wayness to simulate them.
Let $\Gamma=(X\sqcup Y,E)$ be an input of \problem{\#Bipartite-Edge-Cover}.
Consider the reduction from $\Gamma$ used in the proof of
Proposition~\ref{prp:l-conj_of_1WP-1WP} and the
\class{1WP}\xspace{} probabilistic graph $(H,\pi)$ and the
\class{\bigsqcup1WP}\xspace{} query graph $G$ that were constructed.
We construct from $H$ and $G$ the unlabeled probabilistic graph~$H'$ and
unlabeled \class{\bigsqcup2WP}\xspace{} query graph~$G'$ as follows:
\smallskip
\begin{itemize}
\item replace each $L$- or $R$-labeled edge $a
\xrightarrow{L} b$ or $a \xrightarrow{R} b$
in $H$ and $G$ by $3$ edges $a \rightarrow \rightarrow \leftarrow b$;
\item replace each $C$-labeled edge $a \xrightarrow{C} b$ of $H$ and $G$ by $3$ edges $a \leftarrow \leftarrow \leftarrow b$;
\item replace each $V$-labeled edge $a \xrightarrow{V} b$
of $H$ and $G$ by $6$ edges $a \rightarrow \rightarrow
\rightarrow \rightarrow \rightarrow \leftarrow b$.
\end{itemize}
\smallskip
All edges of $H'$ have probability $1$, except the first edge
of each sequence of 6 edges that replaced a \mbox{$V$-labeled
edge},
which has probability $\frac{1}{2}$.
Consider a \class{1WP}\xspace{} component of $G$ that codes the constraint on a
vertex from $Y$, e.g $\xrightarrow{V} (\xrightarrow{R})^i
\xrightarrow{C}$, which was rewritten in~$G'$ into
$\rightarrow \rightarrow \rightarrow \rightarrow \rightarrow \leftarrow
{(\rightarrow \rightarrow \leftarrow)^{i}}
\leftarrow \leftarrow \leftarrow$. A
homomorphism from this component into a possible world~$J'$ of~$H'$ must
actually map to a rewriting of a $\xrightarrow{V}
(\xrightarrow{R})^i \xrightarrow{C}$ sequence in $H'$: indeed,
the key observation is that the first $5$ $\rightarrow$ edges can only
be matched to $5$ consecutive $\rightarrow$ in $J'$, which only
exist as the first 5 edges of a sequence of 6 edges that replaced
a $V$-labeled fact in $H$. There is no choice left to match the
subsequent edges without failing. A similar observation holds for
components coding the constraints on vertices from~$X$ ($\xrightarrow{C}
(\xrightarrow{L})^i \xrightarrow{V}$). Hence, we can show correctness of
the reduction using the same argument as before.
\end{inlineproof}
Allowing two-wayness in both the query and the instance graphs thus allows
us to simulate labels, so that \phomU{} is intractable.
We will study in Section~\ref{sec:u-connected_CQs} what happens
for query graph classes without
two-wayness (i.e., \class{1WP}\xspace{}, \class{DWT}\xspace{}, and unions thereof); so let us now
consider the case of instance graph classes where two-wayness is
forbidden, i.e., is in \class{\bigsqcup DWT}\xspace.
As we will show, \phomU{} of
\emph{arbitrary} query graphs on such \class{\bigsqcup DWT}\xspace{} instance graphs is tractable.
To this end, we need to introduce \emph{level mappings} of acyclic directed
graphs (DAGs):
\begin{definition}
\label{def:levelmap}
A \emph{level mapping} of a DAG~$G$ is
a mapping $\mu$ from the vertices of~$G$ to~$\mathbb{Z}$ such that for each
directed edge $u \rightarrow v$ of~$G$ we have $\mu(v) = \mu(u) - 1$.
We call $G$ a \emph{graded DAG} if it has a level mapping.
\end{definition}
An example of graded DAG together with a level mapping is given in Figure~\ref{fig:u-all-DWT}.
It is easy to see (and shown in Proposition~1
of~\cite{odagiri2014greatest})
that a DAG $G$ is graded
iff there are no two vertices $u$, $v$ and two directed paths $\chi$,
$\chi'$ in $G$ from $u$ to $v$ such that $\chi$ and $\chi'$ have
different lengths (in the terminology of~\cite{odagiri2014greatest},
$G$ does not have a \emph{jumping edge}).
Graded DAGs are related to the classical notion of graded ordered
set~\cite{schroder2016graded}, and the level mapping function
has been called in the literature a \emph{depth
function}~\cite{odagiri2014greatest}, a \emph{grading
function}~\cite{schroder2016graded}, a \emph{set of
levels}~\cite{schroder2016graded}, or a \emph{rank
function}~\cite{stanley1997enumerative}.
To obtain such a level mapping, we can proceed by picking one vertex
in each connected component of~$G$,
mapping each of these vertices to level~0, and then
exploring $G$ by a breadth-first traversal and assigning the level of each
vertex according to the level of the vertex used to reach it, visiting
all edges and defining the image of each vertex. It is clear that this
process yields a level mapping of~$G$ unless it tries to assign two
different levels to the same vertex $v$, which cannot happen if there is no
jumping edge \cite[Proposition~1]{odagiri2014greatest}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[yscale=.7,xscale=.97]
\node[fill = white, name = 02] at (0,2) {};
\node[fill = white, name = 22] at (2,2) {};
\node[fill = white, name = 33] at (3,3) {};
\node[fill = white, name = 73] at (7,3) {};
\node[fill = white, name = 2] at (-0.2,2) {$2$};
\draw [dashed] (0,0) node[left] {$0$} -- (8,0);
\draw [dashed] (0,1) node[left] {$1$} -- (8,1);
\draw [dashed] (02) -- (22);
\draw [dashed] (22) -- (8,2);
\draw [dashed] (0,3) node[left] {$3$} -- (33);
\draw [dashed] (33) -- (73);
\draw [dashed] (73) -- (8,3);
\draw [dashed] (0,4) node[left] {$4$} -- (8,4);
\draw [dashed] (0,5) node[left] {$5$} -- (8,5);
\node[fill = white, name = 11] at (1,1) { };
\node[fill = white, name = 20] at (2,0) { };
\node[fill = white, name = 31] at (3,1) { };
\node[fill = white, name = u1] at (2,4) { };
\node[fill = white, name = u2] at (4,2) { };
\node[fill = white, name = 51] at (5,1) { };
\node[fill = white, name = 62] at (6,2) { };
\node[fill = white, name = 71] at (7,1) { };
\node[fill = white, name = v2] at (8,2) { };
\node[fill = white, name = 64] at (6,4) { };
\node[fill = white, name = v1] at (8,4) { };
\node[fill = white, name = 75] at (7,5) { };
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (02) -- (11);
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (11) -- (20);
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (22) -- (11);
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (22) -- (31);
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (33) -- (22);
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (u1) -- (33);
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (33) -- (u2);
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (u2) -- (51);
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (62) -- (51);
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (62) -- (71);
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (v2) -- (71);
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (73) -- (62);
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (73) -- (v2);
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (64) -- (73);
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (v1) -- (73);
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (75) -- (64);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{A DAG with
a level mapping (dashed lines), see
Definition~\ref{def:levelmap}.}
\label{fig:u-all-DWT}
\end{figure}
We will now use the notion of graded DAG to show:
\begin{propositionrep}
\label{prp:u-all-DWT}
\phomu{\class{All}\xspace}{\class{\bigsqcup DWT}\xspace} is PTIME.
\end{propositionrep}
\begin{proofsketch}
We only give the idea when the query graph is connected and the graph
instance $H$ is a \class{DWT}\xspace{} (see Appendix for full proof).
As we pointed out already, if the query graph $G$ is not a graded DAG,
then it has a cycle or
a pair of vertices joined by two directed paths of different lengths:
then, from the structure of the \class{DWT}\xspace instance graph, this clearly implies that $\Pr(G
\leadsto H)=0$. So it suffices to study the case when $G$ is a graded
DAG.
As we explained earlier, we can then compute in PTIME a level mapping
$\mu$ of~$G$.
It is clear that, as $G$ is connected, the level
mapping~$\mu$ is uniquely defined up to an additive constant. Hence, we shift $\mu$ so
that the smallest value of its image is~$0$, and we then call the \emph{difference of
levels} of~$G$ the largest value~$m$ in the image of~$\mu$.
Note that
$m$ is \emph{not} the maximal length
from a root of $G$ to a leaf of $G$
(see, e.g., Figure~\ref{fig:u-all-DWT}).
We then claim that, on any possible world $H'$ of
the \class{DWT}\xspace{} instance graph
$H$, the query graph $G$ is
in fact equivalent to the \class{1WP}\xspace query graph $\rightarrow^m$ of length~$m$. This allows us
to conclude using Proposition~\ref{prp:u-DWT-PT}.
One direction is easy to observe, because
$\mu$
directly gives
a homomorphism from~$G$
to~$\rightarrow^m$. For the converse, suppose that a homomorphism $h$ from $G$ to
$H'$ exists. Because $G$ is connected and $H'$ is in \class{\bigsqcup DWT}\xspace, the image of $h$ is actually a \class{DWT}\xspace, call it $T$. Now it is easy to see that the image of a node that has level $m-i$ in
$G$ has depth $i$ in $T$, so that $T$ (and so $H'$) contains the \class{1WP}\xspace $\rightarrow^m$.
\end{proofsketch}
\begin{proof}
Let $G$ be an arbitrary unlabeled graph and $(H,\pi)$ a probabilistic
graph with $H\in \class{\bigsqcup DWT}\xspace$. We
observe that if $G$ contains a directed cycle, then it cannot have a
homomorphism to a subgraph of~$H$ (which is necessarily acyclic), so
$\Pr(G\hom H)=0$. Hence, it suffices to study the case
where the query graph $G$ is a DAG.
Likewise, if there are two vertices $u, v$ of~$G$ and directed paths
$\chi, \chi'$ in $G$ from $u$ to~$v$ such that $\chi$ and~$\chi'$ have
different lengths, then again $G$ cannot have a homomorphism to a
subgraph of~$H$:
indeed, any subgraph of $H$ is a directed forest and there is at most
one directed path between each pair of nodes. So we can assume without
loss of generality that there is no such pattern in~$G$, and $G$
is therefore graded.
Letting $\mu$ be a level mapping of $G$, we call the
\emph{difference of levels} of $\mu$ the difference
between the largest and smallest value of its image; the
\emph{difference of levels} of~$G$ itself is the minimum
difference of levels of a
level mapping of~$G$. As the level mappings of~$G$ only differ in the
constant value that they add to all vertices of each connected
component, the difference of levels can clearly be computed in PTIME by shifting each connected
component so that its minimal level is zero, and computing the
difference; we call the result of the shifting the \emph{minimal level
mapping} of~$G$.
\medskip
Letting $m$ be the difference of levels of~$G$, we now make the
following claim: \emph{in any subgraph $H'$ of~$H$, there is a
homomorphism from $G$ to $H'$ if and only if $H'$ has a directed path of
length $m$}.
This claim implies the result. Indeed, we can first check in PTIME if
$G$ has no cycles and has no pairs of paths of different lengths between
two endpoints, and return 0 if the conditions are violated. We can then
compute in PTIME the difference of levels $m$ of $G$ using the
observations above.
Now, on any subgraph of~$H$, the query $G$ is equivalent to
the \class{1WP}\xspace{}
graph $\rightarrow^m$, so our result follows from
Proposition~\ref{prp:u-DWT-PT}.
\medskip
All that remains is to prove the claim.
We first note that it suffices
to show the claim under the assumption that $G$ is connected. Indeed, if
the claim is true for all connected $G$, then the claim is implied for
arbitrary $G$ by considering each of its connected components, applying
the claim, and observing that $G$ has a suitable homomorphism to $H'$
iff each one of its connected components does, i.e., iff $H'$ has a
directed path whose length is the maximal difference of levels of a
connected component of~$G$, and this is precisely the difference of
levels $m$ of~$G$. Hence, we now prove the claim for connected $G$.
We start with the backwards direction of the claim.
It is easily seen that there is a
homomorphism $h'$ from $G$ to the \class{1WP}\xspace{} graph~$\rightarrow^m$. Indeed, we define $h'$
according to the minimal level mapping $\mu$ of~$G$: we set $h'$ to map
all the vertices whose level is $i$ to the $i$-th vertex
of~$\rightarrow^m$. From the
existence of~$h'$, we know that, whenever there is a homomorphism~$h$
from $\rightarrow^m$ to~$H'$, then $h \circ h'$ is a homomorphism from
$G$ to~$H'$, which shows the backwards implication.
For the forward direction of the claim, suppose that there exists a homomorphism $h$ from $G$ to $H'$, and let
$m$ be the difference of levels of $G$.
Because $G$ is connected and $H'$ is in \class{\bigsqcup DWT}\xspace, the image of $h$ is actually a \class{DWT}\xspace, call it $T$. Now it is easy to see that the image of a node that has level $m-i$ in
$G$ has depth $i$ in $T$, so that $T$ (and so $H'$) contains the \class{1WP}\xspace $\rightarrow^m$.
This finishes the proof of the converse and thus the proof of Proposition~\ref{prp:u-all-DWT}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Disconnected Instances}
\label{sec:disconnected-instances}
We conclude our study of the disconnected case with
the case of disconnected \emph{instance graphs}, which we show to be less
interesting than the disconnected \emph{query graphs} that we studied so far.
Specifically, when the query is \emph{connected}, \phom{}
on arbitrary instances can reduce in PTIME to
\phom{} of
the same queries on a corresponding class of connected instances:
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:disconnected-instances}
For any class of graphs $\mathcal{H}$, let $\mathcal{H}'$ be the class of
connected components of graphs in~$\mathcal{H}$.
Then for any class of \emph{connected} graphs $\mathcal{G}$, \phoml{\mathcal{G}}{\mathcal{H}} reduces in
PTIME to \phoml{\mathcal{G}}{\mathcal{H}'},
and \phomu{\mathcal{G}}{\mathcal{H}} reduces in PTIME to
\phomu{\mathcal{G}}{\mathcal{H}'}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{inlineproof}
Let $G \in \mathcal{G}$, $H \in \mathcal{H}$, and write $H = {H'_1 \sqcup \ldots
\sqcup H'_n}$: we have
$H'_i \in \mathcal{H}'$ for all $1 \leq i \leq n$.
Let $\pi$ be a probability
distribution over $H$:
the independence assumption ensures that the
edges of any $H'_i$ are pairwise independent from those of any~$H'_j$ for $i
\neq j$.
Now, as $G$ is connected, any image of a homomorphism from $G$ to~$H$ must actually
be included in some~$H'_i$.
Thus, the computation of $\Pr(G\hom H)$
reduces to that of the $\Pr(G\hom H'_i)$ for $1 \leq i \leq n$, as follows:
\[\Pr(G\hom H)=1 - \prod_{1 \leq i \leq n} (1 -
\Pr(G\hom H'_i)). \qedhere \]
\end{inlineproof}
We last discuss the case when both the query and instance graphs are
disconnected.
Let us consider the results of Table~\ref{tab:unlabeled-conj_of} for connected
instance graphs. Clearly, any hardness results of a connected class
carries over to the corresponding disconnected class. Conversely, we have shown in
Proposition~\ref{prp:u-all-DWT} that \phomu{\class{All}\xspace}{\class{\bigsqcup DWT}\xspace} is PTIME; this implies
that
all tractable cases in Table~\ref{tab:unlabeled-conj_of} also hold
for
unions of the indicated instance classes, except \phomu{\class{\bigsqcup1WP}\xspace}{\class{\bigsqcup PT}\xspace} and \phomu{\class{\bigsqcup DWT}\xspace}{\class{\bigsqcup PT}\xspace}.
But we have noted
at the end of Section~\ref{sec:labeled-disconnected-queries}
that, in the unlabeled setting, \class{\bigsqcup1WP}\xspace{} or \class{\bigsqcup DWT}\xspace query graphs are equivalent to
\class{1WP}\xspace{} query graphs: thus, Lemma~\ref{lem:disconnected-instances},
together with tractability of \phomu{\class{1WP}\xspace}{\class{PT}\xspace}, implies
\phomu{\class{\bigsqcup1WP}\xspace}{\class{\bigsqcup PT}\xspace} and \phomu{\class{\bigsqcup DWT}\xspace}{\class{\bigsqcup PT}\xspace} are both in PTIME.
Hence, the results of
Table~\ref{tab:unlabeled-conj_of} also hold when instances are unions of the
indicated classes.
We have thus completed our study of
$\phomL$ and $\phomU$ for
disconnected instances and/or disconnected
queries, We accordingly focus on connected queries and instances in the next two
sections.
\subsection{Hardness Results}
We recall that, if we allow \emph{arbitrary}
connected unlabeled probabilistic instance graphs (or even just $4$-partite graphs), then computing the probability that there exists
a path of length $2$ is already \#P-hard:
this is shown in~\cite{suciu2011probabilistic},
and we will state this result in our
context as Proposition~\ref{prp:unlabeled_1wp_on_connected} in the next section.
Hence, if we want to obtain PTIME complexity for \phom{}, we need to restrict the class of instances.
We can start by restricting the instances to be polytrees, but as we show, this
does not suffice to ensure tractability:
\begin{propositionrep}
\label{prp:l-1WP-PT}
\phoml{\class{1WP}\xspace}{\class{PT}\xspace} is \#P-hard.
\end{propositionrep}
To show this result, we will reduce from the problem of computing the
probability of a Boolean formula, which we now define:
\begin{definition}
\label{def:booleanproba}
Given a set of variables $\mathcal{X}$ and a \emph{probability assignment} $\pi$
mapping each variable $X$ in~$\mathcal{X}$ to a rational probability $\pi(X) \in [0, 1]$, we define
the \emph{probability} $\pi(\nu)$ of a valuation~$\nu: \mathcal{X} \to \{0,1\}$ as
\[\pi(\nu) \colonequals \left(\prod_{X \in \mathcal{X},~\nu(X)=1}
\pi(X)\right) \left(
\prod_{X \in \mathcal{X},~\nu(X)=0} (1-\pi(X))\right).\]
The \emph{Boolean probability computation problem} is defined as follows:
given a Boolean formula $\phi$ on variables $\mathcal{X}$ and a probability
assignment $\pi$ on~$\mathcal{X}$,
compute the total probability of the valuations that satisfy~$\phi$, i.e.,
$\Pr(\phi, \pi) = \sum_{\nu \text{~satisfies~} \phi} \pi(\nu)$.
\end{definition}
This problem is known to be \#P-hard, even under severe restrictions on the
formula $\phi$. We will use the \problem{\#PP2DNF}{} formulation of the above problem, which
is \#P-hard~\cite{provan1983complexity,suciu2011probabilistic}:
\begin{definition}
\label{def:pp2dnf}
A \emph{positive DNF}
is a Boolean formula~$\phi$ of the form
\[\phi = \bigvee_{1 \leq i \leq m} \left( \bigwedge_{1 \leq j \leq n_i}
X_{i,j} \right),\] i.e., it is
a disjunction of
(conjunctive) \emph{clauses} that are conjunctions of variables of~$\mathcal{X}$.
We assume that each variable of~$\mathcal{X}$ occurs in~$\phi$, as we can
eliminate the others without loss of generality.
A \emph{positive partitioned 2-DNF} (PP2DNF) is intuitively a positive
DNF $\phi$ on a
partitioned set of variables where each clause contains one variable from
each partition. Formally, the variables of~$\phi$ are $\mathcal{X} \sqcup
\mathcal{Y}$, where we write
$\mathcal{X} =
\{X_1,\ldots,\allowbreak X_{n_1}\}$ and $\mathcal{Y} = {\{Y_1,\ldots,
\allowbreak Y_{n_2}\}}$,
and
$\phi$ is of the form $\bigvee_{j=1 \ldots m} (X_{x_j} \land Y_{y_j})$
with $1 \leq x_j \leq n_1$ and $1 \leq y_j \leq n_2$ for $1\leq j \leq
m$.
The \problem{\#PP2DNF}{} problem is the Boolean probability computation problem
when we impose
that $\pi$ maps every variable to $1/2$, and
that $\phi$ is a PP2DNF.
\end{definition}
We show Proposition~\ref{prp:l-1WP-PT}
by reducing from \problem{\#PP2DNF}{}:
\begin{proofsketch}
The full proof is in appendix; see Figure~\ref{fig:l-1WP-PT} for an
illustration. From the PP2DNF formula $\phi$, we construct
a $\class{PT}\xspace$ probabilistic instance where each branch
starting at the root describes a variable of the formula. The first edge is
probabilistic and represents the choice of valuation. The edges are oriented
upwards or downwards depending on whether the variable belongs to~$\mathcal{X}$ or
to~$\mathcal{Y}$. We add a special gadget at different depths of the branch
to code the index of each of the clauses where the variable occurs.
We code satisfaction of the formula by a query that tests for a path of a
specific length that starts and ends with the gadget. The query has a match
exactly on possible worlds where we have set two variables to true such that
the sum of the depths of the gadgets corresponds to the query length: this
happens iff the two variables occur in the same clause.
\end{proofsketch}
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}[xscale=.85,yscale=1]
\node[fill = white, name = H] at (-1.15,5) {$H$:};
\node[fill = white, name = R] at (3.5,5) {$R$};
\node[fill = white, name = X1] at (0.5,3) {$X_1$};
\node[fill = white, name = X2] at (3,3) {$X_2$};
\node[fill = white, name = Y1] at (4,3) {$Y_1$};
\node[fill = white, name = Y2] at (6.5,3) {$Y_2$};
\node[fill = white, name = X13] at (0.5,1.5) {$X_{1,3}$};
\node[fill = white, name = X12] at (0.5,0) {$X_{1,2}$};
\node[fill = white, name = X11] at (0.5,-1.5) {$X_{1,1}$};
\node[fill = white, name = X23] at (3,1.5) {$X_{2,3}$};
\node[fill = white, name = X22] at (3,0) {$X_{2,2}$};
\node[fill = white, name = X21] at (3,-1.5) {$X_{2,1}$};
\node[fill = white, name = Y11] at (4,1.5) {$Y_{1,1}$};
\node[fill = white, name = Y12] at (4,0) {$Y_{1,2}$};
\node[fill = white, name = Y13] at (4,-1.5) {$Y_{1,3}$};
\node[fill = white, name = Y21] at (6.5,1.5) {$Y_{2,1}$};
\node[fill = white, name = Y22] at (6.5,0) {$Y_{2,2}$};
\node[fill = white, name = Y23] at (6.5,-1.5) {$Y_{2,3}$};
\node[fill = white, name = A11] at (-1,-2.5) {$A_{1,1}$};
\node[fill = white, name = A12] at (-1,-1) {$A_{1,2}$};
\node[fill = white, name = A23] at (1.5,0.5) {$A_{2,3}$};
\node[fill = white, name = B12] at (5.5,-1) {$B_{1,2}$};
\node[fill = white, name = B21] at (8,0.5) {$B_{2,1}$};
\node[fill = white, name = B23] at (8,-2.5) {$B_{2,3}$};
\draw[dashed, line width = 1pt, ->] (X1) -- (R) node[midway, left=2pt, above = 2pt, fill=white] {$S$};
\draw[dashed, line width = 1pt, ->] (X2) -- (R) node[midway, left=2pt, fill=white] {$S$};
\draw[dashed, line width = 1pt, ->] (R) -- (Y1) node[midway, right=2pt, fill=white] {$S$};
\draw[dashed, line width = 1pt, ->] (R) -- (Y2) node[midway, right=2pt, above = 2pt, fill=white] {$S$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, <-] (X1) -- (X13) node[midway, left=1pt, fill=white] {$S$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, <-] (X13) -- (X12) node[midway, left=1pt, fill=white] {$S$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, <-] (X12) -- (X11) node[midway, left=1pt, fill=white] {$S$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, <-] (X2) -- (X23) node[midway, left=1pt, fill=white] {$S$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, <-] (X23) -- (X22) node[midway,left=1pt, fill=white] {$S$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, <-] (X22) -- (X21) node[midway,left=1pt, fill=white] {$S$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (Y1) -- (Y11) node[midway, right=1pt, fill=white] {$S$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (Y11) -- (Y12) node[midway, right=1pt, fill=white] {$S$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (Y12) -- (Y13) node[midway, right=1pt, fill=white] {$S$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (Y2) -- (Y21) node[midway, right=1pt, fill=white] {$S$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (Y21) -- (Y22) node[midway, right=1pt, fill=white] {$S$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (Y22) -- (Y23) node[midway, right=1pt, fill=white] {$S$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (A11) -- (X11) node[midway, left=6pt, above = 1pt, fill=white] {$T$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (A12) -- (X12) node[midway, left=6pt, above = 1pt, fill=white] {$T$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (A23) -- (X23) node[midway, left=6pt, above = 1pt, fill=white] {$T$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (Y12) -- (B12) node[midway, right=6pt, above = 1pt, fill=white] {$T$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (Y21) -- (B21) node[midway, right=6pt, above = 1pt, fill=white] {$T$};
\draw[line width = 1pt, ->] (Y23) -- (B23) node[midway, right=6pt, above = 1pt, fill=white] {$T$};
\node[fill = white, name = G] at (3.5,-3.4) {$G$:
$\xrightarrow{\,~T\,~}\xrightarrow{\,~S\,~}\xrightarrow{\,~S\,~}\xrightarrow{\,~S\,~}\xrightarrow{\,~S\,~}\xrightarrow{\,~S\,~}\xrightarrow{\,~S\,~}\xrightarrow{\,~T\,~} $};
\end{tikzpicture}
\centering
\caption{Illustration of the proof of Proposition~\ref{def:pp2dnf} for the
PP2DNF formula $X_1 Y_2 \lor X_1 Y_1 \lor X_2 Y_2$. Dashed edges have probability $\frac{1}{2}$, all others have probability $1$.}
\label{fig:l-1WP-PT}
\end{figure}
\begin{proof}
We reduce from the \#P-hard problem \problem{\#PP2DNF}.
From the formula $\phi$,
we construct the following $\{S, T\}$-labeled probabilistic graph $H$
(an example of this construction is presented in
Figure~\ref{fig:l-1WP-PT}):
\begin{itemize}
\item The vertices of $H$ are $\{R\} \sqcup \{X_1,\ldots
X_{n_1}\} \allowbreak \sqcup \{Y_1,\ldots,\allowbreak Y_{n_2}\}
\allowbreak \sqcup \{X_{i,j} \mid 1 \leq i \leq n_1,~1\leq j \leq m\}
\sqcup \{Y_{i,j} \mid 1 \leq i \leq n_2,~ 1\leq j
\leq m\} \sqcup \{A_{x_j,j} \mid 1 \leq j \leq
m\} \sqcup \{B_{y_j,j} \mid 1 \leq j \leq m\}$.
\item The edges of $H$, all of which have probability $1$ except when specified, are:
\begin{itemize}
\item $X_i \xrightarrow{S} R$ for all $1 \leq i
\leq n_1$ and $R \xrightarrow{S} Y_i$ for all $1 \leq i \leq n_2$, all having probability $\frac{1}{2}$ and intuitively coding the valuation of each variable;
\item For all $1 \leq i \leq n_1$, the edge
$X_{i,m} \xrightarrow{S} X_i$ and the edges
$X_{i,j} \xrightarrow{S} X_{i,j+1}$ for all $1 \leq j \leq m-1$;
\item For all $1 \leq i \leq n_2$, the edge $Y_i
\xrightarrow{S} Y_{i,1}$ and the edges
$Y_{i,j} \xrightarrow{S} Y_{i,j+1}$ for all $1 \leq j \leq m-1$;
\item For all $1 \leq j \leq m$, the
edges $A_{x_j,j} \xrightarrow{T}
X_{x_j,j}$ and $Y_{y_j,j}
\xrightarrow{T} B_{y_j,j}$, intuitively
indicating that variables $X_{x_j}$ and
$Y_{y_j}$ belong to clause $j$.
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
The $\{S, T\}$-labeled graph $G$ is then $\xrightarrow{T} (\xrightarrow{S})^{m+3} \xrightarrow{T}$.
It is clear that $G$ is a \class{1WP}\xspace{} query graph, $H$ is a polytree and that both can be constructed in PTIME from $\phi$.
We now show that $\Pr(G\hom H)$ is exactly the number of satisfying assignments of~$\phi$ divided by $2^n$, so that the computation of one reduces in PTIME to the
computation of the other, concluding the proof.
To see why, we define a bijection between the valuations $\nu$ of $\{X_1,\ldots,X_{n_1}\} \sqcup \{Y_1,\ldots,Y_{n_2}\}$ to the possible worlds $H'$
of $H$ that have non-zero probability, in the expected way: keep
the edge $X_i \xrightarrow{S} R$ (resp., $R \xrightarrow{S} Y_i$)
iff $X_i$ (resp., $Y_i$) is assigned to true in the valuation. We then show that there is a homomorphism
from $G$ to $H'$ if and only if $\phi$ evaluates to true under $\nu$.
Indeed, if there is a homomorphism from $G$ to $H'$, then by considering the only possible matches of the $T$-edges, one can check easily that
the image of the match in $H'$ must be of the following form for some
$1 \leq j \leq m$: $A_{x_j,j} \xrightarrow{T} X_{x_j,j} \xrightarrow{S} X_{x_j,j+1} \xrightarrow{S} \cdots \xrightarrow{S} X_{x_j,m} \xrightarrow{S} X_{x_j} \xrightarrow{S} R \xrightarrow{S}
Y_{y_{j'}} \xrightarrow{S} Y_{y_{j'}, 1} \xrightarrow{S} Y_{y_{j'}, 2} \xrightarrow{S} \cdots \xrightarrow{S} Y_{y_{j'}, {j'}} \xrightarrow{T} B_{y_{j'}, {j'}}$; further, from the length of the $S$-path we must have $(m-j)+4+(j'-1) = m+3$, so that we must have $j = j'$. Then, by construction,
$X_{x_j}$ and~$Y_{y_j}$ belong to clause $j$, so the valuation satisfies~$\phi$.
Conversely, suppose that the valuation satisfies $\phi$, then for some $1 \leq j \leq m$ we know that $X_{x_j}$ and $Y_{y_j}$ are assigned to true by the valuation,
and so we can build the homomorphism as above from $G$ to $H'$.
\end{proof}
Hence, restricting instances to polytrees is not sufficient to ensure
tractability, even for $\class{1WP}\xspace$ query graphs. We must thus restrict the instance
further, by disallowing one of the two remaining features, namely branching and
two-wayness.
The first option of disallowing branching, i.e., requiring the
instance to be a $\class{2WP}\xspace$, is studied in Section~\ref{sec:tractability} below,
where we show that the problem is tractable for arbitrary
query graphs.
The second option is to forbid two-wayness on the instance,
i.e., restrict it to be a $\class{DWT}\xspace$. In this case, we first show that
intractability holds even when we also forbid two-wayness in the query graph,
i.e., we also restrict it to be a $\class{DWT}\xspace$.
The result follows from our earlier work on
the combined complexity of query
evaluation~\cite{amarilli2017combined,amarilli2017combinedb}:
\begin{propositionrep}[\cite{amarilli2017combinedb}]
\label{prp:l-DWT-DWT}
\phoml{\class{DWT}\xspace}{\class{DWT}\xspace} is \#P-hard.
\end{propositionrep}
\begin{proof}
The proof is almost the same as that of Proposition~36
of~\cite{amarilli2017combinedb}, straightforwardly adapted to our setting of probabilistic
graphs (in particular replacing the unary relation~$R$ by a binary relation),
by observing that the probabilistic instance defined in this proof is actually
a $\class{DWT}\xspace$ (beyond having treewidth~1), and that the query actually corresponds
to a $\class{DWT}\xspace$ graph (beyond being $\alpha$-acyclic).
\end{proof}
If we forbid branching in the query graph instead of two-wayness, requiring it
to be a $\class{2WP}\xspace$, then intractability still holds, which also follows from our
earlier results:
\begin{propositionrep}[\cite{amarilli2017combinedb}]
\label{prp:l-2WP-DWT}
\phoml{\class{2WP}\xspace}{\class{DWT}\xspace} is \#P-hard.
\end{propositionrep}
\begin{proof}
The proof is almost the same as that of Proposition~38
of~\cite{amarilli2017combinedb}, again adapted to our setting of probabilistic
graphs, with one small modification: we do not
materialize edges $b \xrightarrow{S_-} a$ in the instance graph for each edge
$a \xrightarrow{S} b$ in the instance, and
instead modify the query to replace all edges $x \xrightarrow{S_-} y$ by edges $x
\xleftarrow{S} y$. This ensures that the query is a $\class{2WP}\xspace$ and the instance is
a $\class{DWT}\xspace$, and hardness is shown similarly to the original proof.
\end{proof}
Thus, on $\class{DWT}\xspace$ instances, the only remaining case is when the query is a
one-way path. We will now show in the section below that this case is tractable, in
addition to the case of arbitrary queries on $\class{2WP}\xspace$ instances that we left open
above.
\subsection{Tractability Results}
\label{sec:tractability}
The general proof technique to obtain PTIME combined complexity in this section
is inspired by the probabilistic database literature~\cite{suciu2011probabilistic}:
compute the \emph{lineage} of~$G$ on $H$ as a Boolean formula in positive disjunctive
normal form (DNF), then compute its probability. Let us first define
\emph{lineages}:
\begin{definition}
\label{def:lineage}
Let $G$ be a query graph and $(H, \pi)$ be a probabilistic graph with edge set~$E$.
For any valuation $\nu: E \to \{0, 1\}$, we denote by~$\nu(H)$ the possible
world of~$H$ where each edge $e \in E$ is kept iff $\nu(e) = 1$.
Letting $\phi$ be a
Boolean function whose variables are the edges of~$E$, we say that $\phi$
\emph{captures the lineage of $G$ on $H$} if, for any valuation $\nu: E \to
\{0, 1\}$, the function $\phi$ evaluates to~$1$ under~$\nu$ iff we have $G
\leadsto \nu(H)$.
\end{definition}
Lineage representations allow us to reduce the
$\phom$ problem to the Boolean probability computation problem on the lineage
function (recall Definition~\ref{def:booleanproba}).
Formally, for any query graph $G$ and
probabilistic graph $(H, \pi)$, given a Boolean function $\phi$ that captures the lineage of$~G$
on~$H$, we compute the answer to $\phom$ on~$G$ and $(H,\pi)$ as the probability $\Pr(\phi,
\pi)$ of $\phi$ under~$\pi$: it is immediate by definition that these two
quantities are equal.
Of course, computing a lineage representation does not generally suffice to show
tractability, because, as we explained earlier, the Boolean probability
computation problem is generally intractable. However, computing a Boolean
lineage allows us to leverage the known tractable classes of Boolean
formulas.
Specifically, we will show how to use the class of \emph{$\beta$-acyclic
positive DNF
formulas}, which are known to be tractable~\cite{brault2015understanding}.
We define this notion, by first recalling
the notion of a \emph{$\beta$-acyclic hypergraph}, and then defining a
\emph{$\beta$-acyclic positive DNF}:
\begin{definition}
\label{def:beta-acyclic}
A \emph{hypergraph} $\mathcal{H} = (V,E)$ is a finite set~$V$ of vertices and a set~$E$ of non-empty subsets of~$V$, called \emph{hyperedges}.
For $v \in V$, we write $\mathcal{H} \setminus v$ for the hypergraph $(V \setminus \{v\}, E')$ where $E'$ is
$\{e \setminus \{v\} \mid e \in E\} \setminus \{ \emptyset \}$.
A vertex $v \in V$ of~$\mathcal{H}$ is called a \emph{$\beta$-leaf}
\cite{brault2014hypergraph} if the set of hyperedges that contain it,
i.e., $\{e \in E \mid v \in e\}$, is totally
ordered by inclusion. In other words, we can write $\{e \in E
\mid v \in
e\}$ as $(e_1, \ldots, e_k)$ in a way that ensures that $e_i \subseteq
e_{i+1}$ for all $1 \leq i < k$.
A $\beta$-elimination order for a hypergraph
$\mathcal{H} = (V,E)$
is defined inductively as follows:
\smallskip
\begin{itemize}
\item if $E = \emptyset$, then the empty tuple is a $\beta$-elimination order for $\mathcal{H}$;
\item otherwise, a tuple $(v_1, \ldots, v_n)$ of vertices of $\mathcal{H}$ is a $\beta$-elimination order for $\mathcal{H}$
if $v_1$ is a $\beta$-leaf in~$\mathcal{H}$ and $(v_2, \ldots, v_n)$ is a $\beta$-elimination order for $\mathcal{H} \setminus v_1$.
\end{itemize}
\smallskip
The hypergraph $\mathcal{H}$ is \emph{$\beta$-acyclic} if there is a $\beta$-elimination order for $\mathcal{H}$.
\end{definition}
We can see a positive DNF (recall Definition~\ref{def:pp2dnf}) as a hypergraph
of clauses on the variables, and introduce the notion of
\emph{$\beta$-acyclic positive DNFs} accordingly:
\begin{definition}
The \emph{hypergraph} $\mathcal{H}(\phi)$ of a positive DNF
on variables~$\mathcal{X}$
has $\mathcal{X}$ as vertex set and has one hyperedge per clause, i.e., we have
$\mathcal{H}(\phi) \colonequals (\mathcal{X},
E)$ with $E \colonequals \{ \{X_{i,j} \mid 1 \leq j \leq n_i\} \mid 1 \leq i \leq m\}$.
We say that the positive DNF $\phi$ is \emph{$\beta$-acyclic} if $\mathcal{H}(\phi)$ is $\beta$-acyclic.
\end{definition}
It follows directly from results by Brault-Baron, Capelli, and Mengel about the
$\beta$-acyclic \ensuremath{\problem{\#CSP}_\mathrm{d}}{} problem~\cite{brault2015understanding}
that we can tractably compute the probability of $\beta$-acyclic positive
DNFs:
\begin{theoremrep}
\label{thm:prob-acyclic-DNF}
The Boolean probability computation problem is in PTIME
when restricted to $\beta$-acyclic positive DNF formulas.
\end{theoremrep}
\begin{proofsketch}
The \ensuremath{\problem{\#CSP}_\mathrm{d}}{} problem studied in \cite{brault2015understanding} is about
computing a partition function over the hypergraph, under weighted
constraints on hyperedges: it generalizes the problem of counting the
number of valuations of $\beta$-acyclic formulae in conjunctive normal
form (CNF) by~\cite[Lemma~3]{brault2015understanding}.
We show how the result extends
to $\beta$-acyclic positive DNF, using de Morgan's law, and to probability computation
for weighted variables, using additional constraints on singleton
variable sets.
\end{proofsketch}
\begin{proof}
We reduce our Boolean probability computation problem to the problem of
$\beta$-acyclic \ensuremath{\problem{\#CSP}_\mathrm{d}}{} of~\cite{brault2015understanding}, which they show to
be in PTIME (Theorem~26 of~\cite{brault2015understanding}). We will explain
how probability computation in the sense of Definition~\ref{def:booleanproba}
can be encoded in their setting, by a variant of their own encoding
(in Lemma~3 of~\cite{brault2015understanding}): we give a full proof for
completeness.
First, we recall their definition of \ensuremath{\problem{\#CSP}_\mathrm{d}}{} (Definitions~1 and~2 in~\cite{brault2015understanding}) in the case of a Boolean domain.
We denote by $\mathbb{Q}_+$ the nonnegative rational numbers.
Denote by $\{0, 1\}^\mathcal{X}$ the set of functions from $\mathcal{X}$
to~$\{0,1\}$, i.e., the Boolean valuations of~$\mathcal{X}$.
For $\nu \in \{0, 1\}^\mathcal{X}$ and $\mathcal{Y} \subseteq \mathcal{X}$, we denote by
$\restr{\nu}{\mathcal{Y}}$ the restriction of~$\nu$ to~$\mathcal{Y}$.
A \emph{weighted constraint (with default value)} on variables~$\mathcal{X}$
is a pair
$c=(f,\mu)$ that consists of a
function $f: S \to \mathbb{Q}_+$ for some subset~$S$ of~$\{0, 1\}^\mathcal{X}$,
called the \emph{support} of $c$,
and a \emph{default value} $\mu \in \mathbb{Q}_+$;
we write $\mathrm{var}(c) \colonequals \mathcal{X}$.
The constraint $c$ induces a total function on $\{0, 1\}^\mathcal{X}$, also
denoted $c$, that maps $\nu \in \{0,1\}^\mathcal{X}$ to~$f(\nu)$ if $\nu \in S$, and to~$\mu$ otherwise.
The \emph{size} of $c$ is $|c| = |S| \times |\mathcal{X}|$. Intuitively, a
constraint with default value
assigns a weight in~$\mathbb{Q}_+$ to all valuations of~$\mathcal{X}$,
but the default value mechanism allows us to avoid writing explicitly the complete table of this mapping.
An instance of the \ensuremath{\problem{\#CSP}_\mathrm{d}}{} problem then consists of a finite set $I$ of weighted constraints.
The size of $I$ is $|I| \colonequals \sum_{c \in I} |c|$, and we write
$\mathrm{var}(I) \colonequals \bigcup_{c \in I} \mathrm{var}(c)$.
The output of the problem is the \emph{partition function}
\[w(I) = \sum_{\nu \in \{0, 1\}^{\mathrm{var}(I)}} \prod_{c \in I}
c(\restr{\nu}{\mathrm{var}(c)}).\]
The \emph{hypergraph} $\mathcal{H}(I)$ of the \ensuremath{\problem{\#CSP}_\mathrm{d}}{} instance $I$ (defined in Section~2.2 of~\cite{brault2015understanding}) is the hypergraph $(\mathrm{var}(I), E_I)$ where
$E_I = \{\mathrm{var}(c) \mid c \in I \}$. We say that $I$ is \emph{$\beta$-acyclic} if $\mathcal{H}(I)$ is a $\beta$-acyclic hypergraph (recall Definition~\ref{def:beta-acyclic}), and we call
\emph{$\beta$-acyclic \ensuremath{\problem{\#CSP}_\mathrm{d}}{}} the problem \ensuremath{\problem{\#CSP}_\mathrm{d}}{} restricted to $\beta$-acyclic instances.
By Theorem~26 of~\cite{brault2015understanding}, the problem $\beta$-acyclic \ensuremath{\problem{\#CSP}_\mathrm{d}}{} is in PTIME.
We now explain how to reduce the probability computation problem to the $\beta$-acyclic \ensuremath{\problem{\#CSP}_\mathrm{d}}{} problem.
Let $\phi = \bigvee_{1 \leq i \leq m} \left( \bigwedge_{1 \leq j \leq
n_i} X_{i,j} \right)$ be a Boolean
$\beta$-acyclic DNF on variables~$\mathcal{X}$, with probabilities $\pi(X) \in
[0,1]$ for each $X \in \mathcal{X}$.
We construct in linear time from~$\phi$ and~$\pi$ the variable set
$\mathcal{X}' \colonequals \{X' \mid X \in \mathcal{X}\}$, the CNF formula $\phi' \colonequals \bigwedge_{1 \leq i \leq m} \left( \bigvee_{1 \leq j \leq n_i} X'_{i,j} \right)$, and the probability valuation
$\pi'$ on~$\mathcal{X}'$ defined by $\pi'(X'_{i,j}) = 1-\pi(X_{i,j})$. By De Morgan's duality law, $\phi'$ is equivalent to the negation of~$\phi$, so that we have
$\Pr(\phi, \pi) = 1-\Pr(\phi', \pi')$; hence, the probability
computation problem for~$\phi$ and~$\pi$ reduces in PTIME to the
same problem for $\phi'$ and~$\pi'$.
We then construct in linear time a $\beta$-acyclic \ensuremath{\problem{\#CSP}_\mathrm{d}}{} instance $I$ such that $\Pr(\phi', \pi') = w(I)$, which concludes the proof.
For each variable $X' \in \mathcal{X}'$, we define a weighted constraint
$c_{X'}$ on variables $\{X'\}$
by $c_{X'}(X' \mapsto 1) = \pi'(X')$ and $c_{X'}(X' \mapsto 0) =
1-\pi'(X')$, which codes the probability of the variables.
Now, for each clause $1 \leq i \leq m$, just like in
Lemma~3 of~\cite{brault2015understanding}, we define a weighted
constraint $c_i=(f_i,1)$ with default value~1 whose variables are
$\{X'_{i,j} \mid 1 \leq j \leq n_i\}$, i.e., those that occur in the clause:
$f_i(\nu)$ is $0$ for the (unique) valuation that sets all variables of the clause to~$0$,
intuitively coding the constraint of the clause.
From the fact that $\phi$ was $\beta$-acyclic, it is clear that $I$ is also $\beta$-acyclic.
Now, the result $w(I)$ of the partition function sums over all
valuations of the variables of~$I$, namely the variables~$\mathcal{X}'$
of~$\phi'$. Whenever a valuation does not satisfy some clause $1 \leq i
\leq m$, the weighted constraint $c_i$ will give it weight~0, hence
ensuring that the product evaluates to~0, so we can restrict the sum to
valuations that satisfy~$\phi'$: such valuations are given weight~$1$ by all weighted
constraints $c_i$. Now, it is easy to see that the weight of valuations
$\nu$ that satisfy $\phi$ is their probability $\pi'(\nu)$, as each
$c_{X'}$ gives them weight $\pi'(X')$ or $1-(\pi'(X'))$ depending on
whether $\nu(X')$ is~1 or~0.
Hence, we have reduced the probability computation problem for $\beta$-acyclic DNF formulas
to $\beta$-acyclic \ensuremath{\problem{\#CSP}_\mathrm{d}}{} in PTIME, which concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
We will then use the tractability of $\beta$-acyclic formulas to show PTIME combined
complexity results for our $\phomL$ problem. The first result that we show
is tractability for labeled \class{1WP}\xspace{} query graphs on \class{DWT}\xspace{} probabilistic instance
graphs:\footnote{The connection to $\beta$-acyclicity in this context is due to Florent
Capelli.}
\begin{propositionrep}
\label{prp:l-1WP-DWT}
\phoml{\class{1WP}\xspace}{\class{DWT}\xspace} is PTIME.
\end{propositionrep}
\begin{proofsketch}
Intuitively, the proof proceeds in three steps. The first step is to enumerate
all candidate minimal matches of the query graph in the instance graph, i.e.,
subgraphs of the instance graph to which the query graph could have a homomorphism, and
which are minimal for inclusion. As the query
graph is a path, we know that the minimal matches are downward paths in the $\class{DWT}\xspace$
instance: hence, as each vertex of the $\class{DWT}\xspace$ instance can be the lowest vertex
of at most one match, there are polynomially many matches to consider.
The
second step is to decide which ones of these matches are actually a match of the
query, by considering the labels: as both the query graph and the match are a $\class{1WP}\xspace$,
this is straightforward. These first two steps produce a positive DNF that captures the lineage
of the query graph on the instance in the standard sense.
The third step is to notice that this
lineage expression is $\beta$-acyclic: this is because its variables can be eliminated
by considering the nodes of the instance $\class{DWT}\xspace$ in a bottom-up fashion.
\end{proofsketch}
\begin{proof}
Let $G \defeq u_1 \xrightarrow{R_1} \cdots \xrightarrow{R_{m-1}} u_m$ be the \class{1WP}\xspace{} query (where all $R_i$ are not necessarily distinct), and $H$ be the downwards tree instance.
The idea is to construct the lineage of~$G$ on~$H$ as a $\beta$-acyclic
DNF $\phi$, so that we can conclude with Theorem~\ref{thm:prob-acyclic-DNF}.
It is clear that any match of $G$ can only be a downwards path of $H$, hence we construct~$\phi$ as follows:
for every downwards path $a_1 \xrightarrow{R'_1} \cdots \xrightarrow{R'_{m-1}} a_m$ of length $m$ of $H$ (their number is linear in $|H|$ because each path is uniquely defined by the choice of~$a_m$) check if the path is a match
of $G$ (i.e, check that $R_i = R'_i$ for $1 \leq i \leq m-1$), and if it is the case then create a new clause of $\phi$ whose variables are all
the facts $a_i \xrightarrow{R_i} a_{i+1}$ for $1 \leq i \leq m-1$.
The formula $\phi$ thus obtained is then a DNF representation of the lineage of $H$ on~$G$, and has been built in time $O(\card{H} \cdot \card{G})$, i.e., in PTIME.
We now justify that $\phi$ is $\beta$-acyclic by giving a
$\beta$-elimination order for~$\phi$: while $H$ still has edges,
repeatedly pick a leaf $b$ of~$H$ and, letting $a$ be the parent of~$b$, eliminate
the variable $a \xrightarrow{R} b$ from $\phi$.
Such a variable will always be a $\beta$-leaf, as any set of downwards paths of a downwards tree all ending at
a leaf is necessarily ordered by inclusion. From the above, the fact
that $\phi$ is $\beta$-acyclic suffices to conclude the proof.
\end{proof}
Interestingly, we were not able to prove this result using
tree automata-based dynamic programming approach (like we will do later for
Proposition~\ref{prp:u-1WP-PT}).
The second result that we show is tractability when restricting the instance to be a \class{2WP}\xspace{},
and allowing arbitrary \emph{connected} queries (remember from
Proposition~\ref{prp:l-conj_of_1WP-1WP} that the problem is hard even on $\class{1WP}\xspace$
instances if we allow \emph{disconnected} queries):
\begin{propositionrep}
\label{prp:l-connected-2WP}
\phoml{\class{Connected}\xspace}{\class{2WP}\xspace} is PTIME.
\end{propositionrep}
\begin{proof}
First of all, notice that, as the query graph $G$ is connected, the image of a homomorphism from the query $G$ to the \class{2WP}\xspace instance $H$ is necessarily a connected component of $H$.
Moreover, each connected component of $H$ is also a \class{2WP}\xspace and there are $O(|H|^2)$ of them.
We then proceed as follows.
For every connected subpath ${C = a_1 - \cdots - a_n}$ (with each~$-$
being either $\xrightarrow{R}$ or $\xleftarrow{R}$ for some binary relation $R$ in $H$) of~$H$,
we check if there is a homomorphism from $G$ to $C$.
This can be done in PTIME by Theorem~\ref{thm:xbar},
because $C$ trivially has the
$\underline{X}$-property w.r.t.\ the
total order $a_1 < a_2 < \cdots < a_n$: the only possibility for
$(n_0,n_3)$ and $(n_1,n_2)$ to be edges of $C$ when $n_0$ comes before~$n_1$
and $n_2$~comes before~$n_3$ is if $n_0=n_2$ and $n_1=n_3$, in
which case it cannot hold that $n_0\xrightarrow{R}n_3$ and
$n_1\xrightarrow{R}n_2$ at the same time, because we disallow multi-edges.
If there is such a homomorphism, then we create a new clause of $\phi$ whose variables are all
the facts that belong to~$C$.
From this, we obtain in PTIME a positive DNF $\phi$ that captures the lineage of $G$ on $H$.
We now justify that $\phi$ is $\beta$-acyclic by giving a
$\beta$-elimination order for $\phi$, by an argument similar to the
proof of Proposition~\ref{prp:l-1WP-DWT}: repeatedly eliminate
a variable $a - b$ from $\phi$ and this fact from $H$, where $b$ is an endpoint of $H$.
Indeed such a variable will always be a $\beta$-leaf, as any set of
connected component of $H$ including $a - b$ is necessarily ordered by
inclusion. Hence, $\phi$ is $\beta$-acyclic, which allows us to
conclude.
\end{proof}
To show this result, we follow the same scheme as in the proof of
Proposition~\ref{prp:l-1WP-DWT} above:
\begin{inparaenum}[(i)]
\item enumerate all candidate matches;
\item check whether they are indeed matches; and
\item
argue that the resulting lineage is $\beta$-acyclic.
\end{inparaenum} For the first step, there are polynomially many candidate
matches to consider, because matches are necessarily connected subgraphs
of the instance graph~$H$, that are uniquely defined by their endpoints: this is
where we use connectedness of the query. For the third step, the
resulting lineage is $\beta$-acyclic for the same reason as in
Proposition~\ref{prp:l-1WP-DWT}, as we can eliminate variables following the
order of the path~$H$: all connected subpaths containing an endpoint of the path are
ordered by inclusion. What changes, however, is the second step: from the
quadratically many possible matches, to
compute the lineage expression, we must decide which ones are actually matches.
Deciding this for each subpath amounts to testing, given the connected query
graph~$G$ and a candidate match~$H'$, whether $G \leadsto H'$, in the
non-probabilistic sense. This graph homomorphism problem is generally
intractable, but here the minimal match $H'$ is a $\class{2WP}\xspace$ (as it is a subpath of~$H$),
so it turns out to enjoy combined
tractability. The corresponding result was first shown
by Gutjahr~\cite{gutjahr1992polynomial}
for \emph{unlabeled} graphs, when the instance graph is a path, or for more
general instances satisfying a condition called the $\underline{X}$-property;
this was generalized to labeled graphs by Gottlob, Koch, and Schulz
in~\cite{gottlob2006conjunctive}. We recall here the definition of this property:
\begin{definition}[(Definition~3.2 of \cite{gottlob2006conjunctive})]
\label{def:X-property}
Let $H=(V,E,\lambda)$ be a directed graph with labels on $\sigma$, let
$R\in\sigma$,
and let $<$ be a total order on~$V$.
Then $R$ is said to have the \emph{$\underline{X}$-property} w.r.t.\ $<$ if
for all $n_0,n_1,n_2,n_3 \in V$ such that $n_0 < n_1$
and $n_2 < n_3$, if we have $n_0\xrightarrow{R}n_3$ and
$n_1\xrightarrow{R}n_2$ then we also have
$n_0\xrightarrow{R}n_2$.
$H$ is said to have the \emph{$\underline{X}$-property} w.r.t.\ $<$ if it is the case
of each label~$R$.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}(Theorem~3.5 of \cite{gottlob2006conjunctive}, extending
Theorem~3.1 of \cite{gutjahr1992polynomial})
\label{thm:xbar}
Given a labeled query graph $G$, and given a labeled directed graph $H$ with the
$\underline{X}$-property w.r.t.\ some order~$<$,
we can determine in time $O(|H| \times |G|)$ whether $G \leadsto H$.
\end{theorem}
We can use this result to check, for all connected subpaths of the $\class{2WP}\xspace$ instance
graph, whether the query graph has a homomorphism to the subpath.
This leads to the following sketch for the proof of
Proposition~\ref{prp:l-connected-2WP} (the full proof is in Appendix):
\begin{proofsketch}
We proceed following the three-step process outlined above.
We first enumerate the possible query matches in the instance, i.e., the
quadratic number of connected subpaths. Second, we test for each subpath
$a_i - \cdots - a_{i+k}$ whether it satisfies the query. We can do so
tractably because the subpath clearly has the $\underline{X}$-property w.r.t.\
the order $a_i < \cdots < a_{i+k}$: using the notation of
Definition~\ref{def:X-property}, there are in fact no $n_0,n_1,n_2,n_3$ that satisfy the
conditions. Third, having computed the resulting DNF, we compute its
probability using $\beta$-acyclicity, eliminating variables in the order of
the path as we explained above.
\end{proofsketch}
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:introduction}
\input{introduction}
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec:preliminaries}
\input{preliminaries}
\section{Disconnected Case}\label{sec:disconnected-CQs}
\input{disconnected_CQs}
\section{Labeled Connected Queries}\label{sec:l-connected-CQs}
\input{l_connected_CQs}
\section{Unlabeled Connected Queries}\label{sec:u-connected_CQs}
\input{u_connected_CQs}
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conclusion}
\input{conclusion}
\begin{toappendix}
\section{Proof of Hardness of Counting Edge Covers}\label{apx:holographic}
\input{holographic}
\end{toappendix}
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
|
\section{Introduction}
Information gathering using mobile robots in dangerous or hard-to-access environments has significantly improved humanity's ability to understand our world~\cite{Cliff-RSS-15,dunbabin2012robots}. Research in improving the capabilities of these robots has largely focused on automating low level functionality, such as perception and obstacle avoidance. Higher level reasoning (and task level autonomy in particular) in unstructured real world environments has not received as much attention. However, this technology is critical to enable the study of more remote areas, where much of the interesting science lies. Such high level autonomy in the context of information gathering missions is known as \emph{Autonomous Science}. In this paper we use robotic planetary exploration as our motivating application, but the ideas presented here are applicable to exploration of remote environments in general.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{cont1024.jpg}
\caption{The Continuum rover in a Mars-analog environment using its robotic arm to closely examine rocks}
\label{fig:continuum}
\end{figure}
Planetary rovers are required to explore largely unknown environments under strong communication constraints such as high latency, limited bandwidth and infrequent communication windows. They are equipped with multiple heterogeneous sensors which must be used collaboratively to achieve a set of high level scientific goals such as finding evidence of water. In outdoor environments there is also significant noise in the form of shadows, sensor inaccuracies, and deformable terrain. These challenges induce the need for some form of autonomy to ensure safety and mission progress in the absence of human supervision.
Recent research in Autonomous Science has explored increasing autonomy through anomaly detection, selective data transmission, guiding data collection with template based feature matching and adaptive sampling through non-parametric models such as Gaussian processes (GPs) \cite{castano2007oasis,thompson2011autonomous,woods2009autonomous}.
Higher level reasoning such as deciding where to go in the short and long term, which sensors to deploy and most importantly, making inferences from observations to update scientific hypotheses, is handled primarily by human supervisors on Earth. This creates a bottleneck in the scientific progress made as communication can typically only be established twice a day on Mars. In this work we approach the problem of Autonomous Science from a novel cognitive robotics perspective by equipping the rover with an approximate representation of a scientist's domain knowledge. We then develop techniques to reason about this knowledge to explore and sample the environment in a more intelligent and goal-driven manner.
We represent geological knowledge as a Bayesian network~(BN). The BN's structure and conditional probability parameters allow us to capture many important aspects of scientific knowledge such as conditional dependencies between variables, causality relationships and any mathematical or process models that may be known prior to the mission. BNs are limited in expressivity as compared to knowledge representation languages such as Answer Set Prolog \cite{zhang2015mixed}, but have the advantage of handling uncertainty more robustly. This property is crucial in unstructured environments, such as Mars, where sensors and controls are both noisy. Further, there are many algorithms which allow fast approximate inference in BNs, which is an important advantage lacking in many other languages \cite{pearl2014probabilistic}.
We then show how Monte Carlo Tree Search~(MCTS) techniques can be applied to reason about the knowledge BN efficiently and plan goal oriented sensing actions over long horizons. The resulting knowledge representation and reasoning framework extends robotic information gathering in two ways: it enables the robot to reason about prior scientific knowledge in a principled manner, and it allows the robot to plan with multiple sensing modalities to study latent environmental variables which cannot directly be observed.
We apply the framework to a Mars exploration mission where the robot observes environmental features to determine the geological identity of different regions on the map, such as ancient riverbeds and volcanic zones. The robot is equipped with two sensors, a camera and an idealized spectrometer and required to autonomously plan where to move and which sensor to use at each time step while satisfying some sensing budget. We present extensive simulation results where our method outperforms alternative approaches in terms of information gain (confidence) and accuracy. We conclude by demonstrating the practicality of our approach in an analog Martian environment using our experimental rover, Continuum (shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:continuum}).
\section{Related Work}
\subsection{Bayesian Networks for Knowledge Representation}
Due to their desirable property of remaining robust under uncertainty, many authors have employed BNs to model domain knowledge, particularly in the form of expert systems. Applying these networks to robotic decision making problems in unstructured environments is, however, less studied. Most authors have limited their use to classification and have not closed the loop around path planning~\cite{sharif2015autonomous,apostolopoulos2001robotic}.
Work that is similar to ours is by Post et al.~\cite{post2016planetary}, who use BNs to create an obstacle map while integrating any sensor uncertainties that are present. A path is then planned to achieve a goal position while minimizing the probability of collisions. This work, however, does not attempt to model scientific knowledge, especially the spatial relationships.
Gallant et al.~\cite{gallant2011science} used a BN to classify minerals and assign benefit scores based on the current scientific goals of the mission. The benefit scores were then fed into a cost function to determine the best action take. However, their approach does not reason about unobserved parts of the environment and does not consider the problem of selecting which sensor to use.
\subsection{Informative Path Planning}
The idea of planning the placement of sensors to achieve some information-theoretic goal can be viewed as an active sensing problem, or more generally, an informative path planning problem. When the problem is monotone submodular, greedy approaches are effective and offer performance guarantees~\cite{krause2012near}. Unfortunately, this property is often violated in field environments leading to arbitrarily poor worst case performance. Branch and bound techniques which prune suboptimal branches early in the tree search have shown promise~\cite{bestprobabilistic}. However efficiently calculating tight bounds in problems with unknown environments and multiple sensors like ours is non-trivial. MCTS methods, however, work for any general objective function and do not require bounds. They are anytime and hence suitable for online planning~\cite{browne2012survey}.
Approaches that involve initially unknown environments typically utilize GPs and exploit the monotone submodular nature of the mutual information or variance reduction function to avoid exhaustive search~\cite{binney2012branch,hollinger2014sampling}. While GPs can represent spatial phenomena in a probabilistic manner, they are not particularly useful tools for encoding domain knowledge especially causal knowledge. Proposed methods are limited to: imposing priors on the co-variance parameters, transforming the training data and biasing the mean function~\cite{azmanincorporating}. Further, the computational complexity of GPs make them difficult to use in online planning applications with long horizons such as the problem considered here.
\section{Autonomous Science for Planetary Rovers}
This section discusses the robot properties, the assumptions made about the world, and formally defines the planning problem that the robot is required to solve in the context of Mars exploration.
\subsection{Robot and Environment Setup}
The robot is a UGV which moves around in a world discretized into cells. The robot is equipped with a camera which can detect rocks and extract their visual features. The camera can take measurements within its field of view which may span multiple cells. The robot is also equipped with an ultraviolet (UV) light source which it can project onto the environment to reveal UV reflective minerals. The UV light source simulates what a spectrometer might do on a real Mars mission since it is energetically expensive to use and has a narrow sensing range, but gives more informative measurements than a camera. For the remainder of this paper we refer to the camera as the low cost `remote' sensor and the UV source as the high cost `local' sensor.
\subsection{Problem Setup}
Given this robot and environment setup and some representation of scientific knowledge, the robot is required to plan a sequence of informative sensing actions $a_{seq}$ to minimize entropy of some scientific latent variable of interest $L$ across all of the $N$ cells on the map. A sensing action is a tuple consisting of a movement action and which sensor to use. The robot is also constrained to some specified sensing (energy or time) budget. The optimization objective can be described by Eq. 1.
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&a^*_{seq} = \operatorname*{arg\,max}_{a_{seq} \in A} EI(a_{seq}) \\
&\textbf{s.t.} \sum^{|a_{seq}|}_{i}{\textnormal{cost($a_i$)} = \text{Budget}}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The cost function and the action space $A$ we use will be defined in Section V. $EI$ is the expected information gain of an action sequence which is calculated by marginalizing out all possible observations $Z_{seq}$ that can result from the sensing sequence (Eq. 2). The $P(Z_{seq}|a_{seq})$ term is effectively a sensor model and $I$ is an information gain function given by Eq. 3 where $H$ is the Shannon entropy. The conditional entropy $H(L_n|Z_{seq})$ requires a mapping from observations to the latent variable of interest. This is the knowledge representation component of the framework while the optimization to determine sensing sequences is akin to scientific reasoning.
\begin{equation}
EI(a_{seq}) = \sum_{Z_{seq}}{I(Z_{seq})P(Z_{seq}|a_{seq})}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
I(Z_{seq}) = \sum_{n=1}^{N}{H(L_n) - H(L_n|Z_{seq})}
\end{equation}
\section{Approach}
In this section we present the two main components of the system: BN knowledge representation and a MCTS planner. The planner reasons about the knowledge network and the robot and environment state to determine a sequence of sensing actions which maximize the information gained on the scientific latent variable of interest.
\subsection{Knowledge Representation}
The purpose of the BN is to model the relationship between the observations made and the latent variable of interest through scientific knowledge. The structure of the network encodes causal knowledge while the conditional probability parameters encode quantitative knowledge.
Since, rocks are key sources of geological cues in Martian environments, we design the BN around them (Fig.~\ref{knowledgebn}). The rocks in the environment of class $R$ exhibit $N$ visual features represented by the variable $F$. The robot can observe these features through its camera, denoted by the variable $Z$. The variable $B$ is the UV reflective material that can be measured by the robot's local sensor. Lastly $L$ resembles the underlying latent variable which affects the environment. In this paper we assume $L$ to be the type of location the robot is in such as desert or a riverbed and this is scientifically interesting variable we are interested in gaining information on.
All nodes in the network are discrete as geologists often look for features which do not have associated continuous measurements such as the presence of bedding on a rock. Discretization also simplifies inference. The structure of the BN can be adapted to account for different variables and dependencies that come with specific applications. In this paper all nodes have three categories they can take but the approach works for any arbitrary number.
The proposed BN structure allows several sources of information to be integrated in the form of conditional probabilities. $P(Z|F)$ is the sensor model, $P(F|R)$ is effectively a classifier likelihood while $P(B|L)$ and $P(R|L)$ are geological properties of the environment. This network exists in every cell of the environment. If there are no rocks detected in a cell, then the $R$ node and its children will be removed to speed up future computations.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={5cm 3cm 8cm 6.5cm},clip,width=0.5\textwidth]{bnet_diagram.pdf}
\caption{Left: The structure of the Bayesian network used to represent geological knowledge. Right: Spatial relationships between adjacent cells}
\label{knowledgebn}
\end{figure}
In natural environments there are also strong spatial correlations present. There are several methods of encoding this relationship. A common approach is through a Markov random field. However this will make the inference problem difficult as cycles will be introduced in the graphical model. Another alternative is to add links between the $L$, $R$ and $B$ nodes of adjacent cells. This implies that the variables $R$ and $B$ are dependent on the $L$ nodes in the neighborhood as opposed to just the one in its cell. Nodes that are far from where the observation was taken have less influence on the inference. This decreasing influence is modeled by a Gaussian function. Fig. \ref{knowledgebn} illustrates this spatial dependency. The resolution of the $L$ grid does not have to match the $R$ grid and can be adapted based on the expected spatial variability of variables.
The conditional probability parameters can either be specified directly through domain knowledge, learned from training data \cite{heckerman1995learning} or even learned online by modeling them as Dirichlet distributions \cite{girdhar2015modeling}. In this work we assume the maximum likelihood parameters are known a priori.
Due to this BN's structure, the belief on the value of nodes can be updated recursively without keeping an history of observations. The message passing technique is used for efficiently propagating belief updates through the BN \cite{yedidia2000generalized}.
\subsection{Monte Carlo Tree Search}
In this problem, the robot acquires observations after executing every sensing action and has the freedom to adapt the sensing plan accordingly. Therefore at planning time, the robot only needs to decide the next best action to take which in expectation will give maximal future rewards. We propose the use of MCTS methods to address this sequential decision making problem. The algorithm is presented in Alg. 1.
MCTS is a best first, anytime algorithm which involves cycling through four stages: node selection, expansion, simulation and back-propagation. The key idea is to first select promising leaf nodes based on a tree policy. The selected node is expanded and a terminal reward is estimated by conducting simulations or `rollouts' in the decision space. The reward is then back propagated up the tree and the process is repeated until some computational budget is reached. At the end of the search, the child of the root node with the highest average reward is selected as the next best action. Since MCTS is sampling based, it is well suited for large state spaces, high branching factors and long horizon planning. For an overview on MCTS methods we refer the reader to Browne's comprehensive survey \cite{browne2012survey}.
\begin{algorithm}[!t]
\caption{MCTS Science Autonomy Planner}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State \textbf{Input:} SensingBudget $S$, BeliefSpace $Bel$, DomainKnowledge BN $K$, RemainingBudget $R$
\Function{Main}{}
\State $R \gets S$
\While{$R > 0$}
\State $robotPose \gets getLocalisation()$
\State $a_{opt} \gets planner(robotPose, R, Bel, K)$
\State $Z\gets takeObservation(a_{opt})$
\State $Bel\gets updateBeliefSpace(Z, Bel, K)$
\State $R \gets R - cost(a_{opt})$
\EndWhile
\EndFunction
\State
\Function{planner}{$robotPose, R, Bel, K$}
\State $T \gets initialiseTree(robotPose, R)$
\State $currentNode \gets T.rootNode$
\While{within computational budget}
\State $currentNode \gets treePolicy(T)$
\State $sequence\gets rolloutPolicy(currentNode, R)$
\State $reward \gets getReward(sequence, Bel, K)$
\State $T \gets updateTree(T, reward)$
\EndWhile
\State
\Return $bestChild(T)$
\EndFunction
\State
\Function{rolloutPolicy}{$currentNode, R$}
\State $sequence \gets currentNode$
\While{$R > 0$}
\State $nextNode \gets defaultPolicy(currentNode)$
\State $currentNode \gets nextNode$
\State $sequence \gets sequence + currentNode$
\State $R \gets currentNode.R$
\EndWhile
\State
\Return $sequence$
\EndFunction
\State
\Function{getReward}{$sequence, B, K$}
\State $reward \gets 0$
\For{$i=1:length(sequence)$}
\State $currentAction \gets sequence(i)$
\State $Z = sampleObs(currentAction, Bel, K)$
\State $Bel_{new} = updateBelief(Z, Bel, K)$
\State $infoGain = calcInfoGain(Bel_{new}, Bel)$
\State $reward \gets reward + infoGain$
\State $Bel \gets Bel_{new}$
\EndFor
\State
\Return $reward$
\EndFunction
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
We formulate the MCTS such that each node in the tree is a potential sensing action that can be made. It is a tuple consisting of the robot's x and y position, the orientation, the type of sensor used and the remaining sensing budget. Each node also stores the average reward $\bar{R_i}$ of all the simulations that have passed through it and the number of times it has been visited $n_i$ during the tree search. The children of the node are determined by the robot's action space and the remaining budget. We now describe each stage of the MCTS in detail and show how it has been adapted for our problem.
\textbf{Selection:} The first stage of MCTS is using a tree policy to select which leaf nodes to expand. We want to expand leaf nodes which are expected to have a good terminal reward but at the same time evaluate alternative nodes sufficiently to minimize chances of converging to local minima. The Upper Confidence Tree (UCT) policy based on the optimism in the face of uncertainty paradigm is known to be a good solution to balance the exploration/exploitation trade-off present here \cite{kocsis2006bandit}. UCT begins at the root node and iteratively selects leaf nodes with the highest Upper Confidence Bound (UCB) until a node with unexpanded children is reached. The UCB score for node $i$ is defined by Eq. 4 below.
\begin{equation}
UCB_i = \bar{R_i} + C_p\sqrt\frac{2\log N}{n_i}
\end{equation}
The first term is the `exploitation' component of UCB. $\bar{R_i}$ is the average reward of all rollouts that have passed through $node_i$. We define the reward function in the simulation subsection below. The second term in the equation is the `exploration' component where $N$ is the number of times the parent of the node has been evaluated and $n_i$ is the number of times node $i$ has been evaluated. $C_p$ is a constant that balances exploration and exploitation. We found empirically that a value of $0.1$ gave good results in both simulations and hardware experiments.
\textbf{Expansion:} From the leaf node selected by the UCT policy, an unexpanded child node is randomly selected and added to the tree.
\textbf{Simulation:} The aim of the simulation stage is to determine the terminal reward associated with this newly expanded child node by executing some default policy. Here we use a random action selection policy from the selected node until the sensing budget is exhausted. A random policy was used because it requires minimal computational overhead to calculate and ensures the decision space is uniformly explored. However since we are sampling randomly, a large number of rollouts are often required to accurately estimate rewards. Using problem specific rollout policies has been shown to significantly improve tree convergence but we leave this as an interesting avenue for future work.
The expected information gain function defined earlier in Eq. 2 is the ideal reward function to evaluate a rollout. However, calculating this function analytically requires summing over all possible observations that can result from the rollout sequence. In our problem, the low cost remote sensor observes rocks in its field of view. Each rock can exhibit $|F|^N$ combinations of features where $|F|$ is the number of classes each feature can take and $N$ is the total number of features. Furthermore the number of rocks seen as well as the position of the rocks in the image are all unknown at planning time if an area hasn't been observed before. The observation space is therefore very large and evaluating the reward exactly is not practical.
We define the reward function as $\frac{I_r}{H_{init}}$ where $I_r$ is the information gain during rollout $r$ and $H_{init}$ is the joint entropy of the $L$ variables at the current state of the mission. This division constrains the average reward to between $0$ and $1$- a requirement for UCB convergence guarantees to hold. We approximate $I_r$ by sampling. We begin at the first node of the rollout sequence. Depending on the sensing action used, an observation is sampled from the belief space. The belief space is updated and passed onto the next node. The process is iterated until the terminal node is reached. The total information gain is determined by subtracting the entropies of the initial and terminal belief spaces.
\textbf{Back-propagation:} Lastly the reward received by the rollout is back-propagated up the tree and the average reward and number of evaluations for each node involved is updated.
The four stages are repeated until the computational budget for the robot has expired at which point the root child with the highest average reward is selected as the next best action. Given enough samples and an appropriate value for the exploration parameter $C_p$ in Equation 4 it can be shown that the tree will converge to the optimal action sequence.
\section{Simulation Experiments}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim = {0 0.2cm 0 0},clip,width = 0.5\textwidth]{sim_example.JPG}
\caption{Left: An example of a randomly generated location ground truth map where the colors signify different classes. Right: An example rock map generated by sampling from the Bayesian Network}
\label{egmap}
\end{figure}
This section aims to empirically demonstrate the performance of the MCTS planner for our Autonomous Science problem. While there are several algorithms for informative path planning in literature, they cannot be applied in situations where multiple sensing modalities are involved without significant algorithmic modifications and heuristics. We therefore compare performance over the following baselines:
\begin{itemize}
\item Random sampling- the robot selects a random action within its action space at each time step
\item Fixed sampling- When one sensor is involved, a lawnmower pattern is popular as it provides uniform coverage. When there are multiple sensors and a sensing budget involved, it is non trivial to design such paths. We here use a 5 stage policy which involves the robot using the remote sensor in the forward direction, 90 degrees to the left, and 90 degrees to the right, using the local sensor in the current cell and then moving one step forward. The stages are repeated until the robot's sensing budget is exhausted.
\item A greedy planner which selects the action with the highest immediate expected information gain to cost ratio. The behavior is similar to a frontier based strategy often used in exploration problems. The expected information gain is approximated by sampling observations from the belief space and simulating belief updates.
\end{itemize}
Large random environments were generated in which the location type and UV nodes were set to be a $40\times 40$ grid. Location type is the scientific latent variable of interest, which represents abstract geological features such as desert, riverbed, etc. The grid was further divided into 25 $8\times 8$ regions of homogeneous location types. The rock and feature space grids were of size $800 \times 800$. Each location grid cell therefore contains multiple rocks with associated features. The remote sensor can make observations in the feature space grid with a field of view of size 50 by 40 cells. All nodes were assigned ground truth labels by randomly sampling from the BN. An example environment is shown in Fig.~\ref{egmap}.
The robot can occupy any one of the cells in the 40 by 40 grid and orient itself in 8 directions in $45\degree$ increments. In each decision step the robot can move one step forward in the direction it is facing or rotate on the spot with either -90$\degree$,-45$\degree$,45$\degree$ or 90$\degree$ increments. It also has to decide which of the two sensors to use. The size of the action space is therefore 10 actions. The $cost(a)$ function is defined as 1 unit for the remote sensor and 8 units for the local sensor.
\begin{table}[!t]
\centering
\caption{Information gain with varying sensing budgets}
\label{table1}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& \multicolumn{3}{c|}{\textbf{Sensing Budget}} \\ \hline
\textbf{Policy} & \textbf{50} & \textbf{70} & \textbf{100} \\ \hline
Random & $103.67(18.68)$ & $114.03(17.87)$ & $130.99(18.29)$ \\ \hline
Fixed & $109.06(18.48)$ & $134.82(20.38)$ & $157.38(17.24)$ \\ \hline
Greedy & $176.34(25.76)$ & $192.44(32.76)$ & $231.55(49.57)$ \\ \hline
MCTS-50 & $166.56(38.20)$ & $202.55(39.63)$ & $243.59(53.45)$ \\ \hline
MCTS-100 & $193.63(39.76)$ & $203.36(40.11)$ & $256.65(50.80)$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Accuracy score with varying sensing budgets}
\label{table2}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& \multicolumn{3}{c|}{\textbf{Sensing Budget}} \\ \hline
\textbf{Policy} & \textbf{50} & \textbf{70} & \textbf{100} \\ \hline
Random & $391.84(15.41)$ & $397.22(16.64)$ & $402.12(19.75)$ \\ \hline
Fixed & $389.62(16.27)$ & $402.55(17.27)$ & $412.47(18.27)$ \\ \hline
Greedy & $426.10(20.80)$ & $436.78(18.61)$ & $451.95(30.15)$ \\ \hline
MCTS-50 & $423.29(24.85)$ & $444.47(26.27)$ & $460.02(36.44)$ \\ \hline
MCTS-100 & $436.35(27.58)$ & $445.21(24.94)$ & $466.22(29.48)$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
We ran 50 trials for each policy with randomly generated environments and start locations. The policies were tested with sensing budgets of 50, 70 and 100 units. Two performance measures were used: the total information gained and an accuracy score. This is defined as the probability of the correct location class in the robot's belief. For example if a robot's belief about the class of $L$ in a particular cell is $[0.1,0.2,0.7]$ and the true class is the second one, the accuracy for the cell will be $0.2$. The accuracy score is the sum of the accuracy of all of the cells. It is an important metric because it captures situations in which the robot's belief converges to the wrong class.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim = {0 0.2 0 0.1cm},clip, width=\textwidth]{cont_diagram.JPG}
\caption{Left: System diagram of Continuum. Right: Continuum's UV light source in action}
\label{continuum_diag}
\end{figure*}
The average information gain and accuracy scores at the end of the mission are shown in Tables I and II with the standard deviation in brackets. Since our MCTS based planner is anytime, it was run with 50 and 100 iterations to test the effect of computation time on resulting performance. For all budget sizes, the adaptive algorithms (greedy and MCTS variants) significantly outperformed random and fixed sampling paths. For budget sizes 70 and 100 both of the MCTS variants yielded better performance than greedy in terms of both information gain and accuracy score.
For a budget of 50 however, the greedy algorithm outperformed the MCTS-50 variant. We believe this is the case due to two reasons. Firstly, the simulation environment is open and unconstrained. With a small budget, the greedy strategy does not reach a point where the local information the robot can gain is exhausted. Secondly, in short planning horizons the next best action has a large effect on the final performance. Since the greedy algorithm allocated 20 samples for each action but MCTS-50 on average only uses 5 samples (the action space has a size of 10), the greedy approach has a better estimate of the information that can be gained in the next action. The fact that MCTS-100 significantly outperformed greedy supports this hypothesis.
In terms of computation time, each iteration of the MCTS took between 0.2 to 0.5 seconds on an average desktop computer. The implementation was however in MATLAB and can be significantly sped up through more efficient memory management and handling of data structures. Parts of the algorithm can be parallelized so utilizing multi-threading is also a possibility.
\section{Planetary Rover Experiments}
In this section we demonstrate the practicality of our approach with a rover mission on an analog Martian terrain based in the Museum of Applied Arts and Sciences (MAAS) in Sydney. This section summarizes the platform capabilities, testing environment, our computer vision technique and concludes with some trial experiments.
\subsection{Platform Details}
Our rover Continuum is pictured in Fig. \ref{continuum_diag}. It is equipped with an omni-directional drive which gives it relatively unconstrained motion capabilities. The spiral shape of the rims act as shock absorbers while the double-bogie chassis allow the rover to climb over steep rocks and minimize the changes in orientation. Continuum has a 6 degree of freedom robotic arm with cameras, an ultraviolet light source and a 2D laser scanner mounted on the end effector. There are also several hazard cameras around the body to check for collisions. In this experiment we use one of the arm cameras and the UV light source as our two sensors. The light source illuminates the UV reflective powder we discuss in the next section and simulates what a spectrometer might do in a real mission. The arm camera was pointed towards the ground to constrain the information that can be gathered in a single sense.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{areatypes.JPG}
\caption{From left to right: The three classes of location type and a typical image when the local sensor is activated.}
\label{area_example}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{segmentation_eg.JPG}
\caption{Our rock segmentation technique in action. It can be seen that there are still some false positives in areas with shadows.}
\label{cv_example}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Environment Setup}
Our testing environment, the MAAS Mars Lab is a $20\times 7$m space which is designed to be a scientifically accurate representation of Martian terrain. The lab was divided into three different types of location shown in Fig. \ref{area_example}. Each location type had slightly different distributions of types of rocks and the features they exhibit. UV reflective powder was added in varying quantities to each category. There was however enough ambiguity between categories to encourage the robot to use a combination of both sensors to gather information. The rock grid was set to be a resolution of 2cm per cell. Rocks are different sizes so they usually span across many cells. To account for this we assume they are located in the cell nearest to their centroid. The conditional probability parameters of the BN were determined from intuition and therefore not 100\% accurate. There were also rocks in the environment which were not explicitly modeled in the BN, which is a realistic source of noise not present in the simulations.
\subsection{Computer vision}
In a realistic unstructured environment the feature extraction process is more complex and requires first segmenting the rocks from the image. It can be seen in Figures 6, 7 and 8 that rocks look very similar to ground in terms of colour. There are also lighting variations and shadows which complicate the image processing step. There are several methods proposed in literature which achieved good results. Edge-based techniques such as \cite{thompson2007performance} ran a Canny edge detector followed by a complex process of pruning and joining edges likely to belong to a rock. Texture based techniques such as \cite{song2008automated} utilized multi-resolution histograms to achieve coarse segmentation followed by an active contour technique to get good edge detection performance. Another interesting and effective approach was used by \cite{dunlop2007multi} which calculated superpixels at different scales followed by adding, subtracting, splitting and merging superpixels to satisfy criterion learned from a Support Vector Machine. However all of these approaches were designed for Martian imagery which did not have the same characteristics as our environment and were not available open source. Furthermore computation time was not considered in these studies so the algorithms often took several minutes to yield a result.
We approach this problem by first over-segmenting the image into superpixels using the SLIC algorithm \cite{achanta2012slic} which groups similarly colored pixels together while preserving the strong edges. This is followed by adaptive normalization to reduce lighting variations and shadows. Histograms of intensity, the number of edges, LAB color and intensity variance were calculated for each superpixel and compared to a training image of the ground with no rocks. Applying appropriate thresholds allows us to classify most of the superpixels as rock, ground or shadow. For the more uncertain superpixels, the amount of texture correlation with their local neighborhoods was measured followed by a voting process. This two stage process yields the final image shown in Fig. \ref{cv_example}. Segmentation is sometimes noisy like most robotic applications especially in the presence of shadows but the probabilistic nature of Bayesian networks helps minimize the resulting effects on decision making. For features we use circularity, size and color as they are simple to calculate and geologically meaningful. The UV measurement was obtained by calculating the blue to red ratio of the RGB channels. The features and UV measurements were both discretized into three categories.
\subsection{Localization and control}
PID controllers were used in conjunction with a localization system detailed in previous work \cite{potiris2014terrain} to control the omni-directional drive such that the required position and orientation is achieved within a small error margin. Localization was fused with the computer vision to register observations on a map which allowed the belief space to be updated. The action space was once again discretized into ten actions where the robot could select one of two sensors and decide whether to move forward one step, move diagonally at -45 and 45 degrees or rotate by -90 or 90 degrees. The robot also checked if actions will lead to collisions or cause the robot to drive over valuable rocks through an occupancy map provided to the robot prior to the mission.
\subsection{Results}
We compared our non-myopic planner against a random action policy with random start locations and orientations in the yard. Ten trials were run for each policy. A sensing budget of 30 units was used with a cost function of 1 and 5 units for the remote and local sensor respectively. We also attempted to implement a greedy strategy but found early in the trials that the robot often got stuck in local minima and wasn't able to give useful results. This is because, unlike the simulations, there were many non traversable rocks present which often created concave areas in the occupancy map. A random policy was able to better recover from such situations, and hence was a better benchmark to compare our algorithm against. The information gain and accuracy scores along with standard deviations are shown in Table III.
\begin{table}[!t]
\centering
\caption{Performance comparison of MCTS planner with random for real robot experiments}
\label{my-label}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|ll}
\hline
\textbf{Policy} & \textbf{Information Gain} & \textbf{Accuracy Score} \\ \hline
Random & 52.23 (11.76) & 161.89 (8.48) \\ \hline
MCTS-50 & 59.17 (18.63) & 170.04 (10.66) \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
If the robot has a uniform distribution over the belief of $L$ across all the cells, the accuracy score is $139.33$. The MCTS algorithms therefore gives almost a $25\%$ increase in accuracy score over random policies and $13\%$ increase in terms of information gain. It is important to note the testing environment was relatively small. Longer horizon plans are likely to generate even more performance benefits.
\section{Conclusions and Future Work}
The results presented in this paper show that our approach has the potential to extend the autonomy of space rovers, and information gathering robots in general. A novel method for encoding scientific knowledge in a BN was proposed, along with a MCTS planner to reason about the network and create informative action policies. This enables robots to plan and deploy sensors to directly study scientifically interesting latent variables in a closed loop fashion. The reduced reliance on communication with scientists for navigation should lead to increased science returns in future missions. Our approach was tested extensively in simulation as well as in an analog Mars environment and showed significant performance improvements over simpler policies.
In future work we would like to evaluate our approach in different use cases such as agriculture and remote sensing. Richer knowledge representation frameworks such as statistical relational models could be explored, while the performance of the MCTS can be further improved through more informed rollout policies and better reward function approximations. Another interesting line of work is to adapt the structure and conditional probability parameters of the BN online to better fit and predict observations.
\section*{ACKNOWLEDGMENT}
We would like to thank ACFR, MAAS and the Mars Lab project for supporting this work. Thanks also goes to Graeme Best, Oliver Cliff, Asher Bender and Steven Potiris for their valuable feedback.
\bibliographystyle{ieeetr}
|
\section{Error estimates for Riemann sums}\label{sectIntApprox}
\maketitle
\begin{abstract}
In this short note, we obtain error estimates for Riemann sums of some singular functions.
\end{abstract}
Let $N \in \bbN$, and let $z_0 =-1$ or $z_0 = 0$.
For a function $F_1 :[z_0, 1] \to \bbR$ denote the error estimate of the Riemann sum of the integral $\int_{z_0}^1 F_1(x) dx$ by
$$
R_n := \int_{z_0}^1 F_1(x) dx - \left( \frac{1}{2n}F_1(z_0) + \frac{1}{2n}F_1(1) + \sum_{ k = z_0 n + 1}^{n-1} \frac{1}{n}F_1\lr{\dfrac{k}{n}}\right).
$$
We prove the following 3 propositions, which are used, e.g., in~\cite{GT}.
\begin{prp}\label{lemIntSqrt1}
Assume that a function $F_1(x)$ can be represented as
$$
F_1(x) = c_1 (1-x)^{1/2}+ c_2 (1-x)^{3/2} + \tilde{F}_1(x),
$$
where $c_1, c_2 \in \bbR$ and $\tilde{F}_1 \in C^2[z_0, 1]$. Then
\begin{enumerate}
\item
There exists $L_1 = L_1(F_1, N) > 0$ such that
$$
\left|R_n\right| \leq L_1\frac{1}{n^{3/2}}, \quad n \geq N.
$$
\item If, additionally, $\tilde{F}_1(x) = c_3 (1-x)^{5/2} + c_4 (1-x)^{7/2} + \bar{F}_1(x)$, where $c_3, c_4 \in \bbR$ and $\bar{F} \in C^4[z_0, 1]$, then there exists $\bar{L}_1 = \bar{L}_1(F_1, N) > 0$ such that
$$
\left|(n+1)^2 R_{n+1} - n^2 R_n\right| \leq \bar{L}_1\frac{1}{n^{1/2}} \quad n \geq N.
$$
\end{enumerate}
\end{prp}
\begin{prp}\label{lemIntSqrt2}
Assume that a function $F_2(x)$ can be represented as
\begin{equation}\label{P7s}
F_2(x) = c_1 (1-x)^{-1/2}+ c_2 (1-x)^{1/2} + \tilde{F}_2(x),
\end{equation}
where $c_1 > 0$, $c_2 \in \bbR$, and $\tilde{F}_2 \in C^1[z_0, 1]$.
Then there exists $L_2 = L_2(F_2, N) > 0$, $L_2^* = L_2^*(F_2, N) > c_1$ and $l_2 = l_2(F_2, N)$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eqL2}
L_2^*\frac{1}{n^{1/2}} - l_2 \frac{1}{n} \leq \int_{z_0}^1 F_2(x) dx - \sum_{k = z_0n}^{n-1} \frac{1}{n}F_2\lr{\dfrac{k}{n}} \leq
L_2\frac{1}{n^{1/2}}, \quad n \geq N.
\end{equation}
In particular, $\left|\sum \limits_{k = z_0 n}^{n-1} \frac{1}{n}F_2\lr{\frac{k}{n}}\right|$ is bounded.
\end{prp}
\begin{prp}\label{propL3}
Assume that $F_3 \in C^0[-1, 1)$ and $|(1-x)^{3/2}F_3(x)|$ is bounded on $[-1, 1)$. Then there exists $L_3 = L_3(F_3, N) > 0$ such that
$$
\left|\sum_{|k|\leq n-1} \frac{1}{n}F_3\lr{\frac{k}{n}}\right| \leq L_3{n^{1/2}}, \quad n \geq N.
$$
\end{prp}
Here we provide the proofs of item 2 of Proposition \ref{lemIntSqrt1} and Proposition \ref{lemIntSqrt2} for the case $z_0 = -1$. Item 1 of Proposition \ref{lemIntSqrt1} and the case $z_0 = 0$ can be proved similarly. Proposition~\ref{propL3} is straightforward.
\subsection*{Proof of item 2 of Proposition \ref{lemIntSqrt1} }
Consider the function $\Phi(x): = F_1(x) + F_1(-x)$.
Then
$$
n^2 R_n = n^2 I_{F1} - \left( \frac{n}{2}\Phi(0) + \frac{n}{2}\Phi(1) + \sum_{k=1}^{n-1} n \Phi\lr{\frac{k}{n}} \right),
$$
where $I_{F1} := \int_{-1}^1 F_1(x)dx$. Therefore,
\begin{align}
(n+1)^2R_{n+1} - n^2 R_n
& = (2n+1)I_{F1} -
\left(
\frac{\Phi(0) + \Phi(1)}{2} +
\sum_{k = 1}^{n} (n+1) \Phi\lr{\frac{k}{n+1}} -
\sum_{k = 1}^{n-1} n \Phi\lr{\frac{k}{n}}
\right) \notag \\
& = \Sigma_{1, n} + \Sigma_{2, n}, \label{P13s}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align*}
\Sigma_{1, n} & := (n+1)I_{F1} - \left( \frac{\Phi(0) + \Phi(1)}{2} + \sum_{k = 1}^n \Phi\lr{\frac{k}{n+1}} \right),\\
\Sigma_{2, n} & := n\lr{I_{F1} - \Phi(0) - \Sigma_{\Phi, n} }, \quad
\Sigma_{\Phi, n} := \sum_{k = 1}^{n} \left( \Phi\lr{\frac{k}{n+1}} - \Phi\lr{\frac{k-1}{n}} \right).
\end{align*}
Note that $\Sigma_{1, n} = (n+1)R_{n+1}$. Hence, Proposition \ref{lemIntSqrt1} (item 1) implies that, for some $L_1 > 0$,
\begin{equation}\label{P14ss}
|\Sigma_{1, n}| \leq L_1 \frac{1}{\sqrt{n+1}}.
\end{equation}
Estimates of $\Sigma_{2, n}$ are more subtle. First, note that
$\frac{k}{n+1} - \frac{k-1}{n} = \frac{n+1-k}{n(n+1)}$
and, hence,
\begin{align*}
\Phi\lr{\frac{k}{n+1}} - \Phi\lr{\frac{k-1}{n}} & = \frac{n+1-k}{n(n+1)}\Phi'\lr{\frac{k}{n+1}} \\ & \;\;\;\; - \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{n+1-k}{n(n+1)}\right)^2 \Phi''\lr{\frac{k}{n+1}} +
\frac{1}{6}\left(\frac{n+1-k}{n(n+1)}\right)^3 \Phi'''(\xi_k),
\end{align*}
where $\xi_k \in \left[\frac{k-1}{n}, \frac{k}{n+1}\right]$. Therefore,
\begin{align}
\Sigma_{\Phi, n} & = \frac{n+1}{n}\sum_{k = 1}^{n}\frac{1}{n+1}\frac{n+1-k}{n+1}\Phi'\lr{\frac{k}{n+1}} -\frac{1}{2}\frac{n+1}{n^2}\sum_{k = 1}^{n}\frac{1}{n+1}\lr{\frac{n+1-k}{n+1}}^2\Phi''\lr{\frac{k}{n+1}} \notag \\
& \;\;\;\; + \frac{1}{6}\frac{n+1}{n^3}\sum_{k = 1}^{n}\frac{1}{n+1}\lr{\frac{n+1-k}{n+1}}^3\Phi'''\lr{\xi_k}. \label{P14s}
\end{align}
Set
\begingroup
\allowdisplaybreaks
$$
\Phi_1(x) := (1-x)\Phi'(x), \quad \Phi_2(x) := (1-x)^2\Phi''(x), \quad \Phi_3(x) := (1-x)^3\Phi'''(x),
$$
\begin{equation}\label{P'16s}
I_{\Phi 1}:= \int_{0}^1 \Phi_1(x) dx, \quad I_{\Phi 2}:= \int_{0}^1 \Phi_2(x) dx,
\end{equation}
\begin{align}
\Sigma_{\Phi 1, n} & := I_{\Phi 1} - \sum_{k = 1}^{n}\frac{1}{n+1}\frac{n+1-k}{n+1}\Phi'\lr{\frac{k}{n+1}} - \frac{1}{2(n+1)}\Phi'(0), \label{eqf1}\\
\Sigma_{\Phi 2, n} & := I_{\Phi 2} - \sum_{k = 1}^{n}\frac{1}{n+1}\lr{\frac{n+1-k}{n+1}}^2\Phi''\lr{\frac{k}{n+1}} - \frac{1}{2(n+1)}\Phi''(0), \label{eqf2}\\
\Sigma_{\Phi 3, n} & := \sum_{k = 1}^{n}\frac{1}{n+1}\lr{\frac{n+1-k}{n+1}}^3\Phi'''\lr{\xi_k} \label{eqf3}.
\end{align}
\endgroup
Since $\xi_k \leq \dfrac{k}{n+1}$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{P15s}
\left|\lr{\frac{n+1-k}{n+1}}^3\Phi'''\lr{\xi_k}\right| \leq |\Phi_3(\xi_k)|.
\end{equation}
Proposition \ref{lemIntSqrt1} (item 1) and \eqref{P15s} imply that
\begin{equation}\label{eqKf}
|\Sigma_{\Phi 1, n}| \leq K_{\Phi 1}\frac{1}{(n+1)^{3/2}}, \quad |\Sigma_{\Phi 2, n}| \leq K_{\Phi 2}\frac{1}{(n+1)^{3/2}}, \quad |\Sigma_{\Phi 3, n}| \leq K_{\Phi 3},
\end{equation}
$$
K_{\Phi 1} := L_1(\Phi_1, N), \quad K_{\Phi 2} := L_1(\Phi_2, N), \quad K_{\Phi 3} := \sup_{x \in (0, 1)} |\Phi_3(x)|,
$$
In this notation, \eqref{P14s} takes the form
\begin{equation*}\notag
\Sigma_{\Phi, n} = \frac{n+1}{n}\lr{I_{\Phi 1} - \frac{\Phi'(0)}{2(n+1)} - \Sigma_{\Phi 1, n}}
-\frac{n+1}{2n^2}\lr{I_{\Phi 2}- \frac{\Phi''(0)}{2(n+1)} - \Sigma_{\Phi 2, n}} + \frac{n+1}{6n^3}\Sigma_{\Phi 3, n}.
\end{equation*}
Finally, taking into account \eqref{P14ss},
we conclude that
\begin{align*}
\Sigma_{2, n} & = nI_{F1} - (n+1)I_{\Phi 1}+ \frac{1}{2}\frac{n+1}{n}I_{\Phi 2} - \lr{n\Phi(0) - \frac{1}{2}\Phi'(0) + \frac{1}{4n} \Phi''(0)} \\
& \;\;\;\; + \lr{(n+1)\Sigma_{\Phi 1, n} - \frac{1}{2}\frac{n+1}{n}\Sigma_{\Phi 2, n} - \frac{1}{6}\frac{n+1}{n^2}\Sigma_{\Phi 3, n}}.
\end{align*}
Using the relations $I_{F1} = I_{\Phi 1} + \Phi(0)$ and $I_{\Phi 2} = 2I_{\Phi 1} - \Phi'(0)$, we obtain
\begin{align*}
\Sigma_{2, n} & = nI_{\Phi 1} + n\Phi(0) -(n+1)I_{\Phi 1}+ \frac{n+1}{n}I_{\Phi 1} - \frac{1}{2}\frac{n+1}{n}\Phi'(0) \\
& \;\;\;\; -\lr{n\Phi(0) - \frac{1}{2}\Phi'(0) + \frac{1}{4n}\Phi''(0)} + \lr{(n+1)\Sigma_{\Phi 1, n} - \frac{1}{2}\frac{n+1}{n}\Sigma_{\Phi 2, n} - \frac{1}{6}\frac{n+1}{n^2}\Sigma_{\Phi 3, n}} \\
& = \frac{1}{n}I_{\Phi 1} - \frac{1}{4n}\Phi''(0) - \frac{1}{2n}\Phi'(0) + \lr{(n+1)\Sigma_{\Phi 1, n} - \frac{1}{2}\frac{n+1}{n}\Sigma_{\Phi 2, n} - \frac{1}{6}\frac{n+1}{n^2}\Sigma_{\Phi 3, n}}.
\end{align*}
The latter equality and estimates \eqref{eqKf} yield
\begin{align*}
|\Sigma_{2, n}| & \leq \frac{1}{n} \lr{|I_{\Phi 1}| + \frac{|\Phi''(0)|}{4} + \frac{|\Phi'(0)|}{2} + \frac{K_{\Phi 3}}{3} } + K_{\Phi 1}\frac{1}{n^{1/2}} + \frac{K_{\Phi 2}}{2}\frac{1}{n^{3/2}} \\
& \leq \frac{1}{n^{1/2}}\lr{K_{\Phi 1} + \lr{|I_{\Phi 1}| + \frac{|\Phi''(0)|}{4} + \frac{|\Phi'(0)|}{2} + \frac{K_{\Phi 3}}{3}}\frac{1}{N^{1/2}} + \frac{K_{\Phi 2}}{2}\frac{1}{N}}.
\end{align*}
Combining this with \eqref{P13s} and \eqref{P14ss}, we have
\begin{equation}\notag
|(n+1)^2 R_{n+1} - n^2 R_n| \leq \bar{L}_1 \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}},\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\notag
\bar{L}_1 := L_1 + K_{\Phi 1} + \lr{|I_{\Phi 1}| + \frac{|\Phi''(0)|}{4} + \frac{|\Phi'(0)|}{2} + \frac{K_{\Phi 3}}{3}}\frac{1}{N^{1/2}} + K_{\Phi 2}\frac{1}{N}.
\end{equation}
\subsection*{Proof of Proposition \ref{lemIntSqrt2}}
Fix $\cmax_1 > c_1$ and $\cmin_1 \in (\frac{2}{3\sqrt{2}-2}c_1, c_1)$.
Let us choose $\delta \in (0, 1)$ such that, for $x \in [1-\delta, 1)$,
\begin{equation}\label{eqIntSqrt01}
\frac{\cmin_1}{(1-x)^{1/2}} \leq F_2(x) \leq \frac{\cmax_1}{(1-x)^{1/2}}, \quad \quad
\frac{1}{2}\frac{\cmin_1}{(1-x)^{3/2}} \leq F'_2(x) \leq \frac{1}{2}\frac{\cmax_1}{(1-x)^{3/2}}.
\end{equation}
Using the representation \eqref{P7s} and \eqref{eqIntSqrt01}, we choose $C = C(F) > 0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eqIntSqrtBV}
\int_{-1}^{\beta} |F'_2(x)| \dx \leq F(\beta) + C, \quad \beta \in [1- \delta, 1).
\end{equation}
Finally, we assume that (increasing $L_2$ and $l_2$ if necessarily)
\begin{equation}\label{P33s}
n \geq \frac{2}{\delta}.
\end{equation}
Integrating by parts, we have
\begingroup
\begin{multline*}
\int_{-1}^1 F_2(x) \dx
= \sum_{k = -n}^{n-1} \int_{k/n}^{(k+1)/n} F_2(x) \dx \\
= \sum_{k = -n}^{n-1} \lr{\left.\lr{x-\frac{k+1}{n}}F_2(x) \right|_{k/n}^{(k+1)/n} - \int_{k/n}^{(k+1)/n} \lr{x-\frac{k+1}{n}}F'_2(x) \dx}
= \sum_{k = -n}^{n-1} \frac{1}{n} F_2\lr{\frac{k}{n}} + \Sigma_{1, n},
\end{multline*}
\endgroup
where
$$
\Sigma_{1, n} := \sum_{k = -n}^{n-1} \int_{k/n}^{(k+1)/n} \lr{\frac{k+1}{n}-x}F'_2(x) \dx.
$$
Inequalities \eqref{eqIntSqrt01}--\eqref{P33s} imply that
\begin{align}
|\Sigma_{1, n}|
& = \left|\int_{1-1/n}^{1} (1-x)F'_2(x) + \sum_{k = -n}^{n-2} \int_{k/n}^{(k+1)/n} \lr{\frac{k+1}{n}-x}F'_2(x) \dx \right| \notag \\
& \leq \int_{1-1/n}^{1} \frac{1}{2}\frac{\cmax_1}{(1-x)^{1/2}} + \sum_{k = -n}^{n-2} \frac{1}{n} \int_{k/n}^{(k+1)/n} |F'_2(x)| \dx
\leq \frac{\cmax_1}{\sqrt{n}} + \frac{1}{n} \int_{-1}^{1-1/n} |F'_2(x)| \dx. \label{P33ss}
\end{align}
Since $1-1/n > 1 - \delta$ due to \eqref{P33s}, we conclude from \eqref{eqIntSqrt01}, \eqref{eqIntSqrtBV} and \eqref{P33ss} that
\begin{equation*}
|\Sigma_{1, n}| \leq \frac{\cmax_1}{\sqrt{n}} + \frac{1}{n}\lr{F_2\lr{1-\frac{1}{n}} + C} \leq 2\cmax_1\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}} + C\frac{1}{n}.
\end{equation*}
Taking $L_2 := 2\cmax_1 + \frac{C}{\sqrt{N}}$, we obtain the second inequality in \eqref{eqL2}.
Set $k_0 := [(1-\delta) n]$ ($[\cdot]$ is the integer part of a real number). We represent $\Sigma_{1, n}$ as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eqSigmas}
\Sigma_{1, n} = \Sigma_{2, n} + \Sigma_{3, n},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align}
\notag \Sigma_{2, n}
& := \lr{\sum_{k = -n}^{k_0-1} \int_{k/n}^{(k+1)/n} \lr{\frac{k+1}{n}-x}F'_2(x) \dx + \int_{k_0}^{1-\delta} \lr{\frac{k_0+1}{n}-x}F'_2(x) \dx}, \\
\label{eqIntApproxS3} \Sigma_{3, n}
& := \lr{ \int_{1-\delta}^{(k_0+1)/n} \lr{\frac{k_0+1}{n}-x}F'_2(x) \dx + \sum_{k = k_0+ 1}^{n-1} \int_{k/n}^{(k+1)/n} \lr{\frac{k+1}{n}-x}F'_2(x)}.
\end{align}
Below we estimate $\Sigma_{2, n}$ and $\Sigma_{3, n}$ separately.
Inequality \eqref{eqIntSqrtBV} implies that
\begin{equation}\label{eqSigma2IA}
\Sigma_{2, n} \geq -\frac{1}{n}\lr{\int_{-1}^{1-\delta} |F'_2(x)| \dx} \geq -\frac{1}{n}(F_2(1-\delta) + C).
\end{equation}
Due to \eqref{eqIntSqrt01} all the terms in expression $\Sigma_{3, n}$ are positive. Inequality \eqref{P33s} implies that the last sum in formula \eqref{eqIntApproxS3} contains at least two terms and inequality \eqref{eqIntSqrt01} implies that
\begin{align}
\Sigma_{3, n} & \geq \int_{1-2/n}^{1-1/n}\lr{1-\frac{1}{n}-x}F'_2(x) \dx + \int_{1-1/n}^{1}(1-x)F'_2(x) \dx \notag \\
& \geq \int_{1-2/n}^{1-1/n}\frac{1}{2}\lr{1-\frac{1}{n}-x}\frac{\cmin_1}{(1-x)^{3/2}} \dx + \int_{1-1/n}^{1}\frac{1}{2}\frac{\cmin_1}{(1-x)^{1/2}} \dx \notag\\
& = \int_{1-2/n}^{1}\frac{1}{2}\frac{\cmin_1}{(1-x)^{1/2}} \dx - \frac{1}{2n}\int_{1-2/n}^{1-1/n}\frac{\cmin_1}{(1-x)^{3/2}} = \frac{3\sqrt{2}-2}{2}\cmin_1\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}} \label{eqSigma3IA}.
\end{align}
Relations \eqref{eqSigmas}, \eqref{eqSigma2IA}, and \eqref{eqSigma3IA} imply that
\begin{equation*}
\Sigma_{1, n} \geq L_2^*\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}} - l_2\frac{1}{n},
\end{equation*}
where $L_2^* := \frac{3\sqrt{2}-2}{2}\cmin_1 > c_1$ and $l_2 := F_2(1-\delta) + C$.
|
\section{\newpage\stdsection}
\let\stdparagraph\paragraph
\renewcommand\paragraph{\vspace*{1em}\stdparagraph}
\renewcommand{\cite}[1]{{[\cites{#1}}}
\newcommand{\nopagebreak\flushright$\filledmedsquare$}{\nopagebreak\flushright$\filledmedsquare$}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{diag}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{diag}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathfrak{G}}}{\ensuremath{\mathfrak{G}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{plh}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{plh}}}
\begin{document}
\title[Regularizing Feynman path integrals using the gen. KV trace]{Regularizing Feynman path integrals using the generalized Kontsevich-Vishik trace}
\author{Tobias Hartung}
\address{Department of Mathematics, King's College London, Strand, London WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom}
\email{<EMAIL>}
\urladdr{www.nms.kcl.ac.uk/tobias.hartung}
\date{\today}
\begin{abstract}
A fully regulated definition of Feynman's path integral is presented here. The proposed re-formulation of the path integral coincides with the familiar formulation whenever the path integral is well-defined. In particular, it is consistent with respect to lattice formulations and Wick rotations, i.e., it can be used in Euclidean and Minkowskian space-time. The path integral regularization is introduced through the generalized Kontsevich-Vishik trace, that is, the extension of the classical trace to Fourier Integral Operators. Physically, we are replacing the time-evolution semi-group by a holomorphic family of operator families such that the corresponding path integrals are well-defined in some half space of $\mathbb{C}$. The regularized path integral is, thus, defined through analytic continuation. This regularization can be performed by means of stationary phase approximation or computed analytically depending only on the Hamiltonian and the observable (i.e., known a priori). In either case, the computational effort to evaluate path integrals or expectations of observables reduces to the evaluation of integrals over spheres. Furthermore, computations can be performed directly in the continuum and applications (analytic computations and their implementations) to a number of models including the non-trivial cases of the massive Schwinger model and a $\phi^4$ theory.
\end{abstract}
\maketitle
\tableofcontents
\section*{Introduction}
In his original work on path integrals, Feynman~\cite{feynman} noted that recognizing known facts from different perspectives can lead to new and interesting insights. Quantum mechanics in particular has been an important example of this observation, having Schrödinger's differential equation and Heisenberg's matrix algebra. While the two theories' mathematical descriptions are seemingly distinct, Dirac's transformation theory proved their equivalence. In 1948, Feynman~\cite{feynman} added a third important mathematical formulation of quantum mechanics based on some of Dirac's observations about the role of the classical action in quantum mechanics. This third description is also known as Feynman's path integral formalism and, in combination with Feynman diagrams, proved to be fundamental for the development and study of Quantum Field Theories (QFTs).
Unfortunately, the path integral is a very elusive object. In fact, only for quantum mechanics an analytically well-defined path integral construction is known. In most other cases, the path integral can only be evaluated ``formally'', e.g., by means of a formal power series in the physical variables~\cite{johnson-freyd}. Thus, giving rise to perturbation theoretical approaches to QFT. In quantum mechanics, the path integral can be defined as a continuum limit of the discretized system~\cite{takhtajan}. Wilson~\cite{wilson} further developed this idea for QFTs since the path integral of a quantum mechanical system in discretized space-time is always well-defined. Thus, Wilson defined the path integral fully non-perturbatively on a space-time grid, going beyond perturbation theory. Using a transformation to Euclidean space-time (Wick rotation), this discretized path integral has been successfully applied to study physical systems computationally~\cite{degrand-detar,gattringer-lang,montvay-muenster} and phase space path integrals mathematically~\cite{kumano-go-I,kumano-go-II,kumano-go-III}.
Non-discretized path integrals in Euclidean space-time can be studied within the framework of classical pseudo-differential operators and their traces and determinants~\cite{paycha}. These traces and determinants are defined using $\zeta$-regularization which also gives rise to the Kontsevich-Vishik trace~\cite{kontsevich-vishik,kontsevich-vishik-geometry}. Incidentally, Hawing~\cite{hawking} had proposed studying the path integral with a curved space-time background in a $\zeta$-regularized setting long before the Kontsevich-Vishik trace was developed. In his approach, Hawking used a power series expansion of the action and regularized the quadratic term using the spectral $\zeta$-function. Furthermore, Gibbons, Hawking, and Perry~\cite{gibbons-hawking-perry} studied convergence properties of the $\zeta$-regularized one-loop approximation of the path integral.
Thus, the paper aims to shed light on the following questions.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] Is it possible to $\zeta$-regularize the partition function and expectation values of observables in Minkowski space-time?
\item[(ii)] Are the regularized partition functions and expectation values of observables independent of the choices made in the construction of the $\zeta$-function?
\item[(iii)] Does the regularization contain the known special cases of well-defined path integrals (e.g., Wick rotated or space-time discretized)?
\item[(iv)] Is the construction physically ``meaningful''?
\end{itemize}
Given the recent developments on $\zeta$-functions of Fourier Integral Operators~\cite{hartung-phd,hartung-scott}, we aim to consider a non-perturbative approach to $\zeta$-regularization of path integrals. In particular, we want this new approach to contain all the special cases above, i.e., discretizations, Wick rotations, and spectral $\zeta$-functions. In order to achieve this goal, the generalized Kontsevich-Vishik trace is the ideal candidate. In fact, it can be shown that the Kontsevich-Vishik trace is the only trace on classical pseudo-differential operators (which we obtain from Wick rotating) that restricts to the canonical trace (which we obtain after discretization). Hence, we will alter Feynman's definition of the path integral to incorporate the generalized Kontsevich-Vishik trace. This ensures that the new definition of the path integral coincides with Feynman's definition whenever Feynman's path integral is well-defined.
This paper is organized as follows. Appendix~\ref{sec:KV} contains a non-technical overview of Fourier Integral Operator $\zeta$-functions and the generalized Kontsevich-Vishik trace. In section~\ref{sec:feynman}, we will use the results of appendix~\ref{sec:KV} to show that path integrals are regularizable in this sense and obtain an altered definition of the path integral, partition function, and expectation values of observables. Finally, we will consider a number of physical models in sections~\ref{sec:harmonic-oscillator}-\ref{sec:spontaneous}. First, we will give examples applying the proposed regularization to very simple models such as the harmonic oscillator, the topological oscillator, and free fermions in order to show how the regularization works in practice. In a second step, we will apply the method to non-trivial cases such as the massive Schwinger model and a $\phi^4$ theory. In particular, we will show analytic computations as well as Python implementations using symbolic arithmetic.
\subsubsection*{Acknowledgment}
The author would like to express his gratitude to Dr. Karl Jansen and Dr. Erhard Seiler for inspiring comments and conversations which helped to develop the work presented in this article.
\section{The regularized Feynman path integral}\label{sec:feynman}
Considering the Schr\"odinger equation\footnote{We use the term ``Schr\"odinger equation'' as a generic name for ``Schr\"odinger-type'' equations like the Dirac equation, i.e., we do not necessarily assume that the Hamiltonian is a Schr\"odinger operator.}
\begin{align*}
\d_0\psi=\frac{-i}{\hbar}H\psi,
\end{align*}
we obtain
\begin{align*}
\psi(t)=\exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^t H(s)ds\r)\psi(0).
\end{align*}
Following Feynman's approach~\cite{feynman} (cf. ``Some Remarks on Mathematical Rigor'' in chapter 4-3~\cite{feynman-hibbs-styer} and~\cite{creutz-freedman}, as well), we will change the physics slightly and introduce a (flat) time torus of length $T$, i.e.,
\begin{align*}
\psi(T)=\exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^T H(s)ds\r)\psi(0)=\psi(0).
\end{align*}
Then, we can formally introduce the partition function
\begin{align*}
Z_T\text{ ``$=$'' }\tr \exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^T H(s)ds\r)
\end{align*}
and the expectation of an observable $\Omega$
\begin{align*}
\langle\Omega\rangle_T\text{ ``$=$'' }\frac{\tr\exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^T H(s)ds\r)\Omega}{Z_T}=\frac{\tr\exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^T H(s)ds\r)\Omega}{\tr\exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^T H(s)ds\r)}.
\end{align*}
The actual expectation value $\langle \Omega\rangle$ in the quantum theory can be recovered using the thermal limit
\begin{align*}
\langle\Omega\rangle:=\lim_{T\to\infty}\langle\Omega\rangle_T.
\end{align*}
Unfortunately, the $\exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^T H(s)ds\r)\Omega$ are not of trace-class, in general. Hence, they need to be regularized.
Based on Ray and Singer's work on spectral $\zeta$-functions~\cite{ray,ray-singer}, Hawking~\cite{hawking} proposed $\zeta$-function regularization. Since most algebras of Fourier Integral Operators do not have the holomorphic functional calculus, we cannot expect to be able to define a spectral $\zeta$ function for $\exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^T H(s)ds\r)\Omega$, but we may consider (generalized) $\zeta$-functions~\cite{hartung-phd}. Thus, the regularized traces are given by the generalized Kontsevich-Vishik trace\footnote{Note that the Kontsevich-Vishik trace is the only trace on the algebra of pseudo-differential operators that coincides with the trace in $L(L_2)$ on pseudo-differential trace-class operators~\cite{maniccia-schrohe-seiler}. The generalized Kontsevich-Vishik trace is, thus, a natural choice of regularization.}~\cite{hartung-phd,hartung-scott}.
Let $H$ be a pseudo-differential operator with symbol\footnote{We call $\sigma$ the symbol of an operator $A$ if and only if $A$ is an integral operator with kernel $k$ which (locally) satisfies $k(x,y)=\int_{\rn[n]}e^{i\langle x-y,\xi\rangle_{\ell_2(n)}}\sigma(x,y,\xi)d\xi$ for some $n\in\nn$.}
\begin{align*}
\sigma_H(t,x,r\xi):=h_2(t,x,\xi)r^2+h_1(t,x,\xi)r+h_0(t,x,r,\xi)
\end{align*}
where $\norm\xi_{\ell_2}=1$, the $h_j$ are continuous, and $h_0(t,x,r,\xi)$ has an asymptotic expansion $\sum_{j\in\nn_0}r^{-j}a_{-j}(t,x,\xi)$. Then, $\exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^T H(s)ds\r)$ has the symbol
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{\exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^T H(s)ds\r)}=e^{iH_2(x,\xi)}e^{iH_1(x,\xi)}e^{\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^T h_0(s,x,r,\xi)ds}
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align*}
H_2(x,r\xi):=\frac{-1}{\hbar}r^2\int_0^T h_2(s,x,\xi)ds\text{ and }H_1(x,r\xi):=\frac{-1}{\hbar}r\int_0^T h_1(s,x,\xi)ds.
\end{align*}
In particular,
\begin{align*}
e^{\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^T h_0(s,x,r,\xi)ds}=&\sum_{k\in\nn_0}\frac{\l(-\frac{i}{\hbar}\r)^k}{k!}\l(\int_0^T h_0(s,x,r,\xi)ds\r)^k\\
\sim&\sum_{k\in\nn_0}\frac{\l(-\frac{i}{\hbar}\r)^k}{k!}\l(\sum_{j\in\nn_0}r^{-j}\int_0^T a_{-j}(s,x,\xi)ds\r)^k,
\end{align*}
in combination with the power series identity (for $n\in\nn$)
\begin{align*}
\l(\sum_{k\in\nn_0}a_kX^k\r)^n=\sum_{m\in\nn_0}c_mX^m
\end{align*}
where $c_0=a_0^n$ and $c_m=\frac{1}{ma_0}\sum_{k=1}^m(kn-m+k)a_kc_{m-k}$, shows that $e^{\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^T h_0(s,x,r,\xi)ds}$ has an asymptotic expansion $b(x,\xi)\sim\sum_{j\in\nn_0}\norm\xi_{\ell_2(N)}^{-j}b_{-j}\l(x,\frac{\xi}{\norm\xi_{\ell_2(N)}}\r)$.
Regarding $\exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^T H(s)ds\r)\Omega$, we note
\begin{align*}
\langle\Fp \Omega\phi,\Fp u\rangle=&\langle\phi,\Omega^*u\rangle\\
=&\int_{\rn[N]}\phi(x)\l(\int_{\rn[N]}e^{i\langle x,\xi\rangle}\sigma_{\Omega^*}(x,\xi)\Fp u(\xi)d\xi\r)^*dx\\
=&\int_{\rn[N]}\int_{\rn[N]}\phi(x)e^{-i\langle x,\xi\rangle}\sigma_{\Omega^*}(x,\xi)^*\Fp u(\xi)^*d\xi dx
\end{align*}
which implies
\begin{align*}
\Fp\Omega\phi(\xi)=\int_{\rn[N]}e^{-i\langle x,\xi\rangle}\sigma_{\Omega^*}(x,\xi)^*\phi(x)dx
\end{align*}
and, thus,
\begin{align*}
&\exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^T H(s)ds\r)\Omega\phi(x)\\
=&\int_{\rn[N]}e^{iH_2(x,\xi)}e^{iH_1(x,\xi)}b(x,\xi)e^{i\langle x,\xi\rangle}\Fp\Omega\phi(\xi)d\xi\\
=&\int_{\rn[N]}\int_{\rn[N]}e^{iH_2(x,\xi)}e^{iH_1(x,\xi)}b(x,\xi)e^{i\langle x,\xi\rangle}e^{-i\langle y,\xi\rangle}\sigma_{\Omega^*}(y,\xi)^*\phi(y)dy d\xi.
\end{align*}
Hence, (utilizing $\sigma_{A^*}(x,y,\xi)=\sigma_A(y,x,\xi)^*$ for any pseudo-differential operator $A$)
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{\exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^T H(s)ds\r)\Omega}(x,y,\xi)=e^{iH_2(x,\xi)}e^{iH_1(x,\xi)}b(x,\xi)\sigma_{\Omega}(x,\xi).
\end{align*}
In other words, both trace integrals in $Z=\frac{\tr \exp\l(-\frac i\hbar\int H\r)\Omega}{\tr \exp\l(-\frac i\hbar\int H\r)}$ have kernels of the form
\begin{align*}
\int_{\rn[N]}e^{i\langle x-y,\xi\rangle}e^{iH_2(x,\xi)}e^{iH_1(x,\xi)}a(x,\xi)d\xi
\end{align*}
with poly-$\log$-homogeneous $a$ provided $h_0$ and $\sigma_\Omega$ are poly-$\log$-homogeneous.
In order to $\zeta$-regularize these integrals, they need to be gauged. One of the simplest and most convenient gauges is the $\Mp$-gauge (or Mellin-gauge; cf. Definition 2.10 in~\cite{hartung-phd})
\begin{align*}
\int_{\rn[N]}e^{i\langle x-y,\xi\rangle}e^{iH_2(x,\xi)}e^{iH_1(x,\xi)}a(x,\xi)\norm\xi_{\ell_2(N)}^z d\xi.
\end{align*}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem-regularization}
Let $X$ be a compact, orientable, $N$-dimensional Riemannian $C^\infty$-manifold without boundary, $\sigma_\Omega$ polyhomogeneous, and
\begin{align*}
Z=\int_X\int_{\rn[N]}e^{-i\sigma_H(x,\xi)}\sigma_\Omega(x,\xi)\ d\xi\ d\vol_X(x)
\end{align*}
with
\begin{align*}
\fa x\in X\ \fa r\in\rn_{\ge0}\ \fa \eta\in\d B_{\rn[N]}:\ \sigma_H(x,r\eta)=h_2(x,\eta)r^2+h_1(x,\eta)r+h_0(x,r\eta)
\end{align*}
where $h_2,h_1\in C(X\times\d B_{\rn[N]})$, $h_0$ polyhomogeneous, and
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] either $h_2=0$ and $\theta(x,\xi):=h_1\l(x,\frac{\xi}{\norm\xi_{\ell_2(N)}}\r)\norm\xi_{\ell_2(N)}$ is a non-degenerate phase function
\item[(ii)] or $\fa x\in X\ \fa\eta\in\d B_{\rn[N]}:\ \abs{h_2(x,\eta)}>0$.
\end{enumerate}
Then, $Z$ can be regularized using the generalized Kontsevich-Vishik trace.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Since we can absorb $e^{ih_0}$ into the amplitude $\sigma$, we obtain without loss of generality
\begin{align*}
Z=\int_X\int_{\d B_{\rn[N]}}\int_{\rn_{>0}}e^{-i\l(h_2(x,\eta)r^2+h_1(x,\eta)r\r)}\sigma(x,r,\eta)\ dr\ d\vol_{\d B_{\rn[N]}}(\eta)\ d\vol_X(x).
\end{align*}
``(i)'' If $h_2=0$ and $\theta(x,\xi):=h_1\l(x,\frac{\xi}{\norm\xi_{\ell_2(N)}}\r)\norm\xi_{\ell_2(N)}$ is a non-degenerate phase function, then $Z$ is a Fourier Integral Operator trace already and can, thus, be regularized using the generalized Kontsevich-Vishik trace.
``(ii)'' Let $\fa x\in X\ \fa\eta\in\d B_{\rn[N]}:\ \abs{h_2(x,\eta)}>0$ and
\begin{align*}
R:=1+\max\l\{\abs{\frac{h_1(x,\eta)}{2h_2(x,\eta)}}\in\rn;\ (x,\eta)\in X\times\d B_{\rn[N]}\r\}.
\end{align*}
Then, we can split $Z$ into two parts
\begin{align*}
Z_1:=\int_X\int_{\d B_{\rn[N]}}\int_{(0,R)}e^{-i\l(h_2(x,\eta)r^2+h_1(x,\eta)r\r)}\sigma(x,r,\eta)\ dr\ d\vol_{\d B_{\rn[N]}}(\eta)\ d\vol_X(x)
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
Z_2:=\int_X\int_{\d B_{\rn[N]}}\int_{\rn_{\ge R}}e^{-i\l(h_2(x,\eta)r^2+h_1(x,\eta)r\r)}\sigma(x,r,\eta)\ dr\ d\vol_{\d B_{\rn[N]}}(\eta)\ d\vol_X(x).
\end{align*}
Considering $Z_1$, we observe that
\begin{align*}
\int_{\d B_{\rn[N]}}\int_{(0,R)}e^{-i\l(h_2(x,\eta)r^2+h_1(x,\eta)r\r)}\sigma(x,r,\eta)\ dr\ d\vol_{\d B_{\rn[N]}}(\eta)
\end{align*}
is the Fourier transform of a compactly supported distribution and continuous in $x$. Hence, $Z_1$ is well-defined (by Schwartz's Paley-Wiener Theorem).
In other words, it suffices to show that we can find a Fourier Integral Operator whose trace coincides with $Z_2$ distributionally. Since $\abs{h_2}>0$, we obtain
\begin{align*}
h_2(x,\eta)r^2+h_1(x,\eta)r=h_2(x,\eta)\l(r+\frac{h_1(x,\eta)}{2h_2(x,\eta)}\r)^2-\frac{h_1(x,\eta)^2}{4h_2(x,\eta)}
\end{align*}
and, absorbing $e^{i\frac{h_1(x,\eta)^2}{4h_2(x,\eta)}}$ into $\sigma$ and setting $\sigma_1(x,s,\eta)=\sigma\l(x,s-\frac{h_1(x,\eta)}{2h_2(x,\eta)},\eta\r)$,
\begin{align*}
Z_2=&\int_X\int_{\d B_{\rn[N]}}\int_{\rn_{\ge R}}e^{-ih_2(x,\eta)\l(r+\frac{h_1(x,\eta)}{2h_2(x,\eta)}\r)^2}\sigma(x,r,\eta)\ dr\ d\vol_{\d B_{\rn[N]}}(\eta)\ d\vol_X(x)\\
=&\int_X\int_{\d B_{\rn[N]}}\int_{\rn_{\ge R+\frac{h_1(x,\eta)}{2h_2(x,\eta)}}}e^{-ih_2(x,\eta)s^2}\sigma_1\l(x,s,\eta\r)\ ds\ d\vol_{\d B_{\rn[N]}}(\eta)\ d\vol_X(x)\\
=&\int_X\int_{\d B_{\rn[N]}}\int_{\rn_{\ge\l(R+\frac{h_1(x,\eta)}{2h_2(x,\eta)}\r)^2}}e^{-ih_2(x,\eta)t}\sigma_1\l(x,\sqrt t,\eta\r)\ \frac{dt}{2\sqrt t}\ d\vol_{\d B_{\rn[N]}}(\eta)\ d\vol_X(x).
\end{align*}
This shows that there exists a Fourier Integral Operator with polyhomogeneous amplitude whose trace coincides with $Z_2$ (up to another Fourier transform of a compactly supported distribution).
\end{proof}
Thus, we can write
\begin{align*}
\langle\Omega\rangle_T(z)=\frac{N(T,z)}{D(T,z)}
\end{align*}
with meromorphic functions $N(T,\cdot)$ and $D(T,\cdot)$. As we are interested in $\langle\Omega\rangle_T(0)$, there are a few cases to consider. If both $N(T,0)$ and $D(T,0)$ are regular and at most one of them vanishes, then gauge independence (cf. Lemma 2.6 in~\cite{hartung-phd}) implies that $\lim_{z\to0}\langle\Omega\rangle_T(z)$ is independent of the choice of gauge in $N$ and $D$ (though it may diverge if $D(T,0)$ vanishes). If one of the limits diverges and the other is finite, then $\lim_{z\to0}\langle\Omega\rangle_T(z)$ is either zero or divergent. Thus, the only interesting cases are if both tend to zero or diverge. In the $\frac\infty\infty$ case the result depends on the order of the pole. If the pole order of $N$ and $D$ are different, then the limits are trivial. If they are the same, then the limit is the quotient of the leading order residues, which again is gauge independent (cf. Lemma 2.5 in~\cite{hartung-phd}).
Hence, gauge dependence can only appear if $N$ or $D$ have vanishing leading Laurent coefficient or we have the $\frac00$ case. In these cases gauge dependence is, in fact, to be expected. Furthermore, the free Schwinger model (section~\ref{sec:free-schwinger}) is a $\frac00$ case, i.e., the choice of gauge is physically important. Since gauging the denominator is essentially changing physics by replacing the solution operator $\exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^t H(s)ds\r)$ with some other operator $\ensuremath{\mathfrak{G}}(t,z)$, it seems sensible to apply this idea to the entire system. In other words, we are considering the family of ``evolution operators'' $\ensuremath{\mathfrak{G}}(t,z)$. Then, we obtain the following new definition of our quantum theory.
\begin{definition}\label{def:reg-path-int}
Let $H$ be the Hamiltonian, $\Omega$ an observable, and $\ensuremath{\mathfrak{G}}(t,z)$ a gauged family of operators with
\begin{align*}
\ensuremath{\mathfrak{G}}(t,0)=\exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}\int_0^t H(s)ds\r).
\end{align*}
Then, we define the expectation value $\langle\Omega\rangle$ of $\Omega$ as
\begin{align*}
\langle\Omega\rangle:=\lim_{T\to\infty}\lim_{z\to0}\frac{\zeta\l(\ensuremath{\mathfrak{G}}(T,\cdot)\Omega\r)(z)}{\zeta\l(\ensuremath{\mathfrak{G}}(T,\cdot)\r)(z)}=\lim_{T\to\infty}\lim_{z\to0}\frac{\l.\l(s\mapsto\tr\ensuremath{\mathfrak{G}}(T,s)\Omega\r)\r|_{\mathrm{mer.}}(z)}{\l.\l(s\mapsto\tr\ensuremath{\mathfrak{G}}(T,s)\r)\r|_{\mathrm{mer.}}(z)}
\end{align*}
where $f|_{\mathrm{mer.}}$ denotes the meromorphic extension of a function $f$.
\end{definition}
\section{The harmonic oscillator}\label{sec:harmonic-oscillator}
In order to see how the proposed $\zeta$-regularization works, let us consider the traditional entry level model; the harmonic oscillator with Hamiltonian
\begin{align*}
H=\hbar\omega\l(a^\dagger a+\frac12\r)
\end{align*}
where
\begin{align*}
a = \sqrt{\frac{m\omega}{2\hbar}}\l(x+\frac{ip}{m\omega}\r),\ a^\dagger=\sqrt{\frac{m\omega}{2\hbar}}\l(x-\frac{ip}{m\omega}\r),\text{ and }p=-i\hbar\d.
\end{align*}
Thus,
\begin{align*}
\sigma_a=\sqrt{\frac{m\omega}{2\hbar}}\l(x+\frac{i\hbar\xi}{m\omega}\r)\text{ and }\sigma_{a^\dagger}=\sqrt{\frac{m\omega}{2\hbar}}\l(x-\frac{i\hbar\xi}{m\omega}\r)
\end{align*}
imply
\begin{align*}
\sigma_H=\hbar\omega\l(\sigma_{a^\dagger}\sigma_{a}+\frac12\r),\ \sigma_{\exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}TH\r)} = e^{\frac{-i}{\hbar}T\sigma_H}\text{, and }\sigma_{\exp\l(\frac{-i}{\hbar}TH\r)H} = e^{\frac{-i}{\hbar}T\sigma_H}\sigma_H.
\end{align*}
Note that $\sigma_H$ is a polynomial of order $2$ in $x$. Thus, we may treat $x$ the same way we treat $\xi$ and gauge with respect to $x$, as well. Otherwise, we would have to compactify the $x$-domain and consider the limit $x$-domain$\to\rn$. Gauging in $x$ and $\xi$ yields the regularized ground state energy
\begin{align*}
\langle H\rangle=\lim_{T\to\infty}\lim_{z_2\to0}\lim_{z_1\to0}\frac{\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{\rn}\int_{\rn}e^{\frac{-i}{\hbar}T\sigma_H(x,\xi)}\sigma_H(x,\xi)\betr\xi^{z_1}\betr x^{z_2}d\xi dx}{\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{\rn}\int_{\rn}e^{\frac{-i}{\hbar}T\sigma_H(x,\xi)}\betr\xi^{z_1}\betr x^{z_2}d\xi dx}.
\end{align*}
Theorem 8.7 in~\cite{hartung-phd} shows that these are trace integrals of Hilbert-Schmidt operators and regular. Although it is possible (and tedious) to compute this limit by hand, it is preferable to have a computer do the work (especially once the model is not analytically solvable anymore). Implementing this limit in Python2.7 is fairly straightforward (using the fact that integration over $\rn$ is equivalent to taking the Fourier transform and evaluating at zero).
\begin{verbatim}
import sympy as smp
z1,z2,T = smp.symbols("z1,z2,T")
x,xi = smp.symbols("x,xi",real=True)
m,hbar,omega = smp.symbols("m,hbar,omega",positive=True)
a = smp.sqrt(m*omega/(2*hbar)) * (x + smp.I*hbar*xi/(m*omega))
a_dag = smp.sqrt(m*omega/(2*hbar)) * (x - smp.I*hbar*xi/(m*omega))
h = hbar * omega * (a_dag * a + smp.sympify(1)/2)
exph = smp.exp(-smp.I * T * h / hbar)
g = smp.Abs(xi)**z1 * smp.Abs(x)**z2
num = smp.fourier_transform(h * exph * g,xi,0)
num = smp.fourier_transform(num,x,0)
den = smp.fourier_transform(exph * g,xi,0)
den = smp.fourier_transform(den,x,0)
L = smp.limit(num/den,z1,0)
L = smp.limit(L,z2,0)
print "<H> = "+str(smp.limit(L,T,smp.oo))
\end{verbatim}
This program correctly outputs the ground state energy $\langle H\rangle=\frac{\hbar\omega}{2}$.
Similarly, we can consider the $3$-dimensional harmonic oscillator whose Hamiltonian is given by
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{H_{3D}}(x_1,x_2,x_3,\xi_1,\xi_2,\xi_3)=\sigma_{H_{1D}}(x_1,\xi_1)+\sigma_{H_{1D}}(x_2,\xi_2)+\sigma_{H_{1D}}(x_3,\xi_3).
\end{align*}
Choosing the gauge
\begin{align*}
g(x_1,x_2,x_3,\xi_1,\xi_2,\xi_3)=\betr{\xi_1\xi_2\xi_3}^{\frac{z_1}{3}}\betr{x_1x_2x_3}^{\frac{z_2}{3}},
\end{align*}
we obtain the ground state energy $\langle H\rangle=\frac{3}{2}\hbar\omega$.
\section{The topological oscillator}\label{sec:topological-oscillator}
The topological oscillator (a.k.a. quantum rotor) models a particle of mass $M$ moving on a circle with radius $R$. Thus, choosing the angle $\phi$ as the free coordinate of the position $(x,y)=(R\cos\phi,R\sin\phi)$, we obtain the Lagrangian
\begin{align*}
\Lp=\frac{M}{2}(\dot x^2+\dot y^2)=\frac{J}{2}\dot\phi^2
\end{align*}
with the moment of inertia $J=MR^2$. The momentum is, then, given by
\begin{align*}
p=\d_{\dot\phi}\Lp=J\dot\phi
\end{align*}
and the Hamiltonian
\begin{align*}
H=\dot\phi p-\Lp=\frac{p^2}{J}-\frac{p^2}{2J}=\frac{p^2}{2J}.
\end{align*}
Hence,
\begin{align*}
\sigma_H=\frac{1}{2J}\xi^2.
\end{align*}
A characteristic value is the topological charge
\begin{align*}
Q=&\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_0^T\dot\phi =\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_0^T\frac pJ\qquad
\then\qquad \sigma_Q=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_0^T\frac \xi Jdt=\frac{T\xi}{2\pi J}
\end{align*}
which counts the number of revolutions the rotor performs in the time-torus and an interesting observable is the topological susceptibility
\begin{align*}
\chi_{\mathrm{top}}=\lim_{T\to\infty}\l\langle\frac{Q^2}{-iT}\r\rangle_T
\end{align*}
which is directly connected to the energy gap $\Delta E$ between the ground state and the first excited state
\begin{align*}
\Delta E = 2\pi^2\chi_{\mathrm{top}}.
\end{align*}
Again, we can implement this directly in Python2.7
\begin{verbatim}
import sympy as smp
z,T = smp.symbols("z,T")
J,xi = smp.symbols("J,xi",real=True)
h = xi**2 / (2 * J)
Q = T*xi/(2 * smp.pi * J)
g = smp.Abs(xi)**z
num = smp.fourier_transform(smp.exp(-smp.I * T * h) * g * Q**2,xi,0)
den = smp.fourier_transform(smp.exp(-smp.I * T * h) * g,xi,0)
chi_top = smp.limit(smp.limit(num/(-smp.I * T * den),z,0),T,smp.oo)
energy_gap = 2 * smp.pi**2 * chi_top
print "chi_top = "+str(chi_top)
print "energy gap = "+str(energy_gap)
\end{verbatim}
and obtain the correct results $\chi_{\mathrm{top}}=\frac{1}{4\pi^2J}$ and $\Delta E=\frac{1}{2J}$.
\section{The free massive Schwinger model}\label{sec:free-schwinger}
Let us now consider the free massive Schwinger model\footnote{The massive Schwinger model can be understood as QED in two space-time dimensions.}~\cite{schwinger} whose Hamiltonian, in the zero-momentum frame using natural units $c=\hbar=1$, is given by (cf., e.g., equation~(2.2) in~\cite{jansen-cichy})
\begin{align*}
H_m=
\begin{pmatrix}
m&-i\d\\
-i\d&m
\end{pmatrix}
\end{align*}
\begin{comment}
Then, we observe
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{H_0^{2k}}=\xi^{2k}
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{H_0^{2k-1}}=
\begin{pmatrix}
0&\xi^{2k-1}\\
\xi^{2k-1}&0
\end{pmatrix}
\end{align*}
which imply
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{\exp\l(-iH_0T\r)}=
\begin{pmatrix}
\cos(T\xi)&-i\sin(T\xi)\\
-i\sin(T\xi)&\cos(T\xi)
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{align*}
Since $m$ and $H_0$ commute, we obtain $e^{iH_mT}=e^{imT}e^{iH_0T}$, i.e.,
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{\exp\l(-iH_mT\r)}=e^{-imT}
\begin{pmatrix}
\cos(T\xi)&-i\sin(T\xi)\\
-i\sin(T\xi)&\cos(T\xi)
\end{pmatrix}
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{\exp\l(-iH_mT\r)H_m}=&e^{-imT}
\begin{pmatrix}
\cos(T\xi)&-i\sin(T\xi)\\
-i\sin(T\xi)&\cos(T\xi)
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
m&\xi\\\xi&m
\end{pmatrix}\\
=&e^{-imT}
\begin{pmatrix}
m\cos(T\xi)-i\xi\sin(T\xi)&\xi\cos(T\xi)-im\sin(T\xi)\\
\xi\cos(T\xi)-im\sin(T\xi)&m\cos(T\xi)-i\xi\sin(T\xi)
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{align*}
\end{comment}
Using the $\Mp$-gauge and a cut-off function $1_{B(0,X)}\le\chi\le 1_{B(0,X+1)}$ (that is, to introduce a space-torus in order to compactify the spatial domain), the ground state energy is, then, given by
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\langle H_m\rangle=&\lim_{X,T\to\infty}\lim_{z\to0}\frac{\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{\rn}\int_{\rn}\chi(x)\tr\sigma_{\exp\l(-iH_mT\r)H_m}(\xi)\betr\xi^zd\xi dx}{\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{\rn}\int_{\rn}\chi(x)\tr\sigma_{\exp\l(-iH_mT\r)}(\xi)\betr\xi^zd\xi dx}.\\
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
Theorem 8.7 in~\cite{hartung-phd} shows that these are trace integrals of Hilbert-Schmidt operators and regular. Implementing this limit in Python2.7 is straightforward again (the limit $X\to\infty$ can be ignored since $\langle H_m\rangle_T(z)$ is independent of $X$).
\begin{comment}
\begin{verbatim}
import sympy as smp
z,T = smp.symbols("z,T")
x,xi = smp.symbols("x,xi",real=True)
m = smp.symbols("m",positive=True)
chi = smp.Function("chi")(x)
f = smp.integrate(1/(2*smp.pi) * chi * smp.Abs(xi)**z ,x)
g = smp.integrate(1/(2*smp.pi) * chi * xi * smp.Abs(xi)**z ,x)
num = smp.fourier_transform( m*f-smp.I*g ,xi,T/(2*smp.pi)).doit()
num += smp.fourier_transform( m*f+smp.I*g ,xi,-T/(2*smp.pi)).doit()
den = smp.fourier_transform( f ,xi,T/(2*smp.pi)).doit()
den += smp.fourier_transform( f ,xi,-T/(2*smp.pi)).doit()
print "<H_m> = "+str(smp.limit(smp.limit(num/den,z,0),T,smp.oo))
\end{verbatim}
\end{comment}
\begin{verbatim}
import sympy as smp
z = smp.symbols("z")
x,xi = smp.symbols("x,xi",real=True)
m,T = smp.symbols("m,T",positive=True)
chi = smp.Function("chi")(x)
H = smp.Matrix([[m,xi],[xi,m]])
eiTH = smp.exp(smp.I*T*H)
gauge = smp.Abs(xi)**z
num = smp.fourier_transform((H*eiTH*gauge).trace()*chi,xi,0)
den = smp.fourier_transform((eiTH*gauge).trace()*chi,xi,0)
num = smp.integrate(num,x)
den = smp.integrate(den,x)
print "<H_m> = "+str(smp.limit(smp.limit(num/den,z,0),T,smp.oo))
\end{verbatim}
This program outputs \verb|<H_m> = m|. In other words, we have just correctly computed
\begin{align*}
E=mc^2
\end{align*}
for the free massive Schwinger model.
\section{Free relativistic Fermions}\label{sec:free-relativistic-Fermions}
Let us now step up to $4$ space-time dimensions and consider a free relativistic fermion of mass $m$. Then, using the Pauli matrices $\sigma_k$, we obtain the Hamiltonian (Einstein summation over spatial indices)
\begin{align*}
H_m=
\begin{pmatrix}
m&-i\sigma_k\d_k\\
-i\sigma_k\d_k&m
\end{pmatrix}
\end{align*}
which yields
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{\exp(-iH_mT)}=&e^{-imT}\l(\cos\l(T\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}\r)-\frac{i\sin\l(T\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}\r)}{\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}}
\begin{pmatrix}
0&\sigma_k\xi_k\\
\sigma_k\xi_k&0
\end{pmatrix}
\r)
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{\exp(-iH_mT)H_m}=&e^{-imT}\l(\cos\l(T\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}\r)
\begin{pmatrix}
m&\sigma_k\xi_k\\
\sigma_k\xi_k&m
\end{pmatrix}
-i\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}\sin\l(T\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}\r)\r).
\end{align*}
Thus,
\begin{align*}
\langle H_m\rangle=&\lim_{T\to\infty}\lim_{z\to0}\frac{\int_{\rn[3]}\l(4m\cos\l(T\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}\r)-4i\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}\sin\l(T\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}\r)\r)\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}^zd\xi}{\int_{\rn[3]}4\cos\l(T\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}\r)\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}^zd\xi}\\
=&m+\lim_{T\to\infty}\lim_{z\to0}\frac{-i\int_{\rn[3]}\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}^{z+1}\l(e^{iT\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}}-e^{-iT\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}}\r)d\xi}{\int_{\rn[3]}\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}^{z}\l(e^{iT\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}}+e^{-iT\norm\xi_{\ell_2(3)}}\r)d\xi}\\
=&m+\lim_{T\to\infty}\lim_{z\to0}\frac{-i\vol\l(\d B_{\rn[3]}\r)\int_{\rn_{>0}}r^{z+3}\l(e^{iTr}-e^{-iTr}\r)dr}{\vol\l(\d B_{\rn[3]}\r)\int_{\rn_{>0}}r^{z+2}\l(e^{iTr}+e^{-iTr}\r)dr}\tag{$*$}\\
=&m+\lim_{T\to\infty}\lim_{z\to0}\frac{\l(-e^{-i\frac{\pi (z+3)}{2}}-e^{-3i\frac{\pi (z+3)}{2}}\r)\Gamma(z+4)T^{-z-4}}{i\l(-e^{-i\frac{\pi (z+2)}{2}}+e^{-3i\frac{\pi (z+2)}{2}}\r)\Gamma(z+3)T^{-z-3}}\\
=&m+\lim_{T\to\infty}\lim_{z\to0}\frac{\l(-e^{-i\frac{\pi (z+3)}{2}}-e^{-i\frac{\pi (z+3)}{2}}e^{-i\pi (z+3)}\r)\Gamma(z+4)T^{-z-4}}{i\l(-e^{-i\frac{\pi (z+2)}{2}}+e^{-i\frac{\pi (z+2)}{2}}e^{-i\pi (z+2)}\r)\Gamma(z+3)T^{-z-3}}\\
=&m+\lim_{T\to\infty}\lim_{z\to0}\frac{e^{-i\frac{\pi (z+3)}{2}}\l(-1-e^{-i\pi (z+2)}e^{-i\pi}\r)(z+3)\Gamma(z+3)T^{-z-4}}{ie^{-i\frac{\pi (z+2)}{2}}\l(e^{-i\pi (z+2)}-1\r)\Gamma(z+3)T^{-z-3}}\\
=&m+\lim_{T\to\infty}\lim_{z\to0}\frac{e^{-i\frac{\pi (z+2)}{2}}e^{-i\frac{\pi}{2}}(z+3)}{ie^{-i\frac{\pi (z+2)}{2}}T}\\
=&m+\lim_{T\to\infty}\lim_{z\to0}\frac{-z-3}{T}\\
=&m.
\end{align*}
In other words, we have correctly computed $E=mc^2$ again.
\begin{remark*}
The calculation above highlights a number of properties which will be even more important in the case of the massive Schwinger model (section~\ref{sec:schwinger-gauge-boson-mass}). In the first summand, the ``observable'' $m$ depends on none of the variables which leads to many cancellations. This will be paramount for the massive Schwinger model since the part of the model that is not analytically solvable will vanish in one such cancellation.
The other important property can be seen in the latter summand. Since the argument of the Laplace transform is homogeneous and the volume $T$ of the time-torus enters through the evaluation of the Laplace transform, we obtain that the limit $T\to\infty$ depends primarily on the asymptotic expansion of the observable. Thus, knowing the asymptotic behavior of the observable enables us to decide whether or not a term will vanish in the limit $T\to\infty$.
\end{remark*}
\begin{remark*}
We should note that ($*$) can be implemented just like the implementations above since it is the Laplace transform
\begin{align*}
\Lp(r\mapsto r^q)(s)=\frac{\Gamma(q+1)}{s^{q+1}}
\end{align*}
which holds for $\Re(s)>0$ and $\Re(q)>-1$, and through analytic extension for $s\in\cn\setminus\{0\}$ and $q\in\cn\setminus(-\nn)$. In particular,
\begin{align*}
\int_{\rn_{>0}}r^ze^{iTr}dr=\frac{-ie^{-i\frac{\pi z}{2}}\Gamma(z+1)}{T^{z+1}}
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
\int_{\rn_{>0}}r^ze^{-iTr}dr=\frac{ie^{-3i\frac{\pi z}{2}}\Gamma(z+1)}{T^{z+1}}.
\end{align*}
Furthermore, using stationary phase approximation (cf. chapter 8 in~\cite{hartung-phd}) in the setting of Theorem~\ref{theorem-regularization}, we can see that the regularization is given in terms of these Laplace transforms only. Hence, the actual difficulty in computing $\langle\Omega\rangle_T(z)$ are the integrals over $\d B_{\rn[N]}$ and possibly computing the limits $z\to0$ and $T\to\infty$.
\end{remark*}
Using these Laplace transforms and the fact that the integrals over $\d B_{\rn[N]}$ yield $\vol\d B_{\rn[N]}$ in this case, we obtain the following implementation for the ground state energy of a free relativistic fermion in $N$ spatial dimensions.
\begin{verbatim}
import sympy as smp
z,T = smp.symbols("z,T")
m,voldB,r = smp.symbols("m,voldB,r",positive=True)
N,k = smp.symbols("N,k",positive=True,integer=True)
f = voldB*k*r**(z+N-1)/(2*smp.pi)**N
g = voldB*k*smp.I*m*r**(z+N)/(2*smp.pi)**N
num = smp.laplace_transform(m*f,r,-smp.I*T)[0]
num += smp.laplace_transform(m*f,r,smp.I*T)[0]
num -= smp.laplace_transform(g,r,-smp.I*T)[0]
num -= smp.laplace_transform(g,r,smp.I*T)[0]
den = smp.laplace_transform(f,r,-smp.I*T)[0]
den += smp.laplace_transform(f,r,smp.I*T)[0]
lim = smp.limit(smp.limit(num/den,z,0),T,smp.oo)
print "<H_m> = "+str(smp.simplify(lim))
\end{verbatim}
\section{Gauge boson mass in the Schwinger model}\label{sec:schwinger-gauge-boson-mass}
At this point, we will return to the massive Schwinger model but add an abelian vector gauge field. Thus, the model becomes fully interacting with a non-trivial dynamics leading to the confinement of the charges and, hence, bound states. Hence, applying the $\zeta$-regularization of the generalized Kontsevich-Vishik trace constitutes a first highly non-trivial example of the proposed method. Here, we will only provide a demonstration for the calculation of the gauge boson mass. Further observables could be computed in a similar way if required.
Here, we have the fermionic Hamiltonian in the temporal gauge
\begin{align*}
H_F=
\begin{pmatrix}
m&-i\d_1-eA\\
-i\d_1-eA&m
\end{pmatrix}
\end{align*}
as well as the self-interaction Hamiltonian
\begin{align*}
H_S=-\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}=\frac{1}{2}E^2
\end{align*}
of the gauge field, where $F_{\mu\nu}=\d_\mu A_\nu-\d_\nu A_\mu$, $A=A_1$ ($A_0=0$ is the temporal gauge), and $E=-\d_0A$.
At this point, it is important to address the space-time dependence of the gauge fields. Due to the nature of the observable in question (the gauge boson mass), it is convenient to choose the family $((A(x),E(x)))_{x\in X}$ as canonical coordinates.\footnote{In a sense, this can be seen as a form of projective limit of discretized space.} Though the space torus $X$ needs to be formally introduced (recall that the $\zeta$-regularization needs a compact manifold), we will suppress it in the following since the limit $\vol(X)\to\infty$ is trivial. More importantly, this setting implies that the time-dependence of the gauge fields is implicit while the space-dependence is still explicit.
Thus,
\begin{align*}
\sigma_{\exp\l(-i\int_0^T H\r)}=e^{-imT}e^{-\frac{i}{2}TE^2}
\begin{pmatrix}
\cos\l(T\xi-e\int_0^T A\r)&-i\sin\l(T\xi-e\int_0^T A\r)\\
-i\sin\l(T\xi-e\int_0^T A\r)&\cos\l(T\xi-e\int_0^T A\r)
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{align*}
In~\cite{schwinger}, Schwinger himself supplied us with the Green's function of the Abelian vector gauge field. From it, we can read off the observable $\Omega$ for the squared mass of the gauge boson;
\begin{align*}
\sigma_\Omega=E^2+\frac{e^2}{\pi}.
\end{align*}
Hence, the gauge boson mass $m_g$ is given by (suppressing gauges for $\xi$, $x$, and $A$)
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
m_g^2=&\langle\Omega\rangle\\
=&\lim_{{T\to\infty}\atop{z\to 0}}\frac{\iiiint e^{-imT-\frac{i}{2}TE^2}\l(e^{iT\xi}e^{-ie\int_0^T A}+e^{-iT\xi}e^{ie\int_0^T A}\r)\l(E^2+\frac{e^2}{\pi}\r)\betr E^zd\xi dx dE\mathscr{D}A}{\iiiint e^{-imT-\frac{i}{2}TE^2}\l(e^{iT\xi}e^{-ie\int_0^T A}+e^{-iT\xi}e^{ie\int_0^T A}\r)\betr E^zd\xi dx dE\mathscr{D}A}\\
=&\frac{e^2}{\pi}+\lim_{T\to\infty}\lim_{z\to 0}\frac{\iiiint e^{-\frac{i}{2}TE^2}\l(e^{iT\xi}e^{-ie\int_0^T A}+e^{-iT\xi}e^{ie\int_0^T A}\r)\betr E^{z+2}d\xi dxdE\mathscr{D}A}{\iiiint e^{-\frac{i}{2}TE^2}\l(e^{iT\xi}e^{-ie\int_0^T A}+e^{-iT\xi}e^{ie\int_0^T A}\r)\betr E^zd\xi dx dE\mathscr{D}A}\\
=&\frac{e^2}{\pi}+\lim_{T\to\infty}\lim_{z\to 0}\frac{\int e^{-\frac{i}{2}TE^2}\betr E^{z+2}dE}{\int e^{-\frac{i}{2}TE^2}\betr E^z dE}\\
=&\frac{e^2}{\pi}+\lim_{T\to\infty}\ubr{\lim_{z\to 0}\frac{-ie^{-\frac{3i\pi}{2}\frac{z+1}{2}}\Gamma\l(\frac{z+3}{2}\r)\l(\frac2T\r)^{\frac{z+3}{2}}}{-ie^{-\frac{3i\pi}{2}\frac{z-1}{2}}\Gamma\l(\frac{z+1}{2}\r)\l(\frac2T\r)^{\frac{z+1}{2}}}}_{\propto\frac1T}\\
=&\frac{e^2}{\pi}.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
\begin{remark*}
This calculation highlights the cancellations and asymptotic properties we observed in section~\ref{sec:free-relativistic-Fermions} again. Here, the integrals with respect to $A$ are very difficult and not analytically solvable. However, due to the structure of the observable, these integrals cancel out to a factor of $1$. More importantly, even if they did not cancel, we would know that the second term had to vanish in the limit $T\to\infty$ since we know the asymptotics of the observable in $E$. More precisely, having $\abs E^{z+2}$ in the numerator and $\abs E^z$ in the denominator (and a phase function in terms of $E^2$) implies that the quotient is proportional to $\frac1T$ and, as such, vanishes for $T\to\infty$.
\end{remark*}
\section{Spontaneous symmetry breaking and mass - the $\phi^4$ model}\label{sec:spontaneous}
Since spontaneous symmetry breaking is essential to the Higgs mechanism, we will have a quick look at it here, as well. In the simplest relativistic case, we have scalar fields $\phi=(\phi^1,\ldots,\phi^k)$ and the Langrangian contains a potential term $V(\phi)$. Then, we are looking for constant fields $\phi_0^j$ which locally minimize $V$. These $\phi_0^j$ are the vacuum expectation values of the $\phi^j$. Furthermore, the matrix $\l(\d_{i}\d_{j}V(\phi_0)\r)_{i,j\in\nn_{\le k}}$ is symmetric and its eigenvalues give the squared masses of the fields. In particular, if $k=1$, we obtain the vacuum expectation values from $\d V(\phi_0)=0$ and $\d^2V(\phi_0)\ge0$ where $\sqrt{\d^2V(\phi_0)}$ is the mass of the field.
However, in general, we will not be able to simply read off $V(\phi)$. Instead, we will consider the partition function as a function of $\phi$ and obtain an effective potential $V_e(\phi)$ through the identity $Z(\phi)=\exp\l(-i\int V_e(\phi)d(t,x)\r)$, i.e.,
\begin{align*}
V_e(\phi):=\frac{\ln Z(\phi)}{-iTX}
\end{align*}
where we used the fact that we are looking for constant $\phi$ and introduced a space-time torus of volume $TX$.
Consider the $\phi^4$ model whose Hamiltonian is given by
\begin{align*}
H=\int\frac{p^2}{2}-\frac{1}{2}\phi\Delta\phi-\frac{1}{2}\mu^2\phi^2+\frac{\lambda}{4!}\phi^4dx.
\end{align*}
In this case, the minima are given by $\phi_0=\pm\sqrt{\frac6\lambda}\mu$ and the field mass is $\sqrt2\mu$. Using the $\zeta$-regularized partition function, we obtain
\begin{align*}
Z(z,\phi)=&\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{\rn}e^{-iTX\l(\frac{p^2}{2}-\frac{\mu^2}{2}\phi^2+\frac{\lambda}{4!}\phi^4\r)}\betr p^z dp
\end{align*}
which we may implement directly.
\begin{verbatim}
import sympy as smp
z = smp.symbols("z")
phi,p = smp.symbols("phi,p",real=True)
TX,mu,L = smp.symbols("TX,mu,L",positive=True)
H = p**2/2 - mu**2/2*phi**2 + L/24*phi**4
exph = smp.exp(-smp.I*TX*H)
gauge = smp.Abs(p)**z
Z = smp.fourier_transform(exph * gauge,p,0).doit()/(2*smp.pi)
V = smp.ln(Z)/(-smp.I*TX)
dV = smp.simplify(smp.diff(V,phi))
ddV = smp.diff(dV,phi)
# take limit z->0
dV = smp.limit(dV,z,0)
ddV = smp.limit(ddV,z,0)
extrema = smp.solve(dV,phi)
# check extrema for minima, in physical limit TX->\infty
ddV = smp.limit(ddV,TX,smp.oo)
for i in range(len(extrema)):
extrema[i] = smp.limit(extrema[i],TX,smp.oo)
minima = []
for phi0 in extrema:
if ddV.subs(phi,phi0)>=0:
minima.append(phi0)
print minima
masses = []
for phi0 in minima:
m = smp.sqrt(ddV.subs(phi,phi0))
if m not in masses:
masses.append(m)
print masses
\end{verbatim}
Note that gauge independence of $Z(\phi):=\lim_{TX\to\infty}\lim_{z\to 0}Z(z,\phi)$ means this computation may only fail if $Z(z,\phi)$ has a pole in $0$ or $Z(\phi)=0$ since we cannot take the logarithm in that case ($Z(\phi)\in\cn\setminus\rn_{\ge0}$ can be treated choosing an appropriate branch cut of $\ln$). Here, neither of these cases occurs, i.e., the results are independent of the chosen gauge and we correctly obtain the minima $\pm\sqrt{\frac{6}{\lambda}}\mu$ and the field mass $\sqrt2\mu$.
\begin{remark*}
The situation will be more complex if we are not using the fact that the $\phi$ are (spatially) constant since the $\phi\Delta\phi$ term will not vanish. In that case, it might be more appropriate to write the term as $-\langle\nabla\phi,\nabla\phi\rangle$ which is of the same form as the $p^2$ again, but the best choice will most likely depend on the specifics of the problem and observable in consideration. It should be noted, however, that space-discretization (i.e., replacing $\phi$ by a vector $(\phi(x_j))_j\in \rn[n]$) can be very viable and the resulting path integral will be $\zeta$-regularizable again.
\end{remark*}
\section*{Conclusion}
We proposed a new definition of the path integral based on Feynman's formulation (Definition~\ref{def:reg-path-int}). By construction the proposed definition restricts to Feynman's definition whenever it is well-defined; e.g., using Wick rotations, lattice discretization, or trace-class observables.
We obtained the new definition by replacing Feynman's path integral with its corresponding version as constructed using the generalized Kontsevich-Vishik trace. More precisely, we replaced the time-evolution semi-group $T(t):=e^{-\frac{i}{\hbar}\int_0^t H(s)ds}$ by a holomorphic family of operator families $z\mapsto \ensuremath{\mathfrak{G}}(t,z)$ satisfying $\ensuremath{\mathfrak{G}}(t,0)=T(t)$ and for which Feynman's path integral is well-defined if $\Re(z)$ is sufficiently small. If $\ensuremath{\mathfrak{G}}$ is chosen appropriately, we showed that the path integrals defined for $\Re(z)\ll0$ can be extended meromorphically to $\cn$ (cf. Theorem~\ref{theorem-regularization} and Appendix~\ref{sec:KV}) and defined the regularized path integral as the value of the meromorphic extension at $z=0$ (provided it exists; Definition~\ref{def:reg-path-int}).
Furthermore, we considered a number of fundamental models, including the non-trivial cases of the massive Schwinger model and a $\phi^4$ theory, as evidence for the validity of the proposed definition and provided implementations using symbolic arithmetic. It is particularly important to note that the underlying regularization is a priori known which reduces the computational effort of evaluating these regularized path integrals to the evaluation of spherical integrals (and possibly the limits $z\to 0$ and $\mathrm{physical\ volume}\to\infty$). Hence, continuum computations without Wick rotations are possible with the new definition.
In particular, we can answer the questions we set out in the beginning.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] Is it possible to $\zeta$-regularize the partition function and expectation values of observables in Minkowski space-time?
\end{itemize}
Yes, provided that the Hamiltonian and observable satisfy certain homogeneity and positivity or non-degeneracy assumptions in the leading order terms (cf. Theorem~\ref{theorem-regularization}).
\begin{itemize}
\item[(ii)] Are the regularized partition functions and expectation values of observables independent of the choices made in the construction of the $\zeta$-function?
\end{itemize}
Almost always, the answer to this question is yes. Both are well-defined and choice independent if there are no critical degrees of homogeneity (which depends only on the space-time dimension). Thus, the quotient is almost always well-defined and independent of the choices made (though it might be infinite). Gauge dependence can only appear if the Laurent coefficient of lowest possible order vanish (which depends on the degrees of homogeneity and logarithmic degrees at critical degree of homogeneity). In particular, if there are no critical degrees of homogeneity, then the partition function is gauge independent and the expectation value of the observable can only depend on the gauge if we are in the $\frac00$ case.\footnote{Note that being in the $\frac00$ case is gauge independent, i.e., the $\frac00$ case cannot be removed through the choice of gauge.} On the other hand, this case does appear in practice; the ground state energy of the free relativistic fermion (section~\ref{sec:free-relativistic-Fermions}), for instance, is of this form. To overcome the problem that different choices of gauge in numerator and denominator can generate arbitrary results, we conjecture that choosing the same gauge should give a meaningful choice physically.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(iii)] Does the regularization contain the known special cases of well-defined path integrals (e.g., Wick rotated or space-time discretized)?
\end{itemize}
Yes. Space-time discretization replaces the operators by matrices. Hence all traces are well-defined and the construction of the $\zeta$-regularization coincides with the canonical trace on trace-class operators. Similarly, Wick rotations yield pseudo-differential operators and there it is known that the $\zeta$-regularization used in this context is the unique extension of the canonical trace.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(iv)] Is the construction physically ``meaningful''?
\end{itemize}
This question can be interpreted in different ways. On one hand, we may ask if the regularization can be interpreted physically. In this sense, choosing the same gauge for both numerator and denominator in the expectation value of observables is important. This means that we replace the time-evolution of our system by a holomorphic family of time-evolutions. In other words, we consider a holomorphic family of physical systems and conjecture that the physical values of the system to be studied can be obtained by analytic continuation.
On the other hand, we need to ask whether or not the regularized theory is physically correct. By construction, we know that the regularized theory coincides with the physical theory if we have trace-class operators to begin with. In case the regularization is necessary, we have considered a number of physical models. In each of these models, the regularization not only recovered the known physical values but is also computable. In fact, the dependence on the regularizing parameter is known explicitly and the remaining integrals are over compact manifolds.
\begin{appendix}
\section{The generalized Kontsevich-Vishik trace}\label{sec:KV}
In this appendix, we will give a non-technical overview of Fourier Integral Operator $\zeta$-functions and the (generalized) Kontsevich-Vishik trace. For more detail, please refer to~\cite{hartung-phd,hartung-scott}.
Given a closed, compact, orientable, connected, finite dimensional Riemannian manifold $X$ and a closed conic Lagrangian submanifold $\Lambda$ of $T^*X^2\setminus0$, we can consider the space $I^m(X^2;\Lambda)$ of Lagrangian distributions of order $m$ with microsupport in $\Lambda$ (cf. Chapter 25 in~\cite{hoermander-books}). Integral operators with kernels in some $I^m(X^2;\Lambda)$ are called Fourier Integral Operators. More precisely, we have the following definition.
\begin{definition}
Let $X$ be a $C^\infty$ manifold, $E$ a (complex) vector bundle over $X$, and $Y$ a closed $C^\infty$ sub-manifold of $X$. Then, the space $I^m(X,Y;E)$ of distribution sections of $E$ that are conormal to $Y$ and of order less than or equal to $m$ is the set of all distributions $u\in C_c^\infty(X,E)'$ such that
\begin{align*}
L_1\ldots L_Nu\in B_{2,\infty,\loc}^{-m-\frac{\dim X}{4}}(X,E)
\end{align*}
for all $N\in\nn_0$ and all first order differential operators $L_j$ between distribution sections of $E$ whose coefficients are $C^\infty$ tangential to Y.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark*}
Here, $B_{p,q}^s(\rn[n])$ denotes the usual Besov space and, for $U\sse\rn[n]$ open, we define $B_{p,q,\loc}^s(U)$ as the set of distributions $u\in C_c^\infty(U)'$ such that $\fa \phi\in C_c^\infty(U):\ \phi u\in B_{p,q}^s(\rn[n])$. This definition can then be lifted to manifolds in the usual manner.
\end{remark*}
The definition of conormality can be extended to pseudo-differential operators from $E$ to $E$ with principal symbol vanishing on $Y$. Thus, it can be extended to Lagrangian manifolds.
\begin{definition}
Let $X$ be a $C^\infty$ manifold, $E$ a (complex) vector bundle over $X$, and $\Lambda\sse T^*X\setminus 0$ a closed, conic, $C^\infty$, Lagrangian sub-manifold. Then, the space $I^m(X,\Lambda;E)$ of Lagrangian distribution sections of $E$ of order less than or equal to $m$ is the set of all distributions $u\in C_c^\infty(X,E)'$ such that
\begin{align*}
L_1\ldots L_Nu\in B_{2,\infty,\loc}^{-m-\frac{\dim X}{4}}(X,E)
\end{align*}
for all $N\in\nn_0$ and all properly supported first order pseudo-differential operators $L_j\in\Psi^1(X;E,E)$ whose principal symbols vanish on $\Lambda$.
\end{definition}
It is common to denote $\Lambda$ in terms of a canonical relation $\Gamma\sse\l(T^*X\setminus0\r)^2$ (cf., e.g., Chapter 1 in~\cite{hartung-phd}) which satisfies
\begin{align*}
\Lambda=\Gamma':=\l\{((x,\xi),(y,\eta))\in\l(T^*X\setminus0\r)^2;\ ((x,\xi),(y,-\eta))\in\Gamma\r\}.
\end{align*}
If $\Gamma$ is chosen to be a homogeneous canonical relation (cf., e.g., Chapter 1 in~\cite{hartung-phd}, Theorem 2.4.1 in~\cite{duistermaat}, and Example 1 in~\cite{guillemin-residues}), then the set of operators $\Ap_\Gamma$ with kernels in $\bigcup_{m\in\rn}I^m(X^2;\Gamma')$ forms an associative algebra. Furthermore, it can be shown that $\Ap_\Gamma$ has a non-trivial intersection with the set of trace-class operators in $L(L_2(X))$ (cf. Lemmata 1.12 and 1.13 in~\cite{hartung-phd}); more precisely, if $A\in\Ap_\Gamma$ has kernel\footnote{An integral operator $A$ has kernel $k$ if and only if $Af(x)=\int k(x,y)f(y)dy$ holds for all $f$ in the domain of $A$.} $k\in I^m(X^2;\Gamma')$ with $m$ sufficiently small, then $A$ is of trace-class, $k$ continuous, and
\begin{align*}
\tr A=\int_Xk(x,x)d\vol_X(x).
\end{align*}
In many applications (like the Feynman path integral; cf. section~\ref{sec:feynman}) we would like to extend this trace to operators that are not of trace-class. Such an extension of the trace can be obtained using $\zeta$-regularization. Let $A_0\in\Ap_\Gamma$ with kernel $k_0\in I^m(X^2;\Gamma')$. Then, we consider a holomorphic family $A\in C^\omega\l(\cn,\Ap_\Gamma\r)$ with kernels $k\in C^\omega\l(\cn,I^m(X^2;\Gamma')\r)$ such that $k(0)=k_0$ and $\fa z\in\cn:\ k(z)\in I^{m+\Re(z)}(X;\Gamma')$, and define $\zeta(A)$ to be the maximal meromorphic extension of
\begin{align*}
\zeta(A)(z):= \tr A(z)=\int_Xk(z)(x,x)d\vol_X(x)
\end{align*}
which is well-defined for $\Re(z)$ sufficiently small, that is, $\Re(z)\ll0$.
An important class of holomorphic families of Fourier Integral Operators are gauged Fourier Integral Operators with $\log$-polyhomogeneous amplitudes. These gauged Fourier Integral Operators have kernels of the form
\begin{align*}
k(z)(x,y)=\int_{\rn[N]}e^{i\theta(x,y,\xi)}a(z)(x,y,\xi)d\xi
\end{align*}
where $\theta$ is a phase function
\begin{align*}
\theta(x,y,\xi)=\theta\l(x,y,\frac{\xi}{\norm\xi_{\ell_2(N)}}\r)\norm\xi_{\ell_2(N)}
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
a(z)(x,y,\xi)=a_0(z)(x,y,\xi)+\sum_{\iota\in I}a_\iota(z)(x,y,\xi)
\end{align*}
where $a_0(z)\in L_1(X\times X\times\rn[N])$ and
\begin{align*}
a_\iota(z)(x,y,\xi)=\norm\xi_{\ell_2(N)}^{d_\iota+z}\l(\ln\norm\xi_{\ell_2(N)}\r)^{l_\iota}\tilde a_\iota\l(x,y,\frac{\xi}{\norm\xi_{\ell_2(N)}}\r)
\end{align*}
holds with a number of additional properties making everything well-defined (cf. Chapter 2 in~\cite{hartung-phd}). We call $d_\iota$ the degree of homogeneity of $a_\iota$ and $l_\iota$ the logarithmic order. If all $l_\iota$ vanish, then we call the amplitude polyhomogeneous.
Fourier Integral Operator $\zeta$-functions with polyhomogeneous amplitudes were shown to exist as meromorphic functions on $\cn$ and had their residues studied by Guillemin~\cite{guillemin-lagrangian,guillemin-residues}. Using Guillemin's approach and introducing the notion of gauged poly-$\log$-homogeneous distributions, the author~\cite{hartung-phd,hartung-scott} was able to compute the Laurent expansion of $\zeta(A)$ for Fourier Integral Operators with $\log$-polyhomogeneous amplitudes, as well. In particular, it can be shown that $\zeta(A)$ only has isolated poles of finite order. The poles are located at $z=-N-d_\iota$ and the maximal pole order is $l_\iota+1$.
While the residues of $\zeta(A)$ yield important traces (cf., e.g.,~\cite{guillemin-residues}), we are interested in the values $\zeta(A)(0)$ provided none of the degrees of homogeneity satisfies $d_\iota=-N$. Then, $\zeta(A)$ is holomorphic in a neighborhood of zero and $\zeta(A)(0)$ depends only on $A(0)$. In fact,
\begin{align*}
A_0\ \rightsquigarrow\ A\in C^\omega(\cn,\Ap_\Gamma)\text{ gauged with }A(0)=A_0\ \rightsquigarrow\ \zeta(A)(0)
\end{align*}
defines a trace provided the amplitude of $A_0$ has no critical degree of homogeneity $d_\iota=-N$ (cf. Chapter 7 in~\cite{hartung-phd}). This trace is called the generalized Kontsevich-Vishik trace (the original Kontsevich-Vishik trace is the special case of $A_0$ being a classical pseudo-differential operator) and given by
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\zeta(A)(0)=&\int_X\int_{B_{\rn[N]}(0,1)}e^{i\theta(x,x,\xi)}a(0)(x,x,\xi)\ d\xi\ d\vol_X(x)\\
&+\int_{\rn_{\ge1}\times\d B_{\rn[N]}}\int_Xe^{i\theta(x,x,\xi)}a_0(0)(x,x,\xi)\ d\vol_X(x)\ d\vol_{\rn_{\ge1}\times\d B_{\rn[N]}}(\xi)\\
&+\sum_{\iota\in I}\frac{(-1)^{l_\iota+1}l_\iota!\int_{X\times\d B_{\rn[N]}}e^{i\theta(x,x,\xi)}\tilde a_\iota(0)(x,x,\xi)\ d\vol_{X\times\d B_{\rn[N]}}(x,x,\xi)}{(N+d_\iota)^{l_\iota+1}}.
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
By construction, the generalized Kontsevich-Vishik trace coincides with $\tr$ on trace-class operators. Furthermore, it was shown that the Kontsevich-Vishik trace is the only trace on the algebra of classical pseudo-differential operators that restricts to $\tr$ in $L(L_2(X))$~\cite{maniccia-schrohe-seiler}. These properties make the generalized Kontsevich-Vishik trace a prime candidate for path integral regularization as such a path integral regularization is consistent with respect to discretization (turning operators into matrices and, thus, trace-class) and Wick rotations (turning the path integral into pseudo-differential operator traces).
\end{appendix}
\begin{bibdiv}
\begin{biblist}
\bib{jansen-cichy}{article}{
author={BA\~{N}ULS, M. C.},
author={CICHY, K.},
author={CIRAC, J. I.},
author={JANSEN, K.},
title={The mass spectrum of the Schwinger model with Matrix Product States},
journal={Journal of High Energy Physics},
volume={158},
date={2013}
}
\bib{creutz-freedman}{article}{
author={CREUTZ, M.},
author={FREEDMAN, B.},
title={A Statistical Approach to Quantum Mechanics},
journal={Annals of Physics},
volume={132},
pages={427-462},
date={1981}
}
\bib{degrand-detar}{book}{
author={DEGRAND, T.},
author={DETAR, C.},
title={Lattice Methods for Quantum Chromodynamics},
publisher={World Scientific},
address={Singapore},
date={2006}
}
\bib{duistermaat}{book}{
author={DUISTERMAAT, J. J.},
title={Fourier Integral Operators},
publisher={Birkh\"{a}user},
date={1996}
}
\bib{feynman}{article}{
author={FEYNMAN, R. P.},
title={Space-Time Approach to Non-Relativistic Quantum Mechanics},
journal={Reviews of Modern Physics},
volume={20},
pages={367-387},
date={1948}
}
\bib{feynman-hibbs-styer}{book}{
author={FEYNMAN, R. P.},
author={HIBBS, A. R.},
author={STYER, D. F.},
title={Quantum Mechanics and Path Integrals},
publisher={Dover Publications, Inc.},
edition={Emended Edition},
address={Mineola, NY},
date={2005}
}
\bib{gattringer-lang}{book}{
author={GATTRINGER, C.},
author={LANG, C. B.},
title={Quantum Chromodynamics on the Lattice},
publisher={Springer},
address={Berlin/Heidelberg},
date={2010}
}
\bib{gibbons-hawking-perry}{article}{
author={GIBBONS, G. W.},
author={HAWKING, S. W.},
author={PERRY, M. J.},
title={Path integrals and the indefiniteness of the gravitational action},
journal={Nuclear Physics},
volume={B138},
pages={141-150},
date={1978}
}
\bib{guillemin-lagrangian}{article}{
author={GUILLEMIN, V.},
title={Gauged Lagrangian Distributions},
journal={Advances in Mathematics},
volume={102},
pages={184-201},
date={1993}
}
\bib{guillemin-residues}{article}{
author={GUILLEMIN, V.},
title={Residue Traces for certain Algebras of Fourier Integral Operators},
journal={Journal of Functional Analysis},
volume={115},
pages={391-417},
date={1993}
}
\bib{hartung-phd}{book}{
author={HARTUNG, T.},
title={$\zeta$-functions of Fourier Integral Operators},
publisher={Ph.D. thesis, King's College London},
address={London},
date={2015}
}
\bib{hartung-scott}{article}{
author={HARTUNG, T.},
author={SCOTT, S.},
title={A generalized Kontsevich-Vishik trace for Fourier Integral Operators and the Laurent expansion of $\zeta$-functions},
journal={arXiv:1510.07324v2~[math.AP]},
}
\bib{hawking}{article}{
author={HAWKING, S. W.},
title={Zeta Function Regularization of Path Integrals in Curved Spacetime},
journal={Communications in Mathematical Physics},
volume={55},
pages={133-148},
date={1977}
}
\bib{hoermander-books}{book}{
author={H\"{O}RMANDER, L.},
title={The Analysis of Linear Partial Differential Operators},
part={I-IV},
publisher={Springer},
address={Berlin/Heidelberg},
date={1990}
}
\bib{johnson-freyd}{article}{
author={JOHNSON-FREYD, T.},
title={The formal path integral and quantum mechanics},
journal={Journal of Mathematical Physics},
volume={51},
date={2010}
}
\bib{kontsevich-vishik}{article}{
author={KONTSEVICH, M.},
author={VISHIK, S.},
title={Determinants of elliptic pseudo-differential operators},
journal={Max Planck Preprint, arXiv:hep-th/9404046},
date={1994}
}
\bib{kontsevich-vishik-geometry}{article}{
author={KONTSEVICH, M.},
author={VISHIK, S.},
title={Geometry of determinants of elliptic operators},
journal={Functional Analysis on the Eve of the XXI century, Vol. I, Progress in Mathematics},
volume={131},
pages={173-197},
date={1994}
}
\bib{kumano-go-I}{article}{
author={KUMANO-GO, N.},
title={Phase space Feynman path integrals with smooth functional derivatives by time slicing approximation},
journal={Bulletin des sciences mathematiques},
volume={135},
pages={936-987},
date={2011}
}
\bib{kumano-go-II}{article}{
author={KUMANO-GO, N.},
author={FUJIWARA, D.},
title={Phase space Feynman path integrals via piecewise bicharacteristic paths and their semiclassical approximations},
journal={Bulletin des sciences mathematiques},
volume={132},
pages={313-357},
date={2008}
}
\bib{kumano-go-III}{article}{
author={KUMANO-GO, N.},
author={VASUDEVA MURTHY, A. S.},
title={Phase space Feynman path integrals of higher order parabolic type with general functional as integrand},
journal={Bulletin des sciences mathematiques},
volume={139},
pages={495-537},
date={2015}
}
\bib{maniccia-schrohe-seiler}{article}{
author={MANICCIA, L.},
author={SCHROHE, E.},
author={SEILER, J.},
title={Uniqueness of the Kontsevich-Vishik trace},
journal={Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society},
volume={136 (2)},
pages={747-752},
date={2008}
}
\bib{montvay-muenster}{book}{
author={MONTVAY, I.},
author={M\"{U}NSTER, G.},
title={Quantum Fields on a Lattice},
publisher={Cambridge University Press},
address={Cambridge},
date={1994}
}
\bib{paycha}{article}{
author={PAYCHA, S.},
title={Zeta-regularized traces versus the Wodzicki residue as tools in quantum field theory and infinite dimensional geometry},
journal={Proceedings of the International Conference on Stochastic Analysis and Applications},
pages={69-84},
date={2001}
}
\bib{ray}{article}{
author={RAY, D. B.},
title={Reidemeister torsion and the Laplacian on lense spaces},
journal={Advances in Mathematics},
volume={4},
pages={109-126},
date={1970}
}
\bib{ray-singer}{article}{
author={RAY, D. B.},
author={SINGER, I. M.},
title={$R$-torsion and the Laplacian on Riemannian manifolds},
journal={Advances in Mathematics},
volume={7},
pages={145-210},
date={1971}
}
\bib{schwinger}{article}{
author={SCHWINGER, J.},
title={Gauge Invariance and Mass II},
journal={Physical Review},
volume={128},
pages={2425-2429},
date={Dec. 1962}
}
\bib{takhtajan}{book}{
author={TAKHTAJAN, L. A.},
title={Quantum Mechanics for Mathematicians},
publisher={American Mathematical Society},
address={Providence, RI},
date={2008}
}
\bib{wilson}{article}{
author={WILSON, K. G.},
title={Confinement of quarks},
journal={Physical Review D},
volume={10},
pages={2445},
date={1974}
}
\end{biblist}
\end{bibdiv}
\end{document}
\setcounter{theorem}{0}
|
\section{Introduction}
Deep learning methods are becoming important due to their demonstrated success at tackling complex learning problems. At the same time, increasing access to high-performance computing resources and state-of-the-art open-source libraries are making it more and more feasible for everyone to use these methods.
Natural Language Processing focuses on the interactions between human language and computers. It sits at the intersection of computer science, artificial intelligence, and computational linguistics.
NLP is a way for computers to analyze, understand, and derive meaning from human language in a smart and useful way. By utilizing NLP, developers can organize and structure knowledge to perform tasks such as automatic summarization, translation, named entity recognition, relationship extraction, sentiment analysis, speech recognition, and topic segmentation.
The development of NLP applications is challenging because computers traditionally require humans to communicate to them via a programming language. Programming languages are precise, unambiguous and highly structured. Human speech, however, is not always precise, it is often ambiguous and the linguistic structure can depend on many complex variables, including slang, regional dialects and social context.
\subsection{Introduction to CNN}
A Neural Network is a biologically-inspired programming paradigm which enables a computer to learn from observed data. It is composed of a large number of interconnected processing elements, neurons, working in unison to solve a problem. An ANN is configured for a specific application, such as pattern recognition or data classification, through a learning process.
An ANN consists of three parts or layers: The input layer, a hidden layer and the output layer.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4.5cm]{Figure1}
\caption{Basic structure of an ANN}
\label{fig:Figure1}
\end{figure}
Convolutional Neural Networks are very similar to ordinary Neural Networks. They are also made up of neurons that have learnable weights and biases. The main difference is the number of layers. CNN are just several layers of convolutions with nonlinear activation functions applied to the results. In a traditional NN each input neuron is connected to each output neuron in the next layer. That is called a fully connected layer. In CNNs, instead, convolutions are used over the input layer to compute the output. This results in local connections, where each region of the input is connected to a neuron in the output. Each layer applies different filters, typically hundreds or thousands and combines their results.
\begin{figure*}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14cm]{Figure2}
\caption{Basic structure of a CNN}
\label{fig:Figure2}
\end{figure*}
A key aspect of Convolutional Neural Networks is the use of pooling layers, typically applied after the convolutional layers. Pooling layers subsample their input. The most common way to perform pooling it to apply a max operation to the result of each filter. The pooling process can also be applied over a window. There are two main reasons to perform pooling.
One property of pooling is that it provides a fixed size output matrix, which typically is required for classification. This allows the use of variable size sentences, and variable size filters, but always obtaining the same output dimensions to feed into a classifier.
Pooling also reduces the output dimensionality while keeping the most salient information. You can think of each filter as detecting a specific feature. If this feature occurs somewhere in the sentence, the result of applying the filter to that region will yield a large value, but a small value in other regions. By performing the max operation information is kept about whether or not the feature appeared in the sentence, but information is lost about where exactly it appeared. Resuming, global information about locality is lost (where in a sentence something happens), but local information is kept since it is captured by the filters.
During the training phase, a CNN automatically learns the values of its filters based on the task that to be performed. For example, in Image Classification a CNN may learn to detect edges from raw pixels in the first layer, then use the edges to detect simple shapes in the second layer, and then use these shapes to deter higher-level features, such as facial shapes in higher layers. The last layer is then a classifier that uses these high-level features.
Instead of image pixels, the input to most NLP tasks are sentences or documents represented as a matrix. Each row of the matrix corresponds to one token, typically a word, but it could be a character. That is, each row is vector that represents a word. Typically, these vectors are word embeddings (low-dimensional representations), but they could also be one-hot vectors that index the word into a vocabulary. For a 10 word sentence using a 100-dimensional embedding we would have a 10x100 matrix as our input.
\begin{figure*}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=12cm]{Figure3}
\caption{How the CNN works}
\label{fig:Figure3}
\end{figure*}
In computer vision, the filters slide over local patches of an image, but in NLP filters slide over full rows of the matrix (words). Thus, the width of the filters is usually the same as the width of the input matrix. The height, or region size, may vary, but sliding windows over 2-5 words at a time is the typical size.
\section{Motivation}
In this paper, Bitvai et al. compare the efficiency of an CNN over an ANN. They consider problem of predicting the future box-office takings of movies based on reviews by movie critics and movie attributes.
An artificial neural network (ANN) is proposed for modelling text regression. In language processing, ANNs were first proposed for probabilistic language modelling, followed by models of sentences and parsing inter alia. These approaches have shown strong results through automatic learning dense low-dimensional distributed representations for words and other linguistic units, which have been shown to encode important aspects of language syntax and semantics. They also develop a convolutional neural network, inspired by their breakthrough results in image processing and recent applications to language processing. Past works have mainly focused on ?big data? problems with plentiful training examples. Given the large numbers of parameters, often in the millions, one would expect that such models can only be effectively learned on very large datasets. However in this paper they show that a complex deep convolution network can be trained on about a thousand training examples, although careful model design and regularisation is paramount.
They consider the problem of predicting the future box-office takings of movies based on reviews by movie critics and movie attributes. Their approach is based on the method and dataset of Joshi et al. (2010), who presented a linear regression model over uni-, bi-, and tri-gram term frequency counts extracted from reviews, as well as movie and reviewer metadata. This problem is especially interesting, as comparatively few instances are available for training while each instance (movie) includes a rich array of data including the text of several critic reviews from various review sites, as well as structured data (genre, rating, actors, etc.) Inspired by Joshi et al. (2010) their model also operates over n-grams, 1 ? n ? 3, and movie metadata, using an ANN instead of a linear model. They use word embeddings to represent words in a low dimensional space, a convolutional network with max-pooling to represent documents in terms of n-grams, and several fully connected hidden layers to allow for learning of complex non-linear interactions. They show that including non-linearities in the model is crucial for accurate modelling, providing a relative error reduction of 40 per cent (MAE) over the best linear model. Their final contribution is a novel means of model interpretation.
Although it is notoriously difficult to interpret the parameters of an ANN, they show a simple method of quantifying the effect of text n-grams on the prediction output. This allows for identification of the most important textual inputs, and investigation of non-linear interactions between these words and phrases in different data instances.
\section{Types of Deep Neural Networks}
\subsection{Recurrent neural network}
The idea behind RNNs is to make use of sequential information. In a traditional neural network all inputs (and outputs) are independent of each other. But for many tasks that results in a bad performance. If the next word in a sentence is going to be predicted, there is the need know which words came before it. RNNs are called recurrent because they perform the same task for every element of a sequence, with the output being depended on the previous computations. Another way to think about RNNs is that they have a memory which captures information about what has been calculated so far. Theoretically RNNs can make use of information in arbitrarily long sequences, but in practice they are limited to looking back only a few steps. In Figure 4 we can see what a typical RNN looks like.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{Figure4}
\caption{Recurrent Network}
\label{fig:Figure4}
\end{figure}
Over the years researchers have developed more sophisticated types of RNNs to deal with some of the shortcomings of the original RNN model.
\subsubsection{Bidirectional RNN}
Bidirectional RNNs are based on the idea that the output at time t may not only depend on the previous elements in the sequence, but also future elements. For example, to predict a missing word in a sequence you want to look at both the left and the right context. Bidirectional RNNs are quite simple. They are just two RNNs stacked on top of each other. The output is then computed based on the hidden state of both RNNs.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6cm]{Figure5}
\caption{Structure of a bidirectional RNN}
\label{fig:Figure5}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Deep RNN}
Deep (Bidirectional) RNNs are similar to Bidirectional RNNs, only that we now have multiple layers per time step. In practice this gives us a higher learning capacity (but we also need a lot of training data).
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6cm]{Figure6}
\caption{Structure of a deep RNN}
\label{fig:Figure6}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{LSTM networks}
LSTMs don?t have a fundamentally different architecture from RNNs, but they use a different function to compute the hidden state. The memory in LSTMs are called cells and you can think of them as black boxes that take as input the previous state and the current input. Internally these cells decide what to keep in (and what to erase from) memory. They then combine the previous state, the current memory, and the input. It turns out that these types of units are very efficient at capturing long-term dependencies.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=9cm]{Figure7}
\caption{Structure of a LSTM}
\label{fig:Figure7}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Recursive neural network}
A recursive neural network (RNN or RCNN) is a deep neural network created by applying the same set of weights recursively over a structure, to produce a structured prediction over the input, or a scalar prediction on it, by traversing a given structure in topological order. RNNs have been successful in learning sequence and tree structures in natural language processing, mainly phrase and sentence continuous representations based on word embedding.
RNN is a general architecture to model the distributed representations of a phrase or sentence with its dependency tree. It can be regarded as semantic modelling of text sequences and handle the input sequences of varying length into a fixed-length vector. The parameters in RCNN can be learned jointly with some other NLP tasks, such as text classification.
Each RNN unit can model the complicated interactions of the head word and its children. Combined with a specific task, RNN can capture the most useful semantic and structure information by the convolution and pooling layers.
Recursive neural networks, comprise a class of architecture that operates on structured inputs, and in particular, on directed acyclic graphs. A recursive neural network can be seen as a generalization of the recurrent neural network, which has a specific type of skewed tree structure. They have been applied to parsing, sentence-level sentiment analysis, and paraphrase detection. Given the structural representation of a sentence, e.g. a parse tree, they recursively generate parent representations in a bottom-up fashion, by combining tokens to produce representations for phrases, eventually producing the whole sentence. The sentence-level representation (or, alternatively, its phrases) can then be used to make a final classification for a given input sentence.
Similar to how recurrent neural networks are deep in time, recursive neural networks are deep in structure, because of the repeated application of recursive connections. Recently, the notions of depth in time the result of recurrent connections, and depth in space the result of stacking multiple layers on top of one another, are distinguished for recurrent neural networks. In order to combine these concepts, deep recurrent networks were proposed. They are constructed by stacking multiple recurrent layers on top of each other, which allows this extra notion of depth to be incorporated into temporal processing. Empirical investigations showed that this results in a natural hierarchy for how the information is processed.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6cm]{Figure8}
\caption{Recursive Network}
\label{fig:Figure8}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Dependency based neural network}
In order to capture long-distance dependencies a dependency-based convolution model (DCNN) is proposed.
DCNN consists of a convolutional layer built on top of Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) networks. DCNN takes slightly different forms depending on its input. For a single sentence, the LSTM network processes the sequence of word embeddings to capture long-distance dependencies within the sentence. The hidden states of the LSTM are extracted to form the low-level representation, and a convolutional layer with variable-size filters and max-pooling operators follows to extract task-specific features for classification purposes. As for document modeling, DCNN first applies independent LSTM networks to each subsentence. Then a second LSTM layer is added between the first LSTM layer and the convolutional layer to encode the dependency across different sentences.
\begin{figure*}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14cm]{Figure9}
\caption{Dependency Network}
\label{fig:Figure9}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Dynamic k-max pooling neural network}
Dynamic k-max pooling is a generalization of the max pooling operator. The max pooling operator is a non-linear subsampling function that returns the maximum of a set of values. The operator is generalized in two respects. First, k-max pooling over a linear sequence of values returns the subsequence of k maximum values in the sequence, instead of the single maximum value. Secondly, the pooling parameter k can be dynamically chosen by making k a function of other aspects of the network or the input.
The convolutional layers apply one-dimensional filters across each row of features in the sentence matrix. Convolving the same filter with the n-gram at every position in the sentence allows the features to be extracted independently of their position in the sentence. A convolutional layer followed by a dynamic pooling layer and a non-linearity form a feature map. Like in the convolutional networks for object recognition (LeCun et al., 1998), the representation is enriched in the first layer by computing multiple feature maps with different filters applied to the input sentence. Subsequent layers also have multiple feature maps computed by convolving filters with all the maps from the layer below. The weights at these layers form an order-4 tensor. The resulting architecture is dubbed a Dynamic Convolutional Neural Network.
Multiple layers of convolutional and dynamic pooling operations induce a structured feature graph over the input sentence. Insert figure. Figure 10 illustrates such a graph. Small filters at higher layers can capture syntactic or semantic relations between noncontinuous phrases that are far apart in the input sentence. The feature graph induces a hierarchical structure somewhat akin to that in a syntactic parse tree. The structure is not tied to purely syntactic relations and is internal to the neural network.
\begin{figure*}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=16cm]{Figure10}
\caption{Dynamic Multi-pooling Network}
\label{fig:Figure10}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Other neural networks}
\subsubsection{Multi-column CNN}
This model shares the same word embeddings, and s multiple columns of convolutional neural networks. The number of columns usually used is three, but it can have more or less depending on the context in which it has to be used. These columns are used to analyze different aspects of a question, i.e., answer path, answer context, and answer type. Typically this framework is combined with the learning of embeddings. The overview of this framework is shown in Figure 11. For instance, for the question when did Avatar release in UK, the related nodes of the entity Avatar are queried from FREEBASE. These related nodes are regarded as candidate answers (Cq). Then, for every candidate answer a, the model predicts a score S (q, a) to determine whether it is a correct answer or not.
\begin{figure*}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=16cm]{Figure11}
\caption{Multi-column Network}
\label{fig:Figure11}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Ranking CNN}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6cm]{Figure12}
\caption{Ranking Network}
\label{fig:Figure12}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Context dependent CNN}
The model architecture, shown in Figure x, is a variant of the convolutional architecture of Hu et al. (2014). It consists of two components:
? convolutional sentence model that summarizes the meaning of the source sentence and the target phrase;
? matching model that compares the two representations with a multi-layer perceptron (Bengio, 2009).
Let E be a target phrase and F be the source sentence that contains the source phrase aligning to E. First of all F and E are projected into feature vectors x and y via the convolutional sentence model, and then the matching score s(x, y) is computed by the matching model. Finally, the score is introduced into a conventional SMT system as an additional feature. Convolutional sentence model. As shown in Figure 13, the model takes as input the embeddings of words (trained beforehand elsewhere) in F and E. It then iteratively summarizes the meaning of the input through layers of convolution and pooling, until reaching a fixed length vectorial representation in the final layer.
In Layer-1, the convolution layer takes sliding windows on F and E respectively, and models all the possible compositions of neighbouring words. The convolution involves a filter to produce a new feature for each possible composition.
\begin{figure*}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14cm]{Figure13}
\caption{Context dependent Network}
\label{fig:Figure13}
\end{figure*}
\section{Natural Language Processing}
\subsection{Basic NLP}
\subsubsection{A Re-ranking Model for Dependency Parser with Recursive Convolutional Neural Network}
In this paper, Zhu et al. propose a recursive convolutional neural network (RCNN) architecture to capture syntactic and compositional-semantic representations of phrases and words. RCNN is a general architecture and can deal with k-ary parsing tree, therefore it is very suitable for dependency parsing. For each node in a given dependency tree, they first use a RCNN unit to model the interactions between it and each of its children and choose the most informative features by a pooling layer. Thus, the RCNN unit can be applied recursively to get the vector representation of the whole dependency tree. The output of each RCNN unit is used as the input of the RCNN unit of its parent node, until it outputs a single fixed-length vector at root node. When applied to the re-ranking model for parsing, RCNN improve the accuracy of base parser to make accurate parsing decisions. The experiments on two benchmark datasets show that RCNN outperforms the state-of-the-art models. The results obtained for this paper can be seen in Table 1.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||l c||}
\hline
& UAS \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
Traditional Methods & \\
\hline
Zhang and Clark (2008) & 91.4 \\
\hline
Huang and Sagae (2010) & 92.1 \\
\hline
Distributed Representations & \\
\hline
Stenetorp (2013) & 86.25 \\
\hline
Chen et al. (2014) & 93.74 \\
\hline
Chen and Manning (2014) & 92.0 \\
\hline
Re-rankers & \\
\hline
Hayashi et al. (2013) & 93.12 \\
\hline
Le and Zuidema (2014) & 93.12 \\
\hline
Our baseline & 92.35 \\
\hline
Our re-ranker & 93.83(+1.48) \\
\hline
Our re-ranker (with oracle) & 94.16 \\ [1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{results}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Semantic Clustering and Convolutional Neural Network for Short Text Categorization}
In this paper, Wang et al. propose a novel method to model short texts based on semantic clustering and convolutional neural network. Particularly, they first discover semantic cliques in embedding spaces by a fast clustering algorithm: (1) semantic cliques are discovered using fast clustering method based on searching density peaks; (2) for fine-tuning multi- scale SUs, the semantic cliques are used to super- vise the selection stage. Since the neighbors of each word are semantically related in embedding space, clustering methods can be used to discover semantic cliques. Then, multi-scale semantic units are detected under the supervision of semantic cliques, which introduce useful external knowledge for short texts. These meaningful semantic units are combined and fed into convolutional layer, followed by max-pooling operation.
\subsubsection{Capturing Semantic Similarity for Entity Linking with Convolutional Neural Networks}
In this work, Francis-landau et al. present a model that uses convolutional neural networks to capture semantic correspondence between a mention?s context and a proposed target entity. These convolutional networks operate at multiple granularities to exploit various kinds of topic information, and their rich parameterization gives them the capacity to learn which n-grams characterize different topics. They model semantic similarity between a mention's source document context and its potential entity targets using CNNs. CNNs have been shown to be effective for sentence classification tasks and for capturing similarity in models for entity linking so they are expected to be effective at isolating the relevant topic semantics for entity linking. They show that convolutions over multiple granularities of the input document are useful for providing different notions of semantic context. Finally, they show how to integrate these networks with a preexisting entity linking system. Through a combination of these two distinct methods into a single system that leverages their complementary strengths, they achieve state-of-the-art performance across several datasets. The results obtained for this paper can be seen in Table 2.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||l c c c||}
\hline
& ACE & CoNLL & WP \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
Google News & 87.5 & 89.6 & 83.8 \\
\hline
Wikipedia & 89.5 & 90.6 & 85.5 \\ [1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{results}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Dependency Sensitive Convolutional Neural Networks for Modeling Sentences and Documents}
In this work, Zhang et al. present Dependency Sensitive Convolutional Neural Networks (DSCNN) as a general-purpose classification system for both sentences and documents. DSCNN hierarchically builds textual representations by processing pretrained word embeddings via Long Short-Term Memory networks and subsequently extracting features with convolution operators. Compared with existing recursive neural models with tree structures,DSCNN does not rely on parsers and expensive phrase labeling, and thus is not restricted to sentence-level tasks. Moreover, unlike other CNN-based models that analyze sentences locally by sliding windows, their system captures both the dependency information within each sentence and relationships across sentences in the same document.
They propose Dependency Sensitive Convolutional Neural Networks (DSCNN), an end-to-end classification system that hierarchically builds textual representations with only root-level labels.
They evaluate DSCNN on several sentence-level and document-level tasks including sentiment analysis, question type classification, and subjectivity classification.
\subsection{Information Extraction}
\subsubsection{Event Extraction via Dynamic Multi-Pooling Convolutional Neural Networks}
In this paper, Chen et al. introduce a word-representation model to capture meaningful semantic regularities for words and adopt a framework based on a multi-pooling CNN to capture sentence-level clues. Since CNN can only capture the most important information in a sentence and may miss valuable facts when considering multiple-event sentences, they propose a dynamic multi-pooling convolutional neural network (DMCNN), as seen in CNN type 3. DMNCC uses a dynamic multi-pooling layer according to event triggers and arguments, to reserve more crucial information. Explain a bit more.
\subsubsection{Event Detection and Domain Adaptation with Convolutional Neural Networks}
In this paper, Nguyen et al. present a convolutional neural network for event detection that automatically learns features from sentences, and minimizes the dependence on supervised toolkits and resources for features, thus alleviating the error propagation and improving the performance for this task. First, they evaluate CNNs for event detection in the general setting and show that CNNs, though not requiring complicated feature engineering, can still outperform the state-of-the-art feature-based methods extensively relying on the other supervised modules and manual resources for features. Second, they investigate CNNs in a domain adaptation (DA) setting for event detection. They demonstrate that CNNs significantly outperform the traditional feature-based methods with respect to generalization performance across domains due to: (i) their capacity to mitigate the error propagation from the preprocessing modules for features, and (ii) the use of word embeddings to induce a more general representation for trigger candidates.
\subsubsection{Combining Recurrent and Convolutional Neural Networks for Relation Classification}
In this paper Vu et al. present three different approaches. First of all, a new context representation for convolutional neural networks for relation classification (extended middle context). Secondly, they propose connectionist bi-directional recurrent neural networks and introduce ranking loss for their optimization. Finally, they show that combining convolutional and recurrent neural net- works using a simple voting scheme is accurate enough to improve results.
1) The presented extended middle context, a new context representation for CNNs for relation classification. The extended middle context uses all parts of the sentence (the relation arguments, left of the relation arguments, between the arguments, right of the arguments) and pays special attention to the middle part.
2) They present connectionist bi-directional RNN models which are especially suited for sentence classification tasks since they combine all intermediate hidden layers for their final decision. Furthermore, the ranking loss function is introduced for the RNN model optimization which has not been investigated in the literature for relation classification before.
3) Finally, they combine CNNs and RNNs using a simple voting scheme and achieve new state-of-the-art results on the SemEval 2010 benchmark dataset.
The results obtained for this paper can be seen in Table 3.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||l l||}
\hline
Classifier & F1 \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
SVM (Rink and Harabagiu, 2010b) & 82.2 \\
\hline
RNN (Socher et al., 2012) & 77.6 \\
\hline
MVRNN (Socher et al., 2012) & 82.4 \\
\hline
CNN (Zeng et al., 2014) & 82.7 \\
\hline
FCM (Yu et al., 2014) & 83.0 \\
\hline
bi-RNN (Zhang and Wang, 2015) & 82.5 \\
\hline
CR-CNN (Dos Santos et al., 2015) & 84.1 \\
\hline
R-CNN & 83.4 \\
\hline
ER-CNN & 84.2 \\
\hline
ER-CNN+R-RNN & 84.9 \\ [1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{results}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Comparing Convolutional Neural Networks to Traditional Models for Slot Filling}
In this paper Adel et al. address relation classification in the context of slot filling, the task of finding and evaluating fillers for different slots. They investigate three complementary approaches to relation classification.
The first approach is pattern matching, a leading approach in the TAC evaluations. Fillers are validated based on patterns. In this work, they consider patterns learned with distant supervision. Their second approach is support vector machines. Their third approach is a convolutional neural network (CNN). CNN can recognize phrase patterns independent of their position in the sentence. Furthermore, they make use of word embeddings that directly reflect word similarity.
1) They investigate the complementary strengths and weaknesses of different approaches to relation classification and show that their combination can better deal with a diverse set of problems that slot filling poses than each of the approaches individually.
2) They propose to split the context at the relation arguments before passing it to the CNN in order to better deal with the special characteristics of a sentence in relation classification. This outperforms the state-of-the-art piecewise CNN.
3) They analyze the effect of genre on slot filling and show that it is an important conflating variable that needs to be carefully examined in research on slot filling.
4) They provide a benchmark for slot filling relation classification that will facilitate direct comparisons of models in the future and show that results on this dataset are correlated with end-to-end system results.
\subsection{Summarization}
\subsubsection{Modelling, Visualising and Summarising Documents with a Single Convolutional Neural Network}
In this paper Denil et al. introduce a model that is able to represent the meaning of documents by embedding them in a low dimensional vector space, while preserving distinctions of word and sentence order crucial for capturing nuanced semantics. Their model is based on an extended Dynamic Convolution Neural Network, which learns convolution filters at both the sentence and document level, hierarchically learning to capture and compose low level lexical features into high level semantic concepts. Their model is compositional; it combines word embeddings into sentence embeddings and then further combines the sentence embeddings into document embeddings. This means that their model is divided into two levels, a sentence level and a document level, both of which are implemented using CNN. At the sentence level CNN are used to transform embeddings for the words in each sentence into an embedding for the entire sentence. At the document level another CNN is used to transform sentence embeddings from the first level into a single embedding vector that represents the entire document. Since their model is based on convolutions, it is able to preserve ordering information between words in a sentence and between sentences in a document. The results obtained for this paper can be seen in Table 4.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||l l||}
\hline
Model & Accuracy \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
BoW & 88.23 \\
\hline
Full+BoW & 88.33 \\
\hline
Full+Unlabelled+BoW & 88.89 \\
\hline
WRRBM & 87.42 \\
\hline
WRRBM+BoW (bnc) & 89.23 \\
\hline
SVM-bi & 86.95 \\
\hline
NBSVM-uni & 88.29 \\
\hline
NBSVM-bi & 91.22 \\
\hline
Paragraph Vector & 92.58 \\
\hline
Their model & 89.38 \\ [1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{results}
\end{table}
\subsection{Machine Translation}
\subsubsection{Context-Dependent Translation Selection Using Convolutional Neural Network}
In this paper, Hu et al. propose a novel method for translation selection in statistical machine translation, in which a convolutional neural network is employed to judge the similarity between a phrase pair in two languages. The specifically designed convolutional architecture encodes not only the semantic similarity of the translation pair, but also the context containing the phrase in the source language. Therefore, their approach is able to capture context-dependent semantic similarities of translation pairs. A curriculum learning strategy is adopted to train the model: the training examples are classified into easy, medium, and difficult categories, and gradually build the ability of representing phrases and sentence-level contexts by using training examples from easy to difficult.
\subsubsection{Encoding Source Language with Convolutional Neural Network for Machine Translation}
In this paper, Meng et al. use a CNN plus gating approach. They give a more systematic treatment by summarizing the relevant source information through a convolutional architecture guided by the target information. With different guiding signals during decoding, their specifically designed convolution+gating architectures can pinpoint the parts of a source sentence that are relevant to predicting a target word, and fuse them with the context of entire source sentence to form a unified representation. This representation, together with target language words, are fed to a deep neural network (DNN) to form a stronger neural network joint model,NNJM. Experiments on two NIST Chinese-English translation tasks show that the proposed model can achieve significant improvements over the previous NNJM. The results obtained for this paper can be seen in Table 5 and Table 6.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||c c c c||}
\hline
Systems & MT04 & MT05 & Average \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
Deep2str & 34.89 & 32.24 & 33.57 \\
\hline
tagCNN & 36.33 & 33.37 & 34.85 \\
\hline
tagCNN-dep & 36.53 & 33.61 & 35.08 \\ [1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{results}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||c c c c||}
\hline
Systems & MT04 & MT05 & Average \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
Deep2str & 34.89 & 32.24 & 33.57 \\
\hline
inCNN & 36.92 & 33.72 & 35.32 \\
\hline
inCNN-2pooling & 36.33 & 32.88 & 34.61 \\
\hline
inCNN-4pooling & 36.46 & 33.01 & 34.74 \\
\hline
inCNN-8pooling & 36.57 & 33.39 & 34.98 \\ [1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{results}
\end{table}
\subsection{Question Answering}
\subsubsection{Question Answering over Freebase with Multi-Column Convolutional Neural Networks}
In this paper, Dong et al. introduce the multi-column convolutional neural networks (MCCNNs) to automatically analyze questions from multiple aspects. Specifically, the model shares the same word embeddings to represent question words. MCCNNs use different column networks to extract answer types, relations, and context information from the input questions. The entities and relations in the knowledge base are also represented as low-dimensional vectors. Then, a score layer is employed to rank candidate answers according to the representations of questions and candidate answers. Their proposed information extraction based method utilizes question-answer pairs to automatically learn the model without relying on manually annotated logical forms and hand-crafted features. They do not use any pre-defined lexical triggers and rules. In addition, the question paraphrases are also used to train networks and generalize for the unseen words in a multi-task learning manner. The results obtained for this paper can be seen in Table 7.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||l c c||}
\hline
Method & F1 & P@1 \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
(Berant et al., 2013) & 31.4 & - \\
\hline
(Berant and Liang, 2014) & 39.9 & - \\
\hline
(Bao et al., 2014) & 37.5 & - \\
\hline
(Yao and Van Durme, 2014) & 33.0 & - \\
\hline
(Bordes et al., 2014a) & 39.2 & 40.4 \\
\hline
(Bordes et al., 2014b) & 28.7 & 31.3 \\
\hline
MCCNN (theirs) & 40.8 & 45.1 \\ [1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{results}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Modeling Relational Information in Question-Answer Pairs with Convolutional Neural Networks}
In this paper, Severyn et al. propose convolutional neural networks for learning an optimal representation of question and answer sentences. The main aspect of this work is the use of relational information given by the matches between words from the two members of the pair. The matches are encoded as embeddings with additional parameters (dimensions), which are tuned by the network. These allows for better capturing interactions between questions and answers, resulting in a significant boost in accuracy.
The distinctive properties of their model are:
1) State-of-the-art use of distributional sentence model for learning to map input sentences to vectors, which are then used to measure the similarity between them.
2) Their model encodes question-answer pairs in a richer representation using not only their similarity score but also their intermediate representations.
3) They augment the word embeddings with additional dimensions to encode the fact that certain words overlap in a given question-answer pair and let the network tune these parameters.
4) The architecture of our net- work makes it straightforward to include any additional features encoding question-answer similarities
5) Finally their model is trained end-to-end starting from the input sentences to producing a final score that is used to rerank answers. They only require to initialize word embeddings trained on some large unsupervised corpora. However, given a large training set the network can also optimize the embeddings directly for the task, thus omitting the need for pre-training of the word embeddings. The results obtained for this paper can be seen in Table 8.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||l c c||}
\hline
Model & MAP & MRR \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
Wang et al. (2007) & .6029 & .6852 \\
\hline
Heilman and Smith (2010) & .6091 & .6917 \\
\hline
Wang and Manning (2010) & .5951 & .6951 \\
\hline
Yao et al. (2013) & .6307 & .7477 \\
\hline
Severyn and Moschitti (2013) & .6781 & .7358 \\
\hline
Yih et al. (2013) & .7092 & .7700 \\
\hline
Yu et al. (2014) & .7113 & .7846 \\
\hline
Wang and Ittycheriah (2015) & .7063 & .7740 \\
\hline
Yin et al. (2015) & .6951 & .7633 \\
\hline
Miao et al. (2015) & .7339 & .8117 \\
\hline
CNNR on (TRAIN) & .6857 & .7660 \\
\hline
CNNR on (TRAIN-ALL) & .7186 & .7828 \\ [1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{results}
\end{table}
Insert table 5 from paper??
\subsection{Speech recognition}
\subsubsection{Convolutional Neural Networks for Speech Recognition}
In this paper Abdel-Hamid et al. describe how to apply CNNs to speech recognition in a novel way, such that the CNN?s structure directly accommodates some types of speech variability. They show a performance improvement relative to standard DNNs with similar numbers of weight parameters using this approach (about 6-10) relative error reduction), in contrast to the more equivocal results of convolving along the time axis, as earlier applications of CNNs to speech had attempted. Their hybrid CNN-HMM approach delegates temporal variability to the HMM, while convolving along the frequency axis creates a degree of invariance to small frequency shifts, which normally occur in actual speech signals due to speaker differences.they porpose a new, limited weight sharing scheme that can handle speech features in a better way than the full weight sharing that is standard in previous CNN architectures such as those used in image processing. Limited weight sharing leads to a much smaller number of units in the pooling layer, resulting in a smaller model size and lower computational complexity than the full weight sharing scheme.
An improved performance is observed on two ASR tasks: TIMIT phone recognition and a large-vocabulary voice search task, across a variety of CNN parameter and design settings. They determine that the use of energy information is very beneficial for the CNN in terms of recognition accuracy. Further, the ASR performance was found to be sensitive to the pooling size, but insensitive to the overlap between pooling units, a discovery that will lead to better efficiency in storage and computation. Finally, pretraining of CNNs based on convolutional RBMs was found to yield better performance in the large-vocabulary voice search experiment, but not in the phone recognition experiment. The results obtained for this paper can be seen in Table 9.
\begin{table*}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||l l c c c c||}
\hline
ID & Network structure & Average PER & min-max PER & params & ops \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
1 & DNN {2000 + 2x1000} & 22.02 & 21.86-22.11 & 6.9M & 6.9M \\
\hline
2 & DNN {2000 + 4x1000} & 21.87 & 21.68-21.98 & 8.9M & 8.9M \\
\hline
3 & CNN {LWS + 2x1000} & 20.17 & 19.92-20.41 & 5.4M & 10.7M \\
\hline
4 & CNN {FWS + 2x1000} & 20.31 & 20.16-20.58 & 8.5M & 13.6M \\
\hline
5 & CNN {FWS + FWS + 2x1000} & 20.23 & 20.11-20.29 & 4.5M & 11.7M \\
\hline
6 & CNN {FWS + LWS + 2x1000} & 20.36 & 19.91-20.61 & 4.1M & 7.5M \\ [1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{results}
\end{table*}
\subsubsection{Analysis of CNN-based Speech Recognition System using Raw Speech as Input}
In this paper Palaz et al. analyze CNN to understand the speech information that is modeled between the first two convolution layers. To that end, they present a method to compute the mean frequency responses of the filters in the first convolution layer that match to the specific inputs representing vowels. Studies on TIMIT task indicate that the mean frequency response tends to model the envelope of the sub-segmental (2-4 ms) speech signal. Then, they present a study to evaluate the susceptibility of the CNN-based system to mismatched conditions. This is an open problem in systems trained in a data-driven manner. They investigate this aspect on two tasks, namely, TIMIT phoneme recognition task and Aurora2 connected word recognition task. Our studies show that the performance of the CNN-based system degrades with the decrease in signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) like in a standard spectral feature based system. However, when compared to the spectral feature based system, the CNN-based system using raw speech signal as input yields better performance. The results obtained for this paper can be seen in Table 10.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||l l c c c c||}
\hline
SNR [dB] & ANN & ANN & CNN & CNN \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
Training & clean & multi & clean & multi \\
\hline
2 & 52.5 & 54.3 & 65.5 & 66.8 \\
\hline
3 & 46.7 & 50.8 & 59.7 & 64.8 \\
\hline
4 & 40.3 & 46.6 & 50.5 & 60.8 \\
\hline
5 & 32.7 & 41.1 & 39.1 & 53.5 \\
\hline
5 & 26.1 & 34.2 & 27.8 & 42.8 \\
\hline
5 & 21.2 & 26.4 & 18.3 & 30.8 \\
\hline
6 & 17.4 & 20.2 & 9.9 & 21.4 \\ [1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{results}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{End-to-End Deep Neural Network for Automatic Speech Recognition}
In this paper Song et al. implement an end-to-end deep learning system that utilizes mel-filter bank features to directly output to spoken phonemes without the need of a traditional Hidden Markov Model for decoding. The system comprises of two variants of neural networks for phoneme recognition. In particular, a CNN is used for frame level classification and recurrent architecture with Connectionist Temporal Classification loss for decoding the frames into a sequence of phonemes. CNNs are exceptionally good at capturing high level features in spatial domain and have demonstrated unparalleled success in computer vision related tasks. One natural advantage of using CNN is that it?s invariant against translations of the variations in frequencies, which are common observed across speaker with different pitch due to their age or gender.
For each frame, the actual input is generated to the CNN by taking a window of frames surrounding it. Each input instance is a small one-channel image patch. The CNN architecture closely resembles many of architectures seen in recent years of research. (It consists of 4 convolutional layers where the first two layers have max pooling. After the convolutions, it's followed by two densely connected layer and finally a softmax layer. ReLU is used for all activation functions). One aspect where they differ is that instead of using the typical square convolution kernel, they use rectangular kernels since given a short window of frames, much of the information is stored across the frequency domain rather than the time domain.
\subsubsection{Applying Convolutional Neural Networks Concepts to Hybrid NN-HMM Model for Speech Recognition}
In this paper, Abdel-Hamid et al. propose to apply CNN to speech recognition within the framework of hybrid NN-HMM model. They propose to use local filtering and max-pooling in frequency domain to normalize speaker variance to achieve higher multi-speaker speech recognition performance. In their method, a pair of local filtering layer and max-pooling layer is added at the lowest end of neural network (NN) to normalize spectral variations of speech signals. Wit the use of the CNN they wish to normalize speech spectral features to achieve speaker invariance and enforce locality of features. The novelty of this paper is to apply the CNN concepts in the frequency domain to exploit CNN invariance to small shifts along the frequency axis through the use of local filtering and max-pooling. In this way, some acoustic variations can be effectively normalized and the resultant feature representation may be immune to speaker variations, colored background and channel noises. The results obtained for this paper can be seen in Table 11.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||l c||}
\hline
Method & PER \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
NN with 3 hidden layers of 1000 nodes & 22.95 \\
\hline
CNN with no pre-training (their work) & 20.07 \\
\hline
NN with DBN pre-training & 20.70 \\
\hline
NN with DBN pre-training and mcRBM features extraction & 20.50 \\ [1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{results}
\end{table}
\section{Journals}
\subsection{Classifying Relations by Ranking with Convolutional Neural Networks (P15-1061)}
In this work, Dong et al. propose a new convolutional neural network (CNN), named Classification by Ranking CNN (CR-CNN), to tackle the relation classification task. The proposed network learns a distributed vector representation for each relation class. Given an input text segment, the network uses a convolutional layer to produce a distributed vector representation of the text and compares it to the class representations in order to produce a score for each class. They propose a new pairwise ranking loss function that makes it easy to reduce the impact of artificial classes. Using CRCNN, and without the need for any costly handcrafted feature, they outperform the state-of-the-art for the SemEval-2010 Task 8 dataset. Their experimental results are evidence that:
1) CR-CNN is more effective than CNN followed by a softmax classifier.
2) Omitting the representation of the artificial class Other improves both precision and recall.
3) Using only word embeddings as input features is enough to achieve state-of-the-art results if only the text between the two target nominals is considered.
The results obtained for this paper can be seen in Table 12.
\begin{table*}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||l p{4in} c||}
\hline
Classifier & Feature Set & F1 \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
SVM (Rink and Harabagiu, 2010) & POS, prefixes, morphological, WordNet, dependency parse, Levin classes, ProBank, FrameNet, NomLex-Plus,Google n-gram, paraphrases, TextRunner & 82.2 \\
\hline
RNN (Socher et al., 2012) & word embeddings & 74.8 \\
\hline
RNN (Socher et al., 2012) & word embeddings, POS, NER, WordNet & 77.6 \\
\hline
MVRNN (Socher et al., 2012) & word embeddings & 79.1 \\
\hline
MVRNN (Socher et al., 2012) & word embeddings, POS, NER, WordNet & 82.4 \\
\hline
CNN+Softmax (Zeng et al., 2014) & word embeddings & 69.7 \\
\hline
CNN+Softmax (Zeng et al., 2014) & word embeddings, word position embeddings, word pair, words around word pair, WordNet & 82.7 \\
\hline
FCM (Yu et al., 2014) & word embeddings & 80.6 \\
\hline
FCM (Yu et al., 2014) & word embeddings, dependency parse, NER & 83.0 \\
\hline
CR-CNN & word embeddings & 32.8 \\
\hline
CR-CNN & word embeddings, word position embeddings & 84.1 \\ [1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Results}
\end{table*}
\subsection{A Convolutional Architecture for Word Sequence Prediction. P15-1151 (genCNN, difficult to understand)1/2 I have to add more info, but I'm having troubles to understand it.}
In this paper, et al. propose a novel convolutional architecture, named genCNN, as a model that can efficiently combine local and long range structures of language for the purpose of modeling conditional probabilities. genCNN can be directly used in generating a word sequence (i.e., text generation) or evaluating the likelihood of word sequences (i.e., language modeling). They also show the empirical superiority of genCNN on both tasks over traditional n-grams and its RNN or FFN counterparts. The results obtained for this paper can be seen in Table 13.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||c c c c||}
\hline
Models & MT06 & MT08 & Average \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
Baseline & 38.63 & 31.11 & 34.87 \\
\hline
RNN rerank & 39.03 & 31.50 & 35.26 \\
\hline
LSTM rerank & 39.20 & 31.90 & 35.55 \\
\hline
FFN-LM rerank & 38.93 & 31.41 & 35.14 \\
\hline
genCNN rerank & 39.90 & 32.50 & 36.20 \\
\hline
Base+FFN-LM & 39.08 & 31.60 & 35.34 \\
\hline
genCNN rerank & 40.4 & 32.85 & 36.63 \\ [1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{results}
\end{table}
\subsection{A Convolutional Neural Network for Modelling Sentences (P14-1062)}
In this paper Kalchbrenner et al. use the Dynamic Convolutional Neural Network (DCNN) for the semantic modeling of sentences. The network handles input sentences of varying length and induces a feature graph over the sentence that is capable of explicitly capturing short and long-range relations. Multiple layers of convolutional and dynamic pooling operations induce a structured feature graph over the input sentence. Small filters at higher layers can capture syntactic or semantic relations between non-continuous phrases that are far apart in the input sentence. The feature graph induces a hierarchical structure somewhat akin to that in a syntactic parse tree. The structure is not tied to purely syntactic relations and is internal to the neural network.
They experiment with the network in four settings. The first two experiments involve predicting the sentiment of movie reviews. The network outperforms other approaches in both the binary and the multi-class experiments. The third experiment involves the categorization of questions in six question types. The fourth experiment involves predicting the sentiment of Twitter posts using distant supervision. The network is trained on 1.6 million tweets labelled automatically according to the emoticon that occurs in them.
\subsection{Sequential Short-Text Classification with Recurrent and Convolutional Neural Networks(N16-1062)}
In this work, Lee et al. present a model based on recurrent neural networks and convolutional neural networks that incorporates the preceding short texts. Inspired by the performance of ANN-based systems for non-sequential short-text classification, they introduce a model based on recurrent neural networks (RNNs) and CNNs for sequential short-text classification, and evaluate it on the dialog act classification task. A dialog act characterizes an utterance in a dialog based on a combination of pragmatic, semantic, and syntactic criteria. Its accurate detection is useful for a range of applications, from speech recognition to automatic summarization. Their model comprises two parts. The first part generates a vector representation for each short text using either the RNN or CNN architecture. The second part classifies the current short text based on the vector representations of the current as well as a few preceding short texts. The results obtained for this paper can be seen in Table 14.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||l c c c||}
\hline
Models & DSTC 4 & MRDA & SwDA \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
CNN & 65.5 & 84.6 & 73.1 \\
\hline
LSTM & 66.2 & 84.3 & 69.6 \\
\hline
Majority class & 25.8 & 59.1 & 33.7 \\
\hline
SVM & 57.0 & - & - \\
\hline
Graphical model & - & 81.3 & - \\
\hline
Naive Bayes & - & 82.0 & - \\
\hline
HMM & - & - & 71.0 \\
\hline
Memory-based Learning & - & - & 72.3 \\
\hline
Interlabeler agreement & - & - & 84.0 \\ [1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{results}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}
This paper presents state-of-the-art deep learning tools for Natural Language Processing.
The main contributions of this work are??An overview of CNN and its different subtypes. A get together of all the problems that have been solved using state-of-the-art CNN technologies. A general view of how CNN have been applied to different NLP problems, with results included.
After the advances made in Computer Vision using deep learning tools, NLP has adapted some of these techniques to make major breakthroughs. However, the results, for now, are only promising. There is evidence that deep learning tools provide good solutions, but they haven't provided such a big leap as the one in Computer Vision.
One of the main problems is that CNN started being used because of the great success in CV. Due to this there's a lack of a common goal. This uncertainty of what to do causes the results to be good but not as good as expected. One of the reasons could be because CNN are thought to be applied to images and not to words.
However, the results and all the ... are encouraging and are an improvement over the previous state-of-the-art techniques.
\section{Future Work}
There's a need to define common goals and set a better use of CNN.
Convolutional Neural Networks are designed to be used on images. Missing component (2D-3D)
Speech recognition seems the area with the best results (maybe because it's one of the areas that concerns a bigger number of people). Try to see the model they have used and adapt it to the problem the author is trying to solve.
\balance
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The authors would like to thank...
\ifCLASSOPTIONcaptionsoff
\newpage
\fi
|
\section{Introduction}
The temperature dependence of the resistivity is one of the most
important properties of metals.
At ambient conditions, the resistivity of metals and their alloys
consists of three contributions:
(i) the residual resistivity $\rho_{\rm imp}$ which is due to
the scattering of conduction electrons on impurities and other
structural defects with a very weak temperature dependence;
(ii) the phonon contribution $\rho_{\rm ph}$, and
(iii) the contribution $\rho_{\rm mag}$ which is due to the scattering
on magnetic fluctuations in ferromagnetic metals and in alloys with
local moments.
In an ideal ferromagnet $\rho_{\rm imp}=0$ while $\rho_{\rm ph}$
varies linearly with temperature $T$ above the Debye temperature and usually
even below it down to fairly low temperatures \cite{rho-ph}.
The contribution due to magnetic fluctuations reaches its maximum at
the Curie temperature, $T_{\rm c}$, and then remains constant.
Its value corresponding to scattering of charge carriers on static disordered
moments is called the spin-disorder resistivity (SDR), $\rho_{\rm SDR}$,
\cite{sdr-kl,sdr-our}.
The SDR is an important feature of ferromagnetic metals and the
bcc-iron at ambient conditions is a textbook example with
$\rho_{\rm mag}$ at $T_{\rm c}$ of about 80~$\mu\Omega$\,cm, four times larger
than its phonon part \cite{rho-exp}.
It should be noted that the temperature dependence of $\rho_{\rm mag}$
below $T_{\rm c}$ obeys reasonably well the $T^2$ law.
At the Earth's core conditions, i.e., at pressures about 350~GPa and
temperatures 5000~K $-$ 6000~K, one naturally expects dominating scattering
on phonons, $\rho_{\rm ph}$, on which many authors studying resistivity
have concentrated.
We refer readers to a recent extensive review \cite{rho-rev}.
We mention in particular studies of Pozzo and Alf\`e \cite{rho-md} which
employ {\it ab initio} molecular dynamics simulations \cite{rho-mdth}.
Their estimate of $\rho_{\rm ph}$ about 50~$\mu\Omega$\,cm
seems to agree reasonably well with the result of a very recent
measurement employing the laser-heated diamond-anvil cell
\cite{rho-ph-dac}.
The estimated value of $\rho_{\rm ph}$ is few times smaller than the
traditional estimates based on the extrapolation of the shock compression
data \cite{rho-shock}.
Possible effects of electron correlations under Earth's core
conditions were investigated recently \cite{pour13,vekil,rho-dmft}.
There are indications of a Fermi-liquid behavior of hcp and fcc phases
and a non-Fermi-liquid behavior of the bcc phase.
The resistivity, $\rho_{\rm ec}$, caused by electron correlations
was calculated for hcp phase and the value $\rho_{\rm ec} = 16~\mu\Omega$\,cm
was reported \cite{rho-dmft}.
It should be noted that a reliable experimental estimate of the
resistivity at the Earth's core conditions is a highly demanding task.
In contrast to existing theoretical studies of electrical
resistivity due to phonons and electron correlations,
the role of spin polarization and magnetic fluctuations in
transport properties of iron at the Earth's core conditions
remains unexplored.
First-principles total energy calculations \cite{mag-earth} clearly
show that the long-range magnetic order does not exist.
On the other hand, authors of Ref.~\onlinecite{mag-earth} demonstrated
the existence of fluctuating Fe-local moment larger than 1~$\mu_{\rm B}$
for bcc Fe as well as for fcc Fe and hcp Fe using the classical model
of local spin fluctuations (LSF).
One can understand this result as a stabilizing effect of the
magnetic entropy.
A similar effect exists also at ambient conditions, e.g., for fcc Ni
in paramagnetic region \cite{mag-ni}.
In particular, the issue here was an estimate of the size of fluctuating
local Ni-moment just above $T_{\rm c}$, i.e., in the paramagnetic state.
A conventional description of the paramagnetic state using the disordered
local moment (DLM) approach \cite{dlm} gives a zero local moment.
The combination of the DLM with the fixed spin-moment (FSM) approach
\cite{mag-ni} yields the total energy that increases with the value
of the fixed local moment $m_{\rm Ni}$ on Ni atoms, but the presence
of magnetic entropy leads to a minimum of the free energy for the value of
$m_{\rm Ni}$ about 0.4~$\mu_{\rm B}$ in a very good agreement both with
the LSF calculations \cite{ni-lsf} and the neutron diffuse scatterings
experiments.
The purpose of the present paper is a first-principles study of
the electrical resistivity of iron-based systems due to the spin
disorder relevant under the Earth's core conditions.
We focus not only on the SDR itself, but also address the combined
effect of several possible scattering mechanisms, namely, phonons,
spin disorder, and impurities.
\section{Theory}
The electronic structure was determined from first principles
by using the tight-binding linear muffin-tin orbital (TB-LMTO)
method and the local spin-density approximation.
The effect of disorder was included in the framework of the coherent
potential approximation (CPA).
The CPA is used to include the effect of substitutional impurities
(Si in the present work) and also to describe the paramagnetic state
in terms of disordered local moments (DLM state)\cite{dlm}.
The effect of phonon disorder is treated within the multicomponent CPA.
Statistical mechanics of disordered moments is based on the magnetic
entropy proposed by Heine and Joynt\cite{magentr} and Grimvall\cite{Grimvall}.
We refer the reader to the Supplemental material \cite{SuMat} for details.
\subsection{Electron transport}
The DLM-FSM method yields the selfconsistent potentials needed to
calculate the SDR using the Kubo-Greenwood approach.
It should be noted that the DLM approach is closely related to the
conventional alloy theory employing the CPA \cite{dlm}.
Calculated SDR of fcc Ni at ambient conditions agrees well with
the experiment (SDR is about 15~$\mu\Omega$\,cm) \cite{sdr-our}.
We use the same computational approach also for estimate of the
SDR at the Earth's core conditions.
We need to determine $\rho_{\rm ph}$ for comparison with the SDR and
to investigate if individual contributions to the total resistivity
are additive -- in other words if the Matthiessen rule is valid.
We employ a simple yet quantitative model to include the effect of phonons.
Their effect is accounted for by frozen random displacements of atomic
positions.
A good agreement of calculated and measured $T$-dependent resistivity
was obtained for $\rho_{\rm ph}$ at ambient conditions \cite{DW}
if the root-mean-square (r.m.s.) displacements $\sqrt{\langle u^{2} \rangle}$
for a given temperature are estimated from the Debye theory.
We refer the reader to the Supplemental material \cite{SuMat} for details.
It is important to note that results are also in a good agreement with
a more sophisticated {\it ab initio} molecular dynamics approach for
bcc Fe at ambient conditions \cite{rho-mdamb}.
However, a straightforward extension of the Debye theory to the Earth's
core condition is not justified as demonstrated recently \cite{rho-ph-dac}.
This theory yields large displacements, for example, for bcc Fe
$\sqrt{\langle u^{2} \rangle} = 0.80$ bohr at 5500 K.
The relation between the temperature and displacements under
the Earth's core conditions can be estimated using other approaches:
(i) Lindemann's melting condition
$\sqrt{\langle u^{2} \rangle} = \varrho \, r_{\rm m}$, where $\varrho$ is
a constant and $r_{\rm m}$ is an interatomic distance \cite{gilvar};
for bcc Fe it gives $\sqrt{\langle u^{2} \rangle} = 0.30$ bohr.
(ii) Molecular dynamics simulations \cite{msd-hcpFe}; the value
$\sqrt{\langle u^{2} \rangle} = 0.59$ bohr was reported for hcp Fe.
The values estimated by these methods are rather scattered
so we show calculated resistivities simply as a function of
r.m.s. displacements.
The stable phase in the Earth's solid core is still under discussion.
The bcc-phase \cite{bcc-ec,bcc-ec2,ngeo} or the bcc-phase stabilized by
sulphur or silicon impurities \cite{bcc-imp-ec}, treated in the present
study, are probable candidates, although hcp Fe is also possible,
whereas fcc Fe seems less probable \cite{soderlind}.
The presence of impurities is needed to explain the density of the
Earth's core which is smaller than if it consisted from pure iron.
The main aim of the present study is to understand the effect of spin
fluctuations on transport so that a specific choice of the particular
phase is less important.
\subsection{Computational details}
All calculations were done using the scalar-relativistic
TB-LMTO method while the effects of
spin disorder and of atomic disorder were treated within the CPA \cite{book}.
The transport properties are determined using the Kubo-Greenwood
approach implemented in the framework of the TB-LMTO-CPA method \cite{kglmto}.
The $spdf$-basis set was employed.
We assumed the volume reduction 0.6:1 with respect to the ambient case
(Wigner-Seitz radius is 2.250 bohr, or bcc lattice constant 2.418~\AA).
The change of the LMTO structure-constant matrix due to the atomic
displacements can be recast into a change of the potential functions
of atoms located formally at the sites of the undistorted crystalline
lattice.
This model is treated in the multicomponent CPA \cite{rho-phth1,DW}.
The reader can find computational details in the Supplemental material \cite{SuMat}.
\section{Results and discussion}
\subsection{Local moments}
The local Fe-moments as a function of temperature $T$ calculated using
the DLM-FSM and the Heine-Joynt magnetic entropy \cite{magentr,Grimvall} are shown
in Fig.~\ref{fig1} together with the values taken from Ref.
\onlinecite{mag-earth}.
We see a good agreement between the results of the LSF and DLM-FSM methods
although the DLM-FSM moments are slightly smaller than the LSF ones.
We refer the reader to a recent paper, Ref.~\onlinecite{sk}, for
a general discussion of both approaches.
Results indicate the existence of robust local Fe-moments
stabilized by the magnetic entropy which monotonically increase
with temperature and which show a saturation at high temperatures.
The values of order 1.1$-$1.3~$\mu_{\rm B}$ for temperatures
5000$-$6000~K, typical for the Earth's core, are found.
\subsection{Spin-disorder resistivity}
The SDR's based on the DLM-FSM approach are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig2} as a function
of the temperature for the same volume as in Fig.~\ref{fig1}.
We see a monotonic increase of SDR with temperature while without the
stabilizing effect of the magnetic entropy the SDR is zero.
The SDR values of order 20~$\mu\Omega$\,cm are obtained for temperatures
in the Earth's core.
Such a value of the SDR contribution is about 2.5 times smaller
than the phonon contribution, but larger than that coming
from the electron correlations \cite{rho-dmft}.
It is interesting to note that for small values of the r.m.s. deviations
the calculated behavior is similar to that at ambient conditions.
In agreement with calculations using first-principles molecular
dynamics \cite{rho-rev} we observe saturation at high temperatures
corresponding to the Earth's core conditions.
It is interesting to compare the present result to that for
bcc Fe at ambient conditions.
First, the dominating contribution at $T_{\rm c}$=1050~K is the SDR,
about four-times larger than that due to phonons.
Second, the Matthiessen rule in bcc Fe is obeyed quite well at
ambient conditions, although even here the theory predicts some
violation \cite{sdr-kirill}.
\subsection{Combined effect of spin disorder and phonons}
Such result raises a natural question about the value of the total
resistivity calculated assuming the validity of the Matthiessen rule,
i.e., the additivity of $\rho_{\rm ph}$ and $\rho_{\rm SDR}$ or
calculated when the effects of both phonons and spin disorder are
included together on the same footing.
The temperature dependence of resistivity of systems with local moments
is very challenging problem even at ambient conditions
\cite{sdr-kirill,rho-phth1,DW}.
The situation is somewhat simpler if we can limit ourselves to the
paramagnetic region, i.e., to the case of the largest possible spin disorder
at a given temperature, or better, for a specific local moment.
We have chosen the moment size corresponding roughly to 5500~K, and
calculated total resistivities corresponding to various
r.m.s. displacements using the multicomponent CPA approach
\cite{rho-phth1,DW}.
We refer the reader to Supplemental material \cite{SuMat} for details.
The results are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig3}a together with the
case with phonons only.
For comparison, the total resistivity assuming the validity of
the Matthiessen rule, $\rho_{\rm M} = \rho_{\rm ph} + \rho_{\rm SDR}$,
is also shown.
We employ $\rho_{\rm SDR}$ calculated at $T=5500$~K \cite{msd-hcpFe}.
The estimated value for $\sqrt{\langle u^{2} \rangle}$ is about
0.59 bohr, to which corresponds $\rho_{\rm ph}$ about 75~$\mu\Omega$\,cm.
This is about 50\% larger value than that calculated for hcp Fe in
Ref.~\onlinecite{rho-rev} or estimated experimentally although for
a smaller pressure (see Fig.~3 in Ref.~\onlinecite{rho-ph-dac}).
We ascribe this discrepancy to a simplified phonon model used here
(see Supplemental material \cite{SuMat} for details) and the missing
knowledge of actual r.m.s. diplacement.
The most remarkable result is, however, a strong violation of the
Matthiessen rule seen in Fig.~\ref{fig3}a: while the SDR is about
20~$\mu\Omega$\,cm, the net increase of the $\rho_{\rm tot}$ is only
2~$\mu\Omega$\,cm.
Even if we choose $\rho_{\rm ph}$ around 50~$\mu\Omega$\,cm, same
as that calculated in Ref.~\onlinecite{rho-rev}, which corresponds
to the present r.m.s. displacement of 0.35 bohr, the net increase is
still only 9~$\mu\Omega$\,cm.
\subsection{Combined effect of spin disorder and other scattering mechanisms}
Now we discuss the combined effect of substitutional impurities, phonons,
and spin fluctuations.
There are indications that nickel, silicon, oxygen, sulfur and other impurities exist
in the Earth's core \cite{bcc-imp-ec,rho-fesi,rho-fesio}.
Nickel is perhaps the most prominent one and the study of its effects was
so far limited to the non-magnetic case, see, e.g., Ref.~\onlinecite{cote}.
It is possible to include two or more magnetic elements (Fe and Ni),
but it would require significantly more demanding computations.
As we make no attempt to study the effect of impurities systematically
we selected a non-magnetic Si to illustrate the role of chemical disorder.
We take a disordered bcc Fe-rich alloy with silicon impurities,
specifically Fe$_{0.92}$Si$_{0.08}$ as an example.
Alloys at Earth's core conditions were not studied within the LSF aproach.
We therefore extend the present DLM-FSM theory to substitutional alloys
assuming zero moments on Si impurities.
The combined effect of phonons and Si impurities was studied using the
first-principles molecular dynamics \cite{rho-fesi}.
The calculated resistivities were 51~$\mu\Omega$\,cm for hcp Fe and
63~$\mu\Omega$\,cm for solid solution Fe$_{0.92}$Si$_{0.08}$ at Earth's
core conditions.
We have evaluated resistivity due to the combined effect of
impurities, spin fluctuations, and phonons.
We assumed a random distribution of Si atoms on the bcc lattice
(no clustering or local environment effects) and described the effect
of phonons in terms of effective r.m.s. displacements similarly as in
the case of pure iron.
The displacements of Fe and Si atoms in the alloy differ, but we
made no attempt to take this fact into account,
we just assumed an effective r.m.s. displacement common for both
atomic species and determined resistivity as a function of it for the SDR
calculated at $T=5500$~K.
The fluctuating moment in disordered alloy calculated using the
DLM-FSM method is 1.114~$\mu_{\rm B}$.
It is slightly smaller than that calculated for pure bcc Fe at the
same temperature, namely, 1.143~$\mu_{\rm B}$ which in turn is smaller
than that obtained by the LSF approach (see Fig.~\ref{fig1}).
Results of our calculations are summarized in Fig.~\ref{fig3}b
in which the total resistivity including impurities, effect of phonons,
and spin disorder is shown together with a resistivity of the
non-magnetic alloy Fe$_{0.92}$Si$_{0.08}$ due to impurities and phonons only.
In the latter case the value $\sqrt{\langle u^{2}\rangle}=0$
corresponds to impurity disorder alone (about 28~$\mu\Omega$\,cm).
The general conclusion is the same as for pure iron case: the
relative weight of the spin disorder in the total resistivity
decreases with temperature, or $\sqrt{\langle u^{2} \rangle}$ and
it approaches that with impurities and phonons only.
The calculated resistivities for pure iron and its alloy due to
phonons only are 54 and 65~$\mu\Omega$\,cm (for
$\sqrt{\langle u^{2} \rangle}=0.35$ bohr), respectively, which agrees well
with the values 51 and 63~$\mu\Omega$\,cm obtained by the molecular
dynamics simulations \cite{rho-fesi}.
A strong violation of the Matthiessen rule at Earth's core conditions was
verified also by using a finite-relaxation time model.
We refer the reader to the Supplemental material \cite{SuMat} for details.
With increasing temperature or with addition of further scattering
mechanisms we observe a saturation of resistivity.
The contributions of individual scattering mechanisms to the total
resistivity are not additive and the Matthiessen rule is violated.
This phenomenon is well-known and it is closely related to the Ioffe-Regel
rule which states that the mean free path of charge carriers cannot
exceed the interatomic distance \cite{gunnar}.
Thermal and transport processes inside the Earth's core
are central to the notion of the geodynamo which is powered by the
release of latent heat.
These processes are not independent, but mutually related
(Wiedemann–-Franz law).
Our results show that due to the spin disorder the electrical
resistivity can have higher value than expected on the basis
of previous calculations while the thermal conductivity will
be smaller.
Although the properties of the liquid core cannot be directly
derived from the properties of the inner core, similar changes
of outer core parameters can be anticipated.
One can thus expect that the effects of the spin disorder will
finally act in favor of a stronger advection in the outer core.
\section{Conclusions}
In summary, we have estimated from first principles a contribution to
the resistivity of bcc Fe and of Fe-rich bcc FeSi alloy which is due
to the presence of fluctuating spin moments stabilized at the Earth's
core conditions by the magnetic entropy which was not considered
in previous studies.
The existence of fluctuating moments larger than 1~$\mu_{\rm B}$,
predicted earlier by the LSF approach, was confirmed
by the present approach using the DLM-FSM method and the Heine-Joynt
entropy also for FeSi alloys.
We used the multicomponent CPA method including vertex corrections
to treat on equal footing three scattering mechanisms, namely,
the scattering on spin disorder, on the atomic substitutional disorder,
and on atoms displaced from their equilibrium positions.
The estimated value of the SDR is about 20~$\mu\Omega$\,cm for bcc Fe.
Very rough estimates of other contributions, namely, $\rho_{\rm ph}$
from phonons and $\rho_{\rm ec}$ from electron correlations are
$\rho_{\rm ph} \approx 50 \mu\Omega$\,cm and $\rho_{\rm ec} \approx 16 \mu\Omega$\,cm.
The contribution from alloy disorder $\rho_{\rm dis}$ depends on the type
and concentration of impurities, for bcc Fe$_{0.92}$Si$_{0.08}$ alloy we
found $\rho_{\rm dis} \approx 28 \mu\Omega$\,cm.
All these contributions should be considered simultaneously as they
are not additive and a pronounced saturation is present.
This fact demonstrates a strong violation of the Matthiessen
rule at the Earth's core conditions.
Consequently the microscopic origins of the transport properties of iron
at the Earth's core conditions are markedly different from those at ambient
conditions, where the violation of the Matthiessen rule is much weaker
and, in addition, the SDR part dominates in the paramagnetic state.
The implications for geophysical phenomena are twofold:
(i) the appearance of magnetic moments changes the electronic structure,
which can lead to modifications of all physical properties, and,
(ii) in particular, it brings a new contribution to electrical resistivity
and thus it can influence thermal conductivity.
These quantities are important parameters in the theory of the
geodynamo and play a significant role in the thermal history of the
Earth.\cite{rho-ph-dac}
\begin{acknowledgments}
V.D., J.K., and I.T. acknowledge the financial support from
the Czech Science Foundation (Grant No. 15-13436S), D.W. support from
the Grant Agency of the Charles University (Grant No. 280815), and
S.Kh. acknowledges the Austrian FWF (SFB ViCoM F4109-N38).
The National Grid Infrastructure MetaCentrum (Project No. LM2015042)
is also acknowledged.
This work was supported by The Ministry of Education, Youth and
Sports from the Large Infrastructures for Research, Experimental
Development and Innovations project "IT4Innovations National
Supercomputing Center -- LM2015070".
V.D. and J.K. thank J. Kamar\'ad for useful discussions concerning
high-pressure experiments.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
The physics of scalar mesons below 2~\ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Ge\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace is a long-standing
puzzle in light meson spectroscopy~\cite{pdg2016},
this is partly due to the fact that these mesons often
have large widths and overlap with each other,
which make them hard to model.
Contributions from Light scalars can be extracted
by using Dalitz plot analyses~\cite{dalitz}
in three-body hadronic decays of charm mesons.
First developed by the E791 Collaboration~\cite{mipwa},
the Model Independent Partial Wave
Analysis (MIPWA)
technique extracts {\ensuremath{\cal S}}-wave\xspace amplitudes
in the Dalitz plot analysis
with no assumption about the nature of the {\ensuremath{\cal S}}-wave\xspace.
To pin down its large numbers of free parameters,
the MIPWA technique requires the large samples
of three-body decay events that have
become increasingly available at the $B$-factories and the LHC.
Notably, the LHCb experiment has recorded charm decays
with sample sizes exceeding any previous experiment by more than
an order of magnitude,
offering a unique opportunity
to study {\ensuremath{\cal S}}-wave\xspace structures with unprecedented levels of precision.
Analysing very large statistics samples requires
disproportionately more computing power.
Running all the calculations in a single Central Processing unit (CPU)
thread would take a prohibitively long time.
Originally, a Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) was a specialised
electronic circuit designed to rapidly
manipulate and alter memory to accelerate the creation of
images for output to a video display.
The
highly parallel structure makes GPUs more effective than
CPUs for algorithms where large blocks
of data are processed in parallel.
Today, the functionality of GPUs has been extended to enable
highly parallel computing for scientific and other more
general applications.
An open-source framework called GooFit~\cite{goofit}
has been developed to exploit the processing power of these GPUs
for parallel function evaluation, particularly in the
context of maximum likelihood fits.
This paper reports an extension of the GooFit framework
to support MIPWA of a three-body decay
with
vastly reduced processing time.
\section{MIPWA method}
Essentially all studies of three-body hadronic $D_{(s)}$ decays
employ the same technique: the unbinned maximum likelihood
fit of the Dalitz plot, in which the quantum mechanical matrix element
governing the decay
is represented by a coherent sum of
amplitudes~\cite{pdg2016}.
These amplitudes correspond to the
possible intermediate states in the decay chain
$D_{(s)}\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace R h_3, R\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace h_1 h_2$ ($h=K,\ \pi$).
The amplitudes are grouped according to the orbital angular momentum $L$
of $R$ and $h_3$ in the rest frame of the $D_{(s)}$,
and the total amplitude is
\begin{equation}
A(s_{12},s_{13}) = \sum_L \sum_k c_k^{L}A_k^{L}(s_{12},s_{13}) \, ,
\end{equation}
where $s_{12(13)}\equiv m^2(h_{1} h_{2(3)})$.
The amplitudes $A_k^L$ are weighted by constant complex coefficients $c_k^L$,
and the series is truncated at $L = 2$.
For a resonance with
non-zero spin,
the amplitude $A_k$ is most often
described using a relativistic Breit-Wigner
function multiplied by a real spin-dependent angular factor~\cite{cleobw}.
For the {\ensuremath{\cal S}}-wave\xspace, two qualitatively
different approaches exist.
In the Isobar
model, the {\ensuremath{\cal S}}-wave\xspace is treated as a sum of a constant non-resonant term and
Breit-Wigner functions for the scalar resonances.
While the Isobar model provides reasonably good descriptions for
narrow resonances, it fails to describe the overlap of broad resonances.
Additionally, the physical interpretation of the constant non-resonant term
is problematic.
To address these issues, the MIPWA describes the ensemble of scalar
components using a purely phenomenological set
of parameters derived from the data.
The $s_{12(13)}$ mass spectrum is divided
into $N-1$ slices with $N$ boundary points separating the slices
and at the two ends of the spectrum.
The {\ensuremath{\cal S}}-wave\xspace is represented
by a generic complex function $A_0(s) = a_0(s) e^{i\phi_0(s)}$.
At each of the $k$ boundary points, $A_0(s=s_k) = a_k e^{i\phi_k}$
where $ a_k $ and $ \phi_k $ are real parameters.
Between the $ N $ boundary points, the {\ensuremath{\cal S}}-wave\xspace
is parametrised by a cubic spline~\cite{cubic} in the complex plane.
The set of \{$a_k, \phi_k$\} are free parameters, along
with the coefficients $ c_l^L $ of the higher spin terms, are determined
in the MIPWA fit.
The large data sets studied, along with the large number
of parameters ($ 2N $) required to describe the {\ensuremath{\cal S}}-wave\xspace,
make maximising the likelihood a computationally intensive
problem.
Interpolating between the boundary points leads to correlations
between the parameters, and hence to non-linear behavior.
\section{MIPWA method with GooFit}
GooFit provides an interface to allow probability density functions (PDFs)
to be evaluated in parallel, using either GPUs or multicore CPUs as back-ends.
While the original intention of GooFit was to utilise the massive
computational
power of NVIDIA GPUs based on the proprietary Compute
Unified Device Architecture language (CUDA)~\cite{cuda},
the Thrust parallel algorithms library~\cite{thrust}
also supports an OpenMP backend for conventional CPUs.
GooFit has been used to perform a number of amplitude analyses,
for example that of
Ref.~\cite{pipipi0}.
For a time-integrated Dalitz plot analysis, GooFit provides
the {\tt DalitzPlotPdf} class to model the Dalitz plot PDF.
The {\tt DalitzPlotPdf}
object contains a list of {\tt ResonancePdf} objects to describe
resonant amplitudes as well as a constant nonresonant amplitude.
The original GooFit package provided only
the Isobar model to parameterise the {\ensuremath{\cal S}}-wave\xspace.
The {\tt ResonancePdf} class has been extended to add support for the MIPWA
method.
The entire {\ensuremath{\cal S}}-wave\xspace is treated as a single resonance ({\tt ResonancePdf}
object), with a set of
free parameters \{$a^k_0, \phi^k_0$\} to be determined in the fit.
\section{MIPWA in $D^+\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace K^+K^+K^-$ decay~\footnote{Charge conjugation is implied throughout.}}
The $D^+\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace K^+K^+K^-$ decay offers a
good
opportunity to study the $K^+K^-$
{\ensuremath{\cal S}}-wave\xspace amplitude directly.
LHCb collected a large $D^+\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace K^+K^+K^-$ data sample
from $2.1~\ensuremath{\mbox{\,fb}^{-1}}\xspace$ of $\sqrt{s} = 7$~\ensuremath{\rm \,Te\kern -0.08em V} $pp$ collisions
recorded by the experiment during 2012.
About 100K candidates were selected
with a signal purity of 90\%. The resonant structure of the $K^+ K^-$
{\ensuremath{\cal S}}-wave\xspace amplitude was studied for the first time using an Isobar model,
and the
results were first presented during the CHARM 2016 workshop~\cite{KKKisobar}.
This analysis indicates that the {\ensuremath{\cal S}}-wave\xspace component accounts for about 90\%
of the decay rate, while the {\ensuremath{\cal P}}-wave\xspace ($\phi(1020)$ resonance)
makes up the rest.
A specific goal of the work presented here is to
provide a tool
to extract the $K^+ K^-$ {\ensuremath{\cal S}}-wave\xspace by performing an MIPWA on
the same LHCb data sample.
In this case, the Dalitz plot is symmetrised along the
two axes of $m^2(K^+K^-)$.
The $K^+ K^-$ mass squared range
is divided into 39 slices using 40 boundary points.
Because the final state contains two indistinguishable
$ K^+ $ mesons, the $ K^+ K^- $ amplitudes interfere
with themselves, and this sort of interference
allows the {\ensuremath{\cal S}}-wave\xspace phase to be determined.
To test the GooFit extension to support MIPWA fits,
samples of 100K signal events are generated from a Dalitz plot PDF (``Toy MC'').
The mass projections from the fit to a test sample can be
seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:fitproj}.
First, the fit quality of the MIPWA method is tested
by comparing the fitted \{$a_k, \phi_k$\}
values with the inputs.
In each fit iteration,
the Dalitz plot normalisation method (``{\tt DalitzPlotPdf::normalise()}'')
is called so that the integral of the total PDF is equal to one.
The normalisation integral is calculated numerically based on
evenly distributed grid points in the Dalitz plot plane.
Figure~\ref{fig:swaveshift} shows the improvement in the fit quality
as the normalisation grid spacing is reduced.
Although the finer granularity
increases numbers of calculations, the high
speed of the GPUs makes this problem tractable.
\begin{figure
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{testfit.png}
\caption{\label{fig:fitproj} The projections of $m^2(K^+ K^-)$ (left)
and $m^2(K^+ K^+)$ (right) from $D^+\ensuremath{\rightarrow}\xspace K^+K^+K^-$. In each plot, the toy MC signal events (points with error bars ) are shown together with
the total fit (blue line), $\phi$ resonance (red line), and {\ensuremath{\cal S}}-wave\xspace (magenta line)
determined from the MIPWA.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{swaveshift.png}
\caption{\label{fig:swaveshift} Differences between the fitted
values and input ones for each boundary point. Shown are set of points with
different grid spacings for the normalisation: 0.01~${\ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Ge\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace}^2$ (purple),
0.004~${\ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Ge\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace}^2$ (red), and 0.001~${\ensuremath{\mathrm{\,Ge\kern -0.1em V}}\xspace}^2$ (blue).}
\end{figure}
\begin{center}
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{\label{tbl:gpuperformance}GPU performance of the MIPWA fit.}
\footnotesize\rm
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c}\hline
Platform & GPU Model & Chip & CUDA cores & Run time (sec.)\\\hline
tWorkstation & Tesla K40c & GK110BGL & 2880 & 76 \\
Desktop PC & GeForce GTX 980 & 2nd gen. Maxwell (GM204) & 2048 & 67\\
Laptop ASUS N56V & GeForce GT 650M & GK107 & 384 & 179\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{center}
As shown in Table~\ref{tbl:gpuperformance}, the GooFit
performance on
three different GPU platforms has been measured
by running the MIPWA fit over the same toy MC sample of 100 K events (see Fig.~\ref{fig:fitproj} for the fit projections).
For comparison, the MIPWA fit using an older code
with the same functionality that runs on one CPU core
takes about eight hours to complete.
Perhaps surprisingly, an older generation mobile GPU
(a GeForce GT 650M with 384 cores) provides excellent performance;
a newer HPC GPU board (a Tesla K40c with 2880 cores) provides better
performance, but not in proportion to the number of cores;
a high-end gamer board (a GeForce GTX 980) provides the best
performance, albeit by a small margin.
Based on other studies with GooFit, significantly
better performance on the new P100 boards is anticipated which utilise
NVIDIA's new Pascal GPU architecture.
\begin{center}
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{\label{tbl:cpuplatforms}Specifications of the testing CPU platforms.
Asterisks next to the number of cores
indicate hyperthreading - two virtual processors per physical core.}
\footnotesize\rm
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|cccc}\hline
Name & Chip type & \# of Cores & Clock [GHz] & RAM [GiB]\\\hline
Cerberus & Intel Xeon E5520 & 8* & 2.27 & 24 \\
Goofy & Intel Xeon CPU E5-2680 v3 & 24* & 2.50 & 120\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{center}
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{OMP_pwa.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:ompfit}Timing results and speedups for the test MIPWA
fit. Tested on two different CPU
platforms as shown in Table~\ref{tbl:cpuplatforms}:
Goofy (Intel Xeon CPU E5-2680 v3 x 2)
and Cerberus (Intel Xeon CPU E5520 x 2).}
\end{figure}
In addition to timing GooFit's new MIPWA performance on
GPUs using Thrust's CUDA
backend, its performance on
two different CPU platforms is timed using Thrust's OpenMP backend,
as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ompfit}.
With two Intel Xeon E5-2680 v3 CPUs, the fit uses 791 seconds for one OpenMP
thread, 50 seconds for 24 threads.
The speedup is almost linear with the increase of the number of OpenMP threads,
up until the number of threads equals the numbers of physical cores.
\section{Summary}
This paper describes an extension of GooFit to support MIPWA fits for three-body decays,
and have achieved speedups of
\textcolor{black}{a few hundred} by using GPUs.
The main branch of GooFit's source code is in a GooFit repository at \url{https://github.com/GooFit/GooFit}, while
the updated code with MIPWA support is in a personal GooFit branch at \url{https://github.com/liang-sun/GooFit}.
\subsection{Acknowledgments}
This work was performed with support from NSF Award PHY-1414736.
NVidia provided K40 GPUs for our use through its University
Partnership program.
The Ohio Supercomputer Center made their
``Oakley'' computer farm available for development, for testing, and for GooFit outreach workshops.
\section*{References}
|
\section{Introduction and Statement of Results} \label{sec-int}
\marpar{sec-int}
Let $k$ be an algebraically closed field, not necessarily of
characteristic $0$. For integers $n,r,e>0$,
a \emph{Veronese $e$-uple $r$-fold in} $\mbb{P}^n_k$ is the image of a
morphism $\nu:\mbb{P}^r_k\to \mbb{P}^n_k$ such that $\nu^*\mc{O}(1)$ is
isomorphic to $\mc{O}(e)$ and such that the pullback homomorphism,
$$
\nu^*_1:H^0(\mbb{P}^n_k,\mc{O}(1))\to H^0(\mbb{P}^r_k,\mc{O}(e)),
$$
is surjective; such a morphism is a closed immersion.
For brevity, the image $\nu(\mbb{P}^r)$ of such a morphism is called a
$V_e^r$.
Denoting by $\p{r}(t) \in \mbb{Q}[t]$ the numerical
polynomial with $\p{r}(d) = \binom{d+r}{r}$ for all integers $d\geq -r$,
the $\mc{O}(1)$-Hilbert polynomial of the image of $\nu$ equals
$\p{r}(et)$. Denote $\p{r}(e)-1$ by $\n{e}(r)$, e.g., $n_1(r)$ equals $r$, and
$n_2(r)$ equals $r(r+3)/2$.
In the Hilbert scheme $\text{Hilb}^{\p{r}(et)}_{\mbb{P}^n/k}$
there is an open subscheme $\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}^n_k)$ parameterizing Veronese
$e$-uple $r$-folds. This open scheme is nonempty precisely when
$h^0(\mbb{P}^n_k,\mc{O}(1)) \geq h^0(\mbb{P}^r,\mc{O}(e))$, i.e., when $n\geq
\n{e}(r).$
When it is nonempty, $\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}^n_k)$
is smooth and geometrically integral of
dimension
$$
f_e(n,r):= (n+1)(\n{e}(r)+1)-(r+1)^2.
$$
Note, in particular, that $f_1(n,r)$ equals $(n-r)(r+1)$, which is
nonnegative if and only if $n\geq r$, i.e., $n\geq n_1(r)$. Please note,
for every $e\geq 2$, for every $n\geq 1$, for every $r\geq 1$,
$f_e(n,r)$ is positive, even though $\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}^n_k)$ is empty for
$n<\n{e}(r)$.
In fact, $\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}^n_k)$ has a natural action of $\textbf{PGL}_{n+1}$
under which it is smoothly homogeneous (the stabilizer subgroup is reduced).
Assuming that it is nonempty, the
quasi-projective scheme $\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}^n_k)$ is projective precisely when
$r$ equals
$1$. For $r=1$, this is a classical Grassmannian,
$\Gg{1}(r,\mbb{P}^n_k)=\text{Grass}(r,\mbb{P}^n_k)$,
parameterizing
$r$-dimensional projective linear subspaces of $\mbb{P}^n_k$.
For every (locally) closed subscheme $X\subset \mbb{P}^n_k$, the \emph{Fano
scheme} of Veronese $e$-uple $r$-folds in $X$ is the intersection
$\F{e}(r,X)$ of the open subscheme $\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}^n_k)$ with the (locally)
closed subscheme $\text{Hilb}^{\p{r}(et)}_{X/k}$ in
$\text{Hilb}^{\p{r}(et)}_{\mbb{P}^n/k}$. Even though the $V^r_e$ varieties
are among the simplest $r$-cycles in $\mbb{P}^n_k$, little is known
about $\F{e}(r,X)$ for general $X$. Here we study $\F{e}(r,X)$ for
degree $d$ hypersurfaces $X$ in $\mbb{P}^n_k$. In that case, there is a
lower bound on the dimension of every (nonempty) irreducible
component as follows,
$$
f_e(n,r,d) = f_e(n,r) - \p{r}(ed) = (n+1)\p{r}(e) - \p{r}(de)-(r+1)^2.
$$
Denote by $\N{e}(r,d)$ the smallest integer $n\geq n_r(e)$ such that
$f_e(n,r,d)\geq 0$, i.e.,
$$
\N{e}(r,d) = \max\left(-1+\p{r}(e),-1+\left\lceil \frac{(r+1)^2+\p{r}(ed)}{\p{r}(e)}
\right\rceil \right).
$$
It is occasionally convenient to use $M_e(r,d) = \N{e}(r,d) - \p{r}(e)+1$,
i.e.,
$$
M_e(r,d) = \max\left(0, \left\lceil \frac{(r+1)^2 + \p{r}(ed)-\p{r}(e)^2}{\p{r}(e)}
\right\rceil \right).
$$
Recall that the complete linear system $\mbb{P} H^0(\mbb{P}^n_k,\mc{O}(d))$
parameterizing degree $d$ hypersurfaces in $\mbb{P}^n_k$ is
canonically $k$-isomorphic to the Hilbert scheme
$\text{Hilb}^{P_n(t)-P_n(t-d)}_{\mbb{P}^n/k}$ of closed subschemes of
$\mbb{P}^n_k$. Denote by $\mathcal{X}\subset \mbb{P} H^0(\mbb{P}^n_k,\mc{O}(d))
\times_{\text{Spec }(k)}\mbb{P}^n_k$ the universal closed subscheme such that the
restricted projection $k$-morphism is flat,
$$
\pi:\mathcal{X} \to \mbb{P} H^0(\mbb{P}^n_k,\mc{O}(d)).
$$
Denote by
$\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X}) \subset \mbb{P} H^0(\mbb{P}^n_k,\mc{O}(d)) \times_{\text{Spec }(k)}
\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}^n_k)$ the relative Fano scheme of Veronese $e$-uple
$r$-folds in fibers of $\pi$, i.e., the intersection of the open
subscheme $\mbb{P} H^0(\mbb{P}^n_k,\mc{O}(d))\times_{\text{Spec }(k)} \F{e}(r,\mbb{P}^n_k)$ with
the relative Hilbert scheme $\text{Hilb}^{\p{r}(et)}_{\pi}$. The
two projection morphisms restrict to morphisms on $\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X})$,
$$
\rho:\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X}) \to \Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}^n_k),
$$
$$
\pi:\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X}) \to \mbb{P} H^0(\mbb{P}^n_k,\mc{O}(d)).
$$
Denote by $\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X})_{\text{fl}}$,
resp. $\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X})_{\text{sm}}$, the maximal open subscheme of
$\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X})$ on which $\pi$ is flat, resp. smooth.
Denote by
$U_{e,d}^r \subset \mbb{P} H^0(\mbb{P}^n_k,\mc{O}(d))$, resp. $V_{e,d}^r\subset
U_{e,d}^r$,
the maximal open subscheme
over which $\pi$ is flat, resp. smooth. The open $U_{e,d}^r$
is a dense open by the Generic
Flatness Theorem.
\begin{prop} \label{prop-inc} \marpar{prop-inc}
For all $n\geq \n{e}(r)$, for all $d\geq 1$,
the morphism $\rho$ is a Zariski locally
trivial projective bundle of relative dimension $P_n(d) - \p{r}(de)$.
Thus the restriction of $\pi$ over $U_{e,d}^r$ either has empty fibers
or else it is flat of relative dimension $f_e(n,r,d)$.
If the characteristic equals $0$ or $p\geq
p_e(n,r,d)$ for an effectively computable integer $p_e(n,r,d)$, then
$V_{e,d}^r$ is a dense open subset of $U_{e,d}^r$, i.e., $\pi$ is
smooth over a dense open of $U_{e,d}^r$.
\end{prop}
By the proposition, in order that $\F{e}(r,X)$ is nonempty for every
degree $d$ hypersurface $X$, it is necessary that $n\geq n_r(e)$ and
$f_e(n,r,d)\geq 0$.
This is equivalent to the condition that $n\geq \N{e}(r,d)$. Also, for
the difference $m:= n- \n{e}(r)$, it is equivalent to the condition that
$m\geq M_e(r,d)$. Using a theorem of Hochster-Laksov, Alex Waldron
proved that the necessary condition is sufficient for $e=1$, i.e., for
linear spaces.
\begin{thm}[Waldron, \cite{Waldron}] \label{thm-Waldron} \marpar{thm-Waldron}
For all $d\geq 3$,
for all $n \geq \N{1}(r,d) = r+\lceil \p{r}(d)/(r+1) \rceil$, the
smooth locus of $\pi$ in $\F{1}(r,\mathcal{X})$ is dense, thus, for every
degree $d$ hypersurface $X$ in $\mbb{P}^n_k$, the Fano scheme $\F{1}(r,X)$
of linear $r$-planes in $X$ is nonempty. For $d=1$, this is true for
all $n\geq \N{1}(r,1) = 1+\n{1}(r) = 1+r$. For $d=2$, this is true
precisely for $n\geq 1+2r.$
\end{thm}
Please note, when $d=2$, then $1+2r > \N{1}(r,2)$ for all $r\geq 2$, so
this case is special.
Recently, Gleb Nenashev has generalized the Hochster-Laksov theorem.
Using this generalization, there is a similar result for all $e\geq 2$ for a
bound $n\geq \wN{e}(r,d)$, where $\wN{e}(r,d)$
is asymptotically sharp for fixed $e$, $r$, and increasing
$d$.
\begin{thm} \label{thm-Veronese} \marpar{thm-Veronese}
For $e\geq 2$, for all $n$ at least
$\wN{e}(r,d) := -1 + 2\p{r}(e) + \lceil \p{r}(de)/\p{r}(e) \rceil$, the
smooth locus of $\pi$ in $\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X})$ is dense. Thus, for every
sufficiently general
degree $d$ hypersurface $X$ in $\mbb{P}^n_k$, the Fano scheme $\F{e}(r,X)$
of Veronese $e$-uple $r$-folds in $X$ is a nonempty, geometrically
reduced, local complete intersection scheme of dimension
$f_e(r,d,n)$.
For $d=1$, this is true precisely for $n\geq 1+\n{e}(r)$. For $d=2$,
this is true precisely for $n\geq \n{e}(r) = \N{e}(r,2)$.
\end{thm}
What about irreducibility,
i.e., connectedness? The method we use to study this, based on
Minoccheri's form of Bertini's irreducibility theorem,
cf. \cite{Minoccheri}, uses
projective parameter spaces. So the result works best for linear
spaces,
$e=1$. The integer $\N{e}'(r,d)$ is
the least integer $n$ such that the complement of the smooth locus
$\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X})_{\text{sm}}$ of $\pi$ in $\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X})$ has
codimension $\geq 2$ everywhere.
\begin{prop} \label{prop-dim} \marpar{prop-dim}
If $n\geq \N{1}'(r,d)$,
then for every degree $d$ hypersurface $X$ in $\mbb{P}^n_k$,
the Fano scheme $\F{1}(r,X)$ is geometrically connected. For
sufficiently general $X$, the Fano scheme is a local complete
intersection scheme that is geometrically integral
and normal. If the characteristic is $0$ or $p>p_1(n,r,d)$, then for
sufficiently general $X$, the Fano scheme is also smooth.
\end{prop}
This connectedness result for linear spaces implies connectedness
results for more general cycles. The following corollary is one
example of this; certainly the bound can be improved.
\begin{cor} \label{cor-dim} \marpar{cor-dim}
If $n\geq \N{1}'(d,\n{e}(r))$, then there exists a dense, Zariski open
subscheme $W_{e,d}^r\subset U_{e,d}^r$ such that
for every degree $d$ hypersurface $X$ with $[X]\in W_{e,d}^r$,
the Fano scheme $\F{e}(r,X)$ is geometrically connected.
If the characteristic is $0$ or $p>p_1(n,r,d)$, then for
sufficiently general $X$, the Fano scheme is also smooth.
\end{cor}
The following bound for $\N{1}'(r,d)$ is sharp to within $1$. There are
infinitely many cases when the bound is sharp.
\begin{thm} \label{thm-nprime} \marpar{thm-nprime}
Regarding $\N{1}'(r,d)$, we have the following.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)]
For all $d\geq 2$, $\N{1}(r,d)\leq \N{1}'(r,d)\leq
1+\N{1}(r,d)$, so the Fano schemes $\F{1}(r,x)$
are geometrically connected if $n\geq
1 + \N{1}(r,d)$.
\item[(ii)]
For $d=1$, $\N{e}(r,1)$ equals
$1+\n{e}(r)$, and the Fano schemes $\F{1}(r,X)$ are
connected for all $n\geq \n{e}(r)$.
\item[(iii)]
For $d=2$, $\N{1}(r,2)$ equals
$2r+1$, $\N{1}'(r,2)$ equals $1+\N{1}(r,2)=2r+2$, and the Fano schemes
$\F{1}(r,X)$
are
geometrically \emph{disconnected} for
$n=\N{1}(r,2)=2r+1$.
\item[(iv)]
For all $d\geq 2$, if
$f_1(\N{1}(r,d),r,d)$ equals $0$, then $\N{1}'(r,d)$ equals
$1+\N{1}(r,d)$; in fact, the length of the finite
Fano scheme for $n=\N{1}(r,d)$ is divisible by $d^{r+1}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
The case of linear spaces deserves special attention.
In characteristic $0$, for $n\geq \N{1}'(r,d)$, for $X$ sufficiently
general, $\F{1}(r,X)$ is smooth and geometrically irreducible of the
expected dimension. What can we say for \emph{every} smooth
hypersurface $X$? In an appropriate degree range, there exists a
canonically defined (nonempty)
irreducible component of $\F{1}(r,X)$ of the expected dimension such
that $\F{1}(r,X)$ is reduced at the generic point of this component.
It is convenient to introduce the flag
Fano scheme.
For every scheme $S$ over $\text{Spec }(\mbb{Q})$, for every
$\mbb{P}^n$-bundle $\pi:\mbb{P}_S(E)\to S$ together with an ample
invertible sheaf $q:\pi^*E^\vee \twoheadrightarrow \mc{O}_E(1)$, for
every locally
closed subscheme $X\subset \mbb{P}^n_k$ such that $\pi:X\to S$ is locally
finitely presented,
denote by $\F{1}(0,1,\dots,r,X/S)$ the flag Hilbert scheme of
$X$, $\text{fHilb}^{P_0(t),P_1(t),\dots,\p{r}(t)}_{X/S}$, parameterizing
flags of linear subspaces contained in fibers of $X$. There is a forgetful
$S$-morphism,
$$
\rho_r:\F{1}(0,1,\dots,r-1,r,X/S)\to \F{1}(0,1,\dots,r-1,X/S).
$$
Assume now that $X$ is $S$-smooth. Then for
every component of $\F{1}(0,1,\dots,r,X/S)$ parameterizing flags of linear
subspace $\Lambda_0\subset \Lambda_1\subset \dots\subset\Lambda_r$ in
geometric fibers of $X/S$, there
is a lower bound $e_r(X/S)$ on the dimension of every
irreducible component of every (nonempty) fiber of $\rho_r$,
$$
e_r(X/S)= -r-1+\sum_{\ell=1}^rb_{r,\ell}\langle
\text{ch}_\ell(T_{X/S}),[\Lambda_\ell] \rangle,
$$
where $\text{ch}_\ell(T_{X/S})$ is the graded piece of the Chern
character of homogeneous degree $\ell$ of
$T_{X/S}=(\Omega_{X/S})^\vee$,
and where the rational numbers
$b_{r,\ell}$ are determined by
$$
\p{r}(t-1) = \sum_{\ell=1}^r \frac{b_{r,\ell}}{\ell!} t^\ell.
$$
There is a natural infinitesimal deformation theory and obstruction
theory for $\rho_r$. When the obstruction group vanishes, then
$\rho_r$ is smooth of relative dimension $e_r(X/S)$.
There exists a sequence $(U_\ell)_{0\leq \ell\leq r-1}$ of open subschemes
$U_\ell\subset \F{1}(0,1,\dots,\ell,X/S)$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] $U_0\subset X$ is the maximal open subscheme over which
$\rho_1$ has vanishing obstruction groups so that $\rho_1$ is
smooth of relative dimension $e_1(X/S)$ over $U_0$,
\item[(ii)] for every $\ell=1,\dots,r-1$, $U_\ell\subset
\rho_\ell^{-1}(U_\ell)$ is the maximal open subscheme over which
$\rho_{\ell+1}$ has vanishing obstruction groups so that
$\rho_{\ell+1}$ is smooth of relative dimension $e_{\ell+1}(X/S)$
over $U_\ell$.
\end{enumerate}
This sequence is compatible with arbitrary base change over $S$. The
main result of \cite{Slinear} is the following.
\begin{prop}\cite{Slinear} \label{prop-upper} \marpar{prop-upper}
Assume that $k$ has characteristic $0$. Let $X\subset \mbb{P}^n_k$ be a
smooth hypersurface of degree $d$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)]
If $n <
r+\p{r}(d-1)$, then
$\rho_r^{-1}(U_{r-1})$ is empty.
\item[(ii)]
If $n\geq r+ \p{r}(d-1)$, then
$\rho_r^{-1}(U_{r-1})$ is nonempty, the
restriction of $\rho_r$ over $U_{r-1}$ is smooth and projective of
relative dimension $n-r-\p{r}(d-1)$, and each geometric fiber is a
complete intersection in a projective space of a sequence of
hypersurfaces whose
maximal degree equals $d$.
\item[(iii)]
If $n$ equals $r+\p{r}(d-1)$ and $d>1$,
then the
fibers of
$\rho_r$ over $U_{r-1}$ are not geometrically connected.
\item[(iv)]
If $n\geq 1+r+\p{r}(d-1)$, then every
geometric fiber of $\rho_r$ over $U_r$ is geometrically connected so
that $\rho_r^{-1}(U_r)$ is smooth and irreducible.
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\textbf{Acknowledgments.} I am grateful to Joe Harris for asking
about connectedness for Fano schemes of hypersurfaces, which led to
this paper. This work was supported by NSF Grant DMS-1405709.
\section{Proof of Proposition \ref{prop-inc}} \label{sec-inc}
\marpar{sec-inc}
This proposition follows by the general method of incidence correspondences.
Let $S$ be a scheme. Let $E$ be a locally free $\mc{O}_S$-module of rank $n+1$.
Let $\pi_0:\mbb{P}_S(E)\to S$ together with $\pi_0^*E^\vee\to \mc{O}_E(1)$
represent the functor that associates to every $S$-scheme, $f:T\to S$,
the set of invertible sheaf quotients on $T$ of $f^*E^\vee$. Then
$\pi$ is a $\mathbb{P}^n$-bundle over $S$.
For every locally closed subscheme $X\subset \mbb{P}_S(E)$ that is locally
finitely presented over $S$ (automatic for Noetherian schemes), for
every integer $r$,
the
associated \emph{Fano scheme}, $\F{1}(r,X/S)$, is the Hilbert scheme
$\text{Hilb}^{\p{r}(t)}_{X/S}$.
Hilbert polynomials are with respect to
the invertible sheaf $\mathcal{O}_E(1)$.
Of course
$\F{1}(r,\mathbb{P}(E)/S)$ is the Grassmannian bundle associated to $E$,
i.e., an $S$-scheme
$\pi_r:\text{Grass}_S(r+1,E)\to S$ together with the locally free
quotient $\pi_r^*E^\vee \to Q_{E,r}$ of rank $r+1$ that represents the
functor sending $f:T\to S$ to the set of rank $r+1$
locally free quotients of $f^*E^\vee$.
For every integer $d\geq 0$, denote by $S_d(E)$ the locally free sheaf
$(\pi_0)_*\mc{O}_E(d)$, so that the direct sum
$S(E) := \bigoplus_{d\geq 0} S_d(E)$ with its natural product structure is the
homogeneous coordinate ring of $\mbb{P}_S(E)$ with respect to $\mc{O}_E(1)$.
In other words, $S_d(E)$ is the degree $d$ symmetric power of
$E^\vee$, i.e., for the tensor algebra $T(E)$ of $E^\vee$, the algebra
quotient $T(E)\to S(E)$ is initial among morphisms of sheaves of
associative $\mathcal{O}_S$-algebras that are commutative.
Since the tensor algebra of the invertible sheaf $\mathcal{O}_E(1)$ on
$\mbb{P}_S(E)$ is commutative, the invertible quotient
$\pi_0^*S_1(E) \to \mc{O}_V(1)$
induces an invertible quotient $\pi_0^*S_d(E) \to \mc{O}_V(d)$. Thus, on
the fiber product $\mbb{P}_S(S_d(E))\times_S\mbb{P}_S(E)$, there is a natural
morphism of invertible sheaves,
$$
\alpha:\text{pr}_1^*\mc{O}_{S_d(E)}(-1) \to \text{pr}_2^* \mc{O}_E(d).
$$
The support of the cokernel of $\alpha$ is a Cartier divisor
$\mathcal{X}\subset \mbb{P}_S(S_d(E))\times_S\mbb{P}_S(E)$ that is flat with
respect to $\text{pr}_1$ and has relative degree $d$ with respect to
$\text{pr}_2^*\mc{O}_E(1)$.
For every separated, finitely presented morphism, $\pi:Z\to S$, for
every quasi-coherent $\mc{O}_Z$-module $\mathcal{E}$ that is locally finitely
presented, that is $\mc{O}_S$-flat, and
that has proper support over $S$, there is
a maximal open subscheme $U=U_{\pi,\mathcal{E}}\subset S$ such that the
complement of $U$ equals the (locally finite)
union of the supports of $R^q\pi_*\mathcal{E}$
for the (locally finitely) many $q>0$ such that $R^q\pi_*\mathcal{E}$ is
nonzero. By \cite[Corollaire 7.9.10, Lemme 7.9.10.1]{EGA3},
for every $S$-scheme $f:T\to S$, for the base change $\pi_T:Z_T\to T$
of $\pi$, and for the pullback $\mathcal{E}_T$ of $\mathcal{E}$ to $Z_T$, the
open subset $U_{\pi_T,\mathcal{E}_T} \subset T$ equals
$f^{-1}U_{\pi,\mathcal{E}}$, $(\pi_T)_*\mathcal{E}_T$ is a locally free
$\mc{O}_T$-module of (locally) finite rank, and the natural map
$f^*\pi_*\mathcal{E}\to (\pi_T)_*\mathcal{E}_T$ is an isomorphism.
In particular, for a numerical polynomial $P(t)$, for the Hilbert
scheme $\HB{P(t)}{\mbb{P}(E)/S}$ with its universal closed subscheme
$Z\subset \HB{P(t)}{\mbb{P}(E)/S}\times_S \mbb{P}_S(E)$ with its projections
$$
\pi_{E,P(t)}:Z\to \HB{P(t)}{\mbb{P}(E)/S},
$$
$$
\rho_{E,P(t)}:Z\to \mbb{P}_S(E)
$$
for every integer $d\geq 1$, there
exists a maximal open subscheme $U_d \subset \HB{P(t)}{\mbb{P}(E)/S}$ such
that $R^q\pi_*\rho^*\mc{O}_{E}(d)$ equals zero on $U_d$ for all $q>0$. On
this open subset, the sheaf $\pi_*\rho^*\mc{O}_E(d)$ is locally free.
There is a natural base change homomorphism of $\mc{O}_{U_d}$-modules,
$$
\phi_{d}: S_d(E)\otimes_{\mc{O}_S} \mc{O}_{U_d} \to \pi_*\rho^*\mc{O}_E(d)|_U.
$$
Denote by $V_d\subset U_d$ the maximal open subscheme on which
$\phi_d$ is surjective, i.e., $V_d$ is the relative complement in
$U_d$ of the support of the cokernel of $\phi_d$. In this case, the
kernel $\mathcal{K}_d$ of $\phi_d$ on $V_d$ is locally free. Thus the dual of the
kernel, $\mathcal{K}^\vee_d$, is also locally free on $V_d$. Denote by
$\kappa:\mbb{P}_{V_d}(\mathcal{K}_d) \to V_d$ the associated projective bundle
with its universal invertible quotient $\kappa^*\mathcal{K}_d^\vee \to
\mc{O}_{\mathcal{K}_d}(1)$.
Since
$\pi_*\rho^*\mc{O}_E(d)|_U$ is locally free on $V_d$, the associated
$\mc{O}_{V_d}$-module homomorphism
$$
\psi_d:S_d(E)^\vee\otimes_{\mc{O}_S}\mc{O}_{V_d}\to \mathcal{K}_d^\vee
$$
is surjective.
Thus, there is a unique $S$-morphism, $\iota:\mbb{P}_{V_d}(\mathcal{K}_d) \to
\mbb{P}_S(S_d(E))$, such that $\iota^*\mc{O}_{S_d(E)}(1)$ equals
$\mc{O}_{K_d}(1)$ and such that $\psi_d$ is the induced homomorphism on
global sections of $\mc{O}_{S_d(e)}(1)$, resp. $\mc{O}_{K_d}(1)$.
In the special case that the Hilbert polynomial $P(t)$ equals
$P_{n,d}(t) = P_n(t) - P_n(t-d)$, this gives the following.
\begin{lem} \label{lem-Hilb} \marpar{lem-Hilb}
The closed subscheme $\mathcal{X}\subset \mbb{P}_S(S_d(E))\times_S\mbb{P}_S(E)$
defines an
isomorphism from $\mbb{P}_S(S_d(E))$ to the Hilbert scheme
$\text{Hilb}^{P_{n,d}(t)}_{\mbb{P}_S(E)/S}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
This is well-known.
Here is the basic idea. First of all, since
$\mathcal{X}$ is a Cartier divisor in a scheme that is flat over
$\mbb{P}_S(S_d(E))$, the Cartier divisor is flat over $\mbb{P}_S(S_d(E))$ if
and only if every geometric fiber is a Cartier divisor in the
geometric fiber of $\mbb{P}_S(E)$. This is true since $\alpha$ is nonzero
on geometric fibers. Thus, there is an induced morphism from
$\mbb{P}_S(S_d(E))$ to the Hilbert scheme.
By the computation of
cohomology of invertible sheaves on projective space, the image of
$\mbb{P}_S(S_d(E))$ maps into the open subset $U_e$ of the Hilbert scheme
for every integer $e\geq d-n$. By computation on geometric points of
$\mbb{P}_S(S_d(E))$, the pullback of $\phi_e$ is surjective for every
$e\geq d-n$. Thus, the morphism to the Hilbert scheme factors through
the open subset $V_e$. On the other hand, on the open subset $V_d$,
since $P_{n,d}(d)$ equals $P_n(d)-1$, $\psi_d$ is an invertible
quotient of the pullback of $S_d(E)^\vee$. This invertible quotient
defines an inverse morphism from $V_d$ to $\mbb{P}_S(S_d(E))$.
Finally, to prove that $V_d$ equals the entire Hilbert scheme, it
suffices to compute on geometric points $\text{Spec }(k)\to S$.
For a closed subscheme
$Z\subset \mbb{P}_k(E_k)$ with Hilbert polynomial $P_{n,d}(t)$, since the
degree of Hilbert polynomial equals $n-1$, there are associated primes
of $Z$ of height $1$, and every such prime is minimal. The
intersection of the finitely many primary components of $\mc{O}_Z$ for
such primes gives an ideal sheaf whose associated closed scheme
$Z^{(1)}$ is a Cartier divisor in $\mbb{P}_k(E_k)$ contained in $Z$ and
that equals the divisorial part of $Z$. Since the leading coefficient
of $P_{n,d}(t)$ equals $d/(n-1)!$, $Z^{(1)}$ has degree $d$. As a
degree $d$ hypersurface in $\mbb{P}_k(E_k)$, the Hilbert polynomial of
$Z^{(1)}$ equals $P_{n,d}(t)$. Thus, for the natural surjection
$\mc{O}_Z\to \mc{O}_{Z^{(1)}}$, the kernel has Hilbert polynomial zero.
Thus the kernel is zero, i.e., $Z$ equals the degree $d$ hypersurface
$Z^{(1)}$.
\end{proof}
Returning to the case of an arbitrary Hilbert polynomial $P(t)$, we have
the following generalization.
\begin{prop} \label{prop-opend} \marpar{prop-opend}
Inside $\mbb{P}_{V_d}(\mathcal{K}_d)\times_S \mbb{P}_S(E),$ the closed subscheme
$(\kappa\times \text{Id}_{\mbb{P}(E)})^{-1}\mathcal{Z}$ is contained in the
closed subscheme $(\iota\times \text{Id})^{-1}\mathcal{X}$. Associated to
this pair of closed subschemes, flat over $\mbb{P}_{V_d}(\mathcal{K}_d)$, the
induced morphism from $\mbb{P}_{V_d}(\mathcal{K}_d)$ to the flag Hilbert scheme
$\text{fHilb}^{P(t),P_{d,n}(t)}_{\mbb{P}(E)/S}$ is an open immersion whose open
image equals the inverse image of $V_d$ via the forgetful morphism
$\Phi_{P(t),d}:\text{fHilb}^{P(t),P_{d,n}(t)}_{\mbb{P}(E)/S} \to \HB{P(t)}{\mbb{P}(E)/S}$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
By construction, on $\mbb{P}_{V_d}(\mathcal{K}_d)$, the defining polynomials of
$\mathcal{X}$, considered as sections of $S_d(E)$, vanish when restricted
to $\pi_*\rho^*\mc{O}_E(d)|_{V_d}$. Thus the pullback of $\mathcal{Z}$ is
contained in the pullback of $\mathcal{X}$. Thus, there is an induced
morphism to the flag Hilbert scheme. By construction, the image of
this morphism is contained in the inverse image of $V_d$. Now we
repeat the argument in the previous lemma to construct an inverse
isomorphism from the inverse image of $V_d$ to $\mbb{P}_{V_d}(\mathcal{K}_d)$.
\end{proof}
Since $\mathcal{K}_d$ is locally free of rank $P_n(d)-P(d)$, the projection
$\mbb{P}_{V_d}(\mathcal{K}_d)\to V_d$ is smooth of relative dimension $P_n(d)-P(d)$.
Thus, we have a corollary of the previous proposition.
\begin{cor} \label{cor-opend} \marpar{cor-opend}
The forgetful morphism $\Phi_{P(t),d}:\Phi_{P(t),d}^{-1}(V_d)\to V_d$
is smooth, even a projective bundle, of relative dimension $P_n(d)-P(d)$.
\end{cor}
Using the corollary, the first part of the proposition is reduced to
the following result.
\begin{lem} \label{lem-VeroneseV} \marpar{lem-VeroneseV}
The open subscheme $\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}(E))$ of the Hilbert scheme is contained
in the open subscheme $V_d$ for every integer $d\geq 1$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Since this is a statement about equality of two open subsets, this can
be checked at the level of geometric points of the Hilbert scheme.
Thus, assume that $k$ is algebraically closed, and let $\nu:\mbb{P}_k(E_r)
\to \mbb{P}_k(E)$ be a Veronese $e$-uple morphism.
For every integer $d\geq 1$, $\nu^*\mc{O}_E(d)$
equals $\mc{O}_{E_r}(de)$. By the computation of cohomology of line bundles on
projective space, $h^q(\mbb{P}_k(E_r),\mc{O}(de))$ is zero for all $q>0$ and for
all $d\geq 1$. Thus, $\text{Image}(\nu)$ gives a point of $U_d$.
Finally, by hypothesis,
$$
\nu^*_1:H^0(\mbb{P}(E)_k,\mc{O}_E(1))\to H^0(\mbb{P}(E_r)_k,\mc{O}_{E_r}(e)),
$$
is surjective. The induced map $\phi_d$ is just the composite of the
$d^{\text{th}}$
symmetric power of $\nu^*_1$ and the evaluation morphism,
$$
\text{Sym}^d_k H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E),\mc{O}_E(1))\to \text{Sym}^d_k
H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E_r),\mc{O}_{E_r}(e)) \to H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E_r),\mc{O}_{E_r}(de)).
$$
The first factor is surjective by hypothesis, and the second factor is
surjective by the computation of cohomology of line bundles on
projective space. Thus, $\text{Image}(\nu)$ is a point of $V_d$.
\end{proof}
As a special case of the lemma that will be useful later, the $d=1$
result implies that the following is a short exact sequence of locally
free sheaves on $\F{e}(r,\mbb{P}(E))$ compatible with arbitrary base change,
$$
0 \to \mathcal{K}_1 \to E^\vee\otimes_{k} \mc{O}_{\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}(E))} \to
\pi_*\rho^*\mc{O}_E(1) \to 0.
$$
Denote the quotient by $E^\vee_G$. Then $\mbb{P}_G(E_G)\to
\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E))$
is a projective
subbundle of the projective bundle
$\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E))\times_{\text{Spec }(k)}\mbb{P}_k(E)$ that is flat over
$\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E))$ of relative dimension $\n{e}(r)$. By construction,
$\mbb{P}_G(E_G)$ contains the restriction over the open $\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E))$ of the
universal closed subscheme over the entire Hilbert scheme.
Thus, this pair of
closed subschemes gives a morphism to the flag Hilbert scheme,
$$
\Psi_{e,r,E}:\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E))\to
\text{fHilb}^{\p{r}(et),P_{\n{e}(r)}(t)}_{\mbb{P}(E)/k}.
$$
On the other hand, there is a forgetful morphism,
$$
\Phi:
\text{fHilb}^{\p{r}(et),P_{\n{e}(r)}(t)}_{\mbb{P}(E)/k}
\to
\text{Hilb}^{\p{r}(et)}_{\mbb{P}(E)/k}.
$$
By construction, $\Phi \circ \Psi$ is the inclusion, so that the image
of $\Psi$ is contained in $\Phi^{-1}(\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E)))$. Altogether,
this proves the following.
\begin{cor} \label{cor-VeroneseV} \marpar{cor-VeroneseV}
The forgetful morphism $\Phi:\Phi^{-1}(\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E)))\to
\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E))$ is an isomorphism, and the pullback via the inverse
isomorphism $\Psi$ of the
universal linear $\n{e}(r)$-fold containing the Veronese is $\mbb{P}(E_G)$,
the family of linear spans of the Veronese $e$-uple $r$-folds.
\end{cor}
The last part of Proposition \ref{prop-inc} follows in characteristic
$0$
by Generic
Smoothness. Of course the characteristic $0$ result implies that
there exists some integer $p_e(n,r,d)$ such that the result also holds
whenever the characteristic $p$ satisfies $p\geq p_e(n,r,d)$. In
fact, this integer is effectively computable, even though the
effective upper bounds here are probably far from optimal. The key is
the following observation.
\begin{lem} \label{lem-insep} \marpar{lem-insep}
Let $k$ be a field. Let $S$ and $T$ be smooth, integral $k$-schemes.
Let $f:S\to T$ be a dominant morphism. For every irreducible
component $B$ of the singular locus of $f$ (defined via Fitting ideals
of $\Omega_f$) endowed with its induced reduced structure,
if $B$ dominates $T$, then $B\to T$ is not separable.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Denote by $S^o\subset S$, resp.
$B^o\subset B$, the $k$-smooth locus of $f$, resp. of $f|_B$.
Then $(df)^\dagger:f^*\Omega_{T/k}\to \Omega_{S/k}$, resp.
$d(f|_B)^\dagger:(f|_B)^*\Omega_{T/k}\to \Omega_{B/k}$, is a local split injection
with locally free cokernel
on $S^o$, resp. $B^o$. Since $d(f|_B)^\dagger$
factors through $\Omega_{S/k}|_B\to
\Omega_{B/k}$, it follows that $B^o$ is contained in $S^o\cap B$.
Since $B$ is
disjoint from $S^o$, $B^o$ is empty. Therefore $f|_B$ is not
separable.
\end{proof}
In case $S$ is a specific quasi-projective $T$-scheme, up to
intersecting $S$ with a sufficiently general collection of hyperplane
sections, it suffices to assume that $B$ is generically finite over
$T$. Then, since $B\to T$ is not separable, the length of
$\mc{O}_{B,\eta}$ as an $\mc{O}_{T,\eta}$-module, $\eta$ a generic point of
$T$, is at least $p$. On the other hand, there are upper bounds on
the length of the singular locus of the zero-dimensional components of
the singular locus of $S$ in terms of the dimension and degree of $S$, cf.
\cite[Section 4.2]{JanGutt}. Using this, it is possible to find an
effective upper
bound on $p_e(n,r,d)$ in terms of dimensions and degrees of Hilbert
schemes.
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm-Veronese}} \label{sec-Veronese}
\marpar{sec-Veronese}
The proof of the main part of the theorem is very similar to the proof
of the theorem of Alex Waldron \cite{Waldron}.
Since smoothness can be checked after base
change from $k$ to an algebraic closure, assume that $k$ is
algebraically closed. As above, assume that $E$ is a $k$-vector space
of rank $n+1$ so that $(\mbb{P}_k(E),\mc{O}_E(1))$ is $k$-isomorphic to
$\mbb{P}^n_k$ with its Serre twisting sheaf.
Let $E_r$ be a $k$-subspace of rank
$r+1$, and let $\nu:\mbb{P}_k(E_r)\hookrightarrow \mbb{P}_k(E)$ denote a
Veronese $e$-uple morphism.
Denote by $\mathcal{J}$ the
corresponding ideal sheaf.
In particular, the $k$-subspace $J_1:=H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E),\mathcal{J}(1))$ of
$E^\vee = H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E),\mc{O}_{E}(1))$ equals the kernel of the
surjection,
$$
\nu^*_1: H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E),\mc{O}_{E}(1)) \to H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E_r),\mc{O}_{E_r}(e)).
$$
This is the same as the pullback of the sheaf $\mathcal{K}_1$ from the
previous section.
The annihilator of $J_1$ is a linear subspace $E_\nu\subset E$ of
dimension $\p{r}(e)$, the pullback of $E_G$ from the previous section.
The subvariety $\mbb{P}_k(E_\nu) = \text{Zero}(J_1)$
of $\mbb{P}_k(E)$ is the unique linear subvariety of dimension $\n{e}(r)$
that contains the image
of $\nu$, i.e., $\mbb{P}_k(E_\nu)$ is the linear span of $\nu$. In
particular, for the ideal sheaf $\mathcal{J}_1$ of $\mbb{P}_k(E_\nu)$ in $\mbb{P}_k(E)$,
$\mathcal{J}_1|_{\mbb{P}_k(E_\nu)}$ equals $J_1\otimes_k\mc{O}_{E_\nu}(-1)$.
The fundamental exact sequence of sheaves of relative differentials
is,
$$
\begin{CD}
0 @>>> \nu^*\mathcal{J} @> \delta >> \nu^*\Omega_{\mbb{P}(E)/k} @> (d\nu)^\dagger >>
\Omega_{\mbb{P}(E_r)/k} @>>> 0.
\end{CD}
$$
Using the Euler exact sequence, $\nu^*\mathcal{J}$ is identified with the
locally free sheaf of rank $n-r$, that is the kernel of the associated
surjective morphism
$$
\widetilde{d\nu}^\dagger: E^\vee\otimes_k \mc{O}_{E_r}(-e)\to E_r^\vee\otimes_k \mc{O}_{E_r}(-1).
$$
Via the factorization of $\nu$ through $\mbb{P}_k(E_\nu)$, there is an
associated short exact sequence for $\nu^*\mathcal{J}$,
$$
0\to J_1\otimes_k \mc{O}_{E_r}(-e) \to \nu^*\mathcal{J} \to \nu^*\mathcal{J}_{>1} \to 0,
$$
where $\mathcal{J}_{>1}$ is the ideal sheaf of $\text{Image}(\nu)$ in
$\mbb{P}_k(E_\nu)$.
Denote by
$\Delta_r(e)\subset \mbb{Z}_{\geq 0}^{r+1}$ the subset of
$\underline{e}=(e_0,e_1,\dots,e_r)$ with $e_0+e_1+\dots+e_r$ equal to
$e$. This set has size $\p{r}(e)$. Denote by $m$ the difference $n+1-\p{r}(e)$.
Denoting by $(t_0,\dots,t_r)$ a basis for $E_r^\vee$, and denoting by
$(y_1,\dots,y_m)$ a basis for $J_1$, this extends to
a basis for $E^\vee$,
$$
(x_{\underline{e}})_{\underline{e} \in \Delta_r(e)}\sqcup
(y_1,\dots,y_m),
$$
such that for every $\underline{e}=(e_0,e_1,\dots,e_r)$,
$$\nu_1^*x_{\underline{e}} = t_0^{e_0}t_1^{e_1}\cdots
t_r^{e_r}.
$$
Then the restriction
$k$-algebra homomorphism $\nu^*:
S(E)\twoheadrightarrow S(E_r)$ is the composition of the
quotient $k[x_{\underline{e}},y_j]\to k[x_{\underline{e}}]$ by the graded ideal
generated by $(y_1,\dots,y_m)$ and the natural surjection
$k[x_{\underline{e}}] \to k[t_0,\dots,t_r]_{(e)}$, where
$k[t_0,\dots,t_r]_{(e)}$ is the graded $k$-subalgebra $\oplus_{d\geq
0} k[t_0,\dots,t_r]_{de}$ of $k[t_0,\dots,t_r]$.
The linear space $\text{Zero}(y_1,\dots,y_m)$ equals the linear span of
the image of $\nu$, $\text{Span}(\nu)$.
The identity map $S_1(E)\to E^\vee$ extends uniquely to a
$k$-derivation that also preserves graded decompositions,
$$
\partial : S(E)\to E^\vee\otimes_k S(E)[-1].
$$
This $k$-derivation defines a graded isomorphism of $S(E)$-modules,
$$
\Omega_{S(E)/k} \to E^\vee\otimes_k S(E)[-1].
$$
Similarly, the identity map $S_1(E_r)\to E_r^\vee$ defines a graded
isomorphism of $S(E_r)$-modules,
$$
\Omega_{S(E_r)/k} \to E_r^\vee\otimes_k S(E_r)[-1].
$$
In particular, if $e$ is prime to the characteristic,
then the derivation in degree $e$,
$$
S_e(E_r) \to E_r^\vee\otimes_k S_{e-1}(E),
$$
defines a surjection of $\mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E_r)}$-modules,
$$
\partial_e:S_e(E_r)\otimes_k\mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E_r)} \to E_r^\vee\otimes_k\mc{O}_{E_r}(e-1).
$$
Twisting, this gives an isomorphism,
$$
\nu^*\mathcal{J}_{>1}(e) \cong \text{Ker}(\partial_e).
$$
If the characteristic does divide $e$, then $\partial_e$ has cokernel
isomorphic to $\mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E_r)}(e)$, and then there is a short exact
sequence,
$$
0 \to \nu^*\mathcal{J}_{>1}(e) \to \text{Ker}(\partial_e) \to \mc{O}_{E_r}(e)
\to 0.
$$
\begin{lem} \label{lem-H1J} \marpar{lem-H1J}
Each of $\nu^*\mathcal{J}_1$, $\nu^*\mathcal{J}$, and $\nu^*\mathcal{J}_{>1}$ is a
locally free $\mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E_r)}$-module. Moreover, for each, $h^1$ of
the dual locally free sheaf is zero.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Via the identifications above, it is straightforward to compute that
each sheaf is locally free. Moreover, since $\nu^*\mathcal{J}_1^\vee$ is
isomorphic to $J_1^\vee\otimes_k \mc{O}_{E_r}(e)$, all of the higher
cohomology groups of this sheaf are zero. Via the long exact sequence
of cohomology, $h^1$ of $\nu^*\mathcal{J}^\vee$ equals zero if $h^1$ of
$\nu^*\mathcal{J}_{>1}^\vee$ equals zero. Via the isomorphisms and via the
vanishing of higher cohomology of $\mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E_r)}$, $h^1$ of
$\nu^*\mathcal{J}_{>1}^\vee$ equals zero if $h^1$ if
$\text{Ker}(\partial_e)^\vee(e)$ equals zero. If the characteristic
is prime to $e$, resp. divides $e$, then we have an exact
sequence,
$$
0 \to E_r\otimes_k \mc{O}_{E_r}(1) \to S_e(E_r)^\vee\otimes_k
\mc{O}_{E_r}(e) \to \text{Ker}(\partial_e)^\vee(e) \to 0,
$$
resp. we have an exact sequence,
$$
0 \to \mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E_r)}\to E_r\otimes_k \mc{O}_{E_r}(1) \to S_e(E_r)^\vee\otimes_k
\mc{O}_{E_r}(e) \to \text{Ker}(\partial_e)^\vee(e) \to 0.
$$
In each case, using the vanishing of all higher cohomology of
$\mc{O}_{E_r}(\ell)$ for $\ell > -r$, the long exact sequence of
cohomology implies that $h^1$ of $\text{Ker}(\partial_e)^\vee(e)$
equals $0$.
\end{proof}
For every $G\in S_d(E)$, i.e., for every global section of
$\mc{O}_E(d)$, the associated adjoint map,
$$
\partial G^\dagger : E\to S_{d-1}(E),
$$
sends each dual basis vector of $E$,
$x_{\underline{e}}^\vee$, resp. $y_i^\vee$ to the partial
derivative $\partial G/\partial x_{\underline{e}}$, resp. $\partial
G/\partial y_i$.
Assume now that $G$ vanishes on $\text{Span}(\nu)$. (N.B. When
$e=1$, this hypothesis is trivially satisfied.
For $e>1$, one could try to
improve the bound in the theorem by dropping this hypothesis.)
Denote by $i:Y\hookrightarrow
\mbb{P}_k(E)$ the zero scheme of $G$, and denote by $\mathcal{I}_Y$ the
corresponding ideal sheaf of $\mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E)}$.
Multiplication by $G$ defines an
isomorphism of $\mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E)}$-modules, $\mc{O}_{E}(-d)\to \mathcal{I}_Y$.
Thus the fundamental exact sequence of sheaves of relative
differentials becomes,
$$
\begin{CD}
0 @>>> i^*\mc{O}_E(-d) @> \partial G >> i^*\Omega_{\mbb{P}(E)/k} @> (di)^\dagger >>
\Omega_{Y/k} @>>> 0.
\end{CD}
$$
Pulling back to $\mbb{P}_k(E_\nu)$
and using transitivity for relative
differentials, there is a commutative diagram,
$$
\begin{CD}
\mc{O}_{E_\nu}(-d) @> \nu^*\partial G >> \Omega_{\mbb{P}(E)/k}|_{\mbb{P}(E_\nu)} \\
@V \partial G_{\nu} VV @VVV \\
\mathcal{J}_1 @> \delta >> \Omega_{\mbb{P}(E_r)/k}
\end{CD}
$$
Via the identification of $\mathcal{J}_1$, the homomorphism $\partial
G_{\nu}$
is
equivalent to a homomorphism,
$$
\mc{O}_{E_\nu}(-d) \to (E/E_\nu)^\vee\otimes_k \mc{O}_{E_\nu}(-1),
$$
Up to a twist and taking the transpose, this is equivalent to a homomorphism,
$$
\partial G_{\nu,1}^\dagger: (E/E_\nu)\otimes_k \mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E_\nu)} \to \mc{O}_{E_\nu}(d-1).
$$
Via adjointness of pushforward and pullback, this is equivalent to a
homomorphism of $k$-vector spaces,
$$
E/E_\nu \to S_{d-1}(E_\nu).
$$
By abuse of notation, this is also denoted by $\partial G_\nu^\dagger$.
This map fits into a commutative diagram,
$$
\begin{CD}
E @> \partial G^\dagger >> S_{d-1}(E) \\
@VVV @VVV \\
E/E_\nu @>> \partial G_{\nu,1}^\dagger > S_{d-1}(E_\nu)
\end{CD},
$$
where the vertical arrows are the natural surjections.
Composing with the surjection $\nu_e^*$,
this map induces a $k$-linear
map,
$$
G_\nu^\dagger:E/E_\nu \to S_{(d-1)e}(E_r)
$$
For every integer $c\geq 0$, for every integer $b\geq 0$, for every
$k$-vector space $W$ and $k$-linear map $\phi:W\to
S_{b}(E)$, there is an associated $k$-linear map
$$
\phi_c:W\otimes_k S_c(E) \to S_{b+c}(E).
$$
obtained from the multiplication on $S(E)$. The $k$-linear map $\phi$
is $c$-\emph{generating} if $\phi_c$ is surjective,
cf. \cite[Definition 7.2]{HS2}.
\begin{lem} \label{lem-normal} \marpar{lem-normal}
Under the above hypothesis that the degree $d$ hypersurface $Y$
contains the linear span $\mbb{P}(E_\nu)$ of $\nu$,
the smooth locus $Y^o$ of the $k$-scheme $Y$ contains
$\text{Image}(\nu)$,
resp.
$\mbb{P}(E_\nu)$, if and only if
the linear system $\partial G_\nu^\dagger$ on $\mbb{P}(E_r)$,
resp. the linear system $\partial G_{\nu,1}^\dagger$ on $\mbb{P}(E_\nu)$,
is $c$-generating for some $c\geq 1$. When $G^o$ contains $\text{Image}(\nu)$,
$p$ is smooth at the point corresponding to the pair
$([\text{Image}(\nu)],[Y])$ if and only if $\partial G_\nu^\dagger$
is $e$-generating.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
By the Jacobian criterion, $Y^o$ equals the maximal open subscheme of
$Y$ on which $\Omega_{Y/k}$ is locally free of rank $n-1$. By
Nakayama's Lemma, the points of $Y$ are precisely those $\text{Spec } \kappa
\to Y$ where the pullback of $\partial G^\dagger$ is nonzero. By the
commutative diagram, this is equivalent to nonvanishing of the
pullback of $\partial G_j^\dagger$. Finally, using the equivalence
between the category of coherent sheaves on $\mbb{P}_k(E_r)$ and the
localization of the
category of finitely presented, graded $S(E_r)$-modules with respect
to modules concentrated in low degrees,
this pullback is nonvanishing at every point of $\mbb{P}_k(E_r)$,
resp. $\mbb{P}_k(E_\nu)$,
if and only if $\partial G_\nu^\dagger$, resp. $\partial
G_{\nu,1}^\dagger$
is $c$-generating for some
$c\geq 1$.
Next, assume that $\partial G_c^\dagger$ is $c$-generating for some
$c\geq 1$. Then for the ideal sheaf $\mathcal{K}$ of $\mbb{P}(E_r)$ in $Y$,
the commutative diagram gives a short exact sequence,
$$
\begin{CD}
0 @>>> \mc{O}_{E_r}(-de) @>\partial G_j >> \nu^*\mathcal{J} @>>>
\nu^*\mathcal{K} @>>> 0
\end{CD}
$$
Since $Y^o$ contains $\text{Image}(\nu)$, the closed immersion
$\nu\mbb{P}(E_r)\hookrightarrow Y^o$ is a \emph{regular immersion}. Thus
the usual obstruction group for deformations of this closed immersion,
$\text{Ext}^1_{\mc{O}_Y}(\mathcal{K},\nu_*\mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E_r)})$ reduces to
$$
H^1( \mbb{P}(E_r), \textit{Hom}_{\mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E_r)}}(\nu^*\mathcal{K},\mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E_r)})).
$$
Since
$\nu^*\mathcal{K}$ is locally free, the transpose of the short exact sequence
above is still a short exact sequence. By Lemma \ref{lem-H1J},
the long exact sequence defines
an isomorphism
$$
\delta:\text{Coker}(\partial G_j^\dagger)_1 \xrightarrow{\cong}
H^1( \mbb{P}(E_r), \textit{Hom}_{\mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E_r)}}(j^*\mathcal{K},\mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E_r)})).
$$
Thus, the obstruction group vanishes if and only if $\partial
G_\nu^\dagger$ is $e$-generating.
Of course there are cases where the
obstruction group is nonzero, yet the relative
Hilbert scheme is still smooth.
However, in this case, both the domain and the target of the morphism
$p$ are smooth $k$-schemes.
The obstruction group is the cokernel of the map induced by
$p$ from the Zariski
tangent space of $\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X}/\mbb{P}_k(S_d(E)))$ to the Zariski tangent
space of $\mbb{P}_k(S_d(E))$. Thus, by the Jacobian criterion,
$p$ is smooth at $([\text{Image}(\nu)],[Y])$
if and
only if $\partial G_\nu^\dagger$ is $e$-generating.
\end{proof}
By Hochster-Laksov \cite[Theorem 1]{HochsterLaksov}, for $e=1$, for
all $d\geq 3$, for all
$n\geq \N{1}(r,d) = r+\lceil \p{r}(d)/(r+1) \rceil$, there exists a linear
system of dimension $m=n-r$ in $S_{d-1}(E_r)$ that is $1$-generating,
say
$$
E/E_\nu \to S_{d-1}(E_r), \ \ y_i^\vee \mapsto G_i(t_0,\dots,t_r).
$$
Recall that the basis for $E^\vee$ is $(x_0,\dots,x_r)\sqcup
(y_1,\dots,y_m)$, where $\nu^*x_i$ equals $t_i$.
For the polynomial
$$
G = \sum_{i=1}^m y_i G_i(x_0,\dots,x_r),
$$
the zero scheme, $Y$, of $G$
contains $\mbb{P}(E_r)$, and $\partial G_\nu^\dagger$ is the given
$1$-generating linear system. Thus, by Lemma \ref{lem-normal}, $\pi$ is
smooth at the pair $([\mbb{P}(E_r)],[Y])$. This proves Theorem
\ref{thm-Waldron}, and this is basically Waldron's proof. In fact,
Waldron also gives a simplified proof of Hochster-Laksov in this case.
Next, for $e\geq 2$, for all $d\geq 3$, it is a theorem of Gleb
Nenashev, \cite[Theorem 1]{Nenashev},
that for all integers $m=n-\p{r}(e)$ satisfying
$m\geq \p{r}(e) + \lceil \p{r}(de)/\p{r}(e) \rceil$, there exists an
$e$-generating linear system,
$$
E/E_\nu \to S_{(d-1)e}(E_r), \ \ y_i^\vee \mapsto G_i(t_0,\dots,t_r).
$$
For each $i$, since $\nu^*_{d-1}$ is surjective, there exists $H_i\in
k[x_{\underline{e}}]_{d-1}$ such that $\nu^*{d-1}(H_i)$ equals $G_i$.
For the polynomial
$$
G = \sum_{i=1}^m y_i H_i,
$$
the zero scheme, $Y$, of $G$ contains $\mbb{P}(E_\nu)$, and $\partial
G_\nu^\dagger$ is the given $e$-generating linear system. Thus, by
Lemma \ref{lem-normal}, $\pi$ is smooth at the pair $([\mbb{P}(E_r)],[Y])$.
This proves the Theorem \ref{thm-Veronese} for $e\geq 2$ and for
$d\geq 3$.
For $d=1$, for all $n\geq 1+n_r(e)$, for every hypersurface $Y$ that
contains $\text{Image}(\nu)$, $\F{e}(r,Y) \cong \Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}^{n-1}_k)$ is
nonempty and smooth. For $d=2$ and for $e\geq 2$, there are smooth
quadric surfaces that contain $\text{Image}(\nu)$, assuming that $k$
is algebraically closed (it would suffice for $k$ to be infinite).
This follows most easily from Bertini's theorem. Since $r\geq 1$,
also $2r+1 \geq 2$. Thus, $\p{r}(2) \geq 2r+2$. By Pascal's Theorem,
$\p{r}(t+1) - \p{r}(t)$ equals $P_{r-1}(t+1)$. For $e\geq -r$, resp. for
$e\geq -1$,
$P_{r-1}(e+1)\geq 0$, resp. $P_{r-1}(e+1)>0$,
so that the integer-valued function
$\p{r}(e)$ is nondecreasing, resp. increasing, in $e$ for $e\geq -r$,
resp. $e\geq -1$. Thus, for all $e\geq 2$, $\p{r}(e)\geq \p{r}(2) \geq
2r+2$. Thus, for $n\geq n_r(e) = \p{r}(e)-1$, $n$ is strictly larger
than $2r$, $\p{r}(e)-1 \geq 1+2r$. Thus, by the usual parameter
counting
proof of
Bertini's theorem, to prove that a general member $G$ in
$H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E),\mathcal{J}(2))$ is defines an everywhere smooth quadric, it
suffices to prove for every $k$-point $p\in \mbb{P}_k(E_r)$ that the
induced map,
$$
H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E),\mathcal{J}(2)) \to T_{\nu(p)} \mbb{P}_k(E) / d\nu( T_p \mbb{P}_k(E_r)),
$$
is surjective.
Choose homogeneous coordinates on $\mbb{P}_k(E_r)$ so
that $p$ equals $[t_0,t_1,\dots,t_r] = [1,0,\dots,0]$, and then choose
corresponding homogeneous coordinates $(x_{\underline{e}},y_i)$ on
$\mbb{P}_k(E)$ as above.
Then $\nu(p)$
is the point where the coordinate $x_{(e,0,\dots,0)}\neq 0$, yet
$x_{\underline{e}}=0$ for every $\underline{e} \in
\Delta_r(e)\setminus\{ (e,0,\dots,0)\}$,
and $y_i=0$ for every $i=1,\dots,m$.
The tangent space of $T_p\mbb{P}_k(E_r)$ is the space
spanned by the partial derivatives
$\partial/\partial(x_{\underline{e}}/x_{(e,0,\dots,0)})$ for the
elements $\underline{e} = (e-1,0,\dots,0,1,0,\dots,0)$. The quotient
space is generated by the partial derivatives for
$y_i/x_{(e,0,\dots,0)}$ for $i=1,\dots,m$, and by the partial
derivatives of $x_{\underline{e}}/x_{(e,0,\dots,0)}$, where
$\underline{e}=(e_0,e_1,\dots,e_r)$ satisfies $e_0 \leq e-2$.
For every
$i=1,\dots,m$, the quadratic polynomial $y_i x_{(e,0,\dots,0)}$ maps
to the image of the partial derivative for $y_i/x_{(e,0,\dots,0)}$.
For every $\underline{e}\in \Delta_r(e)$ with $e_0\leq e-2$, there
exist elements
$\underline{e}', \underline{e}''\in \Delta_r(e)$ with $e_0',e''_0\leq
e-1$ such that $\underline{e}+(e,0,\dots,0) =
\underline{e}'+\underline{e}''$. Thus the quadratic polynomial
$x_{\underline{e}}x_{(e,0,\dots,0)} -
x_{\underline{e}'}x_{\underline{e}''}$ maps to the image of the
partial derivative for $x_{\underline{e}}/x_{(e,0,\dots,0)}$. Thus,
by Bertini's Theorem, there exists $G\in H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E),\mathcal{J}(2))$ such
that $Y=\text{Zero}(G)$ is everywhere smooth. The action of
$\textbf{PGL}(E)$ on the open subset $\mbb{P} S_2(E)\setminus \Delta$
parameterizing smooth quadrics is smoothly homogeneous. This action
lifts to an action of $\textbf{PGL}(E)$ on
$\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X})$. Thus, whenever $Y$ is smooth, the restriction of $\pi$
to the $\textbf{PGL}(E)$-orbit of $([\text{Image}(\nu)],[Y])$ is
smooth, cf. \cite[Corollaire 6.5.2(i)]{EGA4}.
By the lemma, if $\pi$ is smooth, then $n-r \geq n_0-r$. Conversely,
assume that $n \geq n_0$. Then there exists a $k$-linear map,
$$
\phi:E/E_r \to S_{d-1}(E_r)
$$
that is $1$-generating. For the image of every dual vector $t_i^\vee$
in $E/E_r$, denote by $G_i\in S_{d-1}(E_r)$ the image of this element
under $\phi$. For every $(n-r)$-tuple
$(\widetilde{G}_{r+1},\dots,\widetilde{G}_n)$ of elements
$\widetilde{G}_i\in S_{d-1}(E)$
that maps to $G_i$,
the element
$$
G = \widehat{G} + t_{m+1}\widetilde{G}_1 + \dots + t_n\widetilde{G}_n
$$
is an element of $S_d(E)$ that vanishes on $\mbb{P}(E_r)$. By definition
of $\partial G_j^\dagger$ in terms of partial derivatives, this equals
$\phi$. Thus, $([\mbb{P}(E_r)],[Y])$ is a point where $p$ is smooth.
This proves the first part of the proposition: the smooth locus of $p$
is nonempty (and hence dense) if and only if $n\geq n_0$.
\section{Proof of Proposition \ref{prop-dim}} \label{sec-dim}
\marpar{sec-dim}
In this section, fix $e$ to equal $1$.
Let $n$ equal $n_1'(d,r)$, and
denote $m=n_1'(d,r)-r$. The morphism $\rho:\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X}) \to
\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}(E))$ is a Zariski locally trivial projective bundle.
Moreover, both domain and target have natural actions of
$\textbf{PGL}(E)$, and the morphism is equivariant for these actions.
Finally, the morphism $\pi$ is also equivariant. Thus the closed
subscheme $B$ where $\pi$ is not smooth is
$\textbf{PGL}(E)$-invariant. Since $\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}(E))$ is homogeneous
under the action of $\textbf{PGL}(E)$, the restriction of $\rho$ to
$B$ is flat.
Thus, the hypothesis that $B$ has codimension $\geq 2$
everywhere is equivalent to the hypothesis that the intersection of
$B$ with one, and hence every, geometric fiber of $\rho$ has
codimension $\geq 2$ everywhere in that fiber. Since the geometric
fibers of $\rho$ are projective spaces, this is equivalent to the
hypothesis that
there exists a finite
morphism from $\mbb{P}^1$ to a geometric fiber of $\rho$ whose image is
disjoint from $B$.
Now we apply the proof of Bertini's Connectedness Theorem, as
generalized by Cristian Minoccheri. For the $k$-morphism,
$$
\pi:\F{1}(r,\mathcal{X}) \to \mbb{P}_k(S_d(E)),
$$
the source and target are both smooth, projective $k$-schemes, and the
target is algebraically simply connected, since it is a projective
space. By hypothesis, the complement $B$ of the smooth locus of $\pi$ has
codimension $\geq 2$ everywhere.
Thus, by \cite[Theorem 3.1]{Minoccheri},
the geometric generic fiber of $\pi$ is connected.
Finally, by Zariski's Main Theorem, since the geometric generic fiber
of $\pi$ is connected, every geometric fiber of $\pi$ is connected.
For the maximal open subscheme $U$ of $\mbb{P}_k(S_d(E))$ over which both
$\F{1}(r,\mathcal{X})$ and $B$ are flat, the restriction of
$\pi$ over $U$ is a flat morphism whose domain and target are both
smooth, hence $\pi|_U$ is a flat, local complete intersection morphism
\cite[Appendix B.7.6]{F}. So every geometric fiber of $\pi$ over $U$ is a
projective, local complete intersection scheme. Moreover, the
singular locus equals the intersection of the fiber with $B$, and this
has codimension $\geq 2$ by hypothesis. Thus, by Serre's Criterion,
the geometric fiber is integral and normal, cf. \cite[Th\'{e}or\`{e}me
5.8.6]{EGA4}. As in
Proposition \ref{prop-inc}, if the characteristic equals $0$ or $p\geq
p_e(n,r,d)$, then, up to replacing $U$ by a dense, Zariski open
subscheme, $\pi|_U$ is even smooth.
\section{Proof of Corollary \ref{cor-dim}} \label{sec-dim2}
\marpar{sec-dim2}
Recall from Corollary \ref{cor-VeroneseV} that there exists a
universal family of linear spans $\mbb{P}_G(E_G) \subset
\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E))\times_{\text{Spec }(k)} \mbb{P}_k(E)$ of the universal family of
Veronese varieties. This projective subbundle contains the universal
family of Veronese $e$-uple $r$-folds. The pair defines a morphism to
the flag Hilbert scheme,
$$
\Psi_{e,r,E}:\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E))\to
\text{fHilb}^{\p{r}(et),P_{\n{e}(r)}(t)}_{\mbb{P}(E)/k},
$$
whose image is contained in the inverse image open subset
$\Phi^{-1}(\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E)))$, where $\Phi$ is the forgetful morphism
$$
\Phi:
\text{fHilb}^{\p{r}(et),P_{\n{e}(r)}(t)}_{\mbb{P}(E)/k}
\to
\text{Hilb}^{\p{r}(et)}_{\mbb{P}(E)/k}.
$$
Now consider the second forgetful morphism,
$$
\Lambda:\Phi^{-1}(\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E))) \to \Gg{1}(\n{e}(r),\mbb{P}_k(E)).
$$
Using the action of $\textbf{PGL}(E)$, the morphism $\Lambda$ is a
Zariski locally trivial fiber bundle whose fiber over a $\kappa$-valued
point
$[\mbb{P}_\kappa(E')]\in
\Gg{1}(\n{e}(r),\mbb{P}_k(E))(\text{Spec }(\kappa))$ equals $\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}_\kappa(E'))$. In
particular, $\Lambda$ is faithfully flat, finitely presented,
quasi-projective and smooth with geometrically irreducible fibers.
Now let $d\geq 1$ be an integer. As usual, denote by $\mathcal{X}\subset
\mbb{P} H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E),\mc{O}_E(d))\times_{\text{Spec }(k)} \mbb{P}_k(E)$ the universal
family of degree $d$ hypersurfaces in $\mbb{P}_k(E)$.
Consider the projection
$$
\rho:\F{1}(\n{e}(r),\mathcal{X}) \to \Gg{1}(\n{e}(r),\mbb{P}_k(E)).
$$
Denote by $F_{e,1}(r,\n{e}(r),\mathcal{X})$ the fiber product,
$$
\begin{CD}
F_{e,1}(r,\n{e}(r),\mathcal{X}) @>\text{pr}_1 >> \Phi^{-1}(\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E))) \\
@V \text{pr}_2 VV @VV \Lambda V \\
\F{1}(\n{e}(r),\mathcal{X}) @>> \rho > \Gg{1}(\n{e}(r),\mbb{P}_k(E)).
\end{CD}
$$
Chasing diagrams, $F_{e,1}(r,\n{e}(r),\mathcal{X})$ is an open subset of the
relative flag Hilbert scheme of $\pi:\mathcal{X}\to \mbb{P}
H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E),\mc{O}_E(d))$ parameterizing pairs of closed subschemes in
fibers of $\pi$ of Hilbert polynomials $\p{r}(et)$,
resp. $P_{\n{e}(r)}(t)$. More precisely, this is the open subset of the
flag Hilbert scheme parameterizing pairs where the smaller closed
subscheme is a Veronese $e$-uple $r$-fold, and where the larger closed
subscheme is the linear span of the Veronese variety. In particular,
because $\Lambda$ is faithfully flat, finitely presented,
quasi-projective and smooth with geometrically irreducible fibers, the
same holds for the base change morphism,
$$
\text{pr}_2 : F_{e,1}(r,\n{e}(r),\mathcal{X}) \to \F{1}(\n{e}(r),\mathcal{X}).
$$
Since $n\geq n'_1(d,\n{e}(r))$, the projection morphism
$$
\pi':\F{1}(\n{e}(r),\mathcal{X})\to \mbb{P} H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E),\mc{O}_E(d))
$$
is projective and dominant with irreducible geometric generic fiber,
by Proposition \ref{prop-dim}. Combined with the previous paragraph,
also the composition
$$
F_{e,1}(r,\n{e}(r),\mathcal{X}) \xrightarrow{\text{pr}_2} \F{1}(\n{e}(r),\mathcal{X})
\xrightarrow{\pi'} \mbb{P} H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E),\mc{O}_E(d)),
$$
is quasi-projective and dominant with irreducible geometric generic
fiber. By the definition of the flag Hilbert scheme, this composition
also equals the composition
$$
F_{e,1}(r,\n{e}(r),\mathcal{X})\xrightarrow{\text{pr}_1} \F{e}(r,\mathcal{X})
\xrightarrow{\pi} \mbb{P} H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E),\mc{O}_E(d)).
$$
By Proposition \ref{prop-inc}, $\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X})$ is smooth and
irreducible, even a projective bundle over $\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E))$. In
particular, the image of $\text{pr}_1$ is contained in the normal
locus of $\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X})$. Thus, by \cite[Lemma 3.2]{dJS10},
also the morphism
$$
\pi:\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X})\to \mbb{P} H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E),\mc{O}_E(d))
$$
is dominant with irreducible geometric generic fiber. By the usual
constructibility argument, cf. \cite[Th\'{e}or\`{e}me I.4.10]{Jou},
there exists a
dense open subset $W^r_{e,d}$ of $\mbb{P} H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E),\mc{O}_E(d))$ over which $\pi$ is
faithfully flat with geometrically irreducible fibers.
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm-nprime}} \label{sec-nprime}
\marpar{sec-nprime}
\textbf{Proof of (i).} Since $d\geq 2$, also $d-1\geq 1$. Thus
the difference $m=n-r-1$ satisfies
$m\geq n_1(d,r)-r$, and this is at least $r+1$.
In particular, $m$ is
positive.
Choose
homogeneous coordinates $(x_0,\dots,x_r,y_0,y_1,\dots,y_m)$ on
$\mbb{P}_k(E)$ so that $\mbb{P}_k(E_r)$ equals the zero scheme of
$(y_0,y_1,\dots,y_m)$.
Assume that $n\geq 1+n_1(r)$. Then by Hochster-Laksov once again,
there exists a $1$-generating
$k$-subspace
$\iota:W\hookrightarrow
k[t_0,\dots,t_r]_{d-1}$
of dimension $m$. Let $(w_1,\dots,w_m)$ be an ordered basis
for $W$, and denote by $G_i(t_0,\dots,t_r)$ the image $\iota(w_i)$.
Define $W'=k^{\oplus (m+1)}$, and define
$$
\psi:(k^{\oplus 2}) \times (k^{\oplus(m+1)}) \to W,
$$
$$
\psi((a,b),(c_0,\dots,c_m)) = (ac_0+bc_1)w_1 + (ac_1+bc_2)w_2 +
\dots + (ac_{m-1}+bc_m)w_m.
$$
This is a $k$-bilinear map.
When $a$ is nonzero, then the restriction of $\psi_{(a,b),\bullet}$ to the
subspace $\text{Zero}(c_m)$ is an isomorphism, so that the image is
$1$-generating. When $b$ is nonzero, then the restriction of
$\psi_{(a,b),\bullet}$ to the subspace $\text{Zero}(c_0)$ is an
isomorphism. Thus, defining
$$
G_{a,b}(x_i,y_j) =
(ay_0+by_1)\Gg{1}(x_0,\dots,x_r) + \dots + (ay_{m-1}+by_m)G_m(x_0,\dots,x_r),
$$
and defining $Y_{a,b} = \text{Zero}(G_{a,b}) \subset \mbb{P}_k(E)$,
there is a morphism
$$
g:\mbb{P}^1_k \to \F{1}(r,\mathcal{X}), \ \ [a,b] \mapsto ([\mbb{P}_k(E_r)],[Y_{a,b}]),
$$
that is a finite morphism into the fiber of $\rho$ over $[\mbb{P}_k(E_r)]$
whose image is contained in the smooth locus
$\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X})_{\text{sm}}$ of $\pi$, i.e., the image of $g$ is
disjoint from the singular locus $B$ of $\pi$. The fiber of $\rho$
is a projective space, and every nonempty Cartier divisor in
projective space has nonempty intersection with every nonempty curve
in projective space. Thus, the intersection of $B$ with the fiber of
$\rho$ has codimension $\geq 2$ in that fiber.
As in the proof of Proposition
\ref{prop-dim}, since both $\rho$ and $\rho|_B:B\to \Gg{1}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E))$
are flat, it follows that $B$ has codimension $\geq 2$ everywhere in
$\F{1}(r,\mathcal{X})$.
Thus,
$n_1'(d,r)$ is no greater than $1+n_0(d,r)$.
\textbf{Proof of (ii).} This is essentially the same argument as in
the proof of Corollary \ref{cor-dim}. The morphism $\Lambda:\F{e}(r,\mathcal{X})
\to \mbb{P} H^0(\mbb{P}_k(E),\mc{O}_E(1))$ is a Zariski locally trivial fiber
bundle whose fibers are schemes $\Gg{e}(r,\mbb{P}^{n-1}_k)$. These are
nonempty and geometrically connected precisely when $n-1\geq \n{e}(r)$,
i.e., $n\geq 1 + \n{e}(r)$.
\textbf{Proof of (iii).} By (i), $n'_1(2,r)\leq 1+n_1(2,r)$. Thus,
it suffices to prove that $\F{1}(r,X)$ is disconnected for
$n=n_1(2,r)=2r+1$. Denote by
$(t_0,\dots,t_r,t_{r+1},\dots, t_{2r+1})$ an ordered basis for
$S_1(E)$.
For $k$ algebraically
closed, all smooth quadric hypersurfaces in $\mbb{P}_k(E)$ are
projectively equivalent to the zero scheme of the quadratic
polynomial,
$$
G(t_0,t_1,\dots,t_r,t_{r+1},t_{r+2},\dots,t_{2r+1}) = t_0t_{r+1} +
t_1t_{r+2} + \dots + t_rt_{2r+1}.
$$
Consider the $r$-planes
$\Pi=\text{Zero}(t_{r+1},\dots,t_{2r+1})$,
$\Lambda=\text{Zero}(t_0,\dots,t_r)$, and $\Gamma =
\text{Zero}(t_0,t_{r+2},t_{r+3},\dots,t_{2r+1})$. These are all
contained in $X=\text{Zero}(G)$. By \cite[Lemma 0.3, Appendix]{BrH-B},
$(\Pi.\Lambda)_X = 0$. If $m$ is even, then
$(\Pi.\Pi)_X = 1$. If $m$ is odd, then $(\Pi.\Gamma)_X=1$. Since
algebraically equivalent $m$-cycles are numerically equivalent, it
follows that $F_m(X/k)$ has more than one connected component (in fact
it has precisely two connected components).
\textbf{Proof of (iv).} This is a computation in the Chow group of
the Grassmannian $\Gg{1}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E))$. As an Abelian group under
addition, this is a finite free Abelian group. Moreover, for the
projection of the flag variety to the Grassmannian,
$$
\text{Flag}(0,1,\dots,r,\mbb{P}_k(E)) \to \Gg{1}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E)),
$$
the induced pullback map on Chow rings is an injective homomorphism
that identifies the Chow ring of $\Gg{1}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E))$ with a saturated
Abelian subgroup of the Chow ring of the flag variety, i.e., the
quotient Abelian group is a finite free Abelian group. Thus,
divisibility of cycles in the Chow ring of $\Gg{1}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E))$ can be
checked after pullback to the Chow ring of the flag variety.
There are many methods for
performing computations in the Chow ring of the flag variety.
The method used here is via ``Chern roots'' of the total Chern class
of the tautological bundle.
Begin with the $(r+1)$-fold fiber product,
$$
\mbb{P}_k(E)^{r+1} = \mbb{P}_k(E) \times_{SP(k)} \dots \times_{\text{Spec }(k)} \mbb{P}_k(E).
$$
Inside of this scheme, denote by $D_{\leq r}$ the degeneracy closed
subscheme (in the sense of Porteous's formula)
where
the $r+1$ points are linearly degenerate, i.e., the closed subscheme
defined by the vanishing of all $(r+1)\times(r+1)$-minors
of the following homomorphism of
locally free sheaves,
$$
\phi_{r+1}:E^\vee\otimes_k \mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E)^{r+1}} \to \bigoplus_{i=0}^r
\text{pr}_i^* \mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E)}(1).
$$
Denote by $U_{r+1}\subset \mbb{P}_k(E)^{r+1}$ the open complement of
$D_{\leq r}$. On $U_{r+1}$, the morphism $\phi_{r+1}$ is a locally
free quotient of rank $r+1$. Thus, for every integer $0\leq s\leq r$, the
associated map
$$
\phi_{r+1,s+1}:E^\vee\otimes_k \mc{O}_{U_{r+1}} \to \bigoplus_{i=0}^s
\text{pr}_i^*\mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E)}(1)
$$
is a locally free quotient of rank $s+1$. Altogether, these morphisms
define a morphism to the flag variety,
$$
\beta:U_{r+1}\to \text{Flag}(0,1,\dots,r,\mbb{P}_k(E)).
$$
Working inductively on $r$, $\beta$ is an iterated fiber bundle, each
factor of which is an affine space bundle that is trivialized for a Zariski
open covering of the target. Thus, by the homotopy axiom for Chow
groups, \cite[Proposition 1.9]{F}, the pullback map
$$
\text{CH}^*(\text{Flag}(0,1,\dots,r,\mbb{P}_k(E))) \to \text{CH}^*(U_{r+1})
$$
is a ring isomorphism.
On the other hand, since $U_{r+1}$ is an open subset of
$\mbb{P}_k(E)^{r+1}$, there is a presentation for the Chow group,
$$
\text{CH}^*(\mbb{P}_k(E)^{r+1})/I \cong \text{CH}^*(U_{r+1}),
$$
where $I$ is a $\mathfrak{S}_{r+1}$-invariant ideal. Since
$\text{CH}^*(\mbb{P}_k(E)) = \mbb{Z}[u]/\langle u^{n+1} \rangle$ for the first
Chern class $u$ of $\mc{O}_E(1)$, this presentation is the same as
as
$$
\mbb{Z}[u_0,\dots,u_r]/J
$$
where $J$ is an ideal containing $\langle
u_0^{n+1},\dots,u_r^{n+1}\rangle$ such that $J/\langle
u_0^{n+1},\dots,u_r^{n+1} \rangle$ equals $I$, and each $u_i$ is the
first Chern class of $\text{pr}_i^*\mc{O}_{\mbb{P}(E)}(1)$. Moreover, for
every integer $s=0,\dots,r$, for the tautological locally free
quotient bundle $E^\vee\otimes_k \mc{O}_{\text{Flag}}\to Q_{s+1}$ of rank
$s+1$,
the total
Chern class of $Q_{s+1}$ equals the image of
$(1+u_0)(1+u_1)\cdots(1+u_s)$.
Thus, the elements $(u_0,\dots,u_r)$ are the ``Chern roots'' of the
tautological flag of locally free sheaves on the flag variety (up to
signs, depending on the sign convention; these signs have no effect on
divisibility).
In particular, the top Chern class of $\text{Sym}^d(Q_{r+1})$ equals the
image of the $\mathfrak{S}_{r+1}$-invariant polynomial,
$$
p_{r+1,d}(u_0,\dots,u_r) =
\prod_{\underline{d},d_0+\dots+d_r=d} (d_0u_0 + \dots + d_ru_r),
$$
where the product is over all elements $\underline{d}=(d_0,\dots,d_r)$
in $(\mbb{Z}_{\geq 0})^{r+1}$ with $d_0+\dots+d_r = d$.
In particular, separating out those factors $\underline{d} =
d\mathbf{e}_i$ where only $d_i=d$ and all other $d_j$ are zero, $p_{r+1,d}$
factors as
$$
p_{r+1,d}(u_0,\dots,u_r) = d^{r+1} (u_0u_1\cdots u_r)
q_{r+1,d}(u_0,\dots,u_r),
$$
$$
q_{r+1,d}(u_0,\dots,u_r) =
\prod_{\underline{d}\neq
d\mathbf{e}_i, d_0+\dots+d_r=d} (d_0u_0+\dots + d_ru_r).
$$
Thus, the top Chern class of $\text{Sym}^d(S_{r+1}^\vee)$ equals
$d^{r+1}$ times another class, in fact $d^{r+1}c_{r+1}(S_{r+1}^\vee)
\gamma$ where $\gamma$ is the class obtained as the
image of $q_{r+1,d}(u_0,\dots,u_r)$.
A
priori, this top Chern class might be zero as a cycle class.
However, by Theorem
\ref{thm-Waldron}, when $f_1(n,r,d)\geq 0$,
this class is nonzero: it is Poincar\'{e} dual to
the transversal cycle $\F{1}(r,X)$ for sufficiently general $X$.
Moreover, since $\F{1}(r,X)$ is generically smooth for general $X$, in
the special case that $f_1(n,r,d)$ equals $0$, $\F{1}(r,X)$ is a
zero-dimensional, smooth $k$-scheme whose length equals the degree of
this top Chern class.
By the computation above, the
degree of the top Chern class in $\text{CH}^{(r+1)(n-r)}(\Gg{1}(r,\mbb{P}_k(E)))$
equals $d^{r+1}$ times the degree of another cycle. Thus the length of the
zero-dimensional, smooth $k$-scheme $\F{1}(r,X)$ is divisible by
$d^{r+1}$. In particular, for $d\geq 2$, $\F{1}(r,X)$ is not
geometrically connected as a $k$-scheme.
|
\section{Introduction}
The advent of galaxy redshift surveys has revolutionised our understanding of the large-scale structure of the Universe and provided us with multiple ways to constrain the cosmological model.
Mock catalogues of synthetic galaxies play a threefold role in the analysis of these datasets \citep{Cole:1998,Blaizot:2005,Kitzbichler:2007,Sousbie:2008,Carlson:2010,Merson:2013}. (i) They shape
theoretical predictions into structures that closely match observations. (ii) They form a straightforward tool
to derive biases and covariance matrices of estimators for statistical descriptions of the large-scale structure
(e.g. correlation functions or their Fourier analogues).
(iii) Related to that, as forecasting tools, they provide key information to designing new surveys by
minimising the impact of statistical errors and systematic effects on selected observables.
Since the 1970s, the size of galaxy catalogues has constantly increased in terms of solid-angle and redshift coverage as well as in sampling rate.
The next generation of surveys will provide us with the possibility to measure galaxy clustering on scales comparable with the Hubble radius \citep[e.g.][]{EuclidRedBook, Levi:2013Desi, Maartens:2015SKA}. Theoretical studies suggest that a number of general relativistic effects might be detectable on these scales. In order to fully exploit the potential of the new datasets,
it is therefore imperative to develop analysis tools (and thus mock catalogues) that include these effects.
In this paper, we present a method to create mock galaxy catalogues that incorporate relativistic corrections
and are built upon the output of either common Newtonian simulations of galaxy formation or semi-analytic models based on standard N-body simulations.
Relativistic effects arise from the fact that we observe galaxies on our past lightcone.
The presence of perturbations superimposed to a Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) background alters the
null geodesics of the photons emitted by distant galaxies. In consequence, all the direct observables for a galaxy
are different than in a smooth universe: its redshift, angular position on the sky and the flux in any given waveband.
Galaxy peculiar velocities, for instance, distort the radial pattern of the galaxy distribution
\citep{Kaiser:1987qv, Hamilton:1997zq}.
Similarly, magnification due to gravitational lensing
modifies the observed number counts in flux-limited samples \citep{Turner1980, Turner:1984ch, Sasaki:1987ad, Matsubara:2000pr}.
Many recent studies have demonstrated the existence of several additional corrections that, although suppressed on smaller scales, might generate observable signals on distances comparable with the Hubble radius \citep[e.g.][]{McDonald2009, Yoo:2008tj, Yoo:2009au, Bonvin:2011bg, Challinor:2011bk, Bertacca:2012tp, Jeong:2011as, Yoo:2012se, DiDio:2013bqa, DiDio:2013sea, Bonvinetal2014, Montanari:2015rga, Yoo:2013zga, Bonvin:2015kuc, Cardona:2016qxn, DiDio:2016ykq, Raccanelli:2016avd, Raccanelli:2013gja, Raccanelli:2015vla, Gaztanaga:2015jrs}.
At linear order in the perturbations, these additional corrections include Doppler terms plus Sachs-Wolfe \citep[standard and integrated, see][]{Sachs:1967er, Rees:1968} and (Shapiro) time-delay contributions.
Robust models of galaxy clustering on large scales should thus include these modifications that, most likely,
will be key to extracting unbiased
information on the dark sector of the Universe (i.e. on the nature of dark energy and dark matter) and to improve constraints on primordial non-Gaussianity.
This can be done following different approaches. One possibility is to study structure formation
using N-body simulations that include dynamical space-time
variables in the weak-field approximation \citep{Adamek:2013wja, Adamek:2014xba, Adamek:2015eda, Adamek:2016zes}, within a post-Friedmann framework \citep{Milillo:2015cva, Bruni:2013mua, Thomas:2015kua}, or by employing full numerical relativity \citep{Bentivegna:2016, Giblin-Mertens-Starkman-2016}.
Alternatively, one can correct a posteriori the results of Newtonian simulations to account for lightcone effects \citep{Chisari:2011iq}. This is feasible because, at linear order in the perturbations, the mathematical description of a pressureless fluid can be formulated so that
there is agreement between general relativity and its Newtonian approximation \citep{Haugg:2012ng, Rigopoulos:2013nda, Fidler:2015npa, Fidler:2016tir}
In this paper, we follow the latter approach to develop the LIGER (light cones using general relativity) method.
As illustrated in Fig. \ref{pic_diagram}, schematically, LIGER takes a Newtonian simulation as an input and,
after selecting an observer, outputs the distribution of galaxies in `comoving redshift space' (i.e. as it would be inferred by applying the background metric to the observed galaxy properties).
The algorithm combines
the original snapshots of the simulation at constant background time to produce the galaxy
distribution on the perturbed light cone.
This is achieved by using a coordinate transformation that includes local terms and contributions that are integrated along the line of sight.
Multiple efforts have been made in the literature to investigate the detectability of subtle relativistic effects from forthcoming survey data.
Generally, these studies are based on the Fisher-information matrix, use idealised survey characteristics and neglect systematics.
The ultimate test to discern which relativistic effects will be observable is to apply the very same estimators that are used for the data to the LIGER mocks.
This exciting perspective provides the main motivation for our work.
The numerical implementation of the LIGER method will be made publicly available in due course.
The paper is structured as follows. In Section 2, we introduce the LIGER method and describe its numerical implementation. In Section 3, we present two straightforward applications of our code. As an illustration of LIGER's functionality, we first re-analyse a result which has already been discussed in the literature, namely, the impact of magnification bias in the observed cross-correlation of galaxy samples at substantially different redshifts. Subsequently, we discuss the more challenging detection of Doppler terms in the galaxy angular power spectrum at low redshift.
Finally, in Section 4, we conclude.
Throughout, we adopt units in which the speed of light is one and define the space-time metric tensor to have
signature $(-,+,+,+)$. Greek indices indicate space-time components (i.e. run from 0 to 3) while Latin indices label spatial components (i.e. run
from 1 to 3). The Einstein summation convention is adopted.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth,bb=0 0 694 369,keepaspectratio=true]{./Pictures/Fig1.pdf}
\caption{Schematic diagram illustrating the sequence of main processing steps in the LIGER method. }
\label{pic_diagram}
\end{figure}
\section{The LIGER method} \subsection{Theory}
\subsubsection{Redshift-space distortions}
We observe galaxies as they are at the time in which their worldline intersects our past light cone.
The comoving location of a galaxy can be inferred from two basic observables: its position on the sky, ${\bf n}_{\rm s}$ (a unit vector defined in terms of two angles), and its redshift, $z$.
In fact, these data are sufficient to build three-dimensional maps of the galaxy distribution provided that we assume to live in an unperturbed FRW universe with a fixed set of cosmological parameters.
In reality, such a `redshift-space' map gives a distorted portrayal of the cosmic web due to the presence of inhomogeneities \citep{Sargent-Turner-1977}.
Galaxies are artificially shifted both in the radial and tangential directions due to their peculiar motions and the bending of the light they emit.
These effects are collectively known under the name of redshift-space distortions.
In mathematical terms, redshift-space is characterized by a set of coordinates that `flatten' our past light cone \citep[e.g.][]{Bertacca:2015}.
For instance, the null geodesic from an observed galaxy to us can be described in terms of the following conformal space-time coordinates:
\begin{equation}
x_{\rm s}^\mu=(\eta_{\rm s},\; {\bf x}_{\rm s})=(\eta_0- \chi_{\rm s}, \; \chi_{\rm s} \, {\bf n}_{\rm s})\;,
\end{equation}
where $\eta_0$ is the present-day value of conformal time (i.e. at observation), $\chi_{\rm s}$ denotes the comoving distance (from the observer) of events located along the geodesic in the unperturbed model universe and $n^i_{\rm s}=x_{\rm s}^i/ \chi_{\rm s}$.
The full distance to the galaxy corresponds to the observed redshift $z$, in compact notation $\chi_{\rm s}(z)$.
For a given photon path (see Fig.~\ref{fig:1}), we want to define a mapping from real to redshift space,
\begin{equation}
x_{\rm r}^\mu [\chi_{\rm r}(\chi_{\rm s})] = x_{\rm s}^\mu (\chi_{\rm s})+ \Delta x^\mu (\chi_{\rm s})\;,
\end{equation}
where
$x_{\rm r}^i$ denotes the actual comoving position located at distance $\chi_{\rm r}$ along the direction $n^i_{\rm r}=x_{\rm r}^i/\chi_{\rm r}$.
[In general, we use the subscripts `s' and `r' to distinguish redshift-space quantities from their real-space counterparts.]
Perturbing $x^\mu_{\rm r}$ around $x^\mu_{\rm s}$ and writing $\chi_{\rm r} = \chi_{\rm s}+ \delta \chi$, we obtain, at linear order,
\begin{eqnarray}
x_{\rm r}^\mu ( \chi_{\rm r}) &=& x_{\rm s}^\mu (\chi_{\rm r})+ \delta x^\mu (\chi_{\rm r}) \nonumber \\
&=& x_{\rm s}^\mu (\chi_{\rm s})+ \frac{\ud x_{\rm s}^\mu}{\ud\chi_{\rm s}} \delta \chi+\delta x^\mu (\chi_{\rm s})\;.
\end{eqnarray}
By using $\chi_{\rm s}$ as the affine parameter for the null geodesic, we write the total derivative along the past light cone as $\ud /\ud \chi_{\rm s}= - \p / \p \eta_{\rm s} + n^i_{\rm s} \p/\p x_{\rm s}^i$.
Since ${\ud x_{\rm s}^i}/{\ud\chi_{\rm s}}=n^i_{\rm s}$ [to zero order], linear redshift-space distortions can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{Deltat}
\Delta x^0(\chi_{\rm s})&=&-\delta\chi+\delta x^0(\chi_{\rm s}) \\
\label{Deltax}
\Delta x^i ( \chi_{\rm s}) &=& n^i_{\rm s} \delta \chi+ \delta x^i ( \chi_{\rm s}) \;.
\end{eqnarray}
The first term on the right-hand side of equation~(\ref{Deltax}) corresponds to the change in the affine parameter while the second one derives from the
perturbation of the photon path and has both tangential and radial components.
Note that the real-space distance to the galaxy does not coincide with $\chi_{\rm s}(z)$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=16 cm,bb=100 0 1200 580]{./Pictures/Fig2.pdf}
\caption{
Real- and redshift-space perspectives.
A galaxy with real-space position $x^i_{\rm r}$ (top left), located at distance $\chi_{\rm r}$ from the observer (bottom),
is assigned an apparent position $x^i_{\rm s}$ in redshift space (top right) at distance $\chi_{\rm s}$.
Since the photon path to the observer in real space is not straight, the observed position of the galaxy on the sky, ${\bf n}_{\rm s}$ does
not coincide with its actual one, ${\bf n}_{\rm r}$.
\label{fig:1}}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Perturbations of the past light cone}
In order to compute explicitly all the terms in equations~(\ref{Deltat}) and (\ref{Deltax}), we need to work out how metric perturbations alter null geodesics.
In what follows, we model the matter content of the universe as a collisionless fluid in the single-stream regime. This common assumption provides a suitable
approximation on the large scales we are interested in. We use the subscripts `e' and `o' to denote the fluid properties evaluated at the position of the light source (the galaxy) when the photons were emitted and at the location of the observer when the photons were received, respectively.
For linear scalar perturbations in the Poisson gauge\footnote{The restricted Poisson gauge containing only scalar perturbations is also known as the longitudinal or conformal Newtonian gauge.}, the space-time metric can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{New}
\ud s^2=a^2(\eta)\Big[-\big(1+2 \Psi\big)\ud \eta^2+\big(1-2 \Phi \big)\delta_{ij} \ud x_{\rm r}^i \ud x_{\rm r}^j\Big]\;,
\end{equation}
where $a$ denotes the scale factor of the expanding universe while $\Psi$ and $\Phi$ indicate the Bardeen potentials of the inhomogeneities.
In this framework, the redshift of a galaxy measured by an observer is
\begin{equation}
1+z= \frac{(u_\mu p^\mu)|_{\rm e}}{(u_\mu p^\mu)|_{\rm o}}\;,
\end{equation}
where $u^\mu$ denotes the four-velocity of the matter fluid (we assume there is no velocity bias) and $p^\mu$ is the photon four-momentum.
By perturbing the photon geodesic around the FRW solution, we derive expressions for
$\delta x^\mu$ and $\delta \chi$.
The final result for the galaxy shift is \citep[see also][]{Yoo:2008tj, Yoo:2009au, Bonvin:2011bg, Challinor:2011bk, Jeong:2011as}
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq_delta_los}
\delta \chi \!\!\!\!\!&=&\!\!\!\!\! - \left(\chi_{\rm s}+{1 \over \cH}\right) \left[\Psi_{\rm o}-\left(n_{\rm s}^i v_i\right)_{\rm o} \right]+{1 \over \cH} \left[\Psi_{\rm e}-\left(n_{\rm s}^i v_i\right)_{\rm e}\right] \nonumber \\
&&\!\!\!\!\!+\int_0^{\chi_{\rm s}} \left[2 \Psi +(\chi_{\rm s}- \chi) \p_0 \left(\Phi+ \Psi \right) \right]\nonumber \,\ud \chi\\
&&\!\!\!\!\!+{1 \over \cH}\int_0^{\chi_{\rm s}} \p_0 \left(\Phi+ \Psi \right)\,\ud \chi \;,
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq_delta_len}
\delta x^0\!\!\!\!\!&=&\!\!\!\!\!-\chi_{\rm s}\left[ \Psi_{\rm o}- \left(n_{\rm s}^i v_i\right)_{\rm o} \right]+ 2 \int_0^{\chi_{\rm s}} \Psi \,\ud \chi \nonumber \\
&&\!\!\!\!\!+ \int_0^{\chi_{\rm s}} \left(\chi_{\rm s} - \chi\right) \p_0 \left(\Phi+ \Psi \right)\,\ud \chi \;,\\
\delta x^i\!\!\!\!\!&=&\!\!\!\!\!-\left( v^i_{\rm o} + \Phi_{\rm o} n^i_{\rm s}\right) \chi_{\rm s} +2 n^i_{\rm s} \int_0^{\chi_{\rm s}} \Phi \,\ud \chi\nonumber \\
&&\!\!\!\!\! - \int_0^{\chi_{\rm s}} (\chi_{\rm s}-\chi) \delta^{ij} \p_j \left( \Phi + \Psi \right)\,\ud \chi \;,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\cH= \p_0 \ln a$ and $\chi_{\rm s}$ are evaluated at the observed redshift of the galaxy while $v^i$ is the peculiar velocity.
Here, local corrections express the Sachs-Wolfe and the Doppler effects. Those integrated along the line of sight derive from
gravitational lensing, the Shapiro time-delay and the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect.
\subsubsection{Magnification}
Metric perturbations also alter the solid angle under which galaxies are seen by distant observers thereby enhancing or decreasing their apparent flux.
In terms of the luminosity distance, $D_{\rm L}$, the magnification of a galaxy is defined as
\begin{equation}
{\mathcal M}=\left( \frac{D_{\rm L}}{\bar{D}_{\rm L}}\right)^{-2}\;,
\end{equation}
where $\bar{D}_{\rm L}$ denotes the luminosity distance in the background model universe evaluated at
the observed redshift of the galaxy.
At linear order in the perturbations, we can write
\citep[e.g.][]{Challinor:2011bk,Bertacca:2015}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:magnif}
{\mathcal M}\!\!\!\!\!&=&\!\!\!\!\!1-2\left(1-\frac{1}{{\mathcal H}\chi_{\rm s}}\right)\left[\Psi_{\rm o}-\left(n_{\rm s}^i v_i\right)_{\rm o}\right] \nonumber\\
&\,&\!\!\!\!\!+2\left(1-\frac{1}{{\mathcal H}\chi_{\rm s}}\right)\left[\int_0^{\chi_{\rm s}} \p_0(\Phi+\Psi) \,\ud \chi+\Psi_{\rm e}-\left(n^i_{\rm s}v_i\right)_{\rm e} \right]\nonumber\\
&\,&\!\!\!\!\!+2\Phi_{\rm e}-\frac{2}{\chi_{\rm s}}\int_0^{\chi_{\rm s}} (\Phi+\Psi)\,\ud \chi+2\kappa\;,\label{eq_magni}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\kappa=\frac{1}{2}\int_0^{\chi_s} \left(\chi_{\rm s}- \chi \right) \frac{\chi}{\chi_{\rm s}}\nabla_\perp^2 \left(\Phi+\Psi\right) \ud \chi
\end{eqnarray}
corresponds to the classical convergence and the differential operator $\nabla_\perp^2$ is defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
\nabla_\perp^2 =\nabla^2-\left(n^i_{\rm s} \p_i \right)^2-\frac{2}{\chi}n^i_{\rm s} \p_i\;.
\end{eqnarray}
Note that the magnification includes contributions from different physical effects.
We refer to the term proportional to $n^i_{\rm s}v_i$ as `Doppler lensing'.
In order to model statistical observables (e.g. correlation functions) on small-scales, it is acceptable to
replace the two-dimensional Laplacian $\nabla_\perp^2$ with the three-dimensional one $\nabla^2$, so that $\kappa$ can be expressed
in terms of the matter overdensity using the Poisson equation. In fact,
the effective lensing weight, $(\chi_{\rm s}- \chi)\,\chi/\chi_{\rm s}$, varies on scales comparable to the Hubble radius and the line-of-sight integral that defines $\kappa$ heavily suppresses the contribution of radial Fourier modes with smaller wavelengths \citep[e.g.][]{Kaiser1992}.
Although this approximation has been implemented to produce full-sky mock catalogues \citep[e.g.][]{Fosalbaetal2008,Fosalbaetal2015},
we do not use it since we want to study galaxy clustering at wide angular separations.
\subsubsection{Link with N-body simulations}
To evaluate $\delta x^\mu$, $\delta \chi$ and ${\cal M}$, we need to compute the gravitational potentials appearing in equation~(\ref{New}) as a function of space and time.
Since we want to apply our results to simulations, we need to derive the potentials starting from the particle distribution in the computer models.
This corresponds to using the matter density contrast in the synchronous comoving gauge, i.e. $\delta_{\rm sim}\equiv\delta_{\rm syn}$.
Fortunately, to linear order in the perturbations and for a pressureless fluid in a universe with $\Lambda$CDM background,
the source equation for $\Psi$ in the Poisson gauge can be re-written in terms of $\delta_{\rm syn}$
as the standard Poisson equation \citep[e.g.][]{Chisari:2011iq, Green-Wald2012}.
Therefore, the complete dictionary we use to translate from the simulations to the Poisson gauge is:
\begin{equation} \label{eq_poission}
\Phi=\Psi=\phi\;, \ \ \ \nabla^2 \phi=4 \pi G a^2 \bar\rho_{\rm m} \delta_{\rm sim}\;, \ {\rm and} \ v^i=v^i_{\rm sim}\;,
\end{equation}
where $G$ denotes Newton's gravitational constant and $\bar\rho_{\rm m} $ is the matter density in the FRW background.
\subsection{Light cones from simulations}
\label{sect_lightcones}
In this section we explain the numerical methods we use to implement the theory discussed above and build mock light cones starting from the output of a simulation.
We begin with the calculation of the gravitational potential. Following a standard procedure,
we use the particle distribution in each snapshot to compute the matter density contrast on a regular Cartesian grid with the cloud-in-cell method \citep[e.g.][]{HockneyEastwood1988}.
We then solve the Poisson equation using a fast Fourier transform and obtain $\phi({\bf x}_{\rm r},t)$ as well as its spatial derivatives (by spectral differentiation).
Partial time derivatives of the potential are computed with a finite-difference method that combines several consecutive snapshots at fixed comoving position ${\bf x}_{\rm r}$.
There are a few subtleties at play in the calculation of the galaxy shift and the magnification given in equations~(\ref{eq_delta_los}), (\ref{eq_delta_len}) and (\ref{eq_magni}).
All these quantities include local terms evaluated at a specific position and non-local parts that are expressed as integrals along the line of sight to the observer.
The integrals should be taken in redshift-space where the photon path is a straight line.
Since $|\phi|\ll 1$ and deflections are generally small, we take the integrals in real space which is correct to linear order in the perturbations as in the Born approximation in quantum mechanics.
We use the fast voxel traversal algorithm by \citet{Amanatides-Woo} to perform the integrals within the grid over which the gravitational
potential is evaluated. All functions appearing in the integrands are interpolated in time (here converted into the line-of-sight distance to make sure that everything is computed on the backward light cone of the observer) such that their first derivatives are continuous.
Note that the integration path starts at the observer and ends at a fixed redshift-space position which is unknown for all the simulated galaxies.
Although to linear accuracy we could use the real-space position of the galaxies, we implement the following procedure which is slightly more accurate (see also Fig.~\ref{pic_shift}).
(i) We evaluate all local terms in equations~(\ref{eq_delta_los}) and (\ref{eq_delta_len}) and shift the galaxies accordingly.
(ii) The non-local terms are estimated with integrals that run from the observer to the position of the galaxy shifted by the local terms.
(iii) An additional shift due to the non-local terms is imposed to obtain the final redshift-space position.
In principle, steps (ii) and (iii) could be iterated until numerical convergence is achieved.
However, this is not necessary in practice since the local terms generate much larger shifts than the non-local ones.
This is fortunate because the integration along the line of sight is by far the slowest element of the LIGER code.
Magnification is computed along the same lines \citep[similar line-of-sight integrations have been used by][ for weak-lensing studies]{WhiteHu2000,Kiesslingetal2011,Fosalbaetal2008,Fosalbaetal2015}.
Of course we do not shift all the galaxies at all times as this would significantly slow down the code and also be useless. We first identify the snapshots
within which a given galaxy would cross the backward light cone of the observer in the absence of metric perturbations.
We then calculate and apply the redshift-space displacements considering a few outputs surrounding this time.
Finally, we compute the intersection of the world line of the galaxy with the straight light cone of the observer in redshift space and we save this position and the corresponding magnification.
Each light cone identifies a sub-region in space-time corresponding to a three-dimensional ball in comoving redshift space.
Its radius is limited by the box size of the underlying simulation.
To avoid replications or spurious correlations due to the periodic boundary conditions applied in cosmological simulations, we limit the radius of the balls to one third of the box size.
This way each light cone covers nearly 15 per cent of the simulation volume and we can place five different observers from a single run avoiding intersections.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth,bb=100 0 1200 550,keepaspectratio=true]{./Pictures/Fig3.pdf}
\caption{Schematic summarising how galaxies (Section~\ref{sect_lightcones}) or N-body particles (Section~\ref{sect_galaxy_dist}) are shifted to build the light cones.
We first apply the correction due to local terms (dashed arrow) and then compute the shift produced by the non-local contributions (dotted arrow).
In runs with low mass resolution, each particle `contains' $w_{\rm g}$ galaxies.
The linear bias coefficient $b$ and $w_{\rm g}$ are calculated at the real-space position $x_{\rm r}^i$
while the magnification bias $Q$ is computed at the redshift-space position $x_{\rm s}^i$.
}
\label{pic_shift}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Light cones based on dark-matter-only simulations}\label{sect_galaxy_dist}
The LIGER method is general and can be used with all kinds of cosmological simulations.
Whenever galaxy positions and luminosities are available (from either a hydrodynamic simulation or a semi-analytic model based on an N-body run), it is straightforward to apply shifts and magnifications at their locations.
However, the transverse size of the light cones rapidly increases with redshift so that very large simulation boxes are required to cover
wide opening angles. In this case, running simulations with sufficient spatial and mass resolution to follow galaxy formation is computationally challenging.
For this reason, LIGER has the option to shift the dark-matter particles themselves and create the galaxy density field a posteriori.
The problematic step is to account for galaxy biasing.
We illustrate how our implementation works by reasoning in terms of
continuous densities.
To linear order in the perturbations, we can write the matter density contrast in redshift space as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq_delta_rsd}
\delta_{\rm s}=\delta_{\rm sim}+\delta_{\rm RSD}\;,
\end{eqnarray}
where we have conveniently collected the corrections
due to the metric distortions into the term \citep{Yoo:2008tj, Yoo:2009au, Bonvin:2011bg, Challinor:2011bk, Jeong:2011as}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{deltaRSD}
\delta_{\rm RSD}\!\!\!\!\!&=&\!\!\!\!\!-\left(\frac{\partial_0\cH}{\cH^2}+\frac{2}{\chi_{\rm s} \cH}\right)\delta \ln a +\Psi_{\rm e} -2\Phi_{\rm e}+\frac{(\p_0\Phi)_{\rm e}}{\cH}+3 \cH \phi_v \nonumber\\
&\,&\!\!\!\!\!-\frac{1}{\cH} \left[n^i_{\rm s}\p_i \left(n^j_{\rm s} v_j\right)\right]_{\rm e}
+\frac{2}{\chi_s} \int_0^{\chi_s} \left(\Phi+\Psi \right)\ud \chi -2\kappa\;,
\end{eqnarray}
in which $\phi_v$ is the linear velocity potential\footnote{This term originates because $\delta_{\rm sim}$ is defined in the synchronous comoving gauge while all the rest is set in the Poisson gauge.}
at the galaxy position (i.e. $v_i=\partial_i\phi_v$)
and the apparent redshift change $\delta \ln a=\delta z/(1+z)$ due to the perturbations is
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta \ln a = \Psi_o-(n_{\rm s}^i v_{i})_o - \Psi_{\rm e} + (n_{\rm s}^i v_i)_{\rm e}- \int_0^{\chi_s} \p_0\left(\Phi+\Psi \right) \ud \chi \; .
\end{eqnarray}
To the same accuracy, galaxy clustering in redshift space can be modelled
in terms of three redshift-dependent bias parameters, $b$, ${\cal Q}$ and ${\cal E}$, encoding information about different properties of the galaxy population under study, namely \citep{Challinor:2011bk, Jeong:2011as}
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta_{\rm g, s}=b\,\delta_{\rm sim}+{\cal Q}\,({\mathcal M}-1)+{\cal E}\,(\delta \ln a-\cH\phi_v)+\delta_{\rm RSD}\;.
\label{galaxydistortion}
\end{eqnarray}
The expression above assumes that the intrinsic perturbation in the galaxy number density is $\delta_{\rm g, r}=b\,\delta_{\rm sim}$
with $b$ the linear bias parameter.
It also considers that lensing magnification alters the observed number density of galaxies. This effect is quantified by the magnification-bias parameter
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal Q}=-\frac{\partial\ln \bar{n}_{\rm g}}{\partial\ln L}\Big|_{L=L_{\rm lim}},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\bar{n}_{\rm g}(>L)$ denotes the comoving number density of galaxies with luminosity larger than $L$
and the derivative is evaluated at the (redshift-dependent) limiting luminosity of the survey.\footnote{For
simplicity, we assume that the list of targets for spectroscopic observations is flux limited. In case also a size cut
is applied, another redshift-dependent function should be added to ${\cal Q}$ since gravitational lensing also alters the size of galaxy images \citep{Schmidtetal2009}.}
Finally, equation (\ref{galaxydistortion}) takes into account that the comoving number density of galaxies in the sample might change with redshift. This phenomenon is described by the `evolutionary bias' parameter
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal E}=-\frac{\partial \ln \bar{n}_{\rm g}}{\partial \ln (1+z)}\;.
\end{eqnarray}
Our goal is to connect $\delta_{\rm g, s}$ with the particle density in the N-body simulations.
For simplicity, we assume that $|{\cal H}\phi_v|\ll|\delta\ln a|$ and neglect the velocity potential which could influence galaxy clustering only on scales comparable with the Hubble radius.
Then equations (\ref{eq_delta_rsd}) and (\ref{galaxydistortion}) give
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta_{\rm g, s}=(b-1)\delta_{\rm sim}+\delta_{\rm s}+{\cal E}\,\delta \ln a+{\cal Q}\,({\mathcal M}-1)\;,
\label{emphdeltag}
\end{eqnarray}
which can be used to derive the local galaxy number density $n_{\rm g,s}=\bar{n}_{\rm g}\,(1+\delta_{\rm g,s})$.
By expressing the matter fields in terms of the density of N-body particles, i.e.
$\delta_{\rm sim}+1={n_{\rm sim,r}}/{\bar{n}_{\rm sim}}$ and $\delta_{\rm s}+1={n_{\rm sim,s}}/{\bar{n}_{\rm sim}}$, we can write
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq_numbercount1}
n_{\rm g,s}\!\!\!\!\!&=&\!\!\!\!\!(b-1)\left(w_{\rm g}n_{\rm sim,r}-\bar{n}_{\rm g}\right)+w_{\rm g}n_{\rm sim,s}+\bar{n}_{\rm g}{\cal E}\,\delta \ln a\nonumber\\
&&\!\!\!\!\!+\bar{n}_{\rm g}{\cal Q}({\cal M}-1),
\end{eqnarray}
where $w_{\rm g}=\bar{n}_{\rm g}/\bar{n}_{\rm sim}$ denotes the mean number of galaxies per simulation particle at a given redshift.
The products $w_{\rm g}n_{\rm sim,r}$ and $w_{\rm g}n_{\rm sim,s}$ rescale the unbiased density fluctuations in the simulations to the galaxy mean density.
The magnification term in equation~(\ref{eq_numbercount1}) reflects the relative change of the galaxy counts per particle which is proportional to $w_{\cal Q}={\cal M}^{\cal Q}$.
For $|{\cal M}-1|\ll1$, we can thus write $w_{\rm g}w_{\cal Q}n_{\rm sim,s}=w_{\rm g}[{\cal Q}({\cal M}-1)+1]n_{\rm sim,s}$, so that
\begin{eqnarray}
n_{\rm g,s}\!\!\!\!\!&=&\!\!\!\!\!(b-1)\left(w_{\rm g}n_{\rm sim,r}-\bar{n}_{\rm g}\right)+w_{\rm g}w_{\cal Q}n_{\rm sim,s}+\bar{n}_{\rm g}{\cal E}\,\delta \ln a\,.
\end{eqnarray}
By using the definition of ${\cal E}$ and linearising, $w_{\rm g}(z)w_{\cal Q}(\hat{\bf n}_{\rm s},z)n_{\rm sim,s}(\hat{\bf n}_{\rm s},z)+\bar{n}_{\rm g}(z){\cal E}\,\delta \ln a$ coincides with $w_{\rm g}(\bar{z})w_{\cal Q}(\hat{\bf n}_{\rm s},z)n_{\rm sim, s}(\hat{\bf n}_{\rm s},\bar{z})$ where $\bar{z}=z-\delta z$ is the redshift in absence of perturbations
(note that to first order it is equivalent to evaluate $w_{\cal Q}$ at $z$ or $\bar{z}$).
Eventually, making explicit the arguments of all functions, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
n_{\rm g, s}(\hat{\bf n}_{\rm s},z)\!\!\!\!\!&=&\!\!\!\!\![b(\bar{z})-1]\left[w_{\rm g}(\bar{z})\,n_{\rm sim, r}(\hat{\bf n}_{\rm r},\bar{z})-\bar{n}_{\rm g}(z)\right]\nonumber\\
&\,&\!\!\!\!\!+w_{\rm g}(\bar{z})w_{\cal Q}(\hat{\bf n}_{\rm s},z)\,n_{\rm sim, s}(\hat{\bf n}_{\rm s},\bar{z})\,.
\label{eq_numberdens}
\end{eqnarray}
We use this expression to compute $n_{\rm g, s}$ from the simulations (see Fig.~\ref{pic_shift} for a schematic representation).
In practice, we weigh the shifted and unshifted dark-matter particles according to equation~(\ref{eq_numberdens}).
Once the light cone for the matter has been constructed, it is very fast to build the galaxy mocks for many different galaxy populations.
This corresponds to changing the functions $w_{\rm g}(z)$, $b(z)$ and ${\cal Q}(z)$.
\subsubsection{Doppler terms}
Isolating the terms proportional to the velocity field in the right-hand side of equation (\ref{galaxydistortion}) we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta_{\rm g, v}=-\frac{1}{\cal H} \left(\frac{\partial n_{\rm s}^iv_i}{\partial \chi_{\rm s}}\right)_{\rm e}-
\frac{ \alpha(\chi_{\rm s})}{\cH \chi_{\rm s}}
\left[{\left(n_{\rm s}^iv_i\right)_{\rm e}-\left(n_{\rm s}^iv_i\right)_{\rm o}}\right] \;,
\label{hamilton}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\partial/\partial\chi_{\rm s}=n^i\partial_i$,
\begin{equation}
\alpha(\chi_{\rm s})=\gamma_0+\gamma_1\, \cal H\chi_{\rm s}
\end{equation}
and, assuming a flat $\Lambda$CDM universe,
\begin{equation}
\label{alphaterms}
\gamma_0=2(1-{\cal Q})\ \ \ \ \ {\rm and} \ \ \ \ \
\gamma_1=1-\frac{3}{2} \Omega_{\rm m}(z)-{\cal E}+ 2 {\cal Q}\;.
\end{equation}
Equation (\ref{hamilton}) coincides with the seminal result for the linear redshift-space distortions derived by \citet{Kaiser:1987qv}.
In the classical literature, the function $\alpha$ is often written as $\alpha=2+{\partial \ln \bar{n}_{\rm g}}/{\partial \ln \chi_{\rm s}}$
\citep{Kaiser:1987qv, Zaroubi-Hoffman1996,1998HamiltonReview}.
Taking into account that we observe galaxies on our past light-cone reveals that several physical effects influence $\alpha$
\citep[see also][]{McDonald2009, Yoo2009, Bertacca:2012tp, Raccanelli:2016avd}.
Equations (\ref{alphaterms}), get contributions from
geometric distortions, redshift evolution (or redshift-dependent selection effects),
Doppler magnification and cosmic acceleration.
Following a standard practice in cosmology, we label the expression proportional to $\alpha$
in equation (\ref{hamilton}) with the collective name of Doppler terms.
Their contribution is usually neglected in clustering studies.
In fact, for an ideal galaxy sample with $\alpha\simeq 2$ and if the depth of a galaxy redshift survey is much larger than the comoving wavelength of interest, the Doppler induced $\delta_{\rm g,v}$ is heavily suppressed
(due to the $\chi_{\rm s}^{-1}$ scaling) with respect to the signal generated by the radial velocity gradient which is always comparable to density perturbations \citep{Kaiser:1987qv}.
This reasoning relies upon the distant-observer approximation.
However, it has been shown that the Doppler corrections can alter the galaxy autocorrelation function at large angular separations in a significant way
\citep{Papai:2008bd, Raccanelli:2010hk}. In this case, the two terms on the right-hand side of
equation (\ref{hamilton}) can be of comparable sizes. Moreover, $Q$ and ${\cal E}$ can drive $\alpha$ sensibly away from 2 and thus enhance
the chance of detecting the Doppler terms from observational data. We will return to this issue in Section \ref{sect_lowred}.
\section{Examples}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,bb=0 0 1032 1048,keepaspectratio=true]{./Pictures/Fig4.png}
\caption{Wedge plots extracted from a sample like cone.
The top images show $b\delta_{\rm sim}$, $\delta_{\rm g,s}$, and $b\delta_{\rm sim}+\delta_{\rm g,v}$.
In all cases, the maps show the galaxy density contrast projected onto the plane of the page within a slice of
5 arcmin thickness. The observer is located at the vertex of the wedge and the labels indicate redshift and comoving distance.
The bottom panels highlight the differences between the various density fields (note the symmetric log-scale).}
\label{pic_stripe}
\end{figure*}
We present two sample applications of LIGER:
first, we estimate the importance of magnification bias in an Euclid-like survey and
then we investigate the detectability of Doppler terms in a low-redshift galaxy catalogue based on the concept of the Square Kilometre Array (SKA).
To begin with, we introduce the numerical simulations and the statistical methods we use.
We then describe the specifications for the surveys and discuss our results in
Sections~\ref{sect_euclidlike} and \ref{sect_lowred}.
\subsection{N-body simulations}
\label{Nbodysims}
We run a large number of cosmological N-body simulations using the L-PICOLA code \citep{2015HowlettLPicola} and subsequently apply LIGER to their outputs.
L-PICOLA is an implementation of the COLA method \citep{2013TassevCola} in which the large-scale dynamics is solved using second-order Lagrangian perturbation theory while a particle-mesh algorithm is used for the
small scales.
This technique is orders of magnitude faster than standard N-body codes and accurately simulates
the clustering of matter on large scales.
This makes it an ideal tool to build large mock catalogues for studying galaxy clustering although
it does not resolve the internal dynamics of dark-matter haloes.
Our simulations include $1024^3$ particles in a periodic cube with side length $L$.
In order to cover the relevant volumes, we use very large values of $L$, namely $12 h^{-1}$ Gpc for our first application and $5 h^{-1}$ Gpc for the second one.
This way we obtain 165 light cones extending to redshift 2.3 for the Euclid-like mocks and
125 light cones extending to redshift 0.6 for the more local mocks (an example is shown in Fig.~\ref{pic_stripe}).
In all cases, the gravitational potential in LIGER is evaluated on a grid with $512^3$ cells.
It is worth stressing that LIGER is completely general and can be applied to the output of any N-body code.
Here we use L-PICOLA because it is ideal for our purposes.
Note that we do not make use of the built-in feature to build light cones on the fly implemented in L-PICOLA.
However LIGER could be merged with it in the future.
\subsection{Angular power spectra}
Our examples focus on large-scale galaxy clustering that we quantify in terms of the angular power spectrum.
We first divide our mock light cones into multiple redshift bins and measure the projected galaxy number density contrast
on the sky, $\sigma_{\rm g}^{(i)}(\btheta)$, for each of them (labelled by the index $i$).
We then decompose $\sigma_{\rm g}^{(i)}(\btheta)$ in spherical harmonics, $\sigma_{\rm g}^{(i)}(\btheta)=a_{lm}^{(i)}\, Y_{lm}(\btheta)$, with
\begin{equation}
a_{lm}^{(i)}=\int{d}^2\btheta\, \sigma_{g}^{(i)}(\btheta)\,Y_{lm}^\ast(\btheta)\;,
\end{equation}
and measure the angular auto- and cross-spectra between all redshift bins using
\begin{equation}
C_{l}^{(ij)}=\frac{1}{2l+1}{\sum_{m=-l}^{l} a_{lm}^{(i)}\,a_{lm}^{(j)\ast}}\;.
\end{equation}
In practice, we use the Healpix algorithm \citep{2005GorskiHealpix} to build digitized maps of $\sigma_{\rm g}^{(i)}(\btheta)$ from which we calculate the power spectra.
In all cases, we make sure that the pixel size does not affect our results in the range of scales of interest.
The galaxy density in a pixel is computed from the distribution of the N-body particles as described in Section~\ref{sect_galaxy_dist}.
Since our particles are rather massive ($1.2\times10^{14}\,h^{-1}M_\odot$ for the $12\,h^{-1}$ Gpc boxes and
$8.8\times10^{13}\,h^{-1}M_\odot$ for the $5\,h^{-1}$ Gpc ones),
each of them `contains' multiple galaxies (i.e. $w_{\rm g}\sim 10$).
This is unavoidable given the extremely large volumes covered by our simulations and the obvious limitations in computing time and memory usage.
Although the resulting overdensity field has increased shot noise with respect to the actual galaxy distribution,
our statistical analysis is not influenced by it. In fact, we never attempt to subtract shot noise from the power spectra as our study is based on the comparison
of different sets of mock catalogues.
Even more importantly, in all cases, shot noise is by far subdominant with respect to the sample and cosmic variance of the clustering signal we are interested in (note that
our main results are based on the analysis of cross statistics between galaxy samples at different redshift).
We also take into account that most survey geometries do not cover the full sky and exclude wide regions surrounding the galactic plane.
In order to simulate a realistic setting, we mask an appropriate amount of the sky around the equator of the observer and consider two distinct regions
around the poles covering a fraction $f_{\rm sky}$ of the celestial sphere.
Spherical harmonics are not orthogonal over finite solid angles and
the pseudo power spectrum $\tilde{C}_{l}^{(ij)}$ measured from the cut sky does not coincide with $\hat{C}_{l}^{(ij)}$ \citep{Peebles1973,Wandeltetal2001}.
We use the standard method by \citet{2002Hivon} to construct an unbiased estimate of the full-sky spectra $\hat{C}_{l}^{(ij)}$ which is obtained multiplying
$\tilde{C}_{l}^{(ij)}$ by the inverse of a mode-mode coupling matrix that depends on the survey mask.
\subsection{Statistical analysis}\label{sect_significance}
Our sample applications aim at quantifying the detectability of some specific redshift-space effects from measurements of two-point statistics.
We assume that we can perfectly model the different contributions to the clustering signal and check whether including or excluding some
of them improves or worsen the fit to the mock data including the full physics.
In particular, we proceed as follows.
We isolate a particular effect (say, e.g., magnification bias) and denote its expected partial contribution to the model galaxy power spectrum as $C_l^{\rm (A)}$ so that
its complementary part is $C_l^{\rm (B)}=C_l-C_l^{\rm (A)}$ (here the superscripts $(ij)$ indicating the redshift bins are understood to simplify notation).
We then fit the power spectra extracted from our mock catalogues with the model
$M_l=\epsilon C_l^{\rm (A)}+C_l^{\rm (B)}=C_l+(\epsilon-1)C_l^{\rm (A)}$ where the coefficient $\epsilon$
can only assume the values zero or one. The question we want to address is to what statistical significance the data favour $\epsilon=1$, i.e.
how necessary it is to add $C_l^{\rm (A)}$ to the model in order to fit the data $\hat{C}_l$ .
All this boils down to comparing the quality of the fit obtained using $\epsilon=0$ and $\epsilon=1$.
This exercise can be performed following different statistical procedures which give very similar results.
\subsubsection{Frequentist approach: simple hypotheses (SH)}\label{sect_significance_simple}
We want to test the null hypothesis $H_0:\epsilon=0$ against the alternative hypothesis $H_1:\epsilon=1$.
Let ${\cal L}_0$ and ${\cal L}_1$ denote the likelihood of the data under $H_0$ and $H_1$, respectively.
Based on the Neyman-Pearson lemma, the likelihood-ratio statistic $\lambda={\cal L}_0/{\cal L}_1$
provides the most powerful test for two simple hypotheses.
If the data do not support $H_0$, then the likelihood ratio should be small.
Thus, we reject the null hypothesis with confidence level $\tau$,
if $\lambda\leq \omega$, where $\omega$ is a constant such that the probability $P(\lambda\leq \omega| H_0)=\tau$.
In order to determine $\tau$ it is thus necessary to determine the probability distribution of the test statistic under $H_0$.
Working with the log-likelihood $\chi^2=-2 \ln {\cal L}$, the rejection condition becomes $\Delta \chi^2=\chi_1^2-\chi_0^2>\ln \omega$.
Assuming Gaussian errors for the angular power spectrum with covariance matrix $\Sigma_{lm}=\langle \hat{C}_l \hat{C}_m\rangle-
\langle \hat{C}_l\rangle \langle \hat{C}_m\rangle$,
we find that, under $H_0$, $\Delta \chi^2$ follows a Gaussian distribution with
mean
\begin{equation}
\mu=C_l^{\rm (A)} \Sigma^{-1}_{lm} C_m^{\rm (A)}
\end{equation}
and variance $4\mu$ (see Appendix \ref{Appendix}).
Therefore, we reject $H_0$ at the 95 per cent confidence level if $\Delta \chi^2>\mu+3.29\sqrt{\mu}$.
The coefficient 3.29 should be replaced with 4.652 to get a 99 per cent confidence level.
A formal $5\sigma$ rejection is obtained for $\Delta \chi^2>\mu+10\sqrt{\mu}$.
It is worth noticing that,
if the covariance matrix of the measurements does not depend on $\epsilon$, then the expected value of $\lambda$ under $H_1$ is
$E(\lambda | H_1)=-E(\lambda | H_0)=-\mu$.
Therefore, the mean values $E(\lambda | H_1)$ and $E(\lambda | H_0)$ will be separated by more than ${\cal N}$ standard deviations of the $\lambda$ distribution
only if $\sqrt{\mu}>{\cal N}$. This is why $\sqrt{\mu}$ is often denoted as the signal-to-noise ratio, $S/N$, of $C_l^{\rm (A)}$.
On the other hand, if the covariance depends on $\epsilon$, then $E(\lambda | H_1)\neq-E(\lambda | H_0)$ and the dispersions around the mean of $\lambda$ under $H_0$ and $H_1$ will be different (see Appendix \ref{Appendix}).
\subsubsection{Frequentist approach: composite hypothesis (CH)}
We also consider a generalized likelihood-ratio test with a compound alternative hypothesis.
In this case we contrast the null hypothesis $H_0:\epsilon=0$ with $H_1:\epsilon \neq 0$.
Let ${\cal L}_{\rm max}$ be the maximum value of the likelihood of the data when $\epsilon$ is varied (between 0 and 1)
and ${\cal L}_0$ the corresponding likelihood under the null hypothesis.
We form the ratio $\lambda={\cal L}_0/{\cal L}_{\rm max}$ which is always between 0 and 1.
We assess the statistical significance of the test by comparing $\Delta \chi^2=-2 \ln \lambda$ to the chi-square distribution with one degree of freedom
(as we only tuned one parameter to determine ${\cal L}_{\rm max}$). Basically we convert $\Delta \chi^2$ into the corresponding percentile of the chi-square distribution. This is the confidence level at which the null hypothesis can be rejected.
In this case, 95 (99) per cent confidence corresponds to a critical value of $\Delta \chi^2=3.84$ (6.64).
\subsubsection{Fisher information}
An alternative approach consists of
quantifying the Fisher information that the angular power spectrum carries about $\epsilon$ (which, in this case, is assumed to be a real number).
Assuming Gaussian errors, we obtain that the Fisher `matrix' for $\epsilon$ is
\begin{equation}
F=\partial_\epsilon M_l\, \Sigma^{-1}_{lm} \,\partial_\epsilon M_m=C_l^{\rm (A)} \Sigma^{-1}_{lm} C_m^{\rm (A)}
\equiv \mu
\end{equation}
\citep[we adopt the `field' perspective as in][]{Carron2013}.
It follows from the Cram\`er-Rao inequality that $\mu^{-1/2}$ gives a lower bound for the expected uncertainty on $\epsilon$
(i.e. the mean curvature of the likelihood function ${\cal L}(\epsilon)$ at its peak).
Therefore, $\sqrt{\mu}$ corresponds to the signal-to-noise ratio with which $\epsilon$ can be measured.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth,bb=0 0 694 719,keepaspectratio=true]{./Pictures/Fig5.eps}
\caption{Expected characteristics of the Euclid (solid) and SKA2 redshift surveys. In the latter case we consider two flux sensitivities: 23 (dashed) and $60\,\mu{\rm Jy}$ (dotted).
The mean galaxy number counts per square-degree and redshift (top),
the evolutionary bias (middle), and the linear and magnification bias parameters (bottom) are shown as a function of redshift.}
\label{Fig:surveydata}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth,bb=0 0 630 537,keepaspectratio=true]{./Pictures/Fig6a.eps}
\hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth,bb=0 0 634 537,keepaspectratio=true]{./Pictures/Fig6b.eps}
\caption{Angular power spectra for the galaxy distribution in a Euclid-like survey split into four equally populated redshift bins.
The left-hand panel refers to the auto-spectrum of the highest-redshift bin while the right-hand panel shows the cross-spectrum between the lowest-and the highest-redshift bins.
The blue curves show the signal averaged over 165 mock catalogues that include relativistic effects to linear order in the perturbations (GR).
The shaded regions surrounding them indicate the standard deviation of the measurements for full-sky (light blue) and Euclid-like (cross pattern) mocks.
The red curves are obtained considering only the redshift-space distortions generated by the Kaiser and Doppler effects (KD) but ${\cal M}=1$.
The yellow ones (which basically coincide with the blue ones) also consider magnification bias due to weak gravitational lensing.
All spectra are averaged in bandpowers with $\Delta l=20$.
The bottom panels highlight the relative difference of the KD and kKD models with respect to the GR signal.}
\label{pic_angular_power}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Bayesian approach (BA)}
Assuming a flat prior for $\epsilon$, the posterior probabilities for $\epsilon=0$ and $\epsilon=1$ are
$P_0=\frac{{\cal L}_0}{{\cal L}_0+{\cal L}_1}$ and
$P_1=\frac{{\cal L}_1}{{\cal L}_0+{\cal L}_1}$,
respectively.
The Bayes factor, $K=P_0/P_1$, thus corresponds to the likelihood ratio ${\cal L}_0/{\cal L}_1$.
According to the Jeffrey scale, there is strong (decisive) evidence against $H_0$ if $K>10$ (100) which gives $\Delta \chi^2>4.605$ (9.21).
Using the alternative scale by Kass and Raftery gives very strong evidence for $\Delta \chi^2>10$.
\subsubsection{Likelihood estimation}
All the statistical methods listed above require the calculation of the likelihood function for $\epsilon$ in each mock realisation.
To do this, we need a model and the covariance matrix for the power spectra (we assume Gaussian measurement errors).
We build an `exact' and unbiased model by averaging the angular power spectra obtained for all our mock light cones.
Since there are no particularly deviant realizations, the average spectra are smooth.
In parallel, we use the maximum-likelihood estimator to get a first approximation for the covariance matrix, $\hat{\Sigma}_{lm}$.
It is well known that the precision matrix obtained by inverting $\hat{\Sigma}_{lm}$ is not very accurate.
Although we make sure to consider enough mock skies so that the covariance matrix of our data vector is invertible, it still contains considerable noise.
We thus use the shrinkage method \citep{CovShrinking2005} to reduce the noise in $\hat{\Sigma}_{lm}$.
As a target we use a diagonal matrix which is always compatible with our estimates.
\subsection{Magnification bias in a Euclid-like survey}\label{sect_euclidlike}
As a simple application of the LIGER method, we discuss the detectability of magnification bias in a Euclid-like survey.
Related work has been presented by \citet{DiDioetal2014} and \citet{Montanari:2015rga}. These authors focused on the Fisher information matrix as a forecasting tool,
while we base our study on the statistical analysis of a large number of mock catalogues.
\subsubsection{Euclid spectroscopic sample}
Euclid is a medium-class mission of the European Space Agency planned for launch in 2020.
It will map the distribution of star-forming galaxies through their redshifted H$\alpha$ emission
in the regions with galactic latitude larger than 30 degrees ($f_{\rm sky}=0.36$).
Low-resolution spectroscopy in the near infrared will be used to measure galaxy redshifts in the range $0.7<z<2.0$.
The specifics of the Euclid redshift survey depend on the poorly known properties of emission-line galaxies at moderate redshifts.
In order to calculate the redshift distribution of the galaxies as well as $Q(z)$ and ${\cal E}(z)$ we use
the redshift-dependent luminosity function by \citet[][model two]{Pozzettietal2016} and assume a limiting line flux of $3.0\times 10^{-16}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$.
Further, we use the linear fit for the galaxy bias $b(z)$ given in \cite{Pozzettietal2016}.
Our results are summarised in Fig.~\ref{Fig:surveydata}.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.945\textwidth,bb=0 0 1310 501,keepaspectratio=true]{./Pictures/Fig7.eps}
\caption{In order to explain the origin of the clustering signal, we consider two sets of Euclid-like mock catalogues (each one containing the same 165 skies) in which we arbitrarily switch on and off some effects.
In the first group, redshift-space distortions are only generated by galaxy radial peculiar velocities (KD) whereas the second suite includes general-relativistic effects to linear order in the perturbations (GR).
We fit the angular power spectra $C_l^{(ij)}$ extracted from each mock catalogue with two models that have been obtained averaging the clustering signal within each series of catalogues.
We then compute the change in $\chi^2$ for every sample.
In the left-hand panel, we compare the histogram of $P(\Delta\chi^2|{\rm GR})$ (on the left) versus $P(\Delta\chi^2|{\rm KD})$ (on the right).
The fact that the histograms are widely separated and do not overlap implies that an Euclid-like survey will clearly detect redshift-space distortions that are not included in the KD model..
This is quantified in the right-hand panel where we plot the fraction $F(>x)$ of the GR mocks within which the KD model is rejected at a confidence level higher than $x$ using different statistical tests (for further details see Section~\ref{sect_significance}).}
\label{pic_deltachi2_euclid}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.945\textwidth,bb=0 0 1296 501,keepaspectratio=true]{./Pictures/Fig8.eps}
\caption{The same as Fig.~\ref{pic_deltachi2_euclid}, but for the $\kappa$KD model, i.e. including the effect of the convergence.
For the CML test, 28 per cent of the GR mocks have $\Delta\chi^2>0$ and therefore favour the $\kappa$KD model.}
\label{pic_deltachi2_euclid_kkd}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Angular power spectra}
We split each of the 165 Euclid mocks into four redshift bins (with boundaries $0.7, 0.86, 1.06, 1.35, 2.0$) that on average contain the same number of galaxies ($\sim1.6\times 10^7$).
We then compute the auto- and cross-power spectra among all bins. To reduce noise we do not resolve individual multipoles and use ten bandpowers with $\Delta l=20$.
Fig.~\ref{pic_angular_power} shows $C_l^{(44)}$ (left-hand panel) and $C_l^{(14)}$ (right-hand panel), where the indices 1 and 4 indicate the lowest
and highest redshift bin, respectively.
The blue curves correspond to the mean power spectra extracted from the mock catalogues that include all redshift-space effects (hereafter GR).
Note that the auto-spectrum is more than ten times larger than the cross-spectrum.
The shaded regions indicate
the standard deviation of the spectra over the 165 realisations in the Euclid-like (cross pattern) and in the full-sky mocks (light blue).
It is interesting to analyse the different contributions to the spectra. The most commonly considered source of redshift-space distortions is
the so-called Kaiser effect due to the gradient of the galaxy radial peculiar velocities, i.e. the first term on the right-hand side in equation (\ref{hamilton}).
In our approach, this correction derives from the $(n_{\rm s}^iv_i)_{\rm e}$ terms in the particle shift and is always mixed with the Doppler contribution.
In order to evaluate the relative importance of the velocity-induced shift,
we build a new set of Euclid mock catalogues (based on the same N-body simulations as the GR ones)
in which we replace equations (\ref{eq_delta_los}), (\ref{eq_delta_len}) and (\ref{eq:magnif}) with
$\delta \chi=-(n_{\rm s}^iv_i)_{\rm e}/\cH$, $\delta x^i=0$ and ${\cal M}=1$, respectively
(this is the standard way to implement redshift-space distortions in simulations and omits the terms proportional to ${\cal Q}$ in $\alpha$).
We dub these light cones KD, a short for `Kaiser and Doppler'.
The red curves in Fig.~\ref{pic_angular_power} show the mean clustering signal extracted from the KD mocks (which from now on we refer to as the KD model for the auto- and cross-spectra).
The lack of power with respect to the GR results is evident: $C_l^{(44)}$ is underestimated by $\sim 3$ per cent and $C_l^{(14)}$ oscillates around zero.
In the left-hand panel of Fig. ~\ref{pic_deltachi2_euclid}, we demonstrate that these differences are highly significant. The histogram on the left-hand side displays the distribution
of $\Delta \chi^2=\chi^2_{\rm GR}-\chi^2_{\rm KD}$ obtained fitting all the $C_l^{(ij)}$ from the 165 GR mocks with the GR and the KD models, respectively. Similarly, the histogram on the right-hand side
shows the corresponding distribution for the KD mocks.
Based on the fact that the histograms are well separated, we conclude that an Euclid-like survey should be able to
detect the signature of redshift-space distortions that are not included in the KD model.
To better quantify how inaccurately the KD model fits the mock GR data, we
apply the statistical tests we have introduced in Section~\ref{sect_significance}.
The cumulative distribution over the 165 GR mocks of the significance with which the KD model is rejected is shown in the right-hand panel of Fig.~\ref{pic_deltachi2_euclid}.
Typically the data disfavour the simpler model with 8$\sigma$ confidence or a Bayes factor of $10^{13}$.
The precise statistical significance of this result is very sensitive to the assumed ${\cal Q}(z)$.
For instance, it increases to 14$\sigma$ if we use model 3 from \cite{Pozzettietal2016}.
This result is not surprising. It is well known that weak gravitational lensing alters the observed clustering signal in deep magnitude-limited surveys \citep{Turner1980}.
The influence of lensing is twofold:
(i) the actual magnitude limit of the survey fluctuates on the sky and with redshift;
(ii) the surface density of galaxies on the sky (and thus their volumetric density in redshift space) is changed.
The last two terms in equation (\ref{deltaRSD})
and the $Q$-dependent term in equation
(\ref{galaxydistortion}) summarise the net effect on the galaxy overdensity field.
Following some early detections \citep{Bartelmann-Schneider-1994, Norman-Williams-2000},
the weak-lensing effect on clustering has been measured with high statistical significance ($8\sigma$) by cross correlating samples of distant quasars and background galaxies in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey \citep{Scrantonetal2005}.
Given this premise, we build a third set of mock light cones (labelled $\kappa$KD) in which we account for the redshift-space distortions due to both the peculiar velocities and weak lensing
assuming that the convergence is the only source of magnification, i.e. ${\cal M}= 1+2\kappa$. To account for both magnification bias and the volume corrections due
to lensing, we simply weigh the N-body particles proportionally to $[{\cal M}(\hat{\bf n}_{\rm s},z)]^{{\cal Q}(z)-1}$ (instead of the standard $[{\cal M}(\hat{\bf n}_{\rm s},z)]^{{\cal Q}(z)}$) and use the same shifts as in the KD mocks.\footnote{
The additional ${\cal M}^{-1}$ results from a volume distortion due to lensing.
To test the consistency of our code, we evaluate this effect in two ways.
In the GR mocks the change of volume is realized by the particle shift.
Alternatively, we weigh particles proportionally to ${\cal M}^{-1}$ in the KD mocks.
We find the same result.}
The resulting spectra (yellow lines in Fig.~\ref{pic_angular_power} which are barely distinguishable by eye from the blue ones) provide
an excellent fit to the $C_l^{(ij)}$ derived from the GR mocks.
This suggests that the measurable differences between the full signal and the KD model are due to gravitational-lensing convergence.
In order to make a quantitative analysis and investigate whether other (more subtle and interesting) light-cone effects (e.g. Doppler lensing and potential terms) might be detectable with a Euclid-like survey, we once again resort to statistics.
Fig.~\ref{pic_deltachi2_euclid_kkd} shows that,
in almost all mock GR realizations, the null hypothesis that the data are generated under the $\kappa$KD model cannot be rejected to any meaningful confidence level.
Although only few of the skies presents deviations larger than $3\sigma$, Fig.~\ref{pic_deltachi2_euclid_kkd} indicates that the GR mocks contain an additional signal (most likely due to Doppler lensing) which is however comparable than the noise.
We thus conclude that no additional sources of redshift-space distortions beyond the Kaiser effect, Doppler contributions and magnification bias can be detected from the angular clustering of all galaxies with spectroscopic redshifts in a Euclid-like survey divided in four equally-populated redshift bins.
This, of course, does not prevent the development of dedicated probes to isolate additional contributions, in particular combining photometric and spectroscopic data to
define multiple tracers of the large-scale structure along the lines of the forthcoming discussion in Section \ref{sect_lowred}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.465\textwidth,bb=0 0 604 500,keepaspectratio=true]{./Pictures/Fig9.pdf}
\caption{The average RMS statistical error of $\hat{C}_l^{(ij)}$ over the 165 Euclid mocks and 10 angular power spectra is plotted as a function of the covered sky fraction
(all curves are normalized to unity for $f_{\rm sky}=1$).
The thick dashed and solid lines refer to two multipole bins centred at $l=30$ and $l=150$, respectively.
The shaded areas highlight the corresponding uncertainty obtained bootstrapping the mock light cones.
The black curve shows the scaling $\propto f_{\rm sky}^{-1/2}$ expected in the Gaussian approximation.
The vertical grey line indicates the planned sky coverage of the Euclid redshift survey.}
\label{pic_euclid_error}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Estimating covariances with LIGER}
Mock catalogues provide a direct way to estimate the covariance matrix of observables and test the range of validity of idealised theoretical models for the statistical errors and their
correlations.
The covariance matrix of the power spectrum on large scales is often described in terms of the Gaussian approximation,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq_covgaus}
\Sigma_{lm}^{(ik)(jh)}=\delta_{lm}\,\frac{C_{\rm l}^{(ik)}C_{\rm l}^{(jh)}+C_{l}^{(ih)}C_{l}^{(jk)}} {(2l+1)f_{\rm sky}}\;,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\delta_{lm}$ denotes the Kronecker symbol and we have restored the superscripts for the redshift bins, for clarity.
As a byproduct of the study presented in the previous section, we use the Euclid mock catalogues to assess the accuracy of the Gaussian approximation.
Overall, our numerical estimates are compatible with the diagonal structure of $ \Sigma_{lm}^{(ik)(jh)}$.
The diagonal elements obtained from the full-sky mocks are in excellent agreement with equation (\ref{eq_covgaus}).
However, we find that the expected scaling with respect to $f_{\rm sky}$ holds true only for low multipoles.
Fig.~\ref{pic_euclid_error} shows how the average standard deviation of $C_l^{(ij)}$ in the mocks varies as a function of
$f_{\rm sky}$.
The thick blue line corresponds to the multipole interval $20< l \leq40$, while the dashed line represents the bin $140<l\leq160$.
Both curves have been normalised by the corresponding standard deviations measured in the full-sky mocks.
The hatched area indicates the error on the ratio estimated bootstrapping the realisations.
The black line highlights the theoretical scaling proportional to $f_{\rm sky}^{-1/2}$.
Note that the statistical error for $C_l^{(ij)}$ at $l\sim 30$ follows this curve for $f_{\rm sky}>0.35$ but rapidly departs from it for smaller sky fractions. Basically,
the data cannot optimally constrain the large-scale power when the footprint of the survey covers too small a fraction of the sky.
Higher multipoles deviate from the ideal relation for even larger values of $f_{\rm sky}$.
For an Euclid-like survey, the statistical error on $C_l^{(ij)}$ at $l\sim 150$ is on average 17 per cent larger than expected using the $f_{\rm sky}^{-1/2}$ scaling.
All this exemplifies the usefulness of LIGER (and mock catalogues in general) to estimate the size of measurement errors in clustering statistics
and warns against using simple approximations outside the range within which they have been accurately tested.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth,bb=0 0 624 499,keepaspectratio=true]{./Pictures/Fig10a.eps}
\hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth,bb=0 0 624 499,keepaspectratio=true]{./Pictures/Fig10b.eps}
\hfill
\caption{Forecasts for the billion-galaxy survey that will be conducted with the SKA2. We consider two galaxy populations
(the total sample (T) characterised by observed flux above $23\,\mu{\rm Jy}$ and the bright sub-sample (B) corresponding to a flux limit of $60\,\mu{\rm Jy}$)
sampled within two narrow and consecutive redshift bins (I: $0.15<z<0.2$ and II: $0.2<z<0.25$).
The average cross-spectra $\hat{C}_l^{\rm (T_I\, B_{II})}$ (solid thick line) and $\hat{C}_l^{\rm (B_I\, T_{II})}$ (dashed thick line) extracted from the full GR mocks are shown
in the left-hand panel. The hatched area denotes the standard deviation of the noise for $\hat{C}_l^{\rm (T_I\, B_{II})}$.
The corresponding quantities computed from the DS mock catalogues are displayed in the right-hand panel.}
\label{pic_angular_power_run2}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Detectability of Doppler terms at low redshift}\label{sect_lowred}
The question we want to address in this section is whether forthcoming probes of the large-scale structure will be able to provide evidence for additional sources
of redshift-space distortions beyond the classic Kaiser effect and magnification bias.
Although the term proportional to $\alpha$ in equation~(\ref{hamilton}) has been almost invariably neglected in past studies of galaxy clustering,
it might become detectable using data from future wide-angle surveys.
Recent work based on analytical calculations has concluded that the Doppler terms should leave a measurable imprint on the
cross correlations between two galaxy populations \citep{McDonald2009, Yoo:2012se, Bonvinetal2014} and, possibly, also on the angular clustering of a single population \citep{Raccanelli:2016avd}.
Here we re-examine this case using LIGER to build mock catalogues for the SKA2 survey.
\subsubsection{Simulating a galaxy redshift survey with the SKA2}\label{sec_ska2}
The SKA is an unprecedentedly large and powerful array of radio telescopes that will be built in Australia and South Africa by an international collaboration.
The construction will be split into two phases: 10 per cent of the collective area should be in place by 2023 (SKA1) while the full array should follow by 2030
(SKA2).
The `billion galaxy survey' conducted with the SKA2 will measure $\sim 10^9$ individual galaxy redshifts
over 30,000 deg$^2$ using the 21-cm line emission from neutral atomic hydrogen \citep{Maartens:2015SKA}.
In many senses, this will be the ultimate ground-based redshift survey for cosmology.
We build 125 mock light-cones with the expected characteristics of the billion-galaxy survey.
Proceeding as described in Sections \ref{sect_galaxy_dist} and \ref{Nbodysims},
we populate our N-body simulations with galaxies making sure to reproduce
the forecasts for the galaxy number counts presented in \cite{Yahyaetal2015}.
At low redshifts ($z\lesssim0.2$) and for flux\footnote{Although ${\rm Jy}$ is a unit of flux density for simplicity we refer to it as a flux.} limits below $10\,\mu{\rm Jy}$, their predictions for $\bar{n}_{\rm g}$ depend very little on the limiting flux of the survey
(implying that $Q\simeq 0$).
This might possibly reflect a shortcoming of their fitting formula (which covers a broad redshift range), an imperfection in the HI modeling,
or the finite mass resolution of the N-body simulations used to make the forecasts (i.e. fainter galaxies might reside within unresolved dark-matter haloes).
Indeed, \cite{Yahyaetal2015} note that observed HI mass functions at low redshifts contain more low-mass objects than found in the forecasts for SKA2.
To play safe, we avoid this region of parameter space.
We thus use a conservative flux limit of $23\,\mu{\rm Jy}$ to define our main sample
\citep[][use $5.3\,\mu{\rm Jy}$ for their realistic forecasts and $23\,\mu{\rm Jy}$ for the pessimistic ones]{Yahyaetal2015} and
also consider a second galaxy population (the bright sample) with fluxes above $60\,\mu{\rm Jy}$.
We derive the corresponding values for $Q(z)$ and ${\cal E}(z)$ after fitting the cumulative number density presented in \citet{Yahyaetal2015} with a third-order polynomial.
This is the same approach followed by \citet{Cameraetal2015} and yields consistent results with their revised analysis\footnote{In a flux limited survey, $Q$ cannot assume negative values as it would imply that less galaxies are detected when a fainter limiting flux is considered
(the presence of an additional bright cut or another selection criterion are necessary to drive $Q<0$).
Due to an unfortunate mishap, the original fitting functions presented in \citet{Cameraetal2015} yield $Q<0$ for faint galaxies at low redshifts.
Although this mistake does not affect their conclusions, the negative magnification biases
have been used by many authors to make forecasts for the SKA2 survey} \citep{Cameraetal2017}.
The outcome of our calculations is shown in Fig. \ref{Fig:surveydata}
together with the functions $b(z)$ which we take directly from \citet{Yahyaetal2015}.
To test the impact of the Doppler terms on the clustering of SKA2 galaxies, we build and contrast two sets of mock catalogues.
The first includes relativistic effects while the second drops the Doppler terms that are proportional to ${\cal E}$ and $Q$.
We omit Doppler magnification by simply ignoring the velocity-dependent terms in equation~(\ref{eq_magni}).
Further, we neglect the term proportional to ${\cal E}$ in equation~(\ref{emphdeltag}) so that
the weight $w_{\rm g}(\bar{z})$ in the second line of equation~(\ref{eq_numberdens}) is replaced with $w_{\rm g}(z)$.
We use the label DS (Doppler suppressed) to indicate the light cones constructed in this way, since it is impossible to isolate the remaining Doppler effects.
\subsubsection{Cross spectra and results}
General relativistic corrections alter galaxy clustering on large scales with respect to the predictions of the `standard model' including
a linear bias and the Kaiser distortions.
In particular, they break the symmetry of two-point statistics under the exchange of particles in the pairs.
In the distant-observer approximation,
the relativistic effects generate odd multipoles in the redshift-space cross-correlation function between two galaxy populations or, equivalently, an imaginary part in the cross spectrum \citep{McDonald2009, Yoo:2012se, Croft2013, Bonvinetal2014, Bonvin2014, Raccanellietal2014}.
In terms of the comoving wavenumber of the perturbations $k$,
relativistic corrections to the cross spectra due to Doppler effect and gravitational redshifts
are suppressed by a factor ${\cal H}/k$ with respect to the leading standard-model terms \citep{McDonald2009}.
Additional corrections (due to the gravitational potential, the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect and the Shapiro time delay) are instead suppressed by a factor $({\cal H}/k)^2$.
Measurements of galaxy clustering on scales comparable with the Hubble radius are therefore necessary to detect them.
There is a complication, however. In the standard model,
the time evolution of the galaxy populations and wide-angle effects due to the fact we observe on our past light-cone give rise to several anti-symmetric terms with similar amplitudes to the relativistic corrections \citep{Bonvinetal2014}. Moreover, dust extinction can further introduce spurious anti-symmetric terms in the galaxy correlation functions \citep{Fang-Hui-etal-2011}.
Finally, from the observational point of view, it is challenging to keep the photometry stable and measure weak clustering signals on very large scales.
Therefore, it is still an open question whether the Doppler contribution can be seen.
In the rest of this section, we will employ our SKA2 mock light cones to address this issue. In doing this, we will neglect systematic effects due to observational limitations and dust
and focus on the feasibility of the experiment from a theoretical point of view.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics [width=0.5\textwidth,bb=0 0 630 499,keepaspectratio=true]{./Pictures/Fig11.eps}
\caption{The observable $\Delta \hat{C}_l$ averaged over the GR (blue line) and DS (red line) mock catalogues.
Hatched areas indicate the standard deviation of the estimates over the realisations.}
\label{pic_angular_power_difference}
\end{figure}
In order to maximise the chances for a successful outcome, it is important to carefully configure the test we want to perform.
There are a few facts to take into consideration: (i) linear peculiar velocities grow bigger at lower redshifts;
(ii) $\gamma_0$ in $\delta_{\rm g,v}$ is divided by ${\cal H}\chi_{\rm s}$;
(iii) the galaxy number density of the samples rapidly decreases for $z\gtrsim0.2$ thus producing a large evolutionary bias but also increasing noise;
(iv) we need to cover enough comoving volume to reduce sample variance.
Given all this, we end up
considering the interval $0.15<z<0.25$ which we further divide into the bins
I: $0.15<z<0.2$ and II: $0.2<z<0.25$.
We also make use of the two galaxy populations introduced in Section~\ref{sec_ska2}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.945\textwidth,bb=0 0 1296 501,keepaspectratio=true]{./Pictures/Fig12.eps}
\caption{As in Fig.~\ref{pic_deltachi2_euclid} but for the 125 DS and GR mock catalogues for the billion-galaxy survey that will be conducted with the SKA2.
We fit the first 25 multipoles of $\Delta\hat{C}_l$ defined in equation~(\ref{eq_Cldiff}).
The fact that the histograms do not significantly overlap demonstrates that the SKA2 will be able to detect non-standard Doppler terms in the galaxy-clustering signal.}
\label{pic_deltachi2_ska2}
\end{figure*}
In order to access the scales that are sensitive to the Doppler contribution, we focus on galaxy pairs with very wide angular separations.
We thus compute the cross angular power spectrum, $\hat{C}_l^{\rm (T_I\, B_{II})}$, between the total galaxy sample within the lower redshift bin and the bright subsample within
the highest redshift bin.
Similarly, we measure $\hat{C}_l^{\rm (B_I\, T_{II})}$ by considering the bright galaxies in bin I and the full population in bin II.
Finally, we consider the difference between the cross spectra:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq_Cldiff}
\Delta\hat{C}_l=\hat{C}_l^{\rm (T_I\,B_{II})}-\hat{C}_l^{\rm (B_I\,T_{II})}\;.
\end{eqnarray}
Average results over the SKA2 mock light cones are shown in Fig.~\ref{pic_angular_power_run2}.
The left-hand panel displays $\hat{C}_l^{\rm (T_I\, B_{II})}$ (solid thick line) and $\hat{C}_l^{\rm (B_I\, T_{II})}$ (dashed thick line) both sampled in bandpowers with $\Delta l=4$.
The same quantities derived from the DS mock catalogues are shown in the right-hand panel.
The additional Doppler terms included in the GR light cones clearly enhance the difference between the cross spectra at low $l$. They boost $\hat{C}_l^{\rm (B_I\, T_{II})}$ (i.e. make it more negative)
and suppress $\hat{C}_l^{\rm (T_I\, B_{II})}$.
This can be explained as follows.
The leading Doppler contribution to the cross spectra
on large scales originates from correlating the term $b \delta_{\rm sim}-{\cal H}^{-1}\partial n_{\rm s}^iv_i/\partial\chi_{\rm s}$ with
the Doppler term in equation (\ref{hamilton}). Therefore, schematically, in terms of single Fourier modes,
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta \hat{C}_l\!\!\!\!\!&\propto&\!\!\!\!\!\left[(b_{\rm T_I}+\mu_{\rm I}^2f_{\rm I}) \alpha_{\rm B_{II}}-(b_{\rm B_I}+\mu_{\rm I}^2f_{\rm I})\alpha_{\rm T_{II}}\right]\frac{\delta_{\rm I}\,v_{\rm II}}{\cH_{\rm II}\chi_{\rm II}}\nonumber\\
&+&\!\!\!\!\!\left[(b_{\rm B_{II}}+\mu_{\rm II}^2f_{\rm II})\alpha_{\rm T_{I}}-(b_{\rm T_{II}}+\mu_{\rm II}^2f_{\rm II})\alpha_{\rm B_I}\right]\frac{\delta_{\rm II}\,v_{\rm I}}{\cH_{\rm I}\chi_{\rm I}} \;,
\end{eqnarray}
where $f=\ud \ln D/\ud \ln a$ (with $D$ the linear growth factor of matter perturbations) describes the evolution of the velocity field, while $\mu_{\rm I}$ and $\mu_{\rm II}$ are the cosines between the wavenumber and the two lines of sight in the wide-angle configuration.
A peculiarity of our samples is that $b_{\rm B}(z)\simeq b_{\rm T}(z)=b(z)$ to very good accuracy \citep[this is different from][which relies on
different linear bias parameters and use three dimensional correlation functions]{Bonvinetal2014} so that
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta \hat{C}_l\!\!\!\!\!&\propto&\!\!\!\!\!\left(\alpha_{\rm B_{II}}-\alpha_{\rm T_{II}}\right)\left(b_{\rm I}+\mu_{\rm I}^2f_{\rm I} \right)\frac{\delta_{\rm I}\,v_{\rm II}}{\cH_{\rm II}\chi_{\rm II}}\nonumber\\
&+&\!\!\!\!\! \left(\alpha_{\rm T_{I}}-\alpha_{\rm B_I}\right)\left(b_{\rm II}+\mu_{\rm II}^2f_{\rm II}\right)\frac{\delta_{\rm II}\,v_{\rm I}}{\cH_{\rm I}\chi_{\rm I}}\;.
\end{eqnarray}
Now,
the DS mocks only include the geometric distortions and those generated by cosmic acceleration, i.e. $\alpha_{\rm DS}=2+[1-(3/2)\Omega_{\rm m}(z)] \cH\chi_{\rm s}$ which
is independent of the galaxy sample and only depends on the underlying cosmological model. Thus, $\Delta \hat{C}_l \simeq 0$ in the DS case.
On the other hand, for the GR mocks we get
$\alpha_{\rm B_{I}}=-1.49$, $\alpha_{\rm B_{II}}=-2.42$, $\alpha_{\rm T_{I}}=0.35$ and $\alpha_{\rm T_{II}}=-0.38$ which combine to produce a positive signal.
In this case ${\cal Q}$ and ${\cal E}$ give roughly equal contributions.
The shaded areas in Fig.~\ref{pic_angular_power_run2} indicate the standard deviation for $\hat{C}_l^{\rm (T_{\rm I}\, B_{\rm II})}$ (the scatter for $\hat{C}_l^{\rm (B_{\rm I}\, T_{\rm II})}$ is of comparable size).
It is evident that the cross spectra extracted from the galaxy survey will be very noisy.
In Fig.~\ref{pic_angular_power_difference} we show the mean and scatter of $\Delta\hat{C}_l$ for the
full GR mocks (blue) and the DS ones (red).
While the relative error on the single cross-spectra is very large, $\Delta\hat{C}_l$ can be measured with much better accuracy (especially for $l<25$).
Since both galaxy populations trace the same large-scale structure, most of the noise in the cross-spectra is correlated and thus does not appear in the difference.
This exemplifies the advantage of using a multi-tracer approach \citep{McDonald-Seljak-2009}.
We are now ready to investigate whether Doppler effects will be measurable with the SKA2.
We first measure $\Delta\hat{C}_l$ from the 125 GR mocks and then fit the multipoles in the range $1\le l\le25$ using both the GR and the DS models (we recall that the models are obtained averaging the signal over all the mock light cones).
The left-hand side histogram in the left panel of Fig.~\ref{pic_deltachi2_ska2} shows the distribution of the corresponding value for $\Delta \chi^2=\chi^2_{\rm GR}-\chi^2_{\rm DS}$.
In parallel, we fit the $\Delta\hat{C}_l$ measurements extracted from the DS mocks and plot the corresponding histogram of $\Delta \chi^2$ on the right-hand side of the figure.
The fact that the two histograms are well separated demonstrates that the SKA2 data should contain enough information to distinguish between the two models.
To better quantify this, for each mock light cone we compute the statistical significance with which we can reject the null hypothesis that the GR data are generated by the DS model.
The resulting cumulative distribution is plotted in the right panel of Fig.~\ref{pic_deltachi2_ska2} using three different statistical tests (see Section~\ref{sect_significance}).
In the vast majority of the mock catalogues, the DS model is ruled out at a confidence ranging between 4 and 7$\sigma$ (or with a Bayes factor above 1000 corresponding
to decisive evidence).
We conclude that the SKA2 should be able to detect the non-standard Doppler contribution to galaxy clustering.
Our results heavily rely upon the multi-tracer technique for the suppression of the statistical noise.
After repeating the analysis with a single tracer (using cross correlations between adjacent and narrow redshift bins), we find that only extreme values for the magnification and evolutionary biases (e.g. $Q \gtrsim 10$ and $|{\cal E}|\gtrsim20$) could lead to a statistically significant detection.
\section{Summary \& conclusions}
There are multiple reasons for which galaxy clustering requires a proper general relativistic description.
(i) We observe events lying on our past light cone.
(ii) The propagation of light is affected by the presence of inhomogeneities in the matter distribution.
(iii) In consequence, galaxy observables (i.e. redshift, flux in some waveband and angular position on the sky) are influenced by the large-scale structure intervening between the source and the observer.
However, when we interpret observations we use an unperturbed FRW model to translate redshifts and fluxes into distances and absolute luminosities.
This leads to redshift-space distortions, i.e. the reconstructed galaxy density does not coincide with the actual one.
The most important source of the discrepancy is the correction due to the peculiar velocity gradient \citep{Kaiser:1987qv}
but it is long known that there are additional contributions and that they might become significant at large angular separations.
Although no consensus has been reached yet, some recent studies based on analytical calculations and on the Fisher information matrix
have concluded that signatures of these additional corrections should be detectable with the next generation of wide-angle surveys.
This paper describes the LIGER method,
a numerical technique to build mock galaxy catalogues including all general relativistic corrections at linear order in the cosmological perturbations.
LIGER post processes the output of a Newtonian simulation and combines its snapshots at constant background time
to build the galaxy distribution in comoving redshift space.
The LIGER method is composed of three steps:
(i) we shift the position of the simulated galaxies from real to redshift space;
(ii) we evaluate the corresponding magnification due to gravitational lensing;
(iii) we find the intersection of the modified world lines of the galaxies with the unperturbed backward light cone of the observer in redshift space.
Steps (i) and (ii) include both local corrections and terms that have been integrated along the line of sight using the Born approximation.
Note that standard mock galaxy catalogues generally include only the Kaiser effect for step (i) and do not account for lensing
\citep[with the exception of][]{Guimaraesetal2005} although magnification maps are routinely built for weak-lensing studies
\citep[e.g.][]{Wambsganss1998,Jainetal2000,WhiteHu2000,ValeWhite2003,Fosalbaetal2008, Fosalbaetal2015,Hilbertetal2009,Kiesslingetal2011}.
LIGER is characterized by the following features.
(i) It can be applied to the output of any Newtonian simulation (N-body or hydrodynamic) independent of the
code with which it has been run. (ii) It is fast to execute so that it is computationally feasible to produce very large numbers of mock catalogues for a given
survey.
(iii) A variant of the standard implementation has been specially designed to work with simulations that cover very large comoving volumes but
do not resolve single galaxies. In this case, the galaxy density field is obtained by biasing the dark-matter distribution.
The main applications of LIGER are foreseen for forthcoming wide-angle spectroscopic surveys like
DESI\footnote{http://desi.lbl.gov},
Euclid\footnote{http://www.euclid-ec.org},
HETDEX\footnote{http://hetdex.org},
SKAII\footnote{https://www.skatelescope.org},
SPHEREx\footnote{http://spherex.caltech.edu},
SuMiRe\footnote{http://sumire.ipmu.jp/en/}
as well as photometric surveys like J-PAS\footnote{http://j-pas.org} and LSST\footnote{https://www.lsst.org}.
Mock catalogues will be used as forecasting tools and to measure biases and covariance matrices of estimators for several statistics of the large-scale structure.
As a proof of concept, we quantify the impact of magnification bias in the angular clustering of galaxies for a Euclid-like survey.
Our results show that lensing convergence generates a non-negligible correction for the angular power spectra of galaxies in broad redshift bins and
dominates cross-spectra between galaxies at widely separated redshifts
\citep[similar conclusions have been reached by][using analytical calculations]{DiDioetal2014, Montanari:2015rga}.
The convergence signal can be detected at 8$\sigma$ significance and
this provides the intriguing possibility to measure the lensing potential from the cross spectra \citep{Montanari:2015rga}.
Additional redshift-space distortions on top of the standard Kaiser correction and the weak-lensing convergence
are generally small. Therefore, customised techniques need be developed in order to measure their signatures.
It is foreseeable that LIGER-based mocks will be key to optimising the design of these probes.
In anticipation of these future applications, we have investigated the detectability of several additional Doppler terms using the specifics of
the planned `billion galaxy survey' with the SKA2 telescope.
Our results show that using two galaxy populations with different flux cuts (T: $f>23 \,\mu{\rm Jy}$ and B: $f>60 \,\mu{\rm Jy}$)
and two consecutive redshift intervals (I: $0.15<z<0.2$ and II: $0.2<z<0.25$), it will be possible to measure a significant Doppler-induced signal.
The statistic we use is the difference of the angular cross power spectra $\Delta C_l=C_l^{\rm (T_I\,B_{II})}-C_l^{\rm (B_I\, T_{II})}$.
For multipoles $l\le25$, this quantity is dominated by the contribution of the Doppler terms and
shows a strikingly reduced variance compared to each of the cross correlations due to the fact that
both galaxy populations are biased tracers of the same underlying matter density. Based on our simulations, $\Delta C_l$ should be detectable with a
signal-to-noise ratio of $\sim 5.5$.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank Alvise Raccanelli and Stefano Camera for discussions.
We acknowledge financial support by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft through the Transregio 33 `The Dark Universe'.
During the preparation of this work MB was also partially supported by the Bonn-Cologne Graduate School for Physics and Astronomy.
\bibliographystyle{mn2e}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{secintro}
Inverse spectral theories enable us to comprehend operators through their spectral data. Several results have been well-known in one-dimensional setting via so-called spectral measures or Weyl-Titchmarsh $m$-functions: there are one-to-one correspondence between canonical systems and Herglotz functions \cite{deB, Win}, another correspondence between Jacobi operators and probability measures \cite{RemLN,Teschl}, and the representations of the spectral measures for Schr\"odinger operators \cite{GL,GS2,Mar2,RemdB,SimIST}. (See precise definitions in the relevant sections below.)
Roughly speaking, the first two turn out to be very easy to apply. This is because both spaces of all Herglotz functions (or equivalently, canonical systems due to the 1-1 correspondence above) and all probability measures (or Jacobi operators) whose supports are in some bounded and closed interval (for example, $[-2,2]$) are known to be compact. In other words, these two spaces are so ``affluent" to not miss any related spectral measures.
Unlike this, some difficult statements are necessary in order to describe the spectral measures of Schr\"odinger operators \cite{GL,GS2,Mar2,RemdB,SimIST}. These have some Gelfand-Levitan type conditions, which are presented in terms of a Fourier-Laplace type transform of their spectral measures. Since
not every Herglotz function can occur as an $m$-function of some Schr\"odinger operator, i.e., there are lots of missing pieces on the space of Schr\"odinger operators compared to canonical systems, the compactness cannot be preserved on this space.
Fortunately, in spite of this insufficiency, this set seems to be still ample in order to formulate an inverse spectral theory. One of the aspects showing this is the density of all their $m$-functions on the (compact) space of the Herglotz functions \cite{Hur3}. Schr\"odinger operators are enough to approximate any canonical systems.
In this paper, we would like to reveal the sparsity of discrete Schr\"odinger operators, which is contrary to the idea based on the density outcome of Schr\"odinger operators \cite{Hur3}. (In many applications we would expect to have the same conclusion on both continuous and discrete settings.) Due to the scarcity, it will be shown that there is a Jacobi operator whose $m$-function is far from those of discrete Schr\"odinger operators. This non-density seems to advocate the fact that no inverse spectral theory does appear to be known for discrete Schr\"odinger operators. They are too scanty to be described. See Table 1 below.
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Inverse spectral theories in one-dimensional space}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c c}
\hline\hline
Continuous & Discrete \\ [0.5ex]
\hline
Canonical systems: compact & Jacobi operators: compact \quad \\
$\implies$ Easy theory & \quad $\implies$ Easy theory \\
Schr\"odinger operators: dense & \textrm{ } Discrete Schr\"odinger operators: scarcity\\
$\implies$ Difficult theory & $\implies$ ``Hard to get such a theory"\\[0.5ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
To derive the sparsity or non-density, the fundamental idea in \cite{Hur3} is followed: instead of dealing with spectral measures or $m$-functions directly, let's work on the related canonical systems. For this, so-called de Branges theory of canonical systems \cite{Ach,deB,HSW,KL,RemdB,Win3,Win4,Win,Win2} has been applied in \cite{Hur3}.
Similarly in this paper, we construct a route for discrete Schr\"odinger operators via canonical systems. More precisely, Theorem \ref{classificationofjcs} and Theorem \ref{classificationofdscs} show the complete expressions of the canonical systems related to Jacobi and discrete Schr\"odinger operators, respectively. Let us call them \emph{Jacobi canonical systems} and \emph{discrete Schr\"odinger canonical systems} for convenience. Since no inverse theory of discrete Schr\"odinger operators has been known, it is Theorem \ref{classificationofdscs} that seems to be the only way to deal with them.
As an application of Theorem \ref{classificationofdscs}, some Jacobi canonical system will be constructed, such that it cannot be approximated by any sequences of discrete Schr\"odinger canonical systems. By two expressions above, this implies that there is a Jacobi operator whose $m$-function is far from those of discrete Schr\"odinger operators. See Theorem \ref{nodensity} below.
Let us enlighten the usefulness of Theorem \ref{classificationofdscs}. It can be interpreted as an inverse spectral theory for discrete Schr\"odinger operators in the version of (trace-normed) canonical systems. Note again that there has been no such a theory for discrete Schr\"odinger operators via their $m$-functions, or equivalently, their spectral measures. This theorem will therefore be very useful to deal with unsolved problems, especially for discrete Schr\"odinger operators, in the field of the spectral theory.
This paper is organized as follows. Basic materials, such as Jacobi operators, canonical systems and their $m$-functions, are provided on the following section. In Section \ref{classification} we classify the canonical systems that are the eigenvalue equations for Jacobi or discrete Schr\"odinger operators in disguise. With this classification, we, in Section \ref{example}, then construct a canonical system corresponding to some Jacobi operator whose $m$-function cannot be approachable by the $m$-functions of discrete Schr\"odinger operators.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{secbasicm}
\subsection{Jacobi and discrete Schr\"odinger operators}\label{Jacobi}
A Jacobi operator $\mathcal{J}$ is a difference operator on $\ell^2({\mathbb N})$, defined by
\begin{equation*}
(\mathcal{J}u)_n=
\begin{cases}
\textrm{ } a_{n-1}u_{n-1}+a_n u_{n+1}+b_n u_n, \quad n\ge2 \\
\textrm{ } a_n u_{n+1}+b_n u_n, \quad n=1
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
where $a, b\in \ell^{\infty}({{\mathbb N}})$, $a_n<0$, $b_n\in{\mathbb R}$. Many other papers assume that $a_n>0$, but it is well-known that the signs of $a_n$ can be switched such that two Jacobi operators are unitarily equivalent. Discrete Schr\"odinger operators are the Jacobi operators satisfying $a_n= -1$ for all $n$.
Then a Weyl-Titchmarsh $m$-function corresponding to the given Jacobi operator is defined by
\begin{equation}\label{mfnforjacobi}
m_{\mathcal{J}}(z) = - \frac{\tilde{y}(1,z)}{a_0 \tilde{y}(0,z)},
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{y}(\cdot, z)$ is a solution to the formal equation
\begin{equation}\label{jacobieqn}
a_{n-1}y_{n-1}+a_n y_{n+1}+b_ny_n=zy_n, \quad n\ge 1,
\end{equation}
such that it is square-summable near $\infty$. The condition that $\mathcal{J}$ is bounded makes sure that $\tilde{y}$ is unique up to multiplicative constants, which implies that (\ref{mfnforjacobi}) is well-defined.
In this paper we assume that $a_0=-1$. This is practicable, since the Dirichlet boundary condition, i.e., $y_0=0$, is the considered one at 0, when the operator is specified.
Weyl $m$-functions for Jacobi operators $m_{\mathcal{J}}$ are Herglotz functions, that is, they map the upper half plane $\mathbb{C}^+$ holomorphically to itself. With the Herglotz representation (which is similar to Poisson integral formula for positive harmonic functions),
it is well-known that
$m_{\mathcal{J}}$'s are expressed by
\begin{equation}\label{HRofJ}
m_{\mathcal{J}}(z)=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{d\rho_{\mathcal{J}}(t)}{t-z}.
\end{equation}
Here the spectral measures $d\rho_{\mathcal{J}}$ are probability measures whose supports are bounded, but not finite.
It, moreover, turns out that the converse of the fact above is also true. All this means that Jacobi operators have an very easy inverse spectral theory (Theorem 13.9 in \cite{RemLN}): there is one-to-one correspondence between (bounded) Jacobi operators and probability measures whose supports are infinite and bounded in ${\mathbb R}$.
Put differently, the Cauchy transforms of such probability measures are the $m$-functions of Jacobi operators.
As opposed to this, there is no well-known result to tell us which Herglotz functions are the $m$-functions for discrete Schr\"odinger operators. This difficulty is the main reason why we cannot work on them directly. See \cite{RemLN} or \cite{Teschl} for all these properties above.
\subsection{Canonical systems}
\subsubsection{Canonical systems and de Branges theory}
To see more larger picture between equations and Herglotz functions let us consider a (half-line) canonical system,
\begin{equation}
\label{cs}
J{\bf{u}}'(x,z)=zH(x){\bf{u}}(x,z), \quad x\in(0,\infty),
\end{equation}
where $J=\big( \begin{smallmatrix} 0 & -1 \\ 1 &0 \end{smallmatrix}$\big) and $H$ (called a Hamiltonian) is a positive semidefinite $2\times2$ matrix whose entries are real-valued, locally integrable functions. Here $z$ is a spectral parameter. In particular, a canonical system or a Hamiltonian $H$ is called \textit{trace-normed}, if $\textrm{Tr }H(x)=1$ for almost all $x$ in $(0,\infty)$. For (\ref{cs}) we always place a boundary condition at 0,
\begin{equation}
\label{bcat0forcs}
u^1(0,z)=0,
\end{equation}
where $u^1$ is the first component of ${\bf{u}}=\big( \begin{smallmatrix} u^1 \\ u^2\end{smallmatrix}$\big).
Similar to $m_{\mathcal{J}}$, a Weyl $m$-function $m_H$ corresponding to the given canonical system can be expressed by
\begin{equation}
\label{mfnforcs}
m_H(z)=\frac{\tilde{u}^2(0,z)}{\tilde{u}^1(0,z)},
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{{\bf{u}}}=\big( \begin{smallmatrix} \tilde{u}^1 \\ \tilde{u}^2 \end {smallmatrix} \big) $ is a solution to (\ref{cs}) satisfying
\begin{equation}
\label{H-int}
\int_0^{\infty} \tilde{{\bf{u}}}^*(x,z)H(x)\tilde{{\bf{u}}}(x,z)dx<\infty.
\end{equation}
Here $^*$ means the Hermitian adjoint. Such a solution satisfying (\ref{H-int}) is called \textit{$H$-integrable}. Note that a half-line trace-normed canonical system is always in a limit-point case at $\infty$, which was obtained from the original argument by \cite{deB} or an alternative proof in \cite{Ach}. In other words, there is only one $H$-integrable solution up to multiplicative constants, and therefore (\ref{mfnforcs}) is well-defined. See \cite{Hur3,Win,Win2} for more details.
De Branges \cite{deB} and Winkler \cite{Win} then showed that, for a given Herglotz function, there exists a unique half-line trace-normed canonical system with (\ref{bcat0forcs}), such that its $m$-function $m_H$ is the given Herglotz function. In \cite{Hur3} it was shown that it is much easier to see which canonical system is an eigenvalue equation of some Schr\"odinger operator, than which Herglotz function is an $m$-function of some Schr\"odinger operator. Based on this theme, this one-to-one correspondence will be essential later in order to cope with canonical systems.
\subsubsection{Singular intervals}\label{singularinterval}
For the purpose of the later use, we need the following treatment, based on \cite{deB} or mainly Section 10 in \cite{RemdB}. An interval is called a \textit{singular interval}, if there exists a number $\varphi$, so that on the given interval, a Hamiltonian $H$ has the form
\begin{equation*}
H(x)=h(x)P_{\varphi}, \quad P_{\varphi}=\begin{pmatrix}\cos^2\varphi & \cos\varphi \sin\varphi\\ \cos\varphi\sin\varphi & \sin^2\varphi \end{pmatrix}
\end{equation*}
for some locally integrable nonnegative function $h$. Note that $P_{\varphi}$ is the projection onto the vector $\left( \begin{smallmatrix} \cos\varphi \\ \sin\varphi \end{smallmatrix} \right)$ and it is invariant under adding multiples of $\pi$ on $\varphi$.
To understand the notion of singular intervals, consider (\ref{cs}) on a singular interval $(a,b)$. After multiplying from the left by $J^{-1}=-J$, the system becomes
$$
{\bf{u}}'(x,z)=-zh(x)JP_{\varphi}{\bf{u}}(x,z).
$$
Since the matrices on the right-hand side commute with one another for different values of $x$, the solution is given by
$$
{\bf{u}}(x,z)=\exp \left( -z\int_a^x h(t) dt J P_{\varphi} \right) {\bf{u}}(a,z).
$$
However, the fact that $P_{\varphi}JP_{\varphi}=0$ (which can be seen either from a direct computation or alternatively from the fact that this matrix is singular, anti-self-adjoint and has real entries) indicates that the series for the exponential terminates and
\begin{equation}\label{contslnforsi}
{\bf{u}}(x,z)=\left( 1-z\int_a^x h(t)dt J P_{\varphi} \right){\bf{u}}(a,z).
\end{equation}
In particular, putting
$H_0=\int_a^b H(x)dx$, we obtain
$$
J({\bf{u}}(b,z)-{\bf{u}}(a,z))=zH_0{\bf{u}}(a,z).
$$
Hence, on a singular interval, (\ref{cs}) is actually a discrete canonical system in disguise. This treatment of singular intervals will be employed to convert a discrete canonical system to a continuous one in Section \ref{classification}.
\subsubsection{Finite measures and singular intervals}\label{finitemeasures}
As the last ingredient on a canonical system, we see that a special type of a singular interval is necessary, when its spectral measure is finite, based on \cite{Win4} or \cite{Win2}.
\begin{Theorem}[Theorem 2.1 \cite{Win4} or Theorem 4.11 \cite{Win2}]
\label{singularintervalwithfm}
The $m$-function of a canonical system has the form
\begin{equation}\label{mfcnwithfm}
m_H(z)=a+\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{d\rho(t)}{t-z}
\end{equation}
with a finite measure $d\rho$ if and only if $0$ is the left end point of a singular interval with $\varphi\neq0$. If $H$ is trace-normed and $(0,l)$ is the maximal singular interval with $\varphi\neq 0$, then the relations $a=\cot\varphi$ and $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} d\rho(t)=(l \sin^2\varphi)^{-1}$ hold.
\end{Theorem}
Here a \emph{maximal} singular interval means that there is no essentially larger singular interval containing the given one. In the theorem above, since $(0,l)$ is a maximal singular interval and $0$ is its left end point, any interval $(0,l+\epsilon)$ cannot be a singular interval for $\epsilon>0$. Remark that a singular interval with $\varphi=0$ is related to the $z$-term in Herglotz representation, not to a finite measure.
By (\ref{HRofJ}), i.e., $a=0$ and $\rho({\mathbb R})=1$ in (\ref{mfcnwithfm}), Theorem \ref{singularintervalwithfm} tells us that the canonical systems for Jacobi operators have $(0,1)$ as the maximal singular interval with $\varphi=\pi/2$. For a later use, let us summarize this fact by the following corollary:
\begin{Corollary}\label{Hforjacobi}
Hamiltonians $H$ of the canonical systems corresponding to Jacobi operators are the projection
$P_{\pi/2}=(\begin{smallmatrix} 0&0\\0&1\end{smallmatrix})$ exactly on
$(0,1)$.
\end{Corollary}
\section{Classification of Jacobi and Discrete Schr\"odinger eigenvalue equations via canonical systems}
\label{classification}
Based on the same idea in \cite{Hur3}, in this section, we classify trace-normed canonical systems which can be written as the eigenvalue equations of Jacobi or discrete Schr\"odinger operators. For convenience, let us call them \textit{Jacobi} or \textit{discrete Schr\"odinger canonical systems}, respectively. As talked in the introduction, this new representation is crucial to modify our problem about $m$-functions to the one about canonical systems.
\subsection{Jacobi canonical systems}\label{Jacobicanonicalsystems}
To find the conditions for Jacobi canonical systems let's first see that Jacobi eigenvalue equations are actually discrete canonical systems.
Choose two solutions $c_n$ and $s_n$ to (\ref{jacobieqn}) with zero energy $z=0$, i.e., $a_{n-1}y_{n-1}+a_n y_{n+1}+b_ny_n=0$, such that
\begin{equation}\label{icforcands}
c_0=s_1=1 \quad\textrm{ and }\quad c_1=s_0=0.
\end{equation}
As mentioned, $a_0=-1$ in this paper, which will be consistent with (\ref{relationacs}) later.
It turns out that, if any nonzero $a_0$ were chosen, it would be necessary to select the solution $c_n$ satisfying $a_0c_0=1$ and $c_1=0$, rather than $c_0=1$ and $c_1=0$ (which is in (\ref{icforcands})).
For $y_n$ satisfying (\ref{jacobieqn}), put
\begin{equation}\label{relation}
\begin{pmatrix} y_n \\ y_{n+1} \end{pmatrix}=:
\begin{pmatrix} c_n & s_n \\ c_{n+1} & s_{n+1} \end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix} u^1_n \\ u^2_n \end{pmatrix}
\quad
\left( =T_n {\bf{u}}_n \right)
\end{equation}
to define ${\bf{u}}_n:=(u^1_n, u^2_n)^t$. Let's denote by $T_n$ the matrix on the right-hand side of (\ref{relation}). Note that $T_n$ has non-zero determinant. Then ${\bf{u}}_n$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{discretecs}
J({\bf{u}}_{n+1}-{\bf{u}}_n)=z
\begin{pmatrix} c_{n+1}^2 & c_{n+1}s_{n+1}\\ c_{n+1}s_{n+1} &s_{n+1}^2 \end{pmatrix}
{\bf{u}}_n
\quad
(=H_{n+1} {\bf{u}}_n).
\end{equation}
(Here the matrix in (\ref{discretecs}) on the right-hand side is denoted by $H_{n+1}$.)
In order to see \eqref{discretecs} and some underlying principles, we introduce so-called (one-step) transfer matrices $M_n(z)$ by
\begin{equation}\label{M_n(z)}
M_n(z)=
\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ -a_{n-1}/a_n & (z-b_n)/a_n \end{pmatrix}.
\end{equation}
Then, as expected from the name of $M_n(z)$, one has $T_n=M_n(0)T_{n-1}$. Solving this for $M_n(0)$ and comparing it to \eqref{M_n(z)} gives two following expressions of $a_n$ and $b_{n+1}$ via the solutions $c_n$ and $s_n$: for all $n\ge 0$,
\begin{equation}\label{relationacs}
a_n=-\frac1{c_n s_{n+1}-c_{n+1}s_n}
\quad
\left( or
\quad
a_n (c_n s_{n+1}-c_{n+1}s_n)=-1
\right)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{relationbcs}
b_{n+1}=a_{n} a_{n+1}(c_{n}s_{n+2}-c_{n+2}s_{n}).
\end{equation}
Moreover, the equation $T_{n+1}{\bf{u}}_{n+1}=M_{n+1}(z)T_{n}{\bf{u}}_{n}$ holds, since
\begin{equation*}
T_{n+1}{\bf{u}}_{n+1}=\begin{pmatrix} y_{n+1} \\ y_{n+2} \end{pmatrix}=M_{n+1}(z)\begin{pmatrix} y_n \\ y_{n+1} \end{pmatrix}=M_{n+1}(z)T_{n}{\bf{u}}_{n}.
\end{equation*}
Due to the fact that the quantity, $M_{n+1}(z)-M_{n+1}(0)$, has only one non-zero entry, we see that
\begin{equation*}
{\bf{u}}_{n+1}-{\bf{u}}_{n}=\frac{z}{a_{n+1}} T^{-1}_{n+1} \begin{pmatrix} 0&0\\0&1 \end{pmatrix} T_n {\bf{u}}_{n},
\end{equation*}
which implies \eqref{discretecs}.
It has been seen how to convert a Jacobi eigenvalue equation (\ref{jacobieqn}) to the discrete canonical system (\ref{discretecs}). Remark that there are other ways to alter (\ref{jacobieqn}) to some (\ref{discretecs}). Our way is, however, the one such that their $m$-functions are the same, which will be demonstrated later.\\
We now transform (\ref{discretecs}) to a \emph{trace-normed} (continuous) canonical system by doing a change of variables and introducing singular intervals. First do the following change of variables: for $n\ge 1$,
\begin{equation*}
c_n+is_n=:R_n e^{i\varphi_n},
\end{equation*}
that is, $c_n=R_n \cos \varphi_n$ and $s_n=R_n \sin\varphi_n$. Without a loss of generality, one may assume that $R_n\ge0$. It turns out that $R_n>0$ in our case. Then (\ref{discretecs}) reads
\begin{equation*}
J({\bf{u}}_{n+1}-{\bf{u}}_n)=z R^2_{n+1} P_{\varphi_{n+1}}{\bf{u}}_n,
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}
P_{\varphi_{n}}=\begin{pmatrix} \cos^2 \varphi_{n} & \cos \varphi_{n}\sin \varphi_{n}\\ \cos \varphi_{n}\sin \varphi_{n} & \sin^2 \varphi_{n} \end{pmatrix}.
\end{equation*}
Adding multiples of $\pi$ on $\varphi$ does not change the projection matrix $P_{\varphi}$. Therefore, adapting the idea of \cite{Win3} (Theorem 2.3 therein), let us uniquely normalize $\varphi$ as a non-decreasing, right-continuous step function, such that, for $n\ge 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{increasingsteps}
\varphi_{n+1}-\varphi_n\in (0,\pi).
\end{equation}
Make sure that, for the unique representation, steps except the first one should be closed-open intervals (such as $[1,2)$) which are strictly increasing.
To switch a discrete canonical system to a continuous one, the treatment of singular intervals, which was discussed in Section \ref{singularinterval}, is now applied. By expanding or contracting these singular intervals, the system above reveals a \emph{trace-normed} canonical system
\begin{equation}\label{tncswithdet0}
J\frac{d}{dt}{\bf{u}}(t,z)=z
\begin{pmatrix} \cos^2 \varphi(t) & \cos \varphi(t)\sin \varphi(t)\\ \cos \varphi(t)\sin \varphi(t) & \sin^2 \varphi(t) \end{pmatrix}
{\bf{u}}(t,z).
\end{equation}
Here, by putting $L_0=0$ and
\begin{equation}\label{defofL}
L_n:=\sum_{k=1}^n R_k^2= \sum_{k=1}^n (c^2_k+s^2_k)\quad \textrm{for } n\ge 1
\end{equation}
which are the lengths of new singular intervals, the function $\varphi$ should be a non-decreasing and right-continuous step function on $(0,\infty)$, so that
\begin{equation}\label{stepfunction}
\varphi(t) =
\begin{cases}
\varphi_{n+1} \qquad \textrm{on } [L_n, L_{n+1}) \quad (n\ge1) \\
\varphi_1 (=\pi/2 ) \quad \textrm{on } (0,L_1) \quad (n=0).
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Here (\ref{icforcands}) implies that $L_1=1$ and $\varphi_1=\pi/2$, that is, $\varphi(t)=\pi/2$ on $(0,1)$, which is consistent with Corollary \ref{Hforjacobi}.
\\
So far it have been verified that any Jacobi eigenvalue equations can be transformed to some trace-normed canonical systems, such that their Hamiltonian $H$ are projections $P_{\varphi}$ with non-decreasing and right-continuous step functions $\varphi$ satisfying $\varphi(t)=\pi/2$ exactly on $(0,1)$. A typical example of $\varphi$ for some Jacobi canonical system is in the following figure:
\vspace{0.5cm}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.65]\label{graphofvarphi}
\draw[->] (0,0) -- (10,0) node[anchor=north] { \large{$t$}};
\draw (0,0) node[anchor=north] {0}
(2,0) node[anchor=north] {$L_1$(=1)}
(4.5,0) node[anchor=north] {$L_2$}
(5.7,0) node[anchor=north] {$L_3$}
(8,0) node[anchor=north] {$L_4$}
(0,1.3) node[anchor=east] {$\varphi_1 (=\frac{\pi}2)$}
(0,2.3) node[anchor=east] {$\varphi_2$}
(0,3.5) node[anchor=east] {$\varphi_3$}
(0,4.3) node[anchor=east] {$\varphi_4$};
\draw[->] (0,0) -- (0,6) node[anchor=east] {\large{$\varphi_n$}};
\draw[dotted] (2,0) -- (2,6)
(4.5,0) -- (4.5,6)
(5.7,0) -- (5.7,6)
(8,0) -- (8,6);
\draw[very thick] (0,1.3) -- (2,1.3)
(2,2.3) -- (4.5,2.3)
(4.5,3.5) -- (5.7,3.5)
(5.7,4.3) -- (8,4.3)
(8,5.3) -- (9.3,5.3);
\draw (-0.03,1.3) -- (0.04,1.3)
(-0.03,2.3) -- (0.04,2.3)
(-0.03,3.5) -- (0.04,3.5)
(-0.03,4.3) -- (0.04,4.3);
\draw (4.2,-1.2) node[anchor=north] {\textbf{Figure A.} \textrm{$\varphi_n$ for a Jacobi canonical system}};
\end{tikzpicture}
\vspace{0.5cm}
Let's finally show that a Jacobi operator and its corresponding Jacobi canonical system share their $m$-functions. First compare their solutions to (\ref{jacobieqn}) and (\ref{tncswithdet0}). More specifically, for $\tilde{y}_n$ a square-summable solution to (\ref{jacobieqn}) near $\infty$, the corresponding solution ${\tilde{\bf{u}}}(t,z)$ via (\ref{relation}) is $P_{\varphi}$-integrable.
Indeed,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \tilde{y}_n^* \tilde{y}_n
&=& \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} {\tilde{\bf{u}}}_n^* H_n {\tilde{\bf{u}}}_n\\
&=& \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} {\tilde{\bf{u}}}_n^* R^2_n P_{\varphi_n} {\tilde{\bf{u}}}_n\\
&=& \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \int_{L_{n-1}}^{L_{n}} {\tilde{\bf{u}}}_n^* P_{\varphi_n} {\tilde{\bf{u}}}_n \textrm{ } dt\\
&=& \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \int_{L_{n-1}}^{L_{n}} {\tilde{\bf{u}}}^*(t,z) P_{\varphi_n} {\tilde{\bf{u}}}(t,z)\textrm{ } dt\\
&=& \int_0^{\infty} {\tilde{\bf{u}}}^*(t,z) P_{\varphi} {\tilde{\bf{u}}}(t,z) \textrm{ }dt.
\end{eqnarray*}
Here the first equality holds due to (\ref{relation}). And (\ref{contslnforsi}), combined with the fact that $P_{\varphi_n}JP_{\varphi_n}=0$, indicates that, on the interval $[L_{n-1}, L_n)$,
$
{\tilde{\bf{u}}}(t)^*P_{\varphi_n}{\tilde{\bf{u}}}(t)={\tilde{\bf{u}}}^*(L_n)P_{\varphi_n}{\tilde{\bf{u}}}(L_n),
$
which says that the fourth equality holds. By (\ref{mfnforjacobi}), (\ref{mfnforcs}), (\ref{icforcands}) and (\ref{relation}), we then have that
\begin{eqnarray*}
m_{J}(z)
&=& -\frac{\tilde{y}_1}{a_0\tilde{y}_0} \quad \left( =\frac{\tilde{y}_1}{\tilde{y}_0} \quad \textrm{since } a_0=-1 \right)\\
&=& \frac{c_1 \tilde{u}^1(0,z)+s_1 \tilde{u}^2(0,z)}{c_0 \tilde{u}^1(0,z)+s_0 \tilde{u}^2(0,z)}\\
&=& \frac{\tilde{u}^2(0,z)}{\tilde{u}^1(0,z)}\\
&=& m_{P_{\varphi}} (z),
\end{eqnarray*}
which indicates that two $m$-functions are the same.\\
Let us summarize what we have discussed so far.
\begin{Theorem}\label{classificationofjcs}
Any Jacobi eigenvalue equation can be written as a canonical system of the form
\begin{equation*}
J\frac{d}{dt}{\bf{u}}(t,z)=z
\begin{pmatrix} \cos^2 \varphi(t) & \cos \varphi(t)\sin \varphi(t)\\ \cos \varphi(t)\sin \varphi(t) & \sin^2 \varphi(t) \end{pmatrix}
{\bf{u}}(t,z)
\end{equation*}
where $\varphi$ is a non-decreasing and right-continuous step function on $(0,\infty)$ with $\varphi(t)=\pi/2$ exactly on $(0,1)$, such that the given Jacobi equation and the corresponding canonical system share their $m$-functions.\\
\end{Theorem}
By the same argument but in reverse, it is not hard to show the converse of Theorem \ref{classificationofjcs}: any trace-normed canonical system having such $\varphi$ is a Jacobi eigenvalue equation in disguise. To speak specifically, let's assume that such a $\varphi$ is given, i.e., $\varphi$ satisfies (\ref{stepfunction}) so that $L_0=0$, $\{ L_n \}_{n\ge1}$ is a strictly increasing sequence of positive numbers with $L_1=1$, and $\{\varphi_{n}\}_{n\ge1}$ is a sequence of numbers such that $\varphi_1=\pi/2$ and $\varphi_{n+1}-\varphi_n\in(0,\pi)$.
Put
\begin{equation}\label{relationofRandL}
R_{n+1}:=\sqrt{L_{n+1}-L_n} \quad(>0)
\end{equation}
and
$$c_{n}:=R_{n}\cos\varphi_{n} \quad\textrm{and}\quad s_{n}:=R_{n} \sin\varphi_{n}.$$
Then $\{ {\bf{u}}(n,z) \}$ satisfies (\ref{discretecs}). By (\ref{relation}), the given canonical system reads the Jacobi eigenvalue equation with $a$ and $b$, which are defined through (\ref{relationacs}) and (\ref{relationbcs}). With the same argument above, it can be shown that these two equations have the same $m$-functions.
\subsection{Discrete Schr\"odinger canonical systems}
Based on the previous discussion, let us classify the canonical systems which correspond to discrete Schr\"odinger eigenvalue equations, and then point out how difficult they are to obtain.
For a discrete Schr\"odinger operators, $a_n\equiv -1$ for all $n\ge 0$. Therefore (\ref{relationacs}) becomes
\begin{equation*}
c_n s_{n+1}-c_{n+1}s_n=1,
\end{equation*}
which, with $R_n$ and $\varphi_n$, expresses
\begin{equation}\label{condforDSwithRandv}
R_nR_{n+1} \sin(\varphi_{n+1}-\varphi_{n})=1.
\end{equation}
Similar to the case of Jacobi operators, $R_1=1$ (or $L_1=1$) and $\varphi_1=\pi/2$. Then (\ref{condforDSwithRandv}) implies that $R_2$ should satisfy the condition
\begin{equation}\label{conditionforR2}
R_2=\csc (\varphi_2-\pi/2),
\end{equation}
which is presented by the blue-dashed curve in Figure B. In particular, $R_2\ge 1$ for any discrete Schr\"odinger operators. A typical second step (i.e., $\varphi_2$ and $R_2$) is the red thick segment in Figure B.\\
\vspace{0.2cm}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.65]\label{graphofvarphi}
\draw[->] (0,0) -- (13,0) node[anchor=north] { \large{$t$}};
\draw (0,0) node[anchor=north] {0}
(2.5,0) node[anchor=north] {1}
(5.1,0) node[anchor=north] {2}
(7.8,0) node[anchor=north, red] {$L_2=R_2^2+1$}
(0,1.2) node[anchor=east] {$\varphi_1=\frac{\pi}2$}
(0,2.4) node[anchor=east] {$\pi$}
(-1,3.2) node[anchor=east, red] {$\varphi_2$}
(0,3.6) node[anchor=east] {$\frac{3\pi}2$};
\draw[->] (0,0) -- (0,5) node[anchor=east] {\large{$\varphi_n$}};
\draw[dotted] (2.5,1.2) -- (12.5,1.2)
(2.5,2.4) -- (5,2.4)
(5.1,0) -- (5.1,2.4)
(2.5,3.6) -- (12.5,3.6);
\draw[dotted, red]
(-1,3.2) -- (2.5,3.2)
(6.7,0)--(6.7,3.2);
\draw[dashed, blue] (5,2.4) (5.5,3)
(5.5,3) parabola bend (12.4,3.55) (12.4,3.55)
(5.5,1.8) parabola bend (12.4,1.25) (12.4, 1.25);
\draw[dashed, blue] (5.5,3) arc[start angle=110, end angle=250, radius=.62];
\draw[very thick, red] (2.5, 3.2) -- (6.7, 3.2);
\draw[thick] (0,1.2) -- (2.5,1.2);
\draw (-0.03,1.2) -- (0.04,1.2)
(-0.03,2.4) -- (0.04,2.4)
(-0.03,3.5) -- (0.04,3.5)
(-0.03,4.3) -- (0.04,4.3)
(5.1, -0.03) -- (5.1, 0.03);
\draw (6.2,-1.2) node[anchor=north] {\textbf{Figure B.} \textrm{$\varphi_n$ for discrete Schr\"odinger canonical systems}};
\end{tikzpicture}\\
Different from Jacobi canonical systems, (\ref{condforDSwithRandv}) says that the length of the next step is determined by $\varphi$ when knowing the previous step. This is because there is no freedom to choose $a_n$ for discrete Schr\"odinger operators. This shows that it is very rare to obtain discrete Schr\"odinger canonical systems.
With the similar process before, we present the classification of the discrete Schr\"odinger canonical systems by the following theorem:
\begin{Theorem}\label{classificationofdscs}
Assume that $L_0=0$ and $\{ L_n \}_{n\ge1}$ is a strictly increasing sequence of positive numbers with $L_1=1$. Put $R_1=1$ and, for $n\ge1$,
$$R_{n+1}:=\sqrt{L_{n+1}-L_n}$$
(which is (\ref{relationofRandL})). Then any canonical system of the form
\begin{equation*}
J\frac{d}{dt}{\bf{u}}(t,z)=z
\begin{pmatrix} \cos^2 \varphi(t) & \cos \varphi(t)\sin \varphi(t)\\ \cos \varphi(t)\sin \varphi(t) & \sin^2 \varphi(t) \end{pmatrix}
{\bf{u}}(t,z)
\end{equation*}
with $\varphi$ satisfying (\ref{stepfunction}), (\ref{increasingsteps}) and (\ref{condforDSwithRandv}) can be written as a discrete Schr\"odinger eigenvalue equation
$$
-y_{n+1}-y_{n-1}+b_ny_n=zy_n,
$$
where
\begin{equation}\label{formulaforp}
b_{n+1}=R_nR_{n+2} \sin(\varphi_{n+2}-\varphi_n).
\end{equation}
Moreover, their $m$-functions are the same.
\end{Theorem}
Remark that, compared to the continuous case, (\ref{condforDSwithRandv}) and (\ref{formulaforp}) correspond to (20) and (25) in \cite{Hur3}, respectively.
\section{Non-density of discrete Schr\"odinger $m$-functions}\label{example}
In this section the $m$-functions for discrete Schr\"odinger operators are shown not to be dense on those for Jacobi operators. As mentioned in the introduction, this result is opposite to the density of Schr\"odinger $m$-functions on all Herglotz functions in \cite{Hur3} for the continuous setting.
To see this, the one-to-one correspondence between Herglotz functions and canonical systems is now utilized to deal with the problem on canonical systems. Based on both Theorem \ref{classificationofjcs} and Theorem \ref{classificationofdscs} (which are the representations of Jacobi and discrete Schr\"odinger canonical systems respectively), it is enough to construct some Jacobi canonical system whose $m$-function cannot be approximated by those of discrete Schr\"odinger operators.
For this, a topology on canonical systems is required, such that it accords with the local uniform convergence on Herglotz functions. Besides de Branges' own work \cite{deB} for this (see also Lemma 2.1 in \cite{Win4}), we adapt the following convergence on canonical systems in \cite{Hur3}:
\begin{Lemma}[Proposition 5.1 in \cite{Hur3}]\label{topologyoncs}
The convergence $m_{H_n}(z)\to m_H(z)$, $n\to\infty$, holds locally uniformly for $z\in{\mathbb C}^+$ if and only if it holds
\begin{equation}
\label{weak*conv}
\int_0^{\infty}{\boldsymbol{f}}^*H_n {\boldsymbol{f}}\to\int_0^{\infty}{\boldsymbol{f}}^*H {\boldsymbol{f}}
\end{equation}
for all continuous functions ${\boldsymbol{f}}=(f^1,f^2)^t$ with compact support of $[0,\infty)$.
\end{Lemma}
Here, let us say that \emph{$H_n$ converges to $H$ weak-$\ast$}, when (\ref{weak*conv}) holds. Note that the trace-normed condition, $\textrm{Tr }H(t)=1$, is preserved in the limiting process, which indicates that $H(t)dt$ is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure. Since there is no point spectrum for these measures, any vectors containing characteristic functions, such as $(\chi_{[1,2)}(t),0)^t$, can be test functions in Lemma \ref{topologyoncs}. In other words, the weak-$\ast$ convergence may be operated with any characteristic functions. \\
We are ready to see the non-density of the $m$-functions for discrete Schr\"odinger operators on all those for Jacobi operators.
\begin{Theorem}\label{nodensity}
There is a Jacobi operator whose $m$-function cannot be approximated by the $m$-functions for discrete Schr\"odinger operators in the sense of the local uniform convergence.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
It is enough to give some Jacobi operator whose $m$-function cannot be approachable by the $m$-functions of discrete Schr\"odinger operators. By de Branges theory this is equivalent to find a Jacobi canonical system which cannot be close by the discrete Schr\"odinger canonical systems in the sense of the topology induced by Lemma \ref{topologyoncs}, as talked.
Based on this idea, consider any Jacobi canonical system satisfying
\begin{equation*}
\varphi^\mathcal{J} (t)=\begin{cases} 3\pi/4 \quad (=\varphi^\mathcal{J}_2) \quad \textrm{on } [1,3/2) \\ \pi \quad (=\varphi^\mathcal{J}_3) \quad \textrm{on } [3/2,2) \end{cases}.
\end{equation*}
(Here the superscript $\mathcal{J}$ is for Jacobi canonical systems.) In other words, its second and third steps look like ones on the following figure:
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.65]\label{graphofvarphi}
\draw[->] (0,0) -- (13,0) node[anchor=north] { \large{$t$}};
\draw (0,0) node[anchor=north] {0}
(2.5,0) node[anchor=north] {1}
(5.1,0) node[anchor=north] {2}
(0,1.2) node[anchor=east] {$\varphi^\mathcal{J}_1=\frac{\pi}2$}
(0,2.4) node[anchor=east,red] {$\varphi^\mathcal{J}_3=\pi$}
(-2.1,1.85) node[anchor=east, red] {$\varphi^\mathcal{J}_2$}
(0,3.6) node[anchor=east] {$\frac{3\pi}2$};
\draw[->] (0,0) -- (0,5) node[anchor=east] {\large{$\varphi^\mathcal{J}_n$}};
\draw[dotted] (2.5,1.2) -- (12.5,1.2)
(5.1,0) -- (5.1,2.4)
(2.5,3.6) -- (12.5,3.6);
\draw[dotted, red] (0,2.4) -- (5,2.4)
(-2.1,1.85) -- (2.5,1.85);
\draw[dashed, blue] (5,2.4) (5.5,3)
(5.5,3) parabola bend (12.4,3.55) (12.4,3.55)
(5.5,1.8) parabola bend (12.4,1.25) (12.4, 1.25);
\draw[dashed, blue] (5.5,3) arc[start angle=110, end angle=250, radius=.62];
\draw[very thick, red] (3.9, 2.4) -- (5.1, 2.4)
(2.5, 1.85) -- (3.9, 1.85);
\draw[thick] (0,1.2) -- (2.5,1.2);
\draw (-0.03,1.2) -- (0.04,1.2)
(-0.03,2.4) -- (0.04,2.4)
(-0.03,3.5) -- (0.04,3.5)
(-0.03,4.3) -- (0.04,4.3)
(5.1, -0.03) -- (5.1, 0.03);
\draw (6.2,-1.2) node[anchor=north] {\textbf{Figure C.} \textrm{Some $\varphi^\mathcal{J}_n$ far from discrete Schr\"odinger canonical systems}};
\end{tikzpicture}\\
We now see that discrete Schr\"odinger canonical systems cannot approach the Jacobi canonical system. Recall first that, due to (\ref{conditionforR2}), any $\varphi^{DS}$ for discrete Schr\"odinger canonical systems should be constant at least on $[1,2)$.
Let us focus on the interval $[1,2)$. Since any constant function cannot be close to two different steps at the same time in the $L_1$-sense, Hamiltonians of discrete Schr\"odinger canonical systems cannot converge in weak-$\ast$ to the one for the given Jacobi canonical system. More precisely, put $\varphi^{DS}_2=3\pi/4$ which is for the second step of discrete Schr\"odinger canonical system. Take a look at the following figure to see the situation.
\vspace{0.6cm}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.65]\label{graphofvarphi}
\draw (2.5,0) node[anchor=north] {1}
(3.9,0) node[anchor=north] {3/2}
(5.1,0) node[anchor=north] {2}
(0.5,2.2) node[anchor=east] {$\varphi^\mathcal{J}_3=\pi$}
(0,1.4) node[anchor=east] {$\varphi^J_2=\frac{3\pi}4$}
(0.5,3.6) node[anchor=east] {$\frac{3\pi}2$};
\draw (7.0,2.0) node[anchor=west, red] {$\varphi^{DS}_2$};
\draw[dotted] (3.9, 2.2)--(3.9,0)
(2.5,3.6) -- (5.1,3.6);
\draw[dotted] (0,1.4) -- (2.5,1.4)
(0.5,2.2) -- (3.9,2.2);
\draw[very thick] (3.9, 2.2) -- (5.1, 2.2)
(2.5, 1.4) -- (3.9, 1.4);
\draw[dotted] (2.5,.6)--(5.1,.6) ;
\draw (5.1, -0.03) -- (5.1, 0.03);
\draw[very thick, red] (2.5, 1.8) -- (5.1,1.8);
\draw[dotted, red] (5.1,1.8) -- (7.0,1.8);
\draw (2.0,-1.2) node[anchor=north] {\textbf{Figure D.} \textrm{Failing $L_1$- approximation by the second step}};
\end{tikzpicture}\\
By direct computation, see that, for two vectors ${\boldsymbol{f}}=(\chi_{[1,3/2)},0)^t$ and ${\boldsymbol{g}}=(\chi_{[3/2,2)},0)^t$ which are used as test functions in Lemma \ref{topologyoncs},
\begin{equation*}
\max \left\{ \left| \int_{{\mathbb R}} {\boldsymbol{f}}^* \left(P_{\varphi^J}-P_{\varphi^{DS}} \right) {\boldsymbol{f}} \right|,
\left| \int_{{\mathbb R}} {\boldsymbol{g}}^* \left(P_{\varphi^J}-P_{\varphi^{DS}} \right) {\boldsymbol{g}} \right|\right\}=1/2.
\end{equation*}
This is because
$
(1,0) (\begin{smallmatrix} h_{1} & h_2 \\ h_2 & h_3 \end{smallmatrix}) \left( \begin{smallmatrix} 1 \\0 \end{smallmatrix}\right) = h_1.
$
It is easy to show that this is the minimum error (see Figure D), that is, for any $\varphi^{DS}$ for discrete Schr\"odinger canonical system, we have that
\begin{equation*}
\max \left\{ \left| \int_{{\mathbb R}} {\boldsymbol{f}}^* \left(P_{\varphi^J}-P_{\varphi^{DS}} \right) {\boldsymbol{f}} \right|,
\left| \int_{{\mathbb R}} {\boldsymbol{g}}^* \left(P_{\varphi^J}-P_{\varphi^{DS}} \right) {\boldsymbol{g}} \right|\right\}\ge1/2.
\end{equation*}
All this implies that the given Jacobi canonical system cannot be approximated by discrete Schr\"odinger canonical systems, as desired.
\end{proof}
As a next project, we may think of how large or small the set of either continuous or discrete Schr\"odinger operators is. This will reveal the relations between Schr\"odinger operators and the larger space, the set of either canonical systems or Jacobi operators, which tells us more about their inverse spectral theories.\\
\textit{Acknowledgement.} The author is grateful to the referee for valuable discussion. This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF-2016R1D1A1B03931764).\\
|
\section{Introduction}
The first discovery of a minor planet (Ceres) in 1801 by Giuseppe Piazzi was possible due to its recovery based on a novel orbit determination method derived by \citet{Gauss1809}. Since then, observational techniques for detecting asteroids have shifted from visual to photographic and photography was replaced by the charge-coupled device (CCD). Due to their high sensitivity, fast readout and use of computer algorithms, CCDs have provided by far the largest amount of positional astrometry for known asteroids. With the new observational methods, measurement uncertainties decreased, thus improving the quality of asteroid orbits.
The first generation of asteroid surveys had the goal of discovering 90\% of Near Earth Objects (NEOs) larger than 1\,km as mandated by the US government to NASA in 1998. The emerging large-format CCDs, dedicated observing time and NASA funding led to a dramatic increase in the discovery rate of asteroids and comets. The first generation of dedicated surveys in 1995-2010 was represented by Spacewatch \citep{McMillan06} on Kitt Peak in Arizona; Lincoln Near-Earth Asteroid Research \citep[LINEAR,][]{Stokes00} in Socorro, New Mexico; Lowell Observatory NEO Survey \citep[LONEOS,][]{Koehn99} in Flagstaff, Arizona; and Near-Earth Object Tracking \citep[NEAT,][]{Pravdo99} on Haleakala, Hawaii and at Palomar, California. In 2005, the Catalina Sky Survey \citep{Larson03}, which included sites at Mt. Bigelow (Catalina) and Mt. Lemmon near Tucson, Arizona, and Siding Spring in Australia, became a major contributor.
Pan-STARRS1 \citep{Hodapp04} is an example of next generation all-sky telescopes focusing on multiple fields of astronomy. In 2011 Pan-STARRS1 started its three-year operations on Haleakala, Maui and in 2014 it turned into a dedicated NEO survey, thus becoming the major contributor of NEO discoveries. Also, the Space Surveillance Telescope on Atom Peak in New Mexico has been submitting large quantities of incidental asteroid astrometry for the last few years. Additionally, the WISE infrared space telescope and its NEO component NEOWISE \citep{Wright10} contributed significantly to the discovery of asteroids and comets.
According to NEO population models \citep{Harris15}, we have reached an estimated discovery completeness of $95\%$ for NEOs larger than 1\,km NEOs and of $30\%$ for NEOs larger 140\,m. In the near future, LSST \citep{2016IAUS..318..282J} and possibly NEOCAM \citep{2016AJ....151..172G} will increase the number of known asteroids by an order of magnitude.
The reliability of asteroid orbits significantly depends on the quality and the statistical treatment of astrometric observations. One way to improve the astrometric precision is to use large telescopes, with a long focal length, good pixel resolution, and located at observing sites with excellent seeing. However, access to large telescopes is rather limited and expensive, the field of view is usually very small and ground-based astrometry can be limited by seeing. Nevertheless, orbits can be improved by extending the data arcs, possibly with archival observations, by removing known biases introduced by the reference catalogs, and by adopting weighting schemes that account for the diverse quality of the astrometric dataset.
\citet{Carpino03} first studied the problem of existing systematic errors in asteroid astrometry due to star catalog biases. \citet{Chesley10} computed systematic errors for multiple star catalogs in comparison to 2MASS \citep{Skrut06}, and provided correction tables that lowered the systematic errors and improved the accuracy of the computed orbits. \citet{Farnocchia15} refined the star catalog debiasing tables by including the effect of star proper motions and extending the scheme to a larger set of catalogs.
\citet{Chesley10} and \citet{Farnocchia15} also proposed weighting schemes based on the RMS for individual stations, eventually grouping by star catalog those stations with lower number of observations. However, in reality the astrometric quality was not always the same throughout the operation of individual surveys. Often telescopes were upgraded, with increased detection sensitivity, improved astrometric reduction pipeline or a different reference frame star catalog. Even human factors could affect the quality of the submitted data.
The availability of a reliable weighting scheme is especially important since the current observation format of the Minor Planet Center does not include astrometric uncertainties, which then need to be assumed when computing asteroid orbits.
Therefore, the scope of this work is to statistically analyze the residuals of debiased astrometric positions from major asteroid CCD surveys as a function of reported magnitude, epoch and type of observation. Ultimately, based on the derived statistics we present a new weighting scheme. The new scheme is now being used by the JPL Solar System Dynamics orbit determination pipeline, including the newly released Scout system \citep{Farnocchia15a, Farnocchia16}.
\section{Statistical analysis of asteroid CCD astrometry}
As of February 9, 2016 the asteroid CCD astrometry dataset contains more than 130 million astrometric measurements of about 700,000 asteroids (Table~\ref{surveys}). The 13 most productive asteroid CCD surveys produced more than 91\% of this dataset and so we focused our analysis on fully characterizing them. The positional astrometry of this dataset is debiased with respect to known star catalog biases by \citet{Farnocchia15} and the residuals computed by the JPL orbit determination pipeline. To make sure the observation residuals reflected the actual astrometric errors, we restricted our analysis to the astrometric dataset corresponding to multi-apparition orbits.
\begin{table*}[ht!]
\small
\begin{center}
\caption{The most productive asteroid surveys are listed with the RMS of their astrometric residuals for multi-apparition asteroids. Statistics for all detections and the fraction of observed known asteroids is current as of February 9, 2016.}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|cc|cc|c}
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{N} &Station &MPC & RA & DEC& \multirow{2}{*}{Detections} & \multirow{2}{*}{Asteroids} & Fraction of \\
& Name&Code &RMS &RMS & &&Asteroids \\
\hline
1 &LINEAR&704&0.67$''$&0.66$''$&32,777,288&370,033&53\%\\
2 &Mt. Lemmon&G96&0.31$''$&0.28$''$&18,640,225&619,386&88\%\\
3 &Pan-STARRS1&F51&0.12$''$&0.12$''$&18,400,219&616,209&88\%\\
4 &Catalina&703&0.69$''$&0.67$''$&17,802,653&436,810&62\%\\
5&Spacewatch&691&0.37$''$&0.34$''$&11,719,895&566,880&81\%\\
6&SST&G45&0.36$''$&0.36$''$&9,915,512&300,495&43\%\\
7&LONEOS&699&0.65$''$&0.59$''$&5,367,447&261,585&37\%\\
8&NEAT&644&0.30$''$&0.36$''$&3,926,121&302,846&43\%\\
9&Purple Mountain&D29&0.50$''$&0.47$''$&3,214,197&274,301&39\%\\
10&WISE&C51&0.55$''$&0.59$''$&2,222,396&149,884&21\%\\
11&Siding Spring&E12&0.49$''$&0.52$''$&2,228,965&168,462&24\%\\
12&Haleakala-AMOS&608&0.72$''$&0.85$''$&1,286,280&144,827&21\%\\
13&La Sagra&J75&0.42$''$&0.39$''$&1,159,632&153,233&22\%\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{surveys}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
The first measure to assess the data quality is to compute the root-mean-square (RMS) of astrometric residuals in RA and DEC (Table~\ref{surveys}). Among surveys Pan-STARRS1 achieves the best accuracy with an RMS of 0.12$''$. Yet, the RMS might not capture outliers, trends like time dependence, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), brightness and rate of motion, which we analyze in the following subsections.
\subsection{Astrometric residuals as a function of observation epoch}\label{sec:res_time}
Over time surveys experience changes in the star catalog used, upgraded CCD cameras and telescopes, and improved measuring algorithms. All of these changes can affect the astrometric quality. The top panels of Figures~\ref{fig.rms1}--\ref{fig.rms6} and the right panel of Figure~\ref{fig.rms7} show the dependency on epoch of observation for the considered surveys. In some cases the observation epoch matters (LINEAR, Catalina, Spacewatch, NEAT, AMOS) in other cases it does not seem to be a factor. For instance, the Spacewatch survey started using a new mosaic camera in late 2002 and saw an improvement of the astrometry in the following years. On the contrary, Pan-STARRS1 has been using the same catalog, same instrument and same reduction and automated pipeline, therefore no change over time was visible.
\subsection{Astrometric residuals as a function of target brightness}
The middle panels of Figures~\ref{fig.rms1}--\ref{fig.rms6} and the left panel of Figure~\ref{fig.rms7} show the astrometric RMS as a function of the magnitude for different surveys. Astrometric errors can significantly increase with respect to the mean RMS (Table~\ref{surveys}). The astrometric uncertainty depends on SNR, which is not available because of the restrictions of the MPC astrometric format. As a proxy for SNR we can use the target's visible brightness. Faint objects have lower SNR and so uncertainties increase as we can see in the figures. Objects that are too bright are also saturated on CCDs and could provide bad photometry and astrometry.
To capture all astrometric measurements within a projected uncertainty, the proposed weights should be larger than the mean RMS and capture the data quality dependence on brightness.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{704_epoch1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{G96_epoch1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{704composit.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{G96_mag1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{704_vel.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{G96_vel.png}
\caption{RMS of astrometric residuals of multi-apparition asteroids in right ascension and declination (top and middle panels) and along-track and cross-track astrometric residuals (bottom panels) as a function of epoch (top panels), magnitude (middle panels) and rate of motion (bottom panels) for LINEAR (left panels) and the Mt. Lemmon Survey (right panels).}
\label{fig.rms1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{F51_epoch1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{703_epoch1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{F51_mag1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{703composit.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{F51_vel.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{703_vel.png}
\caption{RMS of astrometric residuals of multi-apparition asteroids in right ascension and declination (top and middle panels) and along-track and cross-track astrometric residuals (bottom panels) as a function of epoch (top panels), magnitude (middle panels) and rate of motion (bottom panels) for Pan-STARRS (left panels) and the Catalina Sky Survey (right panels).}
\label{fig.rms2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{691_epoch1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{G45_epoch1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{691composit.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{G45_mag1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{691_vel.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{G45_vel.png}
\caption{RMS of astrometric residuals of multi-apparition asteroids in right ascension and declination (top and middle panels) and along-track and cross-track astrometric residuals (bottom panels) as a function of epoch (top panels), magnitude (middle panels) and rate of motion (bottom panels)) for Spacewatch (left panels) and the Space Surveillance Telescope (right panels).}
\label{fig.rms3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{699_epoch1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{644_epoch1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{699_mag1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{644composit.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{699_vel.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{644_vel.png}
\caption{RMS of astrometric residuals of multi-apparition asteroids in right ascension and declination (top and middle panels) and along-track and cross-track astrometric residuals (bottom panels) as a function of epoch (top panels), magnitude (middle panels) and rate of motion (bottom panels) for LONEOS (left panels) and NEAT (right panels).}
\label{fig.rms4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{D29_epoch1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{E12_epoch1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{D29_mag1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{E12_mag1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{D29_vel.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{E12_vel.png}
\caption{RMS of astrometric residuals of multi-apparition asteroids in right ascension and declination (top and middle panels) and along-track and cross-track astrometric residuals (bottom panels) as a function of epoch (top panels), magnitude (middle panels) and rate of motion (bottom panels) for Purple Mountain (left panels) and the Siding Spring Survey (right panels).}
\label{fig.rms5}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{608_epoch1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{J75_epoch1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{608_mag1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{J75_mag1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{608_vel.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{J75_vel.png}
\caption{RMS of astrometric residuals of multi-apparition asteroids in right ascension and declination (top and middle panels) and along-track and cross-track astrometric residuals (bottom panels) as a function of epoch (top panels), magnitude (middle panels) and rate of motion (bottom panels) for Haleakala-AMOS (left panels) and La Sagra (right panels).}
\label{fig.rms6}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{C51_epoch1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{C51_mag1.png}
\caption{RMS of astrometric residuals of multi-apparition asteroids in right ascension and declination as a function of epoch (left panel) and magnitude (right panel) for WISE.}
\label{fig.rms7}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Timing and dependency on the rate of motion}
The motion of asteroids can cause detections to be trailed along the direction of motion, often increasing the measurement error along the direction of motion. When objects move fast in the plane-of-sky, there is also the possibility that timing errors introduce significant positional errors. The bottom panels of Figures~\ref{fig.rms1}--\ref{fig.rms6} show the along-track (AT) and cross-track (CT) residual RMS as a function of magnitude and time for the ground-based observatories in Table~\ref{surveys}. We computed the AT and CT-residuals by projecting the RA and DEC components to the sky-plane motion. CT should reflect the astrometric position error, while AT will also contain errors coming from clock errors or measurement errors for fast trailed asteroids.
We expected to see larger AT errors for fast moving targets. Trailed asteroid detections tend to have larger uncertainties along-track, because the measurement errors are usually correlated with the trail length, due to point-spread-function fitting of trails instead of a proper trail representation \citep{Veres12,Fraser16}. In the case of Pan-STARRS1, LONEOS and Purple Mountain this trend is confirmed. However, in some cases the along-track residuals decrease as a function of the rate of motion (Siding Spring, Mt. Lemmon, Catalina, NEAT), remain flat (LINEAR, Spacewatch, NEAT) or have an upward and downward direction (SST). An upward trend suggests measurement errors caused by trailed detections or timing errors, while a flat trend shows that there is no timing or measurement problem for trails. Finally, a downward trend suggests that measurers might have taken special care in measuring fast moving targets.
Timing errors can be inferred by dividing the along-track residual by the rate of motion. However, it is important to point out it is not always possible to separate timing errors from position errors, especially for slow movers.
If the timing error is large for slow moving asteroids but not for the fast ones, this could likely indicate star catalog bias.
For instance, Figure~\ref{vel_2} is an example of timing error as a function of rate of motion and epoch for Spacewatch, which used five different reference catalogs over time. Until 2014, the timing error seemed to be large, at a level of tens of seconds. However, the lower figure shows that only slow movers represented by main belt asteroids (MBAs) moving at $0.2$\,deg/day on average, are responsible for this effect and only for USNO-A2.0 and UCAC-3 catalogs. Moreover, it is clear how the time bias is catalog dependent, thus pointing to unresolved systematics in the catalogs. At this rate of motion, a catalog bias of 0.1$''$ corresponds to a timing error of 12 seconds. The lowest timing errors were visible for the UCAC-4 catalog, but even there, a seasonal effect is clearly visible, possibly coming from unresolved catalog biases at peculiar values of right ascension. The variation around zero is presumably correlated with the location of the ecliptic with respect to the equator when fields were observed. In general it is hard to identify timing issues for slow movers, as systematic errors in position are dominant.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{spacewatch_vel1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{spacewatch_vel2.png}
\caption{Timing error of Spacewatch astrometry as a function of epoch (top panel) and rate of motion (bottom panel) for star reference catalogs.}
\label{vel_2}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{The weighting scheme for CCD observations}
The current weighting scheme used at JPL is described by \citet{Chesley10} and \citet{Farnocchia15}. The data weights are assigned based on station-specific statistics when enough observations are available, otherwise observations are binned by catalog. The weights are defined as $w=1/\sigma^2$, where $\sigma$ is the observation uncertainty, which is scaled from the RMS of the residuals. To mitigate possible effects of unresolved systematics, uncertainties are inflated by a factor of $\sqrt{N}$, where N represents the number of positions in a nightly batch from the same station.
Based on a few years of experience, we found some issues and room for improvement to the current scheme. In particular, on multiple occasions that scheme forced us to set manual weights for specific objects, especially when dealing with NEOs. As shown in Figures~\ref{fig.rms1}--\ref{fig.rms7}, faint detections end up being overweighted when the data weight is based on the RMS. Ideally, we should use the SNR to scale the RMS, but the SNR is not yet available. Therefore, in the scheme proposed in this paper, we conservatively set the data weights according to the upper bound of the RMS as a function of brightness.
For some stations the astrometric quality is not uniform over time, as discussed in Section~\ref{sec:res_time}. In those cases we split in to different time intervals and analyzed the brightness dependence for each time interval.
For observers without reliable station-specific statistics, the current weighting bins observations and assigns weights by the star catalog used for the astrometric reduction.
However, there can be a significantly inhomogeneous quality between different observers using the same catalog. In particular, even unreliable observers would get aggressive weights if they were using a catalog with good statistics. Moreover, every time a new catalog is introduced, we would need to perform a statistical analysis of the stations using that catalog to determine the data weights, though it may take time before enough observations are available. For instance, all the astrometry reduced by using the Gaia-DR1 catalog \citep{Lindegren2016} was getting deweighted with respect to other catalogs just because Gaia-DR1 is a new catalog and does not have any statistics available. To deal with this problem, we dropped weighting rules only based on the star catalog, and only assigned rules to observatories we can fully characterize.
Also, the $\sqrt{N}$ scaling factor was introducing some issues. For instance, when only a pair of same-night observations, instead of the usual four, was submitted, the individual observations were overweighted. However, with only a pair there is less confidence that the astrometry is reliable. Moreover, the generic weight for CCD astrometry was at 1.5$''$ for the previous scheme and if four observations were submitted the weights were scaled at 3$''$, which appears to be too conservative. In the current scheme, we propose a constant weight up to four observations per night, and then deweight by a scaling factor $\sqrt{N/4}$. We selected a threshold of four observations per night since it is enough observations to make sure the object is real but not too many, which could cause problems due to unresolved systematic errors.
Tables~\ref{new_schema1} and \ref{new_schema2} give the weighting scheme based on the guidelines discussed above. For Catalina, Spacewatch and NEAT there is a time dependence that we account for (Table~\ref{new_schema1}). The remaining surveys did not exhibit statistically significant changes over time (Table~\ref{new_schema2}). Since we cannot fully characterize them, all the other CCD observations (less than 10\% of the whole CCD dataset) get a conservative weight at 1$''$ if the star catalog is known. If the catalog is unknown, there could be regional biases as large as 1$''$ \citep{Farnocchia15} and so observations are further deweighted at 1.5$''$.
\begin{table*}[ht!]
\small
\begin{center}
\footnotesize
\caption{New astrometric weights for CCD observers with astrometric residuals dependent on epoch.}
\tabcolsep=0.11cm
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\hline
MPC Code &$\sigma_{RA,DEC}$ & Epoch \\
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{703} &1.0$''$ & $<2014-01-01$\\
& 0.8$''$ & $>2014-01-01$\\
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{691} &0.6$''$ & $<2003-01-01$\\
& 0.5$''$ & $>2003-01-01$\\
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{644} &0.6$''$ & $<2003-09-01$\\
& 0.4$''$ & $>2003-09-01$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{new_schema1}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[ht!]
\small
\begin{center}
\footnotesize
\caption{New astrometric weights for the most active CCD asteroid observers.}
\tabcolsep=0.11cm
\begin{tabular}{c|c||c|c}
\hline
MPC Code &$\sigma_{RA,DEC}$ & MPC Code &$\sigma_{RA,DEC}$ \\
\hline
704&1.0$''$&C51&1.0$''$\\
G96&0.5$''$&E12&0.75$''$\\
F51&0.2$''$&608&0.6$''$\\
G45&0.6$''$&J75&1.0$''$\\
699&0.8$''$&other w/ catalog&1.0$''$\\
D29&0.75$''$&other w/o catalog&1.5$''$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{new_schema2}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
In addition to the 13 most prolific CCD surveys, there are some key NEO follow-up observers for which the 1$''$ weights would be far too conservative. Follow-up observers do not have as many observations as prolific survey and so it is harder to perform a statistical analysis that is as meaningful. Based on the experience and direct communication with some of them, we add the weighting rules described in Table~\ref{follow_up}. In some cases the usage of more accurate catalog (e.g., Gaia) warranted the usage of even tighter weights.
\begin{table*}[htb]
\footnotesize
\caption{New astrometric weights for selected NEO follow-up observers. Las Cumbres Observatories (LCO) are represented by following observatory codes: K92, K93, Q63, Q64, V37, W84, W85, W86, W87, K91, E10, F65.}
\begin{minipage}{\textwidth}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c||c|c|c}
\hline
MPC &\multirow{2}{*}{Catalog} & \multirow{2}{*}{$\sigma_{RA,DEC}$}&MPC &\multirow{2}{*}{ Catalog }& \multirow{2}{*}{$\sigma_{RA,DEC}$} \\
Code & & & Code & & \\
\hline
645&all&0.3$''$&Y28 & PPMXL, Gaia &0.3$''$\\
673&all&0.3$''$&568&USNO-B1.0, USNO-B2.0 &0.5$''$\\
689&all&0.5$''$&568 &Gaia &0.1$''$ \\
950&all&0.5$''$&568 &PPMXL &0.2$''$ \\
H01&all&0.3$''$&T09&Gaia& 0.1$''$\\
J04&all&0.4$''$&T12&Gaia&0.1$''$\\
W84&all&0.5$''$&T14&Gaia&0.1$''$\\
G83\footnote{\label{aaa}Applies only to program code assigned to M. Micheli, \url{ftp://cfa-ftp.harvard.edu/pub/MPCNewFormat/ProgramCodes.txt}}& UCAC-4, PPMXL &0.3$''$ & 309\footref{aaa}&UCAC-4, PPMXL & 0.3$''$\\
G83\footref{aaa} & Gaia&0.2 $''$ &309\footref{aaa}&Gaia & 0.2$''$ \\
LCO&all&0.4$''$ & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\label{follow_up}
\end{table*}
To validate the performance of the newly suggested weighting scheme, we performed a similar test to that described by \citet{Chesley10} and \citet{Farnocchia15}. Instead of MBAs, instead we used $\sim200$ NEOs with at least 5 apparitions. We computed orbit solutions from subsets of 1 or 2 consecutive apparitions to be considered as predictions and to be compared to the long arc solution, used as truth.
To describe our results, we make the comparison in semimajor axis (Figure~\ref{fig.sigma_a}), as it is the key orbital parameter driving prediction uncertainties. We also did similar comparisons in 6-D orbital element space and Cartesian space, where the results and conclusions are the same. Generally, the cumulative density function (CDF) in semimajor axis is conservative when compared to a theoretical distribution by a factor of 1.5 or less. This conservative factor is likely due the fact we set the weights corresponding to the upper bound of RMS as a function of target's brightness.
On the other hand, the new scheme seems to better capture the distribution tails than the old scheme and would therefore reduce the need of setting manual weights for outliers. We checked that the absolute prediction errors are essentially the same, which confirms the findings by \citep{Chesley10} and \citep{Farnocchia15} that weighting mostly affects prediction uncertainties, rather than the prediction itself.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{1_sma.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{1-2_sma.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{5_sma.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{4-5_sma.png}
\caption{Prediction error in sigma for semimajor axis for 200 NEO for the old (dashed) and new (solid) weighting scheme. Theoretical sigma CDF is depicted by a dash-dotted line. Upper row shows the most recent apparitions and the lower row shows the earliest apparitions (time span of 5 apparitions in total).}
\label{fig.sigma_a}
\end{figure}
\section{Data weights for non-CCD observations}
After CCD observations, the second most common type of observation in the current astrometry catalog is photographic. Even though this observation type dominates the pre-1995 astrometric dataset, we do not have enough data to perform a station-specific analysis as was done for CCD observations.
To set the data weights for photographic astrometry, we selected Ceres and Vesta and computed an orbit using only their CCD, Hipparcos and transit circle observations. This orbit is accurate enough to predict their plane-of-sky positions at least 200 years in the past so we can compare it to photographic astrometry. Figure~\ref{fig.ceres} shows the RMS and mean RA and DEC pre-fit residuals for the photographic observations of these two objects, which we used to set up the weights (Table~\ref{new_schema3}). In any case, we generally advise caution when using old observations because of problems like UTC time not being defined, low precision in the reported astrometric positions, etc.
For other types of observations in the MPC dataset, there is even less information. For instance, brightness was often missing and in general the number of observations is small. Our data weights are derived from the RMS of the corresponding residuals and reported in Table~\ref{new_schema3}.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{ceres_1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{ceres_2.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{vesta_1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{vesta_2.png}
\label{fig.ceres}
\caption{Mean (left) and RMS (right) residuals of photographic positions of Ceres (upper row) and Vesta (lower row) with respect to its orbit derived only from CCD astrometry. The step functions in the right panels correspond to the data weights reported in Table~\ref{new_schema3}.}
\end{figure}
\begin{table*}[ht!]
\small
\begin{center}
\footnotesize
\caption{New astrometric weights for non-CCD observations. In the photographic category we include observations marked with ``P'' (or a blank), ``A" (converted from the B1950 frame) and with ``N" (normal place) by the MPC.}
\tabcolsep=0.11cm
\begin{tabular}{l|c}
\hline
Type of observation & $\sigma_{RA,DEC}$ \\
\hline
Photographic (before 1890-01-01) &10.0$''$ \\
Photographic (from 1890-01-01 to 1950-01-01) &5.0$''$ \\
Photographic (after 1950-01-01)&2.5$''$\\
\hline
Occultations&0.2$''$\\
Hipparcos&0.2$''$\\
Transit circle&0.5$''$\\
Encoder&0.75$''$\\
Micrometer&2.0$''$\\
Satellite&1.5$''$\\
Mini-normal place&1.0$''$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{new_schema3}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\section{Discussion}
The accuracy of asteroid orbits relies on that of the observations. In particular, the ephemeris uncertainties are a function of observation uncertainties. At present, no direct astrometric positional uncertainties are available for the MPC observation dataset. Nor is available information such as the detection SNR, which would allow one to infer what the astrometric uncertainties are. Therefore, our only option to quantify these uncertainties is to perform a statistical analysis of the astrometric errors.
We considered the 13 most productive CCD surveys, which account for more than 90\% of the overall astrometric dataset. For all of them we found that there is a significant dependence of the astrometric quality on a target's brightness. In particular, there is a clear quality degradation for faint objects, especially when near the survey's limiting magnitude, but also for the brightest objects likely due to saturation effects. This sensitivity is hard to capture by a simple metric such as the RMS of that survey's residuals.
We also found that the astrometric quality can change over time, which may correspond to telescope or camera upgrades, changes in the star catalog used for the astrometric reduction, etc.
Another line of investigation was the sensitivity of residuals on the rate of motion. Some surveys do not seem to properly handle detections of fast movers and the astrometric residuals significantly increase with the rate of motion. Difficulties in treating fast movers arise from the fact that detections are trailed. Also, for fast movers timing errors can result in significant position errors along the direction of motion. However, decoupling timing errors from unresolved systematic position errors is not trivial. Errors in clock timing can be mitigated by assuming timing uncertainties that would naturally map to plane-of-sky uncertainties.
Based on our statistical analysis we derived a new astrometric weighting scheme. The new scheme accounts for the dependence on target's brightness and observation epoch. For those CCD observations that we did not characterize, the weights are set in a conservative way. We found that the proposed weighting scheme is conservative by a factor of as much as 1.5. However, it better handles outliers and faint detections, and it reduces the need of manually setting the weights. Moreover, having some margin can be a good idea for applications such as impact monitoring or ephemeris support for space missions. The new scheme is being used by the JPL Solar System Dynamics orbit determination pipeline.
Future work will account for the Gaia star catalog \citep{Lindegren2016}. Its first release has already proven useful by significantly reducing star catalog systematic effects \citep{Tholen2017}.
In 2018 the second release should become available and will include proper motions. At that point, it will possible to use the Gaia catalog to remeasure and improve past observations, and surveys may consider a massive reprocessing of their astrometry.
Moreover, we plan to use the second release of Gaia to improve the \citet{Farnocchia15} debiasing tables and therefore subtract star catalog systematic errors to the current astrometric dataset.
Another upcoming significant change will be the new Astrometry Data Exchange Standard (ADES\footnote{\url{http://minorplanetcenter.net/iau/info/IAU2015_ADES.pdf}}). This format extends the one currently in use by the Minor Planet Center and allows observers to communicate valuable information such astrometric uncertainties and SNR that can be used to inform the weighting scheme.
However, even after the adoption of this new format, it is important to keep analyzing the performance of the various observers.
In fact, future weighting schemes will not necessarily convert the supplied uncertainties to data weights, at least until these uncertainties are proved to be accurate and to provide statistically consistent ephemeris prediction uncertainties.
Another aspect to be considered in the future is that of timing errors. This error component is important to deal with objects that have high rates of motion in the sky and for which timing errors can be significant or even dominate the astrometric position errors.
\section*{Acknowledgement}
This research was conducted at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. \copyright\ 2017. All rights reserved.
\bibliographystyle{icarus.bst}\biboptions{authoryear}
|
\section{\uppercase{Introduction}}
\label{Second:introduction}
\noindent In recent years, we have witnessed an increasing development of mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets. Smartphones are also becoming an important means for accessing various online services, such as online social networks, email and cloud computing. Many applications and websites allow users to store their information, passwords, etc. Users also save various contact information, photos, schedules and other personal information in their smartphones. No one wants personal and sensitive information to be leaked to others without their permission. However, the smartphone is easily stolen, and the attacker can have access to the personal information stored in the smartphone. Furthermore, the attacker can steal the victim's identity and launch impersonation attacks in networks, which would threaten the victim's personal and sensitive information like his bank account, as well as the security of the networks, especially online social networks. Therefore, providing reliable access control of the information stored on smartphones, or accessible through smartphones, is very important. But, first, it is essential to be able to authenticate the legitimate user of the smartphone, and distinguish him or her from other unauthorized users.
Passwords are currently the most common way for authentication. However, they suffer from several weaknesses. Passwords are vulnerable to attacks because they are easily guessed. They suffer from social engineering attacks, like phishing, pretexting, etc. The usability issue is also a serious factor, since users do not like to have to enter, and reenter, passwords or pins. A study \cite{consumer} shows that 64\% of users do not use passwords as an authentication mechanism on their smartphones. Hence, this paper proposes a means of implicit and continuous authentication, beyond the initial authentication by password, pin or biometric (e.g., fingerprint).
Implicit authentication does not rely on the direct involvement of the user, but is closely related to his/her biometric behavior, habits or living environment. We propose a form of implicit authentication realized by building the user's profile based on measurements from various sensors in a typical smartphone. Specifically, the sensors within the smartphones can reflect users' behavior patterns and environment characteristics. The recent development and integration of sensor technologies in smartphones, and advances in modeling user behavior create new opportunities for better smartphone security.
\begin{table}[!t]
\caption{Sensors enabled in some popular smartphones.}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Sensor & Nexus 5 & iphone 5s & Galaxy S5 \\ \hline
accelerometer & Yes & Yes & Yes \\ \hline
gyroscope & Yes & Yes & Yes \\ \hline
magnetic field& Yes & Yes & Yes \\ \hline
light & Yes & Yes & Yes \\ \hline
proximity & Yes & Yes & Yes \\ \hline
pressure & Yes & No & Yes \\ \hline
temperature & No & No & No \\ \hline
orientation & Yes & No & No \\ \hline
GPS &Yes &Yes &Yes \\ \hline
MIC &Yes &Yes &Yes \\ \hline
camera &Yes &Yes &Yes \\ \hline
Network &Yes &Yes &Yes \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{sensors}
\end{table}
In this paper, we propose a multi-sensor-based system to achieve continuous and implicit authentication for smartphone users. The system leverages data collected by three sensors: accelerometer, orientation sensor, and magnetometer, in a smartphone, and then trains a user's profile using the SVM machine learning technique. The system continuously authenticates the current user without interrupting user-smartphone interactions. The smartphone's security system is alerted once abnormal usage is detected by our implicit authentication mechanism, so that access to sensitive information can be shut down or restricted appropriately, and further checking and remediation actions can be taken. Our authentication mechanism can adaptively update a user's profile every day considering that the user's pattern may change slightly with time. Our experimental results on two different data sets show the effectiveness of our proposed idea. It only takes less than 10 seconds to train the model everyday and 20 seconds to detect abnormal usage of the smartphone, while achieving high accuracy (90\%, up to 95\%).
\begin{table*}[!t]
\caption{Sensor measurements, common usage and whether applications need the user's permission to access measurements.}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Sensor & Description & Common Use & Permission \\ \hline
accelerometer & \tabincell{c}{Measures the acceleration force in $m/s^2$\\ on all three physical axes (x, y, and z)} & Motion detection & No \\ \hline
orientation & \tabincell{c}{Measures degrees of rotation in rad\\ on all three physical axes (x, y, z)} & Rotation detection. & No \\ \hline
magnetometer& \tabincell{c}{Measures the ambient geomagnetic field \\for all three physical axes (x, y, z) in $\mu$T} & \tabincell{c}{Environment detection\\ (compass)} & No \\ \hline
gyroscope & \tabincell{c}{Measures a device's rate of rotation in rad/s\\ on all three physical axes (x, y, and z)} & Rotation detection & No \\ \hline
light & \tabincell{c}{Measures the ambient light level in lx} & \tabincell{c}{Environment detection} & No \\ \hline
proximity & \tabincell{c}{Measures the proximity of an object in cm\\ relative to the view screen of a device} & Phone position during a call. & No \\ \hline
pressure & \tabincell{c}{Measures the ambient air pressure in hPa} & Environment detection & No \\ \hline
temperature & \tabincell{c}{Measures the ambient room temperature \\in degrees Celsius} & Environment detection & No \\ \hline
GPS & Positioning &Tracking and Positioning &Yes \\ \hline
microphone & Record voice & Speech recognition &Yes \\ \hline
camera & Record image &Face recognition &Yes \\ \hline
network & Provide user connection to internet & \tabincell{c}{Connectivity, location,\\ surfing patterns} &Yes \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{permission}
\end{table*}
We arrived at our three-sensor solution by first testing the performance on a single-sensor-based system, considering each of the accelerometer, the orientation sensor and the magnetometer. We found that the authentication accuracy for measurements from the orientation sensor alone is worse than that of the accelerometer alone or the magnetometer alone. Then, we test a two-sensors-based system, using pairwise combinations from these three sensors. This showed that the combination of multiple sensors can improve the accuracy of the resulting authentication. We then combined the measurements from all three sensors, and showed that while there was a slight performance improvement, this incremental improvement is much less than going from one to two sensors, and the authentication accuracy is already above 90\%, reaching 95\%. We also show that our method allows the users to adjust their security levels by changing the sampling rate of the collected data.
The main contributions of our paper are summarized below.
\begin{itemize}
\item We propose a multi-sensor-based system to achieve continuous and implicit authentication, which is accurate, efficient and flexible.
\item We compare our three-sensor-based method with single-sensor and two-sensors-based methods on two real data sets. Our three-sensor-based method is shown to have the best performance.
\item We also analyze the balance between the authentication accuracy and the training time. We give a reasonable
trade-off with respect to the sampling rate and the data size, that is practical and meaningful in the real world environment of commodity smartphone users.
\end{itemize}
\begin{spacing}{0.2}
\section{\uppercase{Background}}
\end{spacing}
\noindent
\begin{table*}[]
\caption{Comparison of our method (we just apply one of our results in PU data set.) and state-of-art research in implicit authentication (if the information is given in the paper cited, otherwise it is shown as n.a. (not available)). FP is false positive rate and FN is false negative rate. \emph{train} means the time for training the model and \emph{test} means the time for detecting the abnormal usage. The script column shows whether a user has to follow a script. If a script is required, we can not achieve implicit authentication without user participation.}\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
&Devices& Sensors & Method & Accuracy &\tabincell{c}{ Detecting \\time} & \tabincell{c}{Script} \\ \hline
Our method & \tabincell{c}{Nexus 5\\Android}& \tabincell{c}{orientation, \\magnetometer,\\accelerometer} & SVM & \tabincell{c}{90.23\%} & \tabincell{c}{train:6.07s\\test:20s} & No \\ \hline
\tabincell{c}{Kayacik et al., 2014} & Android & \tabincell{c}{light,\\orientation, \\magnetometer,\\accelerometer}& \tabincell{c}{temporal \&\\spatial model} & n.a. & \tabincell{c}{train: n.a.\\test:$\geq$122s} & No\\ \hline
\tabincell{c}{ Zhu et al., 2013}& Nexus S & \tabincell{c}{orientation, \\magnetometer,\\accelerometer} & \tabincell{c}{n-gram\\language\\model} & 71.3\% & n.a. & Yes\\ \hline
\tabincell{c}{ Buthpitiya et al.,2011} & n.a. & GPS & \tabincell{c}{n-gram model\\on location} & 86.6\% &\tabincell{c}{train:n.a.\\test:$\geq$30min}& No\\ \hline
\tabincell{c}{ Trojahn et al., 2013} & \tabincell{c}{HTC\\Desire} & screen & \tabincell{c}{keystroke \&\\handwriting} & \tabincell{c}{FP:11\% \\ FN:16\% } & n.a. & Yes \\ \hline
\tabincell{c}{ Li et al., 2013} & \tabincell{c}{Motorola\\Droid} & screen & sliding pattern& 95.7\% &\tabincell{c}{train: n.a.\\test:0.648s} & Yes \\ \hline
\tabincell{c}{ Nickel et al., 2012} &\tabincell{c}{Motorola\\Milestone} & accelerometer & K-NN &\tabincell{c}{FP:3.97\%\\FN:22.22\%} & \tabincell{c}{train:1.5min\\test:30s} & Yes \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table1}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Smartphone inputs and sensors}
A unique feature of a smartphone is that it is equipped with a lot of sensors. Table \ref{sensors} lists some common sensors
in some of the most popular smartphones. Table \ref{permission} lists the sensors' functionality, description of the measurements made, what it can be used for in terms of user or smartphone authentication, and whether Android permissions are required to read the sensor's measurements.
Smartphone sensor information include measurements from an accelerometer, gyroscope, magnetometer, orientation sensor, ambient light, proximity sensor, barometric pressure and temperature. Other more privacy sensitive inputs include a user's location as measured by his GPS location, WLAN, cell tower ID and Bluetooth connections. Also privacy sensitive are audio and video inputs like the microphone and camera. The contacts, running apps, apps' network communication pattern, browsing history, screen on/off state, battery status and so on, can also help to characterize a user.
\subsection{Related work}
Table \ref{table1} summarizes and compares our work with past work on sensor-based authentication.
With the increasing development of mobile sensing technology, collecting many measurements through sensors in smartphones is now becoming not only possible, but quite easy through, for example, Android sensor APIs. Mobile sensing applications, such as the CMU MobiSens \cite{cc1}, run as a service in the background and can constantly collect sensors' information from smartphones. Sensors can be either hard sensors (e.g., accelerometers) that are physically-sensing devices or soft sensors that record information of a phone's running status (e.g., screen on/off).
Continuous authentication on smartphones is likely to become an interesting new research area, given the easily accessible data today in smartphones.
In \cite{cc3}, a lightweight, and temporally \& spatially aware user behavior model is proposed for authentication based on both hard and soft sensors. They considered four different attacks and showed that even the informed insider can be detected in 717 seconds. However, they did not quantitatively show the accuracy. In comparison, our method not only clearly shows high accuracy performance but also requires much less detection time (e.g., we only need 20 seconds to detect an abnormal user while training the profiles for less than 10 seconds.)
SenSec \cite{cc2} constantly collects data from the accelerometer, gyroscope and magnetometer, to construct the gesture model while the user is using the device. SenSec is shown to achieve an accuracy of 75\% in identifying users and 71.3\% in detecting the non-owners. However, they ask users to follow a script, i.e., a specific series of actions, for authentication. In comparison, we do not need users to follow a specific script while still getting good authentication accuracy, higher than 90\%.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.2in,height=1.5in]{mechanism_simple.eps}
\DeclareGraphicsExtensions.
\caption{In our method, we first construct a vector at each time by using sensors' data (In experiment, we use 9 values from the accelerometer, magnetometer and orientation sensor in a smartphone.) After that, we re-sample the data collected from the sensors in a smartphone. Then, we train the re-sampled data with the SVM technique to get a user's profile. Based on the user's profile, we can do the implicit authentication.}
\label{mechanism}
\end{figure*}
In \cite{cc4}, an n-gram geo-based model is proposed for modeling a user's mobility pattern. They use the GPS sensor to demonstrate that the system could detect abnormal activities (e.g., a phone being stolen) by analyzing a user's location history, and the accuracy they achieve is 86.6\%. However, they just utilize a single sensor for authentication, which largely limits their performance. By exploiting multiple sensors, our method achieves better accuracy.
Biometric-based systems have also been used to achieve continuous and unobservable authentication for smartphones \cite{cc5} \cite{cc6} \cite{cc7}. However, they ask users to follow a script for authentication. In comparison, we do not need users to follow a specific script while still getting good authentication accuracy.
\cite{cc5} developed a mixture of a keystroke-based and a handwriting-based method to realize authentication through the screen sensor. Their approach has 11\% false acceptance rate and 16\% false rejection rate.
\cite{cc6} proposed another biometric method to do authentication for smartphones. They exploited five basic movements (sliding up, down, right, left and tapping) and the related combinations as the user's features, to perform authentication.
An accelerometer-based biometric gait recognition to authenticate smartphones through k-NN algorithm was proposed in \cite{cc7}. Their work is based on the assumption that different people have different walking patterns. Their process only takes 30 seconds. However, their approach asks the users to follow a script, where they just record the data when the user is walking. In comparison, we do not need the user to follow any script, which means that we can provide continuous protection without user interaction, while their approach can only guarantee security for walking users.
The fact that sensors reflect an individual's behavior and environment can not only be used for authentication, but can also lead to new attacks. \cite{cc8} proposed an attack to infer a user's input on a telephone key pad from measurements of the orientation sensor. They used the accelerometer to detect when the user is using a smartphone, and predicted the PIN through the use of gyroscope measurements.
Sensors also reflect environmental information, which can be used to reveal some sensitive information. By using measurements from an accelerometer on a smartphone to record the vibrations from a nearby keyboard \cite{cc11}, the authors could decode the context. In \cite{cc10}, the authors show that the gyroscope can record the vibration of acoustic signals, and such information can be used to derive the credit card number.
\section{KEY IDEAS}
\noindent Some past work only consider one sensor to do authentication \cite{cc4}\cite{cc5}\cite{cc6}\cite{cc7}. We will show that the authentication accuracy can be improved by taking other sensors into consideration. We propose a multi-sensor-based technology with a machine learning method for implicit authentication, which only takes a short time to detect the abnormal user, but also needs less than 10 seconds to retrain the user's profile every day. First, we collect the data from the selected sensors. Then, we use the SVM technique as the classification algorithm to differentiate the usage patterns of various users and authenticate the user of the smartphone.
Our methodology can be extended to other sensors in a straight-forward manner. Figure \ref{mechanism} shows our methodology, and the key ideas are presented below.
\subsection{Sensor Selection}
There are a lot of sensors built into smartphones nowadays as shown in Table \ref{sensors} and Table \ref{permission}. With smartphones becoming more connected with our daily lives, a lot of personal information can be stored in the sensors. The goal is to choose a small set of sensors that can accurately represent a user's characteristics.
In this paper, we experiment with three sensors that are commonly found in smartphones: accelerometers, orientation sensors and magnetometers. They also represent different information about the user's behavior and environment: the accelerometer can detect coarse-grained motion of a user like how he walks \cite{cc7}, the orientation sensor can detect fine-grained motion of a user like how he holds a smartphone \cite{cc8}, and the magnetometer measurements can perhaps be useful in representing his environment. Furthermore, these sensors do not need the user's permission to be used in Android applications, which is useful for continuous monitoring for implicit authentication.
Also, these three sensors do not need the user to perform a sequence of actions dictated by a script--– hence facilitating implicit authentication. Note that our method is not limited to these three sensors, but can be easily generalized to different selections of hard or soft sensors, or to incorporate more sensors.
\subsection{Data Sets and Re-sampling}
\begin{spacing}{1}
We use two data sets, a new one which we collected locally by ourselves which we call the PU data set, and another data set which we obtained from the authors of a published paper \cite{cc3}, which we call the GCU data set.
The PU data set is collected from 4 graduate students in Princeton University in 2014 based on the smartphone, Google Nexus 5 with Android 4.4. It contains sensor data from the accelerometer, orientation sensor and magnetometer with a sampling rate of 5 Hz. The duration of the data collected is approximately 5 days for each user. Each sensor measurement consists of three values, so we construct a vector from these nine values. We use different sampling rates as a factor in our experiments, to construct data points.
\setlength{\parskip}{0.2pt}
We use the second data set, called the GCU dataset version 2 \cite{cc3}, for comparison. This is collected from 4 users consisting of staff and students of Glasgow Caledonian University. The data was collected in 2014 from Android devices and contains sensor data from wifi networks, cell towers, application use, light and sound levels, acceleration, rotation, magnetic field and device system statistics. The duration of the data collected is approximately 3 weeks. For better comparison with our PU data set, we only use the data collected from the accelerometer, orientation sensor and magnetometer data.
The sensor measurements originally obtained are too large to process directly. Hence, we use a re-sampling process to not only reduce the computational complexity but also reduce the effect of noise by averaging the data points. For example, if we want to reduce the data set by 5 times, we average 5 contiguous data points into one data point. In section 4, we will show that the time for training a user's profile can be significantly reduced by re-sampling.
\end{spacing}
\subsection{Support Vector Machines}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3in,height=1.8in]{SVM_teach.eps}
\DeclareGraphicsExtensions.
\caption{Illustrating SVM. The purpose of SVM to find out the largest margin separating two groups of data }
\label{SVM_teach}
\end{figure}
The classification method used by prior work did not give very accurate results. Hence, we propose the use of the SVM technique for better authentication accuracy.
Support Vector Machines (SVMs) are state-of-the-art large margin classifiers, which represent a class of supervised machine learning algorithms first introduced by \cite{svm2}. SVMs have recently gained popularity for human activity recognition on smartphones \cite{svm_recognization}. In this section, we provide a brief review of the related theory of SVMs \cite{svm}, \cite{svm2}.
After obtaining the features from sensors, we use SVM as the classification algorithm in the system. The training data is represented as $\mathcal{D}=\{(\bm{x}_i,\bm{y}_i)\in \mathcal{X}\times\mathcal{Y}:i=1,2,\dots ,n\}$ for $n$ data-label pairs. For binary classification, the data space is $\mathcal{X}=\mathbb{R}^d$ and the label set is $\mathcal{Y}=\{-1,+1\}$. The predictor $\bm{w}$ is $\mathcal{X}\rightarrow \mathcal{Y}$. The objective function is $J(\bm{w},\mathcal{D})$. The SVM finds a hyperplane in the training inputs to separate two different data sets such that the margin is maximized. Figure \ref{SVM_teach} illustrates the concept of SVM classification. A margin is the distance from the hyperplane to a boundary data point. The boundary point is called a support vector and there may exist many support vectors. The most popular method of training such a linear classifier is by solving a regularized convex optimization problem:
\begin{equation}
\bm{w}^{*}=\mathrm{argmin}_{\bm{w}\in\mathbb{R}^d}\frac{\lambda}{2}\|\bm{w}\|^2+\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n l\left(\bm{w}, \bm{x}_i, y_i\right)
\label{eq1}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
l\left(\bm{w}, x, y\right)=\max\left(1-y\bm{w}^T \bm{x},0\right)
\label{eq2}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfigure[PU data set]{
\label{time_PU}
\includegraphics[width=3.05in,height=2.1in]{single_PU.eps}}
\subfigure[GCU data set]{
\label{time_GCU}
\includegraphics[width=3.05in,height=2.1in]{single_GCU.eps}}
\caption{Authentication accuracy for single sensor system in (a) the PU data set, and (b) the GCU data set. Higher sampling rates give better accuracy for each sensor. The accelerometer and magnetometer have better performance than the orientation sensor. The reason is that both of them record a user's longer term characteristics, where the accelerometer somehow represents a user's walking style and the magnetometer records a user's general environment. However, the orientation sensor represents how the user holds a smartphone, which is more variable.}
\label{single}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfigure[PU data set]{
\label{time_PU}
\includegraphics[width=3.05in,height=2.1in]{double_PU.eps}}
\subfigure[GCU data set]{
\label{time_GCU}
\includegraphics[width=3.05in,height=2.1in]{double_GCU.eps}}
\caption{Authentication accuracy with SVM for a combination of two sensors, for (a) the PU data set, and (b) the GCU data set. The higher sampling rate gives better accuracy for each sensor.}
\label{double}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfigure[PU data set]{
\label{PU_all}
\includegraphics[width=3.05in,height=2.1in]{all_compare_PU.eps}}
\subfigure[GCU data set]{
\label{GCU_all}
\includegraphics[width=3.05in,height=2.1in]{all_compare_GCU.eps}}
\caption{Authentication accuracy for single sensors, two sensors and three sensors, for the PU data set and the GCU data set. The higher sampling rate has better accuracy for each combination of sensors. Two sensors give better accuracy than using a single sensor, and three sensors further improves the accuracy.}
\label{all}
\end{figure*}
\begin{table*}[!t]
\caption{The accuracy (\%) vs. sampling rate in both PU data set and GCU data set for all combinations of 1, 2 or 3 sensors.}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\tabincell{c}{sampling rate (s)} & 5& 10 & 20 & 40 & 60 & 120 & 240 & 360 & 480 &600 & 900 & 1200 \\ \hline
acc(PU) & 90.1 & 88.3 & 85.4 & 85.3 & 84.5 & 84.0 & 80.2 & 79.2 & 76.4 & 69.2 & 68.8 & 58.6 \\ \hline
mag(PU) & 91.0 & 88.9 & 86.2 & 84.6 & 83.4 & 74.7 & 73.3 & 73.7 & 68.0 & 66.4 & 62.2 & 60.2 \\ \hline
ori(PU) & 76.5 & 74.2 & 72.2 & 71.3 & 69.8 & 67.1 & 65.8 & 64.7 & 63.9 & 62.1 & 60.4 & 59.0 \\ \hline
acc+mag(PU) & 92.0 & 90.0 & 86.4 & 86.6 & 85.9 & 85.3 & 81.5 & 80.3 & 77.9 & 70.6 & 70.5 & 60.4 \\ \hline
acc+ori(PU) & 91.8 & 90.3 & 87.7 & 86.2 & 86.1 & 83.3 & 82.0 & 80.6 & 77.3 & 72.2 & 69.1 & 67.1 \\ \hline
mag+ori(PU) & 92.8 & 91.1 & 87.7 & 86.7 & 84.7 & 86.5 & 81.3 & 74.0 & 69.1 & 65.9 & 63.2 & 58.3 \\ \hline
all(PU) & 93.9 & 92.8 & 90.1 & 89.1 & 87.2 & 85.2 & 84.3 & 82.7 & 78.7 & 72.4 & 70.8 & 67.2 \\
\hlinewd{0.3pt} \hline \hline \hlinewd{0.3pt} \hline
acc(GCU) & 91.0 & 88.4 & 87.8 & 87.9 & 87.5 & 82.4 & 83.1 & 77.8 & 78.3 & 80.2 & 75.3 & 73.0\\ \hline
mag(GCU) & 92.3 & 91.2 & 91.0 & 85.7 & 85.2 & 83.4 & 79.5 & 76.7 & 75.3 & 72.2 & 69.8 & 69.5 \\ \hline
ori(GCU) & 64.2 & 63.9 & 63.8 & 60.8 & 60.7 & 60.6 & 60.0 & 60.0 & 59.1 & 58.0 & 57.5 & 57.3 \\ \hline
acc+mag(GCU) & 95.5 & 95.8 & 94.7 & 93.7 & 92.7 & 91.8 & 89.2 & 86.7 & 84.0 & 83.1 & 81.4 & 79.6 \\ \hline
acc+ori(GCU) & 96.4 & 96.6 & 95.5 & 94.3 & 93.1 & 92.0 & 90.0 & 87.1 & 84.7 & 83.5 & 82.7 & 79.4 \\ \hline
mag+ori(GCU) & 91.8 & 90.3 & 87.7 & 86.2 & 84.3 & 82.2 & 80.8 & 79.1 & 76.2 & 73.2 & 71.1 & 70.1 \\ \hline
all(GCU) & 97.4 & 97.1 & 96.7 & 95.7 & 95.3 & 93.1 & 90.0 & 89.1 & 87.5 & 85.9 & 83.1 & 80.2 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{num}
\end{table*}
The margin is $\frac{2}{||w||}$ in SVM. So, Equation \ref{eq1} minimizes the reciprocal of the margin (first part) and the misclassification loss (second part). The loss function in SVM is the Hinge loss (Equation \ref{eq2}) \cite{gentile1998linear}. Sometimes, we need to map the original data points to a higher dimensional space by using a kernel function so as to make training inputs easier to separate. In our classification, we label the smartphone owner's data as positive and all the other users' data as negative. Then, we exploit such a model to do authentication. Ideally, only the user who is the owner of the smartphone is authenticated, and any other user is not authenticated. In our experiments, we selected LIBSVM \cite{cc9} to implement the SVM. The input of our experiment is n positive points from the legitimate user and n negative data points from randomly selected n other users. The output is the user's profile for the legitimate user.
\begin{spacing}{0.5}
\section{EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS}
\end{spacing}
\noindent Figure \ref{mechanism} shows the steps in our experiments. The following are some settings in our experiments:
\begin{itemize}
\item We use both the PU data set and the GCU data set.
\item We use accelerometer, magnetometer and orientation sensors (can be extended to other sensors).
\item We re-sample the data by averaging the original data, with the sampling rate changing from 1 second to 20 minutes.
\item Each data is a 9-dimensional vector (three values for each sensor). We use SVM to train the data within one day to obtain a user's profile.
\item We label one user's data as positive and the other users' data as negative, and randomly pick equivalent data from both positive and negative sets.
\item We experiment with data from one sensor, a pair of two sensors, and all three sensors to train the user's profile. We show that multi-sensor-based authentication indeed improves the authentication accuracy.
\item In our experiments, we use 10-fold cross validation, which means that the size of training data over the size of training data and testing data is 1/10.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Single-sensor authentication}
From Figure \ref{single}, we observe the single-sensor-based system in both the PU data set and the GCU data set. First, we find that the accuracy increases with faster sampling rate because we use more detailed information from each sensor. Second, an interesting finding is that the accelerometer and the magnetometer have much better accuracy performance than the orientation sensor, especially for the GCU data set. We think this is because they both represent a user's longer-term patterns of movement (as measured by the accelerometer) and his general environment (as measured by the magnetometer). The orientation sensor represents how the user holds a smartphone \cite{cc8}, which may be more variable. Therefore, the accelerometer and magnetometer have better authentication accuracy. The difference is more marked in the GCU data set, but the overall relative accuracy of the three sensors is the same in both data sets. The accuracy is below 90\% even for fast sampling rates like 10 seconds (see also Table \ref{all}).
\subsection{Two-sensor authentication}
Fig. \ref{double} shows that for all pairwise combinations, accuracy increases with faster sampling rate. The combination of data from two sensors indeed gives better authentication accuracy than using a single sensor (see Table \ref{all}). The average improvement from one sensor to two sensors is 7.4\% in PU data set (14.6\% in GCU data set) when the sampling rate is 20 seconds. Another interesting finding is that using a combination of magnetometer and orientation sensors is worse than the other two pairs which include an accelerometer. In fact, the combination of magnetometer and orientation sensors is not necessarily better than using just the accelerometer (see also Table \ref{num}). Therefore, choosing good sensors is very important. Also, using higher sampling rate gives better accuracy.
\begin{figure*}[]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\label{time_PU}
\includegraphics[width=3.05in,height=2.15in]{time_size_PU_out.eps}}
\subfigure[]{
\label{time_GCU}
\includegraphics[width=3.05in,height=2.15in]{time_size_GCU_out.eps}}
\subfigure[]{
\label{time_GCU}
\includegraphics[width=3.05in,height=2.15in]{time_size_GCU_in.eps}}
\subfigure[]{
\label{time_GCU}
\includegraphics[width=3.05in,height=2.15in]{time_size_GCU_in.eps}}
\caption{(a),(b) represent respectively the time for training a user's profile by using the SVM algorithm for three-sensors-based system in the PU data set and the GCU data set. (c),(d) zoom in on (a),(b) to the sampling interval from 1 to 20 seconds for clarity. We can see that the smaller sampling interval (high sampling rate) needs more time to train a user's profile. Therefore, we need to find a trade-off sampling rate to balance performance and complexity.}
\label{time}
\end{figure*}
\begin{table*}[!t]
\caption{Time for training a user's profile by using the SVM algorithm for three sensors, for (a) the PU data set and (b) the GCU data set, respectively. We can see that the smaller sample interval (higher sampling rate) needs more time to train a user's profile. Therefore, we need to find a trade-off sampling rate to balance performance and complexity.}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\tabincell{c}{sampling interval} &1&2&5& 10 & 20 & 40 & 60 \\ \hline
\tabincell{c}{training time (PU data set)} & 33502s & 1855s & 170.72s & 39.85s & 6.07s & 1.19s & 0.51s\\ \hline
training time (GCU Data Set) & 23101s & 485s & 62.41s & 9.43s & 1.02s & 0.21s & 0.17s\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table2}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfigure[PU data set]{
\label{time_PU}
\includegraphics[width=3.05in,height=2.15in]{PU.eps}}
\subfigure[GCU data set]{
\label{time_GCU}
\includegraphics[width=3.05in,height=2.15in]{GCU.eps}}
\caption{(a),(b) represent the authentication accuracy and the training time with different training data size for three sensors in the PU data set and the GCU data set. Blue dashed lines show that the larger data size has better accuracy because we use more information about the user. Black solid lines show that larger data size usually needs longer training time.}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Three-sensor authentication}
\begin{spacing}{1}
Now, we compare the three-sensor-based system with one and two sensor-based authentication experiments. From Figure \ref{all} and Table \ref{num}, we observe that the three-sensor results give the best authentication accuracy, as represented by the top line with triangles in both data sets, seen more clearly as the highest value in each column in Table \ref{num}. Again, we find that the accuracy increases with faster sampling rates because we use more detailed information from each sensor.
\subsection{Training Time vs. Sampling Rate}
In the rest of the evaluations below, we use the three-sensor-based system, since it has the best authentication accuracy.
From Figure \ref{all} and Table \ref{num}, when the sampling rate is higher than 4 minutes (samples every 240 seconds or less), the accuracy in the PU data set is better than 80\%, while that in the GCU data set is better than 90\%. The average improvement from two sensors to three sensors is 3.3\% in PU data set (4.4\% in GCU data set) when the sampling rate is 20 seconds. Furthermore, when the sampling rate is higher than 20 seconds, the accuracy in the PU data set is better than 90\%, while that in the GCU data set is better than 95\%.
Figure \ref{time} and table \ref{table2} shows that a higher sampling rate (smaller sampling interval) needs more time to train a user's profile. The time exponentially increases with the increase of the sampling rate. It is a trade-off between security and convenience. However, the good news is that when the sampling interval is about 20 seconds, it only needs less than 10 seconds in the PU data set (and roughly 1 second in the GCU data set) to train a user's profile, but the accuracy is higher than 90\% (and 95\% in the GCU data set), as seen from Table \ref{all}. It means that a user only needs to spend less than 10 seconds to train a new model to do the implicit authentication for the whole day in the PU data set and only 1 second for the GCU data set.
These findings validate the effectiveness of our method and its feasibility for real-world applications. Furthermore, our method can be customized for users. They can change their security level by easily changing the sampling rate of sensors in their smartphones.
\subsection{Accuracy and Time vs. Data size}
Figure \ref{fig3} shows another trade-off between security and convenience. We choose a sampling interval of 10 minutes and a training data size ranging from 1 day to 5 days in the PU data set (and 1 day to 15 days in the GCU data set). The blue dashed line with triangles shows that the accuracy increases with the increase of training data size. The black solid line with circles shows that the training time increases with the increase of training data size.
\end{spacing}
\begin{spacing}{0.5}
\section{CONCLUSION}
\end{spacing}
\noindent
In this paper, we utilize three sensors: the accelerometer, the orientation sensor and the magnetometer. We apply the SVM technique as the classification algorithm in the system, to distinguish the smartphone's owner versus other users, who may potentially be attackers or thieves. In our experiments, we compare the authentication results for different sampling rates and different data sizes, which show a trade-off between accuracy performance and the computational complexity. Furthermore, we experiment with data from a single sensor and from a combination of two sensors, to compare their results with data from all three sensors. We find that the authentication accuracy for the orientation sensor degrades more than that of the other two sensors. Therefore, the data collected from the orientation sensor is not as important as that from the accelerometer and magnetometer, which tend to measure more stable, longer-term characteristics of the user's coarse-grained movements and his general physical location, respectively.
Utilizing sensors to do implicit user authentication is very interesting and promising. Our work also suggests some other interesting research directions. First, we can use more detailed sensors' information to further improve the authentication accuracy. Second, we can try to combine the time information with frequency information to better obtain a user's profile. Many other issues relating to the user's privacy remain. It is also interesting to launch an attack through the sensors' information because our research also shows that indeed, sensors can represent a user's characteristic behavior and physical environment.
\section*{\uppercase{Acknowledgements}}
\noindent
This work was supported in part by NSF CNS-1218817. We also appreciate the help of Dr. Gunes Kayacik at Glasgow Caledonian University for providing us the GCU data set.
\vfill
\bibliographystyle{apalike}
{\small
|
\section{Introduction}
In highly frustrated magnetic systems, the degeneracy of the ground state (due to the effective cancelation of the main exchange couplings) makes such systems susceptible to a variety of much weaker interactions~\cite{Diep_2005,Buschow_2001, Lacroix_2011,Ramirez_1994,Greedan_2001}.
These interactions (typically ignored in systems without appreciable frustration) often result in the formation of unusual magnetically ordered phases, both with short-range and long-range correlations.
The family of rare-earth (RE) strontium oxides, \sRo, provides an excellent opportunity to study the interplay between the geometrical frustration of the exchange interactions, the dipolar coupling and the single-ion magnetic properties of different RE elements~\cite{Karunadasa_2005}.
The resulting magnetic ground states are often very complex~\cite{Petrenko_2014} and consist of two different components corresponding to the two inequivalent positions of the magnetic RE ions in the unit cell (see Fig.~\ref{Fig1_structure} which depicts the positions of the magnetic Dy$^{3+}$ ions within \sdo ).
The local environment is different for the two RE sites in all the \sRo\ compounds, therefore the magnetic moments on them, which are often Ising in nature, have different easy-axis directions.
In \seo, a ${\bf k}=0$ long-range \afm\ order with magnetic moments parallel to the $c$ axis on one Er site and a quasi one-dimensional (1D) short-range \afm\ order with the moments along the $a$ axis on another Er site are found to coexist down to the lowest temperatures~\cite{Petrenko_2008,Hayes_2011}.
In \sho, the magnetic structure is similar to that of \seo, but the ${\bf k}=0$ component has only a limited correlation range and the magnetic moments in the quasi-1D structure point along the $b$ axis~\cite{Young_2012,Young_2013}.
In \sybo, the structure is reported to be a noncollinear ${\bf k}=0$ antiferromagnet in which the magnetic moments of two inequivalent Yb ions lie in the $ab$ plane, but have different moment sizes and directions~\cite{Quintero_2012}.
The magnetic structure of \sgo\ at different temperatures is yet to be determined.
This is the only compound in the family with a well-defined double phase transition -- bulk property measurements give clear indications of magnetic ordering at 2.73~K and a further transition at 0.48~K~\cite{Young_2014}.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\vspace{-3mm}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig1}
\vspace{-3mm}
\caption{(Colour online) Positions of the magnetic Dy$^{3+}$ ions within \sdo.
Left panel depicts the honeycomb-like arrangement of the magnetic ions with two crystallographically inequivalent Dy$^{3+}$ sites shown in green (Dy1) and red (Dy2).
The box represents a crystallographic unit cell of the $Pnam$ space group.
Right panel emphasises the zigzag ladders formed by ions on the Dy2 site when viewed along the $a$~axis and shows some of the interionic distances labelled as $r_i$.}
\label{Fig1_structure}
\end{figure
In sharp contrast to the family members discussed above, \sdo\ does not show any signs of a magnetic phase transition down to the lowest experimentally available temperatures.
In zero field, heat capacity measurements indicate that this compound appears to be magnetically disordered down to at least 0.39~K~\cite{Cheffings_2013}, while powder neutron diffraction (PND) reveals only diffuse scattering peaks even at 50~mK~\cite{Poole_2014}.
However, heat capacity~\cite{Cheffings_2013} and magnetisation~\cite{Hayes_2012} measurements both indicate a highly anisotropic behaviour in an applied magnetic field, including a sequence of magnetically ordered phases for a field parallel to the $b$ axis.
Recent ultrasound investigations mapped out the high resolution $H-T$ phase diagrams for the magnetic field applied along the $b$ and $c$ axes~\cite{Bidaud_2016} and suggested that for $H\parallel b$ the long-range-ordered magnetic state is contained within a ``dome" extending up to 2.2-2.5~T at lowest temperatures and up to 1.5~K in a field of 1~T.
In this paper we report the investigations on the nature of the field-induced magnetic ordering in \sdo\ using neutron diffraction measurements performed on both powder and single crystal samples.
Our main results can be grouped into three categories: (i) zero field, where there is no long-range magnetic order, (ii) intermediate fields (up to and including 2~T) where a ``ferrimagnetic'' state is found, (iii) higher field (2.5 and 3~T), where a polarised ``ferromagnetic" state is supported.
Zero field PND data are analysed using the SPINVERT program~\cite{Paddison_2013}, which implements a reverse Monte Carlo (RMC) algorithm.
RMC analysis reveals the patterns of spin-spin correlations in \sdo\ and allows for a more detailed comparison with the magnetic structures of other \sRo\ members.
For $H \parallel b$, an evolution of magnetic structure from collections of weakly-correlated \afm\ chains, through a much more correlated {\it up-up-down} phase corresponding to a magnetisation plateau in intermediate fields, to an effective ferromagnetic state in higher fields is clearly observed in single crystal diffraction experiments.
Remarkably, the {\it up-up-down} phase with the magnetic moments parallel to $b$ axis is also clearly seen through the Rietveld refinement of the PND patterns in intermediate magnetic fields despite the inevitable presence of other magnetic phases in a polycrystalline sample exposed to an external magnetic field.
We also find that the higher-field ferromagnetic state is not a fully polarised phase, as only magnetic moments on one Dy site participate in the formation of the field-induced magnetic order, while the moments on the other site remain largely disordered.
These findings should be helpful for the eventual development of realistic models of the magnetic interactions in the \sRo\ family of compounds.
Some estimates of the interaction ratios in \sdo\ and \sho\ were made from the crystal-field levels~\cite{Poole_2014}.
Further, the anisotropic next-nearest-neighboor model was applied to \sho\ and the relevant parameters estimated~\cite{Wen_2015}.
For \seo, the latest estimates of the exchange and dipolar interactions were derived from the four-particle self-consistent model~\cite{Malkin_2015}.
Despite all the above and the recent theoretical developments~\cite{Dublenych_2016}, it is fair to state that a full understanding of which interactions are dominant in each compound is still largely missing.
\section{Methods}
\label{sec_methods}
A polycrystalline sample of \sdo\ was prepared from the high-purity starting materials SrCO$_3$ and Dy$_2$O$_3$ following previous reports~\cite{Karunadasa_2005,Petrenko_2008}.
Dysprosium enriched with the $^{162}$Dy isotope (95\%) was used for the powder sample preparations in order to reduce the high neutron absorption associated with the presence of $^{161}$Dy and $^{164}$Dy isotopes in naturally occurring dysprosium.
The single crystal of \sdo\ was grown by the floating zone technique using an infrared image furnace as reported previously~\cite{Balakrishnan_2009}.
Naturally occurring dysprosium was used for the single crystal growth.
Smaller crystals from the same growth were used in preceding magnetisation~\cite{Hayes_2012} and heat capacity~\cite{Cheffings_2013} investigations.
High-resolution PND experiments were conducted using a wavelength of 1.594~\AA\ on the D2B diffractometer at the Institut Laue-Langevin, France.
Diffraction patterns were collected in zero field at various temperatures between 60~mK and 10~K as well as in an applied field of up to 2.5~tesla at a base temperature of 60~mK.
A copper sample holder was used in order to provide better heat exchange at low temperatures.
Additional high resolution room-temperature measurements were performed on the D1A diffractometer to refine the scattering length of the Dy-isotope.
Single crystal neutron-diffraction measurements were made on the WISH diffractometer~\cite{WISH} at the ISIS facility at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory (United Kingdom) in a range of temperatures from 60~mK to 10~K and in fields of up to 3~T.
The sample (0.44~g) was fixed to an oxygen free copper holder with the $b$ axis vertical defining the horizontal $(h0l)$ scattering plane.
With a continuous array of position sensitive detectors available on WISH, substantial coverage of the out-of-plane scattering, essential for the results reported in this paper, was also possible, as we were able to reach the reflections between and including the $(h1l)$ and $(h\bar{1}l)$ planes.
Two sample positions, different by 35 degrees in rotation around the vertical axis, were used in order to optimise the neutron flux around the $(0 0 \frac{1}{2})$ and $(2 0 0)$ positions.
For the experiments on both D2B and WISH diffractometers, a dilution refrigerator inside a vertical-field cryomagnet provided the necessary sample environment.
The \textsc{fullprof} suite of programs (including \textsc{k-search} and \textsc{basireps}) was used for refinements of the magnetic phases~\cite{FULLPROF}.
The \textsc{spinvert} program~\cite{Paddison_2012,Paddison_2013} was used to refine the zero-field magnetic diffuse scattering patterns.
Here, the crystallographic unit cell is used to generate a supercell ($15 \times 15 \times 40$, total number of spins 72000), and at first a random Ising spin is assigned to each Dy site (with moments on one site parallel to the $b$~axis, and parallel to the $c$~axis on the other) from which the sum
\begin{equation}
\chi^2 = W \sum_Q \bigg[ \frac{s I_{\rm calc}(Q) - I_{\rm exp}(Q)}{\sigma(Q)}\bigg]^2
\end{equation}
is calculated. Here, $I(Q)$ is the
magnetic scattering intensity, $\sigma(Q)$ is the experimental uncertainty, $W$ is an empirical weighting factor, and $s$ is the scale factor.
An RMC algorithm is then used to fit the data by minimising the sum of the squared residuals -- {\it i.e.} by randomly flipping a spin and then re-calculating $\chi^2$ until no more variation is observed.
Generally, 100 moves were proposed per spin, and these moves were accepted or rejected based on the Metropolis algorithm until the best fit to the data is obtained.
The value of the intensity scale factor, $s$, was refined when fitting the base temperature data, and this was kept fixed when fitting the data for higher temperatures.
Changing around the direction of the spins on the two crystallographically inequivalent sites ({\it i.e.} with moments on one site now parallel to the $c$~axis, and parallel to the $b$~axis on the other) makes no quantitative difference to $\chi^2$, and qualitatively the simulated single crystal diffraction patterns look identical.
The scattering patterns and spin correlations were calculated using the programs \textsc{spindiff} and \textsc{spincorrel}~\cite{Paddison_2012, Paddison_2013}.
To minimise statistical noise, calculated quantities were averaged over 10 independent spin configurations for each temperature.
\section{Powder neutron diffraction}
\subsection{Zero field PND} \label{Zero_field_PND}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig2}
\vspace{-3 mm}
\caption{(Colour online) Lower-$Q$ part of the PND patterns of \sdo\ at $T=$ 0.06, 0.4, 0.8 and 10~K in zero field.
The base temperature $T=0.06$~K dataset is on the original experimental intensity scale, the other datasets are consecutively offset by $-20$ units for clarity.
The difference plot included is for the base temperature of 0.06~K.}
\label{Fig2_H=0T_Tdep}
\end{figure
PND patterns collected at $T=0.06$, 0.4, 0.8 and 10~K in zero field are displayed in Fig.~\ref{Fig2_H=0T_Tdep}.
The data show very broad diffuse scattering features indicating that there are significant short range correlations between the magnetic moments but no static magnetic order.
At the lowest temperature, the magnetic scattering is dominated by a broad peak around $Q = (00\frac{1}{2})$, which decreases in intensity and shifts to higher $Q$ with increasing temperature.
By warming up to 10~K, there are no distinct features in the scattering, however, there is still a difference between the obtained data and the form factor expected for purely paramagnetic scattering from Dy.
Such broad features in reciprocal space cannot be fitted using conventional means such as Rietveld refinement, but as their symmetry is governed by the lattice and their modulation depends on the nature of the magnetic interactions, we have used the RMC method described in Section~\ref{sec_methods} to investigate the short-range correlations in \sdo.
The RMC method (like Rietveld refinements) does not give a unique magnetic structure ``solution", but suggests a model that is compatible with the data.
The $Q$-range used for the RMC is 0.378 to 2.150~\AA$^{-1}$, and two small nuclear Bragg peaks have been omitted from the refinements for all temperatures.
The PND data and RMC fits, displayed in Fig.~\ref{Fig2_H=0T_Tdep}, show very good agreement, with $R_{\rm WP}$ = 1.69, 1.77, 1.71, 1.59\% for 0.06, 0.4, 0.8 and 10~K respectively.
Such a good agreement further justifies the choice of Ising model for the moments on both Dy sites.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\vspace{-11 mm}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig3}
\vspace{-5 mm}
\caption{(Colour online) The single crystal magnetic diffuse scattering patterns calculated from the refined RMC model in the $(h0l)$, top panel, and $(0kl)$, bottom panel, scattering planes at different temperatures.
The same intensity scale is used in all the panels.}
\label{Fig3_RMC}
\end{figure
Calculations of the single crystal scattering patterns from the refined RMC model are shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig3_RMC}.
The magnetic intensity is most pronounced around the $l=\pm \frac{1}{2}$ and symmetry related positions when viewed in both the $(h0l)$ and $(0kl)$ scattering planes.
At low temperatures, the correlation length along the $c$~axis is much longer than along both the $a$ and $b$~axes, and the scattering intensity is heavily modulated along both $h$ and $k$.
The temperature evolution of the scattering shows that there is very little difference between PND patterns taken at 0.06 and 0.4~K (see Fig.~\ref{Fig2_H=0T_Tdep}).
Consequently the calculated single crystal scattering patterns are virtually identical for $T=0.06$ and 0.4~K, therefore the $T=0.4$~K data are excluded from Fig.~\ref{Fig3_RMC}.
On further temperature increase to 0.8~K the lowest-$Q$ peak shifts to a higher scattering vector value and the others become less intense; the associated single crystal scattering profile also becomes less intense and more indistinct, but the higher intensity around the $(h0\frac{1}{2})$, $(0k\frac{1}{2})$ and symmetry related positions remains clearly visible.
Finally by 10~K almost all structure in the scattering profile disappears.
For the ($hk0$) scattering plane (not shown), the magnetic scattering is a lot more diffuse and thus the intensity is more smeared out even at the lowest temperatures.
These observations suggest that the spin correlations for the Dy1 site are systematically weaker compared to the Dy2 site at each temperature, such that on cooling the magnetic moments parallel to the $b$~axis (Dy2 sites) develop significant correlations first and the moments parallel to the $c$~axis (Dy1 site) require lower temperatures to establish considerable correlations.
Therefore the ${\bf k}=0$ structure on the Dy1 sites in \sdo\ is effectively developing in the presence of local fields caused by the highly-correlated moments on the Dy2 sites.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\vspace{-1 mm}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig4}
\vspace{-5mm}
\caption{(Colour online) Spin correlation $\langle S(0) \cdot S(r_i) \rangle$ as a function of the radial distance $r_i$ calculated from the refined RMC model for $T=0.06$~K.
The index $i$ in $r_i$ refers to the set of the $i^\mathrm{th}$ neighbours (some of them, up to $i=6$, are labeled on the figure).
The correlation function is split into two groups for spins pointing along the $b$~axis (Dy2 site) and along the $c$~axis (Dy1 site).}
\label{Fig4_correls}
\end{figure
The calculated maxima in the scattering intensity are a direct result of the Ising-like nature of the spins and reflect the fact that \sdo\ remains in a disordered, spin-liquid-like regime at all temperatures with highly correlated magnetic moments, which are inequivalent on the two Dy sites in this material.
Direct comparison of the single crystal diffraction data (see Section~\ref{Sec_WISH}) and the scattering simulated for the different scattering planes is rather complicated as the Dy used in the WISH experiment is not isotopically enriched, and thus the effects of neutron absorption may play a large role.
Also, due to the limited $Q$ range of the data available for fitting, as well as the fact that it is unpolarised neutron data, the RMC methods used tend to overestimate the degree of ``diffuseness"~\cite{Paddison_2012,Paddison_2013}.
The radial spin correlation functions calculated through the RMC refinements are shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig4_correls} for the two different Dy sites in \sdo.
The data are obtained by averaging 10 independent spin configurations, although numerical variations between different configurations are rather small.
In the adopted system of labelling the set of the $i^\mathrm{th}$ neighbours with the index $i$ at a radial distance $r_i$, $r_1=3.43$~\AA\ refers to the nearest neighbour distance (legs of zigzag ladders), $r_2$ is the next-nearest neighbours distance (rungs of the ladders), $r_4$ is the shortest distance between the moments on different ladders, $r_5=2r_1$ is the next-nearest neighbours distance along the $c$~axis and so on.
Some of the interionic distances for the Dy2 site are labeled in Fig.~\ref{Fig1_structure}, right panel.
The correlation between the spins belonging to two different sites is identically zero because of the presumed strictly Ising character.
The data suggest that for the Dy2 site the nearest neighbour correlations are definitively \afm\ (automatically setting the $r_5$ correlations to be ferromagnetic), while the next-nearest correlations are significantly smaller but also \afm.
For the Dy1 site, the correlations are somewhat weaker, with the nearest-neighbour correlations being marginally ferromagnetic ($r_1$) while the next-nearest correlations ($r_2$) are stronger and \afm.
The inter-ladder correlation ($r_4$) are ferromagnetic for both sites and slightly more pronounced for the Dy1 site.
The average correlations beyond the distance of 20~\AA\ are statistically insignificant.
On warming to 0.4~K the spin-spin correlations remain very similar to what is calculated for $T=0.06$~K while with the temperature increasing to 0.8~K, they tend to marginally decrease.
\subsection{PND in an applied magnetic field}\label{In_field_PND}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig5}
\vspace{-5mm}
\caption{(Colour online) PND patterns of \sdo\ measured at $T=0.06$~K in different magnetic fields.
The $T=10$~K background is subtracted from the data.
The curves are consecutively offset by 100 counts per tesla for clarity.}
\label{Fig5_PND}
\end{figure
Fig.~\ref{Fig5_PND} shows the evolution of the PND patterns of \sdo\ with an applied magnetic field at 0.06~K.
The data are obtained by subtracting the 10~K diffraction pattern in order to isolate the magnetic signal from the lattice contribution as well as the sample environment.
Given the discussion in the previous section, the 10~K data contain a considerable paramagnetic signal, which resulted in noticeable over-subtraction at low scattering angles.
From Fig.~\ref{Fig5_PND} it follows that in lower applied fields (up to 0.3~T) the arrangement of the magnetic moments in \sdo\ are similar to what is observed in zero field; there are only very short-range correlations between the moments.
New, significantly sharper scattering features appear in fields around 0.5~T, while in fields above 2.0~T the scattering pattern consists only of resolution limited peaks.
Thus the observed magnetic peaks can be separated into two different types through their field dependencies.
The first type are the peaks which start to appear with field increasing above 0.5~T and the intensity of which then starts to decrease in fields above 1~T.
These peaks are absent in the pattern measured at 2.5~T.
The intensity of the second type of the peaks continues to increase with increasing field.
From the positions of the Bragg peaks of this second type a magnetic propagation vector ${\bf k} = 0$ can be determined.
The first type of magnetic peaks originate from an \afm\ component to the magnetic order which is only stable at intermediate values of the magnetic field and which is more pronounced at 0.8~K than at 0.06~K.
Although in the refinements these highly structured \afm\ features are treated as regular Bragg peaks, their width is not resolution limited, therefore they do not imply the presence of a long range magnetic order.
The single crystal diffraction data shown below (see section~\ref{Sec_WISH}) provide more in-depth information on the magnetic correlations in the intermediate fields.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\vspace{-1 mm}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig6}
\vspace{-5mm}
\caption{(Colour online) Rietveld refinement of the PND data in an applied magnetic field (a) at 0.06~K and 2.5~T, (b) at 0.8~K and 0.5~T.
The experimental data (red dots), calculated patterns (black lines) and the difference curves (blue lines) are shown.
Ticks represent the positions of the magnetic Bragg peaks.}
\label{Fig6_Rietveld}
\end{figure
The magnetic propagation vector \KP\ was determined from the position of 9 magnetic reflections in a difference pattern created by subtracting the zero field data at 10~K from the 0.8~K data at 1.5~T.
As there are no relics of the magnetic peaks created through the magnetic propagation vector ${\bf k}^\prime$ in the spectrum recorded at 0.06~K and 2.5~T the corresponding data can be treated assuming a single magnetic phase.
For ${\bf k} = 0$, magnetic symmetry analysis was used to determine the irreducible representations (IR) and their basisvectors (BV) for the two Dy sites.
Different possibilities were tested against the data showing that a ferromagnetic structure with moments aligned along the $b$~axis gives the best fit to the measured intensities.
From the single crystal magnetisation measurements~\cite{Hayes_2012}, however, it is known that at 2.5~T and 0.5~K the values of magnetisation are $M\approx 2.0 \mu_{\rm B}$ for $B \parallel a$, $M\approx 6.0 \mu_{\rm B}$ for $B \parallel b$, and $M\approx 2.5 \mu_{\rm B}$ for $B \parallel c$.
It is therefore very likely that for a powder sample, after averaging over all directions of an applied field, only the strongest component of magnetisation ($B \parallel b$) becomes dominant, while all other magnetisation components become indistinguishable from the background.
In fact, a model with ferromagnetic structures on two different Dy sites pointing along $b$ and $c$ axes returned a fit to the measured intensities only marginally worse than the $M \parallel b$ model.
A refinement of the 0.06~K and 2.5~T data was done using the atomic coordinates determined from the high resolution D1A data for the nuclear phase and taking into account the extra reflections coming from the copper contained in the dilution refrigerator insert through a LeBail fit.
This refinement allowed us to extract a scale factor which was then used for refinements of the difference data sets containing solely the magnetic scattering contribution.
Fig.~\ref{Fig6_Rietveld}a displays the corresponding fit to the difference spectrum, dataset at 0.06~K and 2.5~T minus dataset at 10~K in zero field.
Magnetic moment values of 6.0(1) and 1.3(1)$\mu_{\rm B}$ were determined for the two Dy sites.
This result could be compared with previous observations, e.g., the \seo\ or \sho\ compounds~\cite{Petrenko_2008,Hayes_2011,Young_2012} where it was shown that only one out of the two Er or Ho sites possesses a sizeable magnetic moment (the PND data is insufficient to determine which of the two sites has the higher magnetic moment).
However, the comparison is not straightforward, as we are comparing the in-field behaviour of \sdo\ with zero-field properties of \seo\ and \sho.
The in-field behaviour of the latter two compounds is yet to be understood.
\begin{table}[tb]
\caption{Irreducible representations (IR) and their basisvectors (BV) for \KP\ for the Wykoff position 4c of the space group $Pnam$.
R (I) stands for real (imaginary) component of the BV.}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
\vspace{1mm}
\KP\ & & BV1 & BV2 & BV3 \\ \hline
IR1 & & & & \\ \hline
$x, y, z$ &R & 100 & 010 & 001 \\
&I & 000 & 000 & 000 \\ \hline
\vspace{1mm}
$-x+\frac{1}{2}, y+\frac{1}{2}, z+\frac{1}{2}$ &R & -$\frac{1}{2}00$ & $0\frac{1}{2}0$ & $00\frac{1}{2}$ \\
\vspace{1mm}
&I & -$\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}00$ & 0$\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}0$ & 00$\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}$ \\ \hline
IR2 & & & & \\ \hline
$x, y, z$ &R & 100 & 010 & 001 \\
&I & 000 & 000 & 000 \\ \hline
\vspace{1mm}
$-x+\frac{1}{2}, y+\frac{1}{2}, z+\frac{1}{2}$ &R & $\frac{1}{2}00$ & 0-$\frac{1}{2}0$ & 00-$\frac{1}{2}$ \\
\vspace{1mm}
&I & $\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}00$ & 0-$\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}0$ & 00-$\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}$ \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\label{TableI}
\end{table}
As indicated above, the application of a magnetic field leads to the appearance of magnetic reflections originating from two different magnetic propagation vectors.
Within the range of temperature and field values covered in our measurements, there is no scattering pattern containing only the \afm\ contribution with \KP; there is always a contribution from \KO.
Both contributions have to be taken into account in a refinement.
Magnetic symmetry analysis within spacegroup $Pnam$ for \KO\ shows that the two Dy sites are each split into two independent orbits each having the same two allowed IRs.
As every IR is composed of three BVs and a phase factor between the orbits has to be refined, a total of 14 parameters are in theory available to describe the magnetic structure of this antiferromagnetic component.
This number of variables is too large in view of the limited number of magnetic reflections and therefore the magnetic moment values on the orbits originating from the same Dy site were constrained to be equal.
The difference data set (data at $T=0.8$~K, $B=0.5$~T minus 10~K zero-field background) was refined using two magnetic phases representing the \KO\ and \KP\ contributions and fixing the scale factors to the value previously determined from the refinement of the $T=0.06$~K, $B=2.5$~T data.
Testing the two IRs listed in Table~\ref{TableI} only a model using IR2 for the \KP\ contribution gives a good refinement.
As in the case of the \KO\ contribution only one of the two Dy sites has a significant magnetic moment which is predominantly pointing in the direction of the $b$~axis.
It is again not possible to determine from the PND data which of the two Dy sites carries the large magnetic moment.
Crystal field calculations~\cite{Poole_2014} on \sdo\ proposed the existence of a strong Ising anisotropy with the magnetic moments on the Dy1 site predominantly lying along the $c$~axis and those of the Dy2 site in the direction of the $b$~axis.
As our refinement shows the moment to be aligned along the direction of the $b$~axis, we assume the Dy2 site carries the large magnetic moment.
The phase between the two moments on the two orbits of the Dy2 site refines to $\phi/2\pi=0.34(1)$, Table~\ref{TableII} lists the refined coefficients of the BVs of the \KP\ contribution and the ferromagnetic component related to \KO, Fig.~\ref{Fig6_Rietveld}b displays a plot of the refinement.
\begin{table}[tb]
\caption{Results of the two-phase refinements of the difference data sets for 0.8~K/0.5~T and 0.8~K/1.5~T with 10~K/0~T subtracted.}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{lc|lccc}
\vspace{1mm}
\KO\ & Ferro $\parallel b$ & \KP\ & BV1 & BV2 & BV3 \\ \hline
\multicolumn{6}{l}{0.8 K/0.5 T} \\ \hline
Dy1 & -0.5(1) & Dy1 & -- & 0.6(2) & -0.6(4) \\
& & \multicolumn{4}{l}{$\phi /2 \pi \; ({\rm Dy}1_1-{\rm Dy}1_2) =$-0.30(9)} \\ \hline
Dy2 & -2.1(1) & Dy2 & -- & 5.8(1) & -1.4(4) \\
& & \multicolumn{4}{l}{$\phi /2 \pi \; ({\rm Dy2_1 - Dy}2_2) =$-0.34(9)} \\ \hline
\multicolumn{2}{l|}{$R_{\rm Mag}=24$\%} & \multicolumn{4}{l}{$R_{\rm Mag}=20$\%} \\ \hline
\multicolumn{6}{l}{0.8 K/1.5 T} \\ \hline
Dy1 & -0.7(1) & Dy1 & -- & 0.8(1) & -- \\
& & \multicolumn{4}{l}{$\phi /2 \pi \; ({\rm Dy1_1 - Dy1_2}) =$-0.35(5)} \\ \hline
Dy2 & -3.8(1) & Dy2 & -- & 8.2(1) & -- \\
& & \multicolumn{4}{l}{$\phi /2 \pi \; ({\rm Dy2_1- Dy}2_2) =$-0.333(5)} \\ \hline
\multicolumn{2}{l|}{$R_{\rm Mag}=12$\%} & \multicolumn{4}{l}{$R_{\rm Mag}=14$\%} \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\label{TableII}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[b]
\centering
\vspace{-10 mm}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig7}
\vspace{-10 mm}
\caption{(Colour online) Magnetic structure of \sdo\ at 0.8~K in an applied magnetic field of 0.5~T as obtained through the Rietveld refinement of the PND data.}
\label{Fig7_structure}
\end{figure
Taking the \KP\ contribution on its own the magnetic structure would resemble an {\it up-up-down} configuration of the magnetic moments on the two legs of the honeycomb layers along the $c$~direction of the lattice with the magnetic moment value of the down position being twice as large as that of the up position.
The refined value of the phase $\phi /2 \pi \approx 0.333$ between the Dy2$_1$ and the Dy2$_2$ sites which each define one leg of the ladders (Fig.~\ref{Fig7_structure}) shows that this {\it up-up-down} configuration is in phase between the two legs of the zigzag ladder and therefore on the honeycomb lattice as a whole.
The magnetic structure resulting from the superposition of this sine-wave modulated \KP\ contribution and the ferromagnetic \KO\ contribution does not change this {\it up-up-down} configuration but now the magnetic moment values depending strongly on the size of the ferromagnetic contribution.
At 0.8~K and 0.5~T, the relative sizes of the \KO\ and \KP\ contributions result in nearly equal moment values along the chains of about 3.9 and -5.0$\mu_{\rm B}$.
Figure~\ref{Fig7_structure} displays the magnetic structure where the small values of the magnetic moments for the Dy1 site were set to zero in order to highlight the main features of the structure.
A refinement of the data taken at 0.8~K with a higher magnetic field of 1.5~T resulted in the values listed in Table~\ref{TableII}.
The {\it up-up-down} configuration is retained, however, the magnetic moment values (4.4 and -7.9$\mu_{\rm B}$) now differ considerably as the ferromagnetic contribution becomes more important.
In general, there is not enough justification for the introduction of an amplitude modulated magnetic structure in \sdo.
These structures are common in the RE metallic compounds (\sdo\ is an insulator) or at intermediate temperatures, where thermal fluctuations are important (while the proposed structure is for temperatures as low as 0.8 and 0.06~K).
The implication here is that the proposed structure returns the best fit to the observed PND patterns, but it is not necessarily the true magnetic structure of \sdo\ in an applied field.
Although the magnetic moments on the identical Dy sites are most likely to be equal in size in the actual structure, the main complication in the PND analysis is the highly anisotropic response of the system to an applied magnetic field.
This response is more adequately tested with the single crystal diffraction techniques.
\section{Single crystal neutron diffraction}
\label{Sec_WISH}
\subsection{Zero field results}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\vspace{-1 mm}
\includegraphics[width=1.02\columnwidth]{Fig8}
\vspace{-8 mm}
\caption{(Colour online) Single crystal neutron diffraction maps of \sdo\ at $T=0.06$~K in the $(hkl)$ scattering plane for (a) $k=0.0 \pm 0.15$, and (b) $k=-0.5 \pm 0.15$.
The magnetic component of the scattering is isolated by subtracting the 10~K background.
As the subtraction procedure is not perfect, remnant powder lines from the copper sample holder can also be seen in all diffraction maps.}
\label{Fig8_ZeroField}
\end{figure
Fig.~\ref{Fig8_ZeroField} shows the zero-field intensity maps of single crystal diffraction at base temperature, $T=0.06$~K.
Similar to what has been observed in \seo~\cite{Hayes_2011} and \sho~\cite{Young_2013}, in reciprocal space there are two-dimensional (2D) planes of scattering intensity, which after projection onto a particular scattering plane form ``rods" at $(h\,k \pm \! \frac{1}{2})$, $(h\,k \pm \! \frac{3}{2})$ and similar positions.
These 2D scattering features correspond to the formation of spin chains running along the $c$~axis with well-developed intrachain \afm\ correlations and almost no correlations between the chains.
From the very limited width of the ``rods" along the $[001]$ direction, approaching the resolution limit of the diffractometer, it follows that the \afm\ correlations along the chains extend over many unit cells.
The rods in \sdo\ are almost perfectly flat and show only very small modulations in their position and intensity as a function of $h$, but there is a noticeable variation of intensity as a function of $k$.
Broad intensity maxima are observed around the $k=\pm 0.5$ while for $k=0$ and $k=\pm 1$ the rods are barely visible.
This tendency -- the signal is more intense outside of the horizontal scattering plane -- is also preserved in an applied magnetic field (see next section) and was not observed in other compounds in the \sRo\ family where the scattering rods were clearly visible in the $(h0l)$ plane for \sho\ and the $(0kl)$ for \seo.
In both \seo\ and \sho, magnetic ions on only one crystallographic site, RE2, participate in the formation of the \afm\ chains (or ladders), while the moments on another site, RE1, tend to form the \KO\ \afm\ structures.
Interestingly, the RMC calculations, section~\ref{Zero_field_PND}, also indicate a small increase in intensity of the ``rods" outside of the $k=0$ plane, as can be seen in Fig.~\ref{Fig3_RMC}, bottom panel.
Additional measurements of diffraction intensity taken at 1.7~K have shown that the magnetic diffuse scattering signal in zero field has largely disappeared at this temperature.
\subsection{In-field results}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\vspace{-1 mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.97\columnwidth]{Fig9}
\vspace{-3 mm}
\caption{(Colour online) Single crystal neutron diffraction intensity maps for \sdo\ at $T=0.06$~K in an applied field of (left panel) 0.5 and (right panel) 2.0~T.
The maps were produced by integrating the scattering signal in the $(hkl)$ planes over the range of $k$ between $-0.65$ and $-0.35$, making them directly comparable to Fig.~\ref{Fig8_ZeroField}b for which $k=-0.5 \pm 0.15$.}
\label{Fig9_Field}
\end{figure
Given that the diffuse signal is more pronounced outside of the $(h0l)$ scattering plane, Fig.~\ref{Fig9_Field} traces the field dependence of the magnetic intensity in the $(hkl)$ plane for $-0.65<k<-0.35$.
At $T=60$~mK, the measurements were taken in a field from zero to 3~T with a step-size of 0.5~T.
The data taken at 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5~T look almost identical, they are represented by the left-side panel in Fig.~\ref{Fig9_Field}.
In these fields, the rods move to the $(h \, k \, \frac{n}{3})$ positions, where $n=1, 2, 4, 5, 7...$ and gain considerable intensity modulation along the $h$ direction.
The maxima in intensity correspond to integer values of $h$, but the width of the diffuse scattering features along this direction remains considerably larger than the instruments resolution.
From fitting the diffuse scattering features to overlapping Gaussian peaks we estimate that the magnetic correlation length along the $h$ direction as approximately 7~\AA~\cite{width_remark}.
There is only a marginal increase (not more than 5\%) in the correlation length along the $h$ direction for the field increasing from 0.5 to 1.5~T.
Given the substantial coverage of the out-of-plane scattering available on the WISH diffractometer, we were also able to locate more accurately the positions of the intensity maxima in the $k$ direction.
Fig.~\ref{Fig10_hkl} shows the intensity maps for the $(hkl)$ planes for $l=\frac{1}{3}, \frac{\bar{4}}{3}$ and demostrates that in the intermediate-field regime the scattering remains diffuse (there are no properly formed Bragg peaks observed), but becomes much more localised for the $k$ as well as the $h$ directions.
The magnetic correlation length is similar for these two directions.
There is a pronounced undulation in the positions of the intensity maxima away from the zero-field $k=-\frac{1}{2}$ line, however, due to a finite width it is difficult to distinguish between the incommensurate positions of the type $k=-\frac{1}{2} \pm \delta$, with $\delta \approx 0.15$ and the $k=-\frac{1}{3}, -\frac{2}{3}$ predicted by the magnetic propagation vector \KP\ (see section~\ref{In_field_PND}).
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\vspace{-5mm}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig10}
\vspace{-10mm}
\caption{(Colour online) Single crystal neutron diffraction intensity maps for \sdo\ at $T=0.06$~K in an applied field of 1.0~T for (a) $(hk\frac{1}{3})$ and (b) $(hk\frac{\bar{4}}{3})$ scattering planes.}
\label{Fig10_hkl}
\end{figure
A field 2.0~T marks the transition into a more polarised phase, and the pattern collected in this field (right-hand panel in Fig.~\ref{Fig9_Field}) contains almost resolution-limited features.
Above this field, in 2.5 and 3.0~T, the diffuse scattering signal completely disappears from the $(h \, \frac{1}{2} \, l)$ scattering plane.
In these higher fields, no diffuse scattering signal was detected anywhere in reciprocal space accessible on the WISH diffractometer.
Instead, the higher field data contain well-defined resolution-limited Bragg peaks in the $(h0l)$ plane with $h=$ even integer, $l=$ any integer, as well as in the $(h1l)$ and $(h\bar{1}l)$ planes with $h$ and $l$ being any integer numbers.
Additional measurements performed at 1.7~K showed that the intensities of the high-field magnetic Bragg peaks at this temperature are practically identical to those measured at base temperature, 0.06~K.
This observation is in agreement with the $H-T$ phase diagram proposed from the ultrasound measurements~\cite{Bidaud_2016}, where the critical field for the transition to the high-field phase is temperature independent in the range 0.05 to 1.8~K.
Presumably much higher temperatures are required to induce significant thermal disorder in the high-field magnetically-polarised phase.
The meaning of the observed scattering patterns is qualitatively rather transparent.
On application of moderate fields along the $b$ axis, the zero-field collection of uncorrelated \afm\ chains in \sdo\ is replaced by ferromagnetic {\it up-up-down} chains, which have significantly more developed inter-chain correlations.
This intermediate-field regime corresponds to the development of a magnetisation plateau extending from about 0.2 to 2.0~T~\cite{Hayes_2012} where the arrangement of the magnetic moments remain practically constant.
Despite an increased correlation length (7~\AA\ is long enough to link the Dy2 ions in the different ladders) full long-range magnetic order is still missing in this regime.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig11}
\vspace{-5mm}
\caption{(Colour online) Graphical representation of the magnetic intensity in the $(h\bar 1 l)$ (top panel) and $(h0l)$ (bottom panel) scattering planes in a field of 3~T.
The area of the circles represents the observed (red) and calculated (black) intensity of the magnetic Bragg peaks.
The magnetic intensity is obtained by subtracting the high-temperature background from the $T=0.06$~K data.
The calculated intensity is normalised to the magnetic form-factor for the Dy$^{3+}$ ions.}
\label{Fig11}
\end{figure
The appearance of magnetic Bragg peaks at integer positions in higher fields can be explained by the field-induced ferromagnetic arrangement of the magnetic moments on the Dy2 sites along the field direction.
For the $(h1l)$ plane, the intensity of all nuclear peaks due to Dy atoms is extremely small because of a destructive interference between the Dy1 and Dy2 sites.
The intensity becomes significant as soon as the scattering amplitude from the two sites is allowed to differ.
One therefore has to conclude that only the Dy2 sites become fully ordered in fields above 2~T while the Dy1 sites remain largely disordered -- with the reported excitation gap of 4~meV~\cite{Poole_2014} for the Dy1 sites a much stronger field is required to induced a notable moment on them along the $b$ axis.
A full refinement of the magnetic structure in high fields is challenging, as the number of the observed reflections is relatively small and the effects of the wavelength-dependent absorption and extinction are difficult to quantify.
We therefore limit ourselves to a qualitative comparison of the observed Bragg peaks intensity to the intensity calculated for a simple model, in which the magnetic moments on the Dy2 sites are presumed to be fully polarised along the field while the ordered moment on the Dy1 sites is exactly zero.
The intensity is calculated presuming unit-length moments on the Dy2 sites, normalised to the magnetic form-factor for the Dy$^{3+}$ ions and then scaled up to match the measured intensity.
Fig.~\ref{Fig11} illustrates reasonable agreement between the experimental data and the calculations for such a model.
The most noticeable disagreement in the $(h1l)$ plane is perhaps in the intensity of the $(012)$ and $(014)$ peaks, which are observed experimentally but absent in the calculations, while in the $(h0l)$ plane the intensities of the observed peaks at ($\pm$4 0 $\pm$1) are systematically lower than the calculated ones.
Allowing for partial polarisation of the Dy1 site (small moments all pointing either along the field or along the $c$~axis) does not improve the agreement.
In fact, in order to produce non-zero intensity for the $(012)$ and $(014)$ peaks one has to split the Dy1 and/or Dy2 sites and presume different magnetic moments on Dy1$_1$:Dy1$_2$ and/or Dy2$_1$:Dy2$_2$ sites.
This kind of splitting, however, also generates non-zero intensity for the $(h0l)$ peaks with odd values of $h$, which are systematically absent in the WISH data.
More accurate data collection using a single-wavelength diffractometer might be required in order to fully refine the field-induced structure of \sdo.
\section{Summary}
We have probed the development of the low-temperature magnetic correlations in \sdo\ using neutron diffraction techniques.
In zero field, \sdo\ demonstrates only short-range magnetic order down to the lowest experimentally available temperature, 0.06~K.
The RMC analysis of the neutron diffraction patterns observed on a powder sample reveals significant differences in the spin-spin correlations between the Dy$^{3+}$ ions belonging to two crystallographically inequivalent sites, similarly to what has previously been observed in other members of the \sRo\ family.
The formation of one-dimensional spin chains (or ladders) running along the $c$~axis on the Dy2 site has also been observed in a single crystal neutron diffraction experiment.
Application of an external magnetic field at low temperatures initially results in increased correlations in the short-range order regime and then in the appearance of Bragg-like features in the diffraction patterns corresponding to the formation of a longer-range magnetic order.
Despite the natural limitations of the magnetic structure determination from PND in an applied magnetic field, Rietveld refinement gave clear indications as to the nature of the field-induced structures.
The evolution from a short-range order to a nearly ordered {\it up-up-down} configuration and then to a field-polarised state is most clearly seen in the single crystal neutron diffraction experiment for $H \parallel b$ direction.
\section*{ACKNOWLEDGMENTS}
We are grateful to B.Z.~Malkin for numerous discussions of the magnetic properties of \sdo\ and related compounds.
We would also like to acknowledge J.A.M.~Paddison for his help with RMC analysis as well as T.J.~Hayes for his help with sample preparations and neutron scattering measurements.
|
\section*{Supplementary Material}
The supplementary material includes the components of the streamfunction in Eq. (2), analysis of the attracting points, additional details on the Melnikov function calculation and viscous flow simulations, Supplementary Figures for viscous flows, and Supplementary Movies showing animated versions of the dynamics in Fig. 5.
\begin{acknowledgments}
This research was supported by NSF Grant PHY-1001198.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{section:introduction}
Semantic segmentation is a very important topic in computer vision primarily because of its many applications in object recognition, image annotation, image coding, scene understanding and biomedical image processing. One specific field of semantic segmentation is face segmentation in which the task is to correctly assign labels of face regions such as nose, mouth, eye, hair, etc. to each pixel in a face image. Face segmentation techniques are frequently used in security systems and in the field of human computer interaction, mainly in order to facilitate the problems of face detection and recognition~\cite{pujol2017face, ahonen2006face, mian2007an, luu2016a}, and emotion/expression recognition~\cite{cohen2000emotion, stathopoulou2010on, happy2015automatic}. Further specialized entertainment oriented applications of face segmentation include style transfer~\cite{elad2016style-transfer}, virtual make-up application~\cite{liu2016makeup}, virtual face-swapping~\cite{korshunova2016fast} and 3D performance capturing~\cite{saito2016real-time}. Additionally, utilization of face segmentation techniques could potentially improve the performance in several other computer vision tasks involving the processing of face images such as apparent personality prediction~\cite{gucluturk2016deep} and face hallucination~\cite{gucluturk2016convolutional}.
Semantic segmentation of faces is a difficult problem because of the large number of variable conditions that need to be considered, especially when applied to face pictures taken in uncontrolled environments. These conditions include variations in facial expression, skin color, lighting, image quality, pose, hair texture and style, as well as the presence of varying amounts of background clutter and occlusions. Furthermore, despite extensive studies in face segmentation, correctly classifying hair pixels still remains a particularly challenging task~\cite{wang2011a}, largely due to the inherent properties of hair such as color similarity to background, non-rigidity and non-unique shape.
Recently, there has been a sizable number of advances in semantic segmentation. In the context of semantic image segmentation,~\cite{zheng2015conditional} showed that formulating the iterative update equation of a CRF over a fully-connected graph~\cite{krahenbuhl2012efficient} as a recurrent neural network (RNN) resulted in state-of-the-art accuracy on Pascal VOC 2012 dataset~\cite{everingham2014the}. While this model did not learn the pairwise potential of the CRF and relied on fixed Gaussian kernels, it was end-to-end trainable. In the context of semantic face segmentation,~\cite{liu2015multi-objective} showed that formulating the unary potential and the pairwise potential of a conditional random field (CRF) over a four-connected graph as a convolutional neural network (CNN) resulted in state-of-the-art accuracy on the Part Labels dataset~\cite{learned-Miller2016labeled, kae2013augmenting} and the Helen dataset~\cite{le2012interactive, smith2013exemplar-based}. While this model was not end-to-end trainable and relied on graph cuts, it learned both the the unary potential and the pairwise potential of the CRF.
Furthermore,~\cite{yu2015multi-scale} showed that the results of convolutional semantic segmentation models can be improved by using dilated kernels instead of regular kernels, which increase receptive field size without decreasing receptive field resolution. Similarly,~\cite{luc2016semantic} showed that results of convolutional semantic segmentation models can be improved by using an adversarial loss function in addition to a segmentation loss function, which enforces higher-order consistencies without explicitly taking into account any higher-order potentials.
Here, our goal is to formulate a model for semantic face segmentation by combining the respective strengths of the aforementioned models. That is, the model should be end-to-end trainable like~\cite{zheng2015conditional}, and learn both the unary potential and the pairwise potential of a CRF over a four-connected graph like~\cite{liu2015multi-objective} while aggregating multi-scale contexts like~\cite{yu2015multi-scale} and controlling higher-order inconsistencies like~\cite{luc2016semantic}. Table~\ref{table_1} shows an overview of the differences and the similarities between our model (i.e., CnnRnnGan), its variants (i.e., Cnn, CnnGan and CnnRnn), and the recent models that they are based on.
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\caption{\textbf{An overview of the differences and the similarities between the variants of our model, and the recent semantic segmentation models that they are based on.} $\psi_u$ and $\psi_p$ denote learned instead of fixed unary potentials and pairwise potentials, respectively.}
\label{table_1}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lccccc@{}}
\toprule
& \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}adversarial\\ training\end{tabular}} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{conditional random field} & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}dilated\\ conv.\end{tabular}} \\
& & ($\psi_u$) & ($\psi_p$) & (end-to-end) & \\ \midrule
Yu and Koltun (2015)~
\cite{yu2015multi-scale}& $\times$ & ----- & ----- & ----- & \checkmark \\
Liu et al. (2015)~
\cite{liu2015multi-objective}& $\times$ & \checkmark & \checkmark & $\times$ & $\times$ \\
Zheng et al. (2015)~
\cite{zheng2015conditional}& $\times$ & \checkmark & $\times$ & \checkmark & $\times$ \\
Luc et al. (2016)~
\cite{luc2016semantic}& \checkmark & ----- & ----- & ----- & \checkmark \\ \midrule
Cnn (Ours) & $\times$ & ----- & ----- & ----- & \checkmark \\
CnnGan (Ours) & \checkmark & ----- & ----- & ----- & \checkmark \\
CnnRnn (Ours) & $\times$ & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark \\
CnnRnnGan (Ours) & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The contributions of our work are the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item We propose an end-to-end trainable convolutional and recurrent network formulation of a conditional random field over a four-connected graph with learnable unary potentials and pairwise potentials in which dilated convolutions and adversarial training are used for aggregating multi-scale contexts and controlling higher-order inconsistencies, respectively.
\item We exploit the structured nature of faces by conditioning the model on face landmarks, and/or training multiple models for different face landmarks and combining their outputs akin to part-based models.
\item We evaluate the model on two standard semantic face segmentation datasets (i.e., Part Labels and Helen), achieving state-of-the-art results on both of them while considerably improving the segmentation accuracy of challenging face parts such as hair.
\end{enumerate}
The rest of this paper is organized as follows: In the next section, we overview the recent work on semantic segmentation in general and semantic face segmentation in particular. In Section~\ref{section:methods}, we present our model. In Section~\ref{section:results}, we present the results of the main experiments, in which we evaluate our model on both the Part Labels dataset and the Helen dataset, compare the obtained results versus the state-of-the-art, and present the results of the ablation experiments, in which we evaluate variants of our model on the same datasets. In the last section, we conclude with an overview of our work.
\section{Related work}
\label{section:related_work}
Semantic segmentation has been widely studied in computer vision in a wide spectrum of domains. For a comprehensive review of classical approaches for semantic segmentation, we refer the reader to~\cite{zhu2016beyond}. In this section, we review recent work on semantic segmentation in general and semantic face segmentation in particular.
The most recent state-of-the-art semantic segmentation models almost exclusively rely on convolutional neural networks. In contrast to earlier approaches where recognition architectures were directly used for semantic segmentation~\cite{farabet2013learning}, current approaches utilize architectures that are carefully adapted for the task at hand. \cite{long2015fully} proposed the first such approach, where the fully-connected layers of popular architectures such as AlexNet~\cite{krizhevsky2012imagenet}, VGGNet~\cite{simonyan2014very} and GoogLeNet~\cite{szegedy2014going} were replaced with (de)convolution layers and combined with earlier layers to enable dense and high resolution predictions. Since then, this approach has been continuously improved by the introduction of more sophisticated architectures, which enabled denser~\cite{Noh_2015_ICCV, badrinarayanan2015segnet, hong2015decoupled}, higher resolution predictions~\cite{ ghiasi2016laplacian}, and/or encoder-decoder~\cite{zheng2015learning} predictions. In particular, \cite{yu2015multi-scale} proposed dilated convolutions for dense prediction, where contexts could be aggregated by multiscale levels without loss of neither resolution nor coverage. This idea has been extended by~\cite{chen2016deeplab} to enable a larger field of view through spatial pyramid pooling. Such approaches enjoy the benefits of dense and high resolution predictions without the burden of extra parameters.
At the same time, conditional random fields have been used in semantic segmentation for postprocessing outputs of region-level or pixel-level semantic segmentation models. While the relatively small number of outputs of region-based semantic segmentation models could be postprocessed by CRFs with dense pairwise connectivity~\cite{kae2013augmenting}, the relatively large number of outputs of pixel-level semantic segmentation models could only be postprocessed by CRFs with sparse pairwise connectivity~\cite{liu2015multi-objective}. In a seminal work,~\cite{krahenbuhl2012efficient} proposed an efficient iterative algorithm for approximate inference in fully-connected CRFs with Gaussian edge potentials, which has been widely adopted for postprocessing outputs of pixel-level segmentation models~\cite{Noh_2015_ICCV, badrinarayanan2015segnet, hong2015decoupled}. \cite{zheng2015conditional} formulated this algorithm as a recurrent neural network, which is trained along with a pixel-level segmentation model instead of postprocessing it. This formulation is reminiscent of the pixel-level semantic segmentation model in~\cite{pinheiro2014recurrent}, whose outputs were iteratively refined with a recurrent convolutional neural network.
Recently, generative adversarial networks (GANs)~\cite{goodfellow2014generative} have received particular attention in computer vision~\cite{radford2015unsupervised, denton2015deep, chen2016infogan}. The idea behind GANs is training a discriminator and a generator by letting them play a two-player minimax game. In this game, the objective of the discriminator is distinguishing samples that are drawn from the data distribution from samples that are drawn from the model distribution, and the objective of the generator is fooling the discriminator. While GANs have been proposed for estimating generative models via an adversarial process, they have been widely adopted for other tasks such as inpainting~\cite{pathak2016context}, style transfer~\cite{li2016precomputed} and super-resolution~\cite{ledig2016photo-realistic} as loss functions. In particular,~\cite{luc2016semantic} estimated a semantic segmentation model via an adversarial process by training a discriminator for distinguishing ground-truths from outputs of the semantic segmentation model and the semantic segmentation model for fooling the discriminator. They showed that this process leads to improved results on the Stanford Background dataset~\cite{gould2009decomposing} and the PASCAL VOC 2012 dataset~\cite{everingham2014the}.
There has been relatively fewer semantic face segmentation models that rely on convolutional neural networks. Most earlier models were based on CRFs~\cite{kae2013augmenting}, hand designed features~\cite{warrell2009labelfaces} and exemplars~\cite{smith2013exemplar-based}. Kae et al.~\cite{kae2013augmenting} modeled global part dependencies using a restricted Boltzmann machine to have an overall realistic shape while local shape details were modeled through a CRF, whereas Smith et al.~\cite{smith2013exemplar-based} used exemplar-based non-rigid warping for face segmentation. Despite the progress in the models, hair segmentation is still the most challenging part due to its color and style variability. Earlier works include attempts of modeling hair, skin and background color \cite{scheffler2011joint, yacoob2006detection}, mixture of hair styles~\cite{lee2008markov} or MRF/CRF labeling~\cite{huang2008towards}. As a specialized hair segmentation, Wang et al.~\cite{wang2012good} applied co-occurrence probabilities of face components identified by a Markov random field. The final segmentations were constrained in a tree-structured model built over part co-occurrences. Among CNN-based face segmentation methods,~\cite{luo2012hierarchical} segmented faces based on a hierarchical part detection process, where the face was detected as the root of the hierarchy and the smallest components of the face were detected at the bottom of such hierarchy. Then, an autoencoder network transformed those detected components into label maps. As a result of using hierarchies, partially occluded faces could be easily handled. Recently,~\cite{zhou2015interlinked} applied the part detection idea by training one network for each part and mapping the segmentation result to the original image. \cite{liu2015multi-objective} generated pairwise terms as class edge potentials through a four-connected graph. Such edge potentials extracted in a multi-objective network along with unary terms were trained using non-structured loss functions, and provided prior knowledge to the network by including inaccurate segmentations as an additional network input. This study showed the benefits of including prior knowledge for improving face segmentation.
\section{End-to-end semantic face segmentation}
\label{section:methods}
For end-to-end semantic face segmentation, we formulate a conditional random field as a composition of a convolutional neural network and a recurrent neural network (Section~\ref{section:conditional_random_field}). The convolutional neural network is used for obtaining the unary potential and the pairwise kernels of the conditional random field as a function of an input face and its initial segmentation (Section~\ref{section:convolutional_neural_network}). The recurrent neural network is used for obtaining the label compatibility function and a mean field approximation of the Gibbs distribution of the conditional random field as a function of the unary potential and the pairwise kernels of the conditional random field (Section~\ref{section:recurrent_neural_network}). In the training phase, a discriminator and the conditional random field play a two-player minimax game, in which the objective of the discriminator is distinguishing ground-truth segmentations from final segmentations, and the objective of the conditional random field is fooling the discriminator (Section~\ref{section:adversarial_training}). Fig.~\ref{figure:figure_1} illustrates our model. The following sections present the components of our model in detail.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{figures/figure_1}
\caption{
\label{figure:figure_1}
\textbf{Our semantic face segmentation model.} The conditional random field is formulated as a composition of two neural networks:
i) A convolutional neural network, which nonlinearly transforms an input face and its initial segmentation to the unary potential and the pairwise kernels of the conditional random field.
ii) A recurrent neural network, which transforms the unary potential and the pairwise kernels of the conditional random field to the final segmentation of the input face.
In the training phase, a discriminator and the conditional random field play a two-player minimax game, in which the objective of the discriminator is distinguishing ground-truth segmentations from final segmentations, and the objective of the conditional random field is fooling the discriminator.
}
\end{figure*}
Prior to entering the model, an input face is preprocessed as follows: A template face is obtained by averaging the faces in the training set of the Part Labels dataset. Sixty-eight landmarks of the template face and the input face are detected by using the dlib implementation~\cite{king2009dlib-ml} of an ensemble of regression trees~\cite{kazemi2014one}.\footnote{Note that the dataset that was used for training the landmark detection model provided by dlib contains some of the images that we use to test our final segmentation model. To avoid circular analysis, we retrained the landmark detection model on the same dataset that it was originally trained on after removing these images.} An initial segmentation of the input face is obtained by filling the regions that are formed by connecting the landmarks around background, face skin, left eyebrow, right eyebrow, left eye, right eye, nose, upper lip, inner mouth and lower lip. A similarity transformation from the landmarks of the input face to the landmarks of the template face is estimated. The input face and its initial segmentation are warped to the template face by using the similarity transformation, and resized to 500 pixels $\times$ 500 pixels. The final segmentation of the input face is obtained by using our model. Optionally, the final segmentation of the input face can be resized back from 500 pixels $\times$ 500 pixels and warped back from the template face by using the inverse of the similarity transformation. Fig.~\ref{figure:figure_2} illustrates our preprocessing pipeline.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{figures/figure_2}
\caption{\label{figure:figure_2}\textbf{Our semantic face segmentation pipeline.} 1. Sixty-eight landmarks of the the input face are detected. 2. An initial segmentation of the input face is obtained. 3. The input face and the initial segmentation of the input face are warped to the template face by using a similarity transformation, and resized to 500 pixels $\times$ 500 pixels. 4. The final segmentation of the face is obtained by using our model. 5. Optionally, the final segmentation of the input face can be resized back from 500 pixels $\times$ 500 pixels and warped back from the template face by using the inverse of the similarity transformation.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Conditional random field}
\label{section:conditional_random_field}
We begin the exposition of our model by considering a conditional random field over a four-connected graph. Let $\mathbf{I} = \{I_1, \ldots, I_N\}$ and $\mathbf{X} = \{X_1, \ldots, X_N\}$ be random fields, where $I_i \in \mathds{R} ^ 3$ and $X_i \in \mathcal{L} = \{l_1, \ldots, l_P\}$ are the color vector and the label of the pixel $i \in \{1, \ldots, N = h \times w\}$, respectively. Let $\mathcal{G} = (\mathcal{V}, \mathcal{E})$ be a four-connected graph, where $\mathcal{V}$ contains all pixels, and $\mathcal{E}$ contains all pixel pairs that have a taxicab metric of one.
The conditional random field $(\mathbf{I}, \mathbf{X})$ over $\mathcal{G}$ is defined by the following Gibbs distribution:
\begin{equation}
P\left(\mathbf{X} = \mathbf{x} | \mathbf{I}\right) = \frac{1}{Z\left(\mathbf{I}\right)}\exp\left(-E\left(\mathbf{x} | \mathbf{I}\right)\right)
\end{equation}
where $Z$ is the partition function, and $E$ is the following Gibbs energy:
\begin{equation}
E\left(\mathbf{x}\right) = \sum_{i \in \mathcal{V}}\psi_u\left(x_i\right) + \sum_{i, j \in \mathcal{E}}\psi_p\left(x_i, x_j\right)
\end{equation}
where $\psi_u$ is the unary potential, which is the cost of assigning the label $x_i$ to the pixel $i$, and $\psi_p$ is the pairwise potential, which is the cost of assigning the labels $x_i$ and $x_j$ to the pixels $i$ and $j$, respectively. Note that we omit conditioning on $\mathbf{I}$ for notational convenience. The pairwise potential is of the following form:
\begin{equation}
\psi_p\left(x_i, x_j\right) = \mu\left(x_i, x_j\right)k_{i, j}
\end{equation}
where $\mu$ is a label compatibility function, which is not assumed to be symmetric since it was shown that this assumption improves semantic segmentation results~\cite{zheng2015conditional}, and $k$ is arbitrary pairwise kernels.
Following~\cite{krahenbuhl2012efficient}, we approximate the Gibbs distribution with the mean field distribution that minimizes the Kullback–Leibler divergence between the Gibbs distribution and the distributions that are of the following form:\footnote{While the Gibbs energy can be converted to a submodular energy, which makes exact inference (e.g. with combinatorial min cut/max flow algorithms) possible, we resort to approximate inference (i.e. with mean field theory) to be able to formulate it as a recurrent neural network, which makes end-to-end training possible.}
\begin{equation}
Q\left(\mathbf{X}\right) = \prod_{i \in \mathcal{V}}Q_i\left(X_i\right)
\end{equation}
This approximation results in the following iterative update equation:
\begin{equation}
Q_i\left(x_i = l\right) = \frac{1}{Z_i} \exp \left(-\psi_u\left(x_i\right) - \sum_{l' \in \mathcal{L}} \mu\left(l, l'\right) \sum_{i, j \in \mathcal{E}} k_{i, j} Q_j\left(l'\right) \right)
\end{equation}
\subsection{Convolutional neural network}
\label{section:convolutional_neural_network}
Following~\cite{liu2015multi-objective}, we formulate $\psi_u$ and $k$ as a convolutional neural network, whose architecture is inspired by recent architectures proposed in~\cite{yu2015multi-scale, vandenOord2016wavenet, kalchbrenner2016neural}.
The network comprises the following layers:
\begin{enumerate}
\item One convolution layer that has 32 kernels of size $3 \times 3$ with no nonlinearities.
\item Five blocks, where each block comprises the following layers:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Two parallel convolution layers that have 64 kernels of size $1 \times 1$ with no nonlinearities (i.e. bias layer) and 64 dilated kernels of size $3 \times 3$ with gated activation units~\cite{vandenOord2016wavenet} (i.e. weight layer). The input of the bias layer is the initial segmentation. The output of the bias layer is summed with the activation of the weight layer. The output of the weight layer becomes the input of the next layer.
\item Two parallel convolution layers that have 64 kernels of size $1 \times 1$ with no nonlinearities (i.e. residual layer) and 64 kernels of size $1 \times 1$ with rectified linear units (i.e. skip layer). The output of the residual layer is summed with the input of the block, which becomes the input of the next layer. The output of the skip layer is concatenated with the outputs of the skip layers of the remaining blocks along the channel axis, which becomes the input of the next layer after the last block.
\end{enumerate}
\item One convolution layer that has 160 kernels of size $1 \times 1$ with rectified linear units.
\item Two parallel convolution layers that have $P$ kernels of size $1 \times 1$ with no nonlinearities (i.e., $\psi_u$) and four kernels of size $1 \times 1$ with exponential units (i.e., $k$).
\end{enumerate}
Dilated kernels are the same as the regular kernels with the exception that successive kernel elements have holes between each other, whose size is determined by a dilation factor. As a result, they increase receptive field size without decreasing receptive field resolution. Note that regular convolution layers can be considered dilated convolution layers with a dilation factor of one.
The dilation factor of the first block is one, which is doubled after every block. The number of blocks (i.e., five) is chosen to be the largest possible value such that the receptive field dimensions of the last block is less than or equal to the pixel dimensions. That is:
\begin{equation}
q = \argmax_x f\left(x\right) : f\left(x\right) = 3 + 2\sum_{i = 0}^{x - 1}2^i \leq \min\left(h, w\right)
\end{equation}
where $q$ is the number of blocks.
\subsection{Recurrent neural network}
\label{section:recurrent_neural_network}
Following [3], we formulate $\mu$ and the iterative update equation as a recurrent neural network. The network comprises (i) a message passing layer, (ii) a compatibility transform layer, and (iii) a local update and normalization layer. Note that only the compatibility transform layer has free parameters.
The layers are implemented as follows: Let $\psi_u$ be a $P \times h \times w$ tensor and $k$ be a $4 \times h \times w$ tensor, which are the outputs of the convolutional neural network. Prior to the first iteration, $Q$ is initialized with $\psi_u$, and the channels of $k$ are broadcasted to the shape of $Q$, which results in a set of four $P \times h \times w$ tensors.
\begin{itemize}
\item In the message passing layer, $Q$ is shifted up, right, down and left by one pixel, and multiplied (i.e. Hadamard product) with the corresponding elements of k, which results in a set of four $P \times h \times w$ tensors. The elements of this set are summed. As a result, this layer outputs a $P \times h \times w$ tensor, which becomes the input of the next layer.
\item In the compatibility transform layer, the input tensor is convolved with $P$ kernels of size 1 $\times$ 1. As a result, this layer outputs a $P \times h \times w$ tensor, which becomes the input of the next layer.
\item In the local update and normalization layer, the input tensor is subtracted from $-\psi_u$, exponentiated and normalized (i.e., softmax function). As a result, this layer outputs a $P \times h \times w$ tensor, which becomes the input of the first layer after the first four iterations and the output of the network after the fifth iteration.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Adversarial training}
\label{section:adversarial_training}
While this end-to-end trainable convolutional and recurrent neural network formulation of a conditional random field can learn both the unary potential and the pairwise potential, it does not take into account any higher-order potentials that can enforce higher-order consistencies. To be able to enforce higher-order consistencies without explicitly taking into account any higher-order potentials, we train the model by minimizing an adversarial loss function in addition to a segmentation loss function~\cite{luc2016semantic}.
To this end, we train a discriminator along with our model, which is from now on referred to as the generator. We denote the output of the discriminator as $D_{\theta_D}(\mathbf{.})$, which is the probability that the input of the discriminator is a ground-truth segmentation. We denote the output of the generator as $G_{\theta_G}(\mathbf{.})$, which is the probabilities of assigning each of the $P$ labels to each of the $N$ pixels of the input.
In this context, the goal of the discriminator is to distinguish ground-truth segmentations from generated segmentations, whereas the goal of the generator is to generate segmentations that are indistinguishable from ground-truth segmentations. That is, they play the following minimax game:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\min_{\theta_G}\max_{\theta_D} \quad & \mathds{E}_{\mathcal{T}^{\left(n\right)}\sim p_{\mathcal{T}}\left(\mathcal{T}^{\left(n\right)}\right)} \log D_{\theta_D}\left(\mathcal{T}^{\left(n\right)}\right) + \\
& \mathds{E}_{\mathcal{I}^{\left(n\right)}\sim p_{\mathcal{I}}\left(\mathcal{I}^{\left(n\right)}\right)} \log\left(1 - D_{\theta_D}\left(G_{\theta_G}\left(\mathcal{I}^{\left(n\right)}\right)\right)\right)
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{I} = \{\mathcal{I}^{(1)}, \mathcal{I}^{(2)}, \ldots\}$ is a set of images, and $\mathcal{T} = \{\mathcal{T}^{(1)}, \mathcal{T}^{(2)}, \ldots\}$ is a set of corresponding ground-truth segmentations.
We formulate the discriminator as a convolutional neural network whose architecture is inspired by the architecture in~\cite{radford2015unsupervised}. The network comprises four convolution layers and a fully-connected layer. The $i$th convolution layer has $2 ^ {6 + i}$ kernels with a size of $3 \times 3$, a stride of $2 \times 2$, a pad of $1 \times 1$ and leaky rectified units~\cite{maas2013rectifier}. The activations of the first four convolution layers are normalized along the mini-batch (i.e., batch normalization~\cite{ioffe2015batch}). The output of the last convolution layer is averaged along the spatial axes (i.e., global average pooling~\cite{lin2013network}). The fully-connected layer has one kernel with a sigmoid unit.
The discriminator is trained by iteratively minimizing the following discriminator loss function:
\begin{equation}
L_{dis} = -\log D_{\theta_D}\left(\mathcal{T}^{\left(n\right)}\right) - \log\left(1 - D_{\theta_D}\left(G_{\theta_G}\left(\mathcal{I}^{\left(n\right)}\right)\right)\right)
\end{equation}
Note that $L_{dis}$ is the sum of two sigmoid cross entropy loss functions.
The generator is trained by iteratively minimizing the following linear combination of an adversarial loss function and a segmentation loss function:
\begin{eqnarray}
L_{gen} = L_{adv} + \lambda L_{seg}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\lambda$ is the coefficient of the segmentation loss function and the constituent loss functions are of the following forms:
\begin{eqnarray}
L_{adv} & = & -\log D_{\theta_D}\left(G_{\theta_G}\left(\mathcal{I}^{\left(n\right)}\right)\right) \\
L_{seg} & = & -\sum_{l \in \mathcal{L}}\sum_{i \in \mathcal{V}}\mathcal{T}^{\left(n\right)}_{l, i}\log G_{\theta_G}\left(\mathcal{I}^{\left(n\right)}\right)_{l, i}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that $L_{adv}$ is a sigmoid cross entropy loss function, and $L_{seg}$ is a softmax cross entropy loss function.
\section{Results}
\label{section:results}
\subsection{Implementation details}
The models were implemented in Chainer with CUDA and cuDNN~\cite{tokui2015chainer}.
The biases of the models were initialized with zero, the weights of the models were initialized with samples drawn from a scaled Gaussian distribution~\cite{he2015deep}, and the coefficient of the segmentation loss function (i.e., $\lambda$) was set to 100.
Adam~\cite{kingma2014adam} with initial $\alpha$ = 0.001, $\beta_1$ = 0.9, $\beta_2$ = 0.999 and $\epsilon$ = 1e-8 was used to iteratively train the models on the combination of the training set and the validation set\footnote{The hyperparameters (i.e., $\lambda$, $\alpha$ and the number of epochs) were optimized prior to combining the training set and the validation set.} for 111 epochs. The learning rate (i.e., $\alpha$) was reduced by a factor of 10 after 100 and 110 epochs.
At each iteration, the discriminator and the generator were updated sequentially. To prevent them from overpowering each other, the training of the discriminator was suspended or resumed if the following conditions were satisfied, respectively:
\begin{equation}
\frac{L_{dis}}{L_{adv}} < 0.1, \frac{L_{dis}}{L_{adv}} > 0.5
\end{equation}
Similarly, the training of the generator was suspended or resumed if the following conditions were satisfied, respectively:
\begin{equation}
\frac{L_{dis}}{L_{adv}} > 10, \frac{L_{dis}}{L_{adv}} < 2
\end{equation}
These conditions were selected based on~\cite{dosovitskiy2016generating}.
Our source code and pretrained models will be shared post-publication. Further details can be found at \url{https://github.com/umuguc}.
\subsection{Datasets}
We analyzed the Part Labels dataset and the Helen dataset in our experiments. These datasets are the standard benchmark datasets for semantic face segmentation, which comprise pairs of in-the-wild faces and ground-truth segmentations. Parts Label dataset comprises 2927 pairs of in-the-wild faces and ground-truth segmentations of background, face skin (including ear skin and neck skin) and hair (including facial hair), which is split in a 1500 pair training set, a 500 pair validation set and a 927 pair test set. Helen dataset comprises 2330 pairs of in-the-wild faces and ground-truth segmentations of face skin (excluding ear skin and neck skin), left eyebrow, right eyebrow, left eye, right eye, nose, upper lip, inner mouth, lower lip and hair (excluding facial hair), which is split in a 2000 pair training set, a 230 pair validation set and a 100 pair test set.
\subsection{Evaluation metrics}
Results are reported in terms of confusion matrix and Jaccard index (i.e., intersection over union). Confusion matrix is defined as the square matrix $\mathbf{A}$ where $A_{i, j}$ is the number of pixels whose true class is $i$ and predicted class is $j$. Jaccard index of class $i$ is defined as follows:
\begin{equation}
J_i = \frac{A_{i, i}}{\sum_jA_{i, j} + \sum_jA_{j, i} - A_{i, i}}
\end{equation}
Jaccard index of all classes is defined as follows:
\begin{equation}
J = \frac{\sum_iJ_i}{P}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Main experiments}
We conducted two main experiments on the Labeled Parts and the Helen datasets, in which we evaluated the CnnRnnGan model.
\subsubsection{Part Labels dataset}
We iteratively trained one global CnnRnnGan model for segmenting background, face skin and hair. Before the first iteration, the images in the dataset were resized to 106 pixels $\times$ 106 pixels. At each iteration, a mini-batch of size 16 was randomly selected without replacement, horizontally and vertically translated by $\pm$ 5 pixels, and mirrored in the left-right direction. Then, the mini-batch was cropped to the central 96 pixels $\times$ 96 pixels.
In the test phase, the inputs were oversampled (i.e., center and corners) and mirrored (i.e., left-right direction). The outputs were placed to their corresponding locations in the original inputs and averaged. Table~\ref{table_2} shows the resulting confusion matrix and Jaccard index. The most common cause of errors was mislabeling the classes as background. The least common cause of errors was mislabeling the classes as hair. All of the classes were segmented with a relatively high accuracy ($J = 0.8882$). Background was the most accurately segmented class ($J_{b} = 0.9656$). Hair was the least accurately segmented class ($J_{h} = 0.7808$).
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\caption{\textbf{The results of the main experiment on the Part Labels dataset.} Confidence matrix is reported in terms of percentage. The rest of the results are reported in terms of Jaccard index (i.e. intersection over union) of the classes and their arithmetic mean, respectively.}
\label{table_2}
\begin{tabular}{@{}cccccc@{}}
\toprule
& & \multicolumn{3}{c}{predicted class} & \\
& & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/background} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/face_skin} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/hair} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/overall} \\ \midrule
& \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/background} & 97.97 & 00.73 & 01.30 & ----- \\
\multicolumn{1}{r}{\rot{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}true\\ class\end{tabular}}} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/face_skin} & 01.83 & 96.37 & 01.79 & ----- \\
& \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/hair} & 06.35 & 05.44 & 88.21 & ----- \\ \midrule
\multicolumn{2}{c}{Jaccard index} & .9656 & .9182 & .7808 & .8882 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Helen dataset}
We iteratively trained the following five CnnRnnGan models for segmenting different classes:
\begin{itemize}
\item One global model for segmenting background, face skin and hair.
\item Three local models for segmenting eyebrows, eyes and nose, respectively.
\item One local model for segmenting upper lip, inner mouth and lower lip.
\end{itemize}
The outputs of the global model and the local models were aggregated by resizing the output of the global model to 500 pixels $\times$ 500 pixels and placing the non-background outputs of the local models to their corresponding locations in the resized output of the global model.
The global model was trained on the Helen dataset in the exact same way as it was trained on the Part Labels dataset. The local models were trained in a slightly different way than that in which the global models were trained. Before the first iteration, the images in the dataset were cropped to 90 pixels $\times$ 90 pixels such that their centers coincided with the centers of the corresponding classes of the average face. At each iteration, a mini-batch of size 16 was randomly selected without replacement, rotated by $\pm$ 7.5 degrees, scaled by a factor of 1 $\pm$ 0.05, horizontally and vertically translated by $\pm$ 5 pixels, and randomly flipped in the left-right direction. Additionally, the initial segmentations were further randomly rotated by $\pm$ 0.75 degrees, scaled by a factor of 1 $\pm$ 0.005, and horizontally and vertically translated by $\pm$ 0.5 pixels. The additional data augmentation was used to further avoid overfitting the training set since the training set had a small overlap with the training set of the landmark detection model. Finally, the mini-batch was cropped to the central 80 pixels $\times$ 80 pixels.
In the test phase, the inputs were oversampled (i.e., center and corners) and mirrored (i.e., left-right direction). The outputs were placed to their corresponding locations in the original inputs and averaged. Table~\ref{table_3} shows the resulting confusion matrix and Jaccard index. The most common cause of errors was mislabeling the classes as face skin and background. The least common cause of errors was mislabeling the classes as eyes and nose. Importantly, when the non-background outputs of the local models were misclassified, they were almost always misclassified as the output of the global model and almost never as one another, which suggests that the simple post-hoc aggregation of the outputs of the global model and the local models was sufficient. All of the classes were segmented with a relatively high accuracy ($J = 0.7873$). Background and face skin were the most accurately segmented classes ($J_{b} = 0.9452$ and $J_{fs} = 0.8933$). Hair and upper lip were the least accurately segmented classes ($J_{h} = 0.6962$ and $J_{ul} = 0.6619$).
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\caption{\textbf{The results of the main experiment on the Helen dataset.} Confidence matrix is reported in terms of percentage. The rest of the results are reported in terms of Jaccard index (i.e. intersection over union) of the classes and their arithmetic mean, respectively.}
\label{table_3}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lccccccccccc@{}}
\toprule
& & \multicolumn{9}{c}{predicted class} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} \\
& & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/background} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/face_skin} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/eyebrow} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/eye} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/nose} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/upper_lip} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/inner_mouth} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/lower_lip} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/hair} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/overall} \\ \midrule
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/background} & 97.28 & 00.41 & & & & & & & 02.30 & ----- \\
\multicolumn{1}{r}{} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/face_skin} & 01.83 & 95.46 & 00.43 & 00.16 & 00.36 & 00.13 & 00.01 & 00.18 & 01.44 & ----- \\
& \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/eyebrow} & 00.05 & 19.66 & 80.22 & & & & & & 00.06 & ----- \\
\multicolumn{1}{r}{\multirow{3}{*}{\rot{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}true class\end{tabular}}}} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/eye} & & 13.25 & 00.02 & 86.73 & & & & & & ----- \\
\multicolumn{1}{r}{} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/nose} & & 07.23 & & & 92.77 & & & & & ----- \\
\multicolumn{1}{r}{} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/upper_lip} & & 14.16 & & & 00.01 & 80.90 & 03.63 & 01.30 & & ----- \\
& \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/inner_mouth} & & 02.35 & & & & 09.49 & 82.20 & 05.96 & & ----- \\
& \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/lower_lip} & 00.06 & 09.65 & & & & & 04.46 & 84.83 & & ----- \\
& \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/hair} & 16.38 & 02.70 & 00.11 & & & & & & 80.81 & ----- \\ \midrule
\multicolumn{2}{c}{Jaccard index} & .9452 & .8933 & .6987 & .7974 & .8884 & .6619 & .7467 & .7580 & .6962 & .7873 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Compared to the accuracy of hair segmentations on the Part Labels dataset, accuracy of hair segmentations on the Helen dataset was considerably lower ($J_h = 0.7808$ versus $J_h = 0.6962$). This discrepancy can be attributed to the way in which hair was annotated in the datasets. In the Part Labels dataset, hair was annotated by automatically segmenting images to superpixels and manually labeling the superpixels. In the Helen dataset, hair was automatically annotated by alpha matting.
In the Helen dataset, we observed relatively lower accuracy for hair, eyebrows and upper lips compared to the rest of the classes. The relative low accuracy of hair and eyebrows can be attributed to the fact that these classes do not have well defined boundaries making it difficult to isolate them from background and/or face skin. Similarly, the relatively low accuracy of upper lip can be attributed to the fact that this class has shared borders with four other classes (i.e., face skin, inner mouth and lower lip) and often misclassified as belonging to one of them. However, the discrepancy between upper lip, and inner mouth or lower lip is surprising since these classes have the similar properties with upper lip, but might be explained by class imbalance.
\subsection{Comparison of results versus state-of-the-art}
After the main experiments, we compared the results of the CnnRnnGan model on the Part Labels dataset and the Helen dataset versus the earlier results reported in the literature.
\subsubsection{Part Labels dataset}
First, we compared our results on the Part Labels dataset versus the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item RBM and CRF based image labeling method of Kae et al. (2013)~\cite{kae2013augmenting}.
\item CNN, RBM and CRF based semantic part segmentation method of Tsogkas et al. (2015)~\cite{tsogkas2015semantic}.
\item CNN and CRF based face labeling method of Liu et al. (2015)~\cite{liu2015multi-objective}.
\item Convolutional VAE based semantic segmentation method of Zheng et al. (2015)~\cite{zheng2015learning}.
\item Convolutional neural fabric based semantic segmentation method of Saxena et al. (2016)~\cite{saxena2016convolutional}.
\end{itemize}
To the best of our knowledge, the CnnRnnGan model achieved state-of-the-art results on the Part Labels dataset (Table~\ref{table_4}). The best overall results in the literature~\cite{liu2015multi-objective, tsogkas2015semantic} were improved by 1.55 and 0.19 percentage points (pp) from 95.12 to 96.67 and from 96.97 to 97.16 for pixels and superpixels, respectively.\footnote{Note that the CnnRnnGan model was trained on pixels only. The superpixel results were obtained by averaging the corresponding outputs of the CnnRnnGan model. While these results are supoptimal since the CnnRnnGan model was not trained on superpixels, they are reported for completeness.} The improvements in the best existing hair results were more pronounced compared to those in the rest of the best existing results ($6.99$ pp versus $\leq 1.81$ pp).\footnote{Note that background, face skin and hair results were reported in~\cite{liu2015multi-objective} only.}
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\caption{\textbf{Comparison of our results versus the previous state-of-the-art on the Part Labels dataset.} The overall results are reported in terms of pixel and superpixel accuracy, respectively. The rest of the results are reported in terms of $F_1$ score.}
\label{table_4}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lccccc@{}}
\toprule
& \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/background} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/face_skin} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/hair} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/overall}} \\ \midrule
Kae et al. (2013)~\cite{kae2013augmenting} & ----- & ----- & ----- & ----- & 94.95 \\
Tsogkas et al. (2015)~\cite{tsogkas2015semantic} & ----- & ----- & ----- & ----- & 96.97 \\
Liu et al. (2015)~\cite{liu2015multi-objective} & 97.10 & 93.93 & 80.70 & 95.12 & ----- \\
Zheng et al. (2015)~\cite{zheng2015learning} & ----- & ----- & ----- & ----- & 96.59 \\
Saxena et al. (2016)~\cite{saxena2016convolutional} & ----- & ----- & ----- & 94.82 & 95.63 \\ \midrule
\textbf{Ours} & \textbf{98.25} & \textbf{95.74} & \textbf{87.69} & \textbf{96.67} & \textbf{97.16} \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Helen dataset}
Second, we compared our results on the Helen dataset versus the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item Exemplar based face parsing method of Smith et. al (2013)~\cite{smith2013exemplar-based}.
\item CNN and CRF based face labeling method of Liu et al. (2015)~\cite{liu2015multi-objective}.
\item CNN based face parsing method of Liu et al. (2015)~\cite{zhou2015interlinked}.
\end{itemize}
To the best of our knowledge, our model achieved state-of-the-art results on the Helen dataset (Table~\ref{table_5}). The best overall result in the literature~\cite{zhou2015interlinked} was improved by 3.69 pp, from 87.30 to 90.99. The improvements in the best existing face skin, upper lip and lower lip results were more pronounced compared to those in the rest of the best existing results ($\geq 3.16$ pp versus $\leq 1.90$ pp).
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\caption{\textbf{Comparison of our results versus the state-of-the-art on the Helen dataset.} All of the results are reported in terms of $F_1$ score. The additional mouth results include the upper lip results, the inner mouth results and the lower lip results. The overall results exclude the background results and the face skin results.}
\label{table_5}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lccccc@{}}
\toprule
& \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/face_skin} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/eyebrow} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/eye} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/nose} & ... \\ \midrule
Smith et. al (2013)~\cite{smith2013exemplar-based}& 88.20 & 72.20 & 78.50 & 92.20 & ... \\
Liu et. al (2015)~\cite{liu2015multi-objective} & 91.20 & 73.40 & 76.80 & 91.20 & ... \\
Zhou et. al (2015)~\cite{zhou2015interlinked} & ----- & 81.30 & 87.40 & \textbf{95.00} & ... \\ \midrule
Ours & \textbf{94.36} & \textbf{82.26} & \textbf{88.73} & 94.09 & ... \\ \midrule
& \multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} \\ \midrule
& \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/upper_lip} & \includegraphics[width= 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/inner_mouth} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/lower_lip} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/mouth} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/overall} \\ \midrule
Smith et. al (2013)~\cite{smith2013exemplar-based} & 65.10 & 71.30 & 70.00 & 85.70 & 80.40 \\
Liu et. al (2015)~\cite{liu2015multi-objective} & 60.10 & 82.40 & 68.40 & 84.90 & 85.40 \\
Zhou et. al (2015)~\cite{zhou2015interlinked} & 75.40 & 83.60 & 80.90 & 92.60 & 87.30 \\ \midrule
Ours & \textbf{79.66} & \textbf{85.50} & \textbf{86.23} & \textbf{92.82} & \textbf{90.99} \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Ablation experiments}
Finally, we conducted two sets of ablation experiments on the Part Labels dataset and the Helen dataset, in which we evaluated the variants of the CnnRnnGan model.
\subsubsection{Part Labels dataset}
First, we evaluated the effect of removing the different components of the CnnRnnGan model on the Part Labels dataset (Table~\ref{table_6}).
The CnnRnnGan model achieved the best results except for background. The results were deteriorated by removing the Gan component and keeping the Rnn component (CnnRnn model). Removing the Rnn component and keeping the Gan component (CnnGan model) further decreased the accuracy. The results were once again deteriorated by removing both the Rnn component and the Gan component (Cnn model). Among all of the classes, the most notable change was observed for hair ($0.0283$).
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\caption{\textbf{The results of the ablation experiment on the Part Labels dataset.} The results are reported in terms of Jaccard index (i.e. intersection over union) of the classes and their arithmetic mean, respectively.}
\label{table_6}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lcccc@{}}
\toprule
& \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/background} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/face_skin} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/hair} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/overall} \\ \midrule
Cnn & .9617 & .9111 & .7525 & .8751 \\
CnnGan & .9622 & .9114 & .7574 & .8770 \\
CnnRnn & \textbf{.9663} & .9177 & .7795 & .8878 \\ \midrule
\textbf{CnnRnnGan} & .9656 & \textbf{.9182} & \textbf{.7808} & \textbf{.8882} \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
We illustrate qualitative examples of these results in Fig.~\ref{fig:qualitative_partlabels}. In the first column, it can be observed that even though the ground truth had a mistake (the hands were incorrectly labeled as face skin), particularly the CnnRnn and CnnRnnGan models correctly segmented most pixels. The example in the second column demonstrates the performance of the models in a difficult facial hair case. In this example, all models performed well in segmenting the mustache, but only CnnRnnGan model correctly identified the beard pixels. The third column showcases an example that all models performed well. The examples in the fourth and fifth columns highlight the gradual improvement provided by each additional model component in the correct classification of hair pixels. Especially in the example in the fifth column, it is possible to observe the improvements in the identification of fine details of hair. The first failure case example in column six demonstrates a difficult case for all models. The pixels to the left of the face skin are indeed hair pixels, however they belong to another person in the photograph. All models failed to make this distinction. The last failure case example shows that all models failed to segment the facial hair pixels and incorrectly labeled them as facial skin pixels. This error could be attributed to the low contrast difference between the face skin and facial hair pixels.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{figures/figure_3}
\caption{\label{fig:qualitative_partlabels}\textbf{Example segmentations of the variants of the CnnRnnGan model that were evaluated in the ablation experiment on the Part Labels dataset.} The last two columns show failure cases in which none of the model variants achieved satisfactory results. gt. denotes ground-truth.}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Helen dataset}
Second, we evaluated the effect of conditioning the CnnRnnGan model on the initial segmentation and/or training multiple CnnRnnGan models for segmenting different classes on the Helen dataset (Table~\ref{table_7}). The initial segmentation (init. model) failed to achieve competitive results. These results were considerably improved by training a single CnnRnnGan model for segmenting all of the classes (1c. model). Conditioning the single CnnRnnGan model on the initial segmentation (init.+1c. model) slightly increased the accuracy. The results were once again considerably improved by training multiple CnnRnnGan models for segmenting different classes and conditioning them on the initial segmentation (init.+5c. model), which made them the best for all of the classes except for background and hair. Among all of the classes, the most notable improvements were observed for eyebrows, eyes, upper lip, inner mouth and lower lip ($\in [0.1051, 0.2132]$).
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\caption{\textbf{The results of the ablation experiment on the Helen dataset.} The results are reported in terms of Jaccard index (i.e. intersection over union) of the classes and their arithmetic mean, respectively.}
\label{table_7}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lcccccccccc@{}}
\toprule
& \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/background} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/face_skin} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/eyebrow} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/eye} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/nose} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/upper_lip} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/inner_mouth} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/lower_lip} & \includegraphics[width = 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/hair} & \includegraphics[width= 0.5cm, height = 0.5cm]{icons/overall} \\ \midrule
init. & .8253 & .6358 & .4855 & .6527 & .5325 & .5568 & .5757 & .6001 & & .5405 \\
1c. & \textbf{.9465} & .8770 & .6074 & .6811 & .8562 & .5666 & .6655 & .6667 & \textbf{.7030} & .7300 \\
init.+1c. & .9408 & 8805 & .6189 & .6880 & .8618 & .5724 & .6804 & .6738 & .6717 & .7320 \\ \midrule
init.+5c. & .9452 & \textbf{.8933} & \textbf{.6987} & \textbf{.7974} & \textbf{.8884} & \textbf{.6619} & \textbf{.7467} & \textbf{.7580} & .6962 & \textbf{.7873} \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
We illustrate qualitative examples of these results in Fig.~\ref{figure:figure_4}. In the first five columns of this figure, it is possible to see an increase in performance starting from the simplest initial segmentation model to the complex variants of the CnnRnnGan model. While the initial segmentation does a good job in determining the general locations of each face region, it does not provide a detailed solution. Furthermore, it can be observed that the initial segmentation performs rather poorly in the nose and eyebrow regions, and whenever the expression of the face diverges from a neutral pose in the mouth regions. Among the variants of the CnnRnnGan model, the qualitative differences were minimal. However, the improvement provided by training multiple CnnRnnGan models for segmenting different classes and conditioning them on the initial segmentation (i.e. init.+5c) has resulted in visually distinguishable accuracy differences. This model was able to capture the details better than the remaining two model variants. The last two columns in the figure demonstrate failure cases where all model variants had errors. Models performed poorly in distinguishing hair from background when the background color was similar to the hair color (column 6) and in identifying the mouth regions when the person in the photograph had an extreme facial expression (column 7).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{figures/figure_4}
\caption{\label{figure:figure_4}\textbf{Example segmentations of the variants of the CnnRnnGan model that were evaluated in the ablation experiment on the Helen dataset.} The last two columns show failure cases in which none of the model variants achieved satisfactory results. gt. denotes ground-truth.}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{section:conclusion}
Here, we proposed an end-to-end trainable semantic face segmentation model, which leverages the recent advances in the field. To this end, we formulated a conditional random field over a four-connected graph as convolutional and recurrent networks and estimated them via an adversarial process. Crucially, this formulation made it possible for this model to learn not only unary potentials but also pairwise potentials while aggregating multiscale contextual information and controlling higher-order inconsistencies. We showed that our model can exploit the structured nature of faces by conditioning it on face landmarks, and/or training it for different face landmarks and combining the outputs akin to part-based models. We evaluated our model on the Part Labels dataset and the Helen dataset, achieving state-of-the-art results on both of them while considerably improving the accuracy of challenging face parts such as hair. Future work will evaluate our model on other semantic segmentation datasets to asses its generalizability beyond faces.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This work has been partially supported by VIDI grant number 639.072.513 of the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO), the Spanish projects TIN2015-66951-C2-2-R, TIN2015-65464-R and TIN2016-74946-P (MINECO/FEDER, UE), by the European Comission Horizon 2020 granted project SEE.4C under call H2020-ICT-2015, and by the CERCA Programme/Generalitat de Catalunya.
\bibliographystyle{ieeetr}
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $f: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ be a Lipschitz function. Let $\mathcal{M}$ be a semi-finite von Neumann algebra and let $\mathcal{M}_{sa}$ be its self-adjoint part. This paper deals with differentiability properties of (multi-dimensional versions of) the mapping
\begin{equation}\label{Eqn=SmoothnessMap}
\mathcal{M}_{sa} \ni A \mapsto f(A).
\end{equation}
The interest in such differentiability problems comes from very diverse directions: (i) the mapping \eqref{Eqn=SmoothnessMap} relates strongly to perturbations of commutators, (ii) there is a prolific series of papers devoted to differentiability and Lipschitz properties of \eqref{Eqn=SmoothnessMap}, (iii) the map \eqref{Eqn=SmoothnessMap} relates to Connes' non-commutative geometry and in particular the spectral action, see \cite{CM}, \cite{Skripka}, \cite{Suij}.
The roots of the results of this paper can be traced back to a problem of Krein \cite{Krein} which led to a remarkable diversity of papers concerning double operator integrals and Schur multipliers. The original Krein problem asks if for a function $f$ being Lipschitz implies that it is operator Lipschitz, meaning that \eqref{Eqn=SmoothnessMap} is Lipschitz for the uniform norm on $\mathcal{M}_{sa}$. Krein's question is very natural but it was shown that it has a negative answer \cite{Far8}, unless one imposes stricter differentiability assumptions on $f$ (like belonging to certain Besov or Sobolev spaces), see \cite{APPS}, \cite{BiSo1}, \cite{PellerHankel} to name just a few. Contributions to the problem were made by various people including Davies \cite{Davies}, Kato \cite{Kato} and Kosaki \cite{Kosaki} who found positive and negative results (under suitable conditions) for the analogue of Krein's problem for $L_p$-norms.
With the development of double operator integrals (see e.g. \cite{BirSolDOI}, \cite{PSJFA04}, \cite{PSW}) significant steps forward were made on Lipschitz and differentiability properties of the mapping \eqref{Eqn=SmoothnessMap}, which were shown to be equivalent to various commutator estimates (see \cite{BirSol89}, \cite[Theorem 2.2]{DDPS1}). In turn this led to questions on the behavior of certain Schur multipliers and related double operator integrals.
Finding estimates -- even if they are non-optimal -- for norms of Schur multipliers is a highly non-trivial task. The hard part is that Schur multipliers acting on $L_\infty$-spaces (or just matrix algebras) can often be estimated using Stinespring dilations, see e.g. \cite{PisierBook}. However, if one considers Schur multipliers on $L_p$-spaces this tool is inapplicable. Therefore, in order to attack Krein's problem for $L_p$-spaces, $p\not = 1, \infty$ we are forced to introduce new techniques.
A corner stone result was obtained in \cite{PotapovSukochev2} (see also \cite{HNVW}): it was shown by D. Potapov and the second named author that the mapping \eqref{Eqn=SmoothnessMap} is Lipschitz continuous with respect to the $L_p$-norm, $1 < p < \infty$. As \cite{PotapovSukochev2} involves an application of the vector valued Marcinkiewicz multiplier theorem (due to Bourgain) it was not clear what the optimal non-commutative Lipschitz constants are. A sharp estimate for $L_p$-spaces was found in \cite{CMPS}. However in the category of symmetric spaces the question whether the so-called weak-$(1,1)$ estimate holds remained open.
A first result in this weak-$(1,1)$ direction was obtained by Nazarov and Peller \cite{NazarovPeller} who proved it in the special case that $A - B$ has rank 1. In the same paper a question concerning validity of this result for an arbitrary trace class perturbation $A-B$ was posed. A full answer for $f$ being the absolute value map was obtained in \cite{CPSZ} using positive definite Schur multipliers and triangular truncations. In \cite{CPSZ2} this result was extended to all Lipschitz functions. The result is ultimate for the functions of 1 variable: it is optimal within the category of symmetric spaces and it implies all other known estimates on perturbations of commutators and Lipschitz functions obtained before \cite{CMPS}, \cite{CPSZ}, \cite{Davies}, \cite{DDPS1}, \cite{DDPS2}, \cite{Kato}, \cite{Kosaki}, \cite{NazarovPeller}, \cite{PotapovSukochev2}. The key ingredient of the proof in \cite{CPSZ2} is a new connection with non-commutative Calder\'on-Zygmund theory and in particular with the main result from Parcet's fundamental paper \cite{Parcet} (see also the recent paper by Cadilhac \cite{Cad} for a substantially shorter proof). \hyphenation{multi-pliers}\hyphenation{ana-ly-sis}
In this paper we focus on multi-dimensional (or multi-variable) Lipschitz estimates for the mapping \eqref{Eqn=SmoothnessMap} which naturally includes a version of the Nazarov-Peller problem for normal operators.
This study is deeply connected with that of classical Fourier multipliers. In particular, the dimension dependence of classes of multipliers as Bochner-Riesz multipliers, Riesz multipliers, (directional) Hilbert transforms et cetera, has been an important theme of research (we refer to Grafakos's book \cite{Grafakos} with ample such results). Therefore, it is natural to look at the higher dimensional behavior of \eqref{Eqn=SmoothnessMap}. Some results were obtained in \cite{KPSS} and \cite{CMPS}. However, the results in these papers are not optimal. In this paper we obtain the following.
\begin{thm}\label{final theorem} For every Lipschitz function $f:\mathbb{R}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ and for every collection $\mathbf{A}=\{A_k\}_{k=1}^d\subset B(H)$ of commuting self-adjoint operators such that $[A_k,B]\in L_1(H),$ we have
$$\|[f(\mathbf{A}),B]\|_{1,\infty}\leq c(d)\|\nabla(f)\|_{\infty}\cdot\max_{1\leq k\leq d}\|[A_k,B]\|_1.$$
For every Lipschitz function $f:\mathbb{R}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ and for every collections $\mathbf{X}=\{X_k\}_{k=1}^d\subset B(H),$ $\mathbf{Y}=\{Y_k\}_{k=1}^d\subset B(H)$ of commuting self-adjoint operators such that $X_k-Y_k\in L_1(H),$ we have
$$\|f(\mathbf{X})-f(\mathbf{Y})\|_{1,\infty}\leq c(d)\|\nabla(f)\|_{\infty}\cdot\max_{1\leq k\leq d}\|X_k-Y_k\|_1.$$
\end{thm}
As a corollary of Theorem \ref{final theorem} we extend our main result from \cite{CPSZ2} to normal operators, see Corollary \ref{Cor=Normal}, which substantially improves corresponding results in \cite{BiSo1}, \cite{CMPS} (see also \cite{APPS}). This extension is based on a strengthened version of the transference principle from \cite{CPSZ2} as explained in Section \ref{Sect=IntSpec}. In the text we prove a somewhat stronger result than Theorem \ref{final theorem} in the terms of double operator integrals (see the next section for the definitions), of which the main Theorem \ref{final theorem} is a corollary.
\begin{thm}\label{doi bound} For every Lipschitz function $f:\mathbb{R}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ and for every collection $\mathbf{A}=\{A_k\}_{k=1}^d$ of commuting self-adjoint operator in a semifinite von Neumann algebra $\mathcal{M},$ we have
$$\|T_{f_{k_0}}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V)\|_{1,\infty}\leq c(d)\|\nabla(f)\|_{\infty}\|V\|_1,\quad V\in(L_1\cap L_2)(\mathcal{M}),$$
for every $1 \leq k_0 \leq d$.
Here, $f_{k_0}$ is defined by \eqref{fk def}.
\end{thm}
Our proofs are based on weak type versions of de Leeuw theorems \cite{de Leeuw} and a delicate analysis of homogeneous Calder\'on--Zygmund operators.
\section{Preliminaries}
\subsection{General notation}
Throughout the paper $d$ is an integer $\geq 1$. Our main result, Theorem \ref{final theorem}, concerns $d$-tuples of commuting self-adjoint operators, whereas the proofs involve an analysis on $\mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ and $\mathbb{T}^{d+1}$. We use
\[
\nabla=(\partial_1,\ldots,\partial_{d+1})=\frac{1}{i} (\frac{\partial}{\partial t_1}, \ldots, \frac{\partial}{\partial t_{d+1}})
\]
for the gradient, which is an unbounded operator on $L_2(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})$. We use $\mathcal{F}$ for the Fourier transform $\mathcal{F}(f)(t) = (2\pi)^{-(d+1)/2}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{d+1}} f(s) e^{-i \langle s, t \rangle} ds$.
Let $\mathcal{M}$ be a semifinite von Neumann algebra equipped with a faithful normal semifinite trace $\tau.$ In this paper, we always presume that $\mathcal{M}$ is represented on a separable Hilbert space.
A (closed and densely defined) operator $x$ affiliated with $\mathcal{M}$ is called $\tau-$measurable if $\tau(E_{|x|}(s,\infty))<\infty$ for sufficiently large $s.$ We denote the set of all $\tau-$measurable operators by $S(\mathcal{M},\tau).$ For every $x\in S(\mathcal{M},\tau),$ we define its singular value function $\mu(A)$ by setting
$$\mu(t,x)=\inf\{\|x(1-p)\|_{\infty}:\quad \tau(p)\leq t\}.$$
Equivalently, for positive self-adjoint operators $x\in S(\mathcal{M},\tau),$ we have
$$n_x(s)=\tau(E_x(s,\infty)),\quad \mu(t,x)=\inf\{s: n_x(s)<t\}.$$
We have for $x,y \in S(\mathcal{M},\tau)$ (see e.g. \cite[Corollary 2.3.16]{LSZ})
\begin{equation}\label{triangle svf}
\mu(t+s,x+y)\leq\mu(t,x)+\mu(s,y),\quad t,s>0.
\end{equation}
Let $S((0,\infty) \times (0, \infty)) = S(L_\infty((0,\infty) \times (0, \infty)), \int\: ds)$ where the integral is the Lebesgue integral.
Recall that every $x \in S(\mathcal{M},\tau), y\in \mathcal{M}$ such $\mu(x) \otimes \mu(y) \in S((0,\infty) \times (0, \infty))$ we have (see \cite[Eqn. (4.1)]{CPSZ2} for the proof),
\begin{equation}\label{mu tensor}
\mu(x\otimes y)=\mu(\mu(x)\otimes\mu(y)),
\end{equation}
For a measurable function $f$ on $\mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ we use $\sigma_l(f)(t) = f(l^{-1}t), l>0$. Note that
\begin{equation}\label{Eqn=CovariantTrans}
\Vert \sigma_l(f) \Vert_1 = l^{d+1} \Vert f \Vert_1, \quad \Vert \sigma_l(f) \Vert_2 = l^{(d+1)/2} \Vert f \Vert_2,
\end{equation}
where the norms are with respect to the Lebesgue measure on $\mathbb{R}^{d+1}$.
\subsection{Non-commutative spaces}
For $1\leq p<\infty$ we set,
$$L_p(\mathcal{M})=\{x\in S(\mathcal{M},\tau):\ \tau(|x|^p)<\infty\},\quad \|x\|_p=(\tau(|x|^p))^{\frac1p}.$$
The Banach spaces $(L_p(\mathcal{M}),\|\cdot\|_p)$, $1\leq p<\infty$ are separable. Define the space $L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M})$ by setting
$$L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M})=\{x\in S(\mathcal{M},\tau):\ \sup_{t>0}t\mu(t,x)<\infty\}.$$
We equip $L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M})$ with the functional $\|\cdot\|_{1,\infty}$ defined by the formula
$$\|x\|_{1,\infty}=\sup_{t>0}t\mu(t,x),\quad x\in L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}).$$
It follows from \eqref{triangle svf} that
\[
\begin{split}
&\|x+y\|_{1,\infty}=\sup_{t>0}t\mu(t,x+y)\leq\sup_{t>0}t(\mu(\frac{t}{2},x)+\mu(\frac{t}{2},y)) \\
\leq & \sup_{t>0}t\mu(\frac{t}{2},x)+\sup_{t>0}t\mu(\frac{t}{2},y)=2\|x\|_{1,\infty}+2\|y\|_{1,\infty}.
\end{split}
\]
In particular, $\|\cdot\|_{1,\infty}$ is a quasi-norm. The quasi-normed space $(L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}),\|\cdot\|_{1,\infty})$ is, in fact, quasi-Banach (see e.g. \cite[Section 7]{KS} or \cite{Sind}). Naturally we set $L_{1, \infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}) = L_{1, \infty}(L_\infty(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))$ and $L_{1, \infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}) = L_{1, \infty}(L_\infty(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))$.
\subsection{Weak type inequalities for Calder\'on-Zygmund operators}
Parcet \cite{Parcet} proved a non-commutative extension of Calder\'on-Zygmund theory.
Let $K$ be a tempered distribution on $\mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ which we refer to as the {\it convolution kernel}. We let $W_K$ be the associated Calder\'on-Zygmund operator, formally given by $f \mapsto K \ast f.$ In what follows, we only consider tempered distributions having local values (that is, which can be identified with measurable functions $K:\mathbb{R}^{d+1}\rightarrow\mathbb{C}$).
Let $\mathcal{M}$ be a semi-finite von Neumann algebra with normal, semi-finite, faithful trace $\tau.$ The operator $1\otimes W_K$ can, under suitable conditions, be defined as a non-commutative Calder\'on-Zygmund operator by letting it act on the second tensor leg of $L_1(\mathcal{M})\widehat{\otimes}L_1(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}).$ The following theorem in particular gives a sufficient condition for such an operator to act from $L_1$ to $L_{1,\infty}.$ Its proof was improved/shortened very recently by Cadilhac \cite{Cad}.
\begin{thm}[\cite{Cad}, \cite{Parcet}]\label{Thm=Parcet}
Let $K:\mathbb{R}^{d+1} \backslash \{0\} \rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ be a kernel satisfying the conditions
\begin{equation}\label{parcet conditions}
|K|(t)\leq\frac{{\rm const}}{|t|^{d+1}},\quad |\nabla K|(t)\leq\frac{{\rm const}}{|t|^{d+2}}.
\end{equation}
Let $\mathcal{M}$ be a semi-finite von Neumann algebra. If $W_K\in B(L_2(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})),$ then the operator $1\otimes W_K$ defines a bounded map from $L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_\infty(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))$ to $L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_\infty(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})).$
\end{thm}
We need a very special case of Theorem \ref{Thm=Parcet}.
\begin{thm}\label{parcet corollary} If $g\in L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})$ is a smooth homogeneous function, then $1\otimes g(\nabla)$ defines a bounded map from $L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_\infty(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))$ to $L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_\infty(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})).$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof} Without loss of generality, the function $g$ is mean zero on the sphere $\mathbb{S}^d$ (this can be always achieved by subtracting a constant from $g$). By Theorem 6 on p.75 in \cite{Stein} and using that $g$ has mean 0, we have $g(\nabla)=W_K,$ where $K=\mathcal{F}^{-1}(g)$ is a smooth homogeneous function of degree $-d-1$. The gradient of the function $K$ is a smooth homogeneous function of degree $-d-2$. These conditions guarantee that \eqref{parcet conditions} holds for $K$ and by Theorem \ref{Thm=Parcet}, the assertion follows.
\end{proof}
In Section \ref{Sect=DeLeeuw}, we prove the following compact analogue of Theorem \ref{parcet corollary}. The transference arguments in Section \ref{Sect=IntSpec} require such a compact form. We let $\nabla_{\mathbb{T}^{d+1}}$ be the gradient operator on the $(d+1)$-torus.
\begin{thm}\label{axis torus} If $g$ is a smooth homogeneous function on $\mathbb{R}^{d+1},$ then the operator $1\otimes g(\nabla_{\mathbb{T}^{d+1}}):L_2(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))\to L_2(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))$ admits a bounded extension acting from $L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))$ to $L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1})).$
\end{thm}
\begin{rmk}\label{Rmk=DeLeeuw}
Theorem \ref{axis torus} should be understood as a de Leeuw theorem in the following sense. Assume for simplicity that $\mathcal{M} = \mathbb{C}$. $g(\nabla)$ of Theorem \ref{parcet corollary} is a Fourier multiplier with symbol $g$. $g(\nabla_{\mathbb{T}^{d+1}})$ is the Fourier multiplier on $L_2(\mathbb{T}^{d+1})$ whose symbol is the restriction of $g$ to $\mathbb{Z}^{d+1}$. Theorem \ref{axis torus} then shows that $g\vert_{\mathbb{Z}^{d+1}}$ is the symbol of a bounded multiplier $L_1(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}) \rightarrow L_{1, \infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1})$. This is a weak $(1,1)$ version of de Leeuw's theorem \cite{de Leeuw}.
\end{rmk}
\subsection{Double operator integrals}\label{doi subsection} Let $\mathbf{A}=\{A_k\}_{k=1}^d$ be a collection of {\it commuting} self-adjoint operators affiliated with $\mathcal{M}.$ Consider projection valued measures on $\mathbb{R}^d$ acting on the Hilbert space $L_2(\mathcal{M})$ by the formulae
$$x\to\Big(\prod_{k=1}^dE_{A_k}(\mathcal{B}_k)\Big)x,\quad x\to x\Big(\prod_{k=1}^dE_{A_k}(\mathcal{C}_k)\Big),\quad x\in L_2(\mathcal{M}).$$
These spectral measures commute and, hence (see Theorem V.2.6 in \cite{BirSol}), there exists a countably additive (in the strong operator topology) projection-valued measure $\nu$ on $\mathbb{R}^2$ acting on the Hilbert space $L_2(\mathcal{M})$ by the formula
\begin{equation}\label{birsol spectral measure}
\nu(\mathcal{B}_1\times\cdots\times\mathcal{B}_d\times\mathcal{C}_1\times\cdots\times\mathcal{C}_d):x\to \Big(\prod_{k=1}^dE_{A_k}(\mathcal{B}_k)\Big)x\Big(\prod_{k=1}^dE_{A_k}(\mathcal{C}_k)\Big),\quad x\in L_2(\mathcal{M}).
\end{equation}
Integrating a bounded Borel function $\xi$ on $\mathbb{R}^{2d}$ with respect to the measure $\nu$ produces a bounded operator acting on the Hilbert space $L_2(\mathcal{M}).$ In what follows, we denote the latter operator by $T_{\xi}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}$ (see also \cite[Remark 3.1]{PSW}).
In the special case when $A_k$ are bounded and ${\rm spec}(A_k)\subset\mathbb{Z},$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{doi special}
T_{\xi}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V)=\sum_{\mathbf{i},\mathbf{j}\in\mathbb{Z}^d}\xi(\mathbf{i},\mathbf{j})\Big(\prod_{k=1}^dE_{A_k}(\{i_k\})\Big)V\Big(\prod_{k=1}^dE_{A_k}(\{j_k\})\Big).
\end{equation}
We are mostly interested in the case $\xi=f_k$ for a Lipschitz function $f.$ Here, for $1 \leq k \leq d$ and $\lambda, \mu \in \mathbb{R}^{d}$,
\begin{equation}\label{fk def}
f_k(\lambda,\mu)=
\begin{cases}
\frac{(f(\lambda)-f(\mu))(\lambda_k-\mu_k)}{\langle\lambda-\mu,\lambda-\mu\rangle},\quad \lambda\neq\mu\\
0,\quad \lambda=\mu.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\section{A de Leeuw type theorem for Calder\'on-Zygmund operators}\label{Sect=DeLeeuw}
In this section we collect de Leeuw type results (c.f. \cite{de Leeuw}) needed in the subsequent proofs. The main result is Theorem \ref{axis torus}. This theorem should be understood as a restriction theorem for (homogeneous) Fourier multipliers, see Remark \ref{Rmk=DeLeeuw}.
The strategy of the proof is as follows. One finds an asymptotic embedding of $L_1(\mathbb{T}^{d+1})$ (resp. $L_{1, \infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1})$) into $L_1(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})$ (resp. $L_{1, \infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})$) such that this asymptotic embedding intertwines the Fourier multipliers/Calder\'on-Zygmund operators and their discretizations.
\vspace{0.3cm}
In what follows,
$$G_l(t)= (l \sqrt{2\pi})^{-(d+1)} e^{-\frac{|t|^2}{2l^2}},\quad t\in\mathbb{R}^{d+1}, \quad l>0.$$
We have that $\|G_l\|_1=1$.
Let $\mathcal{F}$ stand for the Fourier transform.
Note that
\begin{equation}\label{Eqn=Covariance}
\begin{split}
(\mathcal{F}G_l)(t)= &
(l \sqrt{2\pi})^{-(d+1)}\int e^{ - \frac{ \vert s \vert^2}{2 l^2} } e^{-i \langle t,s \rangle} ds \\
=& (l \sqrt{2\pi})^{-(d+1)} \int e^{ - \frac{ \vert s \vert^2}{2} } e^{-i \langle l t,s \rangle} ds
= G_1(lt).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We set
\begin{equation}\label{ek def}
e_k(t):=e^{i\langle k,t\rangle},\quad k,t\in\mathbb{R}^{d+1}, k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d+1}.
\end{equation}
Let $\alpha = (\alpha_1, \ldots, \alpha_{d+1})$ where $\alpha_k \in \mathbb{Z}_+$. The notation $\partial^{\alpha}$ is used for $h(\nabla),$ where $h(t)=\prod_{k=1}^{d+1}t_k^{\alpha_k},$ $t\in\mathbb{R}^{d+1}.$ We have
\[
M_{e_{-k}} g(\nabla) M_{e_k} = g(M_{e_{-k}} \nabla M_{e_k}) = g(\nabla + k).
\]
\begin{rmk}
The Gaussian functions $G_l$ are needed to normalize our asymptotic embeddings given by periodizations of functions (see Lemmas \ref{first periodic lemma} and \ref{second periodic lemma} for exact statements). These asymptotic embeddings are closely related to the Bohr compactification of $\mathbb{R}^{d+1}$.
\end{rmk}
The following lemma is a $(d+1)-$dimensional analogue of Lemma 7 in \cite{PScrelle}.
\begin{lem}\label{fourier estimate lemma} For every function $h$ on $\mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ whose partial derivatives up to order $d+1$ belong to $L_2(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})$ we have
$$\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(h)\|_1\leq 2^{\frac{d+1}{2}}\sum_{|\alpha|\leq d+1}\|\partial^{\alpha}(h)\|_2.$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} For every $\mathscr{A}\subset\{1,\cdots,d+1\},$ we define the set $O_{\mathscr{A}}\subset\mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ by setting
$$O_{\mathscr{A}}=\{t\in\mathbb{R}^{d+1}:\ |t_k|\geq 1,\ k\in\mathscr{A},\ |t_k|\leq 1,\ k\notin\mathscr{A}\}.$$
We also define the function $h_{\mathscr{A}}$ on $\mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ by setting
$$h_{\mathscr{A}}(t)=\prod_{k\in\mathscr{A}}t_k,\quad t\in\mathbb{R}^{d+1}.$$
Note that the sets $O_{\mathscr{A}}$ form a partition of $\mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ and that for every choice of $\mathcal{A}$ we have $\Vert h_{\mathscr{A}}^{-1} \chi_{O_{\mathscr{A}}} \Vert_2 \leq 2^{\frac{d+1}{2}}$.
We have
\[
\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(h)\|_1\leq\sum_{\mathscr{A}\subset\{1,\cdots,d+1\}}\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(h)\chi_{O_{\mathscr{A}}}\|_1.
\]
By the H\"older inequality
\[
\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(h)\|_1\leq \sum_{\mathscr{A}\subset\{1,\cdots,d+1\}}\|h_{\mathscr{A}}\mathcal{F}^{-1}(h)\chi_{O_{\mathscr{A}}}\|_2\|h_{\mathscr{A}}^{-1}\chi_{O_{\mathscr{A}}}\|_2.
\]
By the previous paragraph and the Plancherel identity
\[
\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(h)\|_1\leq 2^{\frac{d+1}{2}}\sum_{\mathscr{A}\subset\{1,\cdots,d+1\}}\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(h_{\mathscr{A}}(\nabla)h)\|_2=2^{\frac{d+1}{2}}\sum_{\mathscr{A}\subset\{1,\cdots,d+1\}}\|h_{\mathscr{A}}(\nabla)h\|_2.
\]
The proof follows as $h_{\mathscr{A}}(\nabla) = \partial^{\alpha}$.
\end{proof}
For a multi-index $\alpha = (\alpha_1, \ldots, \alpha_{d+1}) \in \mathbb{Z}_+^{d+1}$ let $\vert \alpha \vert = \sum_{i=1}^{d+1} \alpha_i$. We shall without further reference use the fact that $\partial^\alpha(\sigma_l(f)) = l^{- \vert \alpha \vert} \sigma_l(\partial^\alpha(f))$ for any smooth function $f$ on $\mathbb{R}^{d+1}$.
\begin{lem}\label{first convergence lemma} Let $g\in L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})$ be a smooth function with all derivatives assumed to be uniformly bounded. If $(\partial^{\alpha}g)(0)=0$ for every multi-index $\alpha$ with $|\alpha|\leq d,$ then
$$\|(g(\nabla))(G_l)\|_1\to0,\quad l\to\infty.$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} We have $g(\nabla)=\mathcal{F}^{-1}M_g\mathcal{F}$, with $M_g$ the multiplication operator with $g$ on $L_2(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})$.
Recall again that $\mathcal{F}(G_l)(t) = G_1(lt), t\in\mathbb{R}^{d+1}.$
Thus, see e.g. \eqref{Eqn=Covariance},
$$(g(\nabla))(G_l)=\mathcal{F}^{-1}M_g\mathcal{F}(G_l)=\mathcal{F}^{-1}(gh_l),$$
where $h_l(t)=G_1(lt),$ $t\in\mathbb{R}^{d+1}.$ It follows from Lemma \ref{fourier estimate lemma} that
$$\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(gh_l)\|_1\leq 2^{\frac{d+1}{2}}\sum_{|\alpha|\leq d+1}\|\partial^{\alpha}(gh_l)\|_2\leq 2^{\frac{d+1}{2}}\sum_{|\alpha|+|\beta|\leq d+1}\|\partial^{\alpha}(g)\partial^{\beta}(h_l)\|_2.$$
Due to the assumption that $(\partial^{\alpha}g)(0)=0$ for every multi-index $\alpha$ with $|\alpha|\leq d$, all coefficients in the Taylor expansion of $g$ around 0 of the terms of order $\leq d$ vanish. Therefore, as all derivatives of $g$ are assumed to be uniformly bounded functions we obtain that $|\partial^{\alpha}g|\leq c(g)f^{d+1-|\alpha|},$ $|\alpha|\leq d+1,$ where $f(t)=\vert t \vert$, for some constant $c(g)$. Thus,
$$\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(gh_l)\|_1\leq 2^{\frac{d+1}{2}}c(g)\sum_{|\alpha|+|\beta|\leq d+1}\|f^{d+1-|\alpha|}\partial^{\beta}(h_l)\|_2.$$
We have
$$\partial^{\beta}(h_l)=l^{|\beta|}\sigma_{\frac1l}(\partial^{\beta}G_1),\quad f^{d+1-|\alpha|}=l^{|\alpha|-d-1}\sigma_{\frac1l}(f^{d+1-|\alpha|}).$$
Thus,
\[
\begin{split}
& \|f^{d+1-|\alpha|}\partial^{\beta}(h_l)\|_2
= l^{\vert \beta\vert+\vert\alpha\vert-d-1}\|\sigma_{\frac1l}(f^{d+1-|\alpha|}\partial^{\beta}(G_1))\|_2=\\
= & l^{ \vert \beta \vert + \vert \alpha \vert - \frac{3}{2}(d+1) } \|f^{d+1-|\alpha|}\partial^{\beta}G_1\|_2 \rightarrow 0.
\end{split}
\]
This concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{second convergence lemma} If $g:\mathbb{R}^{d+1}\to\mathbb{C}$ is a Schwartz function such that $g(0)=0,$ then
$$\|(g(\nabla))(G_l)\|_1\to0,\quad l\to\infty.$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Define Schwartz functions $g_j:\mathbb{R}^{d+1}\to\mathbb{C},$ $1\leq j\leq d+1,$ by setting
$$g_j(t)=\frac{g(0,\cdots,0,t_j,\cdots,t_{d+1})-g(0,\cdots,0,t_{j+1},\cdots,t_{d+1})}{t_j},\quad t\in\mathbb{R}^{d+1}.$$
We have,
$$g(t)= \sum_{j=1}^{d+1}t_j g_j(t).$$
and, therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{scl1}
g(\nabla)(G_l)=\sum_{j=1}^{d+1} g_j(\nabla) \cdot \Big( \partial_j G_l \Big).
\end{equation}
It follows from Young inequality that
$$\|g_j(\nabla)x\|_1=\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}M_{g_j}\mathcal{F}x\|_1=\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(g_j)\ast x\|_1\leq\|\mathcal{F}^{-1}(g_j)\|_1\|x\|_1,\quad x\in L_1(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}).$$
The proof then follows provided that for $x = \partial_j G_l, 1 \leq j \leq d+1$ we have,
\begin{equation}\label{Eqn=WriteOut}
\|\partial_jG_l\|_1\to0,\quad l\to\infty.
\end{equation}
Indeed, a direct computation yields,
$$\partial_jG_l=\frac1{l^{d+2}}\sigma_l(h_j),\quad \textrm{ where } h_j(t) :=it_jG_1(t),\quad t\in\mathbb{R}^{d+1}.$$
So appealing to \eqref{Eqn=CovariantTrans}, we obtain
\[
\| \partial_j(G_l )\|_1 = \frac{1}{l} \Vert h_j\Vert_1 \rightarrow 0.
\]
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{third convergence lemma} Let $g\in L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})$ be a smooth function with all its derivatives assumed to be uniformly bounded. If $k\in\mathbb{R}^{d+1},$ then
$$\|(g(\nabla))(G_le_k)-g(k)G_le_k\|_1\to0,\quad l\to\infty.$$
Here $e_k$ is given by \eqref{ek def}.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Suppose first that $k=0$ and $g(0)=0.$ Let $\psi$ be a Schwartz function on $\mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ such that $\psi(t)=1$ whenever $|t|\leq 1.$ Set
$$\phi(t)=\sum_{|\alpha|\leq d}\frac{i^{|\alpha|}}{\prod_{k=1}^{d+1}(\alpha_k)!}(\partial^{\alpha}g)(0)t^{\alpha}\psi(t),\quad t\in\mathbb{R}^{d+1}.$$
Clearly, $\phi$ is a Schwartz function, $\phi(0) = 0$ and $(\partial^{\alpha}g)(0)=(\partial^{\alpha}\phi)(0)$ for $|\alpha|\leq d.$ In other words, the function $g-\phi$ satisfies the assumptions of Lemma \ref{first convergence lemma}. Using Lemmas \ref{first convergence lemma} and \ref{second convergence lemma}, we obtain
$$\|((g-\phi)(\nabla))(G_l)\|_1\to0,\quad \|(\phi(\nabla))(G_l)\|_1\to0,\quad l\to\infty.$$
Using triangle inequality, we obtain
$$\|(g(\nabla))(G_l)\|_1\to0,\quad l\to\infty.$$
This proves the assertion in our special case.
To prove the assertion in general, note that
\begin{equation}\label{Eqn=Limit}
\begin{split}
& \Vert g(\nabla) (G_l e_k) - g(k) G_l e_k \Vert_1
= \Vert (M_{e_{-k}} g(\nabla) M_{e_k} - g(k)) (G_l ) \Vert_1 \\
= & \Vert ( g(\nabla +k) - g(k) )(G_l) \Vert_1.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Now as $t\to g(t+k)-g(k)$ is a function satisfying the assumptions of the first paragraph, we see that \eqref{Eqn=Limit} goes to 0 as $l \rightarrow \infty$.
\end{proof}
The following Lemma \ref{fourth convergence lemma} is the main intertwining property as we explained in the beginning of this section.
\begin{lem}\label{fourth convergence lemma} Let $g\in L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})$ be a smooth (except at $0$) homogeneous function of degree $0.$ For every $0\neq k\in\mathbb{R}^{d+1},$ we have
$$\|(g(\nabla))(G_le_k)-g(k)G_le_k\|_{1,\infty}\to0,\quad l\to\infty.$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Fix $0\neq k\in\mathbb{R}^{d+1}.$ Fix a Schwartz function $\phi$ supported on the ball $\{|t|_2 < \vert k \vert_2 \}$ such that $\phi(t)=1$ whenever $|t|_2\leq \frac12|k|_2.$ Clearly, both functions $\phi$ and $g(1-\phi)$ satisfy the conditions of Lemma \ref{third convergence lemma}. We obtain
\[
\begin{split}
&\|((g(1-\phi))(\nabla))(G_le_k)-g(k)G_le_k\|_{1,\infty} \\
\leq &
\|((g(1-\phi))(\nabla))(G_le_k)-g(k)G_le_k\|_{1} \to0,\quad l\to\infty
\end{split}
\]
And also
\[
\|(\phi(\nabla))(G_le_k) \|_{1}\to0,\quad l\to\infty.
\]
By Theorem 1 on p.29 in \cite{Stein} (see especially Step 2 on p.30; one can also use Theorem \ref{parcet corollary} here), the operator $g(\nabla):L_1(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})\to L_{1,\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})$ is bounded. Thus, since $\phi$ satisfies the assumptions of Lemma \ref{first convergence lemma},
$$\|(g\phi(\nabla))(G_le_k)\|_{1,\infty}\leq\|g(\nabla)\|_{L_1\to L_{1,\infty}}\|(\phi(\nabla))(G_le_k)\|_1\to0,\quad l\to\infty.$$
The assertion follows by applying triangle inequality.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{tensor mu} Let $A\in L_1(\mathcal{M}_1)$ and let $B\in L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}_2).$ We have
$$\|A\otimes B\|_{1,\infty}\leq\|A\|_1\|B\|_{1,\infty}.$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Define the function $z$ on $(0,\infty)$ by setting $z(t):=t^{-1},$ $t>0.$ We have
$$\mu(A\otimes B)\stackrel{\eqref{mu tensor}}{=}\mu(\mu(A)\otimes\mu(B))\leq\|B\|_{1,\infty}\mu(\mu(A)\otimes z).$$
We claim that for every positive decreasing function $x\in L_1(0,\infty),$ we have $\mu(x\otimes z)=\|x\|_1z.$ Set $x_n=\sum_{k=0}^{n^2-1}\mu(\frac{k+1}{n},x)\chi_{(\frac{k}{n},\frac{k+1}{n})}, n > 1.$ The functions $\chi_{(\frac{k}{n},\frac{k+1}{n})}\otimes z,$ $0\leq k<n^2,$ are disjointly supported and equimeasurable with $\frac1nz.$ Therefore,
$$\mu(x_n\otimes z)=\mu(\sum_{k=0}^{n^2-1}\mu(\frac{k+1}{n},x)\chi_{(\frac{k}{n},\frac{k+1}{n})}\otimes z)=\mu(\bigoplus_{k=0}^{n^2-1}\frac1n\mu(\frac{k+1}{n},x)z)=\|x_n\|_1z.$$
It is immediate that $x_n\uparrow x$ and, therefore, $x_n\otimes z\uparrow x\otimes z$ and $\mu(x_n\otimes z)\uparrow \mu(x\otimes z).$ This proves the claim.
\end{proof}
Let
\[
{\rm per}:\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1})\to \mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})
\]
be the natural embedding by periodicity. Under the identification $\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}) \simeq L_\infty(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}, \mathcal{M})$ (the latter being understood as weakly measurable, essentially bounded functions) and similarly for the torus, it is defined as
\[
{\rm per}(f)(t) = f(t \:\: {\rm mod} \: 2\pi), \qquad t \in \mathbb{R}^{d+1}.
\]
\begin{comment}
More precisely, we have a measure preserving identification
\[
j: \mathbb{R}^{d+1} \rightarrow \mathbb{Z}^{d+1} \times \mathbb{T}^{d+1}: t \mapsto ( \lfloor \frac{ t}{2\pi} \rfloor, t - 2\pi \lfloor \frac{ t}{2\pi} \rfloor).
\]
Then we have ${\rm per}_{0}: L_\infty(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}) \rightarrow L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})$ which is defined by ${\rm per}_0(f)(t) = \widetilde{f}(j^{-1}(t))$ where $\widetilde{f}$ is the function on $ \mathbb{Z}^{d+1} \times \mathbb{T}^{d+1}$ given by $\widetilde{f}(k, \theta) = f(\theta)$. Then ${\rm per} = {\rm Id}_{\mathcal{M}} \otimes {\rm per}_{0}$.
\end{comment}
We consider $\mathbb{T}$ with total Haar measure $2 \pi$. The next Lemma \ref{first periodic lemma} provides the asymptotic embedding of $L_1(\mathbb{T}^{d+1})$ to $L_1(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})$.
\begin{lem}\label{first periodic lemma} For every $W\in L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1})),$ we have
$$\lim_{l\to\infty}\|{\rm per}(W)\cdot(1\otimes G_l)\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))}=\frac1{(2\pi)^{d+1}}\|W\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))}.$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} For every $m\in\mathbb{Z},$ define $l(m),n(m)\in\mathbb{Z}$ by setting
\begin{equation}\label{Eqn=LDef}
l(m)=
\begin{cases}
m&m\geq0\\
m+1&m<0
\end{cases},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{Eqn=NDef}
n(m)=
\begin{cases}
m+1&m\geq0\\
m&m<0
\end{cases}.
\end{equation}
Next set
\[
\begin{split}
l(m) = (l(m_1), \ldots, l(m_{d+1})),& \qquad m \in \mathbb{Z}^{d+1}, \\
n(m) = (n(m_1), \ldots, n(m_{d+1})),& \qquad m \in \mathbb{Z}^{d+1}.
\end{split}
\]
Clearly,
\[
\begin{split}
& \|{\rm per}(W)\cdot(1\otimes G_l)\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))} \\
= & \sum_{m\in\mathbb{Z}^{d+1}}\|{\rm per}(W)\cdot(1\otimes G_l)\cdot(1\otimes\chi_{2\pi m+[0,2\pi]^{d+1}})\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))}.
\end{split}
\]
By construction,
\[
G_l(2\pi n(m))\leq G_l(t)\leq G_l(2\pi l(m)),\quad t\in 2\pi m+[0,2\pi]^{d+1}.
\]
Hence,
\[
\begin{split}
& \|{\rm per}(W)\cdot(1\otimes G_l)\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))} \\
\leq & \sum_{m\in\mathbb{Z}^{d+1}}G_l(2\pi l(m))\|{\rm per}(W)\cdot(1\otimes\chi_{2\pi m+[0,2\pi]^{d+1}})\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))} \\
= &\|W\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))}\cdot \sum_{m\in\mathbb{Z}^{d+1}}G_l(2\pi l(m)).
\end{split}
\]
Similarly,
\[
\begin{split}
& \|{\rm per}(W)\cdot(1\otimes G_l)\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))} \\
\geq &\sum_{m\in\mathbb{Z}^{d+1}}G_l(2\pi n(m))\|{\rm per}(W)\cdot(1\otimes\chi_{2\pi m+[0,2\pi]^{d+1}})\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))} \\
= &\|W\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))}\cdot \sum_{m\in\mathbb{Z}^{d+1}}G_l(2\pi n(m)).
\end{split}
\]
We have
\[
\begin{split}
&\sum_{m\in\mathbb{Z}^{d+1}}G_l(2\pi l(m))
= \left( \sum_{m\in\mathbb{Z}} G_l(2\pi l(m))
\right)^{d+1} \\
= &
\Big(\frac1{l\sqrt{2\pi}}+\frac1{l\sqrt{2\pi}}\sum_{m\in\mathbb{Z}}e^{-\frac{(2\pi m)^2}{2l^2}}\Big)^{d+1}\to\frac1{(2\pi)^{d+1}},\quad l\to\infty,
\end{split}
\]
where the limit is by elementary Riemann integration. Similarly
\[
\begin{split}
&\sum_{m\in\mathbb{Z}^{d+1}}G_l(2\pi n(m))
= \left( \sum_{m\in\mathbb{Z}} G_l(2\pi n(m))
\right)^{d+1} \\
= &
\Big( -\frac1{l\sqrt{2\pi}}+\frac1{l\sqrt{2\pi}}\sum_{m\in\mathbb{Z}}e^{-\frac{(2\pi m)^2}{2l^2}}\Big)^{d+1}\to\frac1{(2\pi)^{d+1}},\quad l\to\infty.
\end{split}
\]
Combining the last 4 equations completes the proof as they show that we have estimates
\[
\begin{split}
& \frac1{(2\pi)^{d+1}}\|W\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))} - \epsilon_l \\
\leq & \|{\rm per}(W)\cdot(1\otimes G_l)\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))} \leq \frac1{(2\pi)^{d+1}}\|W\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))} + \epsilon_l.
\end{split}
\]
for some sequences $\epsilon_l >0$ that converges to 0.
\end{proof}
The next lemma gives the asymptotic norm estimate of periodizations of elements of $L_{1, \infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1})$ with the norms of $L_{1, \infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})$.
\begin{lem}\label{second periodic lemma}
For every $W\in L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1})),$ we have
$$\liminf_{l\to\infty}\|{\rm per}(W)\cdot(1\otimes G_l)\|_{L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))}\gtrsim\|W\|_{L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))}.$$
Here, $\gtrsim$ means inequality up to some constant independent of $W$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} We estimate crudely,
\[
\begin{split}
G_l(t)\geq & c(d)l^{-d-1},\quad |t|\leq 4\pi l,\\
\chi_{\{|t|\leq 4\pi l\}}\geq & \sum_{|m|\leq l}\chi_{2\pi m+[0,2\pi]^d}.
\end{split}
\]
Hence,
\[
\begin{split}
& \|{\rm per}(W)\cdot(1\otimes G_l)\|_{L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))} \\
\geq & c(d)l^{-d-1}\|{\rm per}(W)\cdot(1\otimes \sum_{|m|\leq l}\chi_{2\pi m+[0,2\pi]^d})\|_{L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))}.
\end{split}
\]
Since the elements ${\rm per}(W)\cdot(1\otimes \chi_{2\pi m+[0,2\pi]^d})$ with $|m|\leq l$ are pairwise orthogonal we have that
$${\rm per}(W)\cdot(1\otimes \sum_{|m|\leq l}\chi_{2\pi m+[0,2\pi]^d}) \in L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}) )$$
and
$$\bigoplus_{|m|\leq l} W \in L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1})\otimes l_{\infty})$$
are unitarily equivalent. Then
\[
\begin{split}
& \|{\rm per}(W)\cdot(1\otimes G_l)\|_{L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))}
\geq c(d)l^{-d-1}\|\bigoplus_{|m|\leq l}W\|_{L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1})\otimes l_{\infty})}.
\end{split}
\]
Let $n_l$ be the number of $m \in \mathbb{Z}^{d+1}$ with $\vert m \vert_2 \leq l$. Note that $n_l \gtrsim l^{d+1}$. Then $\mu(t, \bigoplus_{|m|\leq l}W ) = \mu( n_l^{-1} t, W )$ from which we may continue the estimate
\[
\begin{split}
& \|{\rm per}(W)\cdot(1\otimes G_l)\|_{L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))}
\geq c(d)l^{-d-1} n_l \|W\|_{L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))} \\
\geq & c(d) \|W\|_{L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))}.
\end{split}
\]
\end{proof}
We are now fully equipped to prove our main result.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{axis torus}] Let $\mathscr{A}\subset\mathbb{Z}^{d+1}$ be a finite set. Let
$$W=\sum_{k\in\mathscr{A}}W_k\otimes e_k,\quad W_k\in L_1(\mathcal{M}).$$
Firstly, we prove
\[
\Vert (1 \otimes g(\nabla))(W)\Vert_{1, \infty} \lesssim \Vert W \Vert_1,
\]
for $W$ as above. As conditional expectations are contractions on $L_1$ we have
\[
\begin{split}
& \Vert \sum_{0 \not = k \in \mathscr{A} } W_k \otimes e_k\Vert_1
\leq
\|\sum_{k\in\mathscr{A}} W_k\otimes e_k\|_1 + \Vert W_0 \otimes e_0 \Vert_1
\leq 2\|W\|_1, \qquad k \in \mathcal{A}.
\end{split}
\]
Therefore, we may (and will) assume without loss of generality that $0\notin\mathscr{A}.$ By Theorem \ref{Thm=Parcet}, we have
$$\|(1\otimes g(\nabla))({\rm per}(W)\cdot (1\otimes G_l))\|_{L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))}\leq \|{\rm per}(W)\cdot (1\otimes G_l)\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))}. $$
By respectively Lemma \ref{tensor mu} and Lemma \ref{fourth convergence lemma} we have for each $k \in \mathcal{A}$ as $l \rightarrow \infty$,
\[
\begin{split}
& \Vert (1 \otimes g(\nabla))(W_k \otimes G_l e_k) - g(k) (W_k \otimes G(l) e_k) \Vert_{1, \infty} \\
\leq & \Vert W_k \Vert_1 \Vert (g(\nabla))(G_l e_k) - g(k) G_l e_k \Vert_{1, \infty} \rightarrow 0.
\end{split}
\]
The quasi-triangle inequality gives for sums of arbitrary operators $x_\alpha$ that
$$\Vert \sum_{\alpha \in \mathcal{A}} x_\alpha \Vert_{1, \infty} \leq 2^{\vert \mathcal{A} \vert} \sum_{\alpha \in \mathcal{A}} \Vert x_\alpha \Vert_{1, \infty}.$$
So it follows that as $l \rightarrow \infty$
\[
\Vert \sum_{\alpha \in \mathcal{A}} (1 \otimes g(\nabla))(W_k \otimes G_l e_k) - \sum_{\alpha \in \mathcal{A}} g(k) (W_k \otimes G(l) e_k) \Vert_{1, \infty} \rightarrow 0.
\]
In other words we have as $l \rightarrow \infty$
\[
\Vert (1 \otimes g(\nabla)) ( {\rm per}(W) \cdot (1 \otimes G_l) ) - {\rm per} ( (1 \otimes g(\nabla) ) (W) ) (1 \otimes G_l) \Vert_{1, \infty} \rightarrow 0.
\]
\begin{comment}
Then by the definitions, a quasi triangle inequality with constant $c(\mathcal{A})$ depending on the size of $\mathcal{A}$, Lemma \ref{tensor mu}, and then since $0\notin\mathscr{A}$, we may use Lemma \ref{third convergence lemma} to get convergence. So,
\begin{equation}\label{Eqn=Inter}
\begin{split}
& \Vert
(1\otimes g(\nabla))({\rm per}(W)\cdot (1\otimes G_l))-{\rm per}((1\otimes g(\nabla_{\mathbb{T}^{d+1}}))(W))\cdot (1\otimes G_l) \Vert_{1, \infty} \\
\leq & \Vert \sum_{k \in \mathcal{A}} W_k \otimes \left( g(\nabla)( {\rm per}(e_k) G_l )- g(k) {\rm per}(e_k ) G_l \right) \Vert_{1, \infty} \\
\leq & c(\mathcal{A}) \sum_{k \in \mathcal{A}} \Vert W_k \otimes \left( g(\nabla)( {\rm per}(e_k) G_l )- g(k) {\rm per}(e_k ) G_l \right) \Vert_{1, \infty} \\
\leq & c(\mathcal{A}) \sum_{k \in \mathcal{A}} \Vert W_k \Vert_1 \Vert g(\nabla)( {\rm per}(e_k) G_l )- g(k) {\rm per}(e_k ) G_l \Vert_{1, \infty}
\to 0
\end{split}
\end{equation}
as $l\to\infty.$
\end{comment}
Thus,
\begin{equation}\label{Eqn=SomeLimit}
\begin{split}
& \liminf_{l\to\infty}\|{\rm per}((1\otimes g(\nabla))(W))\cdot (1\otimes G_l)\|_{L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))} \\
\leq & \liminf_{l\to\infty}\|{\rm per}(W)\cdot (1\otimes G_l)\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
It follows now from Lemma \ref{second periodic lemma}, \eqref{Eqn=SomeLimit} and Lemma \ref{first periodic lemma} that
\begin{equation}\label{estimate specific}
\begin{split}
& \|(1\otimes g(\nabla_{\mathbb{T}^{d+1}}))(W)\|_{L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))}\\
\lesssim &
\liminf_{l\to\infty}\|{\rm per}((1\otimes g(\nabla_{\mathbb{T}^{d+1}}))W)\cdot(1\otimes G_l)\|_{L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))} \\
\leq & \liminf_{l\to\infty}\|{\rm per}(W)\cdot (1\otimes G_l)\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1}))} \\
\lesssim &
\|W\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
This proves the assertion for our specific $W$.
To see the assertion in general, fix an arbitrary $W\in L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))$ and choose $W^m$ as above such that $W^m\to W$ in $L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))$ as $m\to\infty$ (see Lemma \ref{Lem=Fejer}). In particular, the sequence $\{W^m\}_{m\geq1}\subset L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))$ is Cauchy. By \eqref{estimate specific}, the sequence $\{(1\otimes g(\nabla))(W^m)\}_{m\geq1}\subset L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))$ is also Cauchy. Denote the limit by $T(W).$ If also $W\in L_2(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1})),$ then the sequence $\{W^m\}_{m\geq1}$ can be chosen such that also $W^m\to W$ in $L_2(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))$ (see Remark \ref{Rmk=Fejer2}). Thus, $T(W)=(1\otimes g(\nabla))(W)$ for $W\in(L_1\cap L_2)(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1})).$ This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{doi bound} for the case of integral spectra}\label{Sect=IntSpec}
The next Theorem \ref{main lemma} provides the crucial connection between Calder\'on--Zygmund operators and commutator estimates. The equality \eqref{conjugate} should be understood as a transference to Schur multipliers argument. Note that here we have an exact equality \eqref{conjugate}, which we did not yet obtain in \cite{CPSZ2}.
\begin{thm}\label{main lemma} For every contraction $f:\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{Z}$ and for every collection of commuting self-adjoint operators $\mathbf{A}=\{A_k\}_{k=1}^d\subset\mathcal{M}$ with ${\rm spec}(A_k)\subset\mathbb{Z},$ we have
$$\|T_{f_{k_0}}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V)\|_{1,\infty}\leq c(d)\|V\|_1,\quad V\in L_1(\mathcal{M}),\quad 1\leq k_0\leq d.$$
Here, $f_{k_0}$ is given by \eqref{fk def}.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof} Fix $1 \leq k_0 \leq d$. The idea is to construct a bounded linear operator $S:L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))\to L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))$ (independent of $f$) and an isometric embedding $I:L_1(\mathcal{M})\to L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1})),$ $I:L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M})\to L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))$ (dependent on $f$) such that
\begin{equation}\label{conjugate}
S\circ I=I\circ T_{f_{k_0}}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}.
\end{equation}
Fix a smooth function $\varsigma:[0,1]\to\mathbb{R}$ such that $\varsigma(u)=u,$ $u\in[\frac12,1]$ and $\varsigma(u)\geq\frac13,$ $u\in[0,\frac12].$ Define a smooth function $g:\mathbb{S}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ by setting
$$g(t)=\frac{t_{k_0}t_{d+1}}{\varsigma(\sum_{k=1}^dt_k^2)},\quad |t|_2=1.$$
Extend $g$ to a smooth homogeneous function $g:\mathbb{R}^{d+1}\backslash\{0\}\to\mathbb{R}$ (of degree $0$) by setting $g(t)=g(\frac{t}{|t|_2}),$ $0\neq t\in\mathbb{R}^{d+1}.$ For $|t|_2=1,$ the conditions $\sum_{k=1}^dt_k^2\geq\frac12$ and $|t_{d+1}|\leq(\sum_{k=1}^dt_k^2)^{\frac12}$ are equivalent. Hence,
\begin{equation}\label{g value}
g(t)=\frac{t_{k_0}t_{d+1}}{\sum_{k=1}^dt_k^2},\quad |t_{d+1}|\leq(\sum_{k=1}^dt_k^2)^{\frac12},\quad 0\neq t\in\mathbb{R}^{d+1}.
\end{equation}
By assumption, $A_k=\sum_{i_k\in\mathbb{Z}}i_kp_{k,i_k},$ where $\{p_{k,i_k}\}_{i_k\in\mathbb{Z}}$ are pairwise orthogonal projections such that $\sum_{i_k\in\mathbb{Z}}p_{k,i_k}=1.$ Since $A$ is bounded, it follows that $p_{k,i_k}=0$ for all but finitely many $i_k\in\mathbb{Z}.$ Hence, these sums are, in fact, finite.
For every $\mathbf{i}=(i_1,\cdots,i_d)\in\mathbb{Z}^d,$ set $p_{\mathbf{i}}=p_{1,i_1}\cdots p_{d,i_d}.$ It is immediate that $\{p_{\mathbf{i}}\}_{\mathbf{i}\in\mathbb{Z}^d}$ are pairwise orthogonal projections and $\sum_{\mathbf{i}\in\mathbb{Z}^d}p_{\mathbf{i}}=1.$ Consider a unitary operator
$$U_f=\sum_{\mathbf{i}\in\mathbb{Z}^d}p_{\mathbf{i}}\otimes e_{(\mathbf{i},f(\mathbf{i}))},$$
where $e_{(\mathbf{i},f(\mathbf{i}))}$ is given in \eqref{ek def}.
We are now ready to define the operators $S$ and $I.$ Set
$$S(W)=(1\otimes g(\nabla_{\mathbb{T}^{d+1}}))(\sum_{\substack{\mathbf{i},\mathbf{j}\in\mathbb{Z}^d\\ \mathbf{i}\neq\mathbf{j}}}(p_{\mathbf{i}}\otimes 1)W(p_{\mathbf{j}}\otimes 1)),\quad W\in L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^{d+1})),$$
$$I(V)=U_f(V\otimes 1)U_f^*,\quad V\in L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}).$$
Since $f$ is a contraction we have that $|f(\mathbf{i})- f(\mathbf{j})| \leq | \mathbf{i}-\mathbf{j}|_2$ and therefore by \eqref{g value} we obtain
\[
g(\mathbf{i}-\mathbf{j}, f(\mathbf{i})- f(\mathbf{j}) ) = f_{k_0}(\mathbf{i},\mathbf{j}), \qquad \mathbf{i}, \mathbf{j} \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}.
\]
In particular
\[
g(\nabla_{\mathbb{T}^{d+1}}) e_{(\mathbf{i}-\mathbf{j},f(\mathbf{i})-f(\mathbf{j}))}) = f_{k_0}(\mathbf{i},\mathbf{j}) e_{(\mathbf{i}-\mathbf{j},f(\mathbf{i})-f(\mathbf{j}))}), \qquad \mathbf{i}, \mathbf{j} \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}.
\]
Recall also that $f_{k_0}( \mathbf{i}, \mathbf{i}) = 0, \mathbf{i} \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}$.
We now prove the transference equality \eqref{conjugate}:
\[
\begin{split}
S(I(V))= & S \left( \Big(\sum_{\mathbf{i}\in\mathbb{Z}^d}p_{\mathbf{i}}\otimes e_{(\mathbf{i},f(\mathbf{i}))}\Big)\cdot\Big(\sum_{\substack{\mathbf{i},\mathbf{j}\in\mathbb{Z}^d }}p_{\mathbf{i}}Vp_{\mathbf{j}}\otimes 1 \Big)\cdot \Big(\sum_{\mathbf{i}\in\mathbb{Z}^d}p_{\mathbf{i}}\otimes e_{(\mathbf{i},f(\mathbf{i}))} \Big)^\ast \right) \\
= &S(\sum_{\mathbf{i},\mathbf{j}\in\mathbb{Z}^d}p_{\mathbf{i}}Vp_{\mathbf{j}}\otimes e_{(\mathbf{i}-\mathbf{j},f(\mathbf{i})-f(\mathbf{j}))}) \\
\stackrel{\eqref{g value}}{=} & \sum_{\substack{\mathbf{i},\mathbf{j}\in\mathbb{Z}^d\\ \mathbf{i}\neq\mathbf{j}}}p_{\mathbf{i}}Vp_{\mathbf{j}}\otimes f_{k_0}(\mathbf{i},\mathbf{j}) e_{(\mathbf{i}-\mathbf{j},f(\mathbf{i})-f(\mathbf{j}))} \\
= & \Big(\sum_{\mathbf{i}\in\mathbb{Z}^d}p_{\mathbf{i}}\otimes e_{(\mathbf{i},f(\mathbf{i}))}\Big)\cdot\Big(\sum_{\substack{\mathbf{i},\mathbf{j}\in\mathbb{Z}^d }}p_{\mathbf{i}} T_{f_{k_0}}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V) p_{\mathbf{j}}\otimes 1 \Big)\cdot \Big(\sum_{\mathbf{i}\in\mathbb{Z}^d}p_{\mathbf{i}}\otimes e_{(\mathbf{i},f(\mathbf{i}))} \Big)^\ast \\
=&U_f\cdot (T_{f_{k_0}}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V) \otimes 1) \cdot U_f^*=I(T_{f_{k_0}}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V)).
\end{split}
\]
By Theorem \ref{axis torus}, the mapping
$$1\otimes g(\nabla_{ \mathbb{T}^{d+1} }):L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_\infty(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))\to L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_\infty(\mathbb{T}^{d+1})).$$
is bounded.
Therefore,
\[
\begin{split}
&\|T_{f_{k_0}}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V)\|_{L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M})}=\|I(T_{f_{k_0}}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V))\|_{L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))} \\
=&\|S(I(V))\|_{L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))}\\
\leq & \|S\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))\to L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))}\|I(V)\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))}\\
\lesssim & \|1\otimes g(\nabla)\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))\to L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}\otimes L_{\infty}(\mathbb{T}^{d+1}))}\|V\|_{L_1(\mathcal{M})}.
\end{split}
\]
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of the main results}
In this section we collect the results announced in the abstract and its corollaries.
\begin{lem}\label{riemann} Let $\mathbf{A}=\{A_k\}_{k=1}^d\subset\mathcal{M}$ be an arbitrary collection of commuting self-adjoint operators. If $\{\xi_n\}_{n\geq0}$ is a uniformly bounded sequence of Borel functions on $\mathbb{R}^{2d}$ such that $\xi_n\to\xi$ everywhere, then
\begin{equation}\label{riemann sum convergence}
T_{\xi_n}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V)\to T_{\xi}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V),\quad V\in L_2(\mathcal{M})
\end{equation}
in $L_2(\mathcal{M})$ as $n\to\infty.$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Let $\nu$ be a projection valued measure on $\mathbb{R}^{2d}$ considered in Subsection \ref{doi subsection} (see \eqref{birsol spectral measure}). Let $\gamma:\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}^{2d}$ be a Borel measurable bijection. Clearly, $\nu\circ\gamma$ is a countably additive projection valued measure on $\mathbb{R}.$ Hence, there exists a self-adjoint operator $B$ acting on the Hilbert space $L_2(\mathcal{M})$ such that $E_B=\nu\circ\gamma.$
Set $\eta_n=\xi_n\circ\gamma$ and $\eta=\xi\circ\gamma.$ We have $\eta_n\to\eta$ everywhere on $\mathbb{R}.$ Thus,
\[
\begin{split}
& T_{\xi_n}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2d}}\xi_nd\nu=\int_{\mathbb{R}}\eta_n(\lambda)dE_B(\lambda)=\eta_n(B)\to\eta(B) \\
= & \int_{\mathbb{R}}\eta(\lambda)dE_B(\lambda)=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{2d}}\xi d\nu=T_{\xi}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}.
\end{split}
\]
Here, the convergence is understood with respect to the strong operator topology on the space $B(L_2(\mathcal{M})).$ In particular, \eqref{riemann sum convergence} follows.
\end{proof}
In the next proof let $\lfloor x \rfloor$ be the largest integer smaller than $x$ and let $\{ x \} = x - \lfloor x \rfloor$ be the fractional part.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{doi bound}] {\bf Step 1.} Let $f:\mathbb{R}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ be a contraction. We claim that the mapping $f^n:\mathbb{Z}^d\to\mathbb{Z}$ defined by the formula
$$f^n({\bf i})=\lfloor \frac{n}{2}f(\frac{{\bf i}}{n})\rfloor,\quad {\bf i}\in\mathbb{Z}^d,$$
is also a contraction.
Indeed, we have
$$f^n({\bf i})-f^n({\bf j})=\frac{n}{2}(f(\frac{{\bf i}}{n})-f(\frac{{\bf j}}{n}))+(\{\frac{n}{2}f(\frac{{\bf j}}{n})\}-\{\frac{n}{2}f(\frac{{\bf i}}{n})\}).$$
By assumption, we have that
$$\frac{n}{2}|f(\frac{{\bf i}}{n})-f(\frac{{\bf j}}{n})|\leq\frac{n}{2}|\frac{{\bf i}}{n}-\frac{{\bf j}}{n}|\leq\frac12|{\bf i}-{\bf j}|.$$
It is immediate that
$$\{\frac{n}{2}f(\frac{{\bf j}}{n})\}-\{\frac{n}{2}f(\frac{{\bf i}}{n})\}\in(-1,1).$$
Thus,
$$|f^n({\bf i})-f^n({\bf j})|<\frac12|{\bf i}-{\bf j}|+1.$$
If $|{\bf i}-{\bf j}|\geq2,$ then
$$|f^n({\bf i})-f^n({\bf j})|<\frac12|{\bf i}-{\bf j}|+1\leq|{\bf i}-{\bf j}|$$
and the claim follows. If $|{\bf i}-{\bf j}|<2,$ then
$$|f^n({\bf i})-f^n({\bf j})|<\frac12|{\bf i}-{\bf j}|+1<2.$$
Since $|f^n({\bf i})-f^n({\bf j})|\in\mathbb{N},$ it follows that
$$|f^n({\bf i})-f^n({\bf j})|\leq 1\leq |{\bf i}-{\bf j}|$$
provided that ${\bf i}\neq{\bf j}.$ This proves the claim for $|{\bf i}-{\bf j}|<2.$
{\bf Step 2.} Let $f:\mathbb{R}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ be a contraction. For every $n\geq1,$ set
$$A_{k,n}\stackrel{def}{=}\sum_{i_k\in\mathbb{Z}}i_kE_A([\frac{i_k}{n},\frac{i_k+1}{n})),\quad \mathbf{A}_n=\{A_{k,n}\}_{k=1}^d.$$
Fix $1 \leq k_0 \leq d$. Then
$$\xi_n(t,s)=(f^n)_{k_0}(\mathbf{i},\mathbf{j}),\quad t_k\in[\frac{i_k}{n},\frac{i_k+1}{n}),s_k\in [\frac{j_k}{n},\frac{j_k+1}{n}),\quad\mathbf{i},\mathbf{j}\in\mathbb{Z}^d.$$
It is immediate that (see e.g. Lemma 8 in \cite{PScrelle} for a much stronger assertion)
$$T_{\xi_n}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V)=T_{(f^n)_{k_0}}^{\mathbf{A}_n,\mathbf{A}_n}(V).$$
It follows from Theorem \ref{main lemma} that
$$\|T_{\xi_n}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V)\|_{1,\infty}\leq c(d)\|V\|_1.$$
Note that $\xi_n\to \frac12f_{k_0}$ everywhere. It follows from Lemma \ref{riemann} that
$$T_{\xi_n}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V)\to T_{\frac{1}{2} f_{k_0}}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V),\quad V\in L_2(\mathcal{M})$$
in $L_2(\mathcal{M})$ (and, hence, in measure --- see e.g \cite{PSW}) as $n\to\infty.$ Since the quasi-norm in $L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M})$ is a Fatou quasi-norm \cite{LSZ}, it follows that
$$\|T_{f_{k_0}}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V)\|_{1,\infty}\leq c(d)\|V\|_1,\quad V\in (L_1\cap L_2)(\mathcal{M}).$$
\begin{comment}
{\bf Step 3:} Let $f:\mathbb{R}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ be a Lipschitz function. It follows from Step 2 that
$$\|T_{f_{k_0}}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V)\|_{1,\infty}\leq c(d)\|\nabla(f)\|_{\infty}\|V\|_1,\quad V\in (L_1\cap L_2)(\mathcal{M}).$$
Let now $V\in L_1(\mathcal{M})$ be arbitrary. Choose a sequence $\{V_m\}_{m\geq1}\in (L_1\cap L_2)(\mathcal{M})$ such that $V_m\to V$ in $L_1(\mathcal{M}).$ The sequence $\{V_m\}_{m\geq1}\in (L_1\cap L_2)(\mathcal{M})$ is Cauchy in $L_1(\mathcal{M})$ and, therefore, the sequence $\{T_{f_{k_0}}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V_m)\}_{m\geq1}$ is Cauchy in $L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M}).$ Denote its limit by $T_{f_{k_0}}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V).$ We have that
$$\|T_{f_{k_0}}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(V)\|_{1,\infty}\leq c(d)\|\nabla(f)\|_{\infty}\|V\|_1,\quad V\in L_1(\mathcal{M}).$$
This completes the proof.
\end{comment}
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{Cor=LpEsitmate} For every Lipschitz function $f:\mathbb{R}^d\to\mathbb{R}$ and for every collection $\mathbf{A}=\{A_k\}_{k=1}^d$ of bounded commuting self-adjoint operators, the operator $T_{f_k}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}$ extends to a bounded operator from $L_p(\mathcal{M})$ to $L_p(\mathcal{M}),$ $1<p<\infty.$
\end{cor}
\begin{proof} By Theorem \ref{doi bound}, $T_{f_k}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}$ extends to a bounded operator from $L_1(\mathcal{M})$ to $L_{1,\infty}(\mathcal{M})$ for every $1 \leq k \leq d$. Since also $T_{f_k}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}:L_2(\mathcal{M})\to L_2(\mathcal{M}),$ it follows from real interpolation that $T_{f_k}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}:L_p(\mathcal{M})\to L_p(\mathcal{M}),$ $1<p<2.$ Thus, $(T_{f_k}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}})^*:L_{\frac{p}{p-1}}(\mathcal{M})\to L_{\frac{p}{p-1}}(\mathcal{M}),$ $1<p<2.$ Since $f_k(s,t)=f_k(t,s),$ $s,t\in\mathbb{R}^d,$ it follows that $(T_{f_k}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}})^*=T_{f_k}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}.$ In particular, $T_{f_k}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}:L_{\frac{p}{p-1}}(\mathcal{M})\to L_{\frac{p}{p-1}}(\mathcal{M}),$ $1<p<2.$ This concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{eg psw lemma} If $A_k,B\in B(H),$ $1\leq k\leq d,$ are self-adjoint operators such that $[A_k,B]\in L_2(H),$ $1\leq k\leq d,$ then, for every Lipschitz function $f,$ we have
$$\sum_{k=1}^dT_{f_k}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}([A_k,B])=[f(\mathbf{A}),B].$$
Here $f_k$ is given by \eqref{fk def}.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} By definition of double operator integral given in Subsection \ref{doi subsection}, we have for any bounded Borel function on $\mathbb{R}^{2d}$,
\begin{equation}\label{doi mult}
T_{\xi_1}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}T_{\xi_2}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}=T_{\xi_1\xi_2}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}.
\end{equation}
Let $\xi_{1,k}=f_k$ and let $\xi_{2,k}(\lambda,\mu)=\lambda_k-\mu_k$ when $|\lambda|_2,|\mu|_2\leq\sup_{1\leq k\leq d}\|A_k\|_{\infty},$ $\xi_{2,k}(\lambda,\mu)=0$ when $|\lambda|_2 >\sup_{1\leq k\leq d}\|A_k\|_{\infty}$ or $|\mu|_2 > \sup_{1\leq k\leq d}\|A_k\|_{\infty}.$ It is immediate that
$$(\sum_{k=1}^d\xi_{1,k}\xi_{2,k})(\lambda,\mu)=f(\lambda)-f(\mu),\quad \lambda,\mu\in\mathbb{R}^d, \: {\rm s.t. } \: \vert \lambda \vert_2, \vert \mu \vert_2 \leq \sup_{1\leq k\leq d}\|A_k\|_{\infty}.$$
If $p$ is a finite rank projection, then $pB\in L_2(H)$ and
$$T_{\sum_{k=1}^d\xi_{1,k}\xi_{2,k}}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(pB)=f(\mathbf{A})pB-pBf(\mathbf{A}),\quad T_{\xi_{2,k}}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(pB)=A_kpB-pBA_k,$$
Applying \eqref{doi mult} to the operator $pB\in L_2(H),$ we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{finite p}
\sum_{k=1}^dT_{f_k}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(A_kpB-pBA_k)=f(\mathbf{A})pB-pBf(\mathbf{A}).
\end{equation}
By Theorem 4.2 in \cite{Voiculescu}, there exists a sequence $p_l$ of finite rank projections such that $p_l\to1$ strongly and such that, for every $1\leq k\leq d,$ $[A_k,p_l]\to0$ as $l\to\infty$ in $L_d(H)$ for $d>1$ and in $L_2(H)$ if $d=1.$ In particular,
$$A_kp_lB-p_lB A_k=p_l[A_k,B]+[A_k,p_l]B\to [A_k,B],\quad l\to\infty,$$
in $L_d(H).$
By the preceding paragraph and Corollary \ref{Cor=LpEsitmate}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{lconv}
T_{f_k}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}(A_kp_lB-p_l B A_k)\to T_{f_k}^{\mathbf{A},\mathbf{A}}([A_k,B]),\quad l\to\infty,
\end{equation}
in $L_d(H).$ On the other hand,
\begin{equation}\label{rconv}
f(\mathbf{A})p_lB-p_lBf(\mathbf{A})\to f(\mathbf{A})B-Bf(\mathbf{A}),\quad l\to\infty,
\end{equation}
in the strong operator topology. Substituting \eqref{lconv} and \eqref{rconv} into \eqref{finite p}, we conclude the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{final theorem}] By assumption, $[A_k,B]\in L_1(H)\subset L_2(H).$ The first assertion follows by combining Lemma \ref{eg psw lemma} and Theorem \ref{doi bound}. Applying the first assertion to the operators
$$
A_k=
\begin{pmatrix}
X_k&0\\
0&Y_k
\end{pmatrix},\quad
B=
\begin{pmatrix}
0&1\\
1&0
\end{pmatrix},
$$
we obtain the second assertion.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{Cor=Normal}
For every Lipschitz function $f:\mathbb{C} \to\mathbb{R}$ and for every normal operator $A \in B(H)$ and every $B \in B(H)$ such that $[A,B]\in L_1(H),$ we have
$$\|[f(A),B]\|_{1,\infty}\leq c(d)\|\nabla(f)\|_{\infty} \|[A,B]\|_1.$$
For every Lipschitz function $f:\mathbb{C} \to \mathbb{R}$ and for every pair $X, Y \in B(H)$ of normal operators such that $X-Y\in L_1(H),$ we have
$$\|f(X)-f(Y)\|_{1,\infty}\leq c(d)\|\nabla(f)\|_{\infty} \|X-Y\|_1.$$
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
An operator $A$ is normal if and only it can be written as $A = A_1 + i A_2$ with $A_1$ and $A_2$ commuting self-adjoint operators. Identifying $\mathbb{C} \simeq \mathbb{R}^2$ we may see $f$ as a 2 real variable Lipschitz function, say $\widetilde{f}$, and this identification is compatible with spectral calculus, i.e. $f(A) = \widetilde{f}(A_1, A_2)$. Then the corollary is a direct consequence of the statements in Theorem \ref{final theorem}.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
In the emerging Internet of things (IoT) \cite{IoT} and device-to-device (D2D) \cite{HR161} communication systems, a transmit node equipped with $M$ transmit antennas may broadcast messages simultaneously to $N$ low-cost receive nodes that are equipped with a single antenna. Under the assumption that the number of transmit antennas are much larger than the number of served users, i.e., $M\!\gg\!N$, which is known as massive multiple-input-multiple-output (MIMO) systems\cite{5G1}, the multiple-input-single-output (MISO) broadcasting channels corresponding to different users that link the transmit and receive nodes are approximately orthogonal to each other. Consequently, the zero-forcing (ZF) precoders applied at the transmit nodes can efficiently eliminate the inter-user interference, and the MISO channels can be decomposed into a number of parallel and independent single-input-single-output (SISO) channels in such cases.
In small-antenna systems such as small cells \cite{5G2} with compact base-stations and WiFi systems, however, compared to the number of served users the number of transmit antennas are usually limited. Further, in current 3GPP standard \cite{3gpp36201}, LTE-A systems support only up to 8 transmit antennas. Although future releases may support massive-MIMO or full-dimension MIMO (FD-MIMO)\cite{FDMIMO} and the number of transmit antennas at the eNode-B may increase to 64 for 2-D antenna array designs, the intended number of served users will also increase due to the vast connections featured in 5G systems. Consider the case where $N$ is comparable to $M$, in order to fully eliminate the inter-user interference, the linear ZF precoder performs poorly due to the non-orthogonality of the MISO broadcast channel vectors. Therefore, advanced precoder designs are required to improve the transmit power-efficiency and increase the rates of data-transmissions.
Some of the typical precoder designs are to preserve parts of the inter-user interference and mitigate them with the techniques of channel coding with side information (CCSI). CCSI has generated much research interests due to its applications in data hiding \cite{PA99}, precoding for interference channels \cite{CS03}, and transmitter cooperation in Ad-hoc networks\cite{M06}. Gelfand and Pinsker in \cite{GP80} derive the capacity of a single-user memoryless channel with an additive interference signal $\vec{s}$ known to the transmitter, but not the receiver. Consider a received signal
\begin{eqnarray} \label{md0} \vec{y}=\vec{x}+\vec{s}+\vec{z}, \end{eqnarray}
where $\vec{x}$, $\vec{y}$ are transmit and receive signals, and $\vec{z}$ is the unknown Gaussian noise, respectively. The capacity of model (\ref{md0}) is shown to equal
\begin{eqnarray} \label{GP} \mathcal{C}=\max_{p\left(\vec{u}, \vec{x}|\vec{s}\right)}\left\{I(\vec{u};\vec{y})-I(\vec{u};\vec{s})\right\} . \end{eqnarray}
where $\vec{u}$ is an auxiliary random variable and the maximum is taken over all joint probability distributions. Based on the result (\ref{GP}), Costa shows in \cite{C83} that with dirty-paper coding (DPC), the channel capacity $ \mathcal{C}$ is the same even if the interference $\vec{s}$ is not present. Utilizing the same principle, the DPC scheme can be extended to multi-user Gaussian vector broadcast channels\cite{GK11}, and DPC capacity regions have been derived via the uplink-downlink duality between broadcast channels and multiple-access channels \cite{VT03, JV04}. Practical DPC designs based on finite-alphabets have been extensively developed such as Tomlinson-Harashima precoding \cite{SL09}, Lattice Precoding \cite{ER05}, and trellis coded quantization and modulation \cite{ES05, YV05}.
Caire and Shamai in \cite{CS03} propose a ZF based DPC (ZF-DP) design for MISO broadcast channels. They show that with successive DPC utilized at transmitter, the sum-rate of the ZF-DP precoder is close to the optimal DPC. In \cite{DL07}, the authors propose a successive ZF-DP (SZF-DP) precoding scheme and show that in the low SNR regime, the SZF-DP has similar performance as a successive ZF (SZF) precoder, where the SZF-DP and SZF precoders are direct extensions of the ZF-DP and linear ZF precoders in \cite{CS03} for MIMO broadcast channels. In \cite{TJBB131, TJBB132} the authors further extend the ZF-DP and SZF-DP precoders subject to per-antenna power constraint (PAPC) instead of a sum-power constraint (SPC). Nevertheless, all the successive DPC based precoder designs in \cite{CS03, DL07, TJBB131, TJBB132} assume a full successive DPC scheme. As the number of users $N$ increases, the successive DPC becomes prohibitive as it needs to consider the inter-user interference up to $N\!-\!1$ users. Recently, the authors in \cite{ML16} propose a user-group based DPC precoder (UG-DP), which splits the $N$ users into $g$ disjoint groups with each group containing $N_g$ users\footnote{For notational convenience, we assume that $N$ is divisible by $g$ and let $N_g\!=\!N/g$. But it can be straightforwardly modified to other cases with minor changes.}. The inter-group interferences are eliminated by the precoder, while the intra-group interferences are canceled with successive DPC that is implemented on each user-group independently. With a small $N_g$, the DPC has less-complexity and is feasible \cite{SL09, ER05, ES05, YV05, ML16, LJ07}. However, as different user-groups are orthogonalized to each other, the UG-DP also suffers from rate-losses, especially when the channel vectors of different user-groups are spatially correlated.
In this work, we propose a generalized ZF precoder (GZF) design in conjunction with successive DPC, namely, the GZF-DP precoder, which unifies the designs of the UG-DP and the ZF-DP precoders. Instead of considering $N\!-\!1$ users in previous designs, we consider inter-user interference up to $\nu$ users, where the parameter $\nu$ is up to design and provides a trade-off between the rates and implementation complexity of the successive DPC\footnote{Instead of using DPC at transmitter, in cooperative networks \cite{NH04} the receiver nodes can implement successive interference cancellations (SIC) to achieve the same rates as the DPC. However, that requires a cost of communicating between the receive nodes. In which case, the parameter $\nu$ represents a maximal number of communication channels needed for the receive nodes.}. By setting $\nu\!=\!0$, the GZF-DP precoder degrades to the linear ZF precoder, which has low complexity (no DPC is needed) but also low rates. On the other hand, with setting $\nu\!=\!N\!-\!1$, the GZF-DP precoder is identical to the ZF-DP precoder \cite{CS03}, which performs better than the other settings of $\nu$ but also has the highest DPC implementation complexity. Moreover, as the UG-DP precoder can be viewed as a special case of the GZF-DP precoder, it renders lower rates than the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!N_g\!-\!1$.
With the GZF-DP precoder, we consider two optimal designs: sum-rate maximization and minimum user-rate maximization, that are aiming to maximize the overall throughput and the quality of service (QoS), respectively. Using Lagrange multipliers, the optimal GZF-DP precoder designs for both cases are found in closed-form which depend on optimal power-allocations. For the sum-rate maximization, the optimal power allocation is found through a water-filling scheme in relation to modified water-levels introduced by preserving the inter-user interference up to $\nu$ users. While for the minimum user-rate maximization, the optimal power allocation can be solved directly in closed-form which also depends on $\nu$. Moreover, we provide two low-complexity algorithms for optimal user-orderings for both maximizations, respectively. We show through numerical results that, the proposed GZF-DP precoder is superior to the previous ZF and UG-DP precoders, and most interestingly, with a small value of $\nu$ ($\leq \!3$) the proposed GZF-DP precoder performs close to the ZF-DP precoder\cite{JV04}, i.e., the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!N\!- \!1$.
Notice that, as the precoder designs in \cite{DL07, TJBB131, TJBB132} follow similar approaches as those in \cite{CS03}, the proposed GZF-DP precoder can also be extended to MIMO broadcast channels and PAPC constraint, which is a generalization of the SZF-DP precoder by only performing DPC up to $\nu$ multiple-receive-antenna users. However, as in \cite{DL07, TJBB131, TJBB132} only the sum-rate maximization with a full DPC is considered, an interesting fact that the sum-rate maximization actually sacrifices the user-rates of some of the last users (corresponding to the last columns of channel matrix $\vec{H}$) compared to the linear ZF precoder is not shown. With the variable $\nu$ increasing from 0 to $N\!-\!1$, this property is clear shown in this work, which also motivates us to consider the minimum user-rate maximization for the proposed GZF-DP precoder.
The rest of the paper are organized as follows. In Sec. II, we briefly introduce the MISO system model and the previous precoder designs. In Sec. III, we elaborate the proposed GZF-DP precode designs in detail for sum-rate and minimum user-rate maximizations, respectively. We also analyze the low-complexity ordering algorithms for both maximization problems. Empirical results are provided in Sec. IV, and Sec. V summarizes the paper.
\subsection*{Notations:}
Throughout this paper, superscripts $(\cdot)^{-1}$, $(\cdot)^{1/2}$, $(\cdot)^{\ast}$,
$(\cdot)^{\rm T}$ and $(\cdot)^{\dag}$ stand for the inverse, matrix square root, complex conjugate, transpose, and
Hermitian transpose, respectively. Boldface letters indicate vectors and boldface uppercase letters designate matrices. We also reserve $a_{m,n}$ to denote the element at the $m$th row and $n$th column of matrix $\vec{A}$, $a_{m}$ to denote the $m$th element of vector $\vec{a}$, and $\vec{I}$ to represent the identity matrix. The operators $\mathcal{R}\{\cdot\}$ and $\mathrm{Tr}(\cdot)$ take the real part and the trace of the arguments, and $[\cdot]^{+}$ is the non-negative protection. In addition, $\mathcal{J}_1\!\setminus\mathcal{J}_2$ returns a set that contains all elements in set $\mathcal{J}_1$ that are not in $\mathcal{J}_2$, and the expressions $\vec{A}\!\succ\!\vec{B}$ and $\vec{A}\!\succeq\!\vec{B}$ represent that $\left(\vec{A}\!-\!\vec{B}\right)$ is positive definite and semi-positive definite, respectively.
\section{System Model and Previous Sum-rate Maximization Precoder Designs}
Consider an MISO system with an $M$-antenna transmitter and $N$ single-antenna users with assumption $M\!\geq\!N$. The channel vector from the transmitter to the $n$th user is denoted as $\vec{h}_n\!\in\!\mathbb{C}^{M \times 1}$, and the $m$th entry $h_{mn}$ of $\vec{h}_n$ is the channel gain from the $m$th transmit antenna to the $n$th user. Denote the $N\!\times\!M$ channel
\begin{eqnarray} \vec{H}=[\vec{h}_1 \; \vec{h}_2 \;\ldots \;\vec{h}_N]^{\rm T}, \end{eqnarray}
and let the $N\!\times\!1$ vectors
{\setlength\arraycolsep{2pt} \begin{eqnarray} \vec{y}&=&[y_1 \; y_2 \;\ldots \; y_N]^{\rm T}, \notag \\
\vec{x}&=&[x_1 \; x_2 \;\ldots \; x_N]^{\rm T}, \notag \\
\vec{z}&=&[z_1 \; z_2 \;\ldots \; z_N]^{\rm T}, \end{eqnarray}}
\hspace{-1.4mm}where $x_n$ is the DPC-encoded symbol of the $n$th user that cancels the non-causal interference from the other users, and $y_n$, $z_n$ is the received sample and the noise term corresponding to the $n$th user, respectively. With an $M\!\times\!N$ precoding matrix $\vec{P}$ applied at the transmitter, the received signals at the $N$ autonomous users can be compactly written as
\begin{eqnarray} \label{md1} \vec{y} =\vec{H}\vec{P}\vec{x}+\vec{z},\end{eqnarray}
where the noise term $\vec{z}$ comprises identical and independently distributed (IID) complex Gaussian variables with zero mean and a covariance matrix $N_0\vec{I}$. The transmit symbols $x_n$ are uncorrelated due to DPC encoding and have unit-transmit power, that is, $\mathbb{E}[\vec{x}\vec{x}^{\dag}]\!=\!\vec{I}$. In addition, the transmit node is subject to a total transmit power constraint $P_{\mathrm{T}}$ such that
\begin{eqnarray} \label{con1} \mathrm{Tr}\left(\vec{P}\vec{P}^{\dag}\right)\leq P_{\mathrm{T}}.\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Optimal DPC Precoder}
Denote the effective channel $\vec{F}\!=\!\vec{H}\vec{P}$, the interference channel corresponding to each of the $N$ users from (\ref{md1}) can be written as
\begin{eqnarray} y_n= f_{n,n}x_n+\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}f_{n,k}x_k+\sum_{k=n+1}^{N}f_{n,k}x_k+z_n. \end{eqnarray}
With a successive DPC \cite{C83} encoding scheme, the interference term $\sum\limits_{k=1}^{n-1}f_{n,k}x_k$ is non-causally known and canceled, while the causal interference term $\sum\limits_{k=n+1}^{N}f_{n,k}x_k$ is regarded as additive noise. Therefore, the optimal DPC precoder that maximizes the sum-rate is designed by solving the following problem
{\setlength\arraycolsep{2pt} \begin{eqnarray} \label{DP} &&\underset{\vec{F}}{\mathrm{maximize\;\;}} \sum_{n=1}^{N}\log\left(1+\frac{|f_{n,n}|^2}{N_0+\sum\limits_{k=n+1}^{N}|f_{n,k}|^2}\right) \notag \\
&& \mathrm{subject\; to\;\;}(\ref{con1}). \end{eqnarray}}
\hspace{-1.4mm}Directly optimizing (\ref{DP}) is computationally complex as it is a non-convex problem. In \cite{JV05} the authors propose an iterative water-filling scheme to solve (\ref{DP}) based on the uplink-downlink duality. Although the optimal DPC precoder achieves the capacity region \cite{WY06} of the multi-user MISO broadcast channels, the linear ZF precoder is widely used due to its simple implementation.
\subsection{Linear ZF Precoder}
The linear ZF precoder is set to
\begin{eqnarray} \label{zf} \vec{P}=\vec{H}^{\dag}\left(\vec{H}\vec{H}^{\dag}\right)^{-1}\vec{F},\end{eqnarray}
where $\vec{F}$ is an $N\!\times\!N$ diagonal matrix. With (\ref{zf}), the constraint (\ref{con1}) changes to
\begin{eqnarray} \label{con2} \mathrm{Tr}\left(\vec{F}^{\dag}\left(\vec{H}\vec{H}^{\dag}\right)^{-1}\vec{F}\right)\leq P_{\mathrm{T}}.\end{eqnarray}
Denote $\vec{G}\!=\!\left(\vec{H}\vec{H}^{\dag}\right)^{\!-1}$, the sum-rate maximization for linear ZF precoder is then formulated as
{\setlength\arraycolsep{2pt} \begin{eqnarray} \label{prbm1} &&\underset{f_{n,n}}{\mathrm{maximize\;\;}} R=\sum_{n=1}^{N}\log\left(1+\frac{|f_{n,n}|^2}{N_0}\right) \notag \\
&&\mathrm{subject\; to\;\;} \sum_{n=1}^{N}g_{n,n}|f_{n,n}|^2\leq P_{\mathrm{T}}.\end{eqnarray}}
\hspace{-1.4mm}The optimal power allocation is found through the water-filling scheme,
\begin{eqnarray} \label{wf1} |f_{n,n}|^2=N_0\left[\frac{1}{\lambda g_{n,n}}-1\right]^{+}\!,\end{eqnarray}
where $\lambda\!\geq\!0$ is a constant such that power constraint (\ref{con2}) is satisfied. The optimal sum-rate reads
\begin{eqnarray} \label{sumrate1} R^{\mathrm{sum}}=\sum_{n=1}^{N}\big[-\log\left( \lambda g_{n,n}\right)\big]^{+},\end{eqnarray}
As the linear ZF precoder completely eliminates the inter-user interference, it results in low transmit power-efficiencies (even with regularizations\cite{ZF2}), especially when $\vec{H}$ is ill-conditioned. In \cite{CS03}, the authors propose a ZF-DP precoder that only nulls out the causal inter-user interference through ZF, and utilize successive DPC to cancel the non-causal interference.
\subsection{ZF-DP Precoder}
Assuming the channel decomposition $\vec{H}\!=\!\vec{R}\vec{U}$, where $\vec{R}$ is an $N\!\times\!N$ lower-triangular matrix and $\vec{U}$ is an $N\!\times\!M$ unitary matrix, the ZF-DP precoder is set to $\vec{P}\!=\!\vec{U}^{\dag}\vec{B}$, and the $N\!\times\!N$ diagonal matrix $\vec{B}$ represents the power allocation whose $n$th diagonal element is $b_n$. The effective channel with the ZF-DP precoder equals $\vec{F}\!=\!\vec{R}\vec{B}$, and the received sample $y_n$ reads
\begin{eqnarray} y_n= f_{n,n}x_n+\sum_{k=1}^{n-1}f_{n,k}x_k+z_n. \end{eqnarray}
Through successive DPC encoding, the non-casual interference $\sum\limits_{k=1}^{n-1}f_{n,k}x_k$ is nulled out for each of the users, and the sum-rate maximization problem can be formulated as
{\setlength\arraycolsep{2pt} \begin{eqnarray} \label{prbm2} &&\underset{b_n}{\mathrm{maximize\;\;}} \sum_{n=1}^{N}\log\left(1+\frac{|b_n r_{n,n}|^2}{N_0}\right) \notag \\
&&\mathrm{subject\; to\;\;} \sum_{n=1}^{N}b_n^2\leq P_{\mathrm{T}}.\end{eqnarray}}
\hspace{-1.4mm}The optimal power allocation $b_n$ can also be found through standard water-filling. Although the ZF-DP precoder renders promising performance, the implementation of successive DPC becomes over complex when $N$ is large. To reduce the DPC complexity, the authors in \cite{ML16} propose a low-complexity UG-DP precoder.
\subsection{UG-DP Precoder}
We next briefly introduce the UG-DP precoder design. Assuming the same channel decomposition as with ZF-DP precoder, but now we constrain $\vec{R}$ to be block-diagonal, with each block $\vec{R}_k$ ($1\!\leq\!k\!\!\leq\!g$) being an $N_g\!\times\!N_g$ lower-triangular matrix. Let the $N_g\!\times\!M$ sub-matrix $\vec{H}_k$ comprise the row vectors in $\vec{H}$ corresponding to the users in the $k$th group, and the $(N\!-\!N_g)\!\times\!M$ sub-matrix $\bar{\vec{H}}_k$ comprise the remaining row vectors. With decomposition $\vec{U}\!=\!\left[\vec{U}_1,\vec{U}_2,\cdots,\vec{U}_g\right]^{\dag}$, each $M\!\times\!N_g$ component $\vec{U}_k$ can be obtained through
\begin{eqnarray} \label{QR2}\vec{H}_k\left(\vec{I}-\bar{\vec{H}}_k^{\dag}\left(\bar{\vec{H}}_k\bar{\vec{H}}_k^{\dag}\right)^{-1}\bar{\vec{H}}_k\right)\!=\!\vec{R}_k\vec{U}_k^{\dag}. \end{eqnarray}
Then, with the matrix $\vec{U}_k$ calculated via (\ref{QR2}), the optimal $\vec{P}$ equals $\vec{P}\!=\!\vec{U}^{\dag}\vec{B}$ and the effective channel becomes $\vec{F}\!=\!\vec{R}\vec{B}$, where the diagonal matrix $\vec{B}$ represents the power allocation to different users. Then, the remaining processes follow the ZF-DP precoder design. Although the UG-DP precoder reduces the complexity of DPC by user-grouping, it also suffers from rate-losses from the orthogonalization of different user-groups. In order to increase the rates of the UG-DP precoder while keeping a similar complexity, we can extend the block-diagonal lower-triangular $\vec{R}$ and $\vec{F}$ to be band-shaped matrices. That is, the connections among different user-groups are preserved such that, only the elements along the main diagonal and the first $\!N_g\!-\!1$ lower-diagonals of $\vec{R}$ and $\vec{F}$ can take non-zero values. The proposed GZF-DP precoder design is based on such a principle and is explained in detail next.
\section{Optimal Designs of the Proposed GZF-DP Precoder}
Instead of assuming $\vec{F}$ to be diagonal or block-diagonal such as in previous designs, we let $\vec{F}$ to be a band-shaped and lower-triangular for the GZF-DP precoder design,
{\setlength\arraycolsep{1pt} \begin{eqnarray} \label{Fmat} \vec{F}\!=\!\left[\!\begin{array}{ccccccc}
f_{1,1}&~&~&~&~&~&~\\ f_{2,1}& f_{2,2}&~&~&~&~&~\\
\vdots&f_{3,2}&\ddots&~&~&~&~ \\
f_{\nu+1,1}&\vdots&\ddots&\ddots&~&~&~\\~&f_{\nu+2,2}&\ddots&\ddots&\ddots&~&~\\
~&~&\ddots&\ddots&\ddots&\ddots&~\\ ~&~&~&f_{N, N-\nu}&\cdots&f_{N, N-1}&f_{N, N}
\end{array} \!\right]\!. \;\;\end{eqnarray}}
\hspace{-1.4mm}The parameter $\nu$ denotes the interfering depth of the effective MISO broadcasting channels. For simpler descriptions, we define two operations as
\vspace{-4mm}
{\setlength\arraycolsep{2pt} \begin{eqnarray} n\ominus \nu&=&\max(n-\nu, 0), \notag \\
n\boxplus\nu&=&\min(n+\nu, N). \end{eqnarray}}
\hspace{-1.4mm}The GZF-DP precoder generalizes the linear ZF precoder in the sense that $\nu$ can be set larger than 0. Under the case $\nu\!=\!0$, the GZF-DP precoder degrades to the linear ZF precoder and no DPC is needed. With $\vec{F}$ defined in (\ref{Fmat}), the received sample $y_n$ of the $n$th user reads
\begin{eqnarray} \label{md3} y_n= f_{n,n}x_n+\sum_{k=n\ominus\nu}^{n-1}f_{n,k}x_k+z_n. \end{eqnarray}
As the interference $\sum\limits_{k=n\ominus\nu}^{n-1}f_{n,k}x_k$ is non-causally known at the transmit node, we can apply the same successive DPC encoding as the ZF-DP precoder\cite{CS03} to cancel it. That is, we first encode a first user that suffers no interference from the other users after precoding. Then, the second user is encoded utilizing DPC scheme with regarding the encoded symbols from the first user as known interference. The remaining users are successively encoded in the same manner. For each of the $N$ users, as there are at most $\nu$ users to be considered in the DPC and $\nu\!\ll\!N\!-\!1$, the GZF-DP precoder renders much lower-complexity of the successive DPC operations than the ZF-DP precoder and has similar complexity as the UG-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!N_g\!-\!1$.
Before deriving the optimal GZF-DP precoder designs, we make some useful notations. Denote the $\nu\!\times\!1$ vectors that comprise the non-zero entries on each column of $\vec{F}$ excluding the main diagonal element as
\begin{eqnarray} \label{fn} \vec{f}_n^{\nu}&=&\left[f_{n+1, n}\;, f_{n+2, n}\;,\cdots\;,f_{n\boxplus\nu, n}\right]^{\rm T}.\end{eqnarray}
Moreover, define the $(\nu\!+\!1)\!\times\!(\nu\!+\!1)$ principle sub-matrix $\vec{G}_n^{\nu}$ obtained from $\vec{G}$ as
{\setlength\arraycolsep{3pt} \begin{eqnarray} \label{Gn} \vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}\!=\!\left[\begin{array}{cccc} g_{n,n}& g_{n,n+1}&\cdots&g_{n,n\boxplus\nu}\\g_{n+1,n}& g_{n+2,n+1}&\cdots&g_{n+1,n\boxplus\nu}\\ \vdots&\vdots&\vdots&\vdots \\g_{n\boxplus\nu,n}&g_{n\boxplus\nu,n+1}&\cdots&g_{n\boxplus\nu,n\boxplus\nu}\end{array} \right]\!\!. \end{eqnarray}}
\hspace{-1.4mm}and let
\begin{eqnarray} \label{gn} \vec{g}_{n}^{\nu}&=&\left[g_{n,n+1}\;,g_{n,n+2}\;,\cdots\;,g_{n,n\boxplus\nu}\right]^{\dag}.\end{eqnarray}
Then, $\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}$ is the $\nu\!\times\!\nu$ principle sub-matrix obtained by further removing the first row and column vectors from $\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}$.
\subsection{Sum-rate Maximization}
We first consider the GZF-DP precoder design for the sum-rate maximization subject to the transmit power constraint (\ref{con2}). The problem can be formulated as
{\setlength\arraycolsep{2pt} \begin{eqnarray} \label{prbm3} &&\underset{\vec{F}}{\mathrm{maximize\;\;}} \sum_{n=1}^{N}\log\left(1+\frac{|f_{n,n}|^2}{N_0}\right) \notag \\
&&\mathrm{subject\; to\;\;} \mathrm{Tr}\left(\vec{F}^{\dag}\vec{G}\vec{F}\right)= P_{\mathrm{T}}.\end{eqnarray}}
\hspace{-1.4mm}Note that, we have changed the power constraint in (\ref{prbm3}) from $\mathrm{Tr}\left(\vec{F}^{\dag}\vec{G}\vec{F}\right)\!\leq\! P_{\mathrm{T}}$ to $\mathrm{Tr}\left(\vec{F}^{\dag}\vec{G}\vec{F}\right)\!=\! P_{\mathrm{T}}$. The reason is that, for a solution of (\ref{prbm3}), the equality of the power constraint always holds. This is so, since if $\mathrm{Tr}\left(\vec{F}^{\dag}\vec{G}\vec{F}\right)\!<\! P_{\mathrm{T}}$ holds, we can scale up $\vec{F}$ to be some $\tilde{\vec{F}}\!=\!\alpha\vec{F}$ ($\alpha\!>\!1$) such that $\mathrm{Tr}\left(\tilde{\vec{F}}^{\dag}\vec{G}\tilde{\vec{F}}\right)\!=\! P_{\mathrm{T}}$ holds, and with $\tilde{\vec{F}}$ the sum-rate in (\ref{prbm3}) is also increased. By constraining $f_{n,n}\!\geq\!0$, the optimal solution for (\ref{prbm3}) is stated in Theorem 1.
\begin{theorem}
The optimal band-shaped and low-triangular matrix $\vec{F}$ as defined in (\ref{Fmat}) for sum-rate maximization (\ref{prbm3}) satisfies the following conditions
{\setlength\arraycolsep{2pt}\begin{eqnarray} \label{optfnk} \vec{f}_n^{\nu}=-f_{n,n}\left(\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}\right)^{-1}\vec{g}_{n}^{\nu}, \\
\label{wf2} f_{n,n}=\sqrt{N_0\left[\frac{1}{\lambda\hat{g}_n^{\nu}}-1\right]^{+}}, \end{eqnarray}}
\hspace{-1.4mm}where
\begin{eqnarray} \label{hatg} \hat{g}_{n}^{\nu}=g_{n,n}-\left(\vec{g}_n^{\nu} \right)^{\dag}\left(\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}\right)^{-1}\vec{g}_{n}^{\nu},\end{eqnarray}
and $\lambda\!>\!0$ is a constant such that the transmit power constraint is satisfied.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Consider the Lagrangian function
\begin{eqnarray} \label{costfun} \mathcal{L}= \sum_{n=1}^{N}\log\left(1+\frac{|f_{n,n}|^2}{N_0}\right)-\lambda\left(\mathrm{Tr}\left(\vec{F}^{\dag}\vec{G}\vec{F}\right)- P_{\mathrm{T}}\right), \end{eqnarray}
where $\lambda$ is the Lagrange multiplier. The necessary conditions \cite{B82} for the optimal solution are
\begin{eqnarray} \label{KKT} \left.\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial\mathcal{L} }{\partial f_{n,k}} =0,\; 1\leq n, k&\leq N\;\, \\
\mathrm{Tr}\left(\vec{F}^{\dag}\vec{G}\vec{F}\right)- P_{\mathrm{T}}&= 0\;\, \\
\lambda& \geq 0 \;\, \end{aligned}\right\} .\end{eqnarray}
Note that, with the definitions in (\ref{fn})-(\ref{gn}), the trace term in (\ref{costfun}) can be rewritten as
{\setlength\arraycolsep{2pt} \begin{eqnarray} \label{trace} \mathrm{Tr}\left(\vec{F}^{\dag}\vec{G}\vec{F}\right)\!=\!\sum_{n=1}^{N}\left[ f_{n,n}\; \left(\vec{f}_n^{\nu}\right)^{\dag}\right]\! \left[\begin{array}{cc} g_{n,n}& \left(\vec{g}_n^{\nu}\right)^{\dag} \\ \vec{g}_n^{\nu}&\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1} \end{array} \right] \!\left[ \begin{array}{c}f_{n,n}\;\\ \vec{f}_n^{\nu}\end{array}\right]\!. \; \end{eqnarray}}
\hspace{-1.4mm}Taking the first-order derivatives of $\mathcal{L}$ with respect to $f_{n,n}$ and $\vec{f}_n^{\nu}$, and using (\ref{trace}) results in
{\setlength\arraycolsep{2pt} \begin{eqnarray} \label{der1} \frac{\partial\mathcal{L} }{\partial f_{n,n}} &=&\frac{N_0 f_{n,n}}{
N_0+|f_{n,n}|^2}-\lambda\left(f_{n,n}g_{n,n}+\left(\vec{f}_n^{\nu}\right)^{\dag}\vec{g}_n^{\nu} \right)\!,\;\\
\label{der2} \nabla_{\vec{f}_n^{\nu}}\mathcal{L} &=&-\lambda\left( f_{n,n}\left(\vec{g}_n^{\nu}\right)^{\dag}+\left(\vec{f}_n^{\nu}\right)^{\dag}\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}\right)^{\rm T} \!. \qquad\end{eqnarray}}
\hspace{-1.4mm}Then, by setting $\nabla_{\vec{f}_n^{\nu}}\mathcal{L} $ in (\ref{der2}) to zero, the vector $\vec{f}_n^{\nu}$ can be solved for, and the result is given in (\ref{optfnk}).
Inserting (\ref{optfnk}) back into (\ref{der1}) and setting $\partial\mathcal{L} /\partial f_{n,n}$ to zero, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray} \label{wf22} \frac{N_0}{
N_0+|f_{n,n}|^2}=\lambda\left(g_{n,n}- \left(\vec{g}_n^{\nu} \right)^{\dag}\left(\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}\right)^{-1}\vec{g}_{n}^{\nu}\right).\end{eqnarray}
From (\ref{wf22}) it holds that $\lambda\!>\!0$ as $N_0\!>\!0$, since $\hat{g}_{n}^{\nu}\!>\!0$ which will be shown later in Property 1. Using (\ref{hatg}), the optimal $f_{n,n}$ reads
\begin{eqnarray} \label{wf23} \left|f_{n,n}\right|^2=N_0\left[\frac{1}{\lambda\hat{g}_n^{\nu}}-1\right]^{+}. \end{eqnarray}
As we constrain $f_{n,n}$ to be positive, the solution of $f_{n,n}$ is in (\ref{wf2}), which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
With the necessary conditions of $\vec{f}_n^{\nu}$ and $f_{n,n}$ stated in Theorem 1, the constraint in (\ref{prbm3}) can be written as
{\setlength\arraycolsep{2pt} {\begin{eqnarray} \label{trace3} \frac{1}{N_0}\mathrm{Tr}\left(\vec{F}^{\dag}\vec{G}\vec{F}\right)&=&\frac{1}{N_0}\sum_{n=1}^{N}\hat{g}_n^{\nu}|f_{n,n}|^2 \notag \\&=& \sum_{n=1}^{N}\left[\frac{1}{\lambda}-\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\right]^{+}= \frac{P_{\mathrm{T}}}{N_0}. \end{eqnarray}}
\hspace{-1.4mm}and the sum-rate equals
\begin{eqnarray} \label{dual1} R^{\mathrm{sum}}=\sum_{n=1}^{N}R_n^{\mathrm{user}},\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray} R_n^{\mathrm{user}}\!=\!\big[-\log\left( \lambda \hat{g}_n^{\nu}\right)\big]^{+}. \end{eqnarray}
Therefore, to find the optimal solution for (\ref{prbm3}) is equivalent to find an optimal water-level $1/\lambda$ such that (\ref{dual1}) is maximized and (\ref{trace3}) is satisfied, which can be efficiently solved using water-filling scheme\cite{Y06}. Comparing (\ref{wf23}) with (\ref{wf1}), with the GZF-DP precoder a similar water-filling scheme still applies, however, the water-level has changed as $g_{n,n}$ is replaced now by $\hat{g}_n^{\nu}$, due to the preserved inter-user interference.} We state a property below that shows that $\hat{g}_n^{\nu}$ is positive and non-increasing in $\nu$ for all $1\!\leq\!n\!\leq\!N$.
\begin{property}
Under the condition that $\vec{H}$ has full row rank, for $1\!\leq\!n\!\leq\!N$, it holds that
\begin{eqnarray} \label{prop1} 0\!<\! \hat{g}_n^{N-1}\!\leq\!\hat{g}_n^{N-2}\!\leq\!\cdots\!\leq\!\hat{g}_n^1\!\leq\! g_{n,n}. \end{eqnarray}
\end{property}
\begin{proof}
First we show that for $1\!\leq\!\nu\!\leq\!N\!-\!1$, $0\!<\! \hat{g}_n^{\nu}\!\leq\! g_{n,n}$ holds. Since $\vec{H}$ has full row rank, $\vec{G}\!\succ\!\vec{0}$. Consequently, $\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}$ and $\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}$ are also positive-definite as principle sub-matrices of $\vec{G}$. Hence, $\left(\vec{g}_n^{\nu} \right)^{\dag}\left(\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}\right)^{-1}\vec{g}_{n}^{\nu}\!\geq\!0$, and $\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\!\leq\!g_{n,n}$ follows from (\ref{hatg}). On the other hand, from the definition, $\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}$ equals
\vspace{-4mm}
\begin{eqnarray} \label{Gn1} \vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}=\left[\!\begin{array}{cc} g_{n,n}&\left(\vec{g}_n^{\nu} \right)^{\dag}\\ \vec{g}_n^{\nu} & \vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1} \end{array}\!\right]\!\!. \end{eqnarray}
Hence, $\hat{g}_n^{\nu}$ is the Schur-complement\cite{Z05} of $g_{n,n}$, and by utilizing the matrix-inversion lemma \cite{GL13}, the inverse $\left(\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}\right)^{-1}\!\succ\!\vec{0}$ is in (\ref{inv1}), which shows that $\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\!>\!0$.
Next we show that, $\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\!\leq\! \hat{g}_n^{\nu-1}$ holds for $1\!\leq\!n\!\leq\!N$. Firstly, for $n\!>\!N\!-\!\nu$, by definitions (\ref{gn}) and (\ref{Gn}), the equalities $\vec{g}_n^{\nu}\!=\!\vec{g}_n^{\nu-1}\!$ and $\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}\!=\!\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-2}$ hold. Hence, from (\ref{hatg}), $\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\!=\! \hat{g}_n^{\nu-1}$ holds. Secondly, for $1\!\leq\!n\!\leq\!N\!-\!\nu$, $\vec{G}_{n}$ in (\ref{Gn1}) can also be rewritten as
\begin{eqnarray} \vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}=\left[\!\begin{array}{cc} \vec{G}_{n}^{\nu-1}&\left(\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}\right)^{\dag} \\ \tilde{\vec{g}}_{n}^{\nu}& g_{n+\nu, n+\nu} \end{array}\!\right]\!\!, \end{eqnarray}
where $\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}\!=\!\left[g_{n+\nu,n},\, g_{n+\nu,n+1},\, \cdots, \,g_{n+\nu,n+\nu-1}\right]$. By utilizing the matrix-inversion lemma again, the inverse $\left(\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}\right)^{-1}$ can also be written in (\ref{inv2}). From (\ref{inv1}) we know that, $\left(\hat{g}_n^{\nu-1}\right)^{-1}$ is the first diagonal element of $\left(\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu-1}\right)^{-1}$, while $\left(\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\right)^{-1}$ is the first diagonal element of $\left(\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}\right)^{-1}$ and hence, the first diagonal element of $\left(\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu-1}\!-\!\frac{\left(\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}\right)^{\dag}\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}}{g_{n+\nu, n+\nu}}\right)^{-1}$ from (\ref{inv2}). Using the Woodbury matrix identity\cite{GL13}, $ \left(\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu-1}\!-\!\frac{\left(\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}\right)^{\dag}\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}}{g_{n+\nu, n+\nu}}\right)^{-1}\!\succeq\!\left(\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu-1}\right)^{-1}$ holds. Therefore, $\left(\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\right)^{-1}\!\geq\!\left(\hat{g}_n^{\nu-1}\right)^{-1}$ holds, and $\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\!\leq\! \hat{g}_n^{\nu-1}$ follows, which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure*}[b]
\vspace{-8mm}
\hrulefill
\vspace{2mm}
{\setlength\arraycolsep{4pt}
\begin{eqnarray} \label{inv1} \left(\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}\right)^{-1} \!=\!\left[\!\begin{array}{cc} \left(\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\right)^{-1}&-\left(\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\right)^{-1}\left(\vec{g}_n^{\nu} \right)^{\dag}\left(\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}\right)^{-1}\\ -\left(\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\right)^{-1}\left(\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}\right)^{\!-1}\!\vec{g}_n^{\nu}& \left(\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}\right)^{\!-1}\!+\left(\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\right)^{\!-1}\left(\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}\right)^{-1}\vec{g}_n^{\nu}\left(\vec{g}_n^{\nu} \right)^{\dag}\left(\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}\right)^{\!-1} \end{array}\!\!\right]\!\!. \end{eqnarray}}
\vspace{2mm}
\hspace{-1.4mm}\hrulefill
\vspace{1mm}
{\setlength\arraycolsep{4pt}
\begin{eqnarray} \label{inv2} \left(\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}\right)^{-1} \!\!=\!\!\left[\!\begin{array}{cc} \left(\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu-1}\!-\!\frac{\left(\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}\right)^{\dag}\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}}{g_{n+\nu, n+\nu}}\right)^{\!-1}&-\left(\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu-1}\!-\!\frac{\left(\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}\right)^{\dag}\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}}{g_{n+\nu, n+\nu}}\right)^{-1}\frac{\left(\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}\right)^{\dag}}{g_{n+\nu, n+\nu}}\\ -\frac{-\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}}{g_{n+\nu, n+\nu}}\left(\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu-1}\!-\!\frac{\left(\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}\right)^{\dag}\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}}{g_{n+\nu, n+\nu}}\right)^{\!-1}& \frac{1}{g_{n+\nu, n+\nu}}\!+\!\frac{\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}}{g_{n+\nu, n+\nu}^2}\left(\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu-1}\!-\!\frac{\left(\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}\right)^{\dag}\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}}{g_{n+\nu, n+\nu}}\right)^{-1}\left(\tilde{\vec{g}}_n^{\nu}\right)^{\dag}
\end{array}\!\!\right]\!\!.\quad\; \; \end{eqnarray}}
\vspace{-9mm}
\end{figure*}
As $\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\!\leq\! g_{n,n}$, from (\ref{trace3}) in general the water-level $1/\lambda$ is actually non-increasing when $\nu$ increases. Therefore, not all the user-rates are increased with a larger $\nu$. For instance, for the last user, as $\hat{g}_N^{\nu}\!=\! g_{N,N}$ for all $\nu$, the user-rate $R_{N}^{\mathrm{user}}$ is non-increasing as $\nu$ increases. In general, we have the following corollary.
\begin{corollary}
If $\nu$ is increased from $\nu_1$ to $\nu_1\!+\!1$ for the GZF-DP precoder, as for $n\!\geq\!N\!-\!\nu_1$, $\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\!=\!\hat{g}_n^{\nu-1}\!$ holds, and as a result of the non-increasing water-level, the user-rates of the last $\nu_1\!+\!1$ users are also non-increasing.
\end{corollary}
However, the sum-rate never decrease with a larger $\nu$, which is stated in the below property.
\begin{property}
If $\nu_2\!>\!\nu_1$, the sum-rate $R^{\mathrm{sum}}$ obtained with the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!\nu_2$ is no less than that obtained with $\nu\!=\!\nu_1$. However, under the case that the channel $\vec{H}$ itself is band-shaped with only the elements along the main diagonal and the first $\nu_1$ lower-diagonals can take non-zero values, increasing $\nu$ to be larger than $\nu_1$ will not further increase $R^{\mathrm{sum}}$.
\end{property}
\begin{proof}
The first statement holds from the fact that the effective channel $\vec{F}$ with $\nu\!=\!\nu_1$ is a subset of $\vec{F}$ with $\nu\!=\!\nu_2$. Next we prove the second statement by showing that $\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\!=\!\hat{g}_n^{\nu_1}\!$ for any $n$ and $\nu\!>\!\nu_1$, under the condition that $\vec{H}$ is band-shaped with only the elements along the main diagonal and the first $\nu_1$ lower-diagonals can take non-zero values. Therefore, in such a case, the sum-rate $R^{\mathrm{sum}}$ obtained with $\nu\!>\!\nu_1$ is equal to $R^{\mathrm{sum}}$ with $\nu\!=\!\nu_1$.
We first show that, for $n\!=\!1$, $\hat{g}_1^{\nu}\!=\!\hat{g}_1^{\nu_1}\!$ holds for $\nu\!>\!\nu_1$. We decompose $\vec{G}$ and $\vec{H}\vec{H}^{\dag}$ into block forms as
\begin{eqnarray} \vec{G}=\left[\!\begin{array}{cc} \vec{G}_{1}^{\nu}&\vec{G}_2^{\dag}\\ \vec{G}_2& \vec{G}_3 \end{array}\!\right]\!\!, \;\;
\vec{H}\vec{H}^{\dag}=\left[\!\begin{array}{cc} \vec{B}_{1}&\vec{B}_2^{\dag}\\ \vec{B}_2& \vec{B}_3 \end{array}\!\right]\!\!, \!\!\!\!\!\! \end{eqnarray}
where sub-matrix $\vec{G}_{1}^{\nu}$ follows the definition in (\ref{Gn}) and sub-matrices $\vec{G}_2$, $\vec{G}_3$ are deduced from $\vec{G}_{1}^{\nu}$. Similarly, sub-matrix $\vec{B}_{1}$ has the same size as $\vec{G}_{1}^{\nu}$, and sub-matrices $\vec{B}_2$, $\vec{B}_3$ are deduced from $\vec{B}_{1}$. As $\vec{G}\!=\!\left(\vec{H}\vec{H}^{\dag}\right)^{-1}$, following the matrix inversion lemma we have
\begin{eqnarray} \label{prop21} \left(\vec{G}_{1}^{\nu}\right)^{-1}=\vec{B}_1-\vec{B}_2^{\dag}\vec{B}_3^{-1}\vec{B}_2. \end{eqnarray}
As $\vec{H}$ is band-shaped, when $\nu\!\geq\!\nu_1$, the first row vector in $\vec{B}_2^{\dag}$ comprises all zero elements. Consequently, from (\ref{prop21}) the first diagonal element of $\left(\vec{G}_{1}^{\nu}\right)^{-1}$, which is $\left(\hat{g}_{1}^{\nu}\right)^{-1}$, is equal to the first diagonal element of $\vec{B}_1$. Hence, we have
\begin{eqnarray} \label{prop22} \hat{g}_{1}^{\nu}=|h_1(1)|^{-2},\;\; \nu\!\geq\!\nu_1, \end{eqnarray}
where $h_1(1)$ is the first tap of the channel vector corresponding to the first user,
For $n\!>\!1$, we can permute the principle sub-matrix $\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}$ to the upper-left corner with a permutation matrix $\vec{Q}$ such that,
\begin{eqnarray} \vec{Q}\vec{G}\vec{Q}^{\dag}=\left[\!\begin{array}{cc} \vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}&\tilde{\vec{G}}_2^{\dag}\\ \tilde{\vec{G}}_2& \tilde{\vec{G}}_3 \end{array}\!\right]\!\!, \end{eqnarray}
where $\tilde{\vec{G}}_2$, $\tilde{\vec{G}}_3$ are deduced from $\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}$. We also permute $\vec{H}\vec{H}^{\dag}$ accordingly such that
\begin{eqnarray} \vec{Q}\vec{H}\vec{H}^{\dag}\vec{Q}^{\dag}=\left[\!\begin{array}{cc} \tilde{\vec{B}}_1&\tilde{\vec{B}}_2^{\dag}\\ \tilde{\vec{B}}_2& \tilde{\vec{B}}_3 \end{array}\!\right]\!\!, \end{eqnarray}
where sub-matrices $\tilde{\vec{B}}_{1}, \tilde{\vec{B}}_2, \tilde{\vec{B}}_3$ are defined similarly as before. As $\vec{Q}\vec{G}\vec{Q}^{\dag}\!=\!\left(\vec{Q}\vec{H}\vec{H}^{\dag}\vec{Q}^{\dag}\right)^{-1}$ holds, following (\ref{prop21}) and (\ref{prop22}) we have
\begin{eqnarray} \label{prop23} \hat{g}_{n}^{\nu}=|h_n(n)|^{-2},\;\; \nu\!\geq\!\nu_1, \end{eqnarray}
where $h_n(n)$ is the $n$th tap of the channel vector corresponding to the $n$th user, which is transfered to be the first user after permutation. Therefore, with $\hat{g}_n^{\nu}$ given in (\ref{prop23}), it holds that, $\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\!=\!\hat{g}_n^{\nu_1}\!$ for any $n$ and $\nu\!>\!\nu_1$, which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
Property 2 reveals that if $\vec{H}$ is banded, further increasing the band-size of $\vec{F}$ to be larger than the band-size of $\vec{H}$ will not increase the sum-rate. Moreover, for a band-shaped $\vec{H}$, $\hat{g}_{n}^{\nu}$ can be easily calculated through (\ref{prop23}) for $\nu\!\geq\!\nu_1$. Next, we show that the GZF-DP precoder design actually provides a unified framework of the previous ZF based precoder designs.
\begin{corollary}
With $\nu\!=\!0$, the GZF-DP precoder becomes the linear ZF precoder without DPC; while with $\nu\!=\!N\!-\!1$, the GZF-DP precoder is identical to the ZF-DP precoder. In addition, the UG-DP precoder is inferior to the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!N_g\!-\!1$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
When $\nu\!=\!0$, $\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\!=\!g_{n,n}$ for all $n$, and the GZF-DP precoder is thusly identical to the linear ZF precoder. On the other hand, when $\nu\!=\!N\!-\!1$, the maximization (\ref{prbm3}) can be formulated as the same problem in (\ref{prbm2}), which shows the trade-off between the sum-rate and the complexity of successive DPC. Moreover, as the UG-DP can be reviewed as a special case of the GZF-DP with $\nu\!=\!N_g\!-\!1$, the UG-DP precoder is inferior to the GZF-DP precoder in general.
\end{proof}
Although the ZF-DP precoder provides the highest sum-rate, as shown in Corollary 1, it sacrifices user-rates of some of the last users. As a generalization of the ZF-DP precoder, the GZF-DP precoder, however, can provide a trade-off between the sum-rate increment and the user-rate decrement through the parameter $\nu$. Below we illustrate with an example to show different designs of the linear ZF precoder, the UG-DP precoder, and the proposed GZF-DP precoder.
\begin{figure*}[!b]
{\small
\vspace{-8mm}
\hrulefill
\vspace{2mm}
{\setlength\arraycolsep{1.5pt}
\begin{eqnarray} \vec{F}_{\mathrm{ZF}}\!=\!\left[\!\begin{array}{cccc} 4.376 &~&~&~\\ ~&5.238&~&~ \\ ~&~&4.436&~\\ ~&~&~& 4.407\end{array} \!\right]\!\!, \;
\vec{F}_{\mathrm{UG-DP}}\!=\!\left[\!\begin{array}{cccc} 4.899&0&~&~\\ -1.140 \!+\! 2.340i & -5.217&~&~ \\ ~&~&4.490 &0\\ ~&~&0.489 \!+\! 0.607i&4.389 \end{array} \!\right]\!\!, \notag\end{eqnarray}}
\vspace{2mm}
\hspace{-1.4mm}\hrulefill
\vspace{2mm}
{\setlength\arraycolsep{2pt}
\begin{eqnarray}
\vec{F}_{\mathrm{GZF-DP},\;\nu=1}\!=\!\left[\!\begin{array}{cccc} 4.910&0&~&~\\ -1.143 \!+\! 2.345i & 5.784&~&~ \\ ~& 2.034 \!+\! 0.416i &4.501 &0\\ ~&~&0.490 \!+\! 0.609i&4.400 \end{array} \!\right]\!\!. \notag\end{eqnarray}}
\vspace{-12mm}
}
\end{figure*}
\begin{example}
Assume $N_0\!=\!1$, $P_{\mathrm{T}}\!=\!10$ dB, and consider an MISO channel with 4 transmit antennas and 4 single-antenna users as ($i=\sqrt{-1}$)
{\setlength\arraycolsep{4pt}
\begin{eqnarray} \vec{H}=\left[\!\begin{array}{cccc} 1+4i&4+3i&2+3i&3+3i\\ 4+1i&1+4i&1+1i&2+4i \\ 2+3i&1+4i&3+3i&4+3i\\ 4+4i&2+3i&1+4i&2+2i\end{array} \!\right]\!. \notag\end{eqnarray}}
\hspace{-2mm}The sum-rates (bits/channel use) of the ZF precoder, the UG-DP precoder with $N_{\mathrm{g}}\!=\!2$, and the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!1$ are equal to
\begin{eqnarray} R_{\mathrm{ZF}}^{\mathrm{sum}}\!=\!17.885,\;\,R_{\mathrm{UG-DP}}^{\mathrm{sum}}\!=\!18.206, \;\,
\mathrm{and}\;\, R_{\mathrm{GZF-DP,\;\nu=1}}^{\mathrm{sum}}\!=\!18.514,\notag \end{eqnarray}
respectively. The optimal effective channels $\vec{F}$ are listed at the bottom of this page.
\end{example}
With Example 1, the user-rates corresponding to different precoders are equal to
{\setlength\arraycolsep{2pt} \begin{eqnarray} R_{\mathrm{ZF}}^{\mathrm{user}}&=&[ 4.333, \,4.830, \,4.370, \,4.352], \notag \\
R_{\mathrm{GZF-DP},\; \nu=1}^{\mathrm{user}}&=&[ 4.650, \,5.106, \,4.410, \,4.348], \notag \\
R_{\mathrm{GZF-DP}, \;\nu=2}^{\mathrm{user}}&=&[ 5.394, \,6.047, \,4.387, \,4.324].\notag \end{eqnarray}}
\hspace{-1.4mm}As it can been seen, although the sum-rate is increased from $\nu\!=\!0$ to 1, the user-rate of the last user is decreased. Further, from $\nu\!=\!1$ to 2, the user-rates of the last two users are also decreased, which are aligned with Corollary 1. Especially for the last user, the user-rate is continuously decreasing when $\nu$ increases from 0 to 2. Therefore, instead of maximizing the sum-rate, it is also meaningful to consider maximizations of user-rate, which is usually used as a measurement for the fairness of the QoS.
Next we discuss the minimum user-rate maximization with the proposed GZF-DP precoder.
\subsection{Minimum User-rate Maximization}
For minimum user-rate maximization, the design of the GZF-DP precoder is formulated as
{\setlength\arraycolsep{2pt} \begin{eqnarray} \label{prbm41} &&\underset{\vec{F},\, R^{\mathrm{user}}}{\mathrm{maximize\;\;}} R^{\mathrm{user}} \notag \\
&&\mathrm{\,subject\; to\;\,} R^{\mathrm{user}}\leq\log\left(1+\frac{|f_{n,n}|^2}{N_0}\right), 1\leq n\leq N \notag \\
&&\qquad \qquad\quad\!\mathrm{Tr}\left(\vec{F}^{\dag}\vec{G}\vec{F}\right)\leq P_{\mathrm{T}},\end{eqnarray}}
\hspace{-1.4mm}where the matrices $\vec{F}$ and $\vec{G}$ are the same as defined for the sum-rate maximization and we constrain $f_{n,n}\!\geq\!0$. Following similar arguments as for the sum-rate maximization, it also holds that the equality in the power constraint always holds for an optimal solution of (\ref{prbm41}). Furthermore, we have the below lemma.
\begin{lemma}
For an optimal solution $\vec{F}$ of (\ref{prbm41}), it holds that $R^{\mathrm{user}}\!=\!\log\left(1+\frac{|f_{n,n}|^2}{N_0}\right)$ for all $n$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For an optimal solution $\vec{F}$ of (\ref{prbm41}), we denote the maximal and minimal user-rates as $ R_{n_1}^{\mathrm{user}}$ and $R_{n_2}^{\mathrm{user}}$, respectively, which equal
\begin{eqnarray} \label{Rni} R_{n_i}^{\mathrm{user}}=\log\left(1+\frac{|f_{n_i,n_i}|^2}{N_0}\right), \quad i=1, 2. \end{eqnarray}
Then, the minimum user-rate is equal to $R_{n_2}^{\mathrm{user}}$. We further denote the transmit powers of user $n_1$ and $n_2$ as $P_1$ and $P_2$, respectively. According to (\ref{trace}), it holds that
\begin{eqnarray} \label{pi} P_i= g_{n_i,n_i}|f_{n_i,n_i}|^2+2\mathcal{R}\left\{\left(\vec{f}_{n_i}^{\nu}\right)^{\dag}\vec{g}_{n_i}^{\nu}f_{n_i,n_i}\right\}+\left(\vec{f}_{n_i}^{\nu}\right)^{\dag}\vec{G}_{n_i+1}^{\nu-1}\vec{f}_{n_i}^{\nu}, \quad i=1, 2. \end{eqnarray}
Now let\rq{}s assume $R_{n_1}\!>\! R_{n_2}$, that is, the maximal user-rate is strictly larger than the minimal user-rate. Then, we can scale $f_{n_i,n_i}$ and $\vec{f}_{n_i}^{\nu}$ to be $\tilde{f}_{n_i,n_i}\!=\!\alpha_i f_{n_i,n_i}$ and $\tilde{\vec{f}}_{n_i}^{\nu}\!=\!\alpha_i\vec{f}_{n_i}^{\nu}$, respectively, where $\alpha_2\!>\!1\!>\!\alpha_1$ and
\begin{eqnarray} \alpha_1=\sqrt{1+\frac{(1-\alpha_2^2)P_2}{P_1}}. \notag \end{eqnarray}
Note that, according to (\ref{pi}), with such a scaling operation, the total transmit power of user $n_1$ and $n_2$ remains the same, that is, $\alpha_1^2P_1\!+\!\alpha_2^2P_2\!=\!P_1\!+\!P_2$. However, according to (\ref{Rni}), the user-rate with such a scaling increases $R_{n_2}^{\mathrm{user}}$ and decreased $R_{n_1}^{\mathrm{user}}$. Hence, the minimum user-rate can therefore be increased, which contradicts to the assumption that $\vec{F}$ is optimal. Therefore, for an optimal $\vec{F}$, $R_{n_1}^{\mathrm{user}}\!=\! R_{n_2}^{\mathrm{user}}$ holds, which shows that all user-rates are equal to each other for an optimal $\vec{F}$ of (\ref{prbm41}).
\end{proof}
With the above arguments, we can change (\ref{prbm41}) to the equivalent problem
{\setlength\arraycolsep{2pt} \begin{eqnarray} \label{prbm4} &&\underset{\vec{F},\, R^{\mathrm{user}}}{\mathrm{maximize\;\;}} R^{\mathrm{user}} \notag \\
&&\mathrm{\,subject\; to\;\,} R^{\mathrm{user}}=\log\left(1+\frac{|f_{n,n}|^2}{N_0}\right), 1\leq n\leq N \notag \\
&&\qquad \qquad\quad\!\mathrm{Tr}\left(\vec{F}^{\dag}\vec{G}\vec{F}\right)= P_{\mathrm{T}}.\end{eqnarray}}
\hspace{-1.4mm}Then, the necessary conditions for an optimal solution $\vec{F}$ is stated in Theorem 2.
\begin{theorem}{
The optimal band-shaped and low-triangular matrix $\vec{F}$ in (\ref{Fmat}) for user-rate maximization (\ref{prbm4}) shall satisfy the the conditions that}, the optimal $\vec{f}_n^{\nu}$ is in (\ref{optfnk}) and $f_{n,n}$ equals
\begin{eqnarray} \label{wf3} f_{n,n}=\sqrt{N_0\left[\frac{1}{\lambda_n\hat{g}_n^{\nu}}-1\right]^{+}}, \end{eqnarray}
where $\lambda_n\!>\!0$ are a set of constants such that the transmit power constraint is satisfied.\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The Lagrangian function for multiple constraints in this case reads
\begin{eqnarray} \label{costfun2} \mathcal{L}= R^{\mathrm{user}}-\sum_{n=1}^{N}\mu_n\left(R^{\mathrm{user}}-\log\left(1+\frac{|f_{n,n}|^2}{N_0}\right)\right) -\lambda\left(\mathrm{Tr}\left(\vec{F}^{\dag}\vec{G}\vec{F}\right)- P_{\mathrm{T}}\right), \end{eqnarray}
and the necessary conditions are
\begin{eqnarray} \label{KKT2} \left.\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial \mathcal{L} }{\partial f_{n,k}}\! =\!0,\; 1\leq n, k&\leq N\;\, \\
\sum_{n=1}^N\mu_n\!=\!1,\;\mu_n\geq 0, \; 1\leq n&\leq N\;\, \\
R^{\mathrm{user}}=\log\left(1+\frac{|f_{n,n}|^2}{N_0}\right), \; 1\leq n&\leq N \;\, \\
\mathrm{Tr}\left(\vec{F}^{\dag}\vec{G}\vec{F}\right)- P_{\mathrm{T}}&= 0\;\, \\
\lambda&\geq 0 \;\, \end{aligned}\right\}.
\end{eqnarray}
The first-order derivatives of $\mathcal{L}$ with respect to $f_{n,n}$ is
\begin{eqnarray} \label{der12} \frac{\partial\mathcal{L} }{\partial f_{n,n}} =\frac{\mu_n N_0f_{n,n}}{
N_0+|f_{n,n}|^2}-\lambda\left(f_{n,n}g_{n,n}+\left(\vec{f}_n^{\nu}\right)^{\dag}\vec{g}_n^{\nu} \right), \end{eqnarray}
while the gradient of $\mathcal{L}$ with respect to $\vec{f}_n^{\nu}$ is in (\ref{der2}). Then, from (\ref{der2}) the optimal $\vec{f}_n^{\nu}$ is solved in (\ref{optfnk}), and by inserting (\ref{optfnk}) back into (\ref{der12}) and setting the derivative to zero, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray} \label{optder1} \frac{N_0\mu_n}{
N_0+|f_{n,n}|^2}=\lambda\left(g_{n,n}-\left(\vec{g}_{n}^{\nu}\right)^{\dag}\left(\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}\right)^{-1}\vec{g}_{n}^{\nu}\right).\end{eqnarray}
Hence, as $N_0\!>\!0$, from (\ref{optder1}) it holds that $\lambda\!>\!0$ and $\mu_n\!>\!0$ for all $n$. Otherwise, if either $\lambda\!=\!0$ or $\mu_n\!=\!0$ for some $n$, from (\ref{optder1}) it holds that $\lambda\!=\!\mu_n\!=\!0$ for all $n$, which contradicts the second necessary condition in (\ref{KKT2}) (due to $\partial\mathcal{L} /\partial R^{\mathrm{user}}\!=\!0$). By setting $\lambda_n\!=\!\lambda/\mu_n\!>\!0$ and from (\ref{optder1}) the optimal $f_{n,n}$ equals
\begin{eqnarray} \left|f_{n,n}\right|^2=N_0\left[\frac{1}{\lambda_n\hat{g}_n^{\nu}}-1\right]^{+}, \notag\end{eqnarray}
where $\hat{g}_{n,n}$ is defined in (\ref{hatg}), and the optimal $f_{n,n}$ is then in (\ref{wf3}).
\end{proof}
With the necessary conditions of an optimal $\vec{F}$ in Theorem 2, the user-rate is equal to the minimum user-rate for all users, that is,
\begin{eqnarray} \label{raten} R^{\mathrm{user}}=\big[-\log\left( \lambda_n \hat{g}_n^{\nu}\right)\big]^{+},\quad 1\leq n\leq N,\end{eqnarray}
and the power constraint can be written as
\begin{eqnarray} \label{trace4}\sum_{n=1}^{N}\left[\frac{1}{\lambda_n}-\hat{g}_n^{\nu}\right]^{+}= \frac{P_{\mathrm{T}}}{N_0}. \end{eqnarray}
Note that, different from the sum-rate maximization, now the water-level $1/\lambda_n$ varies for different users. From (\ref{raten}) and (\ref{trace4}), the minimum user-rate can be solved for in closed-form,
\begin{eqnarray} R^{\mathrm{user}}=\log\!\left(1+\frac{P_{\mathrm{T}}}{N_0\sum\limits_{n=1}^{N}\hat{g}_n^{\nu}}\right),\end{eqnarray}
and the optimal $f_{n,n}$ equals
\begin{eqnarray} f_{n,n}=\sqrt{N_0\left(2^{R^{\mathrm{user}}}-1\right)},\quad 1\leq n\leq N. \end{eqnarray}
Although with the sum-rate maximization some user-rates may be decreased with a larger $\nu$ as shown in Corollary 1, for minimum user-rate maximization, $R^{\mathrm{user}}$ will not be decreased by a larger $\nu$. Further, as the maximal minimum user-rate $R^{\mathrm{user}}$ in (\ref{raten}) is uniquely determined by the values of $\hat{g}_n^{\nu}$, we have the below property.
\begin{property}
The conclusions drawn for sum-rate $R^{\mathrm{sum}}$ in Property 2 also stand for minimum user-rate $R^{\mathrm{user}}$.
\end{property}
\subsection{Optimal User-Orderings}
By permuting the order of the $N$ users with an $N\!\times\!N$ permutation matrix $\vec{Q}$, the received signal model (\ref{md1}) reads
\begin{eqnarray} \label{md4} \vec{Q}\vec{y} =\vec{Q}\vec{H}\vec{P}\vec{x}+\vec{Q}\vec{z}.\end{eqnarray}
Changing the order of the users may impact\footnote{This is true for cases $0\!<\!\nu\!<\!N$. For $\nu\!=\!0$, i.e., the linear ZF precoder, as the inter-user interferences are completely nulled out, different user-orderings have no impact on both the sum-rate or minimum user-rate maximizations.} the optimizations in (\ref{prbm3}) and (\ref{prbm4}), due to that the matrix $\vec{G}$ is updated with $\tilde{\vec{G}}\!=\!\vec{Q}\vec{G}\vec{Q}^{\dag}$ and the power constraint changes to,
\begin{eqnarray} \label{con3} \mathrm{Tr}\left(\vec{F}^{\dag}\tilde{\vec{G}}\vec{F}\right)\leq P_{\mathrm{T}},\end{eqnarray}
Denoting the set that comprises all possible user-orderings as $\mathcal{P}$, and as the size $|\mathcal{P}|\!=\!N!$, it is infeasible to find an optimal ordering in a brute-force manner for large values of $N$. Therefore, we next introduce two efficient suboptimal user-ordering algorithms for the sum-rate and the minimum user-rate maximizations for $0\!<\!\nu\!<\!N$ that have complexity orders $\mathcal{O}\left({N}\choose{\nu\!+\!1}\right)$ and $\mathcal{O}(N)$, respectively. We start with the user-ordering for the sum-rate maximization (\ref{prbm3}). From (\ref{dual1}), the optimal user-ordering $\mathcal{U}\!\in\!\mathcal{P}$ shall minimize the product\footnote{Without loss of generality, we assume $\lambda \hat{g}_{n,n}\!\geq\!1$ holds for all users for both sum-rate and minimum user-rate maximizations.},
\begin{eqnarray} \label {p} \mathcal{U}^{\mathrm{opt}}=\mathop{\arg\min}_{\mathcal{U}\in\mathcal{P}}\lambda ^N\prod_{n=1}^{N}\hat{g}_{n}^{\nu}. \end{eqnarray}
Denoting $q\!=\!\prod\limits_{n=1}^{N}\hat{g}_{n}^{\nu}$ and since
\begin{eqnarray} \lambda=\left(\frac{ P_{\mathrm{T}}}{N_0}+\sum_{n=1}^{N}\hat{g}_{n}^{\nu}\right)^{-1}\leq\left(\frac{ P_{\mathrm{T}}}{N_0}+N q^{\frac{1}{N}}\right)^{-1}, \notag \end{eqnarray}
it holds that
\begin{eqnarray} \label{p1} \lambda ^N q\leq\left(\frac{ P_{\mathrm{T}}}{N_0 q^{\frac{1}{N}}}+N\right)^{-N}. \end{eqnarray} \notag
Instead of directly minimizing (\ref{p}), from (\ref{p1}) we can minimize the product $q$ instead. On the other hand, from (\ref{Gn1}) and utilizing the matrix determinant lemma \cite{D08}, $\hat{g}_{n}^{\nu}$ can be rewritten as
$ \hat{g}_{n}^{\nu}\!=\!\det{\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}}/\det{\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}}$, and $q$ equals
\begin{eqnarray} \label{prod2} q=\prod_{n=1}^{N}\frac{\det{\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}}}{\det{\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}}} . \end{eqnarray}
By noticing that the sub-matrix $\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}$ comprises $\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}$ and an extra row and column vectors corresponding to the $n$th user, we can recursively order the users according to (\ref{prod2}) as follows.
At a first stage, to minimize $\hat{g}_{1}^{\nu}$ we first find the best $\nu\!+\!1$ users that minimize $\det{\vec{G}_{1}^{\nu}}$, which needs to search over in total ${N}\choose{\nu\!+\!1}$ possible user combinations\footnote{Note that, the ordering of the $\nu\!+\!1$ users inside each combination is independent with $\det{\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}}$ since the determinant is invariant under the operation that permutes the row and column vectors in the same manner.}. We denote the index set of the obtained $\nu\!+\!1$ users as $\mathcal{J}_1$. Then, in a second step, we select one single user from the chosen $\nu\!+\!1$ users that maximize $\det{\vec{G}_2^{\nu-1}}$, where $\det{\vec{G}_2^{\nu-1}}$ is obtained by removing the corresponding row and column vectors of the selected user in $\vec{G}_{1}^{\nu}$. One such user is selected to be the first user and set $\mathcal{U}(1)$ to its user-index.
At a second stage, we continue to order the remaining $N\!-\!1$ users, with $\nu$ users within the index set $\mathcal{J}_2\!=\!\mathcal{J}_1\!\setminus \mathcal{U}(1)$. In order to minimize $\hat{g}_{2}^{\nu}$, we first add another user from the remaining $N\!-\!\nu\!-\!1$ users to the $\nu$ users in $\mathcal{J}_2$ and calculate $\det\vec{G}_{2}^{\nu}$ corresponding to the selected $\nu\!+\!1$ users. The user from the remaining $N\!-\!\nu\!-\!1$ users that minimize $\det{\vec{G}_{2}^{\nu}}$ is selected, which needs $N\!-\!\nu\!-\!1$ operations. We update $\mathcal{J}_1$ as $\mathcal{J}_2$ plus the selected user-index. Then, we repeat the second step at the first stage to select one user from $\mathcal{J}_2$ (not $\mathcal{J}_1$ in order to keep the value of $\hat{g}_{1}^{\nu}$ unchanged) to maximize $\det{\vec{G}_{3}^{\nu-1}}$, and set $\mathcal{U}(2)$ to the index of that user.
\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{algorithm}[ht!]
\caption{User-ordering for sum-rate maximization with the GZF-DP precoder.}
\label{alg:2}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\vspace{1mm}
\STATE Initialize $n\!=\!1$ and $\mathcal{I}_1\!=\!\mathcal{I}_2\!=\![1,2,\cdots,N]$. \\
\STATE Search over all ${N}\choose{\nu\!+\!1}$ possible combinations to find the best $\nu\!+\!1$ users that minimizes the determinant of the principle sub-matrix $\det{\vec{G}_{1}^{\nu}}$ introduced by their indexes, and denote the best user-combination as $\mathcal{J}_1$, then set $\mathcal{J}_2\!=\!\mathcal{J}_1$.\\
\STATE Select one single user from all users in $\mathcal{J}_2$ to maximize $\det{\vec{G}_{2}^{\nu-1}}$, and denote its user-index as $\mathcal{U}(n)$.\\
\STATE Update $\mathcal{I}_1\!=\!\mathcal{I}_1\!\setminus\!\mathcal{U}(n)$, $\mathcal{J}_2\!=\!\mathcal{J}_1\!\setminus\!\mathcal{U}(n)$, $\mathcal{I}_2\!=\!\mathcal{I}_1\!\setminus\!\mathcal{J}_2$, and set $n\!=\!n\!+\!1$.\\
\STATE Replace the index $\mathcal{U}(n\!-\!1)$ in $\mathcal{J}_1$ with another user-index from the $N\!-\!\nu\!-\!n$ users in $\mathcal{I}_2$, such that $\det{\vec{G}_{n}^{\nu}}$ introduced by the updated $\mathcal{J}_1$ is minimized, and keep the updated $\mathcal{J}_1$. \\
\STATE Repeat Step 3-5 until $\mathcal{I}_2$ is empty. Then, recursively order the remaining $\nu$ users such that $\det{\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}}$ is maximized at each stage. \\
\STATE Output the user-ordering $\mathcal{U}$.\\
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\vspace{-4mm}
Then, we update $\mathcal{J}_2\!=\!\mathcal{J}_1\!\setminus\!\mathcal{U}(2)$, and continue to order the remaining $N\!-\!2$ users in the same way until we finish the ordering of all users. Notice that, for the last $\nu$ users, we only need to recursively select the best user that maximizes $\det{\vec{G}_{n+1}^{\nu-1}}$. Such an algorithm is summarized in Algorithm 1.
Next, we analyze the user-ordering for the minimum user-rate maximization, which renders a simpler user-ordering algorithm. From (\ref{trace4}), it holds that
\begin{eqnarray} \sum_{n=1}^{N}\hat{g}_{n}^{\nu}\left(2^{R^{\mathrm{user}}}-1\right)\leq \frac{P_{\mathrm{T}}}{N_0}. \end{eqnarray}
Therefore, the optimal user-ordering that maximizes $R^{\mathrm{user}}$ shall minimize the sum of $\hat{g}_{n}^{\nu}$,
\begin{eqnarray} \mathcal{U}^{\mathrm{opt}}=\mathop{\arg\min}_{\mathcal{U}\in\mathcal{P}}\sum_{n=1}^{N}\hat{g}_{n}^{\nu}. \end{eqnarray}
As for the last user, $\hat{g}_{N}^{\nu}\!=\!g_{N, N}$ holds, we can select the user that has the smallest diagonal element $g_{n, n}$ to be the last user $\mathcal{U}(N)$. Then, for the second last user, as
\begin{eqnarray} \hat{g}_{N-1}^{\nu}=g_{N-1, N-1}-\frac{|g_{N-1, N}|^2}{g_{N, N}}, \end{eqnarray}
we can choose the user that has the second smallest diagonal element $g_{n, n}$ to be the second last user $\mathcal{U}(N\!-\!1)$. Recursively, based on (\ref{hatg}), the users can be ordered in a descending order of $g_{n, n}$, which is summarized in Algorithm 2.
\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{User-ordering for minimum user-rate maximization with the GZF-DP precoder.}
\label{alg:3}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\vspace{1mm}
\STATE Order the user according to the descending order of the diagonal element $g_{n, n}$.
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\vspace{-4mm}
\section{Empirical Results}
In this section, simulation results are presented to show the promising performance of the proposed GZF-DP precoder for both the sum-rate and minimum user-rate maximizations. The sum-rate of the optimal DPC \cite{JV04} serve as the upper-bound, while the sum-rate and minimum user-rate of the linear ZF precoder serve as lower-bounds. For comparisons, we also present the rates of the UG-DP precoder in \cite{ML16} for sum-rate maximizations, which are inferior to the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!N_g\!-\!1$ and similar DPC complexity. In all simulations, we set the noise power $N_0\!=\!1$ and test under Rayleigh fading channels that are based on the Kronecker correlation model
\begin{eqnarray} \vec{H}\!=\!\vec{R}_{\mathrm{R}}^{1/2}\vec{H}_{\mathrm{IID}}\vec{R}_{\mathrm{T}}^{1/2},\end{eqnarray}
where $N\!\times\!M$ matrices $\vec{H}_{\mathrm{IID}}$ denote IID complex Gaussian channels with zero mean and a covariance matrix being an identity matrix. The $M\!\times\!M$ matrix $\vec{R}_{\mathrm{T}}$ and $N\!\times\!N$ matrix $\vec{R}_{\mathrm{R}}$ denote the correlations at the transmit and receive sides, respectively. We use an exponential correlation model \cite{S01} for both $\vec{R}_{\mathrm{T}}$ and $\vec{R}_{\mathrm{R}}$, which is defined as
{\setlength\arraycolsep{2pt} \begin{eqnarray}\vec{R}\!=\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}\!1&\beta&\cdots&\cdots&\beta^{K-1}\\ \beta&1&\beta&\cdots&\beta^{K-2}\\ \vdots&\ddots&\ddots&\ddots&\vdots\\
\vdots&\ddots&\ddots&\ddots&\beta\\
\beta^{K-1}&\beta^{K-2}&\cdots&\beta&1\end{array}\right]\!,\end{eqnarray}}
\hspace*{-1.4mm}where $K\!=\!M$, $\beta\!=\!\beta_{\mathrm{T}}$ and $K\!=\!N$, $\beta\!=\!\beta_{\mathrm{R}}$ for transmit and receive correlation, respectively.
\subsection{Optimal Orderings}
In Fig. \ref{fig1}, we evaluate the sum-rate with the channel given in Example 1 for all possible $4!\!=\!24$ user-ordering schemes in $\mathcal{P}$. As it can be seen that, different user-orderings provide different sum-rate for $1\!\leq\!\nu\!\leq\!3$.
\begin{figure}[b]
\vspace*{-10mm}
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0mm}
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics{Example1.pdf}}
\vspace*{-8mm}
\caption{\label{fig1} The sum-rate of the GZF-DP precoder with different $\nu$ evaluated with $N_0\!=\!1$ and $P_{\mathrm{T}}\!=\!10$ dB. }
\vspace*{-6mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{fig2}, we evaluate the performance of Algorithm 1 for user-ordering for the sum-rate maximization with $M\!=\!N\!=\!5$ and under IID complex Gaussian channels, that is, $\beta_{\mathrm{T}}\!=\!\beta_{\mathrm{R}}\!=\!0$. The optimal ordering utilizes the brute-force method to select one best user-ordering over all $5!\!=\!120$ possible combinations under each channel realization. The average sum-rate averages the sum-rate over all 120 user-orderings in $\mathcal{P}$. As can be seen, the proposed user-ordering performs 0.5 to 1 dB better than the averaged sum-rate in terms of transmit power $P_{\mathrm{T}}$.
In Fig. \ref{fig3}, we evaluate the performance of Algorithm 2 for user-ordering for the minimum user-rate maximization with $M\!=\!N\!=\!6$ and under IID complex Gaussian channels. As can be seen, the proposed Algorithm 2 performs around 1 dB better than the averaged sum-rate in terms of transmit power $P_{\mathrm{T}}$, and quite close to the optimal user-ordering that is selected over $6!\!=\!720$ possible schemes in $\mathcal{P}$ with brute-force method for each channel realization.
\subsection{Sum-rate Maximization}
Next we evaluate the sum-rate maximizations with $M\!=\!N\!=\!8$. In Fig. \ref{fig4} we simulate under IID complex Gaussian channels. As can be seen, the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!1$ renders around 1.5 dB and 4 dB gains compared to the UG-DP precoder and the linear ZF precoder in terms of transmit power $P_{\mathrm{T}}$, respectively. With $\nu\!=\!3$, which means that in the effective channel we preserve at most interference from 3 other users for each of the users, the GZF-DP precoder is only less than 1.5 dB away from the optimal DPC, and performs quite close to the ZF-DP precoder \cite{CS03}, i.e., the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!7$.
In Fig. \ref{fig5}, we repeat the tests in Fig. \ref{fig4} under Rayleigh fading channels with correlation factors $\beta_{\mathrm{T}}\!=\!0.2$ and $\beta_{\mathrm{R}}\!=\!0.8$. As can be seen, the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!1$ renders around 2 dB and 5 dB gains compared to the UG-DP and ZF precoders in this case, respectively. The $P_{\mathrm{T}}$ gains of the GZF-DP precoder are larger than those gains as in Fig. \ref{fig4}, due to the fact that the MISO broadcast channels are correlated in this case. Moreover, we also evaluate the GZF-DP precoder with user-ordering based on Algorithm 1. For the UG-DP precoder, we use the brute-force method to select the optimal user-ordering under each channel realization. As it can be seen, with user-orderings both the GZF-DP and UG-DP precoders renders higher sum-rates. But still, even with the optimal user-ordering, the UG-DP precoder is 1.5 dB away from the proposed GZF-DP precoder without user-ordering.
\begin{figure}[t]
\vspace*{-4mm}
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0mm}
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics{OptOrder_sumrate_1.pdf}}
\vspace*{-8mm}
\caption{\label{fig2} The sum-rate of the proposed Algorithm 1 for user-ordering with the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!1$ (the left figure) and $\nu\!=\!2$ (the right figure) for $M\!=\!N=5$. }
\vspace*{-6mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\vspace*{-6mm}
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0mm}
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics{OptOrder_userrate.pdf}}
\vspace*{-8mm}
\caption{\label{fig3} The user-rates of the proposed Algorithm 2 for user-ordering with the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!1$ (the left figure) and $\nu\!=\!2$ (the right figure) for $M\!=\!N\!=6$. }
\vspace*{-10mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\vspace*{-4mm}
\begin{center}
\hspace*{16mm}
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics{N8M8_NoCorr.pdf}}
\vspace*{-34mm}
\caption{\label{fig4}The sum-rate maximization with $M\!=\!N\!=\!8$ under IID complex Gaussian channels.}
\vspace*{-6mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\vspace*{-6mm}
\hspace*{16mm}
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics{N8M8_Corr_tx0p2_Rx0p8_Ordering.pdf}}
\vspace*{-34mm}
\caption{\label{fig5}The sum-rate maximization with $M\!=\!N\!=\!8$ under Rayleigh-fading channels and $\beta_{\mathrm{T}}\!=\!0.2$ and $\beta_{\mathrm{R}}\!=\!0.8$}
\vspace*{-10mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\vspace*{-4mm}
\begin{center}
\hspace*{16mm}
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics{N8M8_NoCorr_Userrate.pdf}}
\vspace*{-34mm}
\caption{\label{fig6}Repeat the test in Fig. \ref{fig4} for minimum user-rate maximization under IID complex Gaussian channels.}
\vspace*{-6mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\vspace*{-6mm}
\begin{center}
\hspace*{0mm}
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics{N8M8_Corr_tx0p2_Rx0p8_Userrate.pdf}}
\vspace*{-8mm}
\caption{\label{fig7}Repeat the test in Fig. \ref{fig5} for minimum user-rate maximization under Rayleigh-fading channels.}
\vspace*{-10mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Minimum User-rate Maximization}
Next we evaluate the minimum user-rate maximizations with $M\!=\!N\!=\!8$ and repeat the tests in Fig. \ref{fig4} and Fig. \ref{fig5}, respectively. As can be seen, in Fig. \ref{fig6} the proposed GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!1$ is around 2 dB better than the linear ZF precoder, while in Fig. \ref{fig7} the gain is more than 4 dB due to spatial correlated channels. In addition, in both cases, the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!3$ performs close to the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!7$, i.e., the ZF-DP precoder.
\begin{figure}[t]
\vspace*{-4mm}
\begin{center}
\hspace*{0mm}
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics{M24_Nchanges_NoCorr_sumrate.pdf}}
\vspace*{-8mm}
\caption{\label{fig8}The sum-rate maximization with $M\!=\!24$ and different number of users $N$ under IID complex Gaussian channels. Note that the transmit power is constant no matter the number of users $N$.}
\vspace*{-6mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\vspace*{-6mm}
\begin{center}
\hspace*{16mm}
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics{M8N8_Corrchanges_NoCorr_sumrate.pdf}}
\vspace*{-34mm}
\caption{\label{fig9}The sum-rate maximization with $M\!=\!N\!=\!8$ under Rayleigh-fading channels. The correlation factors $\beta_{\mathrm{T}}\!=\!\beta_{\mathrm{R}}$, and change from 0.1 to 0.9.}
\vspace*{-10mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\vspace*{-4mm}
\begin{center}
\hspace*{0mm}
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics{M24_Nchanges_NoCorr_Userrate_2.pdf}}
\vspace*{-8mm}
\caption{\label{fig10}Repeat the tests in Fig. \ref{fig8} for user-rate maximization.}
\vspace*{-6mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\vspace*{-6mm}
\begin{center}
\hspace*{0mm}
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics{M8N8_CorrChange_Userrate_1.pdf}}
\vspace*{-8mm}
\caption{\label{fig11}Repeat the tests in Fig. \ref{fig9} for user-rate maximization.}
\vspace*{-10mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Impact of the Number of Users and Correlation Factors}
Next we evaluate the impacts of increasing the number of users and the spatial correlation factors. In all simulations, we set the total transmit power $P_{\mathrm{T}}\!=\!10$ dB. In Fig. \ref{fig8}, we set the number of transmit antennas $M\!=\!24$ and increase the user number $N$ from 4 to 24. As can be seen, as the number of users increases, the sum-rate first increases and then decreases both for the linear ZF precoder and the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!<\!N\!-\!1$. This is so, since as $N$ increases the degrees of freedom (DoF) for the precoder designs also increase and consequently the sum-rate is getting higher. However, the inter-user interference increased with a larger $N$ causes sum-rate degradation for small values of $\nu$. Nevertheless, it can be seen that the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!1$ renders the same sum-rate as the ZF precoder with one user less.
In Fig. \ref{fig9}, we set $M\!=\!N\!=\!8$ and $\beta_{\mathrm{T}}\!=\!\beta_{\mathrm{R}}\!=\!\beta$. We increase $\beta$ from 0.1 to 0.9. As can be seen, as $\beta$ gets higher, the sum-rate decreases for all precoders. At low and medium correlations, the GZF-DP precoder shows significant gains over the linear ZF precoder. For instance, the GZF-DP precoder with $\beta\!=\!0.5$ renders the same sum-rate as the linear ZF precoder with $\beta\!=\!0$. Therefore, the GZF-DP precoder is more robust against the transmit and receive correlations compared to the linear ZF precoder. In addition, with the user-ordering proposed in Algorithm 1 the correlation gain is even larger.
In Fig. \ref{fig10}, we repeat the tests in Fig. \ref{fig8} for minimum user-rate maximizations. As can be seen, unlike the cases of the sum-rate maximizations, as the number of users increases, the user-rates of all precoder designs decrease. We also present a contour line of the sum-rate, which shows that the sum-rate also decreases when $N$ is close to $M$. For large $N$, we can see that the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!1$ renders the same user-rate as the linear ZF precoder with one user less.
In Fig. \ref{fig11}, we repeat the tests in Fig. \ref{fig9} for minimum user-rate maximizations. As can be seen, as the correlation factor $\beta$ gets higher, the user-rates also decrease for all precoders. The GZF-DP precoder again shows superior performance compared to the linear ZF precoder, and is more robust against transmit and receive correlations.
\subsection{Practical FD-MIMO Scenario}
At last, we evaluate the proposed GZF-DP precoder in an FD-MIMO downlink scenario considering a 3D channel model \cite{KJ03}. The test scenario is depicted in Fig. \ref{fig12}, where we have an $8\!\times\!8$ 2D antenna-array deployed at an e-NodeB that is 20 meters above the ground. The spacing between to adjacent antenna elements (both in horizontal and vertical dimensions) is 1/2 wave-length. The e-NodeB broadcasts at 2.4 GHz to 8 single-antenna users that are placed along a line which is perpendicular to the 2D antenna-plane. The distance between two adjacent users is 10 meters and the first user is 20 meters away from the e-NodeB. For simplicity, we consider an ideal line-of-sight (LOS) situation with channels constructed from the free-space path loss.
As shown in Fig. \ref{fig13}, the sum-rate of the proposed GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!1$ is much higher than that of the linear ZF precoder. And with $\nu\!=\!3$ the GZF-DP precoder significantly outperforms the UG-DP precoder with $N_g\!=\!4$. Moreover, the GZF-DP precoder with $\nu\!=\!3$ also performs close to the ZF-DP precoder which requires a full successive DPC scheme.
\begin{figure}[t]
\vspace*{-4mm}
\begin{center}
\hspace*{0mm}
\scalebox{0.65}{\includegraphics{3DMIMO.pdf}}
\vspace*{-5mm}
\caption{\label{fig12}An FD-MIMO scenario where an e-NodeB equipped with an $8\!\times\!8$ 2D antenna-array is broadcasting to 8 lined-up single-antenna users.}
\vspace*{-6mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\vspace*{-6mm}
\begin{center}
\hspace*{16mm}
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics{Sumrate_3DMIMO.pdf}}
\vspace*{-34mm}
\caption{\label{fig13}The sum-rate maximization for the FD-MIMO scenario considered in Fig. \ref{fig12}.}
\vspace*{-10mm}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Summary}
We have proposed a generalized zero-forcing precoder (GZF) in conjunction with successive dirty-paper coding (DPC), namely, the GZF-DP precoder, for multi-input-single-output (MISO) broadcast channels. Utilizing the successive DPC encoding scheme at the transmitter to cancel the known non-causal interference, the GZF-DP precoder preserves up to $\nu$ interferers for each of the users and results in significant rate-increments. We analyze optimal designs of the proposed GZF-DP precoder both for sum-rate and minimum user-rate maximizations. The optimal GZF-DP precoder designs are solved in closed-forms in relation to optimal power allocations. For the sum-rate maximization, the optimal power allocation can be efficiently found with modified water-filling schemes introduced by inter-user interference, while for the minimum user-rate maximization, the optimal power allocation is solved in closed-from. We have also derived two efficient and low-complexity user-ordering algorithms for the GZF-DP precoder for the sum-rate and minimum user-rate maximizations, respectively. We show through numerical results that, the proposed GZF-DP precoder yields both much higher sum-rate and minimum user-rate compared to the traditional linear ZF precoder and the previous user-grouping based DPC (UG-DP) precoder, and is close to the ZF with full complexity DPC (ZF-DP) precoder.
|
\section{About "quotes"}
\title{Memory effects on epidemic evolution: The susceptible-infected-recovered epidemic model}
\author{M. Saeedian}
\affiliation{Department of Physics, Shahid Beheshti University, G.C., Evin, Tehran 19839, Iran}
\author{M. Khalighi}
\affiliation{Department of Physics, Shahid Beheshti University, G.C., Evin, Tehran 19839, Iran}
\author{N. Azimi-Tafreshi}
\affiliation{Physics Department, Institute for Advanced Studies in Basic Sciences, 45195-1159 Zanjan, Iran}
\author{G.~R. Jafari}
\affiliation{Department of Physics, Shahid Beheshti University, G.C., Evin, Tehran 19839, Iran}
\affiliation{School of Biological Sciences, Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM), Tehran, Iran}
\affiliation{Center for Network Science, Central European University, H-1051, Budapest, Hungary}
\author{M. Ausloos}
\affiliation{GRAPES, rue de la Belle Jardini\`ere 483, B-4031, Angleur, Belgium}
\affiliation{ School of Management, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester, LE1 7RH, United Kingdom}
\affiliation{ eHumanities group, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Joan Muyskenweg 25, 1096 CJ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands}
\date{\today}
\begin{abstract}
Memory has a great impact on the evolution of every process related to human societies. Among them, the evolution of an epidemic is directly related to the individuals' experiences. Indeed, any real epidemic process is clearly sustained by a non-Markovian dynamics: memory effects play an essential role in the spreading of diseases.
Including memory effects in the susceptible-infected-recovered (SIR) epidemic model seems very appropriate for such an investigation. Thus, the memory prone SIR model dynamics is investigated using fractional derivatives.
The decay of long-range memory, taken as a power-law function, is directly controlled by the order of the fractional derivatives in the corresponding nonlinear fractional differential evolution equations.
Here we assume ``fully mixed'' approximation and show that the epidemic threshold is shifted to higher values than those for the memoryless system, depending on this memory ``length'' decay exponent.
We also consider the SIR model on structured networks and study the effect of topology on threshold points in a non-Markovian dynamics. Furthermore, the lack of access to the precise information about the initial conditions or the past events plays a very relevant role in the correct estimation or prediction of the epidemic evolution. Such a ``constraint'' is analyzed and discussed.
\end{abstract}
\pacs{87.23.Ge, 05.30.Pr, 05.70.Fh}
\maketitle
\section{Introduction}
\label{s1}
The study of epidemiology, concerning the dynamical evolution of diseases within a population, has attracted much interest during the recent years \cite{review}. Mathematical models of infectious diseases have been developed in order to integrate realistic aspects of disease spreading \cite{mathematicalmodels,models2,models3,models4}. A simple and commonly studied model, introduced by Kermack and McKendrick, is the susceptible-infected-recovered (SIR) model \cite{Kermack}. In this model, populations can be in each of three states: susceptible, infected and recovered (removed), denoted by S, I and R, respectively. Originally, it is assumed that susceptible individuals become infected with a rate proportional to the fraction of infected individuals in the overall population (fully mixed approximation) and infected individuals recover at a constant rate. The epidemic process presents a (percolation) transition between a phase, in which the disease outbreak reaches a finite fraction of the population, and a phase with only a limited number of infected individuals \cite{Grassberger,Stauffer}.
The model has also been investigated for population on lattices (e.g. \cite{rhodes1996persistence,sander2003epidemic,tome2010critical}) or on networks (e.g. \cite{may2001infection,volz2007susceptible,parshani2010epidemic}).
For simplicity, we will keep the ``medical epidemic'' vocabulary hereafter. However, the model has also been interesting for describing nonmedical epidemics, such as for financial bubbles \cite{rotundo1,rotundo2}, migration \cite{ACSmigration}, opinion formation \cite{zhao2013sir,nizamani2014public} or internet ``worm propagation'' \cite{liljenstam2002mixed,kim2004measurement,mishra2010fuzzy}. SIR models with distributed delay and with discrete delay have also been studied \cite{beretta1995global,mccluskey2010complete}.
In the usual SIR model, it is assumed that all contacts transmit the disease with the same probability. Moreover, the transmission and recovery coefficients are constant. Hence the state of system at each time does not depend on the previous history of the system: it is a memoryless, so-called Markovian, process.
However, real surveys show evidence of a non-Markovian spreading process \cite{real,real2} in agreement with common expectation. The epidemic processes evolution and control, in human societies, cannot be considered without any memory effect. When a disease spreads within a human population, the experience or knowledge of individuals about that disease should affect their response \cite{models4}. If people know about the history of a certain disease in the area where they live, they use different precautions, such as vaccination, when possible. Thus, some endogenous controlled suppression of the spreading is expected, although other factors can help \cite{ecobichon1990chemical,wamai2008male,legreve2010preventing}.
However, knowledge about the history of a disease does not have the same influence at all times. Experience about the prevalence of a disease and precautions related to the ``old times'' are not always applicable or recommended, hence people tend to follow new strategies against the diseases. In other words, memory of the earlier times could have less effect on the present situation, as compared to more recent times. It can be expected that long-range memory effects decay in time more slowly than an exponential decay, but can typically behave like a power-law damping function.
While much effort has been made so far to determine exact epidemic thresholds in Markovian epidemic models \cite{threshold,threshold1,threshold2,thresholdNewmanPRE,stanley}, few works have been devoted to study the non-Markovian aspects of epidemic processes \cite{non-markov1,non-markov2}. Furthermore, in this work we focus on long-range memory effects, which means arbitrarily long history can be included. That is in contrast to short-term memory effects which have been extensively studied. For instance, Dodds and Watts \cite{Dodds} introduced a general model of contagion considering memory of past exposures to a contagious influence. The authors have argued that their model can fall into one of three universal classes, due to the behavior of fixed point curves. Also, in \cite{SIRSIR, Nature, SISSIS}, the authors consider ``implicit memory'' by applying asynchronous adapting in disease propagation. They show that this type of memory can lead to a first-order phase transition in outbreaks , thus hysteresis can arise in such models \cite{SISSIS}.
It is here briefly recalled that fractional calculus is a valuable tool to observe the influence of memory effects on the dynamics of systems \cite{Herrmann,West,Metzler,Hadis2}, and has been recently used in epidemiological models \cite{SIRfrac1,SIRfrac4,SIRfrac5,SIRfrac6}.
Typically, the evolution of epidemiological models is described with differential equations, the derivatives being of integer order. By replacing the ordinary time derivative by a fractional derivative, a time correlation function or memory kernel appears, thereby making the state of the system dependent on all past states. Thus, it seems that such a method based on derivatives with non-integer order, as introduced by Caputo for geophysics problems \cite{Caputo}, is a very proper formalism for such non-Markovian problems. Moreover, Caputo's formalism provides the advantage that it is not
necessary to define the fractional order initial conditions, when solving such differential equations \cite{Caputo,Podlubny,Podlubny1,fracappl}. Furthermore, the time correlation function, in the definition of Caputo fractional derivative, is a power-law function, which is flexible enough to reflect the fact that the contribution of more early states is noticeably less relevant than the contribution of more recent ones on the present state of the dynamical system.
Most of the previous works have studied the epidemiological models with fractional order differential equations, from a
mathematical point of view. They mainly focused on presenting effective a mathematical methods in order to solve the corresponding differential equations \cite{SIRfrac4,Awawdeh,Young,AAM}. For instance in \cite{AAM} a mathematical tool (the multi step generalized differential transform method) is introduced to approximate the numerical solution of the SIR model with fractional differential equations. Also in \cite{SIRfrac5} the authors use fractional order differential equations for epidemic models and concentrate on the equilibrium
points of the models and their asymptotic stability of differential equations of fractional
order. Other variations of the SIR model with fractional derivatives have also been studied. For instance, Seo, \textit{et al}. introduced the SIR epidemic model with square root interaction of the susceptible and infected individuals and discussed the local stability analysis of the model \cite{Young}. Also in \cite{SIRfrac4}, numerical solution of the SIR epidemic model of fractional order with two levels of infection for the transmission of viruses in a computer network has been presented.
In all previous works, the authors rarely discuss the effect of fractional order
differential equations and memory on the epidemic thresholds and the macroscopic behavior of epidemic outbreaks. Hence, one question remains; we address it in this paper: How does the system robustness change if memory is included in the SIR model? We also use the fractional differential equations, describing the SIR model on structured networks, to see the effect of topology on the evolution of the SIR model including memory effects.
Furthermore the lack of access to accurate information on initial conditions sometimes leads to doubt about epidemic evolution predictions \cite{Shirazi}. The same type of difficulty occurs in related problems, such as in opinion formation \cite{caram1,CaramCaifaAusloosProtoPRE}. Moreover, it may also happen in certain cases that individuals do not believe in old strategies in order to avoid the disease.
This means that the initial time for taking into account the disease control memory is shifted toward more recent times: thereafter, the dynamics is evolving with a new fraction of susceptible and infected individuals, different from that predicted by the solution of the differential equations. In contrast, the fractional calculus method allows us to choose any arbitrary initial time at which the effect of initial conditions can be introduced on the spreading dynamics with a memory content. The interest of fractional calculus will appear through such aspects in the core of the paper.
Thus, the paper is organized as follows. In Sec. \ref{s2}, following Caputo's approach, we convert the differential equations of the standard SIR model to the fractional derivatives, thereby allowing us to consider memory effects. Using numerical analysis results (Sec. \ref{s3}), we discuss the influence of memory on the epidemic thresholds in Sec. \ref{s3finitetime}. We also discuss the dynamics of a non-Markovian epidemic process, when choosing different initial conditions or modifying the proportions of agents at a given time in Sec. \ref{s3initialconditions}. To complete our discussion, we study the dynamics of the model on structured networks in Sec.~\ref{s4}. We also point out that we have observed qualitatively similar results for the SIS (susceptible-infected-susceptible) epidemic model. The conclusions are found in Sec.~\ref{s5}.
\section{memorial Process to Fractional equation}
\label{s2}
The evolution of the standard SIR model is described by a set of coupled ordinary differential equations for susceptible ($S$), infected ($I$), and recovered($R$) individuals, respectively given by,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{SIR eq1}
\nonumber
\frac{dS(t)}{dt}&=& -\beta S(t)I(t),\nonumber \\
\frac{dI(t)}{dt}&=& \beta S(t)I(t)-\gamma I(t),\nonumber \\
\frac{dR(t)}{dt}&=& \gamma I(t),
\end{eqnarray}
in which, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ are infection and recovery coefficients, respectively. The infected individual makes $\beta$ contacts per unit time producing new infections within a mean infectious time of order $1/\gamma$. The evolution of the model is controlled by quantity $\beta/\gamma$, such that above the epidemic threshold, $(\beta/\gamma)_c$, the disease spreads among a finite fraction of individuals.
These (ordinary) differential equations describe a Markov epidemic process, in which the state of individuals at each time step does not depend on previous steps.
The set of Eqs.~(\ref{SIR eq1}) can be solved iteratively until time $t$. In particular, the fraction of susceptible individuals at time $t$, denoted as $S_t$, can be determined. In fact, $1-S_t$ is the size of outbreaks, i.e. the population that has or has had the disease until time $t$.
In order to observe the influence of memory effects, first we rewrite the differential equations (\ref{SIR eq1}) in terms of time dependent integrals as follows,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{SIR eq2}
\frac{dS(t)}{dt}&=&- \beta \int_{t_{0}}^{t} \kappa (t-t^{'})S(t^{'})I(t^{'})dt^{'},\nonumber\\
\frac{dI(t)}{dt}&=& \int_{t_{0}}^{t} \kappa (t-t^{'})\Big(\beta S(t^{'})I(t^{'})-\gamma I(t^{'})\Big)dt^{'},\nonumber\\
\frac{dR(t)}{dt}&=& \gamma \int_{t_{0}}^{t}\kappa (t-t^{'})I(t^{'})dt^{'},
\end{eqnarray}
in which, $\kappa(t-t^{'})$ plays the role of a time-dependent kernel and is equal to a delta function $\delta(t-t^{'})$ in a classical Markov process. In fact, any arbitrary function can be replaced by a sum of delta functions, thereby leading to a given type of time correlations. A proper choice, in order to include long-term memory effects, can be a power-law function which exhibits a slow decay such that the state of the system at quite early times also contributes to the evolution of the system. This type of kernel guarantees the existence of scaling features as it is often intrinsic in most natural phenomena.
Thus, let us consider the following power-law correlation function for $\kappa(t-t^{'})$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{SIR eq2a}
\kappa(t-t{'})=\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha -1) }(t-t^{'})^{\alpha-2},
\end{eqnarray}
in which $0<\alpha\leq1$ and $\Gamma(x)$ denotes the Gamma function. The choice of the coefficient $1/\Gamma{(\alpha-1)}$ and exponent $(\alpha-2)$ allows us to rewrite Eqs.~(2) to the form of fractional differential equations with the Caputo-type derivative.
If this kernel is substituted into Eqs.~(\ref{SIR eq2}), the right hand side of the equations, by definition are fractional integrals of order $(\alpha-1)$ on the interval $[t_0,t]$, denoted by $_{t_0}\! \!D_t^{-(\alpha-1)}$. Applying a fractional Caputo derivative of order $\alpha-1$ on both sides of each Eq.~(\ref{SIR eq2}), and using the fact the Caputo fractional derivative and fractional integral are inverse operators, the following fractional differential equations can be obtained for the SIR model:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{SIR eq3}
_{t_0}^c\! \!D_t^{\alpha}S(t)&=&-\beta S(t)I(t),\nonumber\\
_{t_0}^c\! \!D_t^{\alpha}I(t)&=&\beta S(t)I(t)-\gamma I(t), \nonumber \\
_{t_0}^c\! \!D_t^{\alpha}R(t)&=&\gamma I(t),
\end{eqnarray}
where, $_{t_0}^c\! \!D_t^{\alpha}$ denotes the Caputo derivative of order $\alpha$, defined for an arbitrary function $y(t)$ as follows \cite{Caputo},
\begin{eqnarray}
_{t_0}^c\! \!D_t^{\alpha}~y(t)=\frac{1}{\Gamma(\alpha-1)}\int_{t_{0}}^{t}\frac{y'(\tau)d\tau}{(t-t_0)^\alpha}
\end{eqnarray}
Hence, the fractional derivatives, when introducing a convolution integral with a power-law memory kernel, are useful to describe memory effects in dynamical systems. The decaying rate of the memory kernel (a time-correlation function) depends on $\alpha$. A lower value of $\alpha$ corresponds to more slowly-decaying time-correlation functions (long memory). Hence, in some sense, the strength (through the " length") of the memory is controlled by $\alpha$. As $\alpha \rightarrow 1$, the influence of memory decreases: the system tends toward a memoryless system.
Note that for simplicity, we assume the same memory contributions (same value of $\alpha$) for different states of $S$, $I$ and $R$. Obviously, more complicated functions than Eq. (\ref{SIR eq2a}) and taking into account different $\alpha_i$ ($i=1,2,3$) could be investigated in further work to take into account different time scales.
Although analytical solutions of Eqs.~(\ref{SIR eq3}) are hard to obtain for the general case, they can be obtained at the early stage of the epidemic under a linearization approximation. In this case, it turns out that the number of infected individuals behaves as a Mittag-Leffler function \cite{Podlubny}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{SIR eq4}
I(t)=E_{\alpha ,\zeta}(t) \equiv\sum_{k} \frac{((\beta -\gamma ) t^{\alpha })^{k}}{\Gamma (\alpha k+\zeta )}
\end{eqnarray}
in which, $\zeta$ is a constant, - which depends on the initial conditions \cite{Podlubny}. In particular, for $\alpha=\zeta=1$, the Mittag-Leffler function is the exponential function.
Thus, in the early stage of epidemic dynamics, the growth rate of the infected population in Eq.~(\ref{SIR eq4}) is positive, if $\beta-\gamma>0$. Therefore, the number of infected individuals grows exponentially in such a case, for $\beta>\gamma$, as of course it is expected for the standard memoryless SIR model. The same reasoning applies in order to determine the epidemic threshold for $\alpha<1$.
\section{Numerical results} \label{s3}
Let it be reemphasized that Eqs.~(\ref{SIR eq3}) consist in a system of coupled non-linear differential equations of fractional order, in the following general form
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{SIR eq5}
_{t_0}^c\! \!D_t^{\alpha}y^{(i)}(t)&=& f^{(i)}(t,y^{(1)}(t),y^{(2)}(t),y^{(3)}(t))\nonumber\\
y^{(i)}(t_0)&=&y^{(i0)},
\end{eqnarray}
where, $i=1,2,3$ and $y^{(1)},y^{(2)},y^{(3)}$ denote $S, I, R$ cases respectively. Also, $y^{(i0)}$ are constants which indicate the initial conditions.
To solve the equations, we use the the predictor corrector
algorithm, which is well known for obtaining a numerical solution of first order problems \cite{Diethelm,Diethelmer,Garrappa}.
It is assumed that there exits a unique solution for each of $y_{(i)}$ on the interval $[0,T]$ for a given set of initial conditions.
Considering a uniform grid $\{ t_{n} = nh : n=0,1,2,...,N\}$, in which $N$ is an integer and $ h\equiv T/N$, each Eq.~(\ref{SIR eq5}) can be rewritten in a discrete form,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{SIR eq6}
y^{(i)}_n=y^{(i)}_0+ h^{\alpha}\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}b_{n-k-1}f^{(i)}_k,
\end{eqnarray}
where the coefficients $b_{n-k-1}$ refer to the contribution of each of the $n-1$ past states on the present state of $n$ . The coefficients are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{SIR eq7}
b_{n-k-1}=\frac{(n-1-k)^{\alpha}-(n-k)^{\alpha}}{\Gamma{(\alpha+1)}}
\end{eqnarray}
Thereby after solving Eq.~(\ref{SIR eq5}), numerically, the influence of memory on the evolution of the SIR epidemic model can be analyzed. As mentioned in the Introduction, let us consider two pertinent aspects successively: the finite time behavior and the role of changing initial conditions.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics[angle=0]{fig1.eps}}
\end{center}
\caption{Outbreak size $1-S_{t}$ for a SIR system having evolved until time $t=100$, vs. the parameter defining the threshold: $\beta/\gamma$, when including memory effects. Each curve corresponds to a different value of $\alpha$, as indicated in the inset. As $\alpha$ decreases, the epidemic threshold $(\beta/\gamma)_c$ shifts to higher values. }
\label{f1}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Epidemic threshold at finite times}\label{s3finitetime}
Let us compare the evolution of a system including memory effects with the memoryless case. We solve Eq.~(\ref{SIR eq5}) with initial conditions $y^{(10)}=S_0=1-\epsilon$, $y^{(20)}=I_0=\epsilon$. Fig.~\ref{f1} shows the size of the outbreak for different values of $\alpha$, measured util $t=100$ and for $\epsilon=10^{-4}$. The size of outbreak,
$1-S_t$, is zero (with accuracy $10^{-4}$ ) for small values of $\beta/ \gamma$. The specific value of $\beta/ \gamma$, in which the epidemic size starts to get a non-zero value, is identified as the epidemic threshold point.
The stationary time for a memoryless system ($\alpha=1$) is $t=100$. With decreasing the value of $\alpha$ (including memory) the system needs much time to reach the stationary state. Hence at $t=100$, the threshold point is shifted to the higher value of $\beta/\gamma$.
Figure.~\ref{f1a} shows that the threshold point is increased with decreasing of $\alpha$ for a finite time $t$. Furthermore, as it can be seen in Fig.~\ref{f1}, the size of outbreaks decreases for decreasing $\alpha$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.34}{\includegraphics[angle=0]{fig2.eps}}\\
\end{center}
\caption{Variation of threshold point vs. $\alpha$ for different finite times $t=20,200,2000$. For each time, the epidemic threshold is shifted to higher values with decreasing $\alpha$. The axes are logarithmic and the numbers are presented as 10-base exponential notation.
}
\label{f1a}
\end{figure}
Let the interval $[t_{0}, t]$ be the time interval in which memory effects are taken into account.
In Fig.~\ref{f2}, we compare the evolution of the model with memory for different values of the finite time $t$. The memory effects are considered for a weight $\alpha=0.2$. It is seen that as time evolves the influence of memory decreases, since memory effects decay in time like a power-law function. Hence, the epidemic threshold shifts to lower values of effective infection rate $\beta/ \gamma$ and approaches the threshold of the memoryless model ($\alpha=1$). The curves for $\alpha = 1$ at $t =200$ and $t = 2000$ are hardly distinguishable from the curve at $t = 20$ and are not drawn for better readability. The variation of threshold point, with increasing finite time, is shown in Fig.~\ref{f2a}. Furthermore, for a given $\beta/ \gamma$ value, it appears that there is more time available for disease spreading, whence more individuals become infected.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics[angle=0]{fig3.eps}}
\end{center}
\caption{Order parameter $1-S_{t}$ for a SIR system having evolved until time $t$, when including much memory ($\alpha=0.2$). Each curve corresponds to a different finite time $t$, as indicated in the inset. The threshold values can be compared with that of the corresponding epidemic threshold for a memoryless system, i.e. when $\alpha=1$ (and $t =20$). The curves for $\alpha = 1$ at $t =200$ and $t = 2000$ are not drawn for better readability.}
\label{f2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.34}{\includegraphics[angle=0]{fig4.eps}}\\
\end{center}
\caption{Variation of threshold point vs. $t$ for different values of $\alpha=0.2,0.5,0.8$. For each $\alpha$, the epidemic threshold is shifted to lower values with increasing finite time. The axes are logarithmic and the numbers are presented as base 10 exponential notation.
}
\label{f2a}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Initial conditions}\label{s3initialconditions}
Recall that the dynamics of a non-Markovian process is directly influenced by all events from the beginning of the process. However, some loss of information about some period of time in the past may lead one to consider that the influence of memory might not need to be considered as continuous. It may happen, in many social networks, that individuals do not have enough information about the history of a disease, as recent cases and studies indicate; e.g. see \cite{Eichelberger,BKJohns,morens2015forgotten,tomori2015will}. Only after several individuals have already been infected, do people start to increase their knowledge about the disease and take different precautions. The question arises on how the ``initial time'' at which a non-Markovian process is started, affects the subsequent dynamics of the process.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics[angle=0]{fig5a.eps}}\\
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics[angle=0]{fig5b.eps}}\\
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics[angle=0]{fig5c.eps}}\\
\end{center}
\caption{Effect of different initial times on the dynamics of a non-Markovian process. The curves denote the fraction of $(a)$ susceptible, $(b)$ infected and $(c)$ removed individuals. Dashed and solid lines correspond to Markovian and non-Markovian processes, respectively, started from $t=0$. The curves with symbols, correspond to the dynamics of non-Markovian processes, started from non-zero initial times with different initial conditions.
}
\label{f3}
\end{figure}
If two Markovian processes start at two different times, the evolution of both processes is identical. However, the scenario is quite different for a non-Markovian process, i.e. in which the memory plays a role. This is illustrated through Fig.~\ref{f3} where the fractions of susceptible, infected, and removed individuals are compared in the case of two Markov and non-Markov epidemic processes. Continuous and dashed (black) lines correspond to a system with and without including memory effects, respectively, evolving from the same initial time $t=0$. As it can be seen the fraction of susceptible individuals is greater in a system with inclusion of memory effects with respect to that ignoring the memory (Fig.~\ref{f3}(a)). In other words, the experience and knowledge which individuals have about the disease are obviously helping them to protect themselves against the disease. Equivalently, in a system including the memory effects, the infection grows more slowly as seen in Fig.~\ref{f3}(b).
Thereafter, consider that a non-Markovian process, including memory effects, has evolved until a specific time $t_1$.
Let the process be continuing its evolution, but let the memory of the system be removed at that time. This corresponds to having a new initial time and new initial conditions for the epidemics spreading. The process can be continued without or with memory. The Markovian case is trivial thereafter and thus not discussed. Instead, consider that memory effects are only taken into account at this starting ``new initial time''. In other words, let the population ignore the disease control history (memory) until $t_1$; let the system continue its dynamics but taking into account memory effects thereafter from $t_1$. The initial conditions for the evolution of the system are now a fraction of susceptible and infected individuals at time $t_1$. The curves with square symbols in Fig.~\ref{f3}, correspond to what happens for different ``new initial times'' $t_1=30,70$, for the dynamics of such a non-Markovian epidemic process. As it can be seen, at the beginning of the dynamics, the fraction of susceptible individuals is reduced, since people do not know about the disease. However, as soon as it is influenced by memory, the system becomes more resilient to the spreading. Hence, the fraction of $S$ individuals remains greater as compared to that with a memoryless system, having started at $t=0$. In a similar manner, the fraction of infected and removed individuals deviate from the original one and tend toward the populated states of a memoryless system when the memory from further past times is included. In this case,
the curves become closer to the dashed curve corresponding to a memoryless system. That means that the system loses the information related to past times and tends to present a behavior similar to a memoryless system.
Finally, one can consider ``to remove the memory'' of an epidemic process at various times. At each time step, the system is supposed to lose (or practically negate) the information about the disease before some ``re-awareness time" (see also \cite{funk2009spread}) and to continue its dynamics regardless of the past. For illustration, consider the case of such a sudden awareness and its impact on epidemic outbreaks case through Fig.~\ref{f3}; the system loses its memory at times $t_1=30$ and $t_2=70$, i.e. the dynamics is stopped at $t_1=30$, then is continued until $t_2=70$, removing all the history of the system before that time, next reintroducing the memory dynamics again at $t_2=70$:
see the (red curves with) triangular symbols in Fig.~\ref{f3} corresponding to this case of a double ``loss of memory.''
Notice that in this particular illustrative case, the behavior of the system is seen to be close to the dynamics of a memoryless system, since contributions of the memory of the system are sometimes removed. Such an illustration points to the interest of the model in order to compare it with the case of epidemics spreading waves \cite{BKJohns}; for completeness, let it be pointed out that the connection of periodic epidemics to SIR models has been already mentioned \cite{Greenhalgh1988}: flu is yearly recurrent. Notice also that the value of $\alpha$ could be modified at each new awareness time, but this investigation goes outside the present paper.
\section{The model on structured networks}
\label{s4}
So far we have considered the fully mixed approximation,
such that an infected individual is equally likely to
spread the disease to any other individual. However, in the real world an individual connects to a small
fraction of people. Hence, as is well known, more realistic modeling can be studied through networks,
where their topology has a significant effect on the epidemic process \cite{Moore,Kuperman,SFepidemic}.
For homogeneous networks, each individual has the same number of connections $k\approx \langle k\rangle$
and disease propagates with spreading rate $\beta \langle k\rangle$. In this case, it is obvious that the
epidemic threshold $(\frac{\beta}{\gamma})_c$ is simply replaced by $(\frac{\beta}{\gamma})_c\langle k\rangle$. It is also true for the case of fractional differential Eqs.~4. In other words, threshold point in Fig.~\ref{f1} for each value of $\alpha$ is shifted to $(\frac{\beta}{\gamma})_c\langle k\rangle$.
Now, let us consider heterogeneous scale free networks with degree distribution $P(k)\sim k^{-\lambda}$.
In heterogeneous mean field approximation, it is assumed that all nodes are statistically equivalent and thus one can consider
groups of nodes with the same degree $k$. With this assumption the ordinary differential equations describing the SIR model are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{SIRN eq1}
\nonumber
\frac{ds_{k}(t)}{dt}&=& -\beta ks_{k}(t)\Theta_{k}(t),\nonumber \\
\frac{di_{k}(t)}{dt}&=& \beta ks_{k}(t)\Theta_{k}(t)-\gamma i_{k}(t),\nonumber \\
\frac{dr_{k}(t)}{dt}&=& \gamma i_{k}(t),
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\Theta_k(t)=\frac{\sum_{k-1}kP(k)i_{k}(t)}{\sum_{k}kP(k)}.
\end{eqnarray}
and $i_k, s_k$ and $r_k$ denote the density of infected, susceptible and removed nodes in each group, respectively.
It was turned out that in scale-free networks characterized by a degree exponent $2<\lambda \leq3$, there is no epidemic threshold \cite{SFepidemic}.
Following the same procedure, presented in Sec.\ref{s2}, we can rewrite Eqs.~\ref{SIRN eq1}
to the fractional derivatives, as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{SIRsf}
_{t_0}^c\! \!D_t^{\alpha}s_{k}(t)&=&-\beta s_{k}(t)\Theta_{k}(t),\nonumber\\
_{t_0}^c\! \!D_t^{\alpha}i_{k}(t)&=&\beta s_{k}(t)\Theta_{k}(t)-\gamma i_{k}(t), \nonumber \\
_{t_0}^c\! \!D_t^{\alpha}r_{k}(t)&=&\gamma i_{k}(t),
\end{eqnarray}
For a network with degree exponent $\lambda=3$, we solve Eqs.~(\ref{SIRsf}) numerically. Figure~\ref{f6} shows the evolution of the fraction of total infected individuals $i(t)=\sum_k P(k)i_k(t)$, with considering memory effects with different values of $\alpha$. While for a memoryless SIR model $(\alpha=1)$, the system reaches a stationary state after a short time ($t\simeq 20$), the stationary time is increased with decreasing the value of $\alpha$. Furthermore, we obtain the size of outbreaks at a finite time. Figure~\ref{f7} shows $1-S_t$, measured with accuracy $10^{-5}$ until $t=100$ for different values of $\alpha$. As we can see the epidemic threshold is always zero, as it is for Markov epidemic spreading on scale-free networks with $\lambda=3$. However the size of epidemic decreases with decreasing $\alpha$. The same results are obtained for networks with $2<\lambda<3$. However for $\lambda>3$, the epidemic threshold is shifted with including the memory, similar to what is observed for the homogenous networks.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.42}{\includegraphics[angle=0]{fig6.eps}}\\
\end{center}
\caption{Fraction of infected individuals versus time for the SIR model on a scale-free network with degree exponent $\lambda=3$ and for different values of $\alpha$.
}
\label{f6}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.32}{\includegraphics[angle=0]{fig7.eps}}\\
\end{center}
\caption{Outbreak size, $1-S_{t}$, for the SIR model on a scale-free network with degree exponent $\lambda=3$ in terms of $\beta/\gamma$. The dynamics is evolved until time $t=100$, when including memory effects. Each curve corresponds to a different value of $\alpha$, as indicated in the insert.
}
\label{f7}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{s5}
Memory plays a significant role in the evolution of many real dynamical processes, including the cases of epidemic spreading. Here we have reported a study on the evolution of the SIR epidemic model, considering memory effects. Using the fractional calculus technique, we show that the dynamics of such a system depends on the strength of memory effects, controlled by the order of fractional derivatives $\alpha$. At finite times, including memory effects, the epidemic threshold $(\beta/\gamma)_c$ is shifted to higher values than those for memoryless systems, at values depending on the memory decay rate $\alpha$. In the case that the model evolves on heterogeneous scale-free networks with $2<\lambda\leq3$, the threshold point is always zero. However, the fraction of individuals who are infected or recovered, is reduced if the memory ``length" increases. Hence, memory renders the system more robust against the disease spreading. If the epidemic process evolves further in time, for a fixed memory strength, (i) the disease can infect more individuals and (ii) the epidemic threshold is shifted to smaller values and tends to the
memoryless case values.
Furthermore, we have shown the following result: the evolution of an epidemic process, including memory effects, much depends on the fraction of infected individuals at the beginning of the memory effect insertion in the evolution. During a non-Markovian epidemic process, if the system abruptly loses its memory at a definite time and if from that time on, one lets the non-Markovian process continue again, starting with the number of infected individuals at that time, the dynamics of the system deviates from the basic case, in which the system continuously includes memory effects from the beginning of the process.
Our observations are obtained from a simple epidemiological model: the SIR model. Obviously many parameters are here assumed to be constant. We are aware that some, e.g. policy, feedback might influence the parameter values. They may depend on space, groups, and time. External field conditions may also surely influence real aspects. However, we guess that many qualitative behaviors as those presented here are likely to be quite generally found in reality. More advanced epidemic models, based on various types of complex networks are surely interesting subjects for further investigations, in line with investigations such as, e.g., in \cite{threshold,threshold1,threshold2,thresholdNewmanPRE,stanley}. We also wish to point out that we have observed qualitatively similar results for the SIS epidemic model.
Finally, we may claim that our results are not limited to the epidemiological (``medical'') models but also can be extended for analogous epidemic spreading of rumors, gossip, opinions, religions, and other topics pertinent to epidemics on many social networks.
|
\section{Introduction}
In biological materials, much attention has been paid to the dynamics from the viewpoint of nonequilibrium physics, because of the high complexity of composition, hydrodynamic interactions, active components, etc.~\cite{Mizuno,Weitz,Mikhailov}.
In particular, shape relaxation and fluctuations of lipid bilayer membranes have intensively been studied both in, or near, equilibrium \cite{Brochard, Sackmann, Seifert} and far from equilibrium~\cite{Prost, Garcia,Turlier, BetzPNAS, ParkPNAS, YasudaPRE}.
The dynamics of a bilayer membrane is determined by many factors, such as the viscosity of the surrounding fluid~\cite{Brochard}, the membrane bending rigidity, the inter-monolayer friction caused by relative lateral motions of two monolayers~\cite{Seifert, JBPRL2}, and possibly by active inclusions~\cite{Prost}.
Red blood cell (RBC) membranes have further complexity because of the cytoskeleton which is attached to the lipid bilayer. It has been argued that the cytoskeleton plays crucial roles both in the statics and the dynamics, e.g., drastic effective tension increase in equilibrium \cite{GovPRL,JBPRL,JBEPL,Popescu}, tension decrease in the presence of ATP \cite{BetzPNAS, Turlier}, and enhanced non-equilibrium fluctuations on the scale of the cytoskeleton mesh size \cite{ParkPNAS}.
In RBCs, the cytoskeleton consists of spectrin filaments forming a pre-stressed~\cite{Turlier} two-dimensional (2D) triangular lattice with a protein at each vertex embedded in the bilayer membrane. The lattice spacing $a\approx 100\,\mathrm{nm}$ is quite large, and therefore what matters in the membrane collective dynamics is not only
the modes whose wavelengths are much larger than $a$, but also those having wavelengths smaller than $a$. To understand simultaneously the dynamics on such a wide range of spatial scales, we need to take into explicitly account the discrete nature of the lattice structure. The latter breaks lateral continuous translational symmetry, giving rise to a coupling between modes on different length scales and thus to a rich dynamical behavior.
This paper is organized as follows. In Sec.~\ref{FE}, our model free energy is constructed on the basis of the previous theories for a bilayer membrane (without a cytoskeleton) \cite{Seifert} and for a pre-stressed 2D cytoskeleton coupled to a membrane \cite{JBEPL}. In Sec.~\ref{DE}, following Ref.~\cite{Seifert}, the hydrodynamic equations are introduced, where we take into account the hydrodynamic flows of the surrounding fluid and of the monolayers, inter-monolayer friction between the monolayers. Then we obtain the coupled equations for the membrane variables by integrating out the flow velocity fields. In Sec.~\ref{result}, we discuss how the cytoskeleton alters the dynamics of the membrane, when initially a large-scale deformation is imposed, and when force(s) are applied to small-scale mode(s) for a long time ($\gtrsim 10$ ms). Section \ref{summary} is devoted for discussion and summary. We also present our detailed calculations in the Appendices.
\section{Free energy\label{FE}}
We consider out-of-plane deformations of a RBC membrane patch described by its height $h(x,y)$ above a reference plane $z=0$. Our model free energy is given by $F=F_0+F_{\rm c}$ as follows. We take into account the areal compression which is necessarily coupled with $h$ due to the finite thickness $d\approx 1\, {\rm nm}$ of the monolayers~\cite{Seifert}. Then the bilayer membrane free energy $F_0$ is given by
\begin{align}
F_0=\int \mathrm d ^2x\,\Big[ &\frac{\kappa}{2} (\nabla^2 h)^2+\frac{\sigma}{2}(\nabla h)^2 \nonumber \\&
+\frac{k}{2}\sum_{\epsilon=\pm}\,[\rho^\epsilon+\epsilon d(\nabla^2h)]^2 \Big], \label{F0}
\end{align}
where $\kappa$ is the bare bending rigidity, $\sigma$ the bare tension, $k$ the areal compression modulus and $\nabla=(\partial_x,\partial_y)$. In the above, $\rho^+$ (resp.~$\rho^-$) denotes the dimensionless projected excess lipid density in the upper (resp.~lower) monolayer \cite{Seifert}.
Note that in our paper, the surface tension is not considered as a constant. The quantity $\sigma$ in Eq.~(\ref{F0}) is only the background tension for a flat membrane with homogeneous, reference lipid density ($\rho^\pm=0$). The actual tension fluctuates about the zeroth-order tension $\sigma$ according to a model that is closely related to the area-difference-elasticity model \cite{Miao}. Indeed, the term proportional to $k$ in Eq.~(\ref{F0}), that involves the variables $\rho^+$ and $\rho^-$ is the excess energy associated with a local compression or dilation of the lipids in each monolayer. The actual tension (without the cytoskeleton) is $ \sigma + k(\rho^+ + d \nabla^2 h)$ and $ \sigma + k(\rho^- - d \nabla^2 h)$ in the upper and lower monolayers, respectively.
The other contribution, $F_{\rm c}$, arises from the membrane--cytoskeleton coupling. We assume, to simplify, that the cytoskeleton network is a uniform triangular lattice without defects. An anchoring protein at each lattice site is embedded in the membrane and interacts with its nearest neighbor through an effective spring of relaxed length $a_0$ and stiffness $k_{\rm s}$ (Fig.~\ref{lattice}a). In the ground state ($\rho=h=0$), the network forms a regular triangular lattice, and the lattice points $\{{\bm R}_\ell\}$ are expressed in terms of the primitive lattice vectors ${\bm e}_\alpha$ $(\alpha=1,2)$ as
${\bm R}_\ell=R_\ell^\alpha{\bm e}_\alpha$
with $R_\ell^\alpha\in\mathbb{Z}$ positive or negative integers (see Fig.~\ref{lattice}b). The lattice spacing is $a=|{\bm e}_\alpha|$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{Fig1-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{(a) Illustration of the model red blood cell (RBC) membrane. (b) Cytoskeletal network. (c) Reciprocal lattice. The yellow region represents the first Brillouin zone (FBZ).}
\label{lattice}
\end{figure}
If the out-of-plane deformation of the membrane is sufficiently small, $F_{\rm c}$ is given by \cite{JBEPL}
\begin{align}
F_{\rm c}=\frac{\nu}{4} \sum_{\ell} \sum_{\bm n}\,[h({\bm R}_\ell)-h({\bm R}_\ell+{\bm n})]^2, \label{F_lattice}
\end{align}
where $\nu=k_{\rm s}(1-a_0/a)$ is the effective stiffness of the harmonic potentials associated with the out-of-plane deformations, and $\sum_{\bm n}$ denotes the sum over the nearest neighbor sites. Note that $\nu$ is nonzero only if the lattice is pre-stressed ($a\ne a_0$). In Ref.~\cite{Turlier}, as a result of fitting their experimental data, it has been shown that the cytoskeleton in healthy RBCs is naturally stretched (by about $4\%$) while the bare membrane tension can be negative.
Let us introduce the in-plane Fourier transform as ${\cal F}_{\bm q}[\cdots] \equiv\int {\rm d}^2x\, (\cdots)e^{-i{\bm q}\cdot{\bm x}}$ and the reciprocal vectors ${{\bm e}^\alpha}$ satisfying ${\bm e}^\alpha\cdot{\bm e}_\beta=\delta^\alpha_\beta$, the Kronecker delta (see Fig.~\ref{lattice}c). Because $F_{\rm c}$ breaks the {\it lateral continuous translational symmetry}, modes with different wavevectors are coupled to one another. As shown in Appendix \ref{couple_mode}, the modes coupled to a given $\bm q$ belong to the subset
\begin{align}
Q_{\bm q}=\{ {\bm q}+2\pi m_\alpha {\bm e}^\alpha | m_\alpha \in \mathbb{Z} \}.
\end{align}
\section{Dynamic equations \label{DE}}
Following Seifert and Langer~\cite{Seifert}, we regard each monolayer as a compressible 2D fluid having the shear viscosity $\mu$ and the bulk viscosity $\zeta$. The upper and lower monolayers can have different fluid velocities, ${\bm v}^+$ and ${\bm v}^-$, respectively (Fig~\ref{lattice}a). The full dynamic equations consist of (i) lateral force balance for each monolayer, (ii) force balance normal to the bilayer, and (iii) the continuity equation for lipids in each monolayer.
We use the Stokes equation for the solvent velocity field ${\bm V}$ and the pressure field $p$, with the shear viscosity $\eta$:
\begin{align}
\eta \hat\nabla ^2 {\bm V}-\hat\nabla p=0, \quad \hat\nabla\cdot {\bm V}=0, \label{Stokes}
\end{align}
where $\hat\nabla=(\partial_x,\partial_y,\partial_z)$ is the 3D nabla operator.
No-slip boundary condition is employed at the membrane surface,
$v^\pm_i=V_i \ (i=x,y)$ and $V_z=\partial h/\partial t$ at $z\to 0^\pm$. We also impose ${\bm V}\to 0$ and $p\to p_0$ as $z\to \pm \infty$.
The 2D viscous stress tensors in the monolayers are given by
\begin{align}
\tau_{ij}^\pm=\mu(\partial_i v_j^\pm+\partial_j v_i^\pm )+(\zeta-\mu)\delta_{ij}\nabla \cdot {\bm v}^\pm,
\end{align}
where the superscript ``$+$" (resp.~``$-$") denote the upper (resp.~lower) monolayer.
Then the lateral force balance equation in each monolayer reads
\begin{align}
-\partial_i \left(\frac{\delta F}{\delta\rho^\pm}\right)+\partial_j\tau_{ij}^\pm\pm T_{iz}^\pm\mp b(v^+_i-v^-_i)=0, \label{lateral}
\end{align}
where $T_{ij}^+$ (resp. $T_{ij}^-$) is the stress tensor $T_{ij}=-p\delta_{ij}+\eta (\partial_iV_j+\partial_jV_i)$ in the solvent fluid evaluated at $z\to0^+$ (resp. $z\to 0^-$). The last term is due to the inter-monolayer friction, with the friction coefficient $b$ \cite{Seifert}. In the normal direction, the force exerted by the surrounding fluid is balanced with the restoring force of the membrane,
\begin{align}
T^+_{zz}-T^-_{zz}=\frac{\delta F}{\delta h}. \label{vertical}
\end{align}
At linear order in ${\bm v}^\pm$ and $\rho^\pm$, which are both considered to be small, the continuity equation in each monolayer is given by
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial \rho^\pm}{\partial t}\simeq -\nabla\cdot {\bm v}^\pm. \label{continuity}
\end{align}
The velocities, ${\bm V}$ and ${\bm v}^\pm$, can be eliminated from the dynamic equations by integrating the Stokes equations along $z$ for each mode $\bm q$ (see Appendix \ref{elimination_velo}). This yields coupled linear equations for $\hat{h}\equiv h/d$ and $\rho\equiv (\rho^+-\rho^-)/2$:
\begin{align}
&4\eta d^2 q \frac{\partial \hat{h}({\bm q},t)}{\partial t}=-{\cal F}_{\bm q}\left[ \frac{\delta F}{\delta\hat{h}}\right] +u_h({\bm q},t), \label{EQ1}\\
&\frac{2c(q)}{q^2} \frac{\partial \rho({\bm q},t)}{\partial t}=-{\cal F}_{\bm q}\left[ \frac{\delta F}{\delta\rho}\right] +u_\rho({\bm q},t), \label{EQ2}
\end{align}
where $c(q) = 2b+2\eta q+(\mu+\zeta)q^2$ with $q=|\bm q|$.
We have added $u_h$ and $u_\rho$, representing external forces applied mechanically (e.g., by active molecules) which act on the variables $\hat{h}$ and $\rho$, respectively.
Since ${\cal F}_{\bm q} [\delta F /\delta h]$ includes $\hat{h}({\bm q}')$ for $\forall {\bm q}' \in Q_{\bm q}$, these equations actually consist of sets of coupled equations for the variables $\{\hat{h}({\bm q}'), \rho({\bm q}')\}$ in each set $Q_{\bm q}$ (see Appendix \ref{couple_mode}).
Without the cytoskeleton, the modes for different wavevectors are not coupled in Eqs.~(\ref{EQ1}) and (\ref{EQ2}). Then, $\hat{h}({\bm q})$ and $\rho({\bm q})$ exhibit two relaxation rates, $\gamma_+^{(0)}(q)>\gamma_-^{(0)}(q)$, associated with some linear combinations of $\hat{h}({\bm q})$ and $\rho({\bm q})$.
Seifert and Langer discussed these relaxation modes for vanishing tension~\cite{Seifert}.
They found a crossover wavenumber $q_{\rm c}= 2\eta k/(b\tilde\kappa)\approx 4.4\times 10^6\, {\rm m}^{-1}$, at which the relaxation behavior of the membrane changes qualitatively. Here we set $\kappa=2\times 10^{-20}\,{\rm J} $ as in \cite{JBPRL} (the value of $\kappa$ measured in experiments lies in quite a wide range, $1$ to $30\times 10^{-20}\, {\rm J}$ \cite{Brochard,BetzPNAS,Turlier, Popescu}, but the following results remain almost unchanged even with these different values). For large scales satisfying $q\ll q_{\rm c}$, the rates correspond to $\rho$ relaxing quickly followed by $h$ relaxing slowly with $\rho$ being slaved~\cite{JBNLM}. For small scales, $q\gg q_{\rm c}$, conversely, they correspond to $h$ relaxing quickly followed by $\rho$ relaxing slowly with $h$ being slaved. Hence, the dynamics on the small scales is dominated by the inter-monolayer friction, whereas that on the large scales is dominated by the solvent viscosity.
In the presence of tension, their results hold for $\sigma\ll\sigma_{\rm c}\equiv(2\eta k)^2/(\tilde\kappa b^2)$, except at very large scales (see Refs.~\cite{JBNLM,OkamotoEPJE, Sachin} and Appendix \ref{perturbation}).
However, for $\sigma\gtrsim\sigma_{\rm c}$ the dynamics is dominated at all scales by the inter-monolayer friction, with $\gamma_+^{(0)}\simeq(\sigma q+\kappa q^3)/(4\eta)>\gamma_-^{(0)}\approx kq^2/(2b)$~\cite{JBNLM}.
\section{results \label{result}}
\subsection{Relaxation of a large-scale deformation}
The cytoskeleton shifts the mode relaxation rates by an amount that depends on the prestress $\sim\!\nu$, and at the same times it couples all the modes belonging to a common set $Q_{\bm q}$. Let us first discuss how the rates of the large scale modes, with $q\ll q_{\rm c} \ll 2\pi /a$, are shifted by the cytoskeleton.
For such modes, the dependence on the direction of $\bm q$ is negligible. In the following, analytical expressions will be given systematically at first-order in a perturbative expansion in power series of $\nu$ (see Appendix \ref{perturbation}). The parameter values used in the following numerical calculations are summarized in Table \ref{TabPara}.
\begin{table*}[tbh]
\caption{
List of the parameter values used in numerical calculations.
\label{TabPara}}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}[t]{c c c c c c c c c}
$\sigma$ \quad & $\kappa$\ \ \quad & $k$\ \quad & $d$\ \quad & $\nu$ & $a$ & $\eta$ & $b$\ \quad & $\mu +\zeta $ \quad\\
$\mathrm{N/m}\quad$ & $\mathrm{J}$\quad & $\mathrm{N}/\mathrm{m}$ \quad & $\mathrm{m}$\quad & $\mathrm{N/m}$ & $\mathrm{m}$ & $\mathrm{J}\, \mathrm{s}/\mathrm{m}^3\quad $&$\mathrm{J}\, \mathrm{s}/\mathrm{m}^4\quad$&$\mathrm{J}\, \mathrm{s}/\mathrm{m}^2$\\
\hline
$10^{-11}$ & $2\times 10^{-20} $ & $7 \times 10^{-2}$ & $10^{-9} $ \ & $10^{-6}$ & $10^{-7}$ & $10^{-3}$&$2\times 10^{8}$&$2\times 10^{-9}$\\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table*}
From the dynamic equations (\ref{EQ1})--(\ref{EQ2}), we find that the rates of the large-scale modes, $\gamma_+>\gamma_-$, are shifted according to
\begin{align}
\gamma_+\simeq \frac{\sigma_{\rm eff}q+\kappa_{\rm eff}q^3}{4\eta}, \quad
\gamma_- \simeq \Big( \frac{k}{2b}+ \frac{ 3^{1/2} d^2 b}{4 \eta^2}\nu \Big)q^2,
\label{eigenvalues1}
\end{align}
where $\sigma_{\rm eff}=\sigma+3^{1/2}\nu $ and $\kappa_{\rm eff}=\kappa-3^{1/2}\nu a^2/16$ are the tension and the bending rigidity renormalized by the cytoskeleton~\cite{JBEPL,Turlier}.
Note that the fast and slow rates have been exchanged with respect to their bare value $\gamma_+^{(0)}\simeq kq^2/(2b)>\gamma_-^{(0)}\simeq (\sigma q+\kappa q^3)/(4\eta)$ because we anticipate $\sigma_\mathrm{eff}\gtrsim\sigma_{\rm c}>\sigma$ for large enough $\nu$.
The other rates $\gamma_\pm(q')$ of the subset ${\bm q}'\in Q_{\bm q}$ associated with ${\bm q}$ are also shifted from their bare values $\gamma_\pm^{(0)}(q')$; they correspond to wavelengths comparable to or smaller than the cytoskeleton mesh size and are much faster than those in Eq.~(\ref{eigenvalues1}). Our detailed calculations show that the shifts of these rates are small (see Appendix \ref{perturbation}), but this does not mean that the small-scale modes are not affected by the cytoskeleton
The relaxation of a large scale mode $\bm q$ excites all the small scale modes in $Q_{\bm q}$ (Fig.~\ref{evol1}). To investigate this effect, we set the initial condition $\hat h({\bm x})=e^{i{\bm q}\cdot {\bm x}}$ and $\rho({\bm x})=0$ with $q=10^6\,\mathrm{m}^{-1}$ in the direction ${\bm q}/q=(\sqrt{3}/2,1/2)$, and we integrate numerically the dynamical equations up to the cutoff $20\pi/a$, of the order of the inverse membrane thickness. Experiments indicate $\sigma_\mathrm{eff}\approx\nu\approx10^{-7}$--$10^{-5}\,\mathrm{N/m}$ with $\sigma$ very small or even negative~\cite{Turlier,Sackmann,Garcia, Popescu}. Accordingly, besides the values already given, we set $\sigma=10^{-11}\,\mathrm{N/m}$ and $\nu=10^{-6}\,\mathrm{N/m}$, yielding $\kappa_{\rm eff}=1.9\times 10^{-20}\,\mathrm{J}$ and $\sigma_{\rm eff}=1.73\times 10^{-6}\,\mathrm{N/m}$.
We study the coupled evolution of $\hat h$ and $\rho$ for ${\bm q}$ and for small-scale modes ${\bm q}'\in Q_{\bm q}$. In Fig.~\ref{evol1}, we present as an example only ${\bm q}'={\bm q}+2\pi{\bm e}^2\simeq 2\pi{\bm e}^2$, as we find the other small-scale modes in $Q_{\bm q}$ also exhibit a similar behavior.
In the short time interval $0<t\ll1/\gamma_\pm(q')\approx1/\gamma_\pm^{(0)}(q')$, the small-scale modes $\hat h({\bm q}')$ and $\rho ({\bm q}')$, that are initially zero, are excited, while $\hat{h}({\bm q})$ almost remains unchanged (Fig.~\ref{evol1}a and c). All the excited small-scale modes rapidly approach their respective \textit{quasi-equilibrium states} $\hat{h}_{\rm qe}$ and $\rho_{\rm qe}$, which minimize the free energy for a fixed value of $\hat{h}({\bm q})$, given by
\begin{align}
\hat{h}_{\mathrm{qe}}({\bm q}';\hat{h}({\bm q}))=
\frac{\rho_{\mathrm{qe}}({\bm q}';\hat{h}({\bm q}))}{d^2q'^2} \simeq -\frac{2\nu\hat{h}({\bm q})K_{\bm q}}{\sqrt{3}\kappa a^2 q'^4}, \label{quasi_eq}
\end{align}
where $K_{\bm q}=\sum_{\bm n} (1-e^{i{\bm q}\cdot {\bm n}})$. Figure \ref{evol1}b illustrates the long time evolution of the system. For $1/\gamma_\pm^{(0)}(q')\ll t \lesssim \gamma_+^{-1}$, $\hat h({\bm q})$, $\hat h({\bm q}')$ and $\rho({\bm q}')$ decay with the common rate $\gamma_+$. Then, around $t \approx \gamma_+^{-1}$, $\hat h({\bm q})$ follows the dynamical quasi-equilibrium value $\hat h_{\rm qe}^\rho ({\bm q};\rho({\bm q},t))$ that minimizes the free energy at fixed $\rho({\bm q},t)$. Finally, for $t \gg \gamma_+^{-1}$, all the modes decay with the common rate $\gamma_-$, with $\hat h({\bm q}')$, $\rho({\bm q}')$ and $\hat h({\bm q})$ following their respective dynamical quasi-equilibrium values $\hat h({\bm q}')\simeq \hat h_{\rm qe}({\bm q}';\hat h_{\rm qe}^\rho({\bm q}))$, $\rho({\bm q}')\simeq \rho_{\rm qe}({\bm q}';\hat h_{\rm qe}^\rho({\bm q}))$ and $\hat h({\bm q})\simeq \hat h_{\rm qe}^\rho({\bm q};\rho({\bm q},t))$ (Fig.~\ref{evol1}b and c).
Suppose in Fig.~\ref{evol1} the initial amplitude of $h({\bm q})$ is comparable with the mode wavelength, $2\pi /q\approx 6.3\,\mu{\rm m}$. Then the amplitude of the excited small-scale mode $h({\bm q}')$ is about $2.4\times 10^{-5}\,\mu{\rm m}$, which is much smaller than the mode wavelength $2\pi /q'\approx 8.6 \times 10^{-2} \,\mu{\rm m}$, and may not be observable in experiments. This is because an energy cost to make a deformation with amplitude $q'^{-1}$ at the small-scale $q'$ is larger than to make a deformation with amplitude $q^{-1}$ at the large-scale $q$. Nevertheless, we notice that the cytoskeleton alters qualitatively the large-scale dynamics; because of the cytoskeleton that yields $\sigma_\mathrm{eff}\sim \sigma_{\rm c}\approx 3\times10^{-6}\,\mathrm{N/m}$, {\it the slowest relaxation process is dominated by the large-scale compression mode} $\rho({\bm q})$ limited by the inter-monolayer friction.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.62]{Fig2-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{Relaxation of a (normalized) large-scale deformation $\hat{h}({\bm x})=e^{i{\bm q}\cdot{\bm x}}$. (a) Short-time behavior of the large-scale modes $\hat h({\bm q})$ and $\rho({\bm q})$, and that of the small-scale modes $\hat h({\bm q}')$ and $\rho({\bm q}')$ with ${\bm q}'={\bm q}+2\pi{\bm e}^2$. (b) Long-time behavior of the same variables. (c) Schematic pictures of the process. Although the amplitude of the excited small-scale mode is small, a large effective tension $\sigma_{\rm eff}$ changes qualitatively the large-scale dynamics such that it is dominated by the inter-monolayer friction. }
\label{evol1}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Large-scale deformation induced by small-scale deformation via the cytoskeleton}
We have seen that large-scale deformations excite the modes whose scales are comparable or smaller than the cytoskeleton mesh. Now a question arises. Can small scale deformations excite large scale ones? If yes, is the amplitude of the excited modes large enough to be observable? The answer is no, if there are no applied forces. This is because the small-scale modes are much faster than the large-scale ones, so that the small-scale modes rapidly relax before large-scale modes are excited. However, if we \textit{keep} applying forces \textit{only} to the small-scale modes for a time longer than the relaxation time of the large-scale modes, the latter will be excited \textit{via} the cytoskeleton. Furthermore, if forces are applied to many small-scale modes, the amplitude of the excited large-scale mode can be noticeably large. In fresh RBCs, active molecules could be the source of these forces, as their characteristic time is of the order of $1\,\mathrm{s}$~\cite{BetzPNAS, Turlier} which is much larger than the typical relaxation time of the modes for $q\sim 10^6\,\mathrm{m}^{-1}$. It was further proposed that the active force is particularly enhanced on the scales of the cytoskeleton mesh \cite{ParkPNAS}.
To study this, we choose again $q=10^6\,\mathrm{m}^{-1}$, oriented as before, and we apply a constant force $u_h({\bm q}_1)=\bar{u}$ only to $\hat{h}({\bm q}_1)$ with ${\bm q}_1={\bm q}+2\pi {\bm e}^1\in Q_{\bm q}$ (Fig.~\ref{evolforce}). The corresponding wavelengths of $q$ and ${\bm q}_1$ are then $2\pi/q\approx 6.3\, \mu{\rm m}$ and $2\pi /|{\bm q}_1| \approx 0.87 a$, respectively. We investigate the response of $\hat h$ at the large scale $\bm q$ but also at another small scale, ${\bm q}_2={\bm q}+2\pi {\bm e}^2\in Q_{\bm q}$. With the initial condition $\hat{h}=\rho=0$, all the modes will be proportional to $\bar{u}$. For $t\lesssim1/\gamma_\pm^{(0)}(q_1)$, the small scale deformation $\hat h({\bm q}_1)$ is excited and reaches the stationary value $\hat{h}_{\rm st}({\bm q}_1)\simeq \bar{u}/(\kappa d^2 q_1^4)$ minimizing $F-(2\pi)^{-2}\bar{u}\hat h({\bm q}_1)$.
Then, for $1/\gamma_\pm^{(0)}(q_1) \lesssim t\lesssim \gamma_\pm^{-1}$, the large-scale mode $\hat{h}({\bm q})$ gets excited by $\hat{h}({\bm q}_1)$ via the cytoskeleton deformation, and then for $t\gtrsim\gamma_\pm^{-1}$, $\hat{h}({\bm q})$ reaches the stationary value
\begin{align}
\hat{h}_{\rm st}({\bm q})\simeq -\frac{\Delta\sigma_{\rm eff}+\Delta\kappa_{\rm eff}q^2}{\sigma_{\rm eff}+\kappa_{\rm eff}q^2}\frac{\bar{u}}{\kappa d^2q_1^4},
\end{align}
where $\Delta\sigma_{\rm eff}=\sigma_{\rm eff}-\sigma$ and $\Delta\kappa_{\rm eff}=\kappa_{\rm eff}-\kappa$. With our choice of parameters, $(\Delta\sigma_{\rm eff}+\Delta\kappa_{\rm eff}q^2)/(\sigma_{\rm eff}+\kappa_{\rm eff}q^2) \simeq 1$, and thus $\hat{h}_{\rm st}({\bm q})\simeq -\hat{h}_{\rm st}({\bm q}_1)$, consistent with Fig.~\ref{evolforce}a. We find that the other small-scale modes, such as $\hat h(\bm q_2)$, are also excited, but not significantly (Fig.~\ref{evolforce}a).
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.53]{Fig3-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{Time evolution of the membrane shape under a constant force $\bar u$ applied to the small-scale mode $\hat{h}({\bm q}_1)$, with ${\bm q}_1={\bm q}+2\pi {\bm e}^1$. All values of $\hat{h}$ are normalized by $\bar{u}$. The set $Q_{\bm q}$ is chosen as ${\bm q}/q=(\sqrt{3}/2,1/2)$ with $q=10^6$ ${\rm m}^{-1}$. (a) $\hat{h}$ as a function of $t$ for ${\bm q}$, ${\bm q}_1$ and ${\bm q}_2={\bm q}+2\pi {\bm e}^2$. (b) Schematic pictures of the process.}
\label{evolforce}
\end{figure}
When a force distribution is applied to multiple small-scale modes, the magnitude of the excited large-scale mode $\hat{h}({\bm q})$ can become much larger than in the case examined above. To show this, let us consider at each lattice site of the cytoskeleton active forces
inducing some local curvature. Such forces can formally be derived by adding a ``fictitious" potential $U=-\sum_\ell w_\ell\int {\rm d}^2 x \, \delta({\bm x}-{\bm R}_\ell)\nabla^2 h$ to the free energy. This yields $u({\bm q}')=q'^2 w_{{\bm q}}$, $\forall {\bm q}'\in Q_{\bm q}$ with $w_{\bm q}=\sum_\ell w_\ell e^{-i{\bm q}\cdot {\bm R}_\ell}$. Note that some force is applied also to the large-scale mode ${\bm q}$. By linearity, the effect of the small-scale modes $\bm q'$ on the large-scale mode $\bm q$, denoted by $\delta\hat h(\bm q)$, will be enhanced by a factor $r=\sum'_{m_1,m_2} q_1^2/|2\pi m_\alpha{\bm e}^\alpha|^2$ with respect to the case shown in Fig.~\ref{evolforce} where only the mode $\bm q_1$ was excited. The sum is taken up to the high wavevector cutoff while excluding $m_1=m_2=0$. With the parameters given above, we find $r\approx20$. Assuming that the microscopic forces can produce a deformation of amplitude comparable to the mesh size, i.e., $h_1\simeq50\,\mathrm{nm}$ \cite{BetzPNAS, ParkPNAS}, we expect the large scale response $\delta h$ to be about $r h_1$, which is a sizeable deformation of the order of $1\,\mu\mathrm{m}$. Note that this scale transfer of membrane deformation requires applying the small scale forces for at least about $10\,\mathrm{ms}$ (Fig.~\ref{evolforce}).
\section{Discussion and Summary\label{summary}}
In this paper, since we assume only vertical motion of the quasi-planer RBC patch, and equilibrium dynamics, we neglect the dissipation due to tangential motion of the cytoskeleton as well as the cytoskeleton activity that was studied in Ref.~\cite{Turlier}. Nevertheless, in Appendix \ref{fric_cyto}, we have considered the friction between the tangential monolayer flow and the anchored proteins, yielding an extra contribution to the lateral force balance equation. However, in our detailed calculation, it is shown to be negligible. As for the viscous drag of the spectrin filaments due to the surrounding fluid, it was also shown to be negligible~\cite{Turlier}.
For simplicity, we have assumed a quasi-planer membrane, i.e., small deformations about a flat reference shape.
However, real RBCs are intrinsically curved objects that fluctuate about a curved reference shape \cite{Turlier,EvansPNAS}.
For such cases, not only $\rho=(\rho^+-\rho^-)/2$ but also $\bar\rho=(\rho^++\rho^-)/2$ is coupled to the membrane deformation $h$ \cite{Sachin}. Furthermore, for a curved membrane, the tangential deformation of the cytoskeleton is also coupled to $h$ \cite{Turlier}. For the relaxation of $\bar\rho$, we can show that the inter-monolayer friction is not a dissipation source, while the friction between the anchored proteins and the monolayers is one of the major dissipation sources for large scales satisfying $2\eta q+(\mu+\zeta)q^2\ll \lambda/a^2$. However, in the relaxation of $\bar\rho$ for a bilayer without the cytoskeleton, the inertia effect of the surrounding fluid can not be neglected \cite{Seifert}, so that a more careful study is necessary in the future.
In summary, we have studied the dynamics of RBC membranes modelled as bilayers coupled to a pre-stressed discrete elastic network, and subject to viscous dissipation in the solvent, in each monolayer and between the monolayers. Given the mesh size of the cytoskeleton ($\approx\!100\,\mathrm{nm}$), it is important from the biological point of view to address the dynamics at scales both larger and smaller than the cytoskeleton. Because the latter breaks lateral translational symmetry, each mode is coupled to all the modes that are congruent modulo a wavevector of the cytoskeleton's reciprocal lattice. We have characterized how the small modes renormalize the relaxation rates of the large modes. We have found that, because of the large renormalized tension $\sigma_{\rm eff}$, the shape relaxation dynamics on the large-scales is dominated by the inter-monolayer friction that has regularly been neglected in the previous theories on RBC dynamics \cite{GovPRL, Turlier, EvansPNAS}.
It has been also shown that applying forces on the small scale modes for a sufficiently long time can excite large scale deformations.
To the best of our knowledge, however, the correlations between different Fourier modes, $\langle h({\bm q}, t) h({\bm q}', t')\rangle$, has not been measured in previous experiments. It is informative to measure this quantity in order to know the precise dynamical processes where modes in different scales are coupled due to the cytoskeleton, and also to understand the behavior of active forces in fresh RBCs.
\begin{acknowledgements}
R.O.~and S.K.~acknowledge support from the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research on Innovative Areas “Fluctuation and Structure” (Grant No. 25103010) from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan, and from the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) (Grant No. 15K05250) from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS).
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{Introduction}
The cuprates exhibit a great deal of anomalies besides the superconductivity, which are crucial to understanding the high $T_c$ mechanism, e.g. non-Fermi liquid behavior, pseudogap, etc \cite{Armitage2010,Scalapino2012,Keimer2015,Jin2011,Zhang2016}. The origination of the pseudogap is a protracted struggle for hole-doped cuprates, i.e. whether it is from phase incoherent Cooper pairs or other competing orders \cite{Ding1996,Renner1998,Norman2005,Ma2008,Kondo2009}. In electron-doped cuprates, there are two discriminable energy scales in the normal state, that is, the higher one (0.2$\sim$0.4 eV) mimicking a pseudogap and the so-called ``normal state gap" of lower energy (NSG, $\sim$5 meV) \cite{Armitage2010}. The former is observed by such as optical conductivity spectra \cite{Onose2001} and angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy (ARPES) \cite{Armitage2002}, and identified as antiferromagnetic (AFM) spin correlations \cite{Onose2004}. Nevertheless, the NSG that usually behaves as a zero bias anomaly in differential conductance spectra remains controversial in its origin \cite{Biswas2001,Alff2003,Dagan2005,Shan2008}.
The zero bias anomaly in tunneling spectra may stem from various reasons, such as electron-electron interactions \cite{Altshuler1980}, Coulomb blockade \cite{Pekola2000}, hopping dominated conductance between the clusters of disordered metal grains \cite{Ossi2013}, Kondo scattering from magnetic moments, Giaever-Zeller two-step tunneling process, etc. In electron-doped cuprates, Alff et al. studied the tunneling spectra of Pr$_{2-x}$Ce$_{x}$CuO$_{4}$\, and La$_{2-x}$Ce$_{x}$CuO$_{4}$\,, and reported a $T^*$ that is smaller than $T_c$, pointing to a competing order below the superconducting dome \cite{Alff2003}. However, Dagan et al. reported that in Pr$_{2-x}$Ce$_{x}$CuO$_{4}$\, the buildup temperature of NSG $T^*$ is slightly higher than $T_c$ in the underdoped region and approaching $T_c$ in the overdoped region, linked to the superconducting amplitude fluctuations \cite{Dagan2005}. By integrating the spectral weight and comparing the difference between the NSG and the superconducting state, Shan et al. provided an evidence to a two-gap scenario in Pr$_{1-x}$LaCe$_{x}$CuO$_{4}$\, \cite{Shan2008}. Such contradiction can be ascribed to the difficulty in defining the $T^*$, as well as the side effects from oxygen. It is known that slight oxygen variation is inevitable as tuning the Ce, which can result in remarkable influence on the physical properties \cite{Armitage2010}. As a special system of electron doped cuprates, the superconductivity of parent cuprates (i.e. R$_{2}$CuO$_{4\pm\delta}$) in $T'$ phase was discovered recently \cite{Matsumoto2008}. Most recently, optical conductivity measurements in Pr$_{2}$CuO$_{4\pm\delta}$\, (PCO) thin films disclosed that the high energy ``pseudogap" does not exist in this system \cite{Chanda2014}. However, the low energy NSG has never been addressed in this system, e.g. whether it is similar to other electron doped cuprates or not in such a Ce-free system.
In this work, we present a systemically tunneling study in PCO thin films with various $T_c$ by point-contact technique. The NSG is observed in this system, which is quite similar to other electron doped cuprates. The NSG is nearly field-independent but can be suppressed gradually with increasing the temperature. We find that there is a positive correlation between the magnitude of the NSG and junction resistance for all the superconducting samples, and the magnitude of the NSG is further enhanced in non-superconducting ones with more oxygen disorders. These phenomena can be well explained by AAL theory, revealing that the NSG stems from the disorder-induced electron-electron interactions.
\begin{figure*}[tb]
\includegraphics[width=1.5\columnwidth]{figure1.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) (a)~(d) Temperature dependence of resistivity for parent cuprate Pr$_{2}$CuO$_{4\pm\delta}$\, thin films with various $T_c$ and $RRR$. Resistivities are normalized by dividing the value at 300\,K. (e)~(h) $dI/dV$ versus bias voltage in various temperatures for these samples. All the curves are offset upwards for clarity.} \label{fig:sample}
\end{figure*}
The PCO thin films are grown by polymer assisted deposition (PAD) \cite{Jia2004,Lin2004} on (00l)-oriented SrTiO$_{3}$ substrate \cite{Wei2016}. The as-grown samples are fired at 850 $\textordmasculine$C in sealed tube with oxygen pressure at 200 Pa for crystallization. Then these samples are annealed at 400-600 $\textordmasculine$C under oxygen pressure of ~15 Pa. By adjusting the anneal temperature and time, samples with various $T_c$ can be obtained. The ab-plane resistivity is measured from 2 to 300\,K by a standard four-probe method using Quantum Design PPMS-16 equipment. We have selected six samples with full transition temperature $T_{c0}$ = 0 (N0), 15.5 K (S15), 16.4 K (S16), 17.8 K (S17), 19.3 K (S19) and 23.6 K (S23). Except for the non-superconducting sample N0, the others show narrow transition widths of $\Delta T$ = 1$\sim$2 K in the following measurements.
Tunneling spectra measurements are performed by a home-made point-contact probe, which can be put into the PPMS to ensure the temperature down to 2 K and field up to 16 T. Pt/Ir tips are used to make steady point-contact junctions. We measure the differential conductance spectra with a traditional lock-in technique. The spectra have good reproducibility for the same sample in various locations on the surface. The field is perpendicular to the ab-plane of the samples in all the measurements.
Figures 1(a)-1(d) show the temperature dependence of resistivity for N0, S17, S23 and S19. The residual resistance ratio ($RRR$) in non-superconducting sample is smaller than superconducting ones. Since the $RRR$ is sensitive to the amount of impurities and crystallographic defects, there should exist more disorders in non-superconducting sample. In electron doped cuprates, these disorders mainly come from the apical oxygen and in-plane oxygen vacancies induced by under- or over-annealing process \cite{Radaelli1994}. Figures 1(e)-1(h) present the $dI/dV$ versus bias voltage at various temperatures for above samples, respectively. Zero-bias anomaly observed in N0 demonstrates that the NSG state exists in the non-superconducting samples under zero field (see Fig.1(e)), similar to the non-superconducting Pr$_{1.89}$Ce$_{0.11}$CuO$_{4}$ sample \cite{Dagan2005}. Superconducting coherence peaks are observed in all the superconducting samples, which are suppressed with increasing temperature and disappear at $T_c$. The zero bias conductance is different among these samples due to the various effective barrier heights \cite{ Blonder1982}.
Figure 2(a) displays the spectra for S15 at both $T$ = 20 K, $H$ = 0 T and $T$ = 2.5 K, $H$ = 16 T. The spectra coincide with each other at bias higher than 7 mV, whereas the NSG state appears near the zero bias when field is applied to suppress superconductivity (see Fig. 2(a)). The spectra are almost unchanged with increasing field at $T$ = 2.5 K in N0 as seen in Fig. 2(b). Similar to the non-superconducting sample, the spectra are nearly the same in field up to 16 T after the coherence peaks are suppressed at $H$$\sim$6 T in S23 (see Fig. 2(c)), which is nearly consistent with the $H_{c2}$ measured in Ref. \cite{Krockenberger2012}. We define $G(30mV)/G(0)$ as the magnitude of NSG state and plot it as a function of $H$ as shown in Fig. 2(d). It can be clearly seen that the NSG is hard to be suppressed for all the samples even at $T$ = 15 K and $H$ = 16 T.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{figure2.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) (a) $dI/dV$ versus bias voltage for S15 measured at temperature higher than $T_c$ (solid squares) with $H$ = 0 and magnetic field higher than $H_{c2}$ at $T$ = 2.5 K (solid circles). (b) $dI/dV$ of non-superconducting sample at $T$ = 2.5 K, $H$ = 0$\sim$12 T with $\Delta H$ = 1 T and $T$ = 22 K, $H$ = 0 T. Inset: zoom in the spectra near the zero bias (dashed square region). (c) $dI/dV$ versus bias voltage in different fields for S23. All curves are offset upwards for clarity. (d) Field dependence of $G(30mV)/G(0)$ for different samples. The horizontal gray lines is used for guiding eyes. For superconducting samples, the data are only plotted with fields higher than $H_{c2}$.} \label{fig:sample}
\end{figure}
As shown in Fig. 3(a), for the fields higher than $H_{c2}$, the zero bias dip in the spectra is continuously filled as increasing the temperature. Also, the $G(30mV)/G(0)$ decreases gradually with increasing the temperature (see Fig. 3(b)), which is quite similar to that in other electron doped cuprates \cite{Biswas2001,Dagan2005,Shan2008}. Taking into account the temperature induced Fermi function broadening effects, we calculate temperature dependence of the density of state based on the formula $N(eV, T) = \int{N(E,0)\frac{\partial f(E-eV,T)}{\partial E}dE}$. The calculated $G(30mV)/G(0)$ is obviously higher than experiments (see Fig. 3(b)), which suggests that Fermi broadening is not the main reason to close the NSG.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{figure3.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) (a) $dI/dV$ for S19 in different temperatures at $H$ = 16 T. (b) Temperature dependence of $G(30mV)/G(0)$ for S19 (solid squares) at $H$ = 16 T and N0 at $H$ = 0 T (solid circles). The calculated $G(30mV)/G(0)$ with considering Fermi broadening effects for S19 (dash dotted line) and N0 (dashed line) are plotted as a function of temperature.} \label{fig:sample}
\end{figure}
In order to get further insight into the NSG state, we measure the $dI/dV$ spectra at various junction resistances ($R_j$) (see Fig. 4(a)). We find that the zero bias dip becomes deeper and deeper as increasing the $R_j$. The magnitude of NSG versus $R_j$ is plotted in Fig. 4(b), which shows a nearly positive relationship with $R_j$ for all the superconducting samples. Moreover, the magnitude of NSG in N0 is further enhanced compared to the superconducting ones. According to the Blonder-Tinkham-Klapwijk (BTK) theory, the normalized $dI/dV$ in the superconducting state comes from the contributions of two processes, i.e. the tunneling process and the Andreev reflection process \cite{Blonder1982}. The effective barrier height ($Z$) involving the thickness of oxide barrier and the mismatch of Fermi velocity impacts the contribution fractions from the two processes. On one hand, reducing $Z$ benefits the process of Andreev reflection and suppresses the tunneling process. On the other hand, increasing the oxide barrier thickness will enhance the scattering ratio and shorten the lifetime of quasiparticles, so it will weaken the measurement signal \cite{Dynes1984}. In the normal state, only tunneling process contributes to $dI/dV$. The increased $R_j$ mainly results from the increasing of oxide barrier thickness and must weaken the magnitude of NSG. However, it is contrary to our results.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{figure4.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) (a) $dI/dV$ versus bias voltage of S16 in different junction resistances at $T$ = 2.5 K and $H$ = 12 T. (b) $G(30mV)/G(0)$ versus junction resistance for different samples. The data of the superconducting samples can be nearly fitted with a solid line. The $G(30mV)/G(0)$ of non-superconducting sample (star) is higher than that of the superconducting samples at the same junction resistance. (c) Normalized $dI/dV$ versus bias voltage for N0 at $T$ = 2.5 K, $H$ = 12 T (solid squares). The data are fitted with AAL theory (solid lines). (d) Normalized $dI/dV$ versus bias voltage of different samples at $T$ = 2.5 K, $H$ = 12 T and $T$ = 22 K, $H$ = 0 T. All the data can be well fitted in the range of 2$\sim$8 mV (solid lines).} \label{fig:sample}
\end{figure}
We now summarize the feature of NSG in PCO: (1) NSG state is not sensitive to magnetic field in all the samples. (2) NSG can be suppressed easily by increasing temperature. (3) The magnitude of NSG is positively associated with $R_j$. (4) The magnitude of NSG from non-superconducting sample is further enhanced compared to the superconducting ones.
The Nernst behavior in Pr$_{2-x}$Ce$_{x}$CuO$_{4\pm\delta}$ discloses that the buildup temperature of superconducting fluctuations always follows the $T_c$ dome \cite{Li2007}. No matter for the superconducting fluctuations with the Maki-Thompson type or the Aslamazov-Larkin type above $T_c$, magnetic field should play a role in pair breaking or phase decoherence \cite{Larkin2005}, and therefore suppress the superconducting fluctuations. However, the NSG state persists in field up to 16 T, even in the non-superconducting sample. Besides, the magnitude of NSG is almost the same at $T$ = 15 K in field up to 12 T in PCO (see Fig. 2(d)). Moreover, we observe enhanced magnitude of NSG in non-superconducting sample. Thus, the superconducting fluctuations should not be the key reason for the NSG.
Based on our results, we argue that the NSG should stem from disorder-induced electron-electron interactions. Considering the interaction effects in disordered 2D Fermi systems, Altshuler et al. obtained a logarithmic-correction density of states. In tunneling experiments, the normalized corrections to the density of states can be given as \cite{Altshuler1980,Lee1985}:
\begin{equation}\label{1}
\frac{\delta N(\varepsilon)}{N_{1}} = \frac{1}{4\pi\varepsilon_{F}\tau} ln(2\kappa\Delta)ln(|\varepsilon|\tau),
\end{equation}
where $\delta N(\varepsilon)$ is the corrections to the density of states, $N_{1}$ is unperturbed density of states, $\varepsilon_{F}$ is the Fermi energy, $\tau$ is the relaxation time, $\Delta$ is the thickness of the barrier and $\kappa$ is the inverse screening length in 2D. Both $\tau$ and $\kappa$ can be used to describe the degree of disorders. Enhancing the degree of disorders will increase the corrections to the density of states. The enhanced $\Delta$ also leads to a larger $\delta N$. The AAL theory was confirmed by a number of tunneling experiments in various disordered metallic films, e.g. Be \cite{Butko2000}, Ag \cite{Yu2003} and In \cite{Yoshizawa2015}. We fit the normalized $dI/dV$ of various samples with AAL theory as seen in Figs. 4(c) and 4(d). All the data can be well fitted from 2 mV to 8 mV. The deviation at lower bias comes from the thermal broadening effect \cite{Biswas2001}. At high bias ($>$ 8 mV), the deviation results from other effects such as band edge effects \cite{Wang2012}, the break-down of WKB approximation \cite{Wei1998}, inelastic electron tunneling process \cite{Kirtley1990}, etc.
Now, we try to understand the behaviors of NSG state in the framework of AAL theory. A small amount of disorders in materials mainly cause two effects, i.e. weak localization and electron-electron correlations. The former stems from enhanced back scattering by quantum interference, which leads to a smaller conductance. The magnetic field destroys the quantum interference and increases the conductivity \cite{Hikami1980}. The latter originates from the destruction of long-range Coulomb screening. When the disorder-limited mean free path $l$ is reduced and comparable to the Fermi wavelength, i.e. $k_{F}l$ $\sim 1$, the density of states near the Fermi energy is obvious suppressed by the enhanced electron-electron Coulomb interactions \cite{Altshuler1980}, which is not sensitive to the magnetic field \cite{Lee1985}. The electron-electron interactions induce the localization of electrons as the electronic degrees of freedom freeze. With increasing the temperature, the localized electrons can gradually overcome the Coulomb interactions due to the thermal excitations, and the reduced density of states rebuilds. In addition, $R_j$ is adjusted mainly by changing the thickness of the oxide barrier. The larger thickness of oxide barrier leads to stronger corrections to the density of states \cite{Lee1985}. As mentioned above, the degree of disorder in N0 is stronger than that in the superconducting samples, which leads to an enhancement in magnitude of NSG.
In conclusion, we observe the NSG state in the Ce-free PCO thin films with tunable $T_c$. The NSG exhibits field-independence but temperature-dependence for both superconducting and non-superconducting samples. Importantly, there is a positive correlation between the magnitude of NSG and the junction resistance, and the magnitude of NSG is further enhanced in non-superconducting samples. All these behaviors are well consistent with AAL theory, indicating that the NSG in electron doped cuprates stems from disorder-induced electron-electron correlations.
This work was supported by the National Key Basic Research Program of China (Grants No. 2015CB921000 and 2016YFA0300301), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grants No. 11674374 and 11474338), the Key Research Program of Frontier Sciences, CAS (Grant No. QYZDB-SSW-SLH008) and the Strategic Priority Research Program of the CAS (Grants No. XDB07020100 and XDB07030200), the Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Project (Grant No. Z161100002116011).
|
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We would like to thank Philipp Kr\"ahenb\"uhl for helpful discussions.
\section{Appendix A}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:rec_application}
Given $S \subseteq \mathbb{R}^n$, $y \in \mathbb{R}^m$, $A \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$, and $\gamma, \delta, \epsilon_1, \epsilon_2 > 0$, if matrix $A$ satisfies the $S\=/REC{}(S, \gamma, \delta)$, then for any two $x_1, x_2 \in S$, such that $\|Ax_1 - y\| \leq \epsilon_1$ and $\|Ax_2 - y\| \leq \epsilon_2$, we have
\[
\| x_1 - x_2 \| \leq \dfrac{\epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2 + \delta}{\gamma}.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\begin{align*}
\| x_1 - x_2 \| & \leq \dfrac{1}{\gamma} \left( \| Ax_1 - Ax_2 \| + \delta \right), \\
& = \dfrac{1}{\gamma} \left( \| (Ax_1 - y) - (Ax_2-y) \| + \delta \right), \\
& \leq \dfrac{1}{\gamma} \left( \| (Ax_1 - y) \| + \| (Ax_2-y) \| + \delta \right), \\
& \leq \dfrac{\epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2 + \delta}{\gamma}.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Lemma~\ref{thm:rec_with_p}}
\begin{definition}\label{subgamma}
A random variable $X$ is said to be $\mathrm{subgamma}(\sigma, B)$ if \ $\forall \epsilon \geq 0$, we have
\[
\mathbb{P} \left( |X - \mathbb{E}[X] | \geq \epsilon \right) \leq 2 \max \left(e^{-\epsilon^2/(2\sigma^2)}, e^{-B\epsilon/2}\right).
\]
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:chaining-eps-nets}
Let $G: \mathbb{R}^k \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^n$ be an $L$-Lipschitz function. Let $B^k(r)$ be the $L_2$-ball in $\mathbb{R}^k$ with radius $r$, $S = G(B^k(r))$, and $M$ be a $\delta/L$-net on $B^k(r)$ such that $|M| \leq k\log \left( \dfrac{4Lr}{\delta} \right)$. Let $A$ be a $\mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ random matrix with IID Gaussian entries with zero mean and variance $1/m$. If $$m = \Omega \left( k \log \dfrac{Lr}{\delta} \right),$$ then for any $x \in S$, if $x' = \argmin_{\wh{x} \in G(M)} \|x - \wh{x}\|$, we have $\|A(x - x')\| = \mathcal{O}(\delta)$ with probability $1 - e^{-\Omega(m)}$.
\end{lemma}
Note that for any given point $x'$ in $S$, if we try to find its nearest neighbor of that point in an $\delta$-net on $S$, then the difference between the two is at most the $\delta$. In words, this lemma says that even if we consider measurements made on these points, \textit{i.e.} a linear projection using a random matrix $A$, then as long as there are enough measurements, the difference between measurements is of the same order $\delta$. If the point $x'$ was in the net, then this can be easily achieved by Johnson-Lindenstrauss Lemma. But to argue that this is true for all $x'$ in $S$, which can be an uncountably large set, we construct a chain of nets on $S$. We now present the formal proof.
\begin{proof}
Observe that $ \dfrac{\|Ax\|^2}{\|x\|^2}$ is $\mathrm{subgamma} \left(\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{m}}, \dfrac{1}{m} \right)$. Thus, for any $f > 0$,
\[
\epsilon \geq 2 + \dfrac{4}{m} \log \dfrac{2}{f} \geq \max \left( \sqrt{\dfrac{2}{m} \log \dfrac{2}{f}} , \dfrac{2}{m} \log \dfrac{2}{f} \right)
\]
is sufficient to ensure that
\[
\mathbb{P} \left( \|Ax\| \geq (1+\epsilon) \|x\| \right) \leq f.
\]
Now, let $M = M_0 \subseteq M_1 \subseteq M_2, \cdots \subseteq M_l$ be a chain of epsilon nets of $B^k(r)$ such that $M_i$ is a $\delta_i/L$-net and $\delta_i = \delta_0 / 2^i$, with $\delta_0 = \delta$. We know that there exist nets such that
\[
\log |M_i| \leq k \log \left( \dfrac{4Lr}{\delta_i} \right) \leq ik + k\log \left( \dfrac{4Lr}{\delta_0} \right).
\]
Let $N_i = G(M_i)$. Then due to Lipschitzness of $G$, $N_i$'s form a chain of epsilon nets such that $N_i$ is a $\delta_i$-net of $S = G(B^k(r))$, with $|N_i| = |M_i|$.
For $i \in \lbrace 0, 1, 2 \cdots, l-1 \rbrace $, let
\[
T_i = \lbrace x_{i+1} - x_i \mid x_{i+1} \in N_{i+1}, x_i \in N_i \rbrace.
\]
Thus,
\begin{align*}
|T_i| &\leq |N_{i+1}||N_i|. \\
\implies \log |T_i| &\leq \log |N_{i+1}| + | \log |N_i|, \\
&\leq (2i+1)k + 2k\log \left( \dfrac{4Lr}{\delta_0} \right), \\
&\leq 3ik + 2k\log \left( \dfrac{4Lr}{\delta_0} \right).
\end{align*}
Now assume $m = 3k\log \left( \dfrac{4Lr}{\delta_0} \right)$,
\[
\log(f_i) = - (m + 4ik),
\]
and
\begin{align*}
\epsilon_i &= 2 + \dfrac{4}{m} \log \dfrac{2}{f_i}, \\
&= 2 + \dfrac{4}{m} \log 2 + 4 + \dfrac{16ik}{m}, \\
&= O(1) + \dfrac{16ik}{m}.
\end{align*}
By choice of $f_i$ and $\epsilon_i$, we have $\forall i \in [l-1], \forall t \in T_i$,
\[
\mathbb{P} \left( \|At\| > (1+\epsilon_i) \|t\| \right) \leq f_i.
\]
Thus by union bound, we have
\[
\mathbb{P} \left( \|At\| \leq (1+\epsilon_i) \|t\|, \forall i , \forall t \in T_i \right) \geq 1 - \sum_{i=0}^{l-1} |T_i| f_i.
\]
Now,
\begin{align*}
\log(|T_i|f_i) &= \log(|T_i|) + \log(f_i), \\
&\leq -k\log \left( \dfrac{4Lr}{\delta_0} \right) - ik, \\
&= -m/3 - ik. \\
\implies \sum_{i=0}^{l-1}|T_i|f_i &\leq e^{-m/3}\sum_{i=0}^{l-1}e^{-ik}, \\
&\leq e^{-m/3}\left( \frac{1}{1-e^{-1}} \right), \\
&\leq 2e^{-m/3}.
\end{align*}
Observe that for any $x \in S$, we can write
\begin{align*}
x &= x_0 + (x_1 - x_0) + (x_2 - x_1) \ldots (x_l - x_{l-1}) + x^f. \\
x - x_0 &= \sum_{i=0}^{l-1}(x_{i+1} - x_i) + x^f.
\end{align*}
where $x_i \in N_i$ and $x_f = x - x_l$.
Since each $x_{i+1} - x_i \in T_i$, with probability at least $1 - 2e^{-m/3}$, we have
\begin{align*}
\sum_{i=0}^{l-1} \| A(x_{i+1} - x_i) \| &= \sum_{i=0}^{l-1} (1 + \epsilon_i) \|(x_{i+1} - x_i) \|, \\
&\leq \sum_{i=0}^{l-1} (1 + \epsilon_i) \delta_i, \\
&= \delta_0 \sum_{i=0}^{l-1} \dfrac{1}{2^i} \left(O(1) + \dfrac{16ik}{m} \right), \\
&= O(\delta_0) + \delta_0 \dfrac{16k}{m} \sum_{i=0}^{l-1} \left(\dfrac{i}{2^i} \right), \\
&= O(\delta_0).
\end{align*}
Now, $\|x^f\| = \|x - x_l\| \leq d_l = \dfrac{\delta_0}{2_l}$, and $\| x_{i+1} - x_{i} \| \leq \delta_i$ due to properties of epsilon-nets. We know that $\|A\| \leq 2 + \sqrt{n/m}$ with probability at least $1 - 2e^{-m/2}$ (Corollary 5.35~\cite{vershynin2010introduction}). By setting $l = \log(n)$, we get that, $\|A\| \|x^f\| \leq \left(2 + \sqrt{\dfrac{n}{m}} \right) \dfrac{\delta_0}{2^l} = O(\delta_0)$ with probability $\geq 1 - 2e^{-m/2}$.
Combining these two results, and noting that it is possible to choose $x' = x_0$, we get that with probability $1 - e^{-\Omega(m)}$,
\begin{align*}
\|A(x - x')\| &= \|A(x - x_0)\|, \\
&\leq \sum_{i=0}^{l-1}\| A(x_{i+1} - x_i)\| + \| Ax^f \|, \\
&= \mathcal{O}(\delta_0) + \| A \| \|x^f \|, \\
&= \mathcal{O}(\delta).
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{nonumlemma}
Let $G:\mathbb{R}^k \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^n$ be $L$-Lipschitz. Let $$B^k(r) = \lbrace z \ \vert \ z \in \mathbb{R}^k, \| z \| \leq r \rbrace$$ be an $L_2$-norm ball in $\mathbb{R}^k$. For $\alpha < 1$, if
\[
m = \Omega \left(\frac{k}{\alpha^2} \log \frac{Lr}{\delta} \right),
\]
then a random matrix $A \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$ with IID entries such that $A_{ij} \sim \mathcal{N}\left(0,\frac{1}{m}\right)$ satisfies the $S\=/REC{}(G(B^k(r)), 1-\alpha, \delta)$ with $1 - e^{-\Omega(\alpha^2 m)}$ probability.
\end{nonumlemma}
\begin{proof}
We construct a $\dfrac{\delta}{L}$-net, $N$, on $B^k(r)$. There exists a net such that
\[
\log |N| \leq k \log \left( \frac{4Lr}{\delta} \right).
\]
Since $N$ is a $\dfrac{\delta}{L}$-cover of $B^k(r)$, due to the $L$-Lipschitz property of $G(\cdot)$, we get that $G(N)$ is a $\delta$-cover of $G(B^k(r))$.
Let $T$ denote the pairwise differences between the elements in $G(N)$, \textit{i.e.},
\[
T = \lbrace G(z_1) - G(z_2) \mid z_1,z_2\in N \rbrace.
\]
Then,
\begin{align*}
|T| & \leq |N|^2, \\
\implies \log |T| & \leq 2 \log |N|, \\
& \leq 2k \log \left( \frac{4Lr}{\delta} \right).
\end{align*}
For any $z, z' \in B^k$, $\exists \ z_1, z_2\in N$, such that $G(z_1), G(z_2)$ are $\delta$-close to $G(z)$ and $G(z')$ respectively. Thus, by triangle inequality,
\begin{align*}
\|G(z) - G(z')\| & \leq \|G(z) - G(z_1) \| + \\
& \qquad \|G(z_1) - G(z_2) \| + \\
& \qquad \|G(z_2) - G(z') \|, \\
& \leq \|G(z_1) - G(z_2) \| + 2 \delta.
\end{align*}
Again by triangle inequality,
\begin{align*}
\|AG(z_1) - AG(z_2)\| &\leq \|AG(z_1) - AG(z)\| + \\
&\qquad \|AG(z) - AG(z')\| + \\
&\qquad \|AG(z') - AG(z_2)\|.
\end{align*}
Now, by Lemma~\ref{lemma:chaining-eps-nets}, with probability $1 - e^{-\Omega(m)}$, $\|AG(z_1) - AG(z)\| = \mathcal{O}(\delta)$, and $\|AG(z') - AG(z_2)\| = \mathcal{O}(\delta)$.
Thus,
\[
\|AG(z_1) - AG(z_2)\| \leq \|AG(z) - AG(z')\| + \mathcal{O}(\delta).
\]
By the Johnson-Lindenstrauss Lemma, for a fixed $x \in \mathbb{R}^n$, $\mathbb{P}\left[\|Ax\|^2 < (1-\alpha)\|x\|^2 \right]< \exp(-\alpha^2 m)$. Therefore, we can union bound over all vectors in $T$ to get
\[
\mathbb{P} (\|Ax\|^2 \geq (1-\alpha)\|x\|^2, \ \forall x \in T) \geq 1- e^{-\Omega(\alpha^2 m)}.
\]
Since $\alpha < 1$, and $z_1, z_2 \in N$, $G(z_1) - G(z_2) \in T$, we have
\begin{align*}
(1-\alpha) \| G(z_1) - G(z_2) \| &\leq \sqrt{1-\alpha} \| G(z_1) - G(z_2) \|, \\
&\leq \|A G(z_1) - A G(z_2)\|.
\end{align*}
Combining the three results above we get that with probability $1- e^{-\Omega(\alpha^2 m)}$,
\begin{align*}
(1-\alpha) \|G(z) - G(z')\| &\leq (1-\alpha) \|G(z_1) - G(z_2) \| + \mathcal{O}(\delta), \\
&\leq \|A G(z_1) - A G(z_2)\| + \mathcal{O}(\delta), \\
&\leq \|AG(z) - AG(z')\| + \mathcal{O}(\delta).
\end{align*}
Thus, $A$ satisfies $S\=/REC{}(S, 1-\alpha, \delta)$ with probability $1- e^{-\Omega(\alpha^2 m)}$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Lemma~\ref{thm: subspace embedding}}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:counting-partitions}
Consider $c$ different $k-1$ dimensional hyperplanes in $\mathbb{R}^k$. Consider the $k$-dimensional faces (hereafter called $k$-faces) generated by the hyperplanes, \textit{i.e.} the elements in the partition of $\mathbb{R}^k$ such that relative to each hyperplane, all points inside a partition are on the same side. Then, the number of $k$-faces is $\mathcal{O}(c^k)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Proof is by induction, and follows~\cite{matouvsek2002lectures}.
Let $f(c,k)$ denote the number of $k-$faces generated in $\mathbb{R}^k$ by $c$ different $(k-1)$-dimensional hyperplanes. As a base case, let $k=1$. Then $(k-1)$-dimensional hyperplanes are just points on a line. $c$ points partition $\mathbb{R}$ into $c+1$ pieces. This gives $f(c,1) = \mathcal{O}(c)$.
Now, assuming that $f(c,k-1) = \mathcal{O}(c^{k-1})$ is true, we need to show $f(c,k) = \mathcal{O}(c^k)$. Assume we have $(c-1)$ different hyperplanes $H=\{h_1, h_2, \ldots, h_{c-1}\}\subset\mathbb{R}^k$, and a new hyperplane $h_c$ is added. $h_c$ intersects $H$ at $(c-1)$ different $(k-2)$-faces given by $F=\{f_j \mid f_j = h_j \cap h_c, 1\leq j\leq (c-1)\}$. The $(k-2)$-faces in $F$ partition $h_c$ into $f(c-1, k-1)$ different $(k-1)$-faces. Additionally, each $(k-1)$-face in $h_c$ divides an existing $k$-face into two. Hence the number of new $k$-faces introduced by the addition of $h_c$ is $f(c-1, k-1)$. This gives the recursion
\begin{align*}
f(c,k) &= f(c-1,k) + f(c-1,k-1), \\
&= f(c-1,k) + \mathcal{O}(c^{k-1}), \\
&= \mathcal{O}(c^k).
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{nonumlemma}
Let $G:\mathbb{R}^k \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^n$ be a $d$-layer neural network, where each layer is a linear transformation followed by a pointwise non-linearity. Suppose there are at most $c$ nodes per layer, and the non-linearities are piecewise linear with at most two pieces, and let
\[
m = \Omega \left( \frac{1}{\alpha^2} kd\log c \right)
\]
for some $\alpha < 1$. Then a random matrix $A\in\mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$ with IID entries $A_{ij}\sim\mathcal{N}(0,\frac{1}{m})$ satisfies the $S\=/REC{}(G(\mathbb{R}^k), 1 - \alpha, 0)$ with $1 - e^{-\Omega(\alpha^2 m)}$ probability.
\end{nonumlemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider the first layer of $G$. Each node in this layer can be represented as a hyperplane in $\mathbb{R}^k$, where the points on the hyperplane are those where the input to the node switches from one linear piece to the other. Since there are at most $c$ nodes in this layer, by Lemma~\ref{lemma:counting-partitions}, the input space is partitioned by at most $c$ different hyperplanes, into $\mathcal{O}(c^k)$ $k$-faces. Applying this over the $d$ layers of $G$, we get that the input space $\mathbb{R}^k$ is partitioned into at most $c^{kd}$ sets.
Recall that the non-linearities are piecewise linear, and the partition boundaries were made precisely at those points where the non-linearities change from one piece to another. This means that within each set of the input partition, the output is a linear function of the inputs. Thus $G(\mathbb{R}^k)$ is a union of $c^{kd}$ different $k$-faces in $\mathbb{R}^n$.
We now use an oblivious subspace embedding to bound the number of measurements required to embed the range of $G(\cdot)$. For a single $k$-face $S \subseteq \mathbb{R}^n$, a random matrix $A\in\mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$ with IID entries such that $A_{ij} \sim \mathcal{N}\left(0,\frac{1}{m}\right)$ satisfies $S\=/REC{}(S, 1-\alpha, 0)$ with probability $1 - e^{-\Omega(\alpha^2 m)}$ if $m = \Omega(k/\alpha^2)$.
Since the range of $G(\cdot)$ is a union of $c^{kd}$ different $k$-faces, we can union bound over all of them, such that $A$ satisfies the $S\=/REC{}(G(\mathbb{R}^k),1 - \alpha, 0)$ with probability $1 - c^{kd}e^{-\Omega(\alpha^2 m)}$. Thus, we get that $A$ satisfies the $S\=/REC{}(G(\mathbb{R}^k), 1-\alpha, 0)$ with probability $1 - e^{-\Omega(\alpha^2 m)}$ if
\[
m = \Omega \left( \frac{kd\log c}{\alpha^2} \right).
\]
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Lemma~\ref{thm:rec_application}}
\begin{nonumlemma}
Let $A \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ by drawn from a distribution that (1) satisfies the $S\=/REC{}(S, \gamma, \delta)$ with probability $1-p$ and (2) has for every fixed $x \in \mathbb{R}^n$, $\norm{Ax} \leq 2\norm{x}$ with probability $1-p$. For any $x^* \in \mathbb{R}^n$ and noise $\eta$, let $y = Ax^* + \eta$. Let $\wh{x}$ approximately minimize $\norm{y - Ax}$ over $x \in S$, \textit{i.e.},
\[
\norm{y - A\wh{x}} \leq \min_{x \in S}\norm{y - Ax} + \epsilon.
\]
Then
\[
\norm{\wh{x} - x^*} \leq \left( \frac{4}{\gamma} + 1 \right) \min_{x \in S} \norm{x^* - x} + \frac{1}{\gamma}\left(2\norm{\eta} + \epsilon + \delta\right)
\]
with probability $1-2p$.
\end{nonumlemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\overline{x} = \argmin_{x \in S} \norm{x^* - x}$. Then we have by Lemma~\ref{lemma:rec_application} and the hypothesis on $\wh{x}$ that
\begin{align*}
\norm{\overline{x} - \wh{x}} &\leq \frac{\norm{A\overline{x} - y} + \norm{A \wh{x}-y} + \delta}{\gamma}, \\
&\leq \frac{2\norm{A\overline{x} - y} + \epsilon + \delta}{\gamma}, \\
&\leq \frac{2\norm{A(\overline{x} - x^*)} + 2\norm{\eta} + \epsilon + \delta}{\gamma},
\end{align*}
as long as $A$ satisfies the S\=/REC{}, as happens with probability $1-p$. Now, since $\overline{x}$ and $x^*$ are independent of $A$, by assumption we also have $\norm{A(\overline{x} - x^*)} \leq 2\norm{\overline{x}-x^*}$ with probability $1-p$. Therefore
\[
\norm{x^* - \wh{x}} \leq \norm{\overline{x} - x^*} + \frac{4\norm{\overline{x} - x^*} + 2\norm{\eta} + \epsilon + \delta}{\gamma}
\]
as desired.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Lipschitzness of Neural Networks}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:composition_lipschitz}
Consider any two functions $f$ and $g$. If $f$ is $L_f$-Lipschitz and $g$ is $L_g$-Lipschitz, then their composition $f \circ g$ is $L_f L_g$-Lipschitz.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For any two $x_1, x_2$,
\begin{align*}
\| f(g(x_1)) - f(g(x_2)) \| &\leq L_f \| g(x_1) - g(x_2) \|, \\
&\leq L_f L_g \|x_1 - x_2 \|.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:lipschitz}
If G is a $d$-layer neural network with at most $c$ nodes per layer, all weights $\leq w_{\max}$ in absolute value, and $M$-Lipschitz non-linearity after each layer, then $G(\cdot)$ is $L$-Lipschitz with $L = {(Mcw_{\max})}^d$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider any linear layer with input $x$, weight matrix $W$ and bias vector $b$. Thus, $f(x) = Wx + b$. Now for any two $x_1$, $x_2$,
\begin{align*}
\|f(x_1) - f(x_2)\| &= \|Wx_1 + b - Wx_2 + b\|, \\
&= \|W(x_1 - x_2)\|, \\
&\leq \|W\| \|(x_1 - x_2)\|, \\
&\leq c w_{\max} \|(x_1 - x_2)\|.
\end{align*}
Let $f_i(\cdot), i \in [d]$ denote the function for the $i$-th layer in $G$. Since each layer is a composition of a linear function and a non-linearity, by Lemma~\ref{lemma:composition_lipschitz}, have that $f_i$ is $Mcw_{\max}$-Lipschitz.
Since $G = f_1 \circ f_2 \circ \ldots f_d$, by repeated application of Lemma~\ref{lemma:composition_lipschitz}, we get that $G$ is $L$-Lipschitz with $L = {(Mcw_{\max})}^d$.
\end{proof}
\section{Appendix B}
\input{figures4}
\subsection{Noise tolerance}
To understand the noise tolerance of our algorithm, we do the following experiment: First we fix the number of measurements so that Lasso does as well as our algorithm. From Fig.~\ref{fig:mnist-reconstr-l2}, and Fig.~\ref{fig:celebA-reconstr-l2} we see that this point is at $m=500$ for MNIST and $m=2500$ for celebA. Now, we look at the performance as the noise level increases. Hyperparameters are kept fixed as we change the noise level for both Lasso and for our algorithm.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:mnist-noise-l2}, we show the results on the MNIST dataset. In Fig.~\ref{fig:mnist-noise-l2}, we show the results on celebA dataset. We observe that our algorithm has more noise tolerance than Lasso.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{mnist_reconstr_l2_all.pdf}
\caption{Results on End to End model on MNIST\@. We show per pixel reconstruction error vs number of measurements. `Fixed A' and `Learned A' are two end to end models. The end to end models get noiseless measurements, while the other models get noisy ones. The vertical bars indicate 95\% confidence intervals.}
\label{fig:mnist-reconstr-l2-all}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Other models}
\subsubsection{End to end training on MNIST}
Instead of using a generative model to reconstruct the image, another approach is to learn from scratch a mapping that takes the measurements and outputs the original image. A major drawback of this approach is that it necessitates learning a new network if get a different set of measurements.
If we use a random matrix for every new image, the input to the network is essentially noise, and the network does not learn at all. Instead we are forced to use a fixed measurement matrix. We explore two approaches. First is to randomly sample and fix the measurement matrix and learn the rest of the mapping. In the second approach, we jointly optimize the measurement matrix as well.
We do this for $10$, $20$ and $30$ measurements for the MNIST dataset. We did not use additive noise. The reconstruction errors are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:mnist-reconstr-l2-all}. The reconstructions can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:mnist-e2e}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{mnist_e2e_orig_fixed_learned.pdf}
\caption{MNIST End to end learned model. Top row are original images. The next three are recovered by model with fixed random $A$, with 10, 20 and 30 measurements. Bottom three rows are with learned $A$ and $10$, $20$ and $30$ measurements.}
\label{fig:mnist-e2e}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{More results}
Here, we show more results on the reconstruction task, with varying number of measurements on both MNIST and celebA. Fig.~\ref{fig:more-mnist-reconstr} shows reconstructions on MNIST with $25$, $100$ and $400$ measurements. Fig.~\ref{fig:more-celebA-reconstr1}, Fig.~\ref{fig:more-celebA-reconstr2} and Fig.~\ref{fig:more-celebA-reconstr3} show results on celebA dataset.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.9\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{mnist_reconstr_25_orig_lasso_vae-gen.pdf}
\caption{25 measurements}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.9\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{mnist_reconstr_100_orig_lasso_vae-gen.pdf}
\caption{100 measurements}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.9\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{mnist_reconstr_400_orig_lasso_vae-gen.pdf}
\caption{400 measurements}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Reconstruction on MNIST\@. In each image, top row is ground truth, middle row is Lasso, bottom row is our algorithm.}
\label{fig:more-mnist-reconstr}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.8\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{celebA_reconstr_50_orig_lasso-dct_lasso-wavelet_dcgan-gen.pdf}
\caption{50 measurements}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.8\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{celebA_reconstr_100_orig_lasso-dct_lasso-wavelet_dcgan-gen.pdf}
\caption{100 measurements}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.8\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{celebA_reconstr_200_orig_lasso-dct_lasso-wavelet_dcgan-gen.pdf}
\caption{200 measurements}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Reconstruction on celebA. In each image, top row is ground truth, subsequent two rows show reconstructions by Lasso (DCT) and Lasso (Wavelet) respectively. The bottom row is the reconstruction by our algorithm.}
\label{fig:more-celebA-reconstr1}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.8\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{celebA_reconstr_500_orig_lasso-dct_lasso-wavelet_dcgan-gen.pdf}
\caption{500 measurements}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.8\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{celebA_reconstr_1000_orig_lasso-dct_lasso-wavelet_dcgan-gen.pdf}
\caption{1000 measurements}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.8\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{celebA_reconstr_2500_orig_lasso-dct_lasso-wavelet_dcgan-gen.pdf}
\caption{2500 measurements}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Reconstruction on celebA. In each image, top row is ground truth, subsequent two rows show reconstructions by Lasso (DCT) and Lasso (Wavelet) respectively. The bottom row is the reconstruction by our algorithm.}
\label{fig:more-celebA-reconstr2}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.8\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{celebA_reconstr_5000_orig_lasso-dct_lasso-wavelet_dcgan-gen.pdf}
\caption{5000 measurements}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.8\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{celebA_reconstr_7500_orig_lasso-dct_lasso-wavelet_dcgan-gen.pdf}
\caption{7500 measurements}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{0.8\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{celebA_reconstr_10000_orig_lasso-dct_lasso-wavelet_dcgan-gen.pdf}
\caption{10000 measurements}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Reconstruction on celebA. In each image, top row is ground truth, subsequent two rows show reconstructions by Lasso (DCT) and Lasso (Wavelet) respectively. The bottom row is the reconstruction by our algorithm.}
\label{fig:more-celebA-reconstr3}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\section{Conclusion}
We demonstrate how to perform compressed sensing using generative models from neural nets. These models can represent data distributions more concisely than standard sparsity models, while their differentiability allows for fast signal reconstruction. This will allow compressed sensing applications to make significantly fewer measurements.
Our theorems and experiments both suggest that, after relatively few measurements, the signal reconstruction gets close to the optimal within the range of the generator. To reach the full potential of this technique, one should use larger generative models as the number of measurements increase. Whether this can be expressed more concisely than by training multiple independent generative models of different sizes is an open question.
Generative models are an active area of research with ongoing rapid improvements. Because our framework applies to general generative models, this improvement will immediately yield better reconstructions with fewer measurements. We also believe that one could also use the performance of generative models for our task as one benchmark for the quality of different models.
\section{Experiments and Results}
\subsection{Reconstruction from Gaussian measurements}
We take $A$ to be a random matrix with IID Gaussian entries with zero mean and standard deviation of $1/m$. Each entry of noise vector $\eta$ is also an IID Gaussian random variable. We compare performance of different sensing algorithms qualitatively and quantitatively. For quantitative comparison, we use the reconstruction error = $\| \hat{x} - x^* \|^2$, where $\hat{x}$ is an estimate of $x^*$ returned by the algorithm. In all cases, we report the results on a held out test set, unseen by the generative model at training time.
\subsubsection{MNIST}
The standard deviation of the noise vector is set such that $\sqrt{\mathbb{E}[\| \eta \|^2]} = 0.1$. We use Adam optimizer~\cite{kingma2014adam}, with a learning rate of $0.01$. We do $10$ random restarts with $1000$ steps per restart and pick the reconstruction with best measurement error.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:mnist-reconstr-l2}, we show the reconstruction error as we change the number of measurements both for Lasso and our algorithm. We observe that our algorithm is able to get low errors with far fewer measurements. For example, our algorithm's performance with $25$ measurements matches Lasso's performance with $400$ measurements. Fig.~\ref{fig:mnist-reconstr} shows sample reconstructions by Lasso and our algorithm.
However, our algorithm is limited since its output is constrained to be in the range of the generator. After $100$ measurements, our algorithm's performance saturates, and additional measurements give no additional performance. Since Lasso has no such limitation, it eventually surpasses our algorithm, but this takes more than $500$ measurements of the 784-dimensional vector. We expect that a more powerful generative model with representation dimension $k > 20$ can make better use of additional measurements.
\subsubsection{celebA}
The standard deviation of entries in the noise vector is set such that $\sqrt{\mathbb{E}[\| \eta \|^2]} = 0.01$. We optimize use Adam optimizer~\cite{kingma2014adam}, with a learning rate of $0.1$. We do $2$ random restarts with $500$ update steps per restart and pick the reconstruction with best measurement error.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:celebA-reconstr-l2}, we show the reconstruction error as we change the number of measurements both for Lasso and our algorithm. In Fig.~\ref{fig:celebA-reconstr} we show sample reconstructions by Lasso and our algorithm. We observe that our algorithm is able to produce reasonable reconstructions with as few as $500$ measurements, while the output of the baseline algorithms is quite blurry. Similar to the results on MNIST, if we continue to give more measurements, our algorithm saturates, and for more than $5000$ measurements, Lasso gets a better reconstruction. We again expect that a more powerful generative model with $k > 100$ would perform better in the high-measurement regime.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.48\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{mnist_reconstr_100_orig_lasso_vae-gen.pdf}
\caption{We show original images (top row) and reconstructions by Lasso (middle row) and our algorithm (bottom row).}
\label{fig:mnist-reconstr}
\end{subfigure}\hfill%
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.48\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{mnist_superres_orig_blurred_lasso_vae-gen.pdf}
\caption{We show original images (top row), low resolution version of original images (middle row) and reconstructions (last row).}
\label{fig:mnist-superres}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Results on MNIST\@. Reconstruction with 100 measurements (left) and Super-resolution (right)}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Super-resolution}
Super-resolution is the task of constructing a high resolution image from a low resolution version of the same image. This problem can be thought of as special case of our general framework of linear measurements, where the measurements correspond to local spatial averages of the pixel values. Thus, we try to use our recovery algorithm to perform this task with measurement matrix $A$ tailored to give only the relevant observations. We note that this measurement matrix may not satisfy the S\=/REC{} condition (with good constants $\gamma$ and $\delta$), and consequently, our theorems may not be applicable.
\subsubsection{MNIST}
We construct a low resolution image by spatial $2 \times 2$ pooling with a stride of $2$ to produce a $14 \times 14$ image. These measurements are used to reconstruct the original $28 \times 28$ image. Fig.~\ref{fig:mnist-superres} shows reconstructions produced by our algorithm on images from a held out test set. We observe sharp reconstructions which closely match the fine structure in the ground truth.
\subsubsection{celebA}
We construct a low resolution image by spatial $4 \times 4$ pooling with a stride of $4$ to produce a $16 \times 16$ image. These measurements are used to reconstruct the original $64 \times 64$ image. In Fig.~\ref{fig:celebA-superres} we show results on images from a held out test set. We see that our algorithm is able to fill in the details to match the original image.
\input{figures2}
\input{figures3}
\subsection{Understanding sources of error}
Although better than baselines, our reconstructions still admit some error. There are three sources of this error: (a) Representation error: the image being sensed is far from the range of the generator (b) Measurement error: The finite set of random measurements do not contain all the information about the unknown image (c) Optimization error: The optimization procedure did not find the best $z$.
In this section we present some experiments that suggest that the representation error is the dominant term. In our first experiment, we ensure that the representation error is zero, and try to minimize the sum of other two errors. In the second experiment, we ensure that the measurement error is zero, and try to minimize the sum of other two.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{mnist_manifold_orig_vae-gen.pdf}
\caption{Results on the representation error experiments on MNIST\@. Top row shows original images and the bottom row shows closest images found in the range of the generator.}
\label{fig:mnist-manifold}
\vspace{-6mm}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Sensing images from the range of the generator}
Our first approach is to sense an image that \emph{is} in the range of the generator. More concretely, we sample a $z^*$ from $P_Z$. Then we pass it through the generator to get $x^* = G(z^*)$. Now, we pretend that this is a real image and try to sense that. This method eliminates the representation error and allows us to check if our gradient based optimization procedure is able to find $z^*$ by minimizing the objective.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:mnist-gen-range} and Fig.~\ref{fig:celebA-gen-range}, we show the reconstruction error for images in the range of the generators trained on MNIST and celebA datasets respectively. We see that we get almost perfect reconstruction with very few measurements. This suggests that objective is being properly minimized and we indeed get $\hat{z}$ close to $z^*$. \textit{i.e.} the sum of optimization error and the measurement error is not very large, in the absence of the representation error.
\subsubsection{Quantifying representation error}
We saw that in absence of the representation error, the overall error is small. However from Fig.~\ref{fig:reconstr-l2}, we know that the overall error is still non-zero. So, in this experiment, we seek to quantify the representation error, \textit{i.e.}, how far are the real images from the range of the generator?
From the previous experiment, we know that the $\hat{z}$ recovered by our algorithm is close to $z^*$, the best possible value, if the image being sensed is in the range of the generator. Based on this, we make an assumption that this property is also true for real images. With this assumption, we get an estimate to the representation error as follows: We sample real images from the test set. Then we use the full image in our algorithm, \textit{i.e.}, our measurement matrix $A$ is identity. This eliminates the measurement error. Using these measurements, we get the reconstructed image $G(\hat{z})$ through our algorithm. The estimated representation error is then $\|G(\hat{z}) - x^*\|^2$. We repeat this procedure several times over randomly sampled images from our dataset and report average representation error values. The task of finding the closest image in the range of the generator has been studied in prior work~\cite{creswell2016inverting, dumoulin2016adversarially, donahue2016adversarial}.
On the MNIST dataset, we get average per pixel representation error of $0.005$. The recovered images are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:mnist-manifold}. In contrast with only $100$ Gaussian measurements, we are able to get a per pixel reconstruction error of about $0.009$.
On the celebA dataset, we get average per pixel representation error of $0.020$. The recovered images are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:celebA-manifold}. On the other hand, with only $500$ Gaussian measurements, we get a per pixel reconstruction error of about $0.028$.
These experiments suggest that the representation error is the major component of the total error. Thus, a more flexible generative model can help to decrease the overall error on both datasets.
\section{Introduction}
Compressive or compressed sensing is the problem of reconstructing an unknown vector $x^* \in \mathbb{R}^n$ after observing $m<n $ linear measurements of its entries, possibly with added noise:
\[
y = Ax^* + \eta,
\]
where $A \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ is called the measurement matrix and $\eta \in \mathbb{R}^m$ is noise. Even without noise, this is an underdetermined system of linear equations, so recovery is impossible unless we make an assumption on the structure of the unknown vector $x^*$. We need to assume that the unknown vector is ``natural,'' or ``simple,'' in some application-dependent way.
The most common structural assumption is that the vector $x^*$ is $k$-sparse in some known basis (or approximately $k$-sparse). Finding the sparsest solution to an underdetermined system of linear equations is NP-hard, but still convex optimization can provably recover the true sparse vector $x^*$ if the matrix $A$ satisfies conditions such as the Restricted Isometry Property (RIP) or the related Restricted Eigenvalue Condition (REC)~\cite{tibshirani1996regression,candes2006stable,donoho2006compressed,bickel2009simultaneous}. The problem is also called high-dimensional sparse linear regression and there is vast literature on establishing conditions for different recovery algorithms, different assumptions on the design of $A$ and generalizations of RIP and REC for other structures, see \textit{e.g.}~\cite{bickel2009simultaneous,negahban2009unified,agarwal2010fast,loh2011high,
bach2012optimization}.
This significant interest is justified since a large number of applications can be expressed as recovering an unknown vector from noisy linear measurements. For example, many tomography problems can be expressed in this framework: $x^*$ is the unknown true tomographic image and the linear measurements are obtained by x-ray or other physical sensing system that produces sums or more general linear projections of the unknown pixels. Compressed sensing has been studied extensively for medical applications including computed tomography (CT)~\cite{chen2008prior}, rapid MRI~\cite{lustig2007sparse} and neuronal spike train recovery~\cite{hegde2009compressive}. Another impressive application is the ``single pixel camera''~\cite{duarte2008single}, where digital micro-mirrors provide linear combinations to a single pixel sensor that then uses compressed sensing reconstruction algorithms to reconstruct an image. These results have been extended by combining sparsity with additional structural assumptions~\cite{baraniuk2010model,hegde2015nearly}, and by generalizations such as translating sparse vectors into low-rank matrices~\cite{negahban2009unified,bach2012optimization,foygel2014corrupted}. These results can improve performance when the structural assumptions fit the sensed signals. Other works perform ``dictionary learning,'' seeking overcomplete bases where the data is more sparse (see~\cite{chen2015compressed} and references therein).
In this paper instead of relying on sparsity, we use structure from a \textit{generative model}. Recently, several neural network based generative models such as variational auto-encoders (VAEs)~\cite{kingma2013auto} and generative adversarial networks (GANs)~\cite{goodfellow2014generative} have found success at modeling data distributions. In these models, the generative part learns a
mapping from a low dimensional representation space $z \in \mathbb{R}^k$ to the high dimensional sample space $G(z) \in \mathbb{R}^n$. While training, this mapping is encouraged to produce vectors that resemble the vectors in the training dataset. We can therefore use any pre-trained generator to approximately capture the notion of an vector being ``natural'' in our domain: the generator defines a probability distribution over vectors in sample space and tries to assign higher probability to more likely vectors, for the dataset it has been trained on. We expect that vectors ``natural'' to our domain will be close to some point in the support of this distribution, \textit{i.e.}, in the range of $G$.
\noindent \textbf{Our Contributions:} We present an algorithm that uses generative models for compressed sensing. Our algorithm simply uses gradient descent to optimize the representation $z \in \mathbb{R}^k$ such that the corresponding image $G(z)$ has small measurement error $\norm{AG(z) - y}_2^2$. While this is a nonconvex objective to optimize, we empirically find that gradient descent works well, and the results can significantly outperform Lasso with relatively few measurements.
We obtain theoretical results showing that, as long as gradient descent finds a good approximate solution to our objective, our output $G(z)$ will be almost as close to the true $x^*$ as the closest possible point in the range of $G$.
The proof is based on a generalization of the Restricted Eigenvalue Condition ($REC$) that we call the Set-Restricted Eigenvalue Condition (S\=/REC{}). Our main theorem is that if a measurement matrix satisfies the S\=/REC{} for the range of a given generator $G$, then the measurement error minimization optimum is close to the true $x^*$. Furthermore, we show that random Gaussian measurement matrices satisfy the S\=/REC{} condition with high probability for large classes of generators. Specifically, for $d$-layer neural networks such as VAEs and GANs, we show that $O(kd \log n)$ Gaussian measurements suffice to guarantee good reconstruction with high probability. One result, for ReLU-based networks, is the following:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:intro}
Let $G: \mathbb{R}^k \to \mathbb{R}^n$ be a generative model from a $d$-layer neural network using ReLU activations. Let $A \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$ be a random Gaussian matrix for $m = O(k d \log n)$, scaled so $A_{i,j} \sim N(0, 1/m)$. For any $x^* \in \mathbb{R}^n$ and any observation $y = Ax^* + \eta$, let $\wh{z}$ minimize $\norm{y - AG(z)}_2$ to within additive $\epsilon$ of the optimum. Then with $1 - e^{-\Omega(m)}$ probability,
\[
\norm{G(\wh{z})-x^*}_2 \leq 6\min_{z^* \in \mathbb{R}^k} \norm{G(z^*) - x^*}_2 + 3\norm{\eta}_2 + 2\epsilon.
\]
\end{theorem}
Let us examine the terms in our error bound in more detail. The first two are the minimum possible error of any vector in the range of the generator and the norm of the noise; these are necessary for such a technique, and have direct analogs in standard compressed sensing guarantees. The third term $\epsilon$ comes from gradient descent not necessarily converging to the global optimum; empirically, $\epsilon$ does seem to converge to zero, and one can check post-observation that this is small by computing the upper bound $\norm{y - AG(\wh{z})}_2$.
While the above is restricted to ReLU-based neural networks, we also show similar results for arbitrary $L$-Lipschitz generative models, for $m \approx O(k \log L)$. Typical neural networks have $\text{poly}(n)$-bounded weights in each layer, so $L \leq n^{O(d)}$, giving for all activation functions the same $O(kd \log n)$ sample complexity as for ReLU networks.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:intro2}
Let $G: \mathbb{R}^k \to \mathbb{R}^n$ be an $L$-Lipschitz function. Let $A \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$ be a random Gaussian matrix for $m = O(k \log \frac{Lr}{\delta})$, scaled so $A_{i,j} \sim N(0, 1/m)$. For any $x^* \in \mathbb{R}^n$ and any observation $y = Ax^* + \eta$, let $\wh{z}$ minimize $\norm{y - AG(z)}_2$ to within additive $\epsilon$ of the optimum over vectors with $\norm{\wh{z}}_2 \leq r$. Then with $1 - e^{-\Omega(m)}$ probability,
\[
\norm{G(\wh{z})-x^*}_2 \leq 6\min_{\substack{z^* \in \mathbb{R}^k\\\norm{z^*}_2 \leq r}} \norm{G(z^*) - x^*}_2 + 3\norm{\eta}_2 + 2\epsilon + 2\delta.
\]
\end{theorem}
The downside is two minor technical conditions: we only optimize over representations $z$ with $\norm{z}$ bounded by $r$, and our error gains an additive $\delta$ term. Since the dependence on these parameters is $\log (rL/\delta)$, and $L$ is something like $n^{O(d)}$, we may set $r = n^{O(d)}$ and $\delta = 1/n^{O(d)}$ while only losing constant factors, making these conditions very mild. In fact, generative models normally have the coordinates of $z$ be independent uniform or Gaussian, so $\norm{z} \approx \sqrt{k} \ll n^d$, and a constant signal-to-noise ratio would have $\norm{\eta}_2 \approx \norm{x^*} \approx \sqrt{n} \gg 1/n^d$.
We remark that, while these theorems are stated in terms of Gaussian matrices, the proofs only involve the distributional Johnson-Lindenstrauss property of such matrices. Hence the same results hold for matrices with subgaussian entries or fast-JL matrices~\cite{ailon2009fast}.
\section{Models}
In this section we describe the generative models used in our experiments. We used two image datasets and two different generative model types (a VAE and a GAN). This provides some evidence that our approach can work with many types of models and datasets.
In our experiments, we found that it was helpful to add a regularization term $L(z)$ to the objective to encourage the optimization to explore more in the regions that are preferred by the respective generative models (see comparison to unregularized versions in Fig.~\ref{fig:reconstr-l2}). Thus the objective function we use for minimization is $$\|AG(z) - y\|^2 + L(z).$$ Both VAE and GAN typically imposes an isotropic Gaussian prior on $z$. Thus $\|z\|^2$ is proportional to the negative log-likelihood under this prior. Accordingly, we use the following regularizer:
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:Lz}
L(z) = \lambda \|z\|^2,
\end{equation}
where $\lambda$ measures the relative importance of the prior as compared to the measurement error.
\subsection{MNIST with VAE}
The MNIST dataset consists of about $60,000$ images of handwritten digits, where each image is of size $28 \times 28$~\cite{lecun1998gradient}. Each pixel value is either $0$ (background) or $1$ (foreground). No pre-processing was performed. We trained VAE on this dataset. The input to the VAE is a vectorized binary image of input dimension $784$. We set the size of the representation space $k = 20$. The recognition network is a fully connected $784-500-500-20$ network. The generator is also fully connected with the architecture $20-500-500-784$. We train the VAE using the Adam optimizer~\cite{kingma2014adam} with a mini-batch size $100$ and a learning rate of $0.001$.
We found that using $\lambda = 0.1$ in Eqn. (\ref{eqn:Lz}) gave the best performance, and we use this value in our experiments.
The digit images are reasonably sparse in the pixel space. Thus, as a baseline, we use the pixel values directly for sparse recovery using Lasso. We set shrinkage parameter to be $0.1$ for all the experiments.
\subsection{CelebA with DCGAN}
CelebA is a dataset of more than $200,000$ face images of celebrities~\cite{liu2015deep}. The input images were cropped to a $64 \times 64$ RGB image, giving $64 \times 64 \times 3=12288$ inputs per image. Each pixel value was scaled so that all values are between $[-1, 1]$. We trained a DCGAN~\footnote{Code reused from \url{ https://github.com/carpedm20/DCGAN-tensorflow}}~\cite{radford2015unsupervised,carpedm20} on this dataset. We set the input dimension $k=100$ and use a standard normal distribution. The architecture follows that of~\cite{radford2015unsupervised}. The model was trained by one update to the discriminator and two updates to the generator per cycle. Each update used the Adam optimizer~\cite{kingma2014adam} with minibatch size $64$, learning rate $0.0002$ and $\beta_1=0.5$.
We found that using $\lambda = 0.001$ in Eqn.~(\ref{eqn:Lz}) gave the best results and thus, we use this value in our experiments.
For baselines, we perform sparse recovery using Lasso on the images in two domains: (a) 2D Discrete Cosine Transform (2D-DCT) and (b) 2D Daubechies-1 Wavelet Transform (2D-DB1). While the we provide Gaussian measurements of the original pixel values, the $L_1$ penalty is on either the DCT coefficients or the DB1 coefficients of each color channel of an image. For all experiments, we set the shrinkage parameter to be $0.1$ and $0.00001$ respectively for 2D-DCT, and 2D-DB1.
\section{Our Algorithm}
All norms are $2$-norms unless specified otherwise.
Let $x^* \in \mathbb{R}^n$ be the vector we wish to sense. Let $A \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ be the measurement matrix and $\eta \in \mathbb{R}^m$ be the noise vector. We observe the measurements $y = Ax^* + \eta$. Given $y$ and $A$, our task is to find a reconstruction $\hat{x}$ close to $x^*$.
A generative model is given by a deterministic function $G: \mathbb{R}^k \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^n$, and a distribution $P_Z$ over $z \in \mathbb{R}^k$. To generate a sample from the generator, we can draw $z \sim P_Z$ and the sample then is $G(z)$. Typically, we have $k \ll n$, \textit{i.e.} the generative model maps from a low dimensional representation space to a high dimensional sample space.
Our approach is to find a vector in representation space such that the corresponding vector in the sample space matches the observed measurements. We thus define the objective to be
\begin{equation} \label{eqn:loss}
loss(z) = \|AG(z) - y\|^2
\end{equation}
By using any optimization procedure, we can minimize $loss(z)$ with respect to $z$. In particular, if the generative model $G$ is differentiable, we can evaluate the gradients of the loss with respect to $z$ using backpropagation and use standard gradient based optimizers. If the optimization procedure terminates at $\hat{z}$, our reconstruction for $x^*$ is $G(\hat{z})$. We define the measurement error to be $\|AG(\hat{z}) - y\|^2$ and the reconstruction error to be $\|G(\hat{z}) - x^*\|^2$.
\section{Related Work}
Several recent lines of work explore generative models for reconstruction. The first line of work attempts to project an image on to the representation space of the generator. These works assume full knowledge of the image, and are special cases of the linear measurements framework where the measurement matrix $A$ is identity. Excellent reconstruction results with SGD in the representation space to find an image in the generator range have been reported by~\cite{lipton2017precise} with stochastic clipping and~\cite{creswell2016inverting} with logistic measurement loss. A different approach is introduced in~\cite{dumoulin2016adversarially} and~\cite{donahue2016adversarial}. In their method, a recognition network that maps from the sample space vector $x$ to the representation space vector $z$ is learned jointly with the generator in an adversarial setting.
A second line of work explores reconstruction with structured partial observations. The inpainting problem consists of predicting the values of missing pixels given a part of the image. This is a special case of linear measurements where each measurement corresponds to an observed pixel. The use of Generative models for this task has been studied in~\cite{yeh2016semantic}, where the objective is taken to be a combination of $L_1$ error in measurements and a perceptual loss term given by the discriminator. Super-resolution is a related task that attempts to increase the resolution of an image. We can view this problem as observing local spatial averages of the unknown higher resolution image and hence cast this as another special case of linear measurements. For prior work on super-resolution see \textit{e.g.}~\cite{yang2010image,dong2016image,kim2016accurate} and references therein.
We also take note of the related work of~\cite{gilbert2017} that connects model-based compressed sensing with the invertibility of Convolutional Neural Networks.
A related result appears in~\cite{baraniuk2009random}, which studies the measurement complexity of an RIP condition for smooth manifolds. This is analogous to our S\=/REC{} for the range of $G$, but the range of $G$ is neither smooth (because of ReLUs) nor a manifold (because of self-intersection). Their recovery result was extended in~\cite{hegde2012signal} to unions of two manifolds.
\section{Theoretical Results}
We begin with a brief review of the Restricted Eigenvalue Condition (REC) in standard compressed sensing. The REC is a sufficient condition on $A$ for robust recovery to be possible. The REC essentially requires that all ``approximately sparse'' vectors are far from the nullspace of the matrix $A$. More specifically, $A$ satisfies REC for a constant $\gamma > 0$ if for all approximately sparse vectors $x$,
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:REC}
\|A x\| \geq \gamma \|x \|.
\end{equation}
It can be shown that this condition is sufficient for recovery of sparse vectors using Lasso. If one examines the structure of Lasso recovery proofs, a key property that is used is that the difference of any two sparse vectors is also approximately sparse (for sparsity up to $2k$). This is a coincidence that is particular to sparsity. By contrast, the difference of two vectors ``natural'' to our domain may not itself be natural. The condition we need is that the difference of any two natural vectors is far from the nullspace of $A$.
We propose a generalized version of the REC for a set $S \subseteq \mathbb{R}^n$ of vectors, the Set-Restricted Eigenvalue Condition (S\=/REC{}):
\begin{definition}\label{def:rec_def}
Let $S \subseteq \mathbb{R}^n$. For some parameters $\gamma > 0$,
$\delta \geq 0$, a matrix $A \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ is said to
satisfy the $S\=/REC{}(S, \gamma, \delta)$ if $\ \forall \ x_1, x_2 \in S$,
$$\|A (x_1 - x_2)\| \geq \gamma \|x_1 - x_2 \| - \delta.$$
\end{definition}
There are two main differences between the S\=/REC{} and the standard REC in compressed sensing. First, the condition applies to differences of vectors in an \emph{arbitrary} set $S$ of ``natural'' vectors, rather than just the set of approximately $k$-sparse vectors in some basis. This will let us apply the definition to $S$ being the range of a generative model.
Second, we allow an additive slack term $\delta$. This is necessary for us to achieve the S\=/REC{} when $S$ is the output of general Lipschitz functions. Without it, the S\=/REC{} depends on the behavior of $S$ at arbitrarily small scales. Since there are arbitrarily many such local regions, one cannot guarantee the existence of an $A$ that works for all these local regions. Fortunately, as we shall see, poor behavior at a small scale $\delta$ will only increase our error by $\mathcal{O}(\delta)$.
The S\=/REC{} definition requires that for any two vectors in $S$, if they are significantly different (so the right hand side is large), then the corresponding measurements should also be significantly different (left hand side). Hence we can hope to approximate the unknown vector from the measurements, if the measurement matrix satisfies the S\=/REC{}.
But how can we find such a matrix? To answer this, we present two lemmas showing that random Gaussian matrices of relatively few measurements $m$ satisfy the S\=/REC{} for the outputs of large and practically useful classes of generative models $G: \mathbb{R}^k \to \mathbb{R}^n$.
In the first lemma, we assume that the generative model $G(\cdot)$ is $L$-Lipschitz, \textit{i.e.}, $\forall \ z_1, z_2 \in \mathbb{R}^k$, we have
\[
\| G(z_1) - G(z_2)\| \leq L \|z_1 - z_2\|.
\]
Note that state of the art neural network architectures with linear layers, (transposed) convolutions, max-pooling, residual connections, and all popular non-linearities satisfy this assumption. In Lemma~\ref{lemma:lipschitz} in the Appendix we give a simple bound on $L$ in
terms of parameters of the network; for typical networks this is $n^{O(d)}$. We also require the input $z$ to the generator to have bounded norm. Since generative models such as VAEs and GANs typically assume their input $z$ is drawn with independent uniform or Gaussian inputs, this only prunes an exponentially unlikely fraction of the possible outputs.
\begin{lemma}\label{thm:rec_with_p}
Let $G:\mathbb{R}^k \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^n$ be $L$-Lipschitz. Let $$B^k(r) = \lbrace z \ \vert \ z \in \mathbb{R}^k, \| z \| \leq r \rbrace$$ be an $L_2$-norm ball in $\mathbb{R}^k$.
For $\alpha < 1$, if
\[
m = \Omega \left(\frac{k}{\alpha^2} \log \frac{Lr}{\delta} \right),
\]
then a random matrix $A \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$ with IID entries such that $A_{ij} \sim \mathcal{N}\left(0,\frac{1}{m}\right)$ satisfies the $S\=/REC{}(G(B^k(r)), 1-\alpha, \delta)$ with $1 - e^{-\Omega(\alpha^2 m)}$ probability.
\end{lemma}
All proofs, including this one, are deferred to Appendix A.
Note that even though we proved the lemma for an $L_2$ ball, the same technique works for any compact set.
For our second lemma, we assume that the generative model is a neural network with such that each layer is a composition of a linear transformation followed by a pointwise non-linearity. Many common generative models have such architectures. We also assume that all non-linearities are piecewise linear with at most two pieces. The popular ReLU or LeakyReLU non-linearities satisfy this assumption. We do not make any other assumption, and in particular, the magnitude of the weights in the network do not affect our guarantee.
\begin{lemma}\label{thm: subspace embedding}
Let $G:\mathbb{R}^k \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^n$ be a $d$-layer neural network, where each layer is a linear transformation followed by a pointwise non-linearity. Suppose there are at most $c$ nodes per layer, and the non-linearities are piecewise linear with at most two pieces, and let
\[
m = \Omega \left( \frac{1}{\alpha^2} kd\log c \right)\
\]
for some $\alpha < 1$. Then a random matrix $A\in\mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$ with IID entries $A_{ij}\sim\mathcal{N}(0,\frac{1}{m})$ satisfies the $S\=/REC{}(G(\mathbb{R}^k), 1 - \alpha, 0)$ with $1 - e^{-\Omega(\alpha^2 m)}$ probability.
\end{lemma}
To show Theorems~\ref{thm:intro} and~\ref{thm:intro2}, we just need to show that the S\=/REC{} implies good recovery. In order to make our error guarantee relative to $\ell_2$ error in the image space $\mathbb{R}^n$, rather than in the measurement space $\mathbb{R}^m$, we also need that $A$ preserves
norms with high probability~\cite{CDD09}. Fortunately, Gaussian matrices (or other distributional JL matrices) satisfy this property.
\begin{lemma}\label{thm:rec_application}
Let $A \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ by drawn from a distribution that (1) satisfies the $S\=/REC{}(S, \gamma, \delta)$ with probability $1-p$ and (2) has for every fixed $x \in \mathbb{R}^n$, $\norm{Ax} \leq 2\norm{x}$ with probability $1-p$.
For any $x^* \in \mathbb{R}^n$ and noise $\eta$, let $y = Ax^* + \eta$. Let $\wh{x}$ approximately minimize $\norm{y - Ax}$ over $x \in S$, \textit{i.e.},
\[
\norm{y - A\wh{x}} \leq \min_{x \in S}\norm{y - Ax} + \epsilon.
\]
Then,
\[
\norm{\wh{x} - x^*} \leq \left( \frac{4}{\gamma} + 1 \right) \min_{x \in S} \norm{x^* - x} + \frac{1}{\gamma}\left(2\norm{\eta} + \epsilon + \delta\right)
\]
with probability $1-2p$.
\end{lemma}
Combining Lemma~\ref{thm:rec_with_p}, Lemma~\ref{thm: subspace embedding}, and Lemma~\ref{thm:rec_application} gives Theorems~\ref{thm:intro} and~\ref{thm:intro2}. In our setting, $S$ is the range of the generator, and $\wh x$ in the theorem above is the reconstruction $G(\wh z)$ returned by our algorithm.
|
\section*{Introduction}
Repeat proteins are composed of tandem repetitions of similar structural motifs of about 20 to 40 amino acids. Under appropriate conditions, these polymers fold into elongated, non-globular structures (Fig.~\ref{fig:structures}). It is apparent that the overall architecture is stabilized mainly by short range interactions, in contrast to most globular protein domains that usually adopt very intricate topologies \citep{regan2005current}. In their natural context, repeat proteins are frequently found mediating protein-protein interactions, with a specificity rivaling that of antibodies \citep{smerdon1999trends,kajava2001currentstructural,lassle1999bioessays}. Given their structural simplicity and potential technological applications, repeat-proteins are a prime target for protein design, with very successful examples for a variety of topologies \citep{itzaki2015biochemtrans,baker2015nature,urvoas2010jmbn}. Most of the current design strategies target the creation of rigid native structures with desired folds that, although beautiful, often lose biological functionality \citep{espada2016pressure}. It is becoming clear that the population of `excited states' is crucial for protein function \citep{frauenfelder1987}, and thus tackling energetic inhomogeneities in protein structures may be crucial for understanding how biological activities emerge \citep{ferreiro2014qrb}. The challenge thus relies in finding an appropriate description for the `energy' of each system, a daunting task for large molecular objects such as natural proteins.
In principle, the natural variations observed for proteins of the same family must contain information about the sequence-structure mapping. A simple model that just takes into account the frequency of each amino acid in each position is insufficient to capture collective effects, yet, for some architectures it is surprisingly good for the synthesis of non-natural repeat-proteins by `consensus' design \citep{regan2003structure,regan2007blabla,pluckthun2003jmb,pluckthun2003jmbLRR}. It is apparent that in the case of repeat proteins the local signals play inordinately large roles in the energy distribution, just as expected from their topology \citep{ferreiro2008energy} and hence, small heterogeneities can be propagated from the local repeat units to higher orders affecting the overall structure and dynamics \citep{parra2013tiling,espada2015biochemtran}. Thus, collective effects may be approximated as small perturbations to local potentials, simplifying the energetic description of complex natural systems \citep{frauenfelder2003myoglobin}.
\medskip
\begin{figure*}[!hb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.9\textwidth]{estructuras.pdf}
\caption{Repeat proteins are elongated objects with internal symmetry. Representative structures of members of the repeat proteins families studied. On left, ankyrin repeat (PDB id:1N0R \citep{peng2002pnas}), center tetratricopeptide-like repeats (PDB id:1NA0 \citep{regan2003structure}) and right leucine-rich repeats (PDB id:4IM6). The defined repeated unit is highlighted in orange.
}
\label{fig:structures}
\end{figure*}
\medskip
In the last years new methods to analyze correlated mutations across a family of proteins have arisen (mfDCA\citep{morcos2011pnas}, plmDCA \citep{aurell2013pre,aurell2014jcp}, Gremlin \citep{balakrishnan2011protein}, EVFold \citep{marks2014elife} to name a few). The main hypothesis behind these methods is that biochemical changes produced by a point mutation should be compensated by other mutations (along evolutionary timescales) to maintain protein viability or function.
These methods can also be used to disentangle relevant direct correlations from indirect ones.
They are very successful at predicting spatial contacts and interactions for many protein topologies \citep{morcos2013pnas,cheng2014pnas,onuchic2012pnas,baker2014elife,cheng2016proteinscience}. Nevertheless, these methods do not take into account the chemical nature of the amino acids, which can be codifying inhomogeneities in the energetic distribution that are crucial for the activity of repeat-proteins \citep{pluckthun2007jmb,ladbury2005jmb}. On this basis, different approaches have been proposed recently to include chemical details in the correlation analyses \citep{levy2017potts}, trying to predict folding stability \citep{tiana2015jcp}, conformational heterogeneity \citep{morcos2013pnas,sutto2015pnas,haldane2016protsci} or the global effect on antibiotic resistance from sequences of $\beta$-lactamases \citep{weigt2015mbe,marks2015arxiv}. As many other tools, these were optimized to perform well on globular proteins, and their application to repeat proteins is not straightforward. Besides the point-mutation mechanism, repeat proteins are believed to evolve via duplication and rearrangement of repeats \citep{schuler2016mbe}, resulting in an inherent symmetry which usually confounds sequence analyses \citep{espada2015biochemtran}. Making use of this symmetry, we have previously proposed a specific version of mfDCA and plmDCA for repeat proteins \citep{espada2015BMC}. In this work we develop an alternative `evolutionary field' to approximate the biochemical properties of repeat proteins just from the analysis of natural sequences. We take advantage of the elongated and repetitive structure of these proteins (Fig.~\ref{fig:structures}) to extract as much information as possible from the data, and apply the general ideas on three specific families, ankyrin repeats (ANK), leucine-rich repeats (LRR) and tetratricopeptide-like repeats (TPR).
\section*{Evolutionary energy for repeat proteins }
To study the co-occurrence of mutations in a sequence alignment of a particular protein family, \cite{weigt2009pnas} proposed a Hamiltonian or energy expression which resembles a Potts model:
\begin{equation}
E(\vec{s}) = - \left[ \sum_{i=1}^L h_i(a_i) + \sum_{i=1}^L\sum_{j=i}^L J_{ij}(a_i,b_j) \right]
\label{eq:E}
\end{equation}
where the set of $\{h_i(a_i)\}$ parameters, one for each amino acid in each position, accounts for a local propensity of having a specific residue on a particular site of the protein, and the set of $\{J_{ij}(a_i,b_j)\}$ indicates the strength of the `evolutionary' interaction between each possible amino acid in every pair of positions along the protein. There are $q=21$ possible values of $a_i$ and $b_j$, one for each amino acid and one for the gaps included on the multiple sequence alignments. This expression is evaluated on a particular sequence on an alignment, and the summations go over the $L$ columns of the alignment. A sequence is more favorable or more energetic if it gets lower values of $E(\vec{s})$. It can be expected that the population of sequences follows a Boltzmann distribution $P(\vec{s})=\frac{1}{Z}e^{-E(\vec{s})}$ \citep{finkelstein1995protein}. The parameters are thus fitted to reproduce the frequencies of occurrence of each amino acid in each position ($f_i(a_i)$) and the joint frequencies of amino acids ($f_{ij}(a_i,b_j)$) in an alignment of natural sequences used as input:
\begin{eqnarray}
f_i(a_i)=\sum_{a_k, k\neq i} P(\vec{s})\\
f_{ij}(a_i,b_j)=\sum_{a_k, k\neq i,j} P(\vec{s})
\end{eqnarray}
Nevertheless, for repeat proteins there is another feature we want to capture with an evolutionary energy: the high identity of amino acids constituting consecutive repeats, arisen by the repetitiveness of these families and probably a signature of their evolutionary mechanisms (Fig.~\ref{fig:freq}).
Therefore, we propose the following model for repeat proteins:
\begin{equation}
E(\vec{s}) = - \left[ \sum_{i=1}^L h_i(a_i) + \sum_{i=1}^L\sum_{j=i}^L J_{ij}(a_i,b_j) -\lambda_{Id}(\vec{s})\right]
\label{eq:Eid}
\end{equation}
This expression is designed to be applied in sequences constituted by two repeats. $\lambda_{Id}$ is a parameter that aims at reproducing the probabilities of the percentage of identity (\%Id) between consecutive repeats in natural proteins ($p_{id}$). Basically, it accounts for higher order correlations not captured by the pairwise terms. For a given sequence we calculate the \%Id of the adjacent repeats and sum the parameter $\lambda_{Id}$ corresponding to that \%Id value. When the correct parameters are obtained, this equation can be used to produce an ensemble of sequences consistent with the constraints ($f_i(a_i)$, $f_{ij}(a_i,b_j)$ and $p_{id}$). We work with pairs of repeats as it is the minimum unit that includes the interaction between repeats and the possibility of measure sequence identity between consecutive repeats.
In the following section we will show the convergence of the method and the relevant information that can be obtained from it. For further details about the procedure to assign values to the parameters, please refer to Methods section.
\section*{Results}
\subsection*{\textit{Evolutionary Energy} reproduces ensembles of sequences with natural frequencies and repeat protein characteristics.}
We construct an alignment of pairs of repeats for each family: ANK (PFAM id PF00023, and final alignment of 20513 sequences of L=66 residues each), TPR (PFAM id PF00515, and final alignment of 10020 sequences of L=68 residues each) and LRR (PFAM id PF13516, and final alignment of 18839 sequences of L=48 residues each). See Methods for further details of construction.
We measure $f_{i}(a_i)$, $f_{ij}(a_i,b_j)$ and $p_{id}$. Using a gradient descent procedure we obtain a set of parameters in equation \ref{eq:Eid} which are able to reproduce $f_{i}(a_i)$, $f_{ij}(a_i,b_j)$ and $p_{id}$.
In principle, the number of parameters is large: $Lq$ $h_i$ parameters, $\frac{(Lq)^2 - Lq}{2}$ $J_{ij}$ parameters and $\frac{L}{2}+1$ $\lambda_{Id}$. For example, for pairs of ANK repeats this means 1386 $h_i$, 959805 $J_{ij}$ and 34 $\lambda_{Id}$. To reduce the number of free parameters to fit we use a $L_1$-regularization which fixes to zero those parameters which do not contribute significantly to fit the frequencies. This regularization allows us to set to exactly zero between 85 and 91\% of the $J_{ij}$ parameters which, when they are free to vary, only reach small values (Suppl. Fig.~\ref{fig:jijReg}). We bound the maximum error permitted in the frequency estimations to 0.02. Refer to Methods for more details.
In the three families studied, the parameters obtained allow us to generate ensembles of sequences which reproduce natural $f_{i}(a_i)$, $f_{ij}(a_i,b_j)$ and $p_{id}$ (Fig.~ \ref{fig:freq}A). Notice that most frequencies are fitted with an error of an order of magnitude lower than the maximum bound imposed (Suppl. Fig.~\ref{fig:histerrors}).
\medskip
\begin{figurehere}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{Fig2.png}
\caption{The proposed model fits the frequencies of amino acids and natural repeat-identities $p_{id}$. On A, we compare marginal frequencies $f_i(a_i)$ (red) and joint frequencies $f_{ij}(a_i,b_j)$ (black) on the natural ensemble of sequences (x-axis) and on the set of sequences generated by the model (y-axis). On B, we calculate the distribution of identity between repeats $p_{id}$ for consecutive repeats (solid line), and for natural repeats which are not consecutive, i.e. they are not next to each other in the primary structure (dot lines). Consecutive repeats present a population with high identity between repeats that any pairs of repeats do not show. We compare the distribution produced by the model $p_{id}^{model}$ (dots).}
\label{fig:freq}
\end{figurehere}
\medskip
The $p_{id}$ distributions are also very well reproduced (Fig.~\ref{fig:freq}B). Not only the general shape, but also the populated long tail for highly similar repeats. It is not possible to obtain the same distribution only by fitting amino acid frequencies $f_i(a_i)$ and $f_{ij}(a_i,b_j)$, it is mandatory to explicitly include the $p_{id}$ by including the parameters $\lambda_{Id}$ (Suppl. Fig.~\ref{fig:pidLambda}), suggesting that higher order correlations must be accounted for describing these systems.
\subsection*{Evolutionary Energy distinguishes between proteins on a given family and other polypeptides}
Once the set of parameters \{$h_i(a_i)$,$J_{ij}(a_i,b_j)$,$\lambda_{Id}$\} is obtained, it can be used to score any sequence of $L$ amino acids via equation \ref{eq:Eid}. In this section we test if this measure is capable of distinguishing polypeptides that fold in a three dimensional structure similar to members of the repeat protein family from those that do not.
We calculate the distribution of energies of different sets of sequences (Fig.~\ref{fig:Hist}). The ensembles of natural sequences of each protein family used to learn the parameters have a unimodal distribution of energies centered around -100 (Fig.~\ref{fig:Hist}, dots).
These distributions are clearly differentiated from the energies of random chains of residues (Fig.~\ref{fig:Hist}, red lines).
\medskip
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.9\textwidth]{Fig3.pdf}
\caption{Energy score distribution for different ensembles of sequences. Red lines, natural sequences used to train the model on equation \ref{eq:Eid}. Blue lines, sequences simulated by Monte Carlo under expression \ref{eq:Eid}. In the three families, it overlaps with natural sequences, suggesting that simulated sequences imitate the natural ensemble. Yellow lines, strings of random amino acids used as negative control. They show that the energy distinguishes between polypeptides belonging to a protein family and other strings of amino acids. Green lines, squares, diamonds and triangles, energies for designed proteins.}
\label{fig:Hist}
\end{figure*}
\medskip
For a positive control we evaluate designed proteins which have been experimentally synthesized. For the ANK family, we consider the library of repeat sequences built by Pl\"uckthun's laboratory \citep{pluckthun2003jmb} (blue dots line, Fig.~\ref{fig:Hist}A). This library was constructed by fixing on each repeat 26 positions out of 33 to the most frequent residue in the multiple sequence alignment. This resulted in a set of sequences that have small variations with respect to the ANK consensus (the sequence with the most frequent amino acid in each position). In our expression, they score a very low energy distribution, overlapping with the most negative tail of the distribution of natural sequences. It is notable that consensus designed ANK have been shown experimentally to be extremely stable.
For the TPR family, consensus designed was done by Regan's laboratory \citep{regan2007blabla,regan2003structure}. All pairs of repeats synthesized have the same amino acid sequence, and it's energy score is indicated by a green full square in Fig.~\ref{fig:Hist}B. Again, the designed sequence matches values at the most left side of the energy distribution of natural sequences, and coincidentally reports high folding stability. From it, other variants with few point mutations to improve binding to a specific ligand have been synthesized. As shown in empty green squares \citep{krachler2010} and diamonds \citep{cortajarena2010} in Fig.~\ref{fig:Hist}B, they have higher energy, but still in the left most side of natural sequences distribution. Recently, a different design strategy was done \citep{lupas2016}. Based on a non-repetitive protein, but similar to TPR fold, they put togheter various repetitions of the fold, using TPR loops to link them. They obtained a three-repeats protein whose pair of repeats energy are represented on triangles on Fig.~\ref{fig:Hist}B. This time, they match natural sequences distribution in higher values.
Finally, for the LRR family we contrast with the library of proteins designed by Pl\"uckthun's group based on the consensus sequence \citep{pluckthun2003jmbLRR}. The repetition they considered has 57 amino acids, which includes two types of repeats, one of 28 residues and the other one of 29. As the repeat we are using for LRR is 24 residues long, we aligned both definitions and evaluated the library removing the amino acids not matching our definition. Again, their scores form a narrow distribution, but this time it is not placed on the most favorable side of the natural sequences distribution (Fig.~\ref{fig:Hist}C). Coincidentally, selected species studied do not show such a high folding stability as the ANK library did.
With these parameters, we are able to generate an ensemble of sequences which are in agreement with the constraints used, via a Monte Carlo simulation (see Methods). The distribution of energies of these simulated sequences matches the natural sequences energies distribution with remarkable accuracy. Moreover, we randomly choose 100 sequences from the natural ensemble and 100 sequences from the simulated one, perform a Smith-Waterman pairwise alignment all against all, calculate the pair similarity using BLOSUM62 matrix and used it as a distance method to plot a dendogram of the sequences (Supl. Fig.~\ref{fig:dendograms}). Both species appear interspersed, showing that it is not possible to distinguish a natural sequence from a constructed one. Also, we tested \textit{familiarity} to the ANK family as defined in \cite{turjanski2016protein} and found overlapping distributions for both species (Supl. Fig.~\ref{fig:familiarity}).
Therefore, simulated sequences represent possible variants to natural repeats. The wide distribution of natural proteins suggests that it should be possible to engineer sequences with more variable repeats, more dissimilar among neighbors and to the consensus than the ones published up to date.
\subsection*{Low evolutionary energy sequences have similar repeats}
Are there any invariant properties shared by low energy sequences? Given that repeat-proteins may evolve by other mechanisms besides point substitutions, we analyze if low energy sequences are constituted by highly similar repeats and if they are close to consensus sequences.
On Fig.~\ref{fig:pid}A we show the relation between the \%Id between the repeats and the energy of the sequence. It is evident that low energy sequences are constructed by pairs of highly similar repeats. This could be a transitive effect: if low energy sequences are very similar to the consensus sequence, and the consensus sequence is formed by two identical repeats, we would be seeing that more similarity between repeats causes lower energies. We can see that it is not the case (Fig.~\ref{fig:pid}B). We plot the \%Id to the consensus against the energy of each sequence. The consensus was calculated with the most frequent amino acid in each position on sequences used as input. We can see that there is no evident correlation between the energy and the similarity to the consensus. Thus, low energy sequences that differ from the consensus one may be constructed. Also, there are no sequences which get a high \%Id to the consensus. We conclude that there are different repeats which have low energies within a protein family, and not only the consensus sequence.
\medskip
\begin{figurehere}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{Fig4.pdf}
\caption{Most favorable simulated sequences have very similar repeats, yet they are different to the consensus repeat. On A, we plot the energy vs. the identity between the repeats that constitute the sequence. Even though the deviation is large, most stable sequences tend to have more similar repeats. On B, we plot the energies of simulated sequences vs the identity to the consensus of the family. In all cases, the identity to the consensus is small and uncorrelated to the energy, indicating that sequences which differ significantly from the consensus can be stable variants of the family. }
\label{fig:pid}
\end{figurehere}
\medskip
\subsection*{Evolutionary Energy and folding stability change upon point mutations}
Consensus designed ANK proteins are very stable upon chemical and thermal denaturation \citep{pluckthun2003jmb}, and, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Hist} also score a very low evolutionary energy according to equation \ref{eq:Eid}. Can we quantify the relationship between the stability and the evolutionary energy?
A potential test can be performed by comparing to experiments in which the effect of point mutations was evaluated. These incorporate one, two or three point mutations in natural proteins, and characterize the unfolding free energy $\Delta$G of the wildtype and the mutated variant. A higher $\Delta$G reports a more stable protein. We compare the change in the $\Delta$G between the mutated and the wildtype protein ($\Delta\Delta$G), and the difference of energy for their sequences according to equation \ref{eq:Eid}.
Although the energy expression is learned for pairs of repeats, we can easily extend it to an array of repeats making use of the elongated structure of repeat proteins in which only adjacent repeats interact. From our expression we have parameters assigned to intra-repeat positions ($h_i$ with $i = 1\dots \frac{L}{2}$ and $J_{ij}$ with $i,j$ $=1\dots \frac{L}{2}$), and inter-repeat interactions ($J_{ij}$ with $i = 1\dots \frac{L}{2}$ and $j=\frac{L}{2}+1 \dots L$, and $\lambda_{Id}$). Then for each repeat we can assign an internal energy $\sum_{i=1}^{L/2} h_i(a_i) + \sum_{i=1}^{L/2}\sum_{j>i}^{L/2} J_{ij}(a_i,b_j)$ and a interaction energy $\sum_{i=1}^{L/2}\sum_{j= L/2+1}^L J_{ij}(a_i,b_j)+\lambda_{Id}$, which of course depends on the amino acids constituting each repeat.
On Fig.~\ref{fig:DDG}A, we show the comparison between $\Delta\Delta$G and the evolutionary energy calculated using Eq.~\ref{eq:Eid},
done for three different ANK proteins: I$\kappa$B$\alpha$ \citep{devries2011jmb,ferreiro2007jmb}, Notch \citep{street2005improved} and p16 \citep{tang2003sequential}. It should be noted that different experimental techniques return different values for $\Delta$G for the same protein, non overlapping within experimental error, pointing that other factors contribute to the experimental quantification of $\Delta\Delta$G. A linear fit returns $R^2 \approx 0.49$. Nevertheless, from 152 mutations we analyzed, 114 (75 \%) are predicted favorable when the mutation stabilized the folding of the structure, and unfavorable when they have also been measured to destabilize. The predictions that deviated the most are mutations in Notch from Serine to Proline, which is a structural disruptor, and were not considered in the linear fit.
\medskip
\begin{figurehere}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Fig5.pdf}
\caption{Variation of energy score as a predictor of the folding stability upon point mutations. We compare difference in unfolding $\Delta$G between a wildtype protein and a mutated variant (x-axis) and the change in energy according to Eq. \ref{eq:Eid}. Error bars indicate the experimental standard deviation. On A, for proteins belonging to ANK family, and on B for LRR.}
\label{fig:DDG}
\end{figurehere}
\medskip
On Fig.~\ref{fig:DDG}B, we show reported mutations on pp32 \citep{barrick2015pnas}, a protein belonging to LRR family. Again, measurements with different methods report different values of $\Delta\Delta$G. The linear fit returns a poor $R^2 \approx 0.21$, but 30 (75\%) mutations are both predicted and reported unstabilizing.
A similar comparison was performed by \cite{tiana2015jcp} for small globular proteins with an expression related to Eq. \ref{eq:E}. To reduce the number of interaction parameters $J_{ij}(a_i,b_j)$ they explicitly used structural information and set to zero all interactions between positions which are not in contact in the native structure. In contrast, we use a $L_1$-regularization to fix to zero those parameters which do not contribute significantly to the fitting process and obtain $J_{ij}(a_i,b_j)=0$ and $J_{ij}(a_i,b_j)\neq 0$ in all pairs of positions, regardless they are supposed to be in contact or not in the 3D structure.
\subsection*{Interaction parameters are related to the structure and the sequence symmetry}
Are the obtained parameters related to structural properties of these proteins?
Local fields, $h_i(a_i)$, should account for the local propensity of each amino acid in each position, and therefore are expected to be related to $f_i(a_i)$.
Fig.~\ref{fig:campo1}A shows that the inferred $h_i(a_i)$ parameters are different from the initial condition $-\ln(f_i(a_i))$
for the ANK family; that is, the values obtained for the parameters that account for higher order correlations are relevant. In red we highlight the points related to the consensus amino acid in each position. All of these residues have a strong local field associated to them, justifying why the construction of sequences with these amino acids results in foldable proteins.
We also show a contact map of two ANK repeats (PDB id: 1N0R) on Fig.~\ref{fig:campo1}B: gray background indicates that the two positions given by x and y axis are in contact in the native structure, and white that they are not. On the upper triangle of the figure and in blue crosses, we mark the positions involved in the highest $J_{ij}$ parameters, i.e. those which imply higher coupling. A darker blue indicates that there are more $J_{ij}$ (more combinations of amino acids) between those positions. Most of the highest $J_{ij}$ match a pair of positions in contact in the 3D structure, or two which correspond to the same residue in the adjacent repeat patterns, i.e. i-th position in the first repeat and position j=i+33 in the second repeat. In red crosses we show the lowest $J_{ij}$, that mark a negative constraint. Again, a darker red means that there are more $J_{ij}$ with low values between those positions. It is apparent that these also involve mostly residues in contact, but shows that other regions are responsible for negative design.
\medskip
\begin{figurehere}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{Fig6.pdf}
\caption{For the ANK family, on panel A we compare the parameters $h_i(a_i)$ to the marginal frequencies. The site-independent model (and initial condition) states that $h_i(a_i) = \ln(f_i(a_i))$. For the final model, this relation is tuned by the higher order correlations. On red, the parameters associated with the most common amino acid in each position are highlighted. On panel B, we compare the contact map of a pair of repeats of 1N0R (gray shadow) and the highest (blue) and lowest (red) $J_{ij}(a_i,b_j)$ parameters. The color scale indicates how many parameters involves the two positions (due to different sets of amino acids). Most extreme values fall into residues in contact or in the equivalent position of a repeat.}
\label{fig:campo1}
\end{figurehere}
\medskip
\section*{Discussion}
We propose a statistical model to account for fine details of the energy distribution in families of repeat proteins using only the sequences of amino acids. The model consists of a generalization of a Potts model to account for the local and pair-wise interactions and an extra term that includes higher order correlations, accounting for the similarity between consecutive repeats. The model is constrained by evolutionary characteristics of the families of proteins: we measure the frequencies of amino acids, co-occurrence of amino acids and the identity between repeats in extant natural proteins. To statistically define these quantities it is necessary to have a large set of sequences, which we showed are currently available for several repeat-protein families \citep{espada2015BMC}. No information about the native folded conformation is required. The computation of the evolutionary energy field is computationally demanding, mostly due to long times spent in rigorous Monte Carlo simulations, but once the fitting is done the parameters can be used to score individual sequences fast and easily.
We studied three popular repeat protein families: ANK, TPR and LRR. After pre-processing of the alignments, we had enough sequences ($\approx$ 20500, 10000 and 18800 respectively) to fit the model to pairs of repeats of each family. We scored the \textit{evolutionary energy} of all natural sequences in PFAM, and it allowed us to clearly distinguish between natural proteins and random sequences of amino acids: the first have energy values $<$ -50 and show a large spread while all random sequences have energy values $\approx$ 0. We evaluated designed repeat proteins which have been shown to fold and found that they score within the natural sequences distribution of energies. For the ANK and TPR family, these designed proteins have been shown to be highly stable upon thermal and chemical denaturation and, coincidentally, they are located at the most favorable side of the energy distribution of natural proteins, suggesting that the evolutionary energy score can be related to folding stability.
The energetic model can be used in Monte Carlo simulations to generate sequences that agree with the natural constraints of a given protein family. This ensemble of simulated sequences matches the amino acid frequencies, the identity between repeats and also the energy distribution of natural proteins. We found this set of simulated sequences is statistically indistinguishable from natural counterparts. Thus, the proposed model can be used as a tool to design repeat-protein sequences that have all the natural characteristics evaluated to date. Moreover, the stability change upon single point mutation can be well predicted by the model. For both the simulated sequences and for natural counterparts, we found that the similarity between consecutive repeats correlates with lower energy values, and that these are not necessarily similar to the consensus sequence of the family, pointing out that duplication of stretches of sequences may well be an important factor in the evolution of these systems \citep{bjorklund2006ploscompbiol}.
The existence of a simple and reliable energy function to score the `evolutionary energy' of repeat-proteins can be used to trace the biological forces that acted upon their history, and to explore to which extent these conflict with the physical necessities of the systems \citep{morcos2014tsel}. Mapping the energy inhomogeneities along the repeat-arrays may allow us to infer the population of excited states in these proteins, many of which have been related to their physiological mechanisms.
\section*{Methods}
\subsection*{Sequence alignments}
Sequences of repeats were obtained from PFAM 27.0 \citep{bateman2004pfam}. These sequences usually have misdetected initial and final residues. We completed these positions with the amino acids present on the actual proteins. This leads to a reduction on the number of gaps in our alignments, which usually derives into noisy predictions in correlation analyses \citep{tiana2015jcp}. After, we created the alignment of pairs of repeats, joining sequences of repeats which are consecutive in a natural protein. Finally, we removed insertions from the alignments by deleting positions which have gaps in more than 80\% of the sequences in the alignment.
\subsection*{Frequency calculations}
Our model fits the occurrence of amino acids in every position, which we call the marginal frequency of residue $a_i$ at position $i$ of the alignment and denote $f_i(a_i)$, and the joint occurrence of two amino acids $a_i$ and $b_j$ simultaneously at two different positions of the alignment, $f_{ij} (a_i,b_j)$. To avoid biases by the overrepresentation of some proteins in the database, we used CD-HIT \citep{cdhit2002} to choose representative sequences which differ between them in more than 90\% of identity percentage. Finally, we computed by counting the $f_i(a_i)$ and $f_{ij}(a_i,b_j)$, and divided by the total number of sequences.
\subsection*{$p_{id}$ calculations}
From the same alignment explained in \textit{Frequencies calculations}, for a sequence which has $L$ residues constituting two consecutive repeats, the \%Id between the repeats is the number of amino acids in positions $i$ and $i+\frac{L}{2}$, for $i=1\dots \frac{L}{2}$ which are exactly the same. Gaps are treated as an amino acid. Once we have the values for all sequences in an alignment, we define $p_{id}$ as the proportion of sequences within the alignment with the same $\%Id$ between repeats.
\subsection*{Construction of an ensemble of sequences in agreement with a energy equation}
Given a set of parameters ${h_i,J_{ij},\lambda_{Id}}$ and Eq. \ref{eq:Eid}, we use a Monte Carlo procedure and the Metropolis criterion to generate an ensemble of N sequences of length L each. We initiate with a random string of L residues. At each step, we produce a point mutation in any position. If this mutation is favorable, i.e. the energy is lower than that of the original sequence, we accept the mutation. If not, we accept the mutation with a probability of $e^{-\Delta E}$, where $\Delta E$ is the difference of energy between the original and the mutated sequence. When accepted, the mutated sequence is used as the original one for next step. We add one sequence to our final ensemble every t steps (we used t=1000).
\subsection*{Learning the parameters for the model}
Our model is proposed to reproduce $f_i(a_i)$, $f_{ij}(a_i,b_j)$ and $p_{id}$ from the alignment of natural sequences. To learn the set of parameters ${h_i,J_{ij},\lambda_{Id}}$ which reproduce them, we used a gradient descent procedure.
In each step, an ensemble of N=80000 sample sequences was produced via Monte Carlo using as energy the expression \ref{eq:Eid} and the trial parameters. We measured its marginal, joint frequencies and $p_{id}$ and updated the local parameters according to:
\begin{equation}
h_i^{t+1} \leftarrow h_i^t - \epsilon_s \left[f_i(a_i) - f_i^{model}(a_i)\right]
\label{eq:h}
\end{equation}
As the number of parameters for coupling is large ($=21^2 L^2$), we used a regularization $L_1$ to force to 0 those parameters which are not contributing significantly to the modeled frequencies. Then, we update these parameters by:
\footnotesize
\begin{equation}
J_{ij}^{t+1} \leftarrow \left\lbrace
\begin{array}{ll}
0 & \text{if } J_{ij}^t=0 \text{ and } \Delta < \gamma \\
\epsilon_j \left[ - \gamma sign (\Delta)\right] & \text{if } J_{ij}^t=0 \text{ and } \Delta > \gamma \\
J_{ij}^t + \epsilon_j \left[\Delta-\gamma sign(J_{ij}^t) \right] & \text{if } \left[ J_{ij}^t + \epsilon_j (\Delta -\gamma sign(J_{ij}^t)\right]\cdot J_{ij}^t >0 \\
0 & \text{if } \left[ J_{ij}^t + \epsilon_j (\Delta -\gamma sign(J_{ij}^t)\right]\cdot J_{ij}^t <0 \\
\end{array} \right.
\label{eq:j}
\end{equation}
\normalsize
where $\Delta=f_i(a_i) - f_i^{model}(a_i)$. Finally, the parameters $\lambda_{Id}$ are updated according to:
\begin{equation}
\lambda_{Id}^{t+1} \leftarrow \lambda_{Id}^{t} + \epsilon_{ID} \left[ p_{id}(\%Id) - p_{id}^{model}(\%Id)\right]
\label{eq:lambda}
\end{equation}
We iterated until the maximum difference between the predicted frequencies and the natural sequences was below 0.02.
The code was written in C++ and is available at GitHub.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work was supported by Universidad de Buenos Aires and Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas CONICET (ANPCyT grant PICT2012-1647 to R.E. and D.U.F.). Work in Paris was supported by grant ERCStG n. 306312. R.G.P. is a long-term EMBO postdoctoral fellow. R.E. and R.G.P. would like to thank C.F.K.
\bibliographystyle{unsrtnat}
|
\section{Introduction}
Throughout the paper, all spaces will be Tychonoff. Central to the topic of our paper is the following definition:
\begin{definition}\label{definition: F sigma delta spaces}
Let $X$ be a Tychonoff topological space. We say that $X$ is an \emph{$F_{\sigma\delta}$ space} if there exists a compactification $cX$ of $X$, such that $X\inF_{\sigma\delta}(cX)$.
We say that $X$ is an \emph{absolute $F_{\sigma\delta}$ space} (or that $X$ is \emph{absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$}) if $X\inF_{\sigma\delta}(cX)$ holds for every compactification $cX$ of $X$.
\end{definition}
Note that $X$ is absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$ if and only if $X\inF_{\sigma\delta}(Y)$ holds for every Tychonoff topological space $Y$ in which $X$ is embedded.
If, in the above definition, we replace the class $F_{\sigma\delta}$ by $G_\delta$, we get the definition of the well known concept of Čech-completeness -- however, in such a case the situation is less complicated, because every Čech-complete space is automatically absolutely $G_\delta$. Internal characterization Čech-complete spaces was given by Zdeněk Frolík, who also gave a characterization of $F_{\sigma\delta}$ spaces in terms of complete sequences of covers (see Definition \ref{def: complete seq. of covers} below). He then asked for a description of those spaces which are \emph{absolutely} $F_{\sigma\delta}$ (Problem 1 in \cite{frolik1963descriptive}), and this problem is still open.
However, Frolík did not know whether there actually exist non-absolute $F_{\sigma\delta}$ spaces. This part of the problem was solved later by Talagrand, who found an example of such a space (\cite{talagrand1985choquet}). Thus, we formulate Frolík's problem as follows:
\begin{problem} \label{problem: 1}
Among all $F_{\sigma\delta}$ spaces, describe those which are absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$.
\end{problem}
If we are unable to completely determine the answer to Problem \ref{problem: 1}, the next best thing to do is to find a partial answer to Problem \ref{problem: 2} for as many spaces as possible.
\begin{problem} \label{problem: 2}
Let $X$ be a (possibly non-absolute) $F_{\sigma\delta}$ space. Describe those compactifications of $X$ in which it is $F_{\sigma\delta}$.
\end{problem}
In Section \ref{section: fsd topological spaces}, we give a partial answer to Problem \ref{problem: 2} by showing that if a $X$ is $F_{\sigma\delta}$ in some compactification $cX$, it is automatically $F_{\sigma\delta}$ in all larger compactifications (which is easy) and also in all compactification which are not much smaller than $cX$ (see Corollary \ref{corollary: countable quotients} for the details).
In Proposition \ref{proposition: fs disjoint covers and abs fsd} we give a partial answer to Problem \ref{problem: 1} by finding a sufficient condition for a space to be absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$. This condition is similar in flavor to Frolík's characterization of $F_{\sigma\delta}$ spaces. Applying this result, we get that hereditarily Lindelöf $F_{\sigma\delta}$ spaces are absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$ (Theorem \ref{theorem: countable network}) and that separable Banach spaces are absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$ in the weak topology (Corollary \ref{corollary: banach spaces}).
In the rest of the introductory section we collect some known results and background information.
We could adapt Definition \ref{definition: F sigma delta spaces} for the lower classes of Borel hierarchy, where we have the following standard results. Their proof consists mostly of using the fact that continuous image of a compact space is compact.
\begin{remark}
Let $X$ be a topological space.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $X$ is absolutely closed $\iff$ $X$ is compact.
\item $X$ is absolutely $F_\sigma$ $\iff$ $X$ is $\sigma$-compact.
\item $X$ is absolutely open $\iff$ $X$ is locally compact.
\item $X$ is absolutely $G_\delta$ $\iff$ $X$ is Čech-complete.
\end{enumerate}
In the first two cases, $X$ being closed ($F_\sigma$) in some compactification automatically implies that $X$ is closed ($F_\sigma$) in every Tychonoff space where it is embedded. For open and $G_\delta$ spaces, we only get that $X$ is open ($G_\delta$) in those Tychonoff spaces where it is densely embedded.
\end{remark}
As shown in \cite{talagrand1985choquet}, not every $F_{\sigma\delta}$ space is absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$. This means that the class of $F_{\sigma\delta}$ sets is the first one for which it makes sense to study Problem \ref{problem: 2}, which is one of the reasons for our interest in this particular class. However, Talagrand's is the only result of this kind (as far as the author knows), and not much else is known about `topologically' absolute $F_{\sigma\delta}$ spaces. In \cite{kovarik@brooms}, topological absoluteness is studied for general $\mathcal F$-Borel classes, providing more examples based on Talagrand's construction and also some theoretical results.
Several authors have investigated slightly different notions of absoluteness for $F_{\sigma\delta}$ spaces. Recall that in separable metrizable setting, $F_{\sigma\delta}$ sets coincide with $\textrm{alg}\left(F\right)_{\sigma\delta}$ sets (where $\textrm{alg}\left(F\right)$ is the algebra generated by closed sets). As shown in \cite{holicky2003perfect}, the class of $\textrm{alg}\left(F\right)_{\sigma\delta}$ sets is absolute (in the sense that if a set is in $\textrm{alg}\left(F\right)_{\sigma\delta}(cX)$ for some compactification $cX$, it is automatically of this same class in every Tychonoff space where it is embedded).
In \cite{marciszewski1997absolute} and \cite{junnila1998characterizations}, the authors study metric spaces which are absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$ `in a metric sense' - that is, $X\inF_{\sigma\delta} (Y)$ for every \emph{metrizable} space $Y$ in which $X$ is embedded. In \cite{junnila1998characterizations}, the authors give a characterization of `metric absoluteness' for $F_{\sigma\delta}$ spaces in terms of complete sequences of covers - namely that $X$ is absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$ in the metric sense if and only if it has a complete sequence of $\sigma$-discrete covers.
Unfortunately, this result is not useful in our setting, because Talagrand's space is an example of non-metrizable space, which does have such a complete sequence, but it is not absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$ (in our - topological - sense).
In \cite{kovarik@brooms}, it is shown that if a metric space is separable, its complexity is automatically absolute even in the topological sense. For $F_{\sigma\delta}$ spaces, this is a special case of Theorem \ref{theorem: countable network}.
\section{Compactifications}\label{section: compactifications}
We recall the standard definitions of compactifications and their partial ordering. By \emph{compactification} of a topological space $X$ we understand a pair $(cX,\varphi)$, where $cX$ is a compact space and $\varphi$ is a homeomorphic embedding of $X$ onto a dense subspace of $cX$. Symbols $cX$, $dX$ and so on will always denote compactifications of $X$.
Compactification $(cX,\varphi)$ is said to be \emph{larger} than $(dX,\psi)$, if there exists a continuous mapping $f : cX\rightarrow dX$, such that $\psi = f \circ \varphi$. We denote this as $ cX \succeq dX $. Recall that for a given $T_{3\slantfrac{1}{2}}$ topological space $X$, its compactifications are partially ordered by $\succeq$ and Stone-Čech compactification $\beta X$ is the largest one.
Often, we encounter a situation where $X\subset cX$ and the corresponding embedding is identity. In this case, we will simply write $cX$ instead of $(cX,\textrm{id}|_X)$. Lastly, whenever we write symbols $cX$ or $dX$, we will automatically assume that they denote some compactifications of $X$. Much more about this topic can be found in many books - for a more recent one, see for example \cite{freiwald2014introduction}.
In the introduction, we defined the notion of being an $F_{\sigma\delta}$ space and an absolute $F_{\sigma\delta}$ space. Having defined the partial order $\succeq$ on the class of compactifications of $X$, we note the basic facts related to Problem \ref{problem: 2}. The proof of this remark consists of using the fact that continuous preimage of an $F_{\sigma\delta}$ set is an $F_{\sigma\delta}$ set.
\begin{remark}\label{remark: absolute complexity}
For a topological space $X$, we have the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item $X$ is an $F_{\sigma\delta}$ space $\iff$ $X\inF_{\sigma\delta}(\beta X)$;
\item $X$ is an absolute $F_{\sigma\delta}$ space $\iff$ $X\inF_{\sigma\delta}(cX)$ for every $cX$;
\item $X\inF_{\sigma\delta} (dX)$, $cX\succeq dX$ $\implies$ $X\inF_{\sigma\delta}(cX)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{remark}
\begin{notation}
Let $X$ be a topological space, suppose that two of its compactifications satisfy $dX\preceq cX$ and that $\varphi : cX\rightarrow dX$ is the mapping which witnesses this fact. We denote
\[ \mathcal{F}\left( cX, dX\right):=\left\lbrace \varphi^{-1} \left(x\right)\big | \ x\in dX, \ \varphi^{-1} \left(x\right) \textrm{ is not a singleton} \right\rbrace . \]
\end{notation}
In this sense, every compactification $dX$ smaller than $cX$ corresponds to some disjoint system $\mathcal{F}$ of compact subsets of $cX\setminus X$. Conversely, some disjoint systems of compact subsets of $cX\setminus X$ correspond to quotient mappings, which correspond to compactifications smaller than $cX$. Not every such system $\mathcal F$ corresponds to a compactification, but surely every finite (disjoint, consisting of compact subsets of $cX\setminus X$) $\mathcal F$ does.
\section{$F_{\sigma\delta}$ spaces}
In this section, we will list some results related to $F_{\sigma\delta}$ spaces.
\subsection{Banach spaces}
Unless otherwise specified, a Banach space $X$ (resp. its second dual), will always be equipped with weak (resp. $w^\star$) topology. In \cite{argyros2008talagrand}, a Banach space $X$ is said to be $F_{\sigma\delta}$ if it is is an $F_{\sigma\delta}$ subset of $X^{\star\star}$. Note that the space $X^{\star\star}$ is always $\sigma$-compact, so it is $F_\sigma$ in $\beta X^{\star\star}$. Consequently, any $F_{\sigma\delta}$ Banach space is automatically an $F_{\sigma\delta}$ space (in the sense of Definition \ref{definition: F sigma delta spaces}).
An important class of Banach spaces are the spaces which are weakly compactly generated (WCG). Recall that a Banach space $X$ is said to be WCG, if there exists a set $K\subset X$ which is weakly compact, such that $\textrm{span}(K)$ is dense in $(X,||\cdot||)$. Clearly all separable spaces and all reflexive spaces are WCG. The canonical example of non-separable non-reflexive WCG space is the space $c_0(\Gamma)$ for uncountable index set $\Gamma$. For more information about WCG spaces, see for example \cite{fabian2013functional}. The reason for our interest in WCG spaces is the following result (\cite[Theorem 3.2]{talagrand1979espaces}):
\begin{proposition}\label{proposition: WCG spaces are fsd}
Any WCG space is an $F_{\sigma\delta}$ Banach space.
\end{proposition}
In fact, even every subspace of a WCG space is $F_{\sigma\delta}$ in its second dual. Talagrand has found an example of an $F_{\sigma\delta}$ Banach space which is not a subspace of a WCG space \cite{talagrand1979espaces}. This space belongs to a more general class of weakly $\mathcal K$-analytic spaces. A problem which had been open for a long time is whether every weakly $\mathcal K$-analytic space is an $F_{\sigma\delta}$ Banach space. A counterexample has been found in \cite{argyros2008talagrand} (as well as some sufficient conditions for a weakly $\mathcal K$-analytic space to be an $F_{\sigma\delta}$ Banach space). The problem which still remains unsolved is whether weakly $\mathcal K$-analytic spaces are topologically $F_{\sigma\delta}$.
\subsection{Topological spaces}\label{section: fsd topological spaces}
\begin{proposition}\label{proposition: G delta characterization}
Suppose that $X\in F_{\sigma\delta}\left(cX\right)$ and $ dX \preceq cX $. Then $X\in F_{\sigma\delta}\left(dX\right)$ holds if and only if there exists a sequence $(H_n)_n$ of $F_\sigma$ subsets of $cX$, such that
\[ \left(\forall F\in\mathcal{F}\left(cX,dX\right)\right)\left(\exists n\in\mathbb{N}\right): X\subset H_n \subset cX \setminus F. \]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Denote by $\varphi$ the map witnessing that $dX\preceq cX$. \\*
$\implies $: Assume that $X=\bigcap F_n$, where the sets $F_n$ are $F_\sigma$ in $dX $. Denote $H_n:=\varphi^{-1}(F_n)$. Clearly, $H_n\subset cX$ are $F_\sigma$ sets containing $X$. Let $F$ be $\mathcal{F}\left(cX,dX\right)$, that is, $F=\varphi^{-1}(y)$ for some $y\in dX\setminus X$. By the assumption, we have $X\subset F_n \subset dX\setminus \left\{y\right\}$ for some $n\in \mathbb N$. By definition of $\varphi$, we get the desired result:
\[ X=\varphi^{-1}\left(X\right)\subset \varphi^{-1}\left(F_n\right)=H_n\subset \varphi^{-1}\left(dX\setminus \left\{y\right\}\right)=\varphi^{-1}\left(X\right)\setminus \varphi^{-1}\left(y\right)=X\setminus F. \]
$\Longleftarrow$: Let the sequence of sets $H_n\subset cX$ be as in the proposition. We know that $X=\bigcap F_n$ for some $F_\sigma$ sets $F_n$. We now receive sets $F'_n:=\varphi(F_n)$ and $H'_n:=\varphi(H_n)$, $n\in\mathbb{N}$, all of which are $F_\sigma$ in $dX$. Clearly, we have
\[ X\subset\bigcap F'_n \cap \bigcap {H'_n}. \]
For the converse inclusion, let $y\in dX \setminus X$. If $\varphi^{-1}(y)$ is a singleton, we have $\varphi^{-1}(y) \subset cX\setminus F_n$ for some $n\in\mathbb{N}$, and therefore $y\notin \varphi(F_n)=F'_n$. If $\varphi^{-1}(y)$ is not a singleton, then $\varphi^{-1}(y)\in \mathcal{F}\left(cX,dX\right)$, so there exists some $n\in\mathbb{N}$, such that $H_n\subset X\setminus \varphi^{-1}(y)$. In this case, we have $y\notin \varphi(H_n)=H'_n$.
\end{proof}
Since any $F_{\sigma\delta}$ space is Lindelöf, we can make use of the following lemma, which follows immediately from \cite[Lemma 14]{spurny2006solution}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: fsd spaces are Fs separated}
Let $X$ be a Lindelöf subspace of a compact space $L$. Then for every compact set $K\subset L \setminus X$, there exists $H\in F_\sigma\left(L\right)$, such that $X\subset H\subset L\setminus K$.
\end{lemma}
Once we have Lemma \ref{lemma: fsd spaces are Fs separated}, Proposition \ref{proposition: G delta characterization} yields the following corollary, which gives a partial answer to Problem \ref{problem: 2}:
\begin{corollary}\label{corollary: countable quotients}
Suppose that $X$ is an $F_{\sigma\delta}$ subspace of $cX$ and $dX\preceq cX$. Then $X$ is $F_{\sigma\delta}$ in $dX$ as well, provided that the family $\mathcal{F}\left(cX,dX\right)$ is at most countable.
\end{corollary}
In particular, this implies that there exists no such thing as a "minimal compactifications in which $X$ is $F_{\sigma\delta}$" (unless, of course, $X$ is locally compact).
\section{Hereditarily Lindelöf spaces}\label{section: countable network}
In this section, we present the following main result:
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem: countable network}
Every hereditarily Lindelöf $F_{\sigma\delta}$ space is absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$.
\end{theorem}
Note that every $F_{\sigma\delta}$ space is Lindelöf (because it is $\mathcal K$-analytic), but the converse implication to Theorem \ref{theorem: countable network} does not hold - that is, not every absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$ space is hereditarily Lindelöf. Indeed, any compact space which is not hereditarily normal is a counterexample. The proof of Theorem \ref{theorem: countable network} will require some technical preparation, but we can state an immediate corollary for Banach spaces:
\begin{corollary}\label{corollary: banach spaces}
Every separable Banach space is absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$ (when equipped with the weak topology).
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
By Proposition \ref{proposition: WCG spaces are fsd}, every separable Banach space $X$ is $F_{\sigma\delta}$. The countable basis of the norm topology of $X$ is a network for the weak topology. The proposition follows from the fact that spaces with countable network are hereditarily Lindelöf.
\end{proof}
We will need the notion of complete sequence of covers:
\begin{definition}[Complete sequence of covers]\label{def: complete seq. of covers}
Let $X$ be a topological space. \emph{Filter} on $X$ is a family of subsets of $X$, which is closed with respect to supersets and finite intersections and does not contain the empty set. A point $x\in X$ is said to be an \emph{accumulation point} of a filter $\mathcal F$ on $X$, if each neighborhood of $x$ intersects each element of $\mathcal F$.
A sequence $\left( \mathcal F_n \right)_{n\in\mathbb N}$ of covers of $X$ is said to be \emph{complete}, if every filter which intersects all $\mathcal F_n$-s has an accumulation point in $X$.
\end{definition}
The connection between this notion and our topic is explained by Proposition \ref{proposition: fsd iff complete sequence of covers}. Note that a cover of $X$ is said to be \emph{closed} (\emph{open}, $F_\sigma$, \emph{disjoint}) if it consists of sets which are closed in $X$ (open, $F_\sigma$, disjoint). As a slight deviation from this terminology, a cover of $X$ is said to be \emph{countable} if it contains countably many elements.
\begin{proposition}\label{proposition: fsd iff complete sequence of covers}Any topological space $X$ satisfies
\begin{enumerate}
\item $X$ is Čech-complete $\iff$ $X$ has a complete sequence of open covers,
\item $\begin{aligned}[t]
X \textrm{ is } F_{\sigma\delta} & \iff X \textrm{ has a complete sequence of countable closed covers} \\
& \iff X \textrm{ has a complete sequence of countable } F_\sigma \textrm{ covers},
\end{aligned}$
\item $X$ is $\mathcal K$-analytic $\iff$ $X$ has a complete sequence of countable covers.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
The equivalence between first and second part of $2.$ is easy, and follows from Lemma \ref{lemma: refinement}. The remaining assertion are due to Frolík (\cite{frolik1960generalizations}, \cite[Theorem 7]{frolik1963descriptive} and \cite[Theorem 9.3]{frolik1970survey}). To get our main result, we will prove a statement which has a similar flavor:
\begin{proposition}\label{proposition: fs disjoint covers and abs fsd}
Any topological space with a complete sequence of countable disjoint $F_\sigma$ covers is absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$.
\end{proposition}
We will need the following observation:
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: refinement} Let $X$ be a topological space.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\left( \mathcal F_n \right)_{n\in\mathbb N}$ is a complete sequence of covers on $X$ and for each $n\in\mathbb N$, the cover $\mathcal F_n'$ is a refinement of $\mathcal F_n$, then the sequence $\left( \mathcal F_n' \right)_{n\in\mathbb N}$ is complete.
\item If $X$ has a complete sequence of countable closed (open, $F_\sigma$) covers, then it also has a complete sequence of countable closed (open, $F_\sigma$) covers $\left( \mathcal F_n \right)_{n\in\mathbb N}$, in which each $\mathcal F_{n+1}$ refines $\mathcal F_n$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The first part follows from the definition of complete sequence of covers of $X$. For the second part, let $\left( \mathcal F_n' \right)_{n\in\mathbb N}$ be a complete sequence of covers of $X$. We define the new sequence of covers as the refinement of $\left( \mathcal F_n' \right)_{n\in\mathbb N}$, setting $\mathcal F_1:=\mathcal F_1'$ and
\[ \mathcal F_{n+1}:=\mathcal F_{n+1}'\wedge\mathcal F_n := \left\{ F'\cap F|\ F'\in\mathcal F_n',\ F\in\mathcal F_{n+1} \right\}. \]
Clearly, the properties of being countable and closed (or $F_\sigma$) are preserved by this operation.
\end{proof}
The main reason for the use of complete sequences of covers is the following lemma:
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: x is in X and c.s.of c.}
Let $\left( \mathcal F_n \right)_{n\in\mathbb N}$ be a complete sequence of covers of $X$ and $cX$ a compactification of $X$. If a sequence of sets $F_n\in\mathcal F_n$ satisfies $F_1\supset F_2\supset \dots$, then $\bigcap_{n \in\mathbb N}\overline{F_n}^{cX} \subset X$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Fix $x\in cX$. We observe that the family
\[ \mathcal B:=\left\{ U \cap F_n|\ U\in\mathcal U\left(x\right),\ n\in\mathbb N \right\} \]
is, by hypothesis, formed by nonempty sets and closed under taking finite intersections, therefore it is a basis of some filter $\mathcal F$ (note that this is the only step where we use the monotonicity of $(F_n)_n$). Since every $F_n$ belongs to both $\mathcal F$ and $\mathcal F_n$, $\mathcal F$ must have some accumulation point $y$ in $X$. If $x$ and $y$ were distinct, they would have some neighborhoods $U$ and $V$ with disjoint closures. This would imply that $V\in\mathcal U\left (y\right )$, $U\supset U\cap F_1\in \mathcal F$ and $V\cap\overline{U}$, which contradicts the definition of $y$ being an accumulation point of $\mathcal F$. This means that $x$ is equal to $y$ and, in particular, $x$ belongs to $X$.
\end{proof}
The property of being hereditarily Lindelöf will be used in the following way:
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma: countable network and disjoint cover}
Every hereditarily Lindelöf $F_{\sigma\delta}$ space $X$ has a complete sequence of countable disjoint $F_\sigma$ covers.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that in a hereditarily Lindelöf space, every open set can be written as a countable union of closed sets. Consequently, the difference of two closed sets is always an $F_\sigma$ set.
Let $(\mathcal F_n )_n$ be a complete sequence of countable closed covers of $X$ (which exists by Proposition \ref{proposition: fsd iff complete sequence of covers}). We enumerate each of the covers $\mathcal F_n$ as $\mathcal F_n=\left\{ F^n_k| \ k\in\mathbb{N} \right\}$. Modifying each $\mathcal F_n$ in the standard way, we obtain disjoint covers of $X$:
\[ \widetilde {\mathcal F_n} := \left\{ F^n_k \setminus \left(F^n_1\cup\dots\cup F^n_{k-1} \right)|\ k\in\mathbb{N} \right\}.\]
By previous paragraph, each of these new covers consists of $F_\sigma$ sets. By $1.$ in Lemma \ref{lemma: refinement}, the sequence $\left( \widetilde {\mathcal F_n} \right)_n$ is complete.
\end{proof}
In order to get Theorem \ref{theorem: countable network}, it remains to prove Proposition \ref{proposition: fs disjoint covers and abs fsd}:
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{proposition: fs disjoint covers and abs fsd}]
Let $(\mathcal D_n)_n$ be the complete sequence of countable disjoint $F_\sigma$ covers of $X$. Without loss of generality, we can assume (by Lemma \ref{lemma: refinement}) that each $\mathcal D_{n+1}$ refines $\mathcal D_n$. Also, let $cX$ be a compactification of $X$. Since $cX$ is fixed, all closures will automatically be taken in this compactification.
We enumerate each cover as $\mathcal D_n=\left\{D^n_m|\ m\in\mathbb{N} \right\}$ and write each of its elements as countable union of closed sets: $D^n_m=\bigcup_i D^n_{m,i}$. We set $\widetilde { \mathcal D_n } := \left\{ D^n_{m,i} |\ m,i\in\mathbb{N} \right\}$ and $\widetilde { \mathcal D } :=\bigcup_n \widetilde { \mathcal D_n }$.
It is clear that $X\subset \bigcap_n \bigcup \left\{ \overline{D}|\ D\in \widetilde {\mathcal D_n} \right\}$. Note that the set on the right hand side is $F_{\sigma\delta}$. The equality does not, in general, hold, but we can modify the right hand side using Lemma \ref{lemma: fsd spaces are Fs separated}.
Indeed, suppose that $x$ belongs to $\bigcap_n \bigcup \left\{ \overline{D}|\ D\in \widetilde {\mathcal D_n} \right\}$, but not to $X$. By Lemma \ref{lemma: x is in X and c.s.of c.}, this means that there are sequences $(m_n)_n$ and $(i_n)_n$, such that $x\in\bigcap_n \overline{D^n_{m_n,i_n}}$, but $D^1_{m_1,i_1}\supset D^2_{m_2,i_2}\supset \dots$ does \emph{not} hold. In particular, $x\in\overline D\cap \overline E$ holds for some $D,E\in\widetilde {\mathcal D}$ disjoint.
Since both $D$ and $E$ are closed in $X$, we have $\overline D \cap \overline E \subset cX \setminus X$. This means we can use Lemma \ref{lemma: fsd spaces are Fs separated} to obtain an $F_\sigma$ subset $H_{D,E}$ of $cX$ satisfying $X\subset H_{D,E}\subset cX\setminus \left( \overline D \cap \overline E \right)$. We claim that
\[ X = \bigcap_n \bigcup \left\{ \overline{D}|\ D\in \widetilde {\mathcal D_n} \right\} \cap \bigcap \left\{H_{D,E}|\ D,E\in\widetilde {\mathcal D} \textrm{ disjoint} \right\}. \]
By definition of $H_{D,E}$, the set on the right side contains $X$, and the opposite inclusion follows from the observation above. Since $\widetilde {\mathcal D}$ is countable, the right hand side is $F_{\sigma\delta}$. This proves that that $X\inF_{\sigma\delta} \left(cX\right)$, which completes the proof (and also the whole section).
\end{proof}
\section{Conclusion}
We have shown that being hereditarily Lindelöf is a sufficient condition for an $F_{\sigma\delta}$ space to be absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$ - this is a fairly useful condition for applications.
The problem of finding the description of absolute $F_{\sigma\delta}$ spaces remains yet unsolved, but we have gotten one step closer to the characterization: By Frolík's result, absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$ space must have a complete sequence of countable $F_\sigma$ covers. If a space has such a sequence of covers which are also disjoint, then it must be absolutely $F_{\sigma\delta}$. Therefore, if the desired characterization can be formulated in terms of complete sequences of covers, it must be something between these two conditions.
|
\section{Introduction}
Understanding how science works and evolves has become an important subject of study over the last few years. Science itself can be regarded as being a complex system, which can be approached through concepts from many disciplines such as physics, statistics, linguistics, and information science. The knowledge achieved by humanity can be understood as a subset of the knowledge in nature. Moreover, the knowledge is constantly evolving and growing with new discoveries. Such evolution have been studied, for instance in \cite{foster2015tradition,cokol2005emergent}. In particular, scientometry~\cite{leydesdorff2009global} emerged as a new research area investigating how science evolves. Among such studies are those related to the modeling of the discovery process~\cite{doi:10.1093/comnet/cnu003,Pareschi20130396,batista2010knowledge}, which are, in general, based on investigations of the structure and dynamics existing in a knowledge space. Such dynamics usually involves researchers acquiring information while exchanging information. Furthermore, the discovery process must take into account how knowledge is organized~\cite{PhysRevE.88.012814,leydesdorff2009global,silva2011investigating,silva2016using}.
The study of how knowledge acquisition takes place allow us to identify the effects influencing the efficiency of such a dynamics and, consequently, to better understand how they can improve or constrain the process of learning. An example of such study was conducted by Silva \emph{et al}~\cite{silva2010identifying}, in which it was shown that discoveries in mathematics, in particular theorems, are more likely to be incorporated at the borders of the respective knowledge space. In order to understand the knowledge acquisition dynamics, some key elements should be considered: (i)~how researchers choose their own research topic; (ii)~the way in which they spread the obtained results; (iii)~how fast the information spreads; (iv)~the visibility of specific researchers and (v)~the organization of the knowledge itself. Some of these elements were previously considered in literature, such as a model of spreading ideas in a group of multiple agents~\cite{burridge2016infrequent}. Other studies addressed techniques to optimize the exploration of a knowledge space~\cite{kim2016network,lopez2012model,rzhetsky2015choosing}. Another important aspect of interest is knowing how the interactions among researchers impacts the discovery process. For instance, what would be the effects implied in case researchers were strongly influenced by their more famous colleagues.
Many works tackled the characterization and modeling of science by using complex networks (e.g.~\cite{da2006learning,silva2010identifying,batista2010knowledge,gonzalez2011threshold,boyer2014random,forsman2014extending,rzhetsky2015choosing,guan2017impact}). Typically, each node represents a concept while the edges stand for the relationship between them. The dynamics of learning in such networks can be modeled as random walks, in which an agent randomly moves along the network through its edges~\cite{da2006learning,boyer2014random}. In this context, the nodes already visited by an agent represent the already learnt concepts. For example, in the methodology proposed by Costa~\cite{da2006learning}, an agent performs a random walk along a multilayer network, which represents the hierarchy of the knowledge structure. Additionally, the movement among layers is only permitted if a certain milestone of learned concepts is reached. Other characteristics can be incorporated in the random walk, such as memory, in which the agent tends to move to places already known in a network~\cite{boyer2014random}. Apart from single agent dynamics, some papers studied the \emph{collective discovery} process, in which the interactions among multiple researchers are taken into consideration~\cite{batista2010knowledge,gonzalez2011threshold,forsman2014extending,rzhetsky2015choosing}. For example, Forsman \emph{et al}~\cite{forsman2014extending} suggests that social and academic networks, as well as their dynamics, are influenced by the relationships among university-level students.
In perspective to the previous studies, we propose a model for knowledge acquisition that incorporates two main aspects typically approached separately: knowledge memory and multiple agents. The memory aspect is encompassed into the proposed dynamics by an specific type of random walk, the \emph{true self-avoiding walk} (TSAW), which was found to be one of the most efficient models to explore networks~\cite{kim2016network}. In the TSAW dynamics, the agent tends to avoid passing through already visited nodes. The dynamics is based on a set of a random walkers that simultaneously explore the network. Aside from these two aspects, we also incorporate into the dynamics the possibility of a researcher to change its research focus based on discoveries made by others. In particular, the agents have a probability of performing a jump, which can be understood as a long-range travel across the network~\cite{estrada2016random}. In the analyzes made by Foster~\emph{et~al}~\cite{foster2015tradition}, the jump dynamics was found to be related to the risk of research. On the other hand, such kind of risk can produce innovation with high impact in science.
In this paper, we perform knowledge dynamics for a set of network models and two real networks: a citation~\cite{silva2016using} and a Wikipedia~\cite{silva2011investigating} network. In both networks, the nodes represent articles and the edges, the citations among them. In particular, for the Wikipedia network, an edge exists between two nodes if there is a hyperlink connecting their corresponding articles.
Bearing in mind that our approach simulates collective discovery, we measure the performance in terms of the fraction of the total number of explored nodes by the agents after a certain number of iterations. Through our approach, we seek to address some important questions regarding the collective discovery process, such as: if frequent changes of the area of study by researchers can positively contribute to the performance in the discovery process; investigating influence of researchers with very high visibility to the dynamics; how important is the overall organization of knowledge to the dynamics; and how the dynamics behaves in specific regions of a network (e.g. its borders).
The current paper is organized as follows: Section~II describes the basic concepts related to the particularities of the adopted random walk model. In Section~III, we present, in detail, our model for knowledge acquisition as well as the description of the used dataset. Section~IV describes the results obtained from the proposed methodology. Finally, Section~V provides the conclusions and suggestions for further work.
\section{True self-avoiding random walk}
The problem of random walks was initially proposed by Karl Pearson, in 1905~\cite{pearson1905problem}, in order to study the dynamics of mosquito swarms in forests. Pearson assumed a mosquito as an agent under a dynamics based on the walking of a drunkard. Such a process starts with the agent placed at a point $O$ along a plane. Next, it moves straight ahead $l$ yards, then, it turns through a random angle and moves another $l$ yards in a straight line. This process is repeated $n$ times. In a short letter to \emph{Nature}, Pearson asked for help on solving the problem of devising the probability distribution $P(d, n)$ of finding such an agent at a certain distance $d$ from $O$ after a high amount of $n$ iterations. The solution was found by Lord Rayleigh~\cite{rayleigh1905problem}, who showed that $P(d, n) \approx {2 d \over n} e^{-d^2/n}$ as $n\to \infty$, a relationship that is statistically similar to the behavior of the diffusion dynamics. The established link between these two concepts (random walks and diffusion), paved the way to the development of the theoretical approaches to understand the characteristics of matter, such as the concept of Brownian motion~\cite{horvath2012diffusive}, leading to the discovering of several macroscopic characteristics and the modeling of many real-world phenomena.
More recently, some variants of the random walk dynamics were introduced, which were employed for modeling of many systems in a wide range of disciplines, including the analysis of insect movements~\cite{kareiva1983analyzing}, modeling of neural activity~\cite{gerstein1964random}, and other biological processes~\cite{codling2008random}. Subsequently, random walks were applied in conjunction with complex networks~\cite{costa2011analyzing,da2007exploring,noh2004random}, which have been used to represent several real-world complex systems. Examples of such developments are: finding influential spreaders in rumor propagation~\cite{de2014role}, characterizing proteins~\cite{rodrigues2009comparison}, text mining~\cite{mihalcea2006random} and knowledge representation~\cite{leydesdorff2009global, silva2013quantifying}.
Among the proposed variations of random walk dynamics on networks, there are those based on self-avoiding random walks (SAW)~\cite{herrero2005self,herrero2003self}. In such a walking dynamics, each agent behaves identically as it would do in a traditional random walk; however, the same agent is not allowed to return to the same node.
Because at each iteration the agent always visit a new node, this dynamic is particularly suitable for optimally exploring a network with no \emph{a priori} information of its global structure. By definition, paths generated from SAWs are finite in length~\cite{tishby2016distribution}, thus a path restart mechanism is needed for exploring the whole network.
A drawback associated with SAWs is the creation of discontinuous paths, as a consequence of the path restart mechanism.
To overcome this pitfall, variations of the self-avoiding random walk have been proposed, including the \emph{true self-avoiding walk} (TSAW)~\cite{kim2016network,lam1984true,stella1984series,amit1983asymptotic}. In such dynamics, also known as \emph{myopic walk}, the probability of visiting a neighbor is higher if it has not already been frequently accessed.
Note that the TSAW resembles the SAW dynamics, with the difference of not being fully restrictive with regard to neighbors already accessed in the previous visits.
In a typical TSAW dynamics, the next node $v^{(t+1)}$ to be taken by an agent must lie in its current neighborhood $v_i \in N(v^{(t)})$. The selection of $v^{(t+1)}$ is conditioned to a probability $P_i$ that diminishes exponentially with the number of times $v_i$ have already been visited, $f(v_i)$. Thus, the probability $P_i$ is proportional to
\begin{equation}
w_i = \alpha^{-f(v_i)},
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ is a constant. Given $w_i$, the probability $P_i$ of visiting
the next node $v_i$ can be computed as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:tsawprobability}
P_i = { w_i \over \sum\limits_{v_j \in N(v^{(t)})} w_j },
\end{equation}
Henceforth, $\alpha=2$.
Since both TSAW and SAW dynamics must maintain a memory of the path already taken by the agent, the analytical study of such both processes becomes very complex. The TSAW dynamics; nonetheless, is more analytically tractable than SAW because the former does not depend on a path restart mechanism~\cite{lopez2012model}. Recently, Kim~\emph{et al}~\cite{kim2016network} showed that the TSAW dynamics is an efficient way to explore complex networks with agents having only the knowledge of the local structure of the network.
\section{Knowledge acquisition modeling}
The process of collective discovery can be modeled as a population of agents exploring the knowledge space under certain dynamics, which should also incorporate the interactions among the agents. In this context, the knowledge space can be represented by a complex network~\cite{leydesdorff2009global, silva2013quantifying} where potential discoveries are indicated by nodes, while relationships between such discoveries are represented as edges. Examples of such networks include citation or co-citation networks~\cite{Ren20123533,PhysRevE.88.012814,Amancio2012427,silva2016using,scientometria}, Wikipedia networks~\cite{Ibrahim201721,silva2011investigating}, and learning objects~\cite{korytkowski2007creating}.
In this study we consider the organization of the knowledge as a complex network, and simulate the researchers as agents under a TSAW dynamics. An example of the proposed TSAW dynamics for an agent is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:fig_trueSelfAvoiding}, where three situations of an agent under such dynamics are shown. Such example illustrates an agent and its respective transitions in the network, where we show how the transition probabilities modifications along some iterations.
\begin{figure*}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{fig_trueSelfAvoiding}
\caption{Example of the TSAW dynamics on a 2D lattice along three distinct time steps: (a) first iteration, (b) second iteration and (c) 13th iteration. Node colors indicate the number of times $f$ that a vertex was visited. The colors orange, blue, green, and red represent $f=0$, $f=1$, $f=2$, and $f=3$, respectively. For each situation the permitted transitions are shown as arrows between nodes alongside with the transition probability given by equation~\ref{eq:tsawprobability}.}
\label{fig:fig_trueSelfAvoiding}
\end{figure*}
In addition to the TSAW mechanism, we also incorporate the concept of stochastic flight~\cite{mandelbrot1983fractal,volchenkov2011random} to the proposed dynamics. Such a modification is needed to account for a scientific environment of multiple interacting agents, which is usually done by reading each other papers, by attending conferences, or via collaborations~\cite{PhysRevE.88.012814,doi:10.1142/S0129183107010437,Viana2013371,0295-5075-99-4-48002,Newman16012001}. In particular, the flight dynamics is employed to simulate the events when a agent changes its object of study based on the discoveries made by another agent. In summary, the TSAW accounts for the local exploration of the knowledge network by a agent, while the stochastic flight allows agents to reach nodes farther away through jumps to knowledge entities close to the recent discoveries.
A variety of flight dynamics exists in the literature, including the L\'evy, Cauchy and Rayleigh flights~\cite{mandelbrot1983fractal}. In our model, we use a flight mechanism with a probability $\gamma$. If this mechanism is activated, the agent does not perform the TSAW dynamics at the current time step. As an alternative, the agent jumps to an arbitrary destination node in the network.
The destination node is stochastically determined according to an influence field emanating from the other agents. In our model, each agent $v_j$ \emph{emits} a field $E_a(i)$ along the topological structure of the network to simulate knowledge dissemination. Such a field is defined in a way so that dissemination decays exponentially with the topological distance $d(i,j)$ from an observation vertex $v_i$ to $v_j$. Thus, for each agent, $a$, this field is computed as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:fielddef}
E_a(i) = \sum_{j \in V}{\eta_i \exp(-d(i,j) \tau) },
\end{equation}
with $V$ being the set of nodes in the knowledge network and $\tau$ a constant of the dynamics. The set of values $\eta_i$ constitutes another parameter of the dynamics and models the fitness of each agent, which allows us to simulate different fields magnitudes emanating from each agent. In other words, by considering this parameter, it is possible to emulate a case where the influence of the agents is not homogeneous. Here, the reduction of the influence field was modeled in terms of exponential decay instead of a power law, so as to constrain the spreading of the influence irrespectively to the network dimension~\cite{jackson1975electrodynamics,silva2012local,wei2014new}.
In the proposed model, the field acts as a stochastic attractor on the agents, inducing them to make a jump. The parameters $\tau$ and $\eta_i$ appearing in the definition of the field (equation~\ref{eq:fielddef}) can be interpreted, respectively, as the \emph{dissemination decay} and the individual \emph{fitness} of each agent. The parameter $\tau$ defines the overall locality of the influence field. On the other hand, $\eta$ allows distinct performance to be assigned to each agent. The adopted influence field is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:fields}~(a).
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.\linewidth]{fig_fields}
\caption{Example of fields emitted by agents. Item (a) represents the field emitted by a single agent, $E_a$. Note that for a given agent, the further the node, weaker its respective field will be. Item (b) shows an example of a resultant field, $E$, which is a superposition of the fields generated by agents $A$ and $B$. Item (b) also illustrates agent $C$ being attracted by the resulting influence field. In this example $\eta_C = 0$ so agent $C$ has no influence over the others.}.
\label{fig:fields}
\end{figure}
For the simulations, we adopted a binary distribution of $\eta$, in which $\eta$ can assume only two possible values: $\eta_\text{common}$ and $\eta_\text{influential}$. A parameter $D_\eta$ defines the portion of agents having $\eta = \eta_\text{influential}$.
In our model, the fields are combined via superposition, thus, the total field $E(i)$ acting on a vertex $v_i$ can be calculated as
\begin{equation}
E(i) = \sum_{a \in \mathcal{A}}{E_a(i)}.
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{A}$ is the set of agents. An example of this field can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:fields}~(b). Note that when the agent jumps it is attracted to the resultant field $E$ and tends to go to a position near the other agents. Finally, the destination of the jump is chosen among all the nodes of the network according to a probability $\Pi(i)$:
\begin{equation}
\Pi(i) = \frac{E(i)}{\sum_{j \in V}{E(j)}}.
\end{equation}
In summary, our model starts with a set of $|A|$ agents randomly displaced over a network representing the knowledge structure. For each iteration, the agents walk along the network according to the two proposed dynamics, TSAW or flight, depending on the jump probability $\gamma$. We should emphasize that the TSAW dynamics in our model is not dependent on the interaction between agents. Such influence takes place only during the decision process of a jump.
\subsection{Network database}
In order to characterize the performance of our model among different knowledge organizations, we put together a small dataset of networks having many distinct properties. This selection starts with one of the simplest network models, a bidimensional lattice (LA), in which nodes are regularly distributed over a squared grid and are connected by proximity. In this work, each node in such a network is connected to its nearest four nodes, except those lying at the borders of the networks. In addition, in order to maintain the same degree in the whole network and to eliminate the boundary effect, we also incorporate a lattice to our dataset, with the border nodes being toroidally connected, which is henceforth called toroidal Lattice (TLA). In this case, all nodes of the network become indistinguible among themselves. We also incorporate some random network models to the dataset, namely the Watts-Strogatz (\emph{WS})~\cite{watts1998WS}, the Barab\'asi-Albert model (\emph{BA})~\cite{barabasi1999BA}, the community model developed by Lancichinetti \emph{et al} (\emph{CN})~\cite{silva2016using} and the Waxman model (\emph{WAX})~\cite{Waxman1988Connections}.
The WS model reproduces the small-world phenomenon commonly found in many real-world networks, e.g. social network~\cite{wasserman1994social}, food web~\cite{dunne2002food}, brain networks~\cite{sporns2004small,bassett2006small}, among others~\cite{amaral2000classes}. In such networks, most of the nodes can be reached from the other nodes in a small number of steps~\cite{costa2007characterization}.
Another important characteristic present in many real-world networks is their scale-free nature. The BA model reproduces this characteristic through two mechanisms: preferential attachment and network growth. More specifically, new nodes are progressively added to the network and are more likely to connect with nodes already presenting many connections, resulting in a power law node degree distribution~\cite{costa2007characterization}.
We also incorporated a geographic model to the dataset. In this case, we choose the traditional Waxman model~\cite{Waxman1988Connections}, in which nodes are randomly displaced along a two dimensional space and are connected according to a probability that decays exponentially with the distance between each pair of nodes.
In addition to the traditional complex network models, we also considered the use of networks presenting community structure, which can be found in many real-world networks representing knowledge, such as citation networks~\cite{silva2016using} and Wikipedia~\cite{silva2011investigating}. In order to do so, we generated benchmark networks of Lancichinetti~et~al.~\cite{lancichinetti2008benchmark}, as we call Community Networks (CN). This model generates scale-free networks with a given number of communities. In addition, there are other parameters in this model, such as the mixing parameter, $\mu$, which defines how often nodes from a community connect with nodes from other communities. Furthermore, there are parameters to control the average degree of the network, $k_{min}$ and $k_{max}$ which are minimum and maximum degree, respectively, and the minimum and maximum community size, $s_{min}$ and $s_{max}$, respectively, where the condition $s_{min} > k_{min}$ and $s_{max} > k_{max}$ should be enforced. Further information about this model can be found in~\cite{lancichinetti2008benchmark}.
We also included in our dataset two real-world networks representing knowledge: a Wikipedia~\cite{silva2011investigating} (\emph{WIKI}) network and a citation network obtained from the Web of Science~\cite{silva2016using} (\emph{WOS}). The WIKI network was obtained from a subset of the Wikipedia incorporating only articles from two main categories: Biology and Mathematics. In such a network, each node represents an article and the edges indicate a reference between two articles. The WOS network was obtained from the set of articles and citations resulting from a query on the Web of Science encompassing only the complex networks field.
The employed models were configured to have similar number of nodes as in the selected real networks. In addition, we considered all networks as unweighted and undirected. The dataset of networks is summarized in table~\ref{tab:networks}. Additionally, we also obtained a visualization for each network, which is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:visualizations}.
\begin{table*}[]
\centering
\caption{Description of the analyzed networks. The number of nodes ($N$) and the average network degree ($k$) are shown. }
\label{tab:networks}
\begin{tabular}{c p{7.0cm} c c c c}
\hline
Network & Description & $N$ & $k$ & Parameters & Refs. \\ \hline
LA & Bidimensional lattice & 10k & 3.96 & & -- \\
TLA & Bidimensional toroidal lattice & 10k & 4.00 & & -- \\
WS-1 & Watts-Strogatz model & 10k & 4.00 & $p=0.001$ & \cite{watts1998WS} \\
WS-2 & Watts-Strogatz model & 10k & 4.00 & $p=0.005$ & \cite{watts1998WS} \\
WAX & Waxman model & $\approx$10k & 6.02 & $\alpha = 1$, $\beta = 0.015$, and $L=1$ & \cite{Waxman1988Connections} \\
BA & Barabasi-Albert model & 10k & 6.00 & & \cite{barabasi1999BA} \\
CN & Fortunato model & 10k & 5.63 & 2 communities, $\mu = 0.2$ & \cite{lancichinetti2008benchmark} \\
WIKI & Subset of wikipedia encompassing articles from Biology and Mathematics & $\approx$12k & 7.29 & -- & \cite{silva2011investigating} \\
WOS & Citation network obtained for the query "Complex Networks" on the Web of Science & $\approx$11k & 17.08 & -- & \cite{silva2016using} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Performance evaluation}
In order to characterize the performance of the proposed dynamics for distinct parameters configurations, we employed a measurement to quantify the learning performance of the agents. The dynamics is evaluated according to their collective discovery performance, more specifically the total number of explored nodes, $\varepsilon_T$, which is defined as
\begin{equation}
\varepsilon_T(t_{a}) = \sum_{t=1}^{t_{a}}{\varepsilon(t)},
\end{equation}
where $t_{a}$ is the actual time (i.e. the current iteration) and $\varepsilon(t)$ is the number of newly explored nodes at $t$, not taking into account those explored on iterations before $t$.
\begin{figure*}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.80\linewidth]{fig_accessibilityNetworks}
\caption{Visualization of all selected networks, with colors representing the accessibility of each node ($A_i^{(h=3)}$).}
\label{fig:visualizations}
\end{figure*}
A full understanding of the presented dynamics can be accomplished by studying how the learning performance is affected by distinct topological characteristics, such as by how central a node is in a network, as the dynamics may vary substantially depending on the region of the network they are being analyzed. Complex networks can display very distinct local characteristics that may affect the dynamics arising from their structure. For instance, it is known that a random walk dynamics can be employed to find the community structure of a given network~\cite{rosvall2008maps}. For this reason, we also considered the evaluation of the collective discovery for distinct regions of the networks. In this case, each region corresponds to sets of nodes sharing a similar property, which can be quantified by a topological measurement. In this work, we use the accessibility~\cite{rodrigues2009structure} measurement to characterize distinct regions of the networks. Such measurement is known to detect borders and influential nodes in a high variety of real-world networks~\cite{travenccolo2009border,de2014role,1742-5468-2015-3-P03005,travenccolo2008accessibility}. In our study we estimate the accessibility as in~\cite{travenccolo2008accessibility}. The accessibility of a vertex $i$ is defined as
\begin{equation}
A^{(h)}_i = \exp \left(- \sum_j p^{(h)}_{ij} \log p^{(h)}_{ij} \right),
\end{equation}
where $p^{(h)}_{ij}$ is the probability of reaching a vertex $j$ having departed from $i$, after $h$ steps. In this study, we considered $h=3$ to avoid the limited size effects as the diameter of some networks in our database can reach very low values, such as $6$ or even $5$.
\section{Results and discussion}
We compared the learning performance of our dynamics among different networks and for many distinct sets of parameters. Moreover, by considering the structure of each network, we discuss the performance of the proposed dynamics in different network regions. Henceforth, the analyses take into consideration $300$ realizations for each combination of parameters. As a result, the performance of the dynamics is measured in terms of the average total number of explored nodes ($\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$) calculated over all these realizations.
\subsection{Network dynamics evaluation}
We first analyzed the lattice network because of its simplicity. We found that the knowledge acquisition performance $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$ in LA and TLA did not vary given several combinations of parameters ($D_\eta$, $\tau$, and $\gamma$). For this reason, we only present the results obtained for the LA network. First, we observed that the variations of $D_\eta$ parameter were weakly reflected in $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig_lattice}~(a). We can infer that the variation of the number of agents with high influence, represented by the vector $D_\eta$, does not change the dynamics performance. The evaluated performance of the other parameters, $\tau$ (the locality of the field) and $\gamma$ (the jump probability), are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig_lattice}~(b) and Figure~\ref{fig:fig_geo_jump}~(a), respectively. Even though all the curves present high standard deviation, the dynamics performance, $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$, was greatly affected by varying $\tau$ or $\gamma$. We also observe that the performance decreases when any of the these two parameters increases. Regarding the parameters $D_\eta$ and $\tau$, the results obtained for the spatial models, WS-1, WS-2 and WAX are markedly similar to those obtained by the analysis of the LA model.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\subfigure[$D_\eta$.]{\includegraphics[width=0.65 \linewidth]{exploredlatticeEta.pdf}}
\subfigure[$\tau$.]{\includegraphics[width=0.65 \linewidth]{exploredlatticeTauOutroIntervalo.pdf}}
\caption{Representations of the dynamics executed in LA, where the items (a) and (b) represent the results of the parameter changes of $D_\eta$ and $\tau$, respectively.}
\label{fig:fig_lattice}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[!htbp]
\centering
\subfigure[LA]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{exploredlatticeJump.pdf}}
\subfigure[WS-1]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{exploredWS0_001Jump.pdf}}
\subfigure[WS-2]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{exploredWS0_005Jump.pdf}}
\subfigure[WOS]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{exploredWoSJump.pdf}}
\subfigure[WIKI]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{exploredbioMathJump.pdf}}
\subfigure[CN]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{exploredFortunato2ComJump.pdf}} \caption{Average performances of the proposed dynamics ($\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$) and corresponding standard deviations obtained by varying the jump probability ($\gamma$) considering six networks: (a)LA; (b)WS-1, (c)WS-2, (d)WOS, (e)WIKI and (f)CN. The parameter $\gamma$ is indicated by colors according to the legend.}
\label{fig:fig_geo_jump}
\end{figure*}
By focusing the analysis on the $\gamma$ parameter, we found similarities among the curves of $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$ obtained for the networks LA, WS-1, and WS-2, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig_geo_jump}(a-c). In these cases, we also observed that the standard deviations of $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$ are similar among all configurations. In addition, increasing $\gamma$ was found to improve the dynamics performance significantly for these networks. Despite these similarities, the impact of increasing $\gamma$ is diminished as the probability of rewiring increases for the WS model (recall that LA also corresponds to a WS model with zero rewiring probability). This indicates that $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$ tends to be more sensitive to the $\gamma$ parameter when the network is more spatial or organized. However, the results obtained for the WAX, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig_wax}, indicate that this behavior is not a direct consequence of the spatiality of networks. The WAX network, a spatial structure, presented particularly low performance variation with the increase of $\gamma$. As in the previous cases, it is better to explore the network without using jumps. Furthermore, we also observed that varying $\tau$ produced similar results.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\linewidth]{exploredWaxJump.pdf}
\caption{Performance, $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$, of our dynamics, varying the values of $\gamma$ adopted in the WAX networks.}
\label{fig:fig_wax}
\end{figure}
We also analyzed how the performance can be affected by varying the jump probability ($\gamma$) for the WOS, WIKI and CN networks. In contrast to the spatial networks discussed above, these networks are inherently more related to knowledge structures. The performance curves obtained for these networks are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig_geo_jump}(d-f). Differently from the results obtained for spatial networks, increasing $\gamma$ improves the performance. We note, however, that the effects of changing $\gamma$ is much lower than for the spatial networks. The curves obtained for the BA network also present this same behavior, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig_ba}(a). In addition, the WIKI network presented a general performance substantially lower than the other models even when compared with the CN network, which reproduces many of the WIKI network characteristics, such as the number of nodes, node degree distribution and its community structure.
Regarding the other parameters, we found no significant influence of $D_\eta$ and $\tau$ to the dynamics performance for the considered knowledge networks. In these cases, the curves are very similar to those obtained for the BA network, which are shown in Figures~\ref{fig:fig_ba}(b)~and~(c).
\begin{figure*}[!htbp]
\centering
\subfigure[$\gamma$]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{exploredbaJump.pdf}}
\subfigure[$D_\eta$]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{exploredbaEta.pdf}}
\subfigure[$\tau$]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{exploredbaTauOutroIntervalo.pdf}}
\caption{The performance, $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$, obtained from the simulation of our dynamics on the BA network while varying the parameters: (a)$\gamma$, (b)$D_\eta$ and (c)$\tau$. We note that the influence of the variations of $D_\eta$ and $\tau$ were not significative. On the other hand, the network exploration is more efficient when the jump probability $\gamma$ is high.}
\label{fig:fig_ba}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Dynamics evaluation in network regions}
We analyzed above the networks in terms of the average performance of $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$ by measuring the dynamics performance globally. Now, we consider different network regions. For this purpose, we understand a network region as being defined by a set of nodes presenting a certain topological characteristic (such as being at the borders of the network, or presenting similar accessibility). To measure the performance, we consider the value of $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$ after $1000$ iterations of the dynamics. This number of iterations was chosen because, if we consider a small number of iterations, the exploration becomes local and, consequently, similar for all considered networks. On the other hand, for high values, the regions are totally explored resulting in similar performance.
Considering our database, we start the analysis with the LA model. The toroidal configuration is not taken into account because it is impossible to define particular regions in this network. For the LA model, we calculated the Chebyshev distance~\cite{prtools}, known as maximum value distance, between the position of each node and the geographical center of the network, instead of accessibility measurement. In order to do so, we used the average position of all network nodes as the geographical center.
The obtained results for the LA simulation can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:fig_lattice_reg}, in which the performances of different $D_\eta$ values were not shown because, in this case, there are no significant variations among $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$ performance. The measured $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$ in different network regions was not found to present significant variations when the jump probability, $\gamma$, is changed (shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig_lattice_reg}(a)). A similar effect was observed when a range of $D_\eta$ values was tested. Furthermore, as in the first analysis, varying the $\tau$ parameter provides a better performance for the regions near the geographical center of the network, but when $\tau \leq 0.01$ there were no significant variations of $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$ (shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig_lattice_reg}(b)).
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\subfigure[$\gamma$]{\includegraphics[width=0.85\linewidth]{explored_jump_distance_lattice.pdf}} \subfigure[$\tau$]{\includegraphics[width=0.85\linewidth]{explored_tauOutroIntervalo_distance_lattice.pdf}}
\caption{The performance $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$ obtained from the dynamics simulation for each network region. Such regions were defined according to the distance between each node and the central position of LA. Two parameters, $\gamma$ (a) and $\tau$ (b), were varied.}
\label{fig:fig_lattice_reg}
\end{figure}
A more extensive analysis was done by considering the accessibility measurement, $\alpha^{(3)}$ to characterize the networks regions. According to this analysis, the variations of $D_\eta$ vector were distinctly reflected in the dynamics for each network region. Since the results obtained for the parameter $\tau$ are almost the same as those obtained for $D_\eta$, the following discussion regarding this parameter also holds for $D_\eta$.
The performance obtained for the considered networks by varying $D_\eta$ are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig_eta_reg}. In most cases, variations of $D_\eta$ did not imply in performance variation for any of the network regions. However, when comparing among regions in the same network, the most central regions tended to have higher values of $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$. Such an effect was observed in all the considered networks representing knowledge structure (CN, WOS, WIKI and BA), as shown in Figures~\ref{fig:fig_eta_reg}(c-f). From these results, we conclude that the number of visible agents did not significantly impact on the network performance. The factor that most influenced the performance was the centrality of the region being explored, because normally the network center is easier to be explored. An exception to this trend is the BA network (f), which did not present significant performance variations when considering distinct network regions.
For the WAX model, we found that no significant differences of $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$ when $D_\eta$ is changed for regions at the borders of the network. However, more expressive differences of $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$ were observed in the central region. The standard deviations were also higher, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig_eta_reg}(b). The simulation for the WS networks showed that the percentage of influent agents, $D_\eta$, is directly related to $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$. These results are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig_eta_reg}(c).
\begin{figure*}[!htbp]
\centering
\subfigure[WS-2]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{explored_eta_accessibility_WS0_005.pdf}}
\subfigure[WAX]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{explored_eta_accessibility_Wax.pdf}}
\subfigure[CN]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{explored_eta_accessibility_Fortunato2Com.pdf}}\\
\subfigure[WOS]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{explored_eta_accessibility_WoS}}
\subfigure[WIKI]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{explored_eta_accessibility_bioMath}}
\subfigure[BA]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{explored_eta_accessibility_ba.pdf}}
\caption{The performance $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$ along the network regions for distinct values of $D_\eta$. The regions were defined in terms of the accessibility measurement with $h=3$. For this analysis, the considered networks are: (a)WS-2; (b)WAX; (c)CN, (d)WOS, (e)WIKI, (f)BA.}
\label{fig:fig_eta_reg}
\end{figure*}
The results obtained for the analyses involving jump probability $\gamma$ variation are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fig_jump_reg}. For all curves, the dynamics performance $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$ was found to be higher at the central regions of the networks (i.e. those with nodes having high accessibility). Except for the WOS(d) and BA(f) networks, the curves monotonically increase with the average accessibility of the regions. Similarly to the results obtained by varying $\eta$, the performance for the BA network does not vary substantially along the network regions nor by changing $\gamma$. However, it is interesting to note that, for regions presenting very low accessibility in the BA network, the performance has an opposite trend to the global behavior, as it decreases with $\gamma$.
In most cases, the influence of varying $\gamma$ to the performance tends to decrease with the average accessibility of the considered region. However, in the case of the WOS network, for a certain range of accessibility values around $1700$, the performance have a significantly drop of performance. This is interesting because other models did not present such behavior. Another interesting observation is that, the standard deviations obtained for the knowledge networks are substantially lower compared to those obtained for the spatial networks. This indicates that the peculiar behavior observed for the WOS networks is not caused by statistical fluctuations but may be the consequence of a more complex topological trait.
In general, for the considered networks representing knowledge structure (WOS, WIKI, CN and BA), in contrast with the spatial networks (LA, WS-2 and WAX), the dynamics do not change much by varying its parameters. In the average, the performance increases only by a small factor, for jump probability and changes even less for the other parameters. However, for the WOS network, depending on the network region, the improvement of performance by varying this parameter can be substantially higher than the other networks.
\begin{figure*}[!htbp]
\centering
\subfigure[WS-2]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{explored_jump_accessibility_WS0_005.pdf}}
\subfigure[WAX]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{explored_jump_accessibility_Wax.pdf}}
\subfigure[CN]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{explored_jump_accessibility_Fortunato2Com.pdf}}\\
\subfigure[WOS]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{explored_jump_accessibility_WoS.pdf}}
\subfigure[WIKI]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{explored_jump_accessibility_bioMath.pdf}}
\subfigure[BA]{\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{explored_jump_accessibility_ba.pdf}}
\caption{The performance $\langle\varepsilon_T\rangle$ for the WS-2 (a), WAX (b), CN (c), WOS (d), WIKI (e) and BA (f) networks, measured from the dynamics simulation for each network region, where the regions were computed according to the $\alpha^{(3)}$ measurement. In this test, we vary the values of the parameter $\gamma$.}
\label{fig:fig_jump_reg}
\end{figure*}
\section{Conclusion}
The problem of how humans represent and acquire knowledge has received growing attention along the last years as a consequence of its potential for understanding and improving the speed of research and learning (e.g.~\cite{foster2015tradition,cokol2005emergent}). These problems are considerably complex because they involve several aspects that can influence the efficiency of how knowledge is achieved, exchanged and disseminated. Such aspects include, for instance, the complexity of the knowledge structure itself, the visibility of researchers, the available memory, the strategies adopted for deciding the next possible subjects of research, amongst many others. One particularly promising approach to understanding knowledge acquisition consists in representing the knowledge as a complex networks, and researchers as agents that move along such networks. A number of approaches adopting such a framework have been proposed in the literature~\cite{doi:10.1093/comnet/cnu003,Pareschi20130396,batista2010knowledge} to study the learning process, i.e. the discovery of new concepts by researchers. In this study, we propose a systematic approach focusing on two important elements influencing knowledge acquisition, namely the memory and visibility of agents, in order to better understand the collective discovery process. The memory aspect was investigated in terms of true self-avoiding dynamics occurring in a knowledge space. Additionally, interactions among researchers were modeled by means of a flight dynamics biased towards the most visible researchers.
We execute our dynamics in many networks, including two real networks (WIKI and WOS) and a set of network models with distinctive topological properties. We observed that the performance of knowledge acquisition can be distinctly optimized for different characteristics of the networks. For example, by increasing the jump probability ($\gamma$), the speed of learning also rises significantly in the case of BA networks. This could be a consequence of the fact that, in such networks, the agents need to pass through hubs to access other nodes up to the point that it starts to avoid the hubs completely. This results in such an agent becoming trapped by a set of nodes because the majority of the shortest paths go across hubs. In a BA network, a jumping agent can move without crossing the hubs, thus having more possibilities to access new nodes. On the other hand, such a configuration was found to be less effective in WAX networks, since when an agent jumps towards other nodes, it will tend to navigate through already learned concepts.
We also investigated the performance by considering distinct network regions, such as the borders and the center of networks. We found that, in most cases, collective discovery occurs faster at the core of the network and becomes slower at the borders. Regarding the three parameters controlling the dynamics, in contrast with the results obtained for the global analysis, some dynamics configurations can indeed change the learning performance depending on the properties of regions being explored. However, for the networks representing knowledge structure, the average gain in performance is low irrespectively to the dynamics parameters. An exception to this trend is the WOS network, which presents a set of regions where the performance can vary substantially under influence of the jump probability. In this case, it is possible to enhance knowledge acquisition by a substantial factor. These results indicate that, for a typical knowledge network, the heuristics governing the way researchers seek for new knowledge does not substantially affect the global performance of the collective discovery, but still can have influence depending on the properties of the region of knowledge under investigation.
The current study adopted a random walk approach incorporating jumps in a multi-agent dynamics. In future works, we intend to probe the effects of considering other network topologies, including directed structures, on the proposed collective learning model. Additionally, some dynamic characteristics can also be investigated, such as other visibility mechanisms and agents with different features (e.g. memory, speed, etc.). Furthermore, our study can be extended to incorporate two layers: one representing the knowledge organization, and the other a network of interactions among researchers.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors acknowledge financial support from Capes-Brazil, S\~ao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) (grant no. 2016/19069-9,
2015/08003-4, 2014/20830-0 and 2011/50761-2), CNPq-Brazil (grant no. 307333/2013-2) and NAP-PRP-USP.
|
\section{Introduction{\label{introduction}}}
The general objective of this paper is to examine the interaction between neutrinos and nuclei by using a model based on the relativistic formalism. We compute the cross sections for the neutrino neutral-current quasi-elastic reaction on carbon and lead targets, with one knocked-out nucleon.
Much of the current research on neutrinos aims at better understanding their intrinsic nature, which may provide evidence for physics beyond the standard model of weak interactions \cite{Zuber}. Some examples of questions regarding the intrinsic nature of neutrinos include: their Dirac-versus-Majorana type \cite{DiracMajorana}, their magnetic moment \cite{magneticmoment}, their role as representatives of CP violation in the leptonic sector \cite{nunokawa}, and their matter-enhanced oscillations \cite{balantekin}. Since neutrinos are not significantly attenuated when they travel through the interstellar medium, they have applications in astrophysics, such as their contribution to the production of energy in the Sun, the influence of neutrinos on the dynamics of a core-collapse supernova explosion, and the cooling of a proto-neutron star \cite{Bahcall}. In many astrophysical situations, the neutrinos serve as messengers probing the interior of dense and opaque objects that otherwise remain out of reach.
The relativistic approach to nuclear dynamics we use here is based on the relativistic mean field theory developed by Walecka {\it et al} \cite{S}-\cite{SW}. This approach has been applied successfully in the analysis of nucleon knockout reactions using electromagnetic probes and meson photoproduction reactions \cite{EDC.HSS}-\cite{MH.HSS}. For instance, the model was utilized and successfully compared with experimental data for the reactions $e+X^A\rightarrow e'+N+X^{A-1}$, with $X^A$ oxygen, zirconium and lead, in a study of relativistic and non-relativistic description of quasi-free electron scattering \cite{MH.JIJ.HSS}. We shall exploit this model and analyze the neutral-current neutrino scattering by two targets: first by $^{12}$C, in order to examine the strange-quark contributions in the nucleon which occur via the isoscalar weak current (and we compare with the data of the MiniBooNE experiment for mineral oil (CH$_2$) \cite{Aguilar-Arevalo}), and second, by $^{208}$Pb in the energy range of neutrinos emitted by a supernova core collapse.
The neutrino neutral-current scattering allows us to examine the strange quark content of the nucleon, which can manifest itself via the isoscalar weak current. This is different from the charged-current scattering, which involves only isovector weak currents.
The analysis of the strange-quark content of the nucleon originated after suggestions that the measurements of the semileptonic weak-neutral-current reactions $\nu p\rightarrow \nu p$ and ${\overline{\nu}} p\rightarrow {\overline{\nu}} p$ at Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) led to a non-trivial contribution for the strange-quark axial-vector form factor \cite{Ahrens1987}. Further analyses, which also took into account the strange-quark vector form factors, showed that BNL's results could not provide decisive conclusions \cite{Garvey1}-\cite{Garvey3}. The strange-quark contributions to the nucleon form factors were studied with the help of neutrinos by using the relativistic Fermi gas model (RFG) in Refs.\cite{horowitz}-\cite{mulders}. Subsequent calculations based on the relativistic plane-wave impulse approximation (RPWIA) have been compared to RFG calculations in Ref.\cite{alberico1}-\cite{maieron}. The next step is taking into account the final-state interaction (FSI) of the ejected nucleon \cite{alberico1}-\cite{bleve}. The relativistic distorted-wave impulse approximation (RDWIA), which we use here, was employed in several neutrino-nucleus calculations \cite{alberico1}-\cite{maieron}. Ryckebusch {\it et al} performed similar calculations using a relativistic multiple scattering approximation \cite{Belgians1}. The authors of Ref.\cite{NPA773} utilized the RDWIA for charged- and neutral-current quasi-elastic neutrino-nucleus reactions on $^{12}$C and have discussed the sensitivity of these reactions to the strange-quark content of the nucleon and to the final state interactions (FSI).
We also extend our computations to the interaction of the neutrinos with $^{208}$Pb. We do this in the energy range which is relevant to the neutrinos resulting from supernova collapse. In this respect there are plans for the Canadian Helium and Lead Observatory (HALO), a detector dedicated to the observation of supernova neutrinos that is located at SNOLAB in the Creighton Mine in Sudbury, Canada \cite{HaloZuber,halowebsite}. It is part of the SuperNova Early Warning System (SNEWS), a worldwide network of detectors currently running or nearing completion, and which are sensitive to core-collapse supernova neutrino signals in the Milky Way. Currently, SNEWS involves seven neutrino experiments \cite{snews}-\cite{snewswebsite}. In addition to providing information about the neutrinos themselves, SNEWS will also allow astrophysicists to learn about the nature of the supernova's core collapse. An important feature of the neutrino signal is that it is prompt: it emerges from the supernova core within tens of seconds, whereas it may take hours or days after the stellar collapse for the electromagnetic signal to emerge. Hence, the neutrinos can provide an early warning to astronomers to observe the very early turn-on of the supernova light curve. Since lead has a larger neutrino-scattering cross section per nucleon than many other elements, most of the scattering events will produce neutrons, thereby signaling a galactic supernova. Lead has another advantage that, being a double magic nucleus, its neutron-capture cross section is low, so that the neutrons have a higher chance of surviving the trip through the lead and the moderator into the neutron detectors.
In this paper, we examine the neutrino neutral-current reaction on nuclei that results in one knocked-out nucleon $N$:
$X^A(\nu, \nu'N)X^{A-1}$,
where $A$ is the mass number of the nucleus $X$, hereafter, $^{12}$C and $^{208}$Pb. For the reactions with $^{12}$C, $N$ denotes either a proton or a neutron, whereas for $^{208}$Pb, we will consider only $N$ as neutrons. In Section \ref{formalism}, we describe the neutrino-nucleus scattering model we use. The S-matrix is expressed in terms of lepton and nuclear currents, and we explain how the latter contains the form factors that pertain to the strange-quark parameters that we investigate. We state and discuss our results in Section \ref{results}, for both carbon and lead.
\section{Neutrino-nucleus scattering model {\label{formalism}}}
The relativistic S-matrix, which describes the
quasi-free neutrino scattering process can be written in a manner similar to what is done for quasi-free electron scattering. In the distorted-wave Born approximation (DWBA) the S-matrix for the neutrino reaction takes the form \cite{BD, JU, MH.JIJ.HSS,PRC69},
\begin{eqnarray}
S_{fi} &=& \frac{1 }{(2\pi)^{7/2}}\frac{G_F}{2\sqrt{2}}\delta(E_N+\epsilon_f-\epsilon_i-E_B)
\sum_{J_B M_B} { \left(J_f, J_B;M_f, M_B| J_i, M_i \right)}
\nonumber \\
& &\times{ \left[ {\cal S}_{J_i J_f} (J_B) \right] }^{1/2}
{\cal L}^\alpha N_{\alpha MM_B},
\label{f1}
\end{eqnarray}
where $G_F$ is Fermi's coupling constant, ${\cal S}_{J_i J_f} (J_B)$ is the spectroscopic factor, $\left| J_iM_i\right\rangle$ and $\left| J_fM_f\right\rangle$ are initial target and final nucleus states, $E_N$ is the energy of the knocked-out nucleon, $\epsilon_i$ and $\epsilon_f$ denote the initial and final energy of the neutrino, and $E_B$ is the energy of the bound nucleon. The interaction of the neutrino with the nucleus is defined through a relativistic formalism using lepton and nuclear currents ${\cal L}^\alpha$ and $N^\beta_{MM_B}$, respectively. The lepton current is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal L}^\alpha
= \overline{\nu}(k_f) (\gamma^\alpha - \gamma^\alpha\gamma^5)\nu(k_i),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\nu(k_i) $ and $\nu(k_f) $ are the initial and final states of the neutrinos, respectively, and $k$ is the momentum of the neutrino. We take these neutrino wave-functions as free left-handed Dirac spinors, and $\gamma^\alpha$ and $\gamma^5$ are the well-known Dirac matrices.
The nuclear current is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
N_{\alpha MM_B}
= \int d^3x\overline{\psi}_{M}\left( k_p,x \right) j_\alpha
\psi_{J_BM_B}\left( x \right)e^{\mathrm{i}{\bf q}\cdot{\bf x}},
\label{f3}
\end{eqnarray}
where the weak nuclear current operator $j^\mu$ is described below.
$\psi_{J_BM_B}(x)$ and $\psi_{M}(x)$ are the initial and final states of the nucleons, and $M_B$ and $M$ are their spin projections. These wave-functions are solutions of the Dirac equation with the proper scalar and vector potentials. The details of the Fock space calculations and the expansion of the Dirac wave-function in partial waves can be found in Ref.\cite{JIJ.HSS}.
With the appropriate factors of $\hbar$ and $c$, the relativistic expression for the triple differential cross section takes the form
\begin{equation}
\frac{d^3\sigma}{d\Omega_{e} d\Omega_p dE_p} =
\frac{G_F^2 m_N c^2 p_N c k_f^2 c^2} {8\left( 2 \pi \right)^{5}\hbar c} \sum_{ J_B M_B M }
{ \frac{ {\cal S}_{J_i J_f} (J_B) }{ 2J_B + 1 } }
{ | {\cal L}^\alpha N_{\alpha MM_B} | }^2,\label{crosssection}
\end{equation}
We use the maximum value of $2J_B +1$ for spectroscopic factor ${\cal S}_{J_i J_f} (J_B)$.
The Fermi constant is $G_F=1.16639\times 10^{-11}$ MeV$^{-2}$, $k_f$ denotes the final momentum of the neutrino, $p_N$ and $m_N$ are momentum and mass of the emitted nucleon, respectively.
We utilize weak form factors similar to those in Refs.\cite{meucci1}, \cite{NPA773}, and \cite{PRC77}. The authors of Ref.\cite{meucci1} use the following one-particle current operator for the weak current:
\begin{equation}
j^\mu = F_1^V(Q^2)\gamma^\mu+\mathrm{i}\frac\kappa{2M}F_2^V(Q^2)\sigma^{\mu\nu}q_\nu-G_A(Q^2)\gamma^\mu\gamma^5,
\label{FormFactor}\end{equation}
where $Q^2=|{\bf q}|^2-\omega^2$ is the four-momentum transfer (with four-momentum $q^\mu= k^{\mu}_{i} - k^{\mu}_{f}$ ), $\kappa$ is the anomalous part of the magnetic moment for nucleon, and $\sigma^{\mu\nu}=\frac \ri2[\gamma^\mu,\gamma^\nu]$ is the usual commutator of the Dirac matrices. The $Q^2$-dependent functions $F_1^V$ and $F_2^V$ are the weak isovector Dirac and Pauli form factors, respectively, and they are given by
\begin{equation}
F_i^{V,p(n)}=\left(\frac 12-2\sin^2\theta_W\right)F_i^{p(n)}-\frac 12F_i^{n(p)}-\frac 12F_i^{s}, \quad i=1, 2,\label{FiV}
\end{equation}
where we have taken the Weinberg angle $\theta_W$ as $\sin^2\theta_W\simeq0.23143$, and the electromagnetic form factors $F_i^p$ and $F_i^n$ are as in Ref.\cite{3WW-DP}.
In Eq.(\ref{FiV}), $F_1^s$ and $F_2^s$ are the strangeness contributions to the vector form factors \cite{PRC77,strange},
\begin{equation}
F_1^s(Q^2)=\frac{(\rho^s+\mu^s)\tau}{(1+\tau)(1+Q^2/M_V^2)^2}, \qquad F_2^s(Q^2)=\frac{(\mu^s-\tau\rho^s)}{(1+\tau)(1+Q^2/M_V^2)^2}\label{FsItalians}
\end{equation}
where $\tau=Q^2/(4m_N^2)$, $M_V=0.843$ GeV, and the strangeness parameters $\rho^s$ and $\mu^s$ will be given various values, as described in Section \ref{results}.
The remaining element in Eq.(\ref{FormFactor}) is the function $G_A$, which denotes the axial form factor \cite{axial},
\begin{equation}
G_A(Q^2)=\frac 12(\tau_3g_A-g_A^s)G(Q^2),\label{gAs}
\end{equation}
where $g_A\simeq 1.26$, $G=(1+Q^2/M_A^2)^{-2}$, with $M_A=(1.026\pm 0.021)$ GeV, and $\tau_3=+1/-1$ for proton/neutron knockout reactions. The parameter $g_A^s$ describes various strange-quark contributions and, like $\rho^s$ and $\mu^s$ in Eq.(\ref{FsItalians}), we will consider different values in Section \ref{results}.
\section{Results and analysis {\label{results}}}
In Section \ref{carbon}, we discuss the results of our computations of the cross section for the quasi-elastic scattering of neutrinos on a $^{12}$C target, with neutrino energy equal to 150, 500 and 1000 MeV. In these calculations we study the effects of the strange-quark contributions to nucleons. We also compare the result of the model for mineral oil with the data available from the MiniBooNE experiment \cite{Aguilar-Arevalo}. In Section \ref{lead}, we discuss the scattering cross section of neutrinos on a $^{208}$Pb target. The neutrinos in this reaction have a lower energy range, 20 - 60 MeV, which is relevant to plans to use lead as a target in future supernova neutrino detectors.
In all the calculations presented in this work the symmetrized Wood-Saxon potentials are used for bound state wave-functions \cite{4GER.THS}.
The continuum wave-functions for the knocked out nucleon are obtained
using the energy and the $A$-dependent optical potential of Cooper {\it et al} \cite{COPE}.
\subsection{Scattering from carbon: strange-quark content of the nucleon and scattering on CH$_2$ {\label{carbon}}}
The purpose of this section is twofold. In the following subsection \ref{strange}, we examine the effect of the strangeness parameters on the neutrino-nucleus reactions. We compute the cross sections for neutral-current quasi-elastic neutrino scattering from $^{12}$C for various values of the strangeness parameters $\rho^s$, $\mu^s$, $g^s_A$ (Eqs.\ref{FsItalians} and \ref{gAs}). This is done for neutrino energies of 150, 500 and 1000 MeV. We examine the strange-quark contributions to the form factors and compare our cross sections with the literature.
In the subsection \ref{cdata}, we compare our results with data from the MiniBooNE experiment for mineral oil (CH$_2$) target \cite{Aguilar-Arevalo}. Their data result from a high-statistics measurement of the flux-averaged cross section as a function of the momentum transfer $Q^2$ for $Q^2<1.6$ GeV$^2$ \cite{Aguilar-Arevalo}.
\subsubsection{Effect of the strange-quark contribution on neutrino-nucleus reactions.}{\label{strange}}
Before we compare our results with the experimental data for the quasi-free neutrino scattering we will do an initial comparison with the previous work for the role of the strangeness parameters. In Figs.\ref{n150} to \ref{rpn1000}, we show the dependence of the differential cross sections for the reaction on $^{12}$C on the various combinations of the strangeness parameters. We display the differential cross sections for the reaction on $^{12}$C in Figs.\ref{n150} to \ref{p1000} with neutron or proton knockouts. We use the values of the parameters used in reference \cite{NPA773}.
Figs.\ref{n150} and \ref{p150} show the results for neutron and proton knockout, respectively, for 150-MeV neutrinos. They display the differential cross section versus the kinetic energy of the knocked-out nucleon. We note that the shapes and magnitudes of the cross sections are similar for proton and neutron, but they differ when it comes to the dependence on the strangeness parameters. For neutron knockout with all the strangeness parameters equal to zero, the cross section is largest, whereas it is smallest for proton. The results presented in these figures indicate that the dependence of the cross section on the strangeness parameter $\rho^s$ is weak. This can be seen by the overlap of the curves of $\mu^s=-0.5$, $g^s_A=-0.1$, with $\rho^s=2$ and $0$. This weaker dependence on $\rho^s$ is echoed by the curves with $\mu^s=0$ and $g^s_A=-0.1$.
The results for $E_\nu=500$ MeV are presented in Figs.\ref{n500} for neutrons and Fig.\ref{p500} for protons. These figures indicate that the strangeness parameter $\rho^s$ plays a stronger role for neutrons compared to 150 MeV. However, the dependence on $\rho^s$ continues to be weak for protons.
Figs.\ref{n1000} and \ref{p1000} show the cross sections for neutron and protons, respectively for $E_\nu=1000$ MeV. From Fig.\ref{n1000} we see that the role of strangeness parameter $\rho^s$ becomes relatively stronger with energy of neutrino. In the proton case however, the effect of $\rho^s$ continues to be negligible. We notice from Figs. \ref{n150} to \ref{p1000} that the cross section increases as we lower $\mu_s$ from $0.0$ to $-0.5$.
When we compare our results with those of Fig.3 of Ref.\cite{NPA773}, we observe that for $E_\nu = 500$ MeV the general behaviour of our results (in our Figs.\ref {n500} and \ref{p500}) is similar to but slightly smaller than the results in Fig.3 of Ref.\cite{NPA773}. Note that our results display a slight shoulder around $T=200$ MeV, as in Ref.\cite{NPA773}. For $E_\nu = 500$ MeV, the relative curves (with different strangeness values) seem generally ordered in the same way in our results as in Ref.\cite{NPA773}.
The Fig.1 of Ref.\cite{KimCheoun2008} has some similarities with our results: for knocked-out neutrons, their cross sections for $g_A^s=0.0$ is greater than for $g_A^s=-0.19$ with values similar to ours, and for knocked-out protons, the contributions are reversed: their cross sections for $g_A^s=0.0$ is smaller than for $g_A^s=-0.19$.
Figs.\ref{rpn150}, \ref{rpn500} and \ref{rpn1000} show the proton-to-neutron ratio of cross sections as a function of the knocked-out nucleon kinetic energy for neutrino energies of 150, 500 and 1000 MeV, respectively. They all show the curves in the same order as Fig.5 of Ref.\cite{NPA773}. A common feature of these figures is the grouping of curves according to their strangeness: (1) the zero-strangeness curve is isolated, (2) the two curves with $g^s_A=-0.19$ and (3) the four curves with $g^s_A=-0.1$, with the cross section increasing with $\left|g^s_A\right|$. For $E_\nu=500$ MeV, our curves are slightly concave upward and their values are between 0.5 and 0.7. For $E_\nu=1000$ MeV, our values are smaller than in Fig.5 of Ref.\cite{NPA773}. Our curve for $\rho^s$, $\mu^s$, and $g^s_A$ = 2.0, 0.0,$ -0.10$ crosses 0.0, 0.0, 0.0. That behaviour is not shown in Fig.5 of Ref.\cite{NPA773}. For strangeness values $\rho^s$, $\mu^s$, and $g^s_A$ = 0.0, 0.0, $-0.10$, the curve in Fig.3 of Ref.\cite{PRC76} is locally parallel to that with zero strangeness factors, but higher by about 0.1; that is, it lies between 0.9 and 0.95. We observe exactly the same behaviour with our results, although our respective results are slightly shifted downward.
Fig.4 of Ref.\cite{PRC76} corresponds to $E_\nu=$1000 MeV. There is a big shift between our curves for $\rho^s$, $\mu^s$, and $g^s_A$ equal to 0.4, $-0.31$, $-0.19$ and the other strangeness values. Three curves can be compared with Fig.4 of Ref.\cite{PRC76}: $\rho^s$, $\mu^s$, and $g^s_A$ = 0.0, 0.0, 0.0; 0.0, 0.0, $-0.19$; and 0.4, $-0.31$, $-0.19$. The ordering is the same as ours, except for 0.4, $-0.31$, $-0.19$. The Fig.2 of Ref.\cite{KimCheoun2008} shows the ratios with solid lines for $g_A^s=-0.19$ and dashed lines for $g_A^s=0.0$. We observe the same ordering in our figure \ref{rpn500}, but the values are slightly different. In both cases, our proton-to-neutron cross sections are smaller than theirs.
\subsubsection{Comparison with data from the MiniBooNE experiment.}{\label{cdata} The neutral-current quasi-elastic scattering on CH$_2$ involves three scattering processes: on free protons in hydrogen, bound protons in carbon and bound neutrons in carbon \cite{Aguilar-Arevalo}. The neutrino flux for different types of neutrino species is given in Ref.\cite{Aguilar-Arevalo2}, and we used it to compare our calculations with experiment for the flux-averaged neutrino cross section. Expressions for flux-averaged and flux-integrated cross sections are given in Ref.\cite{Butkevich}.
A rather detailed comparison of neutral-current quasi-elastic processes using various nuclear models with the MiniBooNE experiment is available in Ref.\cite{Ivanov}.
The flux-averaged cross section is obtained from the integration over the energy $E_\nu$ of the incoming neutrino:
\begin{equation}
\left\langle\frac{d\sigma}{dQ^2}\right\rangle=\int w\left(E_\nu\right)\frac{d\sigma}{dQ^2}\left(E_\nu\right)\; dE_\nu,
\label{flux-averagedcc}\end{equation}
where the momentum transfer is related to the kinetic energy of the emitted nucleon by $Q^2=2m_NT_N$. The neutrino weight function $w\left(E_\nu\right)=\frac{\phi_\nu\left(E_\nu\right)}{\Phi}$ is defined in terms of the neutrino spectrum of the flux, $\phi_\nu\left(E_\nu\right)$, and the total flux $\Phi$ is,
\begin{equation}
\Phi=\int \phi_\nu\left(E_\nu\right)\; dE_\nu.
\end{equation}
We applied Eq.(\ref{flux-averagedcc}) by computing $\frac{d\sigma}{dQ^2}$, for neutrino energies ranging from 25 MeV to 2975 MeV by interval of $dE_\nu=50$ MeV. We then multiplied each cross section by the weighted flux $w(E_\nu)$ given above and integrated over the neutrino energies.
Comparison of our results with the data from MiniBooNE requires that we compute the following cross section per nucleon:
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma_{\nu N\rightarrow\nu N}}{dQ^2}=\frac 17C_{\nu p,H}\frac{d\sigma_{\nu p\rightarrow\nu p,H}}{dQ^2}+\frac 37C_{\nu p,C}\frac{d\sigma_{\nu p\rightarrow\nu p,C}}{dQ^2}+\frac 37C_{\nu n,C}\frac{d\sigma_{\nu n\rightarrow\nu n,C}}{dQ^2},
\end{equation}
where $C_{\nu p,H}$, $C_{\nu p,C}$ and $C_{\nu n,C}$ are $Q^2$-dependent efficiency correction functions for the neutrino scattering off free proton in H, the bound protons in C and the bound neutrons in C, respectively. The theoretical cross sections $\frac{d\sigma_{\nu p\rightarrow\nu p,H}}{dQ^2}$, $\frac{d\sigma_{\nu p\rightarrow\nu p,C}}{dQ^2}$ and $\frac{d\sigma_{\nu n\rightarrow\nu n,C}}{dQ^2}$ correspond to neutrinos on free protons (per free proton), on bound proton (per bound proton) and on bound neutron (per bound neutron), respectively.
The results are shown in Figs.\ref{square} and \ref{squarelog} along with the MiniBooNE data from Ref.\cite{Aguilar-Arevalo}.
We observe that whereas the cross section obtained with the plane-wave approximation with no strangeness produces the data quite well, the distorted-wave cross section underestimates the data in the low-$Q^2$ region up to about 0.7 GeV$^2$. The results of the distorted-wave calculations with no strangeness (long dashed curves) is similar to the relativistic mean field (RMF) calculations presented in Fig.3 of Ref.\cite{Ivanov}. The short dashed curve in these figures provides an interesting insight into the effects of the strangeness parameters on the cross sections. The calculations for this curve used a set of the strangeness parameters ($\rho^s=2$, $\mu^s=-0.5$, and $g^s_A-0.1$) discussed in previous subsection which are similar to those used in Ref.\cite{NPA773}. With this set the cross section increases and curve moves up towards the data. This offer a glimpse of hope with improved calculations one might be able to determine the strangeness contribution. Our model is limited to quasi-free one nucleon knockout reaction and lacks from a reliable optical potential for outgoing neutrons. The behaviour of the cross section at higher momentum transfer is shown with a logarithmic scale in Fig.\ref{squarelog} and shows clearly that the plane-wave calculations fits the data for the complete range and that the distorted-wave calculation also lies within the error bars of the data for $Q^2>0.7$ GeV$^2$.
\subsection{Scattering from lead and supernova core-collapse neutrinos {\label{lead}}}
In this section, we turn to the reactions induced by core-collapse supernova neutrinos, in view of a lead-based observatory such as HALO in SNO+ \cite{HaloZuber,halowebsite}. We apply the formalism discussed above to calculate the cross section for the interaction of these neutrinos with a lead target.
Kolbe and Langanke computed the cross sections and branching ratios for neutrino-induced reactions for the two materials, lead and iron, for various supernova neutrino spectra. This was motivated by proposed supernova-neutrino and neutrino-oscillation detectors such as MINOS, LAND, OMNIS, which considered one of these materials as target \cite{Kolbe}. Table VI of Ref.\cite{Kolbe} lists the cross section for $(\nu, \nu')$ scattering on lead for incoming neutrino energies between 10 and 150 MeV.
There are excellent reviews on the processes of core-collapse supernovae; see Refs.\cite{Scholberg, Janka, Kotake} and references therein. Our main interest is the neutrino flux predictions in the neutrinosphere; that is, the surface of last scattering of supernova-emitted neutrinos (see Fig.1 of Ref.\cite{Scholberg}, and Ref.\cite{Vaananen}). Based on various analyses of supernova neutrino spectra, core-collapse supernova leads to a neutrino fluence, or time-integrated flux, $\frac{dF_\nu(E)}{dE}$, which at Earth spreads over an energy range of approximately 10 to 60 MeV \cite{Beacom, Belina}.
Whereas at intermediate energy the quasi-elastic knockout is the main contributor to the cross section, at low energy, the quasi-elastic knockout is a contribution that needs to be added to the cross section obtained based on intermediate excited states of the nucleus; the latter were computed in Refs. \cite{Kolbe} and \cite{Engel2003}.
In Fig.\ref{40MeVAll}, we display the differential cross section of the neutron-knockout reaction, $^{208}$Pb$(\nu,\nu'n)^{207}$Pb, computed with the relativistic plane-wave impulse approximation, for the individual energy levels $2d_{3/2}$, $2d_{5/2}$, $2f_{5/2}$, $2f_{7/2}$, $3p_{3/2}$, $3p_{1/2}$, $3s_{1/2}$. The cross sections computed from Eq.(\ref{crosssection}) for those neutrino energies, and considering all three neutrino flavours, are displayed in Table \ref{Table}. It is interesting to observe that our results, based on the quasi-elastic neutron knockout, are comparable to those in Refs.\cite{Kolbe} and \cite{Engel2003}. Note, however, that due to the lack of reliability of the optical potential for lead at low energies, we did not present the distorted-wave calculations, as in the previous section, and we performed plane-wave calculations. Since we expect the effects of distortion to reduce the cross section, the results obtained with the distorted-wave computations should produce smaller values.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ | c | c | c| }
\hline
$E_\nu$ & $\sigma_{PW}$ & $\sigma_{1n}$ (Ref.\cite{Engel2003}) \\ \hline\hline
10 & 0.00 & 0.02 \\ \hline
15 & 0.411 & 0.6 \\ \hline
20 & 2.27 & 2.0 \\ \hline
25 & 7.05 & 4.6 \\ \hline
30 & 16.3 & 8.7 \\ \hline
35 & 30.9 & 14.4 \\ \hline
40 & 52.2 & 21.5 \\ \hline
45 & 81.3 & 29.7\\ \hline
50 & 119 & 38.6 \\ \hline
55 & 167 & 47.9 \\ \hline
60 & 224 & 57.4 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Total cross section (in units of 10$^{-45}$ m$^2$) of the neutral-current neutrino quasi-elastic scattering on $^{208}$Pb with neutron knockout for various energies in MeV of the incoming neutrino. $\sigma_{PW}$ is computed by using the relativistic plane-wave impulse approximation, and the last column shows the results for $\nu\rightarrow\nu$ from Table 1 in Ref.\cite{Engel2003}.
\label{Table}}
\end{center}
\end{table}
In order to find the number of neutrons created via neutral-current reactions with electron-neutrinos at HALO-1, which consists of 79 tonnes of lead, we multiplied the cross section $\sigma(E)$ by the fluence $\frac{dF_\nu(E)}{dE}$, which produces the event distribution displayed in Fig.\ref{event_distribution}. We use Eq.(3) of Ref.\cite{Beacom} to compute the fluence $\frac{dF_\nu(E)}{dE}$, of each neutrino flavour $\nu$,
\begin{equation}
\frac{dF_\nu(E)}{dE}=\left(2.35\times 10^{13}\right) \frac{{\cal E}_\nu}{d^2} \frac{E^3}{\langle E_\nu\rangle^5}\exp\left(-\frac{4E}{\langle E_\nu\rangle}\right),\qquad \left[{\mathrm{in}\ }\frac 1{{\mathrm{cm^2\ MeV}}}\right]
\label{fluence}\end{equation}
where ${\cal E}_\nu$ is the total energy emitted by the supernova, in units of $10^{52}$ erg, $d$ is the distance between the emitting supernova and the Earth, in unit of 10 kpc, $E$ is the neutrino energy, and $\langle E_\nu\rangle=12$ MeV for the electron neutrino $\nu_e$ considered here. The fluence distribution for the supernova neutrinos is shown in Fig.\ref{total1t} with the parameters $d=1$ (that is, a distance of 10 kpc from the emitting supernova to the Earth) and ${\cal E}_\nu=5$ (or $5\times10^{52}$ erg) in Eq.\ref{fluence}. From Fig.\ref{total1t}, we see that the fluence peaks at about $1.7\times 10^{10}$ 1/MeV$\cdot$cm$^2$ around $E_\nu$=8-9 MeV and has decreased by one order of magnitude at $E_\nu$=25 MeV.
The total number of events is obtained by utilizing the flux-integrated neutrino cross section, given the span of energies of the neutrinos emitted by a supernova,
\begin{equation}
\left\langle n_{\mbox{event}}\right\rangle=\int dE\; \sigma(E)\;\frac{dF_\nu(E)}{dE},
\label{fluxaveragedcc}\end{equation}
with $\frac{dF_\nu(E)}{dE}$ from Eq.(\ref{fluence}), and $ \sigma_{PW}(E)$ from Table \ref{Table}. This gives a total of 0.54 events for all three neutrino flavours. As mentioned earlier, this quasi-elastic one-neutron-knockout contribution should be added to the neutral-current one-neutron-knockout cross section, based on intermediate excited states, utilized in Ref.\cite{Engel2003}. Moreover, the quasi-elastic knockout contributions could be added respectively for multi-neutron knockout reactions as well as charged-current processes.
In order to get a sense of the number of neutrons produced by HALO-1, we used the cross sections of Table I in Ref.\cite{Engel2003}, computed the probability of neutron production for each flavour, and integrated this probability with the simplified relation for supernova fluence given by Eq.(3) of Ref.\cite{Beacom}. We chose the same values for the fluence parameters as those suggested in Ref.\cite{Beacom}.
This led to 30 neutron events created at HALO-1. The addition of quasi-elastic one-neutron-knockout contribution for the processes will increase the number of neutrons produced at HALO-1.
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper we have presented calculations for the quasi-free scattering of neutrinos in the framework of a relativistic approach. Our focus was on the contributions from the neutral weak current leading to the knockout of a nucleon from the target nucleus. For scattering on carbon, both RDWIA and RPWIA calculations were compared with data from the MiniBooNE experiment. The results obtained with the plane-wave calculations lie between the error bars for the whole range of $Q^2$ while those of the more realistic distorted-wave calculations move below the data for $Q^2$ less than 0.7 GeV$^2$. We performed calculations using one set of non-trivial strangeness parameters, and this improved the results of the distorted-wave calculations with respect to the data. This is encouraging, and suggests that future improvements to the current model should include strangeness contributions.
We made an attempt to explore the role of a quasi-free contribution to the cross section on lead. We could only assess that using RPWIA calculations. We observed that the cross sections thus obtained were comparable to those based on intermediate excited states of the nucleus, to which our results need to be added in order to obtain the number of neutrons produced at HALO-1.
\section*{Acknowledgement}
MdM is grateful to the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada for partial financial support.
We are grateful to Helmy S. Sherif for his input and enlightening discussions, and to Kai Zuber and Aksel Hallin for helpful comments.
|
\section{Introduction} \label{intro}
Recently, research on cooperative communications with full-duplex (FD) relaying technique to achieve more efficient spectrum resource utilization, in addition to the network coverage extension and higher throughput, has underway as one of active research area \cite{Z.Zhang_2015,S.Goyal_2015}.
FD technique is considered as an essential component of the coming 5G wireless systems. In FD operation, the main drawback is the performance degradation imposed by the loopback self-interference due to signal leakage from the transmitter to the receiver at the relay side \cite{T.Riihonen_2011_2,B.P.Day_2012}.
Thus, the priority challenge issue is that of finding the suppression/cancellation techniques of the loopback self-interference. There were considered several approaches including combinations of analogue/digital self-interference (SI) cancellation with RF domain approaches in addition to physical isolation between the transmit and receive antennas, for example, spatial-domain suppression, time-domain cancellation, zero-forcing (ZF) beamforming, power control and so on \cite{Z.Zhang_2015,Bharadia_2013,T.Riihonen_2011_2, T.Riihonen_2016,Suraweera_2014,G.Zheng_2015,Y.Li_2016}.
Especially, \cite{Suraweera_2014} has dealt with the deployment of FD relaying in amplify-\&-forward (AF) cooperative networks with multiple-antenna terminals. More specifically, the joint precoding/decoding design with the rank-1 ZF loopback self-interference suppression which maximizes the end-to-end performance has been proposed with the closed-form precoder/decoder solutions for transmit and receive ZF schemes and related closed-form performance results by solving appropriate optimization problems. In \cite{Suraweera_2014}, authors showed that with the proposed joint ZF-based precoding, the end-to-end performance can be significantly improved.
There are two distinguished relaying protocols in the literature, such as AF and decode-\&-forward (DF). With the AF protocol, an amplified unwanted signal, such as not the interference and noise but also the loop interference in case of FD relaying, can be forwarded to the destination, leading to the noise amplification while the DF protocol provides more reliability for moderate to strong loop interferences by paying more processing compared to the AF protocol because with the DF protocol, the possible performance degradation due to the unwanted signal amplification can be mitigated by decoding the source message and then retransmitting the regenerated decoded message to the destination.
Further, for a FD relay terminal, the optimal/suboptimal diversity-multiplexing tradeoff for this multi-hop setup is achievable by DF relaying \cite{D.Gunduz_2008}.
Based on above observations, in this paper, we consider the outage performance analysis of FD relaying cooperative networks with multiple-antenna terminals, especially in DF protocol, using ZF beamforming (ZFBF) by adopting the joint precoding/decoding design based on the AF cooperative relaying network in \cite{Suraweera_2014}.
More specifically, by analyzing the end-to-end statistics, we derive the accurate closed-form expressions of the end-to-end outage probability for both transmit and receive ZFBF scheme over Rayleigh fading environments.
\section{System and Channel Models} \label{sec_1}
We employ a conventional three-node FD MIMO relay network with DF protocol consisting of one source (S), one relay (R), and
one destination (D), as shown in Fig.~\ref{system_model}. We assume that S has $N_S$ antennas and D has $N_D$ antennas while R is equipped with $N_{R_2}$ transmit antennas and $N_{R_1}$ receive antennas for FD operation. S has no direct link to D, which may result from heavy path loss and high shadowing between S and D.
We also assume that we adopt all known practical RF/analog domain interference cancellation approaches \cite{Bharadia_2013,S.Goyal_2015} to suppress the SI through the feedback channel.\footnote{This SI introduced by loop-back channel dominates over the intended reception and cannot be perfectly cancelled in practice. Note that according to recently published results \cite{Bharadia_2013,S.Goyal_2015}, the SI can be reduced up to a sufficient level (e.g., near 100 dB interference suppression).}
Further, we assume that a single data stream is transmitted. More specifically, S applies a precoding vector ${\bf{t}}_S$ on the data stream, while D applies a linear receive vector ${\mathbf{t}}_D$ with $\left\| {{{\bf{t}}_S}} \right\|_F^2 = 1$ and $\left\| {{{\bf{t}}_D}} \right\|_F^2 = 1$\normalsize, respectively, where $\left\| \cdot \right\|_F$ denotes the Frobenius norm.
To suppress remained SI at a FD node, we apply conventional ZF self-interference suppression approaches at R node where ZFBF is an intuitive criterion.
Let, for the transmit beamforming scheme, the beamformer has the relay transmit vector, ${\bf{W}}_T$, at transmitter side of R with $N_{R_2} \times 1$ and the relay receive vector, ${\bf{W}}_R$, at receiver side of R with $N_{R_1} \times 1$, then the SI can be written as ${\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{W}}_T}$. Here, ZF constraint is that this matrix product of
SI is forced into the all zero \cite{Suraweera_2014,D.Hwang_2016}, i.e., ${\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{W}}_T} \!= \!0$, where all possible pairs $\left({\bf{W}}_R, {\bf{W}}_T \right)$ satisfying the ZF constraint constitute the ZFBF solution set.
We denote that ${{\mathbf{{H}}}_{SR}}$ and ${{\mathbf{{H}}}_{RD}}$ are the S-R and R-D channels,
respectively, while ${{\mathbf{{H}}}_{RR}}$ denotes the loopback self-interference channel.
We also assume that all the channels between nodes experience block fading. Thus, they remain constant over a long observation time (i.e., time slot), and varies independently from
one slot to another. This assumption applies to networks with a low mobility and corresponds to slow fading (block) channels where coding is performed over one block.
In addition, all links are subject to non-selective independent Rayleigh block fading
and additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN).
Then, let the equivalent S-R and R-D channels be ${{\bf{h}}_{SR}} = {\bf{{H}}}_{SR}{{\bf{t}}_S}$ and ${{\bf{h}}_{RD}} = {\bf{H}}_{RD}^\dag {{\bf{t}}_D}$, respectively, then the input signal at R and the received signal at R can be written as respectively
\begin{equation} \label{sec_1:eq_1}
{{\mathbf{r}}_{IN}} = {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}{x_S} + {{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{W}}_T}{x_R} + {{\bf{n}}_{RR}},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{sec_1:eq_2}
{r_R} = {\bf{W}}_R^\dag {\bf{r}} = {\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}{x_S} + {\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{W}}_T}{x_R} + {\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{n}}_{RR}},
\end{equation}
where ${x_S}$ is the transmitted symbol at S with zero-mean and average power $E\left\{ {{{\left| {{x_S}} \right|}^2}} \right\} = {P_S}$, , ${\bf{n}}_{RR}$ is ${N_{{R_1}}} \times 1$ AWGN vector with zero-mean and identity covariance matrix $E\left\{ {{{\bf{n}}_{RR}}{\bf{n}}_{RR}^\dag } \right\} = {{\bf{I}}_{{N_{{R_1}}}}}$, and $\left(\cdot \right)^\dag$ denotes the conjugate transpose.
Here, we add the ZF constraint that the design of ${\bf{W}}_T$ and ${\bf{W}}_R$ ensure no loopback self-interference for full-duplex operation at R.
Then, once the ZF constraint is met, the received signal after ${\bf{W}}_R$ at R becomes as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_1:eq_4}
{r_R}^\prime = {\bf{W}}_R^\dag {\bf{r}} = {\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}{x_S} + {\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{n}}_{RR}},
\end{equation}
with the covariance and the received power at R as, respectively,
\begin{itemize}
\item {\textbf{Covariance: }}
\begin{equation} \label{sec_1:eq_5}
\begin{aligned}
{\sum\nolimits_R} =& E\left\{ {{{\left| {{r_R}^\prime } \right|}^2}} \right\} = E\left\{ {\left( {{\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}{x_S} + {\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{n}}_{RR}}} \right)\left( {x_S^*{\bf{h}}_{SR}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_R} + {\bf{n}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_R}} \right)} \right\}
\\
=& E\left\{ {{\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}{x_S}x_S^*{\bf{h}}_{SR}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_R} + {\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}{x_S}{\bf{n}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_R} + {\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{n}}_{RR}}x_S^*{\bf{h}}_{SR}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_R}} \right.
\\
&\quad\left.{+ {\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{n}}_{RR}}{\bf{n}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_R}} \right\}
\\
=& {\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}E\left\{ {{{\left| {{x_S}} \right|}^2}} \right\}{\bf{h}}_{SR}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_R} + {\bf{W}}_R^\dag E\left\{ {{{\bf{n}}_{RR}}{\bf{n}}_{RR}^\dag } \right\}{{\bf{W}}_R}
\\
=& {P_S}{\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}{\bf{h}}_{SR}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_R} + {\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{I}}_{{N_{{R_1}}}}}{{\bf{W}}_R}
\\
=& {P_S}{\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}{\bf{h}}_{SR}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_R} + {\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{W}}_R},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\item {\textbf{Received Power: }}
\begin{equation} \label{sec_1:eq_6}
\begin{aligned}
{\rm Tr}\left( {{\sum\nolimits_R}} \right) =& {P_S}{\rm Tr}\left( {\left( {{\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}} \right){{\left( {{\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}} \right)}^\dag }} \right) + {\rm Tr}\left( {\left( {{\bf{W}}_R^\dag } \right){{\left( {{\bf{W}}_R^\dag } \right)}^\dag }} \right)\\
=& {P_S}{\left| {{\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}} \right|^2} + \left\| {{\bf{W}}_R^\dag } \right\|_F^2\\
=& {P_S}{\left| {{\bf{W}}_R^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}} \right|^2} + 1 \mathop = \limits^{{\rm{or}}} {P_S}{\left| {{\bf{h}}_{SR}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_R}} \right|^2} + 1,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
where ${\rm Tr}\left( \cdot \right)$ is the trace operation.
Then, for received signal at D, similarly, once the ZF constraint is met, the received signal at D can be given as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_1:eq_7}
{r_D} = {\bf{h}}_{RD}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_T}{x_R} + {n_{RD}},
\end{equation}
where ${x_R}$ is the relay transmit signal with zero-mean and average power $E\left\{ {{{\left| {{x_R}} \right|}^2}} \right\} = {P_R}$ and ${n_{RD}}$ is AWGN with zero mean and unit-variance.
Here, the covariance and the received power at D are as, respectively,
\begin{itemize}
\item {\textbf{Covariance: }}
\begin{equation} \label{sec_1:eq_8}
\begin{aligned}
{\sum\nolimits_D} =& E\left\{ {{{\left| {{r_D}} \right|}^2}} \right\} = E\left\{ {\left( {{\bf{h}}_{RD}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_T}{x_R} + {n_{RD}}} \right)\left( {x_R^*{\bf{W}}_T^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{RD}} + {n_{RD}}^*} \right)} \right\}\\
=& E\left\{ {{\bf{h}}_{RD}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_T}{x_R}x_R^*{\bf{W}}_T^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{RD}} + {\bf{h}}_{RD}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_T}{x_R}{n_{RD}}^* + {n_{RD}}x_R^*{\bf{W}}_T^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{RD}} + {n_{RD}}{n_{RD}}^*} \right\}\\
=& E\left\{ {{\bf{h}}_{RD}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_T}{x_R}x_R^*{\bf{W}}_T^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{RD}} + {n_{RD}}{n_{RD}}^*} \right\}\\
=& {\bf{h}}_{RD}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_T}E\left\{ {{{\left| {{x_R}} \right|}^2}} \right\}{\bf{W}}_T^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{RD}} + E\left\{ {{n_{RD}}{n_{RD}}^*} \right\}\\
=& {P_R}{\bf{h}}_{RD}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_T}{\bf{W}}_T^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{RD}} + 1,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\item {\textbf{Received Power: }}
\begin{equation}\label{sec_1:eq_9}
\begin{aligned}
{\rm Tr}\left( {{\sum\nolimits_D}} \right) =& {P_R} {\rm Tr}\left( {\left( {{\bf{h}}_{RD}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_T}} \right){{\left( {{\bf{h}}_{RD}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_T}} \right)}^\dag }} \right) + 1\\
=& {P_R}{\left| {{\bf{h}}_{RD}^\dag {{\bf{W}}_T}} \right|^2} + 1 \mathop = \limits^{{\rm{or}}} {P_R}{\left| {{\bf{W}}_T^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{RD}}} \right|^2} + 1.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
Note that as results with (\ref{sec_1:eq_4}) and (\ref{sec_1:eq_7}), we can adopt the design/analytical approaches used in \cite{Suraweera_2014}
because our problem is eventually similar to what solve the problem of the joint precoding/decoding design in \cite{Suraweera_2014}.
\section{Statistical Analysis with Receive ZFBF} \label{sec_2}
Based on \cite{K.Wong_2012,Suraweera_2014}, we first assume ${{\bf{W}}_T} = {{\bf{h}}_{RD}}$, then ${{\bf{W}}_R}$ should be aligned to the direction of ${{\bf{h}}_{SR}}$ projected to the orthogonal direction of ${{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}$.
Therefore, by applying the similar approach used in \cite{Suraweera_2014}, ${{\bf{W}}_R}$ can be found from the projection onto the orthogonal space of ${{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}$, with the orthogonal projector onto the left null space of ${{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}$, ${\bf{\hat D}}$, such that
\begin{equation} \label{sec_2:eq_2}
{\bf{\hat D}} \buildrel \Delta \over = {{\bf{I}}_{{N_{{R_1}}}}} - \frac{{{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}{{\left( {{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}} \right)}^\dag }}}{{{{\left( {{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}} \right)}^\dag }{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}}} \mathop = \limits^{{\rm{or}}} {{\bf{I}}_{{N_{{R_1}}}}} - \frac{{{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}{\bf{h}}_{RD}^\dag {\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag }}{{\left\| {{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}} \right\|_F^2}},
\end{equation}
where
${\bf{\hat D}}$ is idempotent and $\frac{{{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}{{\left( {{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}} \right)}^\dag }}}{{{{\left( {{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}} \right)}^\dag }{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}}}$ is the orthogonal projector with rank one (isolate the signal in a single direction ${{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}$), and
${{\bf{I}}_{{N_{{R_1}}}}} - \frac{{{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}{{\left( {{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}} \right)}^\dag }}}{{{{\left( {{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}} \right)}^\dag }{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}}}$ is the orthogonal projector with rank $\left( {{N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right)$ (eliminate the signal in the direction ${{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}$) or it is also called the complementary projector to
$\frac{{{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}{{\left( {{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}} \right)}^\dag }}}{{{{\left( {{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}} \right)}^\dag }{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}}}$.
Once ${{\bf{W}}_R}$ is determined, the SNR monotonically depends on the quantity $\left\| {{\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{h}}_{SR}}} \right\|_F^2$.
Here, ${{\bf{t}}_S}$ is embedded in $\left\| {{\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{h}}_{SR}}} \right\|_F^2$.
Then, by adopting similar approach used in \cite{Suraweera_2014}, we can also consider that the SNR monotonically depends on the quantity $\left\| {{\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right\|_F^2$ where $\left\| {{\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right\|_F^2 = {\lambda _{\max }}\left( {{{\left( {{\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right)}^\dag }\left( {{\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right)} \right)={\lambda _{\max }}\left( {{\bf{H}}_{SR}^\dag {{{\bf{\hat D}}}^\dag }{\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right)$.
Here, because ${\bf{\hat D}}$ is idempotent, $\left\| {{\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right\|_F^2$ can be simplified as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_2:eq_3}
\left\| {{\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right\|_F^2 = {\lambda _{\max }}\left( {{\bf{H}}_{SR}^\dag {\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right).
\end{equation}
Therefore, we can re-write $\left\| {{\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right\|_F^2$ as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_2:eq_4}
\left\| {{\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right\|_F^2 = {\lambda _{\max }}\left( {{\bf{H}}_{SR}^\dag \left( {{{\bf{I}}_{{N_{{R_1}}}}} - \frac{{{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}{{\left( {{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}} \right)}^\dag }}}{{{{\left( {{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}} \right)}^\dag }{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}}}} \right){{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right).
\end{equation}
Here, $\frac{{{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}{{\left( {{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}} \right)}^\dag }}}{{{{\left( {{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}} \right)}^\dag }{{\bf{H}}_{RR}}{{\bf{h}}_{RD}}}}$ has rank one. Thus, it can be re-written as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_2:eq_5}
\begin{aligned}
\left\| {{\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right\|_F^2 =& {\lambda _{\max }}\left( {{\bf{H}}_{SR}^\dag {{\bf{U}}^\dag }\left( {{{\bf{I}}_{{N_{{R_1}}}}} - {\rm{diag}}\left( {1,0, \cdots ,0} \right)} \right){\bf{U}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right)
\\
=& {\lambda _{\max }}\left( {{\bf{\hat H}}_{SR}^\dag {\rm{diag}}\left( {0,1, \cdots ,1} \right){{{\bf{\hat H}}}_{SR}}} \right),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where ${{{\bf{\hat H}}}_{SR}} = {\rm{ }}{\bf{U}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}$ and ${\bf{U}}$ is unitary matrix.
Thus, $\left\| {{\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right\|_F^2$ can be finally re-written as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_2:eq_6}
\left\| {{\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right\|_F^2 = {\lambda _{\max }}\left( {{\bf{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\smile$}}
\over H} }}_{SR}^\dag {{{\bf{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\smile$}}
\over H} }}}_{SR}}} \right),
\end{equation}
where ${{{\bf{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\smile$}}
\over H} }}}_{SR}}$ is $\left( {{N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right) \times {N_S}$ matrix.
Here, based on our channel model assumptions, ${\bf{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\smile$}}
\over H} }}_{SR}^\dag {{{\bf{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\smile$}}
\over H} }}}_{SR}}$ follows the Wishart distribution. As a result, $\left\| {{\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right\|_F^2$ is the maximum eigenvalue of a Wishart matrix $\left( {{\bf{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\smile$}}
\over H} }}_{SR}^\dag {{{\bf{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\smile$}}
\over H} }}}_{SR}}} \right)$ with dimension $\left( {{N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right) \times {N_S}$.
Then, the SNRs, ${\gamma _{SR,1}}$ and ${\gamma _{RD,1}}$, can be finally written as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_2:eq_7}
{\gamma _{SR,1}} = {\gamma _{SR\_\max ,1}} = {P_S}\left\| {{\bf{\hat D}}{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right\|_F^2 = {P_S}{\lambda _{\max }}\left( {{\bf{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\smile$}}
\over H} }}_{SR}^\dag {{{\bf{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\smile$}}
\over H} }}}_{SR}}} \right) = {P_S}{\Lambda _{SR\_\max ,1}},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{sec_2:eq_8}
{\gamma _{RD,1}} = {\gamma _{RD\_\max ,1}} = {P_R}\left\| {{{\bf{H}}_{RD}}} \right\|_F^2 = {P_R}{\Lambda _{RD\_\max ,1}}.
\end{equation}
Here, based on channel assumptions in Sec.~\ref{sec_1}, the links are subject to i.i.d. Rayleigh block fading with the average SNRs, ${{\overline \gamma }_{SR}}$ and ${{\overline \gamma }_{RD}}$. It means that all the channels are stationary during a single transmission and identical.
Therefore, with the help of \cite{R.Mallik_2003}, the PDF expression of ${\Lambda _{SR\_\max ,1}}$ and ${\Lambda _{RD\_\max ,1}}$ can be written as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_2:eq_9}
{f_{{\Lambda _{SR\_\max ,1}}}}\left( \gamma \right) = \sum\limits_{n = 1}^{\min \left( {{N_S},{N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right)} {\sum\limits_{m = \left| {{N_S} - \left( {{N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right)} \right|}^{\left( {{N_S} + {N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right) \cdot n - 2{n^2}} {\frac{{D_{n,m}^1}}{{m!}}{{\left( {\frac{n}{{{{\overline \gamma }_{SR}}}}} \right)}^{\!\!\!m + 1}}{\gamma ^m}\exp \left( { - \frac{n}{{{{\overline \gamma }_{SR}}}} \cdot \gamma } \right)} },
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{sec_2:eq_10}
{f_{{\Lambda _{RD\_\max ,1}}}}\left( \gamma \right) = \sum\limits_{k = 1}^{\min \left( {{N_{{R_2}}},{N_D}} \right)} {\sum\limits_{l = \left| {{N_{{R_2}}} - {N_D}} \right|}^{\left( {{N_{{R_2}}} + {N_D}} \right) \cdot k - 2{k^2}} {\frac{{C_{k,l}^1}}{{l!}}{{\left( {\frac{k}{{{{\overline \gamma }_{RD}}}}} \right)}^{\!\!\!l + 1}}{\gamma ^l}\exp \left( { - \frac{k}{{{{\overline \gamma }_{RD}}}} \cdot \gamma } \right)} }.
\end{equation}
Then, by transforming density functions of (\ref{sec_2:eq_9}) and (\ref{sec_2:eq_10}) with (\ref{sec_2:eq_7}) and (\ref{sec_2:eq_8}), the PDF expressions of ${\gamma _{SR,1}}$ and ${\gamma _{RD,1}}$ can be finally obtained as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_2:eq_11}
\begin{aligned}
{f_{{\gamma _{SR,1}}}}\left( x \right) =& {f_{{\Lambda _{SR\_\max ,1}}}}\left( {\frac{x}{{{P_S}}}} \right) \cdot \frac{1}{{{P_S}}}
\\
=& \sum\limits_{n = 1}^{\min \left( {{N_S},{N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right)} {\sum\limits_{m = \left| {{N_S} - \left( {{N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right)} \right|}^{\left( {{N_S} + {N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right) \cdot n - 2{n^2}} {\frac{{D_{n,m}^1}}{{m!}}{{\left( {\frac{n}{{{P_S}{{\overline \gamma }_{SR}}}}} \right)}^{\!\!\!m + 1}}{x^m}\exp \left( { - \frac{n}{{{P_S}{{\overline \gamma }_{SR}}}} \cdot x} \right)} },
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{sec_2:eq_12}
\begin{aligned}
{f_{{\gamma _{RD,1}}}}\left( x \right) =& {f_{{\Lambda _{RD\_\max ,1}}}}\left( {\frac{x}{{{P_R}}}} \right) \cdot \frac{1}{{{P_R}}}
\\
=& \sum\limits_{k = 1}^{\min \left( {{N_{{R_2}}},{N_D}} \right)} {\sum\limits_{l = \left| {{N_{{R_2}}} - {N_D}} \right|}^{\left( {{N_{{R_2}}} + {N_D}} \right) \cdot k - 2{k^2}} {\frac{{C_{k,l}^1}}{{l!}}{{\left( {\frac{k}{{{P_R}{{\overline \gamma }_{RD}}}}} \right)}^{\!\!\!l + 1}}{x^l}\exp \left( { - \frac{k}{{{P_R}{{\overline \gamma }_{RD}}}} \cdot x} \right)} }.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Here, $D_{n,m}^1 = {c_{n,m}}{K_{a,b}}\frac{{m!}}{{{n^{m + 1}}}}$ and $C_{k,l}^1 = {c_{k,l}}{K_{a,b}}\frac{{l!}}{{{k^{l + 1}}}}$ in \cite{R.Mallik_2003} where ${K_{a,b}} = \frac{1}{{\left[ {\prod\nolimits_{i = 1}^a {\left( {a - i} \right)!\left( {b - i} \right)!} } \right]}}$, $a = \min \left( {{N_S},{N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right)$, and $b = \max \left( {{N_S},{N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right)$ and the coefficients ${c_{n,m}}$ are determined by applying a curve fitting on the plot of $\frac{d}{{d\lambda }}a \times a$ Hankel matrix in \cite{R.Mallik_2003}. Note that $D_{n,m}^1$ and $C_{k,l}^1$ can be computed with the help of \cite{R.Mallik_2003,S.Aissa_2005} by using most symbolic softwares such as Maple, Mathematica, or Matlab. In Appendix~\ref{AP:1}, for users' convenience, we provide the Matlab based code based on the proposed algorithm in \cite{S.Aissa_2005}. With this code, we can directly compute the exact values of the coefficients instead of any curve fitting or approximation.
\section{Statistical Analysis with Transmit ZFBF} \label{sec_3}
In this case, similar to receive ZF case in Sec. \ref{sec_2}, by fixing ${{\bf{W}}_R} = {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}$,
${{\bf{W}}_T}$ should be aligned to the direction of ${{\bf{h}}_{RD}}$ projected to the orthogonal direction of ${\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}$.
Therefore, ${{\bf{W}}_T}$ can be found from the projection onto the orthogonal space of ${\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}$
with the orthogonal projector onto the left null space of ${\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}$, ${\bf{\hat B}}$, such that
\begin{equation} \label{sec_3:eq_3}
{\bf{\hat B}} \buildrel \Delta \over = {{\bf{I}}_{{N_{{R_2}}}}} - \frac{{{\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}{{\left( {{\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}} \right)}^\dag }}}{{{{\left( {{\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}} \right)}^\dag }{\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}}} \mathop = \limits^{{\rm{or}}} {{\bf{I}}_{{N_{{R_2}}}}} - \frac{{{\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}{\bf{h}}_{SR}^\dag {{\bf{H}}_{RR}}}}{{\left\| {{\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}} \right\|_F^2}},
\end{equation}
where ${\bf{\hat B}}$ is idempotent, $\frac{{{\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}{{\left( {{\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}} \right)}^\dag }}}{{{{\left( {{\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}} \right)}^\dag }{\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}}}$ is the orthogonal projector with rank one, and ${{\bf{I}}_{{N_{{R_2}}}}} - \frac{{{\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}{{\left( {{\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}} \right)}^\dag }}}{{{{\left( {{\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}} \right)}^\dag }{\bf{H}}_{RR}^\dag {{\bf{h}}_{SR}}}}$ is the orthogonal projector with rank $\left( {{N_{{R_2}}} - 1} \right)$.
Then, similarly, ${{\bf{W}}_T}$ is determined, we can also consider that the SNR monotonically depends on the quantity $\left\| {{\bf{\hat B}}{{\bf{H}}_{RD}}} \right\|_F^2$, where $\left\| {{\bf{\hat B}}{{\bf{H}}_{RD}}} \right\|_F^2 = {\lambda _{\max }}\left( {{\bf{H}}_{RD}^\dag {\bf{\hat B}}{{\bf{H}}_{RD}}} \right)$. Then, $\left\| {{\bf{\hat B}}{{\bf{H}}_{RD}}} \right\|_F^2$ becomes
\begin{equation} \label{sec_3:eq_4}
\begin{aligned}
\left\| {{\bf{\hat B}}{{\bf{H}}_{RD}}} \right\|_F^2 =& {\lambda _{\max }}\left( {{\bf{H}}_{RD}^\dag {{\bf{U}}^\dag }\left( {{{\bf{I}}_{{N_{{R_2}}}}} - {\rm{diag}}\left( {1,0, \cdots ,0} \right)} \right){\bf{U}}{{\bf{H}}_{RD}}} \right)
\\
=& {\lambda _{\max }}\left( {{\bf{\hat H}}_{RD}^\dag {\rm{diag}}\left( {0,1, \cdots ,1} \right){{{\bf{\hat H}}}_{RD}}} \right),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where ${{{\bf{\hat H}}}_{RD}} = {\bf{U}}{{\bf{H}}_{RD}}$ and ${\bf{U}}$ is unitary matrix.
Then, $\left\| {{\bf{\hat B}}{{\bf{H}}_{RD}}} \right\|_F^2$ can be finally re-written as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_3:eq_5}
\left\| {{\bf{\hat B}}{{\bf{H}}_{RD}}} \right\|_F^2 = {\lambda _{\max }}\left( {{\bf{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\smile$}}
\over H} }}_{RD}^\dag {{{\bf{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\smile$}}
\over H} }}}_{RD}}} \right),
\end{equation}
where ${{{\bf{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\smile$}}\over H} }}}_{RD}}$ is $\left( {{N_{{R_2}}} - 1} \right) \times {N_D}$ matrix.
As a result, $\left\| {{\bf{\hat B}}{{\bf{H}}_{RD}}} \right\|_F^2$ is the maximum eigenvalue of a Wishart matrix $\left( {{\bf{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\smile$}}
\over H} }}_{RD}^\dag {{{\bf{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\smile$}}
\over H} }}}_{RD}}} \right)$ with dimension $\left( {{N_{{R_2}}} - 1} \right) \times {N_D}$.
Then, similar to receive ZF case, the SNRs, ${\gamma _{SR,1}}$ and ${\gamma _{RD,1}}$, can be finally written as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_3:eq_6}
{\gamma _{SR,2}} = {\gamma _{SR\_\max ,2}} = {P_S}\left\| {{{\bf{H}}_{SR}}} \right\|_F^2 = {P_S}{\Lambda _{SR\_\max ,2}}\quad{\text{ with dimension }}\left( {{N_{{R_1}}} \times {N_S}} \right),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{sec_3:eq_7}
{\gamma _{RD,2}} = {\gamma _{RD\_\max ,2}} = {P_R}\left\| {{\bf{\hat B}}{{\bf{H}}_{RD}}} \right\|_F^2 = {P_R}{\lambda _{\max }}\left( {{\bf{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\smile$}}
\over H} }}_{RD}^\dag {{{\bf{\mathord{\buildrel{\lower3pt\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle\smile$}}
\over H} }}}_{RD}}} \right) = {P_R}{\Lambda _{RD\_\max ,2}}.
\end{equation}
Therefore, similar to receive ZF case, the PDF expressions of ${\Lambda _{SR\_\max ,2}}$ and ${\Lambda _{RD\_\max ,2}}$ can be also written as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_3:eq_8}
{f_{{\Lambda _{SR\_\max ,2}}}}\left( \gamma \right) = \sum\limits_{n = 1}^{\min \left( {{N_S},{N_{{R_1}}}} \right)} {\sum\limits_{m = \left| {{N_S} - {N_{{R_1}}}} \right|}^{\left( {{N_S} + {N_{{R_1}}}} \right) \cdot n - 2{n^2}} {\frac{{D_{n,m}^2}}{{m!}}{{\left( {\frac{n}{{{{\overline \gamma }_{SR}}}}} \right)}^{\!\!\!m + 1}}{\gamma ^m}\exp \left( { - \frac{n}{{{{\overline \gamma }_{SR}}}} \cdot \gamma } \right)} },
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{sec_3:eq_9}
{f_{{\Lambda _{RD\_\max ,2}}}}\left( \gamma \right) = \sum\limits_{k = 1}^{\min \left( {{N_D},{N_{{R_2}}} - 1} \right)} {\sum\limits_{l = \left| {{N_D} - \left( {{N_{{R_2}}} - 1} \right)} \right|}^{\left( {{N_D} + {N_{{R_2}}} - 1} \right) \cdot k - 2{k^2}} {\frac{{C_{k,l}^2}}{{l!}}{{\left( {\frac{k}{{{{\overline \gamma }_{RD}}}}} \right)}^{\!\!\!l + 1}}{\gamma ^l}\exp \left( { - \frac{k}{{{{\overline \gamma }_{RD}}}} \cdot \gamma } \right)} }.
\end{equation}
Then, similarly, with ${\gamma _{SR,2}} = {P_S}{\Lambda _{SR\_\max ,2}}$ and ${\gamma _{RD,2}} = {P_R}{\Lambda _{RD\_\max ,2}}$, the closed-form expressions of PDF of ${\gamma _{SR,2}}$ and ${\gamma _{RD,2}}$ can be finally obtained as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_3:eq_10}
\begin{aligned}
{f_{{\gamma _{SR,2}}}}\left( x \right) =& {f_{{\Lambda _{SR\_\max ,1}}}}\left( {\frac{x}{{{P_S}}}} \right) \cdot \frac{1}{{{P_S}}}
\\
=& \sum\limits_{n = 1}^{\min \left( {{N_S},{N_{{R_1}}}} \right)} {\sum\limits_{m = \left| {{N_S} - {N_{{R_1}}}} \right|}^{\left( {{N_S} + {N_{{R_1}}}} \right) \cdot n - 2{n^2}} {\frac{{D_{n,m}^2}}{{m!}}{{\left( {\frac{n}{{{P_S}{{\overline \gamma }_{SR}}}}} \right)}^{\!\!\!m + 1}}{x^m}\exp \left( { - \frac{n}{{{P_S}{{\overline \gamma }_{SR}}}} \cdot x} \right)} },
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{sec_3:eq_11}
\begin{aligned}
{f_{{\gamma _{RD,2}}}}\left( x \right) =& {f_{{\Lambda _{RD\_\max ,1}}}}\left( {\frac{x}{{{P_R}}}} \right) \cdot \frac{1}{{{P_R}}}
\\
=& \sum\limits_{k = 1}^{\min \left( {{N_D},{N_{{R_2}}} - 1} \right)} {\sum\limits_{l = \left| {{N_D} - \left( {{N_{{R_2}}} - 1} \right)} \right|}^{\left( {{N_D} + {N_{{R_2}}} - 1} \right) \cdot k - 2{k^2}} {\frac{{C_{k,l}^2}}{{l!}}{{\left( {\frac{k}{{{P_R}{{\overline \gamma }_{RD}}}}} \right)}^{\!\!\!l + 1}}{x^l}\exp \left( { - \frac{k}{{{P_R}{{\overline \gamma }_{RD}}}} \cdot x} \right)} }.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\section{Outage Performance} \label{sec_4}
The outage probability, ${{\mathop{\rm P}\nolimits} _{OUT}}$, is defined as the probability that the instantaneous end-to-end SNR
falls below a target SNR. Here, based on the mode of operation in Sec.~\ref{sec_1}, the overall system outage occurs a communication failure in one of two links
(i.e., from S to R or from R to D). Therefore, the overall channel outage probability can be expressed in terms of individual link outage probabilities as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_4:eq_1}
{{\mathop{\rm P}\nolimits} _{OUT}} = {{\mathop{\rm P}\nolimits} _{OUT,SR}} + \left( {1 - {{\mathop{\rm P}\nolimits} _{OUT,SR}}} \right){{\mathop{\rm P}\nolimits} _{OUT,RD}},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation} \label{sec_4:eq_2}
{{\mathop{\rm P}\nolimits} _{OUT,SR}} = \Pr \left[ {{\gamma _{SR,i}} < {\gamma _T}} \right] = \int_0^{{\gamma _T}} {{f_{{\gamma _{SR,i}}}}\left( x \right)dx} \quad {\text{for }}i = 1,2
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{sec_4:eq_3}
{{\mathop{\rm P}\nolimits} _{OUT,RD}} = \Pr \left[ {{\gamma _{RD,i}} < {\gamma _T}} \right] = \int_0^{{\gamma _T}} {{f_{{\gamma _{RD,i}}}}\left( x \right)dx} \quad {\text{for }}i = 1,2.
\end{equation}
Similarly, in terms of the mutual-information rate, the event of an information-outage occurs when the received date rate falls below some fixed threshold, ${R_0}$, and each outage probability terms can be expressed for $i=1,2$ as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_4:eq_4}
\begin{aligned}
{{\mathop{\rm P}\nolimits} _{OUT,SR}} =& \Pr \left[ {{{\log }_2}\left( {1 + {\gamma _{SR,i}}} \right) < {R_0}} \right] = \Pr \left[ {{\gamma _{SR,i}} < {2^{{R_0} } - 1}} \right]
\\
=& \int_0^{{2^{{R_0} } - 1}} {{f_{{\gamma _{SR,i}}}}\left( x \right)dx},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{sec_4:eq_5}
\begin{aligned}
{{\mathop{\rm P}\nolimits} _{OUT,RD}} =& \Pr \left[ {{{\log }_2}\left( {1 + {\gamma _{RD,i}}} \right) < {R_0}} \right] = \Pr \left[ {{\gamma _{RD,i}} < {2^{{R_0}} - 1}} \right]
\\
=& \int_0^{{2^{{R_0}} - 1}} {{f_{{\gamma _{RD,i}}}}\left( x \right)dx}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Note that in this case, the closed-form expression of the outage probability can be directly obtained by replacing ${\gamma _T}$ in the closed-form result of (\ref{sec_4:eq_1}) with ${2^{{R_0}}-1}$.
\subsection{Closed-form results for Receive ZFBF case} \label{sec_4_1}
For S-R link, by substituting the PDF in (\ref{sec_2:eq_11}) into the outage probability in (\ref{sec_4:eq_2}), the outage probability of S-R link can be written as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_4_1:eq_1}
\begin{aligned}
{{\mathop{\rm P}\nolimits} _{OUT,SR}} =& \int_0^{{\gamma _T}} {{f_{{\gamma _{SR,1}}}}\left( x \right)dx}
\\
=& \sum\limits_{n = 1}^{\min \left( {{N_S},{N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right)} {\sum\limits_{m = \left| {{N_S} - \left( {{N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right)} \right|}^{\left( {{N_S} + {N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right) \cdot n - 2{n^2}} {\frac{{D_{n,m}^1}}{{m!}}{{\left( {\frac{n}{{{P_S}{{\overline \gamma }_{SR}}}}} \right)}^{m + 1}}\int_0^{{\gamma _T}} {{x^m}\exp \left( { - \frac{n}{{{P_S}{{\overline \gamma }_{SR}}}} \cdot x} \right)dx} } }.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Then, by applying \cite[Eq. (3.381-1)]{kn:gradshteyn_6} and then mathematical simplification, the closed-form result can be obtained as the incomplete Gamma function
\begin{equation} \label{sec_4_1:eq_2}
{{\mathop{\rm P}\nolimits} _{OUT,SR}} = \sum\limits_{n = 1}^{\min \left( {{N_S},{N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right)} {\sum\limits_{m = \left| {{N_S} - \left( {{N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right)} \right|}^{\left( {{N_S} + {N_{{R_1}}} - 1} \right) \cdot n - 2{n^2}} {\frac{{D_{n,m}^1}}{{m!}}\cdot\gamma \!\left( {m + 1,\frac{{n{\gamma _T}}}{{{P_S}{{\overline \gamma }_{SR}}}}} \right)} },
\end{equation}
where $\gamma \left( { \cdot , \cdot } \right)$ is the lower incomplete Gamma function.
For R-D link, similarly, the outage probability of R-D link (\ref{sec_4:eq_3}) can be written with the PDF (\ref{sec_2:eq_12}) as
\begin{equation} \label{sec_4_1:eq_3}
\begin{aligned}
{{\mathop{\rm P}\nolimits} _{OUT,RD}} =& \int_0^{{\gamma _T}} {{f_{{\gamma _{RD,1}}}}\left( x \right)dx}
\\
=& \sum\limits_{k = 1}^{\min \left( {{N_{{R_2}}},{N_D}} \right)} {\sum\limits_{l = \left| {{N_{{R_2}}} - {N_D}} \right|}^{\left( {{N_{{R_2}}} + {N_D}} \right) \cdot k - 2{k^2}} {\frac{{C_{k,l}^1}}{{l!}}{{\left( {\frac{k}{{{P_R}{{\overline \gamma }_{RD}}}}} \right)}^{\!\!\!l + 1}}\int_0^{{\gamma _T}} {{x^l}\exp \left( { - \frac{k}{{{P_R}{{\overline \gamma }_{RD}}}} \cdot x} \right)dx} } }.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Then, with (3.381.1), the closed-form result can be also obtained as the incomplete Gamma function
\begin{equation} \label{sec_4_1:eq_4}
{{\mathop{\rm P}\nolimits} _{OUT,RD}} = \sum\limits_{k = 1}^{\min \left( {{N_{{R_2}}},{N_D}} \right)} {\sum\limits_{l = \left| {{N_{{R_2}}} - {N_D}} \right|}^{\left( {{N_{{R_2}}} + {N_D}} \right) \cdot k - 2{k^2}} {\frac{{C_{k,l}^1}}{{l!}}\cdot\gamma \!\left( {l + 1,\frac{{k{\gamma _T}}}{{{P_R}{{\overline \gamma }_{RD}}}}} \right)} }.
\end{equation}
Note that based on \cite{Q.Zhou_2006}, we can see that a diversity order of $N_S\left(N_{R_1}-1\right)$ and $N_{R_2}N_D$ at the receiver side and the transmitter side, respectively. Thus, the full-duplex receive ZF design can achieve a diversity order of $\min\left(N_S\left(N_{R_1}-1\right),N_{R_2}N_D\right)$.
\subsection{Closed-form results for Transmit ZFBF case} \label{sec_4_2}
In this case, the outage probability formulas have the similar integral form. Therefore, with the closed-form results of PDFs in (\ref{sec_3:eq_10}) and (\ref{sec_3:eq_11}), by adopting the same definite integral table used in (\ref{sec_4_1:eq_2}) and (\ref{sec_4_1:eq_4}),
both closed-form results can be obtained, respectively as
\begin{eqnarray}
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!&&{{\mathop{\rm P}\nolimits} _{OUT,SR}}\! =\! \int_0^{{\gamma _T}} {{f_{{\gamma _{SR,2}}}}\left( x \right)dx} \!= \!\sum\limits_{n = 1}^{\min \left( {{N_S},{N_{{R_1}}}} \right)} {\sum\limits_{m = \left| {{N_S} - {N_{{R_1}}}} \right|}^{\left( {{N_S} + {N_{{R_1}}}} \right) \cdot n - 2{n^2}} {\frac{{D_{n,m}^2}}{{m!}}\cdot\gamma \!\left( {m + 1,\frac{{n{\gamma _T}}}{{{P_S}{{\overline \gamma }_{SR}}}}} \right)} },
\\
\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!&&{{\mathop{\rm P}\nolimits} _{OUT,RD}}\! =\! \int_0^{{\gamma _T}} {{f_{{\gamma _{RD,2}}}}\left( x \right)dx} \!=\! \sum\limits_{k = 1}^{\min \left( {N_D},{{N_{{R_2}}} - 1} \right)} {\sum\limits_{l = \left| {{N_D}-\left( {{N_{{R_2}}} - 1} \right)} \right|}^{\left( {\left({N_D}+{N_{{R_2}}} - 1\right)} \right) \cdot k - 2{k^2}} {\frac{{C_{k,l}^2}}{{l!}}\cdot\gamma \!\left( {l + 1,\frac{{k{\gamma _T}}}{{{P_R}{{\overline \gamma }_{RD}}}}} \right)} }.
\end{eqnarray}
Note also that, similarly, we can see that a diversity order of $N_D\left(N_{R_2}-1\right)$ and $N_S N_{R_1}$ at the transmitter side and the receiver side, respectively. Thus, the full-duplex transmit ZF design can achieve a diversity order of $\min\left(N_D\left(N_{R_2}-1\right),N_S N_{R_1}\right)$.
\section{Results and Conclusions} \label{conc}
In this section, some selected results for the outage probability are given. The simulation set-up follows the system model provided in Section II, especially $P_S=P_R$ and $\overline\gamma_{SR}=\overline\gamma_{RD}$ . Although we have mainly considered a symmetric setup, we additionally consider the effect of asymmetric setups.
More specifically, we consider both cases; i) when the first
hop dominates over the second hop, e.g., ${P'_S}(={\alpha_{SR}}^{2} P_S)> {P'_R}(={\alpha_{RD}}^{2} P_R)$ , and ii) when the second hop dominates over the first hop, e.g., ${P'_R}(={\alpha_{RD}}^{2} P_R)> {P'_S}(={\alpha_{SR}}^{2} P_S)$ , where $\alpha_{SR}$ and $\alpha_{RD}$ are the path-loss factor for the S-R link and the R-D link, respectively.
In addition, $(N_S,N_{R_1},N_{R_2},N_D)$ represents the each antenna configuration, where $N_S$ , $N_D$ , $N_{R_1}$ , and $N_{R_2}$ are the number of antennas at S, D, receiver side of R, and transmitter side of R, respectively. Further, in the following figures, the lines and the markers represent the simulation and the analytical results, respectively. Note that the simulation results match the derived analytical results well.
Fig.~\ref{Figure_1} shows the results based on the receive ZF with different antenna configurations. We observe some interesting results which are useful for system designers.
Specifically, although there is only single antenna mounted on D, the performance can be improved by applying appropriate design parameters at S and R, especially for receive ZF case. Here, for symmetric case, $(2,3,2,1)$ slightly outperforms $(2,2,3,1)$.
Note that for asymmetric case, especially for $\text{link}_{RD} > \text{link}_{SR}$ (or $P'_R:P'_S=3:2$ ) case, this performance gap increases due to the increased possibility of successful decoding at D and the relatively higher diversity order of S-R link for $(2,3,2,1)$ case compared to $(2,2,3,1)$ case.
Contrary, for $\text{link}_{SR} > \text{link}_{RD}$ (or $P'_S:P'_R=3:2$ ) case, the possibility of successful decoding at R increases. As a result, $(2,2,3,1)$ with the higher diversity order of R-D link can provide the better performance.
In Fig.~\ref{Figure_2}, we observe that an additional performance gain can be obtained via increasing the number of antenna at R. More specifically, for receive ZF case, increasing $N_{R_1}$ at R can obtain the additional performance gain while for transmit ZF case, the additional performance gain can be obtained via increasing $N_{R_2}$ .
In Fig.~\ref{Figure_3}, for both $(2,3,2,2)$ and $(2,3,2,3)$ cases, the diversity order of these cases is the same. However, the latter case provides the better performance because the latter case has the relatively higher possibility of successful decoding at D.
Additionally, for $(3, 2, 2, 2)$ and $(2, 3, 2, 2)$ cases, they have the same number of total antenna. However, we observe that, for receive ZF case, swapping $N_S$ with $N_{R_1}$ can improve the outage performance.
\appendices
\section{A MATLAB Code for Evaluation of Coefficients, $D_{n,m}$ or $C_{n,m}$ .}\label{AP:1}
\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1}
\footnotesize\begin{verbatim}
N=input('Input the value of N1 = ');
L=input('Input the value of N2 = ');
m = min(N1,N2);
n = max(N1,N2);
a = prod(factorial(m - [1:m]));
b = prod(factorial(n - [1:m]));
K_mn = 1/(a*b);
syms lamda;
[i_val, j_val] = meshgrid([1:m],[1:m]);
G = symfun(factorial(n-m+i_val+j_val-2) - igamma(n-m+i_val+j_val-1,lamda),lamda);
p_lamda_max = symfun(K_mn * diff(det(G(lamda)),lamda),lamda);
f_eq = p_lamda_max;
k = 1;
l = n+m-2;
cont_flag = true;
A=[];
while cont_flag
a_kl = double(1/K_mn * limit(f_eq/(lamda^l*exp(-k*lamda)),lamda,+inf));
a_kl_prime = a_kl * K_mn * factorial(l)/(k^(l+1));
format rational
A_tmp=[k l a_kl_prime];
A=[A;A_tmp];
g_eq = K_mn*a_kl*lamda^l*exp(-k*lamda);
f_eq = f_eq - g_eq;
l = l-1;
if(l >= n-m)
cont_flag = true;
else
k = k+1;
if(k <= m)
l = (n+m-2*k)*k;
else
cont_flag = false;
end;
end;
end;
fileID = fopen('Coefficient_Data.dat','w');
fprintf(fileID,'Estimated coefficient values of d_im for N1
fprintf(fileID,
fprintf(fileID,'---------------------- \r\n');
fprintf(fileID,
fclose(fileID);
\end{verbatim}
\normalsize
\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{2}
\bibliographystyle{ieeetran}
|
\section*{Executive Summary}
We present a method for skin lesion segmentation for the ISIC 2017 Skin Lesion Segmentation Challenge. Our approach is based on a Fully Convolutional Neural Network architecture which is trained end to end, from scratch, on a small dataset. Our semantic segmentation architecture utilizes several recent innovations in deep learning particularly in the combined use of (i) atrous convolutions to increase the effective field of view of the network's receptive field without increasing the number of parameters, (ii) network-in-network $1\times1$ convolution layers to increase network capacity and (iii) state-of-art super-resolution upsampling of predictions using subpixel CNN layers. We achieved a IOU score of 0.642 on the validation set provided by the organizers.
\section{Background}
One of the fundamental and challenging tasks in digital image analysis is segmentation, which is the process of assigning pixel-wise labels to regions in an image that share some high-level semantics, hence the term ``semantic segmentation''. In skin lesion segmentation, the goal is to assign pixel-wise labels to regions in dermoscopy images that represents skin lesions, such as melanoma, seborrhoeic keratosis or benign nevus.
Skin lesion segmentation is challenging due to a variety of factors, such as variations in skin tone, uneven illumination, partial obstruction due to the presence of hair, low contrast between lesion and surrounding skin, and the presence of freckles or gauze in the image frame, which may be mistaken for lesions. A successful lesion segmentation technique should be robust enough to accommodate these variability.
Skin lesion segmentation is a widely researched topic in medical image analysis\cite{celebi2015state,korotkov2012computerized,celebi2009lesion}. Until recently, most skin lesion segmentation approaches were based on hand crafted algorithms\cite{zhou2011gradient,yuan2009narrow,schaefer2011colour}. Such approaches require carefully designed pre-processing and post-processing approaches such as hair removal, edge-preserving smoothing and morphological operations. The robustness of the such approaches can be somewhat limited however, as each new scenario may require custom tuning.
An alternative approach to manually crafting segmentation algorithms is to instead leverage machine learning techniques to learn a model capable of successfully dealing with the numerous factors of variation. Specifically applicable to this application are artificial neural networks, which have made an impressive resurgence in recent years. The active research area, now
known as deep learning, is currently enjoying interest and support not only from
the academic community, but also from industry. The advances
in hardware performance and low costs involved have made it viable to analyse
very large data sizes using very deep neural network architectures in a
reasonable amount of time. Deep learning-based techniques have resulted in
state-of-the-art performance for many practical problems, especially
in areas involving high-dimensional unstructured data such as in
computer vision, speech and natural language processing. Medical imaging problems have also been given much attention by deep learning researchers\cite{wang2016perspective} and has seen tremendous success for the related skin lesion classification problem\cite{esteva2017}. The notion of being able to train in an end-to end manner, without requiring any manual feature engineering or complicated hand-crafted algorithms, is very attractive indeed.
\section{Semantic Segmentation}
The deep learning approach to image segmentation is known as semantic segmentation. In contrast to low-level image segmentation, which operate purely on local image characteristics such as colour, shape and texture, deep semantic segmentation algorithms are trained using thousands of examples to recognize and delineate regions in an image corresponding to some high-level semantics. A convolutional neural network can be adapted to perform perform semantic segmentation by replacing the top layer\footnote{typically the softmax layer} of a classification network into a convolutional layer. As FCNN use downsampling implemented via the max-pooling or strided convolutions to capture context, these architectures often employ a single or several progressive upsampling layers which are used to upscale lower resolution pixel-wise predictions to match the dimensions of the input image. Ground truth segmentation masks provide pixel-wise labels for the segmentation task, now cast as a pixel-wise classification problem.
The fully convolutional neural network architecture was first proposed by Long et al.\cite{long2015fully}. Subsequently, a number of similar architectures have been reported in the literature\cite{chen2014semantic,badrinarayanan2015segnet}.
For the ISIC 2017 challenge, the skin lesion segmentation task is a binary segmentation task - the goal is to produce accurate segmentation of various skin lesions, benign and malignant, against a variety of background which may consist of skin, colored markers, or dark-vignetted region produced by the dermoscope. Fig.\ref{fig1} shows an example lesion and its corresponding binary mask. The training dataset consists of 2000 dermoscopy images and corresponding binary masks. The images consists of 3 types of skin lesions: nevus, seborrhoeic keratosis and melanoma; the latter lesion being malignant. The images are also of various dimensions.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\label{fig1}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{img1}
\caption{Left: An example of a skin lesion image with a blue marker in the background. Right: The corresponding ground truth binary segmentation mask.}
\end{figure}
\section{Our Approach}
Our approach for lesion segmentation is primarily a fully convolutional neural network, trained from scratch, in an end-to-end manner.
\subsection{Architecture}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\resizebox{0.85\textwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{@{}cccccr@{}}
\toprule
\textbf{Layer} & \textbf{Filter Size} & \textbf{Stride/Rate} & \textbf{Padding} & Non-linearity & \textbf{Type} \\ \midrule
Conv1-1 & 5x5x64 & 2 & Mirror & ReLu & 2D Convolution \\
Conv1-2 & 3x3x96 & 1 & Mirror & ReLu & 2D Convolution \\
Conv1-3 & 1x1x96 & 1 & Same & ReLu & 2D Convolution \\
Conv2-1 & 3x3x128 & 2 & Mirror & ReLu & 2D Convolution \\
Conv2-2 & 3x3x256 & 1 & Mirror & ReLu & 2D Convolution \\
Conv2-3 & 1x1x256 & 1 & Same & ReLu & 2D Convolution \\
Conv3-1 & 3x3x256 & 2 & Mirror & ReLu & Atrous Convolution \\
Conv3-2 & 3x3x256 & 2 & Mirror & ReLu & Atrous Convolution \\
Conv3-3 & 3x3x128 & 2 & Mirror & None & Atrous Convolution \\
Subpixel & 3x3x32 & 1 & Mirror & None & Subpixel CNN Layer \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}%
}
\caption{LesionSeg Architecture}
\label{arch}
\end{table}
The inputs to the network are images resized to $448\times448$. The first convolution layer uses a stride of 2 to downsample the image by a factor of 2. This is followed by series of 2D convolution layers interspersed with $1\times1$ convolutions. We also apply batch-normalization for the convolutional layers and use ReLu activations. The $1\times1$ convolution layers add capacity to the network without increasing the number of parameters.The last two convolutions are dilated convolutional layers or \emph{atrous} convolutions\cite{chen2016deeplab} with a rate of 2. These two layers effectively enlarge the field of view of filters to incorporate larger context without increasing the number of parameters or the amount of computation. Before upsampling is performed, the final subpixel convolution layer is added. This layer has number of filters equal to the upsampling factor and is applied with a stride of 1 and without any non-linearities. The upsampling layer is a subpixel convolutional layer introduced by \cite{shi2016real} which produced state-of-art super-resolution reconstruction accuracy superior to the commonly used bilinear upsampling as used by \cite{long2015fully}.
\subsection{Preprocessing}
The input images and the corresponding ground-truth masks are resized to 448 by 448 pixels. We perform data augmentation on-the-fly by randomly rotating both the image and its mask by 90-degree increments as well as flipping the images. In addition, we also perform per-image-standardization of the input image.
\subsection{Training}
We trained the network using Adam\cite{kingma2014adam} optimization using a per-pixel cross-entropy loss function. During training, we performed randomly sampled images using a batch size of 32. The network is trained until no improvement in the mean IOU is observed.
\subsection{Post-processing}
As the test and validation sets have images of different resolutions up to $6688\times4439$ pixels, we resorted to upscaling the network output back to its original image dimensions using bicubic interpolation and then binarizing the upsampled output mask using a threshold of 128. We also apply morphological opening to eliminate small, spurious errors made by the semantic segmentation using a $3\times3$ disk-shaped kernel.
\section{Results and Discussion}
We achieved a IOU score of 0.642 for the validation set using our approach. Example segmentation outputs from our lesion segmentation architecture is shown in Fig.2.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2in]{new-resize.png}
\caption{Sample 1}
\end{subfigure}%
~
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2in]{new1-resize.png}
\caption{Sample 2}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2in]{new3-resize.png}
\caption{Sample 3}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2in]{new4-resize.png}
\caption{Sample 4}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Examples of segmentation output using our approach.}
\end{figure}
\newpage
|
\section{Introduction and main results}
We are interested in covering a graph with (overlapping) pieces
in such a way that (1) the number of pieces is small, (2) each piece is
simple, and (3) every small subgraph is fully contained in at least one
piece.
Despite the graph theoretic interest in such coverings, it also has
nice algorithmic applications. Consider e.g.\ the subgraph isomorphism
problem. Here, we are given two graphs $G$ and $H$ as input, and
we are asked to determine whether~$G$ contains a subgraph
isomorphic to $H$. In many natural settings the pattern graph $H$
we are looking for is small and in such case a covering
as described above is most useful.
By the first property, we can then iterate through the small
number of pieces, by the third property, one of the pieces will contain
our pattern graph. By the second property, we can test each piece
for containment of $H$.
We can formulate the covering problem in an equivalent way from
the point of view of graph coloring as follows.
\emph{How many colors are
required to color the vertices of a graph $G$ such that the union
of any $p$ color classes induce a simple subgraph} (understanding any
$p$ color classes as a piece in the above formulation)? It remains to
specify what we mean by \emph{simple} subgraphs.
From an algorithmic point of view, trees, or more generally,
graphs of bounded tree-width are very well behaved graphs.
Many NP-complete problems, in fact, all
problems that can be formulated in monadic second order logic,
are solvable in linear time on graphs of bounded
tree-width~\cite{courcelle1990graph,courcelle1990monadic}. In particular, the
subgraph isomorphism problem for every fixed pattern graph~$H$
is solvable in polynomial time on any graph of bounded tree-width.
Taking graphs of small tree-width as our simple building blocks, we can
define a \emph{$p$-tree-width coloring} of a graph $G$ as a vertex coloring
of $G$ such that the union of any $i\leq p$ color classes
induces a subgraph of tree-width at most $i-1$.
Using the structure theorem of Robertson and Seymour~\cite{robertson2003graph}
for graphs
excluding a fixed graph as a minor, DeVos et al.~\cite{devos2004excluding}
proved that
for every graph~$H$ and every integer $p\geq 1$, there is an integer
$N=N(H,p)$, such that every $H$-minor-free graph
admits a $p$-tree-width coloring with $N$ colors.
\emph{Tree-depth} is another important and useful graph invariant. It was
introduced under this name in~\cite{nevsetvril2006tree},
but equivalent notions were known before, including the notion
of \emph{rank}~\cite{nevsetvril2003order},
\emph{vertex ranking number} and minimum height of an
\emph{elimination tree}~\cite{bodlaender1998rankings,deogun1994vertex,schaffer1989optimal}, etc.
In~\cite{nevsetvril2006tree}, Ne\v{s}et\v{r}il and Ossona de Mendez
introduced the notion of $p$-tree-depth colorings as vertex colorings
of a graph such that the union of any $i\leq p$ color classes
induces a subgraph of tree-depth at most $i$.
Note that the tree-depth of a graph is always larger (at least by $1$)
than its tree-width, hence a low tree-depth coloring is a stronger requirement
than a low tree-width coloring.
Also based on the structure theorem, Ne\v{s}et\v{r}il and Ossona de
Mendez~\cite{nevsetvril2006tree} proved that proper minor closed classes
admit even low tree-depth colorings.
Not much later, Ne\v{s}et\v{r}il and Ossona de
Mendez~\cite{nevsetvril2008grad} proved that proper minor closed
classes are unnecessarily restrictive for the existence of low
tree-depth colorings. They introduced the notion of
\emph{bounded expansion classes of graphs}, a concept that
generalizes the concept of classes with excluded minors and with excluded
topological minors. While the original definition of bounded expansion is in terms of density of shallow minors,
it turns out low tree-depth colorings give an alternative characterisation: a class $\mathcal{C}$ of graphs has
bounded expansion if and only if for all $p\in \mathbb{N}$ there exists
a number $N=N(\mathcal{C}, p)$ such that every graph $G\in \mathcal{C}$ admits
a $p$-tree-depth coloring with $N(p)$ colors~\cite{nevsetvril2008grad}.
For the even more general notion
of \emph{nowhere dense classes of graphs}~\cite{nevsetvril2011nowhere},
it turns out that a class $\mathcal{C}$ of graphs closed under
taking subgraphs is nowhere dense if and only if for all $p\in \mathbb{N}$
and all $\epsilon>0$
there exists $n_0$ such that every $n$-vertex graph $G\in \mathcal{C}$
with $n\geq n_0$
admits a $p$-tree-depth coloring
with~$n^\epsilon$ colors.
Furthermore, there is a simple algorithm to compute such a
decomposition in time $\mathcal{O}(n)$ in case~$\mathcal{C}$ has bounded
expansion and in time $\mathcal{O}(n^{1+\epsilon})$ for any
$\epsilon>0$ in case $\mathcal{C}$ is nowhere dense.
As a result, the subgraph isomorphism problem for every
fixed pattern $H$ can be solved in linear time on
any class of bounded expansion and in almost linear time on
any nowhere dense class. More generally, it was shown
in~\cite{dvovrak2013testing,grohe2011methods} that every fixed first order property
can be tested in linear time on graphs of bounded expansion,
implicitly using the notion of low tree-depth colorings, and in
almost linear time on nowhere dense classes~\cite{grohe2014deciding}.
\pagebreak Note that bounded expansion and nowhere dense classes of graphs
are uniformly sparse graphs. In fact, bounded expansion classes of
graphs can have at most a linear number of edges and nowhere dense
classes can have no more than $\mathcal{O}(n^{1+\epsilon})$ many edges.
This motivates our new definition of \emph{low rank-width colorings}
which extends the coloring technique to dense classes of graphs which
are closed under taking induced subgraphs.
Rank-width was introduced by Oum and Seymour~\cite{oum2006approximating} and aims to
extend tree-width by allowing well behaved dense graphs to have
small rank-width. Also for graphs of bounded rank-width there are
many efficient algorithms based on dynamic programming.
Here, we have the important meta-theorem of Courcelle, Makowsky, and
Rotics~\cite{courcelle2000linear}, stating that for every monadic second-order
formula (with set quantifiers ranging over sets of vertices) and every
positive integer $k$, there is an $\mathcal{O}(n^3)$-time algorithm to determine whether an input
graph of rank-width at most $k$ satisfies the formula.
There are several parameters which are equivalent to rank-width in the sense that
one is bounded if and only if the other is bounded. These include
\emph{clique-width}~\cite{courcelle1993handle},
\emph{NLC-width}~\cite{wanke1994k},
and \emph{Boolean-width}~\cite{bui2011boolean}.
\paragraph*{Low rank-width colorings.} We now introduce our main object of study.
\begin{definition}
A class $\mathcal{C}$ of graphs \emph{admits low rank-width colorings}
if there exist functions $N:\mathbb{N}\rightarrow\mathbb{N}$ and
$Q:\mathbb{N}\rightarrow\mathbb{N}$ such that for all $p\in \mathbb{N}$, every graph
$G\in \mathcal{C}$ can be vertex colored with at most
$N(p)$ colors such that the union of any $i\leq p$
color classes induces a subgraph of rank-width at most $Q(i)$.
\end{definition}
As proved by Oum~\cite{oum2008rank},
every graph $G$ with tree-width $k$ has rank-width at most $k+1$,
hence every graph class which admits
low tree-depth colorings also admits
low rank-width colorings.
On the other hand, graphs admitting a
low rank-width coloring can be very dense.
We also remark that graph classes admitting low rank-width colorings are monotone under taking induced subgraphs, as
rank-width does not increase by removing vertices.
Let us remark that due to the model-checking algorithm of Courcelle et al.~\cite{courcelle2000linear},
the (induced) subgraph isomorphism problem is solvable in cubic time for every fixed pattern $H$ whenever the input graph is given together with a low rank-width coloring for $p=|V(H)|$, using $N(p)$ colors.
Indeed, it suffices to iterate through all $p$-tuples of color classes and look for the pattern $H$ in the subgraph induced by these color classes; this can be done efficiently since this subgraph
has rank-width at most $Q(p)$. The caveat is that the graph has to be supplied with an appropriate coloring.
In this work we do not investigate the algorithmic aspects of low rank-width colorings,
and rather concentrate on the combinatorial question of which classes admit such colorings, and which do not.
\paragraph*{Our contribution.} We prove that for every class $\mathcal{C}$ of bounded expansion and every integer
$r\geq 2$, the class $\{G^r\colon G\in \mathcal{C}\}$ of $r$th powers of
graphs from $\mathcal{C}$ admits low rank-width colorings.
It is easy to see that there are classes of bounded expansion
such that $\{G^r\colon G\in \mathcal{C}\}$ has both unbounded
rank-width and does not admit low tree-depth colorings.
We furthermore prove that
the class of unit interval graphs and the class of bipartite permutation graphs
admit low rank-width colorings.
On the negative side, we show that the classes of interval graphs and of permutation graphs do not admit low rank-width colorings.
Finally, we also prove that every graph class admitting low rank-width colorings has the Erd\H{o}s-Hajnal property~\cite{ErdosH1989} and
is $\chi$-bounded~\cite{Gyarfas1987}.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec:prelim}
All graphs in this paper are finite, undirected and simple, that is,
they do not have loops or parallel edges. Our notation is standard,
we refer to~\cite{diestel2012graph} for more background on
graph theory.
We write $V(G)$ for the vertex set of a graph $G$ and
$E(G)$ for its edge set.
A \emph{vertex coloring}
of a graph $G$ with colors from $S$ is a mapping $c\colon V(G)\rightarrow S$.
For each $v\in V(G)$, we call $c(v)$ the color of $v$.
The {\em{distance}} between vertices $u$ and $v$ in $G$, denoted $\mathrm{dist}_G(u,v)$, is the length of a shortest path between~$u$ and $v$ in $G$.
The \emph{$r$th power of a graph $G$} is the graph $G^r$
with vertex set $V(G)$, where there is an edge between two
vertices $u$ and $v$ if and only if their distance in $G$ is at most $r$.
Rank-width was introduced by Oum and Seymour~\cite{oum2006approximating}. We
refer to the surveys~\cite{hlinveny2008width,oum2016rank} for more background.
For a graph $G$, we denote the adjacency matrix of $G$ by $A_G$,
where for $x,y\in V(G)$, $A_G[x,y]=1$ if and only if $x$ is adjacent to $y$.
Let $G$ be a graph. We define the \emph{cut-rank} function $\mathrm{cutrk}_{G} \colon 2^{V} \rightarrow \mathbb{N}$ such that
$\mathrm{cutrk}_G(X)$ is the
rank of the matrix $A_G[X, V(G)\setminus X]$ over the binary field (if $X=\emptyset$ or
$X=V(G)$, then we let $\mathrm{cutrk}_G(X)=0$).
A \emph{rank-decomposition} of $G$ is a pair $(T,L)$, where $T$ is a
subcubic tree (i.e.\ a tree where
every node has degree $1$ or $3$) with at least $2$ nodes and $L$ is a bijection
from $V(G)$ to the set of leaves of $T$.
The \emph{width} of $e$ is define as $\mathrm{cutrk}_G(A^e_1)$ where $(A^e_1, A^e_2)$ is the vertex bipartition of $G$ each $A^e_i$ is the set of all vertices in $G$ mapped to leaves contained in one of components of $T-e$.
The \emph{width} of $(T,L)$ is the maximum width over all edges in $T$, and
the \emph{rank-width} of $G$, denoted by $\mathrm{rw}(G)$, is the minimum width over all rank-decompositions of $G$.
If $\abs{V(G)}\le 1$, then~$G$ has no rank-decompositions, and the rank-width of $G$ is defined to be $0$.
A graph is an \emph{interval graph} if it is the intersection graph of a family $\mathcal{I}$
of intervals on the real line,
an interval graph is a \emph{unit interval graph} if all intervals in $\mathcal{I}$ have the same length.
A graph is a \emph{permutation graph} if it is the intersection graph of line
segments whose endpoints lie on two parallel lines.
A \emph{tree-decomposition} of a graph $G$ is
a pair $(T,\mathcal{B})$
consisting of a tree $T$
and a family $\mathcal{B}=\{B_t\}_{t\in V(T)}$ of sets $B_t\subseteq V(G)$,
satisfying the following three conditions:
\begin{enumerate}[(T1)]
\item $V(G)=\bigcup_{t\in V(T)}B_t$;
\item for every $uv\in E(G)$, there exists a node $t$ of $T$ such that $\{u,v\}\subseteq B_t$;
\item for $t_1,t_2,t_3\in V(T)$, $B_{t_1}\cap B_{t_3}\subseteq B_{t_2}$ whenever $t_2$ is on the path from $t_1$ to $t_3$ in $T$.
\end{enumerate}
The \emph{width} of a tree-decomposition $(T,\mathcal{B})$ is $\max\{ \abs{B_{t}}-1:t\in V(T)\}$.
The \emph{tree-width} of $G$ is the minimum width over all tree-decompositions of $G$.
Let $G$ be a graph and let $G_1,\ldots, G_s$ be its connected components.
Then the \emph{tree-depth} of $G$ is recursively defined as
\[\mathrm{td}(G) = \begin{cases}
1 & \text{if $|V(G)|=1$}\\
1+\min_{v\in V(G)}\ \mathrm{td}(G-v) & \text{if $|V(G)|>1$ and $s=1$}\\
\max_{1\leq i\leq s}\ \mathrm{td}(G_i) & \text{otherwise}.
\end{cases}\]
\section{Powers of sparse graphs}\label{sec:bounded-expansion}
In this section we show that the class of $r$th powers of graphs from a bounded expansion class admit low rank-width colorings.
The original
definition of bounded expansion classes by Ne\v{s}et\v{r}il and Ossona de
Mendez~\cite{nevsetvril2008grad} is in terms of bounds on the density
of bounded depth minors. We will work with the characterisation by
the existence of low tree-depth colorings as well
as by a characterisation in terms of bounds on generalized coloring numbers.
\begin{theorem}[Ne\v{s}et\v{r}il and Ossona de
Mendez~\cite{nevsetvril2008grad}]\label{thm:be-lcw}
A class $\mathcal{C}$ of graphs has
bounded expansion if and only if for all $p\in \mathbb{N}$ there exists
a number $N=N(\mathcal{C}, p)$ such that every graph $G\in \mathcal{C}$ admits
a $p$-tree-depth coloring with $N$ colors.
\end{theorem}
Our main result in this section is the following.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:be-lrw}
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a class of bounded expansion and $r\geq 2$ be an
integer.
Then the class $\{G^r\colon G\in \mathcal{C}\}$ of $r$th powers of
graphs from $\mathcal{C}$ admits low rank-width colorings.
\end{theorem}
For a graph $G$, we denote by $\Pi(G)$ the set of all linear orders
of $V(G)$. For $u,v\in V(G)$ and
a non-negative integer $r$, we say that~$u$ is \emph{weakly $r$-reachable} from~$v$
with respect to~$L$, if there is a path $P$ of length at most $r$ between $u$ and $v$
such that $u$ is
the smallest among
the vertices of $P$ with respect to~$L$.
We denote by $\mathrm{WReach}_r[G,L,v]$ the set of vertices that are weakly $r$-reachable from~$v$ with
respect to~$L$. The
\emph{weak $r$-coloring number $\mathrm{wcol}_r(G)$} of $G$ is defined as
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathrm{wcol}_r(G)& := & \min_{L\in\Pi(G)}\:\max_{v\in V(G)}\:
\bigl|\mathrm{WReach}_r[G,L,v]\bigr|.
\end{eqnarray*}
The weak coloring number was introduced by Kierstead and
Yang~\cite{kierstead2003orders} in the context of coloring and
marking games on graphs.
As shown by Zhu~\cite{zhu2009coloring}, classes of bounded expansion
can be characterised by the weak coloring numbers.
\begin{theorem}[Zhu~\cite{zhu2009coloring}]\label{thm:charbddexp}
A class $\mathcal{C}$ has bounded expansion if and only if for all
$r\geq 1$ there is a number $f(r)$ such that for all $G\in \mathcal{C}$
it holds that $\mathrm{wcol}_r(G)\leq f(r)$.
\end{theorem}
In order to prove \cref{thm:be-lrw},
we will first compute a low tree-depth coloring. We would like
to apply the following theorem, relating the tree-width (and
hence in particular the tree-depth) of a graph and the rank-width of its
$r$th power.
\begin{theorem}[Gurski and Wanke~\cite{GurskiW2009}]\label{thm:tdtorw}
Let $r\ge 2$ be an integer.
If a graph~$H$ has tree-width at most $p$, then $H^r$ has rank-width at most $2(r+1)^{p+1}-2$.
\end{theorem}
We remark that Gurski and Wanke~\cite{GurskiW2009} proved this bound for clique-width instead of rank-width, but clique-width is never smaller than the rank-width~\cite{oum2006approximating}.
The natural idea would be just to combine the bound of \cref{thm:tdtorw} with low tree-depth coloring given by \cref{thm:be-lcw}.
Note however, that when we consider any subgraph $H$ induced by
$i\leq p$ color classes, the graph $H^r$ may be completely different
from the graph $G^r[V(H)]$, due to paths that are present in $G$ but disappear in $H$.
Hence we cannot directly
apply \cref{thm:tdtorw}. Instead, we will prove the existence of a
refined coloring of $G$ such that for any subgraph $H$ induced by
$i\leq p$ color classes, in the refined coloring there is a subgraph
$H'$ such that $G^r[V(H)]\subseteq H'^r$ and such that $H'$ gets only
$g(i)$ colors in the original coloring, for some fixed function $g$. We can
now apply \cref{thm:tdtorw} to $H'$ and use fact that rank-width
is monotone under taking induced subgraphs.
In the following, we will say that a vertex subset $X$ {\em{receives}} a color $i$ under a coloring $c$ if $i\in c^{-1}(X)$.
We first need the following definitions.
\begin{definition}
Let $G$ be a graph, $X\subseteq V(G)$ and $r\geq 2$.
A superset $X'\supseteq X$ is called \emph{an $r$-shortest path hitter} for $X$
if for all $u,v\in X$ with $1<\mathrm{dist}_G(u,v)\leq r$, $X'$ contains an internal vertex of some shortest path between $u$ and $v$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
Let $G$ be a graph, let $c$ be a coloring of $G$, and $r\geq 2$
and $d\geq 1$. A coloring $c'$ is a \emph{$(d,r)$-good refinement} of $c$
if for every vertex set $X$ that receives at most~$p$ colors under $c'$,
there exists an $r$-shortest path hitter $X'$ of $X$ that receives at
most $d\cdot p$ colors under $c$.
\end{definition}
\noindent We use the weak coloring numbers to prove the existence of a good
refinement.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:goodrefinement}
Let $G$ be a graph and $r\ge 2$ be an integer.
Then every coloring $c$ of $G$ using $k$ colors has a $(2\mathrm{wcol}_r(G), r)$-good refinement using $k^{2\mathrm{wcol}_r(G)}$ colors.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Gamma$ be the set of colors used by $c$, and let $d:=2\mathrm{wcol}_r(G)$.
The $(d,r)$-good refinement~$c'$ that we are going to construct will use subsets of $\Gamma$ of size at most $d$
as the color set; the number of such subsets is at most $k^{2\mathrm{wcol}_r(G)}$.
Let $L$ be a linear order of $V(G)$ with
$\max_{v\in V(G)}\:
\bigl|\mathrm{WReach}_r[G,L,v]\bigr|=\mathrm{wcol}_r(G)$.
We construct a new coloring $c'$ as follows:
\begin{enumerate}[(1)]
\item Start by setting $c'(v):=\emptyset$ for each $v\in V(G)$.
\item
For each pair of vertices $u$ and $v$ such that $u\in \mathrm{WReach}_r[G, L, v]$,
we add the color $c(u)$ to $c'(v)$.
\item
For each pair $u,v$ of non-adjacent vertices such that $u<_L v$ and $u\in \mathrm{WReach}_r[G,L,v]$, we do the following.
Check whether there is a path $P$ of length at most $r$ connecting $u$ and $v$
such that all the internal vertices of $P$ are larger than both $u$ and $v$ in $L$.
If there is no such path, we do nothing for the pair $u,v$.
Otherwise, fix one such path $P$, chosen to be the shortest possible, and let $z$ be the vertex traversed by $P$ that is the largest in $L$.
Then add the color $c(z)$ to~$c'(v)$.
\end{enumerate}
Thus, every vertex $v$ receives in total at most $2\mathrm{wcol}_{r}(G)$ colors of $\Gamma$ to its final color $c'(v)$: at most $\mathrm{wcol}_{r}(G)$ in step (2), and at most $\mathrm{wcol}_{r}(G)$ in step (3), because
we add at most one color per each $u\in \mathrm{WReach}_r[G,L,v]$.
It follows that each final color $c'(v)$ is a subset of $\Gamma$ of size at most $2\mathrm{wcol}_{r}(G)$.
We claim that $c'$ is a $(d,r)$-good refinement of $c$.
Let $X\subseteq V(G)$ be a set that receives at most $p$ colors under $c'$,
say colors $A_1, \ldots, A_p\subseteq \Gamma$.
Let $X'$ be the set of vertices of $G$ that are colored by colors in $A_1\cup \cdots \cup A_p$ under $c$.
Since $|A_i|\leq d$ for each $i\in \{1,\ldots,p\}$, we have that $X'$ receives at most $d\cdot p$ colors under $c$.
To show that $X'$ is an $r$-shortest path hitter of $X$,
let us choose any two vertices $u$ and $v$ in~$X$ with $u<_L v$ and $1<\mathrm{dist}_G(u,v)\leq r$.
If there is a shortest path from $u$ to $v$ whose all internal vertices are larger than $u$ and $v$ in $L$,
by step (3), $X'$ contains a vertex that is contained in one such path.
Otherwise, a shortest path from $u$ to $v$ contains a vertex $z$ with
$L(z)<L(v)$ other than $u$ and~$v$.
This implies that there exists $z'\in \mathrm{WReach}_r[G,L,v]\setminus \{u\}$ on the path such that $c(z')\in c'(v)$, and hence
$z'\in X'$ by step (2).
Therefore, $X'$ is an $r$-shortest path hitter of $X$, as required.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}
Let $G$ be a graph, let $X\subseteq V(G)$, and let $r\geq 1$ be an integer.
A superset $X'\supseteq X$ is called \emph{an $r$-shortest path closure of $X$}
if for each $u,v\in X$ with $\mathrm{dist}_G(u,v)=\ell\leq r$, $G[X']$ contains a path of length $\ell$ between $u$ and $v$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
Let $G$ be a graph, let $c$ be a coloring of $G$, and let $r\geq 2$ and $d\geq 1$.
A coloring~$c'$ is a \emph{$(d,r)$-excellent refinement} of $c$ if for every vertex set $X\subseteq V(G)$
there exists an $r$-shortest path closure $X'$ of $X$ such that if $X$ receives $p$ colors in $c'$, then $X'$ receives at most $d\cdot p$ colors in $c$.
\end{definition}
\noindent We inductively define excellent
refinements from good refinements.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:excellentrefinement}
Let $G$ be a graph, $r\ge 2$ an integer, and let $d_r\coloneqq \prod_{2\le \ell\le r}2\mathrm{wcol}_\ell(G)$.
Then every coloring~$c$ of $G$ using at most $k$ colors has a $(d_r, r)$-excellent refinement using at most $k^{d_r}$ colors.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is by induction on $r$.
For $r=2$, an $r$-shortest path hitter of a set~$X$ is an $r$-shortest path closure, and vice versa.
Hence, the statement immediately follows from \cref{lem:goodrefinement}.
Now assume $r\ge 3$.
By induction hypothesis, there is a $(d_{r-1}, r-1)$-excellent
refinement~$c_1$ of $c$ with at most $k^{d_{r-1}}$ colors.
By applying~\cref{lem:goodrefinement} to~$c_1$, we obtain a $(2\mathrm{wcol}_r(G),r)$-good refinement $c'$ of~$c_1$ with at most
$(k^{d_{r-1}})^{2\mathrm{wcol}_r(G)}=k^{d_r}$ colors.
We claim that $c'$ is a $(d_r,r)$-excellent refinement of $c$. Any set $X$
which gets at most $p$ colors from $c'$
can be first extended to an $r$-shortest path hitter $X'$ for $X$ which receives
at most $2\mathrm{wcol}_r(G)\cdot p$ colors. Then $X'$ can be extended by induction hypothesis to an $(r-1)$-shortest
path closure $X''$ of $X'$ that receives at most $d_{r-1}\cdot 2\mathrm{wcol}_r(G)\cdot p=d_r\cdot p$ colors.
It remains to show that $X''$ is an $r$-shortest path closure of $X$.
Take any $u,v\in X$ with $\mathrm{dist}_G(u,v)=\ell\leq r$. If $\ell\leq 1$, then $u,v$ are already adjacent in $G[X]$.
Otherwise, since $X'$ is an $r$-shortest path hitter for $X$, there is a vertex $z\in X'$ that lies on some shortest path connecting $u$ and $v$ in $G$.
In particular, $\mathrm{dist}_G(u,z)=\ell_1$ and $\mathrm{dist}_G(z,v)=\ell_2$ for $\ell_1,\ell_2$ satisfying $\ell_1,\ell_2<\ell$ and $\ell_1+\ell_2=\ell$.
Since $X''$ is an $(r-1)$-shortest path closure of $X'$, we infer that $\mathrm{dist}_{G[X'']}(u,z)=\ell_1$ and $\mathrm{dist}_{G[X'']}(z,v)=\ell_2$.
Hence $\mathrm{dist}_{G[X'']}(u,v)=\ell$ by the triangle inequality.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[of~\cref{thm:be-lrw}]
Let $G$ be a graph in $\mathcal{C}$ and let $d_r:=\prod_{2\le \ell\le r}2\mathrm{wcol}_\ell(G)$.
Since $\mathcal{C}$ has bounded expansion, by \cref{thm:charbddexp}, for each $r$, $\mathrm{wcol}_r(G)$ is bounded by a constant only depending on $\mathcal{C}$.
We start by taking $c$ to be a $(d_r\cdot p)$-tree-depth coloring
with $N(d_r\cdot p)$ colors, where $N$ is the function from \cref{thm:be-lcw}.
Then its $(d_r,r)$-excellent refinement $c'$ has the property
that $c'$ uses at most $N(d_r\cdot p)^{d_r}$ colors, and every subset $X$ which receives at most $p$ colors in $c'$ has an $r$-shortest path closure $X'$ that receives at most $d_r\cdot p$ colors in $c$.
Thus, the graph induced on $X$ in the $r$th power $G^r$ is the same at the graph induced on $X$ in the $r$th power $G[X']^r$.
Since $G[X']$ has tree-depth at most $d_r\cdot p$, by~\cref{thm:tdtorw},
$G[X']^r$ has rank-width at most $2(r+1)^{d_r\cdot p+1}-2$.
Therefore, $G^r[X]$ has rank-width at most $2(r+1)^{d_r\cdot p+1}-2$ as well.
\end{proof}
We now give two example applications of \cref{thm:be-lrw}.
A \emph{map graph} is a graph that can be obtained from a plane graph by making a vertex for each face,
and adding an edge between two vertices, if the corresponding faces share a vertex.
One can observe
that every map graph is an induced subgraph of the second power of another planar graph, namely the {\em{radial graph}} of the original graph.
\begin{lemma}
Every map graph is an induced subgraph of the second power of a planar graph.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $G$ be a map graph, and let $H$ be a planar graph defining the map for $G$.
Consider the {\em{radial graph}} $R$ of $H$: the vertex set of $R$ consists of vertices and faces of $H$,
and a vertex $u$ is adjacent to a face $f$ iff $u$ is incident to $f$ in $H$.
Obviously $R$ is planar.
It follows that $G$ is the subgraph induced in $R^2$ by the vertices corresponding to faces of $H$.
\end{proof}
Thus, map graphs have low rank-width colorings.
A similar reasoning can be performed for line graphs of graphs from any bounded expansion graph class.
Thus, both map graphs and line graphs of graphs from any fixed bounded expansion graph class admit low rank-width colorings.
\begin{lemma}
If $\mathcal{C}$ is a graph class of bounded expansion, then there is a graph class of bounded expansion $\mathcal{C}_1$ such that all line graphs
of graphs from $\mathcal{C}$ are induced subgraphs of graphs from $\mathcal{C}_1^2$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Observe that for any graph $G$, if by $G_1$ we denote $G$ with every edge subdivided once, then the line graph of $G$ is a subgraph of $G_1^2$ induced by the subdividing vertices.
It follows that we may take $\mathcal{C}_1$ to be the class of all $1$-subdivisions of graphs from $\mathcal{C}$. This class also has bounded expansion.
\end{proof}
\section{Other positive results}\label{sec:other-positive}
We now prove that unit interval graphs and bipartite permutation graphs
admit low rank-width colorings.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:unit-interval}
The class of unit interval graphs and the class of bipartite permutation graphs
admit low rank-width colorings.
\end{theorem}
Our results follow from characterizations of these classes
obtained by Lozin~\cite{Lozin2011}.
Let $n,m\geq 1$. We denote by $H_{n,m}$ the graph with $n\cdot m$
vertices which can be partitioned into $n$ independents sets $V_1=\{v_{1,1},\ldots, v_{1,m}\},
\ldots, V_n=\{v_{n,1},\ldots, v_{n,m}\}$ so that for each $i\in \{1,\ldots, n-1\}$ and
for each $j, j'\in \{1,\ldots, m\}$, vertex $v_{i,j}$ is adjacent to $v_{i+1,j'}$ if and only if $j'\in \{1, \ldots, j\}$,
and there are no edges between $V_i$ and $V_j$ if $\abs{i-j}\ge 2$.
The graph $\widetilde{H}_{n,m}$ is the graph obtained from $H_{n,m}$ by
replacing each independent set $V_i$ by a clique.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:rwbound}
The following statements hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item (Lozin~\cite{Lozin2011}) The rank-width of $H_{n,m}$ and of $\widetilde{H}_{n,m}$ is at most $3n$.
\item (Lozin~\cite{Lozin2011}) Every bipartite permutation graph on $n$ vertices is isomorphic to an induced subgraph of $H_{n,n}$.
\item (Lozin~\cite{LozinR2007}) Every unit interval graph on $n$ vertices is isomorphic to an induced subgraph of~$\widetilde{H}_{n,n}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
Hence, in order to prove~\cref{thm:unit-interval}, it suffices to prove that the graphs
$H_{n,m}$ and $\widetilde{H}_{n,m}$ admit low rank-width colorings.
\begin{proof}[of \cref{thm:unit-interval}]
For every positive integer $p$, let $N(p):=p+1$ and $Q(i):=3i$ for each $i\in \{1, \ldots, p\}$.
We prove that for all $n,m\geq 1$, the graphs $H_{n,m}$ and $\widetilde{H}_{n,m}$
can be vertex colored using $N(p)$ colors so that each of the connected components of
the subgraph induced by any $i\le p$ color classes has rank-width at most $R(i)$. As
rank-with and rank-width colorings are monotone under taking induced subgraphs, the
statement of the theorem follows from~\cref{lem:rwbound}.
Assume that the vertices of $H_{n,m}$ (and $\widetilde{H}_{n,m}$, respectively)
are, as in the definition, named $v_{1,1},\ldots, v_{1,m}, \ldots, v_{n,1},\ldots, v_{n,m}$.
We color the vertices in the $i$th row, $v_{i,1},\ldots, v_{i,m}$,
with color $j+1$ where $j \in \{ 0, 1, \ldots, p\}$ and $i\equiv j {\pmod {p+1}}$. Then any connected
component $H$ of a subgraph induced by $i\leq p$ colors is isomorphic to $H_{i',m}$
($\widetilde{H}_{i',m}$, respectively) for some $i'\leq i$.
Hence, according to~\cref{lem:rwbound}, $H$ has rank-width at most $3i=Q(i)$, as claimed.
\end{proof}
\section{Negative results}\label{sec:negative-results}
In contrast to the result in \cref{sec:other-positive}, we prove that interval graphs and permutation graphs do not
admit low rank-width colorings. For this, we introduce twisted chain graphs.
Briefly, a twisted chain graph $G$ consists of three vertex sets $A, B, C$ where
each of $G[A\cup C]$ and $G[B\cup C]$ is a chain graph, but the ordering of $C$ with respect to the chain graphs $G[A\cup C]$ and $G[B\cup C]$ are distinct.
\begin{definition}\label{def:twi}
For a positive integer $n$, a graph on the set of $3n^2$ vertices $A\cup B\cup C$, where
$A=\{v_1, \ldots, v_{n^2}\}$, $B=\{w_1, \ldots, w_{n^2}\}$, and $C=\{z_{(i,j)}\colon 1\le i,j\le n\}$, is called a \emph{twisted chain graph} of order $n$
if
\begin{itemize}
\item for integers $x,y, i, j\in \{1, \ldots, n\}$ and $k=n(x-1)+y$,
$v_k$ is adjacent to $z_{(i,j)}$ if and only if either
($x<i$) or ($x=i$ and $y\le j$);
\item for integers $x,y, i, j\in \{1, \ldots, n\}$ and $k=n(x-1)+y$,
$w_k$ is adjacent to $z_{(i,j)}$ if and only if either
($x<j$) or
($x=j$ and $y\le i$);
\item the edge relation within $A\cup B$ and within $C$ is arbitrary.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
\noindent We first show that a large twisted chain graph has large rank-width. We remark that a proof of this fact seems to follow also from a careful examination and modification of
general constructions given by Dabrowski and Paulusma~\cite{DabrowskiP16}; however, we prefer to give our own direct proof for the sake of completeness.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:twistedgrid-rk}
For every integer $n>0$, every twisted chain graph of order $12n$ has rank-width at least~$n$.
\end{lemma}
Before we proceed to the proof of \cref{lem:twistedgrid-rk}, we need to introduce some basic tools
A vertex bipartition $(X,Y)$ of a graph $G$ is \emph{balanced with respect to a set $C\subseteq V(G)$} if $\frac{|C|}{3}\le |X\cap C|, |Y\cap C|$.
We will need the following standard fact.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:balancedpartition}
If $G$ is a graph of rank-width at most $w$ and $C\subseteq V(G)$ with $|C|\geq 3$, then $G$ admits a vertex bipartition $(X,Y)$ with $\mathrm{cutrk}_G(A)\le w$ that is balanced with respect to $C$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $(T,L)$ be a rank-decomposition of $G$ of width at most $w$.
We subdivide an edge of $T$, and regard the new vertex as a root node.
For each node $t\in V(T)$, let $\mu(t)$ be the number of leaves of $T$ that are descendants of $t$ and correspond to vertices of $S$.
Now, we choose a node $t$ that is farthest from the root node and such that
$\mu(t)\geq \frac{|C|}{3}$.
By the choice of $t$, either $t$ is a leaf or for each child $t'$ of $t$ we have $\mu(t')<\frac{|C|}{3}$.
Therefore, since $|C|\geq 3$, in any case $\frac{|C|}{3}\leq \mu(t)\leq \frac{2|C|}{3}$.
Let~$e$ be the edge connecting the node $t$ and its parent.
By the construction, the vertex bipartition associated with $e$ satisfies the required property.
\end{proof}
We now proceed to the proof of \cref{lem:twistedgrid-rk}.
\begin{proof}[of \cref{lem:twistedgrid-rk}]
Let $m:=12n$ and let $G$ be a twisted chain graph of order $m$.
Adopt the notation from Definition~\ref{def:twi} for $G$.
Suppose for the sake of contradiction that the rank-width of $G$ is smaller than $n$.
By \cref{lem:balancedpartition}, there exists a vertex bipartition $(S,T)$ of $G$ with $\mathrm{cutrk}_G(A)<n$ such that $|C\cap S|\geq \frac{|C|}{3}=m^2/3$ and similarly $|C\cap T|\geq m^2/3$.
Suppose we have vertices $v_{a_1},\ldots,v_{a_k}\in A\cap S$ and $z_{(b_1,c_1)},\ldots,z_{(b_k,c_k)}\in C\cap T$ with the following property satisfied:
$$a_1\leq(b_1-1)m+c_1< a_2\le (b_2-1)m+c_2< \cdots <a_k\le (b_k-1)m+c_k.$$
Such a structure will be called an {\em{$A$-ordered $(S,T)$-matching}} of order $k$.
By the definition of adjacency in $G$ it follows that the submatrix of $A_G[S,T]$ induced by rows corresponding to vertices~$v_{a_i}$ and columns corresponding to vertices $z_{(b_i,c_i)}$
has ones in the upper triangle and on the diagonal,
and zeroes in the lower triangle. The rank of this submatrix is $k$, so since $\mathrm{cutrk}_G(A)<n$, there is no $A$-ordered $(S,T)$-matching of order $n$.
We similarly define the $A$-ordered $(T,S)$-matching of rank $n$, where the vertices $v_{a_i}$ belong to $T$ and vertices $z_{(b_i,c_i)}$ belong to $S$.
Likewise, there is no $A$-ordered $(T,S)$-matching of order $n$.
Suppose now we have vertices $w_{a_1},\ldots,w_{a_k}\in B\cap S$ and $z_{(b_1,c_1)},\ldots,z_{(b_k,c_k)}\in C\cap T$ with the following property satisfied:
$$a_1\leq(c_1-1)m+b_1< a_2\le (c_2-1)m+b_2< \cdots <a_k\le (c_k-1)m+b_k.$$
Such a structure will be called a {\em{$B$-ordered $(S,T)$-matching}} of order $k$, and a {\em{$B$-ordered $(T,S)$-matching}} of order $k$ is defined analogously.
Again, the same reasoning as above shows that there is no $B$-ordered $(S,T)$-matching of order $n$, and no $B$-ordered $(T,S)$-matching of order $n$.
Let $\preceq_1$ and $\preceq_2$ be lexicographic orders on $\{1,\ldots,m\}\times\{1,\ldots,m\}$, with the leading coordinate being the first one for $\preceq_1$ and the second for $\preceq_2$.
\begin{claim}\label{cl:A-side}
If there is a sequence $(x_1,y_1)\prec_1 (x_2,y_2)\prec_1\ldots \prec_1 (x_{4k},y_{4k})$ such that $z_{(x_j,y_j)}\in S$ for odd $j$ and $z_{(x_j,y_j)}\in T$ for even $j$, then there
is either an $A$-ordered $(S,T)$-matching of order $k$, or an $A$-ordered $(T,S)$-matching of order~$k$.
\end{claim}
\begin{clproof}
Denote $r_j=(x_j-1)m+y_j$ for $j=1,2,\ldots,4k$.
For $i=1,2,\ldots,2k$, we define $a_i$ and $(b_i,c_i)$ as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item if $v_{r_{2i-1}}\in S$, then $a_i=r_{2i-1}$ and $(b_i,c_i)=z_{(b_{2i},c_{2i})}$, and
\item if $v_{r_{2i-1}}\in T$, then $a_i=r_{2i-1}$ and $(b_i,c_i)=z_{(b_{2i-1},c_{2i-1})}$.
\end{itemize}
It follows that vertices $v_{a_1},\ldots,v_{a_{2k}}$ and $z_{(b_1,c_1)},\ldots,z_{(b_{2k},c_{2k})}$ satisfy
$$a_1\leq(b_1-1)m+c_1< a_2\le (b_2-1)m+c_2< \cdots <a_k\le (b_k-1)m+c_k,$$
and for each $i$ we have that $v_{a_i}$ and $z_{(b_i,c_i)}$ belong to different sides of the bipartition $(S,T)$.
Now, if for at least $k$ indices $i$ we have $v_{a_i}\in S$ and $z_{(b_i,c_i)}\in T$, then the subsequence induced by elements with these indices gives an $A$-ordered $(S,T)$-matching of order $k$.
Otherwise, there are at least $k$ indices $i$ with $v_{a_i}\in T$ and $z_{(b_i,c_i)}\in S$, and the subsequence induced by them gives an $A$-ordered $(T,S)$-matching of order $k$.
\end{clproof}
A symmetric proof gives the following.
\begin{claim}\label{cl:B-side}
If there is a sequence $(x_1,y_1)\prec_2 (x_2,y_2)\prec_2\ldots \prec_2 (x_{4k},y_{4k})$ such that $z_{(x_j,y_j)}\in S$ for odd $j$ and $z_{(x_j,y_j)}\in T$ for even $j$, then there
is either a $B$-ordered $(S,T)$-matching of order $k$, or a $B$-ordered $(T,S)$-matching of order~$k$.
\end{claim}
From \cref{cl:A-side} and \cref{cl:B-side} it follows that the largest possible length of sequences as in the statements is smaller than $4n$.
For $i,j\in \{1,\ldots,m\}$, call the sets $\{z_{(i,y)}\colon y\in \{1,\ldots,m\}\}$ and $\{z_{(x,j)}\colon x\in \{1,\ldots,m\}\}$ the {\em{$i$th row}} and the {\em{$j$th column}}, respectively.
A row or a column is {\em{mixed}} if it contains both elements of $S$ and elements of $T$.
Observe that if there were at least $4n$ mixed rows, then by choosing vertices from $S$ and $T$ alternately from these rows we would obtain a sequence of length $4n$ as in the statement
of \cref{cl:A-side}. Then \cref{cl:A-side} gives us an $A$-ordered $(S,T)$-matching of order $n$ or an $A$-ordered $(T,S)$-matching of order $n$, a contradiction.
Hence, there are less than $4n$ mixed rows, and symmetrically there are less than $4n$ mixed columns.
Observe that if there were two non-mixed rows such that the first one was contained in $S$ while the second was contained in $T$, then all the $12n$ columns would be mixed, a contradiction.
Hence, either all the non-mixed rows belong to $S$, or all of them belong to $T$. However, there are more than $12n-4n=8n=m/3$ non-mixed rows, so either $S$ or $T$ contains more than a third of vertices of $C$.
This is a contradiction with the assumption that $(S,T)$ is balanced with respect to $C$.
\end{proof}
\noindent We now observe that if a graph class contains arbitrarily large twisted chain graphs, then it does not admit low rank-width colorings.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:interval-permut}
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a hereditary graph class, and suppose for each positive integer $n$ some twisted chain graph of order $n$ belongs to $\mathcal{C}$.
Then $\mathcal{C}$ does not admit low rank-width colorings.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We show that for every pair of integers $m\ge 3$ and $n\ge 1$,
there is an graph $G\in \mathcal{C}$ such that
for every coloring of $G$ with $m$ colors, there is an induced subgraph $H$ that receives at most $3$ colors and has rank-width at least $n$.
This implies that $\mathcal{C}$ does not admit low rank-width colorings.
We will need the following simple Ramsey-type argument.
\cref{cl:prod-rams} follows, e.g., from~\cite[Theorem~11.5]{Trotter1992}, but we give a simple proof for the sake of completeness.
\begin{claim}\label{cl:prod-rams}
For all positive integers $k,d$, there exists an integer $M=M(k,d)$ such that for
all sets $X,Y$ with $|X|=|Y|=M$ and all functions $f\colon X\times Y\to \{1,\ldots,d\}$, there exist subsets $X'\subseteq X$ and $Y'\subseteq Y$ with $|X'|=|Y'|=k$ such that
$f$ sends all elements of $X'\times Y'$ to the same value.
\end{claim}
\begin{clproof}
We prove the claim for $M(k,d)=k\cdot d^{dk}$. Let $X_0$ be an arbitrary subset $X$ of size $dk$. For each $y\in Y$, define the {\em{type}} of $y$ as the function $g_y\colon X_0\to \{1,\ldots,d\}$
defined as $g_y(x)=f(x,y)$. There are at most $d^{dk}$ different types possible, so there is a subset $Y'\subseteq Y$ of size $k$ such that each element of $Y'$ has the same type $g$.
Since $|X_0|=dk$, there is some $i\in \{1,\ldots,d\}$ such that $g$ yields value $i$ for at least $k$ elements of $X_0$. Then if we take $X'$ to be an arbitrary set of $k$ elements mapped to $i$ by $g$,
then $f(x,y)=i$ for each $(x,y)\in X'\times Y'$, as required.
\end{clproof}
Let $M_1:=M(12n, m)$, $M_2:=M(M_1,m)$, and $M_3:=M(M_2,m)$.
Let $G\in \cal C$ be a twisted chain graph of order $M_3$; adopt the notation from Definition~\ref{def:twi} for $G$.
Suppose $G$ is colored by $m$ colors by a coloring $c$.
By \cref{cl:prod-rams}, there exist $X_1, Y_1\subseteq \{1, \ldots, M_3\}$ with $|X_1|=|Y_1|=M_2$ such that
$\{z_{(x,y)}\colon (x,y)\in X_1\times Y_1\}$ is monochromatic under $c$.
Now, for an index $k\in \{1,\ldots,M_3^2\}$, let $(i_1(k),j_1(k))\in \{1,\ldots,m\}\times \{1,\ldots,m\}$ be the unique pair such that $k=(i_1(k)-1)M_3+j_1(k)$,
and let $(i_2(k),j_2(k))\in \{1,\ldots,m\}\times \{1,\ldots,m\}$ be the unique pair such that $k=(j_2(k)-1)M_3+i_2(k)$.
By reindexing vertices $A$ and $C$ using pairs $(i_1(k),j_1(k))$ and $(i_2(k),j_2(k))$,
we may view coloring $c$ on $A$ and $C$ as a coloring on $\{1,\ldots,M_3\}\times \{1,\ldots,M_3\}$.
By applying \cref{cl:prod-rams} to the vertices from $A$ indexed by $X_1\times Y_1$, we obtain subsets $X_2\subseteq X_1$ and $Y_2\subseteq Y_1$
such that $|X_2|=|Y_2|=M_1$ and the set $\{v_{(x-1)M_3+y}\colon x\in X_2, y\in Y_2\}$ is monochromatic.
Finally, by applying \cref{cl:prod-rams} to the vertices from $B$ indexed by $X_2\times Y_2$, we obtain subsets $X_3\subseteq X_2$ and $Y_3\subseteq Y_2$
such that $|X_3|=|Y_3|=12n$ and the set $\{w_{(y-1)M_3+x}\colon (x,y)\in X_3\times Y_3\}$ is monochromatic.
Now observe that the subgraph $G[\{v_{(x-1)M_3+y}, w_{(y-1)M_3+x}, z_{(x,y)}\colon (x,y)\in X_3\times Y_3\}]$
receives at most $3$ colors, and is a twisted chain graph of order $12n$.
By \cref{lem:twistedgrid-rk} it has rank-width at least $n$, so this proves the claim.
\end{proof}
We now observe that a twisted chain graph of order $n$ is an interval graph, provided
each of $A$, $B$, and $C$ is a clique, and there are no edges between $A$ and $B$.
Similarly, for each $n$ there is a twisted chain graph of order $n$ that is a permutation graph.
See Figures~\ref{fig:interval} and~\ref{fig:permutation} for examples of intersection models.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{interval}}
\caption{An interval intersection model of a twisted chain graph of order $2$. }
\label{fig:interval}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{permu}}
\caption{A permutation intersection model of a twisted chain graph of order $2$. }
\label{fig:permutation}
\end{figure}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:twistedgrid1}
Let $G$ be a twisted chain graph of order~$n$, for some positive integer~$n$.
If each of $A$, $B$, and $C$ is a clique, and there are no
edges between $A$ and $B$,
then $G$ is an interval graph.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $M>2n^2$. Consider the following interval model:
\begin{itemize}
\item For each $i\in \{1,\ldots,n^2\}$, assign interval $[0,i]$ to $v_i$.
\item For each $i\in \{1,\ldots,n^2\}$, assign interval $[M-i,M]$ to $w_i$.
\item For each $x,y\in \{1,\ldots,n\}\times \{1,\ldots,n\}$, assign interval $[(x-1)n+y,M-(y-1)n-x]$ to $z_{(x,y)}$.
\end{itemize}
It can be easily seen that this is an interval model of the twisted chain graph of order $n$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:twistedgrid2}
For each positive integer~$n$, there is a twisted chain graph of order~$n$ that is a permutation graph.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $M>10n^2$. Consider the following permutation model, spanned between horizontal lines $\ell_1$ with $y$-coordinate $0$ and $\ell_2$ with $y$-coordinate $1$:
\begin{itemize}
\item For each $i\in \{1,\ldots,n^2\}$, assign the segment with endpoints $(i,0)$ and $(i,1)$ to $v_i$.
\item For each $i\in \{1,\ldots,n^2\}$, assign the segment with endpoints $(M-i,0)$ and $(M-i,1)$ to $w_i$.
\item For each $x,y\in \{1,\ldots,n\}\times \{1,\ldots,n\}$, assign the segment with endpoints $((x-1)m+y,0)$ and $(M-(y-1)m-x,1)$ to $z_{(x,y)}$
\end{itemize}
It can be easily seen that this is a permutation model of some twisted chain graph of order $n$.
\end{proof}
By \cref{thm:interval-permut}, we obtain the following.
\begin{theorem}
The classes of interval graphs and permutation graphs do not admit low rank-width colorings.
\end{theorem}
\section{Erd\H{o}s-Hajnal property and $\chi$-boundedness}\label{sec:EHchi}
A graph class $\mathcal{C}$ has the \emph{Erd\H{o}s-Hajnal property} if there is $\epsilon>0$, depending only on $\mathcal{C}$, such that
every $n$-vertex graph in $\mathcal{C}$ has either an independent set or a clique of size $n^{\epsilon}$.
The conjecture of Erd\H{o}s and Hajnal~\cite{ErdosH1989} states that for every fixed graph $H$, the class of graphs not having $H$ as an induced subgraph has the Erd\H{o}s-Hajnal property;
cf.~\cite{Chudnovsky2014}.
We prove that every class admitting low rank-width colorings has the Erd\H{o}s-Hajnal property.
The proof is based on the fact that every class of graphs of bounded rank-width has this property, which was shown by Oum and Seymour~\cite{OumSpersonal}.
Since this claim is not written in any published work, we include the proof for the completeness.
A graph is \emph{cograph} if it can be recursively constructed from isolated vertices by means of the following two operations:
(1) taking disjoint union of two graphs and (2) joining two graphs, i.e., taking their disjoint union and adding all possible edges with one endpoint in the first graphs and the second endpoint in the second.
It is well-known that every $n$-vertex cograph contains either an independent set or a clique of size $n^{1/2}$; this follows from the fact that cographs are perfect.
\begin{lemma}[Oum and Seymour~\cite{OumSpersonal}]\label{lem:ehbddrw}
For every positive integer $p$, there exists a constant $\delta=\delta(p)$ such that every $n$-vertex graph of rank-width at most $p$
contains either an independent set or a clique of size at least $n^\delta$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\kappa(p):=\frac{1}{\log_2 3+ p}$ and $\delta(p):=\frac{\kappa(p)}{2}$.
We first prove by induction on $n$ that
every $n$-vertex graph of rank-width at most $p$ contains a cograph of size at least $n^{\kappa(p)}$.
Assume $n\geq 3$, for otherwise every graph on at most $2$ vertices is a cograph.
Let $G$ be an $n$-vertex graph of rank-width at most $p$. By \cref{lem:balancedpartition},
$G$ has a vertex bipartition $(A,B)$ where $\mathrm{cutrk}_G(A)\le p$ and $\abs{A}, \abs{B}\geq \frac{n}{3}$.
Since $\mathrm{cutrk}_G(A)\le p$, there exist $A'\subseteq A$ and $B'\subseteq B$ with $\abs{A'}, \abs{B'}\geq \frac{n}{3\cdot 2^p}$,
such that either there are no edges between $A'$ and $B'$, or every vertex in $A'$ is adjacent to every vertex in $B'$.
By induction hypothesis, $G[A']$ contains a cograph $H_1$ and $G[B']$ contains a cograph $H_2$, both as induced subgraphs, such that $\abs{V(H_1)}, \abs{V(H_2)}\ge (\frac{n}{3\cdot 2^p})^{\kappa(p)}$.
Note that $G[V(H_1)\cup V(H_2)]$ is a cograph.
Since $\kappa(p)=\frac{1}{\log_2 3+ p}$, we have $\abs{V(H_1)}+\abs{V(H_2)}\ge 2(\frac{n}{3\cdot 2^p})^{\kappa(p)}= n^{\kappa(p)}$.
We conclude that~$G$ contains either an independent set or a clique of size at least $(n^{\kappa(p)})^{1/2}=n^{\delta(p)}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:lowrwEH}
Every class of graphs that admits low rank-width colorings has the Erd\H{o}s-Hajnal property.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be the class of graphs in question.
Fix any $G\in \mathcal{C}$, say on $n$ vertices.
Since $\mathcal{C}$ admits low rank-width colorings,
there exist functions $N\colon \mathbb{N}\rightarrow\mathbb{N}$ and $R\colon \mathbb{N}\rightarrow \mathbb{N}$, depending only on $\mathcal{C}$,
such that for all $p$,
$G$ can be colored using $N(p)$ colors so
that each induced subgraph of $G$ that receives $i\le p$ colors has rank-width at most $R(i)$.
Let $c$ be such a coloring for $p=1$; then $c$ uses $N(1)$ colors.
Let $\delta(p)$ be the function defined in \cref{lem:ehbddrw}.
We define $$\epsilon:=\min \left( \frac{\delta(R(1))}{2}, \frac{1}{2\log_2 N(1)}\right),$$
and claim that $G$ has an independent set or a clique of size at least $n^{\epsilon}$.
First, assume $n\ge N(1)^2$.
Then there is a color $i$ such that $|c^{-1}(i)|\geq \frac{n}{N(1)}$.
Thus, the subgraph~$H$ induced by the vertices with color $i$ has at least $\frac{n}{N(1)}$ vertices and rank-width at most $R(1)$.
Since $n\ge N(1)^2$, by \cref{lem:ehbddrw}, $H$, and thus also $G$, contains either an independent set or
a clique of size at least $$\abs{V(H)}^{\delta(R(1))}\ge \left(\frac{n}{N(1)} \right)^{\delta(R(1))}\ge n^{\frac{\delta(R(1))}{2}}\ge n^{\epsilon}.$$
Second, assume $n<N(1)^2$.
Then $n^{\epsilon}<N(1)^{2\epsilon}\leq 2$, so any two-vertex induced subgraph of $G$ is either a clique or an independent set of size at least $n^{\epsilon}$.
\end{proof}
A class $\mathcal{C}$ of graphs is \emph{$\chi$-bounded} if there exists a function $f\colon \mathbb N\rightarrow \mathbb N$ such that
for every $G\in \mathcal{C}$ and an induced subgraph $H$ of $G$, we have $\chi(H)\le f(\omega(H))$,
where $\chi(H)$ is the chromatic number of $H$ and $\omega(H)$ is the size of a maximum clique in $H$.
It was proved by Dvo{\v{r}}{\'a}k and Kr{\'a}l'~\cite{DvorakK2012} that for every $p$, the class of graphs of rank-width at most $p$ is $\chi$-bounded.
\begin{theorem}[Dvo\v{r}\'{a}k and Kr\'{a}l'~\cite{DvorakK2012}]\label{thm:bddrwchi}
For each positive integer $p$, the class of graphs of rank-width at most $p$ is $\chi$-bounded.
\end{theorem}
We observe that this fact directly generalizes to classes admitting low rank-width colorings.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:lowrwXbdd}
Every class of graphs that admits low rank-width colorings is $\chi$-bounded.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be the class of graphs in question,
let $G\in\mathcal{C}$, and let $q=\omega(G)$.
Since $\mathcal{C}$ admits low rank-width colorings,
there exist functions $N\colon \mathbb{N}\rightarrow\mathbb{N}$ and $R\colon \mathbb{N}\rightarrow \mathbb{N}$, depending only on $\mathcal{C}$,
such that for all $p$,
$G$ can be colored using $N(p)$ colors so
that each induced subgraph of $G$ that receives $i\le p$ colors has rank-width at most $R(i)$.
Let $c$ be such a coloring for $p=1$, and w.l.o.g. suppose that $c$ uses colors $\{1,\ldots,N(1)\}$.
By \cref{thm:bddrwchi}, there is function $f_{R(1)}$ such that for every graph $H$ of rank-width at most $R(1)$,
we have $\chi(H)\le f_{R(1)}(\omega(H))$.
For $i\in \{1,\ldots,N(1)\}$, let $G_i=G[c^{-1}(i)]$ be the subgraph induced by vertices of color $i$.
Since~$G_i$ is an induced subgraph of $G$, we have that $\omega(G_i)\leq q$, so $G_i$ has a proper coloring $c_i$ using $f_{R(1)}(q)$ colors, say colors $\{1,\ldots,f(q)\}$.
Then we can take the product coloring $c'$ of $G$ defined as $c'(u)=(c(u),c_{c(u)}(u))$. Observe that since each coloring $c_i$ is proper, $c'$ is a proper coloring of $G$.
It follows that the chromatic number of $G$ is at most $N(1)\cdot f(q)$, so we can take $f'(q)=N(1)\cdot f_{R(1)}(q)$ as the $\chi$-bounding function for $\mathcal{C}$.
\end{proof}
\section{Conclusions}\label{sec:conc}
In this work we introduced the concept of low rank-width colorings, and
showed that such colorings exist on $r$th powers of graphs from any bounded expansion class, for any fixed $r$, as well as on unit interval and bipartite permutation graphs.
These classes are non-sparse and have unbounded rank-width.
On the negative side, the classes of interval and permutation graphs do not admit low rank-width colorings.
The obvious open problem is to
characterise hereditary graph classes which admit low rank-width colorings in the spirit of the
characterisation theorem
for graph classes admitting low tree-depth colorings. We believe that \cref{thm:interval-permut} may provide some insight into this question, as it shows that containing arbitrarily large twisted chain graphs
is an obstacle for admitting low rank-width colorings. Is it true that every hereditary graph class that does not admit low rank-width
colorings has to contain arbitrarily large twisted chain graphs?
In this work we did not investigate the question of computing low rank-width colorings, and this question is of course crucial for any algorithmic applications.
Our proof for the powers of sparse graphs can be turned into a polynomial-time algorithm that, given a graph $G$ from a graph class of bounded expansion $\mathcal{C}$,
first computes a low tree-depth coloring, and then turns it into a low rank-width coloring of $G^r$, for a fixed constant $r$.
However, we do not know how to efficiently compute a low rank-width coloring given the graph $G^r$ alone, without the knowledge of $G$.
The even more general problem of efficiently constructing an approximate low rank-width coloring of any given graph remains wide open.
Finally, we remark that our proof for the existence of low rank-width colorings on powers of graphs from a class of bounded expansion actually yields
a slightly stronger result. Precisely, Ganian et al.~\cite{GanianHNJP2012} introduced a parameter {\em{shrub-depth}} (or {\em{SC-depth}}), which is a depth analogue of rank-width,
in the same way as tree-depth is a depth analogue of tree-width. It can be shown that for constant $r$, the $r$th power of a graph of constant tree-depth belongs to a class of constant shrub-depth,
and hence our colorings for powers of graphs from a class of bounded expansion are actually low shrub-depth colorings. We omit the details.
|
\section{Introduction}
Security assessment such as stability analysis generally requires repeated computation based on the full nonlinear power system model, leading to huge computational efforts \cite{Chiang:book}. In addition, the security analysis strongly depends on an accurate network model, which may not be available due to communication failures \cite{Chen:2014}. These factors pose great challenges to online security analysis. Until recently, the deployment of phasor measurement units (PMUs) provides a great opportunity for the development of measurement-based security analysis methods in power systems \cite{Wangxz:2015}-\cite{Zhou:2009PES}.
In this paper, we propose a hybrid measurement and model-based method to estimate the dynamic state Jacobian matrix in near real-time, which provides invaluable information for various security analysis. Conventionally, the Jacobian matrix can be constructed based on state estimation results provided that an accurate dynamic model and network parameter values are available \cite{Abur:book}, which unfortunately is not the case in practice. As a result, the conventional method may give rise to imprecise estimations. In contrast, the proposed hybrid method does not depend on network model, and thus can work as a robust alternative to traditional state estimation-based approaches when uncertainty in network topology is an issue. In addition, the proposed method may also help system operators identify discrepancies in the assumed network model.
The estimated dynamic state Jacobian matrix can be utilized in various applications such as online oscillation analysis, stability monitoring and generation re-dispatch. Due to page limit, we have to present the detailed applications of the estimated matrix in a separate paper.
\section{estimating dynamic state jacobian matrix}\label{sectionmodel}
We consider the general power system dynamic model:
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot{\bm{x}}&=&\bm{f}({\bm{x},\bm{y}})\label{fast ode}\\%+\overline{\Sigma}\bm{\bar{\xi}}\\
\bm{0}&=&\bm{g}({\bm{x},\bm{y}})\label{algebraic eqn}
\end{eqnarray}
Equation (\ref{fast ode}) describes generator dynamics, and their associated control; (\ref{algebraic eqn}) describes the electrical transmission system and the static behaviors of devices. $\bm{f}$ and $\bm{g}$ are continuous functions, vectors $\bm{x}\in\mathbb{R}^{n_{\bm{x}}}$ and $\bm{y}\in\mathbb{R}^{n_{\bm{y}}}$ are the corresponding state variables (generator rotor angles, rotor speeds) and algebraic variables (bus voltages, bus angles) \cite{Wangxz:CAS}.
In this paper, we focus on ambient oscillations around stable steady state. Hence, we demonstrate the proposed method using the classical generator model, which can typically represent generator dynamics in ambient conditions. We assume that the load variations and renewable injections can be transformed into the variation of generator mechanical power,
i.e., the mechanical power for Generator $i$ is $P_{m_i}+\sigma_i\xi_i$, where $\xi_i$ is a standard Gaussian noise, and $\sigma_i^2$ is the noise variance.
Thus (\ref{fast ode})-(\ref{algebraic eqn}) can be represented as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot{\bm{\delta}}&=&\bm{\omega}\label{swing-1}\\
M\dot{\bm{\omega}}&=&\bm{P_m}-\bm{P_e}-{D}\bm{\omega}+{\Sigma}\bm{\xi}\label{swing-2}
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{equation}
P_{e_i}=\sum_{j=1}^{n}E_iE_j(G_{ij}\cos({\delta}_i-{\delta}_j)+B_{ij}\sin(\delta_i-{\delta}_j))\label{swing-3}
\end{equation}
Particularly, $\bm{\delta}=[\delta_1,...\delta_n]^T$ is a vector of generator rotor angles, $\bm{\omega}=[\omega_1,...\omega_n]^T$ is a vector of generator rotor speeds, $\bm{P_m}=[P_{m_1},...P_{m_n}]^T$ is a vector of generators' mechanical power, $\bm{P_e}=[P_{e_1},...P_{e_2}]^T$ is a vector of generators' electrical power, $M=\mbox{diag}(M_1,...M_n)$ are the inertia constants, $D=\mbox{diag}(D_1,...D_n)$ are the damping factors. In addition, $\bm{{\xi}}$ is a vector of independent standard Gaussian random variables representing the variation of power injections, and $\Sigma=\mbox{diag}(\sigma_1,...\sigma_n)$ is the covariance matrix.
For the sake of simplicity, in this work we model the loads as constant impedances. In the future, efforts are needed to incorporate more realistic models.
Linearizing (\ref{swing-1})-(\ref{swing-2}) gives the following:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left[\begin{array}{c}\dot{\bm{\delta}}\\\dot{\bm{\omega}}\end{array}\right]&=&
\left[\begin{array}{cc}{{0}}&{I_n}\\-M^{-1}\frac{\partial{\bm{P_e}}}{\partial{\bm{\delta}}}&-M^{-1}D\end{array}\right]
\left[\begin{array}{c}{\bm{\delta}}\\{\bm{\omega}}\end{array}\right]\nonumber\\
&&+\left[\begin{array}{c}0\\M^{-1}\Sigma\end{array}\right]\bm{\xi}\label{swing-matrix}
\end{eqnarray}
Let $\bm{x}=[\bm{\delta},\bm{\omega}]^T$, $A=\left[\begin{array}{cc}{{0}}&{I_n}\\-M^{-1}\frac{\partial{\bm{P_e}}}{\partial{\bm{\delta}}}&-M^{-1}D\end{array}\right]$, $B=[0,M^{-1}\Sigma]^T$, then (\ref{swing-matrix}) takes the form:
\begin{equation}
\dot{\bm{x}}=A\bm{x}+B\bm{\xi}
\end{equation}
Specifically, if state matrix $A$ is stable, the stationary covariance matrix $C_{\bm{x}\bm{x}}=\left[\begin{array}{cc}C_{\bm{\delta}{\bm{\delta}}}&C_{\bm{\delta}{\bm{\omega}}}\\C_{\bm{\omega}{\bm{\delta}}}&C_{\bm{\omega}{\bm{\omega}}}\end{array}\right]$ can be shown to satisfy the following Lyapunov equation \cite{Hines:2015}\cite{Gardiner:2009}:
\begin{equation}
AC_{\bm{x}\bm{x}}+C_{\bm{x}\bm{x}}A^T=-BB^T \label{lyapunov}
\end{equation}
which nicely combine the measurement and the model knowledge.
In this paper, we draw upon this relation to estimate the state matrix $A$ from the statistical properties of state $C_{\bm{x}\bm{x}}$ that can be extracted from PMU measurements.
Substituting the detailed expressions of $A$ and $B$ to (\ref{lyapunov}) and performing algebraic simplification, we have that:
\begin{eqnarray}
C_{\bm{\delta}{\bm{\omega}}}&=&0\\
C_{\bm{\delta}{\bm{\delta}}}&=&(\frac{\partial{\bm{P_e}}}{\partial{\bm{\delta}}})^{-1}MC_{\bm{\omega}{\bm{\omega}}}\label{rdd}\\
C_{\bm{\omega}{\bm{\omega}}}&=&\frac{1}{2}M^{-1}D^{-1}\Sigma^2\label{rww}
\end{eqnarray}
Particularly, we utilize the relation (\ref{rdd}) that combines the measurements of states and the physical model, which provides an ingenious way to estimate the dynamic state Jacobian matrix from the measurements.
Given that the inertia constants $M$ are typically known, and $C_{\bm{\delta}\bm{\delta}}$, $C_{\bm{\omega}{\bm{\omega}}}$ can be extracted from the PMU measurements (see details in Section \ref{subsectioncddcww}), the Jacobian matrix $\frac{\partial{\bm{P_e}}}{\partial{\bm{\delta}}}$ can be computed from (\ref{rdd}). Furthermore, the system state matrix $A$ can be readily constructed if the damping constants $D$ are known.
\subsection{Estimating Covariance Matrixes $C_{\bm{\delta}\bm{\delta}}$ and $C_{\bm{\omega}{\bm{\omega}}}$}
We assume that PMUs are installed at all the substations that generators are connected to, and that we can use the PMUs to calculate the rotor angle $\bm{\delta}$ and rotor speed $\bm{\omega}$ in steady state with ambient oscillations. Discussion how exactly it is done is beyond the scope of this paper and we refer the
reader to \cite{Zhou:2011}-\cite{Liu:2011}.
\label{subsectioncddcww}
By definition
\begin{equation}\label{cdd}
C_{\bm{\delta}\bm{\delta}}=\left[\begin{array}{cccc} C_{\delta_1\delta_1}&C_{\delta_1\delta_2}&\dots&C_{\delta_1\delta_n}\\
C_{\delta_2\delta_1}&C_{\delta_2\delta_2}&\dots&C_{\delta_2\delta_n}\\
\vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots\\
C_{\delta_n\delta_1}&C_{\delta_n\delta_2}&\dots&C_{\delta_n\delta_n}
\end{array}\right]
\end{equation}
where $C_{\delta_i\delta_j}=\E[(\delta_i-\mu_i)(\delta_j-\mu_j)]$, and $\mu_i$ is the mean of $\delta_i$.
However, $C_{\bm{\delta}\bm{\delta}}$ is typically unknown in practice and needs to be estimated from limited PMU data. A window size around $300$s is implemented in the examples of this paper, which shows a good accuracy. An unbiased estimator of $C_{\bm{\delta}\bm{\delta}}$ is the sample covariance matrix $Q_{\bm{\delta}\bm{\delta}}$ each entry of which is calculated as below\cite{Gardiner:2009}:
\begin{equation}
Q_{\delta_i \delta_j}=\frac{1}{N-1}\sum_{k=1}^N(\delta_{ki}-\bar{\delta}_i)((\delta_{kj}-\bar{\delta}_j))\label{qdd}
\end{equation}
where $\bar{\delta}_i$ is the sample mean of $\delta_i$, and $N$ is the sample size. Likewise, $C_{\bm{\omega}\bm{\omega}}$ can be estimated by $Q_{\bm{\omega}\bm{\omega}}$ in the same way:
\begin{equation}
Q_{\omega_i \omega_j}=\frac{1}{N-1}\sum_{k=1}^N(\omega_{ki}-\bar{\omega}_i)((\omega_{kj}-\bar{\omega}_j))\label{qww}
\end{equation}
When $Q_{\bm{\delta}\bm{\delta}}$ and $Q_{\bm{\omega}\bm{\omega}}$ are calculated, and with the parameter values $M$ on file, we are able to calculate the Jacobian matrix $\frac{\partial{\bm{P_e}}}{\partial{\bm{\delta}}}$ from (\ref{rdd}):
\begin{equation}
(\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{{\delta}}})=MQ_{\bm{{\omega}}{\bm{{\omega}}}}Q^{-1}_{\bm{{\delta}}{\bm{{\delta}}}}\label{approxjacobian}
\end{equation}
\section{Numerical Illustration}
In this section, a numerical example is presented to show the validity of the proposed method. In addition, it will be shown that the proposed method may help identify big discrepancy in the assumed network model since its performance is robust to network topology change.
We consider the standard WSCC 3-generator, 9-bus system model (see, e.g. \cite{Chiang:book}).
The system model in the center-of-inertia (COI) formulation is given as below:
\begin{eqnarray}
\dot{\tilde{\delta}}_1&=&\tilde{\omega}_1\label{9bus-1}\\
\dot{\tilde{\delta}}_2&=&\tilde{\omega}_2\\
M_1\dot{\tilde{\omega}}_1&=&P_{m_1}-P_{e_1}-\frac{M_1}{M_T}P_{coi}-D_1\tilde{\omega}_1+\sigma_1\xi_1\\
M_2\dot{\tilde{\omega}}_2&=&P_{m_2}-P_{e_2}-\frac{M_2}{M_T}P_{coi}-D_2\tilde{\omega}_2+\sigma_2\xi_2\label{9bus-2}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\delta_0=\frac{1}{M_T}\sum_{i=1}^{3}M_i\delta_i$, $\omega_0=\frac{1}{M_T}\sum_{i=1}^{3}M_i\omega_i$, $M_T=\sum_{i=1}^{3}M_i$, $\tilde{\delta}_i=\delta_i-\delta_0$, $\tilde{\omega}_i=\omega_i-\omega_0$, for $i=1,2,3$,
and
\begin{eqnarray}
P_{e_i}&=&\sum_{j=1}^{3}E_iE_j(G_{ij}\cos(\tilde{\delta}_i-\tilde{\delta}_j)+B_{ij}\sin(\tilde{\delta}_i-\tilde{\delta}_j))\nonumber\\
P_{coi}&=&\sum_{i=1}^{3}(P_{m_i}-P_{e_i})
\end{eqnarray}
The parameter values in this examples are: $P_{m_1}=0.72$ p.u., $P_{m_2}=1.63$ p.u., $P_{m_3}=0.85$ p.u.; $E_1=1.057$ p.u., $E_2=1.050$ p.u., $E_3=1.017$ p.u; $M_1=0.63$, $M_2=0.34$, $M_3=0.16$; $D_1=0.63$, $D_2=0.34$, $D_3=0.16$.
Because the following relations that $\tilde{\delta}_3=-\frac{M_1\tilde{\delta}_1+M_2\tilde{\delta}_2}{M_3}$ and $\tilde{\omega}_3=-\frac{M_1\tilde{\omega}_1+M_2\tilde{\omega}_2}{M_3}$ hold in the COI formulation, $\tilde{\delta}_3$ and $\tilde{\omega}_3$ depending on the other state variables can be obtained without integration.
The system state matrix is as follows:
\begin{equation}
A=\left[\begin{array}{cc|cc}0&0&1&0\\0&0&0&1\\\hline\multicolumn{2}{c}{\multirow{2}{*}{J}}\vline\hspace{-0.002in}&-\frac{D_1}{M_1}&0\\&&0&-\frac{D_2}{M_2}\end{array}\right]\label{A}
\end{equation}
where $J=-M^{-1}(\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}}+M\frac{1}{M_T}\frac{\partial P_{coi}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}})$, for $i=1,2$. Let $(\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}})_{coi}=\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}}+M\frac{1}{M_T}\frac{\partial P_{coi}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}}$, then we have
\begin{equation}
\small{((\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}})_{coi})_{ij}}=\left\{\begin{array}{l}E_iE_j(G_{ij}\sin(\tilde{\delta}_i-\tilde{\delta}_j)-B_{ij}\cos(\tilde{\delta}_i-\tilde{\delta}_j))\\
+\frac{M_i}{M_T}\frac{\partial P_{coi}}{\partial\tilde{\delta_i}} \hspace{1.2in} \mbox{if $i\not=j$}\\
\sum^{n}_{k=1}E_iE_k(G_{ik}\sin(\tilde{\delta}_i-\tilde{\delta}_k)\\
+B_{ik}\cos(\tilde{\delta}_i-\tilde{\delta}_k))+\frac{M_i}{M_T}\frac{\partial P_{coi}}{\partial\tilde{\delta_i}} \hspace{0.1in} \mbox{if $i=j$}
\end{array}\right.\label{dpeddcoi}
\end{equation}
where $\frac{\partial P_{coi}}{\partial \tilde{\delta_i}}=2\sum_{k\not=i}E_iE_kG_{ik}\sin(\tilde{\delta}_i-\tilde{\delta}_k)$.
If the network model as well as system states are available, the Jacobian matrix $(\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}})_{coi}$ can be directly computed from (\ref{dpeddcoi}). However, the system topology and line model parameter values are subjected to continuous perturbations. Therefore, the exact knowledge of network topology with up-to-date network parameter values may not be available. In addition, the control faults and transmission delays may also lead to imprecise knowledge of the network parameter values.
In contrast, the proposed method does not require the knowledge of network parameters.
In order to show this, we conduct the following numerical experiment. Assuming that the transient reactance $x_d'$ of Generator 1 increases from $0.0608$ p.u. to $0.1824$ p.u. at 300.01s, mimicking a ling loss between the generator internal node and its terminal bus \cite{Pai:2012}. Let $\sigma_1=\sigma_2=0.01$,
the trajectories of some state variables in system (\ref{9bus-1})-(\ref{9bus-2})
before and after the contingency are presented in Fig. \ref{9bus},
from which we see that the system is able to maintain stability after the line loss, and the state variables are always fluctuating around the stable steady states due to the variation of load and generator power.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.52\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=1.8in ,keepaspectratio=true,angle=0]{d1_9_2.eps}
\caption{Trajectory of $\tilde{\delta}_1$ on [0s,600s]}\label{d1-9}
\end{subfigure
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.5\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=1.8in ,keepaspectratio=true,angle=0]{w1_9_2.eps}
\caption{Trajectory of $\tilde{\omega}_1$ on [0s,600s]}\label{w1-9}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Trajectories of the state variables in the 9-bus system in COI reference.}\label{9bus}
\end{figure}
Before the contingency and if there is no stochastic variation, i.e., $\sigma_1=\sigma_2=0$, $(\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}})_{coi}$ is a constant matrix that can be easily acquired from (\ref{dpeddcoi}):
\begin{equation}
(\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}})_{coi}=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} 8.053 & 1.240\\ 2.802 & 5.085\end{array}\right]\label{det_before}
\end{equation}
We want to show that the matrix obtained from the proposed method is close to this model-based deterministic matrix.
First, $Q_{\bm{\tilde{\omega}}{\bm{\tilde{\omega}}}}$ and $Q_{\bm{\tilde{\delta}}{\bm{\tilde{\delta}}}}$ before the contingency can be calculated from the system trajectories on [0s, 300s]:
\begin{eqnarray}
Q_{\bm{\tilde{\delta}}{\bm{\tilde{\delta}}}}&=&10^{-4}\times\left[ \begin{array}{cc} 0.106 & -0.0483\\ -0.0483 &0.359\end{array}\right]\nonumber\\
C_{\bm{\tilde{\omega}}{\bm{\tilde{\omega}}}}&=&10^{-3}\times\left[ \begin{array}{cc} 0.123 & 0.008\\ 0.008 &0.514\end{array}\right]\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
and therefore $(\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}})_{coi}$ can be computed by the proposed method according to (\ref{approxjacobian}):
\begin{equation}
(\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}})_{coi}^{\star}=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} 7.806 & 1.192\\ 2.642 & 5.214 \end{array}\right]
\end{equation}
where $^\star$ denotes the Jacobian matrix estimated by the proposed method. It is seen that $(\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}})_{coi}^{\star}$ and $(\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}})_{coi}$ are close to each other. Specifically, the estimation error is:
\begin{equation}
\frac{\|(\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}})_{coi}^\star-(\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}})_{coi}\|_F}{\|(\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}})_{coi}\|_F}=3.25\%\label{matrixdistance} \end{equation}
where $\|\|_F$ denotes the Frobenius norm of a matrix measuring the distance between two matrixes. Assuming the damping constants $D$ are known, we can also compute the system state matrix $A$ and the resulting estimation error is:
\begin{equation}
\frac{\|A^\star-A\|_F}{\|A\|_F}=0.34\%\label{matrixdistance}
\end{equation}
The above results demonstrate the proposed method is able to provide accurate estimation for the dynamic state Jacobian matrix and the system state matrix.
To highlight the value of the proposed hybrid method, we assume that the topology change is undetected, while the change of nominal states of $\delta$ and $\omega$ can be detected via PMU measurements. Therefore, the Jacobian matrix after the contingency obtained from the model-based method by (\ref{dpeddcoi}) is:
\begin{equation}
\overline{(\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}})_{coi}^\diamond}=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} 8.171 & 1.239\\ 2.810 & 5.150 \end{array}\right]\label{modelbased}
\end{equation}
where the overline denotes the values after the contingency, and $^\diamond$ denotes the value obtained from the model-based method. Indeed, this estimated Jacobian matrix is far away from the true value of the
Jacobian matrix after the contingency shown as below:
\begin{equation}
\overline{(\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}})_{coi}}=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} 5.950 & 0.968\\ 3.885 & 5.168\end{array}\right]\label{true_after}
\end{equation}
due to the out-of-date network parameter values.
In contrast, by applying the proposed method, we obtain that:
\begin{eqnarray}
\overline{Q_{\bm{\tilde{\delta}}{\bm{\tilde{\delta}}}}}&=&10^{-4}\times\left[ \begin{array}{cc} 0.139 & -0.108\\ -0.108 &0.495\end{array}\right]\nonumber\\
\overline{Q_{\bm{\tilde{\omega}}{\bm{\tilde{\omega}}}}}&=&10^{-3}\times\left[ \begin{array}{cc} 0.113 & -0.024\\ -0.024 &0.658\end{array}\right]\nonumber\\
\overline{(\frac{\partial\bm{P_e}}{\partial\bm{\tilde{\delta}}})_{coi}^{\star}}&=&\left[ \begin{array}{cc} 5.853 & 0.976\\ 3.524 & 5.289 \end{array}\right]\label{proposed}
\end{eqnarray}
The Frobenius distance between the true (\ref{true_after}) and the estimated Jacobian matrix by the proposed method (\ref{proposed}) is still small and is equal to 4.45\%. However, the distance between the true (\ref{true_after}) and the model-based estimation (\ref{modelbased}) is equal to 28.13\% due to assumed inaccurate network model. Regarding the system state matrix $A$, the similar distances are 5.33\% and 22.37\%.
These results clearly demonstrate that the proposed hybrid method provides more accurate estimation for the Jacobian matrix after the contingency since its performance is not affected by the change of network topology. From the other hand, The big difference between the model-based (\ref{modelbased}) and the measurement-based matrix (\ref{proposed}) indicates that there was a mistake in the assumed system model that needs great attention.
From this example, some important insights can be obtained. The proposed method is able to provide accurate estimation for the dynamic state Jacobian matrix
by exploiting the statistical properties of the stochastic system. In addition, the performance of the proposed method may outstand under imprecise knowledge or undetectable change of network topology. The big difference between model-based and the proposed estimations may also alarm system operators for an assumed inaccurate system model.
\section{conclusions and perspectives}\label{sectionconclusion}
In this paper, we have proposed a hybrid measurement and model-based method for estimating dynamic state Jacobian matrix in near real-time. The proposed hybrid method works as a grey box bridging the measurement and the model, and is able to provide fairly accurate estimation without being affected by the variation of network topology. In addition, the proposed method may also identify big discrepancy in the assumed network model.
Since the dynamic state Jacobian matrix and the system state matrix carry uttermost important information on system conditions and dynamics, they can be utilized in various applications such as online oscillation analysis, stability monitoring and emergency control, congestion relief and so forth. In the future, we plan to explore these applications of the estimated Jacobian matrix in power system operation. Besides, further investigations of the method on higher-order generator models and detailed load models are expected.
|
\section{Matching}
\label{app:Matching}
\subsection{One scale matching}
\label{app:OneScale}
Before we present the new two-scale matching which is now performed by \SARAH/\SPheno, we review the
current procedure. The first step is that all \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters are calculated already at $m_Z$ and
two-loop SUSY RGEs are used for the running to $M_{\rm SUSY}$.
\subsubsection{Strong coupling}
The strong interaction coupling at the weak scale is matched to the input value
$\alpha^{(5)}_s(m_Z)$ in the $N_f=5$ flavour scheme via
\begin{align} \alpha_s^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(m_Z) &= \frac{\alpha_s^{(5),\overline{\text{MS}}}(m_Z)}{1 - \Delta\alpha_s(m_Z)}, \\
\Delta\alpha_s(m_Z) =& \frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi} \left( \frac{1}{2} - \frac{2}{3}
\log{\frac{m_t}{m_Z}} + \Delta_s^{\rm MSSM} \right),
\end{align}
The corrections due to the new coloured states in the MSSM are given by
\begin{equation}
\Delta_s^{\rm MSSM} = -
2 \log{\frac{m_{\tilde g}}{m_Z}} - \frac{1}{6} \sum_{i=1}^6 \left(
\log{\frac{m_{\tilde u_i}}{m_Z}} + \log{\frac{m_{\tilde
d_i}}{m_Z}}\right)
\end{equation}
For any other BSM model, $\Delta_s^{\rm MSSM}$ is adjusted by \SARAH to fit to the particle content.
\subsubsection{Electroweak sector}
The EW gauge sector of the MSSM is determined by four fundamental parameters.
These are usually the gauge couplings for $SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y$ and
the electroweak VEVs for the up- and down-Higgs
\begin{eqnarray*}
g_1\,,\hspace{0.5cm} g_2\,,\hspace{0.5cm} v_d\,,\hspace{0.5cm} v_u
\end{eqnarray*}
$v_d$ and $v_u$ are derived from the calculated ew VEV $v(m_Z)^2 = \sqrt{v_d^2+v_u^2}$ and
the input value for $\tan\beta=\frac{v_u}{v_d}$ which could either be given at $m_Z$ or
$M_{\rm SUSY}$. Thus, the matching procedure needs to determinate $v^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(m_Z)$, $g^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_1(m_Z)$ and
$g^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_2(m_Z)$ from three physical quantities. Here, \SPheno and \SARAH use as input the $Z$ mass, the Fermi constant $G_F$ and the electromagnetic coupling of the SM at the
scale $m_Z$ in the 5-flavour scheme, $\alpha_{em}^{(5),\overline{\text{MS}}}(m_Z)$. \\
The relations between the input and \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters is as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The electroweak coupling constant is calculated from
\begin{align}
\alpha_{em}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(m_Z) &= \frac{\alpha_{em}^{(5),\overline{\text{MS}}}(m_Z)}{1 - \Delta\alpha(m_Z)} ,\\
\Delta\alpha(m_Z) =& \frac{\alpha}{2\pi} \Big(\frac{1}{3}-
\frac{16}{9} \log{\frac{m_{t}}{m_Z}} + \Delta_{em}^{\rm MSSM} \Big) .
\end{align}
with
\begin{align}
\Delta_{em}^{\rm MSSM} = & - \frac{4}{9} \sum_{i=1}^6 \log{\frac{m_{\tilde u_i}}{m_Z}} - \frac{1}{9} \sum_{i=1}^6
\log{\frac{m_{\tilde d_i}}{m_Z}} \nonumber \\
& \hspace{1cm} -\frac{4}{3} \sum_{i=1}^2 \log{\frac{m_{\tilde \chi^+_i}}{m_Z}} - \frac{1}{3} \sum_{i=1}^6 \log \frac{m_{\tilde{e}_i}}{m_Z} - \frac{1}{3} \log{\frac{m_{H^+}}{m_Z}}
\label{eq:delta_alpha}
\end{align}
Again, if another model shall be considered, the value of $\Delta_{em}$ is calculated by \SARAH automatically.
\item The Weinberg angle $\sin^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}\Theta_W$ at the scale $m_Z$ is obtained iteratively from the above-computed $ \alpha_{em}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(m_Z)$,
together with $G_F$ and $m_Z$, via
\begin{align}
\left(\sin^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}\Theta_W \cos^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}\Theta_W\right)^2 =
\frac{\pi\,\alpha_{em}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(m_Z)}{\sqrt{2} m_Z^2 G_F (1-\delta_r)} ,
\end{align}
where we have introduced
\begin{align}
\label{def:deltar}
\delta_r &= \hat\rho \frac{\Pi_{WW}^T(0)}{M_W^2} - \frac{\Re\text{e}\Pi_{ZZ}^T(m_Z^2)}{m_Z^2} + \delta_{\rm VB} + \delta_r^{(2)} , \\
\hat\rho &= \frac{1}{1-\Delta\hat\rho} ,\qquad\qquad \Delta\hat\rho
= \Re\text{e}\Biggl[ \frac{\Pi_{ZZ}^T(m_Z^2)}{\hat\rho\,m_Z^2} - \frac{\Pi_{WW}^T(M_W^2)}{M_W^2}\Biggr] + \Delta\hat\rho^{(2)}~,
\end{align}
Here, $\Pi^T_{VV}(p^2)~~(V = Z,W)$ are the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace-renormalized transverse parts of the self-energies of the vector bosons, computed at the
renormalization scale $Q=m_Z$, and $\delta_r^{(2)}$ and $\Delta\hat\rho^{(2)}$ are two-loop corrections as given in
\cite{Fanchiotti:1992tu,Pierce:1996zz}
\begin{align}
\delta_r^{(2)} = \frac{f_1}{(1-\sin^2\Theta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_W ) \sin^2\Theta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_W} - x_t (1 - \delta_r) \rho
\end{align}
with
\begin{align}
x_t = & 3 \left(\frac{G_F m_t^2}{8 \pi^2}\right)^2 \rho_2\left(\frac{m_h}{m_t}\right) \\
f_1 = & \frac{\alpha_S^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace} \alpha_{ew}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}}{4\pi^2} \left(2.145 \frac{m_t^2}{m_Z^2}+0.575 \log\frac{m_t}{m_Z}-0.224-0.144 \frac{m_Z^2}{m_t^2}\right) \\
f_2 = & \frac{\alpha_S^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace} \alpha_{ew}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}}{4\pi^2} \left(-2.145 \frac{m_t^2}{m_Z^2}+1.262 \log\frac{m_t}{m_Z}-2.24-0.85 \frac{m_Z^2}{m_t^2}\right)
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\rho_2(r)= & 19-16.5r+\frac{43}{12} r^2+\frac{7}{120} r^3-\pi \sqrt{r} (4-1.5 r+\frac{3}{32} r^2 +\frac{r^3}{256}) \nonumber \\
& -\pi^2 (2-2 r+0.5 r^2)-\log(r) (3 r-0.5 r^2)
\end{align}
The one-loop vertex and box corrections $\delta_{\rm VB}$ implemented into \SPheno are hard-coded and taken from literature\cite{Degrassi:1990tu, Grifols:1984xs, Chankowski:1993eu}, while the ones used by \SARAH are auto-generated and include therefore all one-loop corrections beyond the MSSM. Also the self-energies $\Pi^T$ are automatically calculated by \SARAH
at the full one-loop level.
\item The electroweak VEV $v$ used to calculate $v_d$ and $v_u$ at $m_Z$ is obtained from
\begin{equation}
v^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(m_Z)= \sqrt{{m_Z^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(m_Z)^2}~\frac{(1- \sin^2\Theta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_W)\sin^2\Theta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_W}{\pi \alpha^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}} }.
\end{equation}
Here, the running mass $m_Z^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}$ is given by
\begin{align}
M^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_Z(M)Z) = \sqrt{m_Z^2 + \Pi^T_{ZZ}(m_Z^2)}
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
\subsubsection{Yukawa couplings}
In order to calculate the value of the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace-renormalized Yukawa coupling at the SUSY scale,
\SPheno used so far the approach of Ref.~\cite{Pierce:1996zz}.
First, for all leptons and the five light quarks the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace masses at $m_Z$ are calculated.
Afterwards, the additional non-SUSY thresholds stemming from massive bosons and the full one-loop SUSY
thresholds are included. For $m_t$
also the known two-loop QCD corrections are added \cite{Avdeev:1997sz,Bednyakov:2002sf}
\begin{equation}
\Sigma^{(2)}_{\rm QCD} = \frac{1}{16\pi^2}{\alpha_s}{18} \left(2011 - 1476 \log(Q) + 396 (\log(Q))^2 - 48 \zeta_3 +
16 \pi^2 (1 + 2 \log2)\right)
\end{equation}
Using these loop corrections, the loop-corrected $3 \times 3$ mass matrices for quarks and leptons are
calculated via
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:oneloopMF}
m_f^{(1L)}(p^2_i) = m_f^{(T)} - {\Sigma}_{S,f}(p^2_i) - {\Sigma}_{R,f}(p^2_i) m_f^{(T)} - m_f^{(T)} {\Sigma}_{L,f}(p^2_i)
\end{equation}
with $f={l,d,u}$. Here, $\Sigma_{S,R,L}$ are usually the one-loop self-energies {\it without} photon and gluon corrections.
Only for the top-quark photon and gluon corrections need to be included and in addition one identifies
\begin{equation}
{\Sigma}_{S,t} = \Sigma^{(1)}_{S,t} + \Sigma^{(2)}_{QCD}
\end{equation}
The \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace Yukawa matrices fulfilling
\begin{equation}
m_u^{(T)} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} Y_u v_u \,, \hspace{1cm} m_d^{(T)} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} Y_d v_d \,, \hspace{1cm} m_l^{(T)} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} Y_l v_l \,,
\end{equation}
are calculated iteratively from eq.~(\ref{eq:oneloopMF}) by the condition that the eigenvalues of
$m_f^{(1L)}(p^2_i)$ must coincide with the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace values for the light leptons and the top pole mass respectively.
\subsection{Two scale matching}
\label{app:TwoScale}
In the new two scale approach, the separation of the matching is that all SM corrections are included at $m_Z$ to obtain the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace values which are then shifted at $M_{\rm SUSY}$ to
their \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace values by including all one-loop SUSY thresholds.
\subsubsection{Calculating the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace parameters at $m_Z$}
The calculation of the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace parameters at $m_Z$ is very similar to the approach described in the last section, but with all BSM
contributions removed.
\begin{enumerate}
\item We get for the gauge couplings
\begin{align}
\alpha_S^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace} = & \frac{\alpha_s^{(5),\overline{\text{MS}}}(m_Z)}{1 + \frac{2}{3} \frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi} \left( \log{\frac{m_t}{m_Z}} \right)} \\
\alpha_{ew}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace} = & \frac{\alpha_{em}^{(5),\overline{\text{MS}}}(m_Z)}{1 + \frac{\alpha}{2\pi} \Big( \frac{16}{9} \log{\frac{m_{t}}{m_Z}} \Big) } \\
\end{align}
\item The Weinberg angle is calculated as
\begin{align}
\sin\Theta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_W = & \frac{1}{2} - \sqrt{\frac{1}{4}-\frac{\pi \alpha_{ew}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(m_Z)} {\sqrt{2} m_Z^2 G_F (1 -\delta_r)} }
\end{align}
with $\delta_r$ defined in eq.~(\ref{def:deltar}). The following one-loop SM contributions are used:
\begin{align}
\delta_{VB} = g_2^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace,2} \rho \left(6 + \frac{\log \cos^2\Theta_W}{\sin^2\Theta_W} \left(\frac{7}{2} - \frac{5}{2} \sin^2\Theta_W - \sin^2\Theta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_W \left(5 + \frac{3}{2} \frac{\cos^2\Theta_W}{\cos^2\Theta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_W} \right) \right)\right)
\end{align}
and the two-loop corrections $\delta_r^{(2)}$ agree with the ones used in the one scale matching.
\item The VEV is obtained from
\begin{equation}
v^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace} = (m_Z^{2,\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm m_Z})+\delta m_Z^{2,\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}) \frac{(1-\sin\Theta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_W) \sin\Theta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_W}{\pi \alpha^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_{ew}(M_{\rm m_Z}) }
\end{equation}
where $\delta m_Z = \Pi^T_{ZZ}(m_Z^2)$ includes only the SM corrections.
\item The Yukawa couplings are obtained from the running $\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace$ quark and lepton masses. Here, we include for $m_t$ the two-loop corrections to relate the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace and pole mass\cite{Fleischer:1998dw}
\begin{align}
m_t^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace} = & m_t^{\rm pole} \Big[1+ \frac{1}{16\pi^2} \left( \left(\frac{16 \pi}{9}\alpha - \frac{16 \pi}{3} \alpha_s \right) (4 + \log(Q)) \right) \nonumber \\
& - \frac{1}{(16\pi^2)} \frac{\alpha_s^2}{18} \left(2821 + 2028 \log(Q) + 396 (\log(Q))^2 + 16 \pi^2 (1+ 2 \log2) - 48 \zeta_3 \right) \Big]
\end{align}
The \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace Yukawa matrices are calculated iteratively from the condition that the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace fermion masses are reproduced once the one-loop SM corrections with massive bosons
are included:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:oneloopMF}
m_f^{(1L)}(p^2_i) = m_f^{(T)} - \tilde{\Sigma}_S(p^2_i) - \tilde{\Sigma}_R(p^2_i) m_f^{(T)} - m_f^{(T)} \tilde{\Sigma}_L(p^2_i)
\end{equation}
Here, $\tilde{\Sigma}$ are the self-energies without the photonic and gluonic contributions.
The eigenvalues of $m_f^{(1L)}(p^2_i)$ must coincide with $m_{f}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(m_Z)$.
\end{enumerate}
$g_i^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}$ ($i=1,2,3$), $Y_f^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}$ ($f=l,d,u$) and $v^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}$ are then evaluated from $m_Z$ to $M_{SUSY}$ using the full two-loop SM RGEs
which are extended by the three-loop contributions involving $g_3$, $\lambda$ and $Y_t$. \\
For the top Yukawa and strong gauge coupling one can include in \SPheno an additional threshold at $m_t$ at which higher order corrections are included by using the fit formulae \cite{Buttazzo:2013uya}
\begin{align}
Y_t(m_t) = & 0.9369 + 0.00556 \left(\frac{m_t}{\rm GeV} - 173.34\right) - 0.6 (\alpha_s(m_Z)-0.1184) \\
g_3(m_t) = & 1.1666 + 0.00314 \frac{(\alpha_s(m_Z)-0.1184)}{0.0007} - 0.00046 \left(\frac{m_t}{\rm GeV} - 173.34\right)
\end{align}
\subsubsection{Calculating the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters at $M_{SUSY}$ in \SARAH}
At the $M_{SUSY}$, the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace parameters are first shifted to \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters and then the SUSY thresholds are added.
\begin{enumerate}
\item {\bf Strong coupling}
\begin{align}
\alpha^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_{S}(M_{\rm SUSY}) = \frac{\alpha^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_{S}(M_{\rm SUSY})}{1-\Delta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_{\alpha_S}}
\end{align}
with
\begin{equation}
\Delta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_{\alpha_S} =\frac{\alpha_s}{2\pi} \left( \frac{1}{2} - \Delta_s^{\rm MSSM} \right)
\end{equation}
\item {\bf Electroweak sector}: \\
The electroweak gauge coupling is calculated from $g_1^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}$, $g_2^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}$ and translated into its $\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace$ value via
\begin{align}
\alpha^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_{ew}(M_{\rm SUSY}) = & \frac{1}{4\pi} \frac{(g_1^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace} g_2^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace})^2}{(g_1^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace})^2+(g_2^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace})^2} \\
\alpha^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_{ew}(M_{\rm SUSY}) = \frac{\alpha^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_{ew}(M_{\rm SUSY})}{1-\Delta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}}
\end{align}
with
\begin{equation}
\Delta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace} = \frac{\alpha^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_{ew}}{2\pi} \left(\frac{1}{3} + \Delta_{em}^{\rm MSSM} \right)
\end{equation}
where $m_Z$ has to be replace by $M_{\rm SUSY}$ in eq.~(\ref{eq:delta_alpha}).
In addition, it is helpful to define for later use
\begin{align}
\sin\Theta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_W =& \frac{g_1^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}}{\sqrt{(g_1^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace})^2+(g_2^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace})^2)}} \\
\delta_r^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace} =& 1 - \frac{\pi \alpha^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_{ew}(M_{\rm SUSY})}{\sqrt{2} G_F m_Z^2 \sin^2\Theta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_W (1- \sin^2\Theta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_W)}
\end{align}
as well as
\begin{align}
\delta_{VB}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace} &= \delta_{VB}^{\rm MSSM} - \delta_{VB}^{\rm SM} \\
\delta m_Z^{2,\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace} &= \Pi_{ZZ}^{T,\rm MSSM} - \Pi_{ZZ}^{T,\rm SM} \\
\delta W_Z^{2,\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace} &= \Pi_{WW}^{T,\rm MSSM} - \Pi_{WW}^{T,\rm SM}
\end{align}
Here, $\Pi_{WW}^{T, \rm MSSM}$ are the full one-loop self-energies within the MSSM. Therefore,
one needs to subtract $\Pi_{VV}^{T,\rm SM}$ to include only the new physics contributions. Thus, for consistency, one needs
to evaluate here $\Pi_{ZZ}^{T,\rm SM}$ in the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace scheme. \\
The \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace values of the Weinberg angle and electroweak VEV are now given by
\begin{align}
\sin^2\Theta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_W = & \frac{1}{2} - \sqrt{\frac{1}{4}-\frac{\pi \alpha_{ew}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(M_{SUSY})} {\sqrt{2} m_Z^2 G_F (1-\delta_r^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace} -\delta_r)} } \\
v^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace} = & \left(m_Z^{2,\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY})+\delta m_Z^{2,\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}\right) \frac{(1-\sin\Theta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_W) \sin\Theta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_W}{\pi \alpha^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_{ew}(M_{\rm SUSY}) }
\end{align}
where the SUSY corrections are calculated as
\begin{align}
\delta_r = & \frac{1 + \delta m_Z^{2,\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}/m_Z^2}{1+\delta W_Z^{2,\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}/m_W^2} \frac{\delta W_Z^{2,\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}}{m_W^2} - \frac{\delta m_Z^{2,\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}}{m_Z^2} + \delta_{VB}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace} \\
\end{align}
$\sin\Theta^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_W$ and $v^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}$ together with calculated $\alpha^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_{ew}(M_{\rm SUSY})$ and the input value for $\tan\beta$ determine $g_1^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY})$,
$g_2^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY})$, $v_d^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY})$, $v_u^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY})$
\item {\bf Yukawa couplings}\\
As first step, the running $\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace$ Yukawa couplings are translated in $\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace$ values via \cite{Harlander:2006rj}
\begin{align}
m_{e,\mu,\tau}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY}) = & m_{e,\mu,\tau}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY}) \times \left(1-\frac{\alpha_{\rm EW}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}}{4 \pi} \right) \\
m_{d,s,b}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY}) = & m_{d,s,b}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY}) \times \Big(1-\frac{\alpha_S^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}}{3 \pi} - \frac{43 (\alpha_S^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace})^2}{144 \pi^2}-\frac{\alpha_{\rm EW}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}}{4 \pi}\frac{1}{9} \Big) \\
m_{u,c,t}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY}) = & m_{u,c,t}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY}) \times \Big(1-\frac{\alpha_S^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}}{3 \pi} - \frac{43 (\alpha_S^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace})^2}{144 \pi^2}-\frac{\alpha_{\rm EW}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}}{4 \pi}\frac{4}{9} \Big)
\end{align}
The running Yukawa couplings are obtained from
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:oneloopMF}
m_f^{(1L)}(p^2_i) = m_f^{(T)} - \tilde{\Sigma}_S(p^2_i) - \tilde{\Sigma}_R(p^2_i) m_f^{(T)} - m_f^{(T)} \tilde{\Sigma}_L(p^2_i)
\end{equation}
Here, $\tilde{\Sigma}$ are the self-energies without SM contributions.
The eigenvalues of $m_f^{(1L)}(p^2_i)$ must coincide with $m_{f}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY})$.
\end{enumerate}
\subsubsection{Calculating the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters at $M_{SUSY}$ in \SPheno}
As in the case of \SARAH, the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace parameters are first shifted to \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters and the SUSY thresholds are added
at $Q=M_{\rm SUSY}$. The main difference is, that the conservation of $SU_L(2)\times U_Y(1)$ is assumed at this scale.
The corresponding formulae read as
\begin{enumerate}
\item {\bf Gauge couplings:} these get shifted by
\begin{equation}
\left(g^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}_i\right)^2 = \frac{(g^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_i)^2}{1 - \frac{(g^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}_i)^2}{8 \pi^2} \Delta g_i^2}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta g_1^2 &=& - \sum_{i=1}^3 \left[ \frac{1}{12} \log\left(\frac{m^2_{L_i}}{Q^2}\right)
+ \frac{1}{12} \log\left(\frac{m^2_{E_i}}{Q^2}\right)
+ \frac{1}{36} \log\left(\frac{m^2_{Q_i}}{Q^2}\right)
+ \frac{1}{18} \log\left(\frac{m^2_{D_i}}{Q^2}\right)
+ \frac{2}{9} \log\left(\frac{m^2_{U_i}}{Q^2}\right) \right] \nonumber \\
&& - \frac{1}{12} \log\left(\frac{m^2_H}{Q^2}\right)
- \frac{1}{3} \log\left(\frac{|\mu|^2}{Q^2}\right) \\
\Delta g_2^2 &=& \frac{1}{3} - \sum_{i=1}^3 \left[ \frac{1}{12} \log\left(\frac{m^2_{L_i}}{Q^2}\right)
+ \frac{1}{4} \log\left(\frac{m^2_{Q_i}}{Q^2}\right) \right]
- \frac{1}{12} \log\left(\frac{m^2_H}{Q^2}\right)
- \frac{1}{3} \log\left(\frac{|\mu|^2}{Q^2}\right) \nonumber \\
&& - \frac{2}{3} \log\left(\frac{|M_2|^2}{Q^2}\right) \\
\Delta g_3^2 &=& \frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{12}\sum_{i=1}^3 \left[ 2\log\left(\frac{m^2_{Q_i}}{Q^2}\right)
+ \log\left(\frac{m^2_{D_i}}{Q^2}\right) + \log\left(\frac{m^2_{U_i}}{Q^2}\right) \right]
- \log\left(\frac{|M_3|^2}{Q^2}\right)
\end{eqnarray}
and
$m_{L_i}$, $m_{E_i}$, $m_{Q_i}$, $m_{D_i}$ and $m_{U_i}$ are the masses of the $\tilde L$, $\tilde E$,
$\tilde Q$, $\tilde D$ and $\tilde U$, respectively, calculated from the corresponding soft SUSY breaking mass
squares. $m_H$ is the mass of the heavy Higgs boson which is calculated according to
\begin{equation}
m^2_H = \frac{1}{2} \left( M^2_{H_u} + M^2_{H_d} + |\mu|^2 + \sqrt{( M^2_{H_u} - M^2_{H_d})^2 + 4 |B \mu|^2} \right)
\end{equation}
\item {\bf Yukawa couplings:} First the shift from $\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace$ to $\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace$ is calculated according to
\begin{eqnarray}
Y_{SM,l}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}{}' &=& \left( 1 - \frac{3}{128 \pi^ 2} \left( g^2_1 - g^2_2 \right) \right) Y_{SM,l}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace} \\
Y_{SM,d}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}{}' &=& \left( 1 - \frac{13 g^2_1}{1152 \pi^ 2} + \frac{3 g^2_2}{128 \pi^2}
- \frac{g^2_3}{12 \pi^ 2} - \frac{43 g^4_3}{9 (16 \pi^2)^2} \right) Y_{SM,d}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace} \\
Y_{SM,u}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}{}' &=& \left( 1 - \frac{7 g^2_1}{1152 \pi^ 2} + \frac{3 g^2_2}{128 \pi^2}
- \frac{g^2_3}{12 \pi^ 2} - \frac{43 g^4_3}{9 (16 \pi^2)^2} \right) Y_{SM,u}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}
\end{eqnarray}
where the gauge couplings $g_i$ are the $\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace$ couplings. In a second step, these
couplings get rescaled as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
Y_{SM,l}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}{} = \frac{1}{\cos\beta} Y_{SM,l}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}{}' \,\,,\,\,
Y_{SM,d}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}{} = \frac{1}{\cos\beta} Y_{SM,d}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}{}' \,\,,\,\,
Y_{SM,u}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}{} = \frac{1}{\sin\beta} Y_{SM,u}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}{}'
\end{eqnarray}
In the next step, the one-loop corrections due to the SUSY particles
and the heavy Higgs-doublet $H$,
where $H$ is to the SM-Higgs orthogonal combination of $H_u$ and $H_d$.
Here we distinguish between holomorphic and non-holomorphic corrections where the first
denotes loop contributions to the existing tree-level coupling and the second the loop-induced ones
to the second Higgs-doublet.
We give here for simplicity the different contributions for the case of real parameters neglecting
flavour mixing. The case with flavour mixing can be easily obtained from appendix A
Ref.~\cite{Buras:2002vd}.
\begin{itemize}
\item Taking either $f=t$ or $f=b$ we obtain for the gluino contributions
\begin{eqnarray}
Y_f^{hol} &=& \frac{g^2_3}{6 \pi^2} M_3 T_f C_0(M^2_3,m^2_{Q},m^2_{F}) \\
Y_f^{ahol} &=& -\frac{g^2_3}{6 \pi^2} M_3 Y_f \mu C_0(M^2_3,m^2_{Q},m^2_{F})
\end{eqnarray}
\item Taking either $f=t$, $f=b$ or $f=\tau$ we obtain for the single bino contributions
\begin{eqnarray}
Y_f^{hol} &=& c_f \frac{g^2_1}{16 \pi^2} M_1 T_f C_0(M^213,m^2_{L_f},m^2_{F}) \\
Y_f^{ahol} &=& - c_f \frac{g^2_1}{16 \pi^2} M_1 Y_f \mu C_0(M^2_1,m^2_{L_f},m^2_{F})
\end{eqnarray}
where $L_f=Q$ in case of $f=t,b$ and $L_f=L$ in case $f=\tau$ and the different combinations of
hypercharges give
\begin{equation}
c_t = -\frac{2}{9} \,\,,\,\, c_b = \frac{1}{9} \,\,,\,\, c_\tau = -1
\end{equation}
\item Taking either $f=t$ or $f=b$ we obtain for the single higgsino contributions
\begin{eqnarray}
Y_f^{hol} &=& \frac{Y_t Y_b}{16 \pi^2} \mu^2 Y_{f'} C_0(\mu^2,m^2_{Q},m^2_{F'}) \\
Y_f^{ahol} &=& - \frac{Y_t Y_b}{16 \pi^2} \mu T_{f'} C_0(\mu^2,m^2_{Q},m^2_{F'})
\end{eqnarray}
where $f'=b$($t$) in case of $f=t$($b$).
\item For the mixed wino/higgsino contributions we find
\begin{eqnarray}
Y_f^{hol} &=& -\frac{3}{4} \frac{g^2_2}{16 \pi^2} Y_{f} C_2(M^2_2,\mu^2,m^2_{L_f}) \\
Y_f^{ahol} &=& \frac{3}{4} \frac{g^2_2}{16 \pi^2} \mu M_2 Y_{f} C_0(M^2_2,\mu^2,m^2_{L_f})
\end{eqnarray}
with $L_f=Q$ in case of $f=t,b$ and $L_f=L$ in case $f=\tau$.
\item For the mixed bino/higgsino contributions we find
\begin{eqnarray}
Y_f^{ahol} &=& - \frac{g^2_1}{16 \pi^2} Y_{f}
\left( c_{fL} C_2(M^2_2,\mu^2,m^2_{L_f}) + c_{fR} C_2(M^2_2,\mu^2,m^2_{F}) \right) \\
Y_f^{ahol} &=& \frac{g^2_1}{16 \pi^2} \mu M_1 Y_{f}
\left( c_{fL} C_0(M^2_2,\mu^2,m^2_{L_f}) + c_{fR} C_0(M^2_2,\mu^2,m^2_{F}) \right)
\end{eqnarray}
with $L_f=Q$ in case of $f=t,b$ and $L_f=L$ in case $f=\tau$. For different coefficients we
obtain
\begin{equation}
c_{tL}= c_{bL} = \frac{1}{6} \,\,,\,\,
c_{tR}= \frac{2}{3} \,\,,\,\,
c_{bR}= -\frac{1}{3} \,\,,\,\,
c_{\tau L} = -\frac{1}{2} \,\,,\,\,
c_{\tau R} = 1\,.
\end{equation}
\item Contributions due to the second heavy Higgs doublet with mass $m_H$ read as
\begin{equation}
Y_f^{hol} = c_f \frac{Y_f^3}{16\pi^2} \ln\left(\frac{m^2_H}{M^2_{\rm SUSY}}\right)
\end{equation}
where $c_f=\sin^2\beta$ in case of $f=b,\tau$ and $c_f=\cos^2\beta$ in case of $f=t$.
\end{itemize}
In case of the $u$-type quarks a simple summation of all contributions suffices
\begin{equation}
Y_u = Y_{SM,u}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace} - \Delta Y_u^{hol} - \Delta Y_u^{ahol} \cot \beta
\end{equation}
In case of the $d$-type quarks and the leptons one has to resum the aholomorphic contributions as they
get large in case of large $\tan\beta$
\begin{equation}
Y_f = \frac{Y_{SM,f}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}}{1 + \frac{\Delta Y_f^{ahol}}{Y_{SM,f}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}} \tan\beta} - \Delta Y_f^{hol}
\end{equation}
where $f=d,$
For completeness we note, that the equivalence of the resummation of the two-point
function (as done in case of \SARAH) with the resummation of the
three-point function (as done in \SPheno) has been shown in \cite{Carena:1999py}.
\end{enumerate}
The loop functions are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
C_0(m^2_1,m^2_2,m^2_3) &=& \frac{1}{m^2_2 - m^2_3}
\left[\frac{m^2_2}{m^2_1 -m^2_2} \ln\left(\frac{m^2_2}{m^2_1}\right)
- \frac{m^2_3}{m^2_1 -m^2_3} \ln\left(\frac{m^2_3}{m^2_1}\right) \right]\\
C_2(m^2_1,m^2_2,m^2_3) &=& \ln\left(\frac{m^2_3}{M^2_{\rm SUSY}}\right)
+ \frac {m_2^4}{(m^2_3-m^2_2)(m^2_2-m^2_1)} \ln\left(\frac{m^2_3}{m^2_2}\right)
- \frac{m_1^4}{(m^2_3-m^2_1)(m^2_2-m^2_1)} \ln\left(\frac{m^2_3}{m^2_1}\right)\nonumber\\
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Using the new and old approach in \SARAH / \SPheno}
\subsection{\SARAH}
The new matching routines and Higgs mass calculations are available with \SARAH version 4.9.0. By default, the new routines are included in the \SARAH output of the
\SPheno source code for any model. Moreover, they are also used by default now for supersymmetric models with the following restriction:
\SARAH only calculates the effective Higgs pole mass within the SM, if the second lightest CP-even scalar
has a pole mass above 500~GeV. The reason is that one can expect for lighter mass splitting potential important effects from the mixing between the two lightest scalars which would get lost
in the effective model ansatz. In addition, there are the following flags which can be used by the user in the LesHouches input file to control when the calculations shall be performed:
\begin{lstlisting}
Block SPHENOINPUT #
...
66 1 # Two-scale matching (yes/no)
67 1 # Calculate Higgs mass in effective SM if possible (yes/no/always)
\end{lstlisting}
The options can be used as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item[{\tt 66}]
\begin{itemize}
\item[{\tt 0}] the old one-scale matching is used
\item[{\tt 1}] the new two-scale matching is used
\end{itemize}
The default value is {\tt 1}
\item[{\tt 67}]
\begin{itemize}
\item[{\tt 0}] the Higgs mass is only calculated at the SUSY scale in the full model
\item[{\tt 1}] the Higgs mass is calculated in the effective SM if only one light scalar is present
\item[{\tt 2}] the Higgs mass is always calculated in the effective SM even if light scalars are present
\end{itemize}
The default value is {\tt 1}
\end{itemize}
\subsection{\SPheno}
\label{app:SPheno}
In \SPheno the new matching procedure and Higgs mass calculation is available with version 4.0.0 and higher.
This procedure is by default switched on but one can switch back to the old one scale matching using the
new entry 49 in block SPHENOINPUT
\begin{lstlisting}
Block SPHENOINPUT #
...
48 1 # 0.. 2-loop QCD to Y_t and alpha_s at m_Z, 1 ... use fit formula at 3 loop
49 1 # Two-scale matching 0/1 correspond to yes/no
\end{lstlisting}
where the value $1$ switches to the one-scale matching. Using 3-loop fit
formul as given in \cite{Buttazzo:2013uya}
instead of the the 2-loop corrections to
$Y_t^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}$ and 1-loop corrections to $\alpha_s$ at $m_Z$ can be achieved by setting the new
flag 48 in block SPHENOINPUT to 1.
Moreover, the entry 38 controlling the order used in
the RGEs has been modified
\begin{lstlisting}
Block SPHENOINPUT #
...
38 3 # 1 & 2: use 1- and 2-loop RGEs; 3: 3-loop SM RGE and 2-loop SUSY RGEs
\end{lstlisting}
with the options
\begin{itemize}
\item[{\tt 1}] one loop RGES for both, SM and SUSY
\item[{\tt 2}] two loop RGES for both, SM and SUSY
\item[{\tt 3}] three loop RGEs for SM but two loop RGES for SUSY
\end{itemize}
\section{Introduction}
The discovery of the Higgs with a mass of about 125~GeV \cite{Aad:2012tfa,Chatrchyan:2012xdj} is, to date, the biggest
success of the large hadron collider (LHC). In contrast, there has not been any evidence for new physics. This puts very
strong constraints on the masses of new coloured particles as predicted, for instance, by supersymmetry (SUSY); working with
very simplified assumptions, it is possible to exclude gluinos and first/second generation squarks nearly up to 2~TeV
\cite{ATLAS-CONF-2016-052,ATLAS-CONF-2016-054,ATLAS-CONF-2016-078,Xie:2223502}.
These experimental results raise not only the question if minimal supersymmetry is still a good solution to the fine-tuning
or hierarchy problem of the standard model of particle physics (SM), but also gives new challenges to study the MSSM
precisely.
In the past many studies for the MSSM were done under the impression that the scale of supersymmetry, $M_{\rm SUSY}$,
should be close to the electroweak scale $M_Z$. Under this assumption it was
possible to calculate the gauge couplings in the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace\ scheme directly from $m_Z$, $G_F$
and $\alpha_{em}$ as well as the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace\ Yukawa couplings from the pole-mass of the top-quark
and the running {\ensuremath{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}}\ lepton and light quark masses given at $Q=m_Z$. More importantly
the Higgs mass(es) has been calculated at fixed order in the full supersymmetric model.
However, both calculations became less accurate the larger $M_{\rm SUSY}$ is because potentially large logarithms of
form $\log\frac{M_{\rm SUSY}}{M_Z}$ and $\log\frac{M_{\rm SUSY}}{m_h}$, respectively, appear.
Therefore, there are ongoing efforts
to improve the calculation in the presence of supersymmetric scales which are well above the electroweak one.
The first road is to keep the current set-up in principle but improve it by higher order corrections: for instance,
{\tt SoftSUSY} provides the possibility to include higher order corrections to the threshold corrections at the weak
scale and in the renormalisation group equation (RGE) running between the weak and SUSY scale, in order to get a better
determination of the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters at the SUSY scale \cite{Allanach:2014nba}. The first ansatz
is to calculate the Higgs mass still in the full MSSM but extends the two-loop fixed order calculation by a resummation of potential large logarithm
involving stops. That's for instance done by {\tt FeynHiggs} since a few years \cite{Hahn:2009zz,Heinemeyer:1998yj,Hahn:2013ria}. The second approach, which becomes more and more popular, is to work in an effective
theory below $M_{\rm SUSY}$: {\tt SusyHD} \cite{Vega:2015fna} and recent versions of {\tt FlexibleSUSY} \cite{Athron:2016fuq}
as well as {\tt FeynHiggs} \cite{Bahl:2016brp}
can consider below $M_{\rm SUSY}$ only the degrees of freedom of the SM, and match the SM to the MSSM just at the SUSY scale.
Also the Higgs mass calculation is done in the effective SM by obtaining a value of the quartic Higgs coupling
$\lambda_{\rm SM}$ from the matching between the MSSM and SM at $M_{\rm SUSY}$. The idea to work in an effective SM below
$M_{\rm SUSY}$ was already well explored in literature before it became easily available via public tools, see e.g.
Refs.~\cite{Espinosa:1991fc,ArkaniHamed:2004fb,Giudice:2004tc,Giudice:2011cg,Degrassi:2012ry,%
Draper:2013oza,Bagnaschi:2014rsa}.
Similarly, also a general Two-Higgs-Doublet-Model was already considered as low energy limit of the MSSM
\cite{Haber:1993an,Carena:1995bx,Lee:2015uza}.
Finally, since several years Split-SUSY variants of the MSSM become more and more popular in which the coloured SUSY
particles are integrated out
\cite{ArkaniHamed:2004fb, Giudice:2004tc, ArkaniHamed:2004yi,Kilian:2004uj,Bernal:2007uv, Giudice:2011cg}.
We have now also extended the stand-alone spectrum generator \SPheno \cite{Porod:2003um,Porod:2011nf} as well as the
{\tt Mathematica} package \SARAH \cite{Staub:2008uz,Staub:2009bi,Staub:2010jh,Staub:2012pb,Staub:2013tta,Staub:2015kfa},
which gives the possibility to auto-generate a spectrum generator for a given model, to improve the predictions for
moderate and heavy SUSY scales. Here, we made use of the second approach: the running \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters at the SUSY scale are
obtained via a two-scale matching procedure and the Higgs mass calculation can optionally be done within an effective SM. We
give in the following not only details of our exact approach but discuss also phenomenological consequences of the improved
calculations. We focus not only on the Higgs mass prediction, which has been already discussed to some extent in the recent
year, but show also potential important effects on the SUSY mass spectrum. Beside the MSSM we consider also
it is minimal extension, the NMSSM.
This paper is organised as follows: in sec.~\ref{sec:methods} we summarize our approach to obtain the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters
at the SUSY scale as well as to calculate the mass of the SM-like Higgs. Many details for the matching are given in
appendix~\ref{app:Matching}, where also the differences between stand-alone \SPheno and the \SARAH generated
version are discussed.
In sec.~\ref{sec:results} we discuss the numerical impact of the improved calculation on the running parameters,
but also on the SUSY and Higgs masses in the MSSM and beyond. We conclude in sec.~\ref{sec:conclusion}.
\section{Matching procedure and effective Higgs mass calculation}
\label{sec:methods}
\subsection{The two-scale matching in \SARAH}
So far, all dedicated MSSM spectrum generators such as {\tt SoftSUSY}
\cite{Allanach:2001kg,Allanach:2009bv,Allanach:2013kza,Allanach:2014nba}, {\tt Suspect} \cite{Djouadi:2002ze}
or \SPheno were adapting the
procedure of Ref.~\cite{Pierce:1996zz} to obtain the running gauge and Yukawa couplings at the SUSY scale. All details
of the calculations are summarised in Appendix \ref{app:OneScale}. The principle idea is that all measured SM parameters are
already translated at $M_Z$ into \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace values taking into account the complete MSSM spectrum
which are then evaluated to the SUSY scale by using the RGEs of the MSSM.
This procedure suffers from increasing uncertainties when the separation of the electroweak and SUSY scale becomes large.
In order to reduce the theoretical uncertainty for
large SUSY scales, {\tt SoftSUSY} is able since some time to include the two-loop SUSY thresholds in the calculation of the
\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters and to perform a three-loop RGE running between $M_Z$ and $M_{\rm SUSY}$. With these additional corrections,
potential large effects in the prediction of the Higgsino mass parameter but also for the Higgs mass were found. The
drawback of this ansatz is that it is computational very expensive and slows down the evaluation
of a given parameter point significantly. Moreover, only the effects of a more precise determination of the top Yukawa coupling on the
Higgs mass are caught in this approach up to some extent, while still potential large logarithm in the fixed order Higgs mass calculation can be present.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\fbox{\parbox{10cm}{\centering {\bf \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace parameters at $M_Z$ ($g_i^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(M_Z)$, $Y_i^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(M_Z)$, $v^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(M_Z)$)}: \\ full one-loop matching including higher order corrections}} \\[2mm]
\textdownarrow \\[2mm]
\fbox{\parbox{10cm}{\centering {\bf Running Up}: \\ SM RGEs up to three-loop } }\\[2mm]
\textdownarrow \\[2mm]
\fbox{\parbox{10cm}{\centering {\bf \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters at $M_{\rm SUSY}$ ($g_i^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY})$, $Y_i^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY})$, $v^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY})$ }: \\ two-loop \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace--\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace conversion; one-loop SUSY shifts }}\\[2mm]
\textdownarrow \\[2mm]
\fbox{\parbox{10cm}{\centering {\bf Effective Higgs self-coupling $\lambda_{\rm SM}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY})$}: \\ Higgs mass matching at one- or two-loop } }\\[2mm]
\textdownarrow \\[2mm]
\fbox{\parbox{10cm}{\centering {\bf Running Down}: \\ SM RGEs up to three-loop } }\\[2mm]
\hspace{2cm}\parbox{3cm}{\textdownarrow (not converged)} \hspace{3cm} \parbox{3cm}{\textdownarrow (converged)}\\[2mm]
\fbox{\parbox{4.5cm}{\centering {\bf $\lambda_{\rm SM}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(M_Z)$}: \\ new iteration to obtain $g_i^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(M_Z)$, $Y_i^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(M_Z)$, $v^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(M_Z)$}}
\hspace{1cm}
\fbox{\parbox{4.5cm}{\centering {\bf $\lambda_{\rm SM}^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(M_t)$}: \\ Higgs pole mass calculation: one- and two-loop corrections included}}
\end{center}
\caption{Schematic procedure of the two scale matching.}
\label{fig:Matching}
\end{figure}
Therefore, we are using another ansatz in \SPheno and \SARAH\footnote{We use in the following \SARAH as synonym for 'a \SARAH generated spectrum generator based on \SPheno'}
which is closer to the setup of {\tt NMSSMCalc} \cite{Baglio:2013iia} or specific versions
of {\tt FlexibleSUSY} \cite{Athron:2014yba,Athron:2016fuq}: the matching at the electroweak scale includes only SM thresholds to obtain the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace values of the
gauge and Yukawa couplings and the electroweak vacuum expectation value (VEV). These parameters are then evolved up to the SUSY scale
using SM RGEs, and the translation from \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace to \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace scheme and the inclusion of SUSY thresholds is done at the SUSY scale.
All details of the calculation are given in Appendix~\ref{app:Matching}. The precision to obtain the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters at the SUSY scale
via this two-scale matching (2SM) is as follows in \SARAH/\SPheno
\begin{enumerate}
\item The \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace parameters at the weak scale are calculated using:
\begin{itemize}
\item One-loop electroweak corrections to the fermion masses
\item Two-loop QCD corrections to the top quark mass
\item One-loop corrections to $\delta_{VB}$ as well as one- and two-loop corrections to $\delta_\rho$
\end{itemize}
\item The SM RGEs are available up to three-loop
\item The \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace--\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace conversion of the running fermion masses is done at two-loop $\alpha_s$ and at one-loop
in case of the electroweak gauge couplings
\item The \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace--\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace conversion of the gauge couplings is done at one-loop
\item The SUSY thresholds are included at full one-loop
\end{enumerate}
The \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters obtained in that way are then used to calculate the SUSY and Higgs masses at $M_{\rm SUSY}$. Since both, the matching at the $M_Z$ and
$M_{\rm SUSY}$ depends on these masses, one needs to iterate the matching procedure. For this reason it is necessary to calculate
the quartic self-coupling $\lambda_{\rm SM}(M_{\rm SUSY})$ within the SM which is a function of the SUSY masses and parameters. A handy and very general ansatz to
obtain $\lambda_{\rm SM}(M_{\rm SUSY})$ was presented in Ref.~\cite{Athron:2016fuq}: one can match the Higgs pole masses in the full MSSM and the SM at the SUSY scale
\begin{equation}
m_h^{\rm SM,pole}(M_{\rm SUSY}) \equiv m_h^{\rm MSSM,pole}(M_{\rm SUSY})
\end{equation}
from what one can derive $\lambda_{\rm SM}$ as
\begin{equation}
(v^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace}(M_{\rm SUSY}))^2 \lambda_{\rm SM}(M_{\rm SUSY}) = (m_h^{\rm SM,tree}(M_{\rm SUSY}))^2 = (m_h^{\rm MSSM,pole}(M_{\rm SUSY}))^2 - \Pi_h(M_{\rm SUSY} )
\end{equation}
Here, $\Pi_h(M_{\rm SUSY} )$ are the radiative corrections to the Higgs mass within the SM which are calculated using \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace parameters at this scale,
while the pole mass calculation in the MSSM involves \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters. The equivalence of this ansatz to the matching of four point function as for instance performed
in Refs.~\cite{Draper:2013oza,Bagnaschi:2014rsa} and used also by {\tt SUSYHD} has been explicitly shown in Ref.~\cite{Athron:2016fuq}.
SM RGEs are used are afterwards to run $\lambda_{\rm SM}$ to $M_Z$, and the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace parameters are recalculated at this scale. This procedure is iterated until the mass spectrum at the SUSY scale has converged.
\subsection{Differences between \SARAH and \SPheno in the new matching routines}
\label{sec:differences}
The above procedure corresponds to the details in \SARAH whereas the procedure implemented in the stand-alone
\SPheno differs in the following details:
\begin{itemize}
\item at $Q=m_t$: the top Yukawa coupling is optionally replaced by the fit formula given by eq.~(57) of Ref.~\cite{Buttazzo:2013uya}
\item at $Q=m_t$: the strong coupling $g_3$ is optionally replaced by the fit formula given by eq.~(60) of Ref.~\cite{Buttazzo:2013uya}
\item at $Q=M_{SUSY}$: the thresholds corrections to the gauge and Yukawa interactions are
calculated in the electroweak basis assuming an unbroken $SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y$.
The full formulae are given in Appendix~\ref{app:Matching}.
\end{itemize}
The flags to use/not use the fit formulae of Ref.~\cite{Buttazzo:2013uya} are given in Appendix~\ref{app:TwoScale}. If not indicated otherwise,
these fit formulae are used in the following comparisons.
\subsection{The effective Higgs mass calculation}
So far, the mass calculation with \SPheno/\SARAH would have stopped after the conversion of the mass spectrum at $M_{\rm SUSY}$. However, this could lead to a large theoretical uncertainty
in the Higgs mass prediction for large SUSY masses: the fixed order Higgs mass calculation as performed by \SPheno/\SARAH would become inaccurate because of the appearance of large
logarithms $\sim \log(M_{\rm SUSY}/M_{ew})$. In order to cure this, one could do a resummation of these large logs. However, in our setup it
is much easier to use the value $\lambda_{\rm SM}(M_{\rm SUSY})$, which is already known, and run it to the top mass scale. By this running all large logarithms get re-summed and one can then calculate $m_h$ at $m_t$ within the SM including radiative corrections. In \SARAH/\SPheno we include the full SM one-loop corrections as well as the two-loop corrections $O(\alpha_t(\alpha_s\alpha_t))$ to $m_h$. The schematic procedure for the matching and Higgs mass calculation is summarized in Fig.~\ref{fig:Matching}.
\section{Consequences of the two-scale matching \& effective Higgs mass calculation}
\label{sec:results}
\subsection{Running SM couplings}
\label{sec:Coup}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/MSUSY_Yt.pdf} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/MSUSY_dYt.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/MSUSY_Yb.pdf} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/MSUSY_dYb.pdf}
\caption{The \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace values of the running top and bottom
Yukawa couplings at the SUSY scale. The dashed red line shows the result
using the one-scale matching as done by earlier \SARAH/\SPheno version, while the blue line is the new results from \SARAH and
black the one from \SPheno. In addition, we show the results for {\tt SoftSUSY} using one-loop (dashed orange) and two-loop SUSY thresholds (full brown),
as well as for {\tt FlexibleSUSY} (green).
On the right we give the difference $\Delta = \frac{Y^{\rm A} - Y^{\rm B}}{Y^{\rm A}}$ between
the results of two calculations as indicated.}
\label{fig:Yukawas}
\end{figure}
All the efforts to disentangle the weak and the SUSY scale in the matching are done to get more accurate values of the running \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters at the SUSY scale. Therefore, we want
to start the discussion of the impact of the new matching procedure with presenting the changes in the
\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters at the SUSY scale. The results for the top and bottom Yukawa couplings
are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Yukawas} and those for the three gauge couplings $g_1$, $g_2$ and $g_3$ are depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:gauge}. Since the exact matching procedure using two scales is slightly different between \SPheno and \SARAH as explained in sec.~\ref{sec:differences} we show the new results for both codes. Since we have turned off here the fit formula of Ref.~\cite{Buttazzo:2013uya} in the \SPheno calculation, the remaining differences appearing here are due to the threshold corrections of the gauge and Yukawa couplings at $M_{\rm SUSY}$.
One sees that in particular the top Yukawa coupling changes significantly compared to the older calculation with only one matching scale (1SM). For $M_{\rm SUSY} =100$~TeV, the calculated \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace value with \SARAH using the two-scale matching is nearly 10\% below the one for the one-scale matching. These large changes are in agreement with the results of
Ref.~\cite{Athron:2016fuq} where the impact of a 2SM on the top Yukawa coupling has also been analysed analytically.
We show for comparison also the calculated couplings in {\tt SoftSUSY} with and without two-loop SUSY thresholds and three loop RGEs. It is obvious that there was a non-negligible difference between the old results
and the one-loop results of {\tt SoftSUSY} although both calculations were of the same order in perturbation theory. The reason are the matching conditions which
can schematically be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{mfermion}
m_t^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace} = m_t^{pole} + \hat{m}_t \,\Sigma(\hat{m}_t^2) \;,
\end{equation}
where all loop corrections are summarised in $\Sigma$. \SPheno uses $\hat{m}_t = m_t^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}$ while {\tt SoftSUSY} and other codes set
$\hat{m}_t = m_t^{pole}$. The result obtained with the new two-scale matching agrees now rather well with the {\tt SoftSUSY} results once
the two-loop SUSY corrections in the matching are included up to several TeV. However, for even higher SUSY scales one finds that even the SUSY calculation with two-loop thresholds gives sizeable differences to the RGE re-summed calculation. On the other side, we find an excellent agreement with {\tt FlexibleSUSY} which performs also a two-scale matching, but uses a different matching procedure at the SUSY scale \footnote{We have adapted the approach of Ref.~\cite{Pierce:1996zz} to a two scale approach: we calculate the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace gauge and Yukawa couplings from the running \ensuremath{\overline{\text{MS}}}\xspace values of $\alpha_{ew}$, $\sin\Theta_W$, $g_3$ as well as from the running fermion masses and CKM matrix at the SUSY scale. The calculation is similar to the corresponding matching of the measured values of these parameters to the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters at $M_Z$ done before. All details are given in appendix~\ref{app:TwoScale}. In contrast, {\tt FlexibleSUSY} demands the
equality of pole masses in the SM and MSSM at the SUSY scale to get the matching conditions for the SM gauge and Yukawa couplings.}.
A similar, but less pronounced effect can be seen for the bottom Yukawa coupling. Here, the changes between the one and two-scale matching account for a shift of about 6\% for a SUSY scale of
100~TeV.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/MSUSY_g1.pdf} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/MSUSY_dg1.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/MSUSY_g2.pdf} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/MSUSY_dg2.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/MSUSY_g3.pdf} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/MSUSY_dg3.pdf} \\
\caption{The same as Fig.~\ref{fig:Yukawas} for the gauge couplings $g_1$, $g_2$ and $g_3$.}
\label{fig:gauge}
\end{figure}
For the gauge couplings, the difference between the one and two-scale matching are in general much smaller than for the Yukawa couplings. The changes are usually well below 1~\% even for a SUSY scale of 100~TeV. The only exception is {\tt SoftSUSY} when turning on the two-loop thresholds to the strong coupling. In that case a significant decrease in $g_3$ with increasing $M_{SUSY}$ is seen. This effect is not confirmed by the RGE re-summed calculations.
\subsection{Gauge coupling unification}
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{Figs/Mgut.pdf} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{Figs/Delta_g.pdf}
\caption{On the left: the predicted value for $M_{\rm GUT}$ as function of $m_0=M_{1/2}$ in the CMSSM. The red line corresponds to the old one-scale matching, while the
blue and green line are the results for the two-scale matching with \SARAH and \SPheno. On the right: the difference between $g_1(M_{\rm GUT})$ and $g_3(M_{\rm GUT})$ (in percent)
as function of $m_0$. The colour code is the same as on the left. We included here in \SPheno the two-loop thresholds corrections to $g_3$. }
\label{fig:GUT}
\end{figure}
The shifts in the gauge couplings are rather small even for very large SUSY masses in the multi TeV range. Thus, they play phenomenologically only a sub-dominant role
compared to the larger effects in the top Yukawa coupling. However, if one embeds the MSSM into a UV complete framework like supergravity, the running gauge couplings
$g_1^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}$ and $g_2^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}$ are usually used as starting point to find the scale of grand unification, $M_{\rm GUT}$ by imposing the condition
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gGUT}
g_1(M_{\rm GUT}) = g_2(M_{\rm GUT})
\end{equation}
Also the goodness of complete unification, i.e. the remaining difference between $g_3(M_{\rm GUT})$ compared to the other two couplings is very sensitive to the values of
$g_1^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}$ and $g_2^{\ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace}$ at $M_{\rm SUSY}$. Therefore, we are checking the impact of the two-scale matching on $M_{\rm GUT}$ and $\Delta g = \frac{g_1(M_{\rm GUT})-g_3(M_{\rm GUT})}{g_1(M_{\rm GUT})}$
in a constrained version of the MSSM (CMSSM). The CMSSM
has five input the parameters: the universal scalar mass $m_0$, the universal gaugino mass $M_{1/2}$, the universal trilinear
soft-breaking parameter $A_0$, the ratio of the ew VEVs $\tan\beta=v_u/v_d$ and the phase of $\mu$. All three dimensionful parameters,
$m_0$, $M_{1/2}$ and $A_0$, are set $M_{\rm GUT}$.
Here, we fixed
\begin{equation}
m_0 = M_{1/2} \,,\hspace{1cm} \tan\beta = 10 \,,\hspace{1cm} A_0 = 0 \,,\mu >0
\end{equation}
and varied $m_0$ from 200~GeV up to 100~TeV.
The results are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:GUT}. The predicted value for the GUT scale as function of $M_{\rm SUSY}$ changes only slightly when using the new two-scale matching compared to the one-scale matching. In a complete GUT-model, the difference $\Delta g$ has to be explained by
threshold corrections to heavy GUT-scale particles \cite{Weinberg:1980wa,Hall:1980kf}
as we are using two-loop RGE running . Therefore, the right plot of this figure indicates the possible
size of such corrections due to the GUT-scale spectrum. The prediction for $\Delta g$ is different comparing the one- and two-scale matching, but also comparing the new results of \SARAH and \SPheno. The dominant origin of this difference is the inclusion of the two-loop correction to $g_3$ in \SPheno, i.e. the difference between the two lines can be taken as an estimate for the theoretical uncertainty in $\Delta g$ coming from higher order effects: only two-loop SM corrections
in the matching of $g_3$ are included in \SPheno, but not the two-loop SUSY thresholds. Also, for consistency three-loop RGEs
of $g_3$ up to $M_{\rm GUT}$ would be necessary. However, for small $m_0$ also the terms
$O(v^2/M^2_{\rm SUSY})$, which are neglected in \SPheno by computing the thresholds in
the $SU(2)_L\times U(1)_Y$ limit become important and introduce a difference in the prediction of the GUT scale, which enters logarithmically in the unification condition.
\subsection{SUSY masses}
The changes in the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters at the SUSY scale influence also the mass spectrum. This has very important consequences
in particular on the Higgs mass which are discussed in the dedicated section sec.~\ref{sec:mh}.
For now, we concentrate on the
SUSY masses. In that case, the masses do hardly change if all SUSY specific parameters are defined at the SUSY scale because only tiny
changes in the $F$- and $D$-term contributions as well as in the radiative corrections will appear. Those are found to be hardly in the percent range even
for large SUSY scales. Larger effects
are present, if on considers unified scenarios in which the SUSY parameters are set via boundary conditions at a scale well above the
SUSY scale. The additional RGE running between the high scale, which is often associated with the GUT scale via eq.~\ref{eq:gGUT},
will then introduce a larger dependence on \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace values of SM gauge and Yukawa couplings at $M_{\rm SUSY}$. As example, we consider again the CMSSM.
For simplicity, we fix in the following, if not stated otherwise, $A_0 = 0$, $\mu > 0$, $\tan\beta = 10$ and perform a scan over $m_0$ and $M_{1/2}$. The changes
in the masses of the lightest stop, lightest stau, lightest neutralino and the gluino in the $(m_0,M_{1/2})$-plane are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:masses}. The
largest effect in general can be seen for the light stop mass which changes by 2--3\% when pushing $m_0$ in the multi-TeV range. For the other masses,
the changes in the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters account only for moderate changes of 1\% and below.
The only exception are fine-tuned region with a Higgsino LSP
which we discuss below in more detail. Here,
we also display the
changes in the bino LSP mass because there small shifts can have sizeable effects in the calculation of the relic
density, e.g.\ in case of Higgs resonances or in case of co-annihiliation.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/m0_M12_St1.pdf} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/m0_M12_Stau1.pdf} \\[5mm]
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/m0_M12_Chi1.pdf} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/m0_M12_Glu.pdf}
\caption{The mass difference $\Delta = \frac{m^{\rm old} - m^{\rm new}}{m^{\rm old}}$ in percent between the old and new mass calculation using \SARAH.
The red boundary in the $\tilde{\chi}^0_1$-plot shows
the area with a Higgsino LSP which is discussed in the text in more detail.}
\label{fig:masses}
\end{figure}
The impact of the \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace parameters at $M_{\rm SUSY}$ on the prediction of the light stop mass depends also on the chosen value for $A_0$. For non-vanishing $A_0$,
the changes can become larger as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:mSt1_A0}. Setting $A_0 = + 1.5 m_0$ we find that the stop mass changes by more than 5\% for $m_0 > 4$~TeV.
These changes are still very moderate and have hardly any phenomenological impact at the LHC.
However, as mentioned above they can become important for instance in stau or stop co-annihilation
to explain the dark matter abundance in the universe \cite{Bagnaschi:2015eha}.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/m0_M12_St1_A0.pdf} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/m0_M12_St1_2A0.pdf}
\caption{The same as Fig.~\ref{fig:masses} for lightest stop but using $A_0 = -1.5 m_0$ (left) and $A_0 = +1.5 m_0$ (right) .}
\label{fig:mSt1_A0}
\end{figure}
A much more pronounced effect can be observed for the $\mu$ parameter in the so called 'Focus-Point'-region \cite{Chan:1997bi,Feng:1999mn,Feng:1999zg,Feng:2000gh} from the minimisation conditions of the potential. This result at tree-level in
\begin{equation}
|\mu|^2 = \frac{(m_{H_d}^2 - m_{H_u}^2 \tan\beta^2)}{\tan^2\beta-1} - \frac{1}{2} M_Z^2 \simeq - m_{H_u}^2 - \frac{1}{2} M_Z^2
\end{equation}
where we have assumed in the last step $\tan\beta \gg 1$. The special feature of the focus point region is that
cancellations in the RGE contributions
to $m_{H_u}^2$ result in moderately small $\mu$ which is much smaller than the other SUSY mass parameters. How well these cancellation work
depends strongly on the value of the top Yukawa coupling. Hence, we find that in the focus point region, which is usually needs moderate $M_{1/2}$ and
large $m_0$, the value of $\mu$ changes by more than 25\% as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:mu}.
Thus, also the Higgsino masses vary significantly between the one and two-scale matching calculation.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/m0_M12_mu.pdf} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/m0_M12_muZoom.pdf}
\caption{The same as Fig.~\ref{fig:masses} for the value of $\mu$ at the SUSY scale. The right plot is a zoom into the interesting region of the left one.}
\label{fig:mu}
\end{figure}
If one assumes that a large $\mu$-parameter is the main source of fine-tuning in the MSSM, these changes in $\mu$ have also an impact on naturalness considerations. Using the
approximate formula $\Delta \simeq \frac{\mu^2}{M_Z^2}$ as measure for the fine-tuning\footnote{These formula differs by a factor of two compared to the usually taken expression
$\Delta \simeq 2 \frac{\mu^2}{M_Z^2}$ because of the incorporation of loop effects which have been overlooked for a long time \cite{Ross:2017kjc}.}, on sees that the fine-tuning prediction could reduce a factor of 2 and more in the focus point region when going from the one-scale matching to the two-scale matching.
\subsection{Higgs mass in the MSSM}
\label{sec:mh}
The impact of heavy SUSY masses on the Higgs mass is nowadays a widely discussed topic.
While fixed order calculations suffer from increasing uncertainties, there are two
methods to improve the accuracy: (i) resumming the stop contributions as done
by {\tt FeynHiggs}; (ii) working with a EFT ansatz as first done by {\tt SusyHD}
and later incorporated in {\tt FlexibleSUSY} as well. The pole mass matching
described in sec.~\ref{sec:methods}, which was used so far only in {\tt FlexibleSUSY} and now
also by \SPheno/\SARAH, has the additional
advantage that it includes terms $O(v^2/M_{\rm SUSY}^2)$. This is in contrast to previous calculations
to obtain $\lambda_{\rm SM}$ from the effective potential which are used by {\tt SusyHD} for instance.
Thus, these EFT calculation have a larger uncertainty for not too large $M_{\rm SUSY}$, while
the predictions using a pole mass matching are still reliable for $M_{\rm SUSY}$ of 1~TeV and even below. \\
We give a comparison of the Higgs mass prediction of the new \SARAH and \SPheno versions against
previous calculations as well as the current versions of {\tt FeynHiggs} (2.12.2), {\tt SusyHD} (1.0.2)
and {\tt FlexibleSUSY} (1.7.2)\footnote{We used for the following comparison the model file {\tt MSSMtower} of {\tt FlexibleSUSY}
which also performs a pole mass matching to get $\lambda_{\rm SM}(M_{\rm SUSY})$.}.
For simplicity, we assume a degeneracy of the SUSY soft masses as well as
$M_A$ and $\mu$ at the SUSY scale:
\begin{eqnarray}
&M_1 = M_2 = M_3 = M_A = \mu \equiv M_{\rm SUSY} & \\
&m_{\tilde e}^2 = m_{\tilde l}^2 = m_{\tilde d}^2 =m_{\tilde u}^2 = m_{\tilde q}^2 = {\bf 1} M_{\rm SUSY}^2 &
\end{eqnarray}
We neglect all trilinear soft-terms but the one involving the stops which is parametrised as usual by
\begin{equation}
L = A_t Y_t \tilde{t}_L \tilde{t}^*_R H_u + \text{h.c}
\end{equation}
The results for the Higgs mass prediction for $A_t = 0, \pm M_{\rm SUSY}$ and $M_{\rm SUSY}$ up to 100~TeV are summarised
in Figs.~\ref{fig:MSUSY_mh} -- \ref{fig:MSUSY_mh_diff_A0}.
One can see in Fig.~\ref{fig:MSUSY_mh} that the new calculation of \SPheno/\SARAH gives a significant lower Higgs mass for very heavy
SUSY scales and is in good agreement with the other codes like {\tt FlexibleSUSY} and {\tt SusyHD} for the entire
range of $M_{\rm SUSY}$ shown here \footnote{The large rise in the Higgs mass
as shown by {\tt FeynHiggs} for $M_{\rm SUSY} > 5$~TeV stems from a conversion problem of the
input parameters and will most likely disappear in the near future \cite{Bahl}.
}. {Only for small values of $M_{\rm SUSY}$ {\tt SusyHD} deviates from the other codes because of terms
$O({v^2}/{M^2_{\rm SUSY}})$ missing due to the effective potential approach.} The main reason for the large rise in the Higgs mass
with \SPheno/\SARAH using a one-scale matching is the calculation of the top Yukawa coupling as discussed in sec.~\ref{sec:Coup}.
Since the calculation is per se not wrong {but the differences in the calculation of $Y_t$ correspond
to a three-loop effect in $m_h$}, the large changes in the Higgs mass prediction shows how large the theoretical uncertainty
of the fixed order calculation can become for very large SUSY scales. It might be surprising that a formal three-loop
effect has such a big impact. However, it was for instance discussed in Ref.~\cite{Draper:2013oza} that at three-loop large cancellations appear,
i.e. an incomplete three-loop calculation can give a quite misleading impression.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{Figs/mH_mSUSY_zeroA0.pdf}
\caption{The Higgs mass prediction of different computer codes as function of the SUSY mass. The dashed red line corresponds to the old prediction
by \SARAH/\SPheno.}
\label{fig:MSUSY_mh}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{Figs/DmH_mSUSY_zeroA0_SPheno.pdf} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{Figs/DmH_mSUSY_zeroA0_other.pdf}
\caption{On the left: difference between the Higgs mass as predicted by the new \SARAH and the old
version using one- (blue) or two-loop (green) matching conditions for $\lambda_{\rm SM}$ at the SUSY scale. On the right:
the differences between \SARAH and the new stand-alone \SPheno version (black), {\tt SusyHD} (blue; dashed line with three-loop
thresholds to $Y_t$, full line without these corrections)
as well as {\tt FlexibleSUSY}. We used here vanishing trilinear soft-breaking stop couplings.}
\label{fig:MSUSY_mh_diff}
\end{figure}
Since the agreement between the different codes becomes impressively good even for very large SUSY masses, we give in Fig.~\ref{fig:MSUSY_mh_diff} the
numerical differences between the Higgs mass predictions of \SARAH compared to the other codes. Also the difference between the one-scale matching and
the two-scale matching using a one- or two-loop calculation of $\lambda$ is shown: for $M_{\rm SUSY} = 100$~TeV the Higgs mass prediction decreases
by about 7~GeV when doing it via the EFT approach. The remaining differences to {\tt SusyHD} and {\tt FlexibleSUSY} is always better than 1~GeV, most often even better
than 0.5~GeV \footnote{The public version of {\tt FlexibleSUSY} performs so far a one-loop matching for $\lambda$. We compare therefore the \SARAH results of a two-loop matching
only with {\tt FeynHiggs}, \SPheno and {\tt SusyHD}, while we use for the comparison with {\tt FlexibleSUSY} the one-loop matching results.}. The increasing difference between \SARAH and {\tt FlexibleSUSY} compared
to \SPheno and {\tt SusyHD} comes from the calculation of the top Yukawa coupling in the SM: while \SARAH and {\tt FlexibleSUSY} use two-loop thresholds, \SPheno and {\tt SusyHD} have included even higher order corrections via the fit formula of Ref.~\cite{Buttazzo:2013uya}. These correction need not to be included because they are of a higher loop level than the Higgs mass calculation is done. Thus, the difference between these two calculations give an impression of the minimal, theoretical uncertainty which is at least present. The differences between the codes also don't grow significantly if we use non-vanishing values for $A_t$ as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:MSUSY_mh_diff_A0}: the overall changes in the Higgs mass between the \SARAH calculation in the full MSSM and in the effective SM changes again by 7--8~GeV for very large SUSY scales, while the difference to the other codes is in the range of 1~GeV and less.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{Figs/DmH_mSUSY_positiveA0_SPheno.pdf} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{Figs/DmH_mSUSY_negativeA0_SPheno.pdf} \\[2mm]
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{Figs/DmH_mSUSY_positiveA0_other.pdf} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{Figs/DmH_mSUSY_negativeA0_other.pdf}
\caption{The same as Fig.~\ref{fig:MSUSY_mh_diff} for non-vanishing $A_t$. }
\label{fig:MSUSY_mh_diff_A0}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Higgs mass beyond the MSSM}
With \SARAH it is also possible to generate a spectrum generator for models beyond the MSSM which calculates mass spectra,
decays and precision observables \cite{Porod:2014xia}.
Also for these models
two-loop Higgs mass calculations are performed by default. All important two-loop corrections stemming from new particles and/or new interactions
are covered as discussed in detail in Refs.~\cite{Goodsell:2014bna,Goodsell:2015ira,Goodsell:2016udb}. The calculations make use of the generic results of
Refs.~\cite{Martin:2001vx,Martin:2002wn,Martin:2003it,Martin:2003qz,Martin:2005eg} and the only approximations used in the \SARAH implementation of the
two-loop calculations are (i) the gaugeless limit, i.e. setting $g_1=g_2=0$, and (ii) neglecting momentum dependence, i.e.\ $p^2=0$.
Thus, \SARAH provides for models beyond the MSSM the same precision in the Higgs mass as it does for the MSSM.
Moreover,the obtained results with \SARAH include already for the next-to-minimal supersymmetric standard model (NMSSM) corrections which are not
available otherwise \cite{Goodsell:2014pla,Staub:2015aea}. However, there is one additional subtlety when using these two-loop corrections in extended Higgs sector
which we need to discuss before coming to the results of the EFT approach:
massless states appearing in the two-loop calculations usually cause divergences. Since the calculations are done in Landau gauge, these divergences are often
associated with the Goldstone bosons of broken gauge groups what has caused the name 'Goldstone boson catastrophe' \cite{Martin:2013gka,Martin:2014bca}. For many cases this behaviour
was already under control in \SARAH by the treatment of the $D$-terms what induced finite Goldstone masses as explained in Ref.~\cite{Goodsell:2016udb}.
However, for large SUSY scales, it can still happen that the ratio $m_S/M_{\rm SUSY}$ for some scalar mass $m_S$ becomes very small and introduces
numerical problems. As short-term workaround we have introduced for this reason a regulator $R$ which defines the minimal scalar mass squared as function
of the renormalisation scale $Q$
\begin{equation}
m^2_{S,\rm min} = R Q^2
\end{equation}
All scalar masses which appear in the two-loop integrals which are small than $m^2_{S,\rm min}$ are then replaced by $R Q^2$.
We found that numerical dependence on $R$ is usually small for values of $R$ between 0.1 and 0.001. Nevertheless,
the results of Ref.~\cite{Braathen:2016cqe} shall be included in \SARAH
in the near future to have a rigorous solution to the Goldstone boson catastrophe which
is independent of any regulator \cite{workinprogress}. \\
We can turn now to the discussion of the changes in the Higgs mass prediction when using the EFT ansatz. In general, it
is possible to use the two-scale matching together with an effective calculation of the Higgs mass within the SM also for non-minimal models.
The procedure is exactly the same as for the MSSM. \SARAH uses the calculated Higgs mass in the full model to obtain $\lambda_{\rm SM}(M_{\rm SUSY})$ via
a pole mass matching. It then evaluates $\lambda_{\rm SM}(m_t)$ and calculates $m_h$ at that scale using SM corrections.
We briefly discuss the impact of the new calculation at the example of the NMSSM\footnote{We refer to Ref.~\cite{Ellwanger:2009dp} for an introduction
into the NMSSM and for questions regarding the notation in the following}. For this purpose, we relate the NMSSM specific,
dimensionful parameters to the SUSY scale via
\begin{eqnarray*}
&\mu_{\rm eff} = M_{\rm SUSY}\,,\hspace{1cm} A_\kappa = -\lambda M_{\rm SUSY}\,,
\hspace{1cm} A_\lambda= M_{\rm SUSY}\left(\frac{\tan\beta}{(1+\tan\beta^2)} - \frac{\kappa}{\lambda}\right)&
\end{eqnarray*}
With this parametrisation we find that the heavy MSSM-like scalars get a tree-level mass of $M_{\rm SUSY}$ while also the scalar singlets are sufficiently heavy to be integrated out at $M_{\rm SUSY}$. We set in addition
\begin{eqnarray*}
\tan\beta = 4 \,,\hspace{1cm} \lambda = \kappa
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus, the only free parameters left are $\lambda$ and $M_{\rm SUSY}$. The Higgs mass for a variation of $M_{\rm SUSY}$ for $\lambda=0.1,0.3,0.5,0.7$ is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:NMSSM_mh}. Here, we also show the
results with and without regulator $R$. One can see that the numerical problems associated with small masses, which in this case here are the light Higgs as well as the
two Goldstone bosons, show up for increasing $M_{\rm SUSY}$. The larger
$\lambda$ is, the more pronounced these problems are. However, with a regulator $R=0.01$ this behaviour can be prevented
for all values of $\lambda$ and $M_{\rm SUSY}$ shown here for the one- and two-scale matching. We find that the results with regulator masses
are in agreement with Ref.~\cite{Athron:2016fuq} within the indicated uncertainties. \\
The impact on the Higgs mass using the new two-scale matching is similar as for the MSSM: for SUSY masses up to 2~TeV, the effects are small and
less than 2~GeV, but they quickly increase with increasing $M_{\rm SUSY}$. For $M_{\rm SUSY} = 25$~TeV, the difference in the Higgs mass prediction
is between 5.5 and 6.5~GeV. For our example we find that the differences depend only weakly on the value of $\lambda$.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/NMSSM_lam01.pdf} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/NMSSM_lam03.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/NMSSM_lam05.pdf} \hfill
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/NMSSM_lam07.pdf} \\[4mm]
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/NMSSM_lam_diff.pdf} \\
\caption{The SM-like Higgs mass in the NMSSM as function of the SUSY scale for four different values of $\lambda$ (first, second row): the dotted red line gives
the result of the one-scale matching (1SM) without regulator $R$, the dashed lines uses one-scale matching and $R=10^{-1},10^{-2},10^{-3}$, while for the green line the two-scale matching (2SM)
was used together with a Higgs mass calculation in the effective SM. The third row shows the difference $\Delta m_h$ between the one-scale and two-scale matching (both with $R=10^{-2}$).
}
\label{fig:NMSSM_mh}
\end{figure}
Similarly, one can use now \SARAH to study also the Higgs masses for other models in the presence of large SUSY scales more precisely. However, a detailed
exploration of these effects in other models is beyond the scope of this paper. Here, we want to stress
that one should be careful with models with extended Higgs sector because not all scalar masses become automatically large if $M_{\rm SUSY}$ is large. Examples are
for instance models with extended gauge sectors in which a second light scalar can appear because of $D$-flat directions \cite{OLeary:2011vlq,Hirsch:2011hg,Hirsch:2012kv}.
In these cases, a sizeable mixing
between the SM-like Higgs and another scalar can be present, i.e. the calculation of $m_h$ within an effective SM might now be valid. Therefore, \SARAH does not perform
this calculation by default, if a second CP-even scalar with a mass below 500~GeV is present.
\subsection{Perturbativity limit of new interactions}
Many models beyond the MSSM are attractive because they give a tree-level enhancement of the Higgs mass.
This is quite interesting from the point of view because it reduces the required loop contributions to obtain
$m_h=125.1$. Usually this allows for smaller values of $A_t$ which is important for the stability
of the scalar potential \cite{Camargo-Molina:2013sta,Blinov:2013fta,Chowdhury:2013dka,Camargo-Molina:2014pwa,Beuria:2016cdk}.
The best studied example is again the NMSSM which pushes the Higgs mass via new $F$-term contributions which are proportional to $\lambda^2$.
We demonstrate this in Fig.~\ref{fig:NMSSM_lam_max} where we compare the dependence of the Higgs mass on the stop mixing parameter $X_t$ as defined
as
\begin{equation}
X_t = A_t -\mu\tan\beta
\end{equation}
In the NMSSM, $\mu$ is replaced by $\mu_{\rm eff}$.
We see for a SUSY scale of 5~TeV and the chosen value of $\tan\beta=2$ and $\lambda=0.6$ even without stop mixing the Higgs mass can be found in the correct mass range of 122-128~GeV.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/NMSSM_MSSM_Xt.pdf}
\caption{The Higgs mass in the MSSM and NMSSM as function of $X_t/M_{\rm SUSY}$ using one- and two-scale matching.
Here we set $\mu = M_{\rm SUSY} = 5$~TeV and used for the MSSM $\tan\beta=10$, $M_A=5$~TeV. The input parameters for the NMSSM were $\lambda=0.6$, $\kappa=0.2$,
$A_\lambda=10$~TeV, $A_\kappa=-5$~TeV, $\tan\beta=2$.}
\label{fig:NMSSM_lam_max}
\end{figure}
Because of this large impact of $\lambda$ on the Higgs mass , it is very important to know how big $\lambda$ can be in order to be still in agreement with gauge couplings unification at $M_{GUT}$.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/NMSSM_Lam_max.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{Figs/NMSSM_DLam_max.pdf}
\caption{Left: maximal value of $\lambda(M_{SUSY}$ consistent with perturbativity up to $M_{GUT}$
for different values of $\kappa$. The full (dashed) lines correspond to the case of
two (one) scale matching. Right: the difference $\Delta\lambda = \lambda^{\rm max}_{\rm 2SM}(M_{\rm SUSY})-\lambda^{\rm max}_{\rm 1SM}(M_{\rm SUSY})$ of the two
matching schemes.}
\label{fig:NMSSM_lam_max}
\end{figure}
In Figure~\ref{fig:NMSSM_lam_max} we display the maximal value of $\lambda(M_{\rm SUSY})$ which does not lead to a
Landau pole below $M_{GUT}$ for different values of $\kappa(M_{\rm SUSY})$
and for $M_{\rm SUSY}$ up to 25~TeV and $\tan\beta=4$, and show the differences between the
one- and two-scale matching. Because of the smaller top Yukawa coupling in the two-scale approach, one finds that slightly larger values of $\lambda(M_{\rm SUSY}$
are allowed that for the one-scale matching.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
We have presented the new two-scale matching procedure in \SARAH/\SPheno to improve the prediction of the running \ensuremath{\overline{\text{DR}}}\xspace gauge and Yukawa couplings
at the SUSY scale for large values of $M_{\rm SUSY}$. Together with the new matching, also the possibility of an EFT Higgs mass calculation is
introduced. In the EFT calculation $\lambda_{SM}$ is obtained via a Higgs pole mass matching at $M_{\rm SUSY}$ and the SM-like Higgs mass is calculated
within the SM at the top mass scale. We have shown various consequences of the two-scale matching and the EFT Higgs mass calculation in the MSSM and
beyond. In particular, we have compared the Higgs mass prediction for SUSY scales up to 100~TeV and found a good agreement with other EFT codes
as {\tt SusyHD} and {\tt FlexibleSUSY}. We have also shown that the value of $\mu$ in the CMSSM can change significantly because of the changes in the
top Yukawa coupling. This has an direct impact on naturalness considerations.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank Alexander Voigt for helpful discussions concerning the matching procedure in {\tt FlexibleSUSY} and
Eliel Camargo for his contribution in the early stage of this work. W.P.~has been supported
by the DFG, project nr.~PO 1337/7-1.
|
\section{Introduction}
One of the most ubiquitous statistical distributions for non-equilibrium, steady-state systems is known as the $q$-canonical ensemble.
Systems described by $q$-canonical distributions are common in Nature, as non-equilibrium steady states in plasmas~\cite{Lima2000,Livadiotis2015}, fluids under
turbulence~\cite{Jung2004}, astrophysical systems where gravitational interactions are dominant~\cite{Du2004b}, high-energy collisions~\cite{Cleymans2013},
among several others. The $q$-canonical ensemble is a statistical model described by two parameters, $\beta_0$ and $q$, which assigns a probability density to the
microstates $\bm{\Gamma}$ given by
\begin{equation}
P(\bm{\Gamma} | \beta_0, q) = \frac{1}{Z_q(\beta_0, q)}\left[1-(1-q)\beta_0 H(\bm{\Gamma})\right]_{+}^{\frac{1}{1-q}},
\label{eq_qcanon_microstates}
\end{equation}
where $\left[x\right]_+ = \max(x, 0)$, in such a way that it converges to the canonical ensemble in the limit $q \rightarrow 1$, that is
\begin{equation}
P(\bm{\Gamma} | \beta_0, q = 1) = \frac{1}{Z(\beta_0)}\exp\left(-\beta_0 H(\bm{\Gamma})\right).
\label{eq_canon}
\end{equation}
The central problem in terms of fundamental statistical physics is to explain the origin of this family of non-canonical distributions. In 1988
Constantino Tsallis~\cite{Tsallis1988, Tsallis2009} proposed a generalization of Boltzmann-Gibbs statistical mechanics now known as \emph{non-extensive statistical mechanics},
in which instead of the Gibbs-Shannon entropy one maximizes the generalized entropy
\begin{equation}
S_q = \frac{1}{q-1}\left(1-\int d\bm{\Gamma}\; p(\bm{\Gamma})\right)^q
\end{equation}
subjected to constraints. After Tsallis' work, $q$ is known as the non-extensivity parameter or entropic index, and the $q$-canonical statistics as Tsallis statistics.
More recently, alternative mechanisms which explain the emergence of $q$-canonical ensembles have been proposed, most prominently the idea of Superstatistics~\cite{Beck2003, Beck2004, Sattin2006}.
The superstatistical framework considers a system having a statistical distribution of temperatures described by the probability density $P(\beta|\mathcal{S})$, so that the microstates
are weighted with the probability distribution
\begin{equation}
P(\bm{\Gamma}|\mathcal{S}) = \int_0^\infty d\beta P(\beta|\mathcal{S})\left[\frac{\exp(-\beta H(\bm{\Gamma}))}{Z(\beta)}\right].
\label{eq_superstat}
\end{equation}
In the particular case when there is a single temperature, i.e. $P(\beta|\mathcal{S})$ is a Dirac delta function, we recover the canonical ensemble,
whereas the $q$-canonical ensemble arises when the factor $f(\beta)=P(\beta|\mathcal{S})/Z(\beta)$ is given by a Gamma distribution~\cite{Beck2003}.
In this work we propose a third mechanism, an alternative to the maximization of Tsallis entropy and Superstatistics. We show that the $q$-canonical ensemble arises naturally
from invariance considerations, when expressed using the concept of the \emph{fundamental temperature function}.
This work is organized as follows. After this introduction, in Section \ref{sect_notation} we give a brief description of generalized, steady-state ensembles and introduce the concept of fundamental
temperature. In Section \ref{sect_postulates} we state the postulates leading to the $q$-canonical ensemble, while Section \ref{sect_proof} provides the detailed proof of our
main result. We close with some concluding remarks in Section \ref{sect_concluding}.
\section{The generalized Boltzmann factor and the fundamental temperature}
\label{sect_notation}
For the canonical ensemble (Eq. \ref{eq_canon}) the probability of having an energy $E$ is given by
\begin{align}
P(E|\beta) & = \Big<\delta(E-H(\bm{\Gamma}))\Big>_\beta \nonumber \\
& = \int d\bm{\Gamma}\delta(E-H(\bm{\Gamma}))\left[\frac{\exp(-\beta H(\bm{\Gamma}))}{Z(\beta)}\right] \nonumber \\
& = \frac{\exp(-\beta E)}{Z(\beta)}\Omega(E),
\label{eq_energy_canon}
\end{align}
where $\Omega(E)$ is the density of states,
\begin{equation}
\Omega(E) = \int d\bm{\Gamma}\delta(E-H(\bm{\Gamma})).
\end{equation}
In this work we will be focusing on more general \emph{steady states} $P(\bm{\Gamma}|\mathcal{S})$ such that
\begin{equation}
P(\bm{\Gamma}|\mathcal{S})=\rho(H(\bm{\Gamma})).
\label{eq_SS}
\end{equation}
where $\rho(E)$ will be referred to as the generalized Boltzmann factor. The probability density for the
energy of the system in such an ensemble is given by
\begin{equation}
P(E|\mathcal{S}) = \rho(E)\Omega(E).
\label{eq_energy_rho}
\end{equation}
Simple inspection shows that superstatistical ensembles, given by Eq. \ref{eq_superstat}, are particular cases of this form,
where the generalized Boltzmann factor is
\begin{equation}
\rho(E) = \int_0^\infty d\beta \left[\frac{P(\beta|\rho)}{Z(\beta)}\right]\exp(-\beta E),
\end{equation}
which is the Laplace transform of the function $f(\beta)=P(\beta|\rho)/Z(\beta)$.
For a steady state described by Eq. \ref{eq_SS}, let us define the fundamental inverse temperature
function~\cite{Loguercio2016, Palma2016, Davis2018}, denoted by $\beta_F(E)$, as the derivative
\begin{equation}
\beta_F(E) = -\frac{\partial}{\partial E}\ln \rho(E).
\label{eq_def_fund}
\end{equation}
Although this quantity has appeared before in the literature as an effective inverse temperature induced by the surroundings
of a system~\cite{Velazquez2009,Velazquez2009a}, in this work it will take a broader and more important meaning, as a
generalization of the inverse temperature for any system in a steady state in the sense of Eq. \ref{eq_SS}.
Knowledge of $\beta_F(E)$ is completely equivalent to knowledge of $\rho(E)$, as we can recover it by simple integration
and normalization, and thus it also completely describes the ensemble. However, it has usually a simpler form than
$\rho$ and can be read in a more intuitive way. In the context of superstatistics, $\beta_F(E)$ has a clear interpretation:
it is the conditional expectation of the superstatistical parameter $\beta$ at a given energy $E$, that is,
\begin{equation}
\beta_F(E) = \big<\beta\big>_{E, \mathcal{S}}.
\label{eq_fund_interp}
\end{equation}
The proof of this equivalence is given in the Appendix.
As we have defined it, $\beta_F(E)$ is an ensemble-dependent function of the energy of the system. The only case where this
function is a constant is of course the canonical ensemble, which can be seen clearly from Eq. \ref{eq_fund_interp}, as in
this case there is a single superstatistical (inverse) temperature, namely $\beta_0$, and the expectation
$\big<\beta\big>_E=\beta_0$, independent of the energy. Also by integration of Eq. \ref{eq_def_fund}, $\beta_F(E)=\beta_0$
implies $\rho(E) \propto \exp(-\beta_0 E)$.
A more interesting case to consider is the $q$-canonical ensemble, given by Eq. \ref{eq_qcanon_microstates}. Now the generalized Boltzmann factor
$\rho(E)$ is
\begin{equation}
\rho(E) = \frac{1}{Z_q(\beta_0)}\left[1-(1-q)\beta_0 E\right]_{+}^{\frac{1}{1-q}} = \rho(E; \beta_0, q)
\label{eq_qcanon}
\end{equation}
and the fundamental inverse temperature is given by~\cite{Davis2013}
\begin{equation}
\beta_F(E; \beta_0, q) = \frac{\beta_0}{1-(1-q)\beta_0 E}.
\label{eq_qcanon_betaf}
\end{equation}
In terms of $\beta_F(E)$ it is straightforward to take the limit $q=1$, in which $\beta_F(E) \rightarrow \beta_0$ (i.e. we recover the canonical ensemble).
Some of the functional forms for $\beta_F$ for different ensembles are given in Table \ref{tbl_models}.
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
Ensemble & $\rho(E)$ & $\beta_F(E)$ \\
\hline
Canonical & $\exp(-\beta_0 E)/Z(\beta_0)$ & $\beta_0$ \\
\hline
$q$-canonical & $\frac{1}{\eta(\beta_0, q)}\left[1-(1-q)\beta_0 E\right]_+^{\frac{1}{1-q}}$ & $\beta_0/(1-(1-q)\beta_0 E)$ \\
\hline
Gaussian & $\frac{1}{Z(a, E_t)}\exp(-a(E-E_t)^2)$ & $2a(E-E_t)$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Generalized Boltzmann factor $\rho(E)$ and fundamental inverse temperature function $\beta_F(E)$ for the
canonical, $q$-canonical and Gaussian~\cite{Challa1988a,Johal2003} ensembles.}
\label{tbl_models}
\end{table}
\section{Statement of the postulates}
\label{sect_postulates}
Our aim in this section is to describe the $q$-canonical ensemble with a minimal set of postulates, based on our
definition of the fundamental temperature. In fact, we will show that only two such postulates suffice to recover the
$q$-canonical form of $\beta_F$ given in Eq. \ref{eq_qcanon_betaf}.
The first postulate asserts that the same fundamental temperature function applies to the whole of a system, as well as its parts.
More precisely, for a system with energy $E$ which can be divided into two contributions, namely $E=E_1+E_2$, we impose that
\begin{equation}
\beta_F(E_1+E_2; \beta_0) = \beta_F(E_1; \beta_F(E_2; \beta_0)).
\label{eq_first_postulate}
\end{equation}
A simple interpretation of this is that part of the system, encoded in $E_2$, is ``absorbed'' into the environment that
affects the rest (represented by $E_1$), and that environment is no longer constant, but depends on the fluctuations of
$E_2$ \emph{through the same function} $\beta_F$.
Setting $E_1=E_2=0$ in Eq. \ref{eq_first_postulate} leads to the boundary condition $\beta_F(0; \beta_0) = \beta_0$ for any value of $\beta_0$,
that is, the limit of low energy always corresponds to the canonical ensemble.
The second postulate requires the existence of a function $D(x)$ such that
\begin{equation}
\beta_F(E; \beta_0) E = D(\beta_0 E).
\label{eq_second_postulate}
\end{equation}
In this way, the physical properties of the system only depend on the product $\beta E$ (the ratio \emph{energy/temperature}).
Rescaling the energy and the temperature simultaneously by the same factor $\alpha$ cannot have any effect on the description of the system.
This can be easily seen in Eq. \ref{eq_cvt_rho}, where rescaling $E \rightarrow \alpha E$ and $\beta_F \rightarrow \beta_F/\alpha$ will not
change the expectation of $\big<\nabla\cdot \bm{v}\big>_\rho$.
It is a simple exercise to check that, for the $q$-canonical fundamental temperature given in Eq. \ref{eq_qcanon_betaf} both
requirements (Eqs. \ref{eq_first_postulate} and \ref{eq_second_postulate}) hold for any value of $q$. We will go further, and in the
next section we will show that the $q$-canonical ensemble is the only possible model compatible with both postulates simultaneously.
\section{Proof of the uniqueness of the $q$-canonical form}
\label{sect_proof}
We start by assuming the first postulate,
\begin{equation}
\beta_F(h+g; \beta_0) = \beta_F(h; \beta_F(g; \beta_0)),
\end{equation}
and recognizing its validity for any combination of values of $h$, $g$ and $\beta_0$. By differentiation with respect to
$h$ and $g$, we find a system of differential equations, namely
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\partial \beta_F(A; \beta_0)}{\partial A}\Big|_{A=h+g}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! = \frac{\partial \beta_F(h; \beta_F(g; \beta_0))}{\partial h}, \label{eq_system_1} \\
\frac{\partial \beta_F(A; \beta_0)}{\partial A}\Big|_{A=h+g}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! = \frac{\partial \beta_F(h; B)}{\partial
B}\Big|_{B=\beta_F(g;\beta_0)}\!\!\!\!\!\!\frac{\partial \beta_F(g; \beta_0)}{\partial g}.
\label{eq_system_2}
\end{eqnarray}
Combining Eq. \ref{eq_system_1} and \ref{eq_system_2} we get
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial \beta_F(g; \beta_0)}{\partial g} = \frac{\left(\frac{\partial \beta_F(h; B)}{\partial h}\right)}{\left(\frac{\partial \beta_F(h; B)}{\partial B}\right)}\Big|_{B=\beta_F(g;\beta_0)},
\end{equation}
which implies, on the one hand, that the right-hand side is a function of $\beta_F(g;\beta_0)$, that is,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial \beta_F(g; \beta_0)}{\partial g} = F(\beta_F(g; \beta_0)),
\label{eq_partial_1}
\end{equation}
and also that it is independent of $h$, therefore
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial \beta_F(h; B)}{\partial h} = F(B)\left(\frac{\partial \beta_F(h; B)}{\partial B}\right).
\label{eq_partial_3}
\end{equation}
Combining Eq. \ref{eq_partial_1} with $g=h$ and Eq. \ref{eq_partial_3}, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial \beta_F(h; \beta_0)}{\partial \beta_0} = \frac{F(\beta_F(h; \beta_0))}{F(\beta_0)}.
\label{eq_partial_2}
\end{equation}
Now we incorporate the second postulate, $\beta_F(h; \beta_0) h =D(\beta_0 h)$ and require the equality of the
second-order cross derivatives,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial^2 \beta_F}{\partial h\partial \beta_0} = F'\left(\frac{D(\beta_0 h)}{h}\right)D'(\beta_0 h)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial^2 \beta_F}{\partial h\partial \beta_0} = \frac{F'\left(\frac{D(\beta_0 h)}{h}\right)}{F(\beta_0)}
\left[\frac{\beta_0 D'(\beta_0 h)}{h} - \frac{D(\beta_0 h)}{h^2}\right],
\end{equation}
leading to
\begin{equation}
\frac{F(\beta_0)}{\beta_0^2} = \frac{1}{\beta_0 h} - \frac{D(\beta_0 h)}{D'(\beta_0 h)(\beta_0 h)^2}.
\end{equation}
As the left-hand side does not depend on $h$, it follows that both sides are equal to a constant, $K$. Then, the
function $F$ is given by $F(x)=Kx^2$ and also
\begin{equation}
D'(x) = \frac{D(x)}{x(1-Kx)},
\end{equation}
with general solution,
\begin{equation}
D(x) = \frac{\lambda x}{1-Kx}.
\end{equation}
where $\lambda$ is an integration constant, to be determined. We now have, for the fundamental inverse temperature,
\begin{equation}
\beta_F(h; \beta_0) = \frac{D(\beta_0 h)}{h} = \frac{\lambda \beta_0}{1-K \beta_0 h}.
\end{equation}
As $\beta_F(0; \beta_0)=\beta_0$, the integration constant $\lambda$ must be equal to one, and therefore the only fundamental inverse
temperature compatible with Eqs. \ref{eq_first_postulate} and \ref{eq_second_postulate} has the $q$-canonical form
\begin{equation}
\beta_F(h; \beta_0) = \frac{\beta_0}{1-(1-q)\beta_0 h},
\end{equation}
after the identification of $K$ with $1-q$. We can check as well that the function $F(x)=Kx^2$ leads to the correct
partial derivatives in Eqs. \ref{eq_partial_1} and \ref{eq_partial_2} for the $q$-canonical,
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial \beta_F(h; \beta_0)}{\partial h} & = (1-q)\beta_F(h; \beta_0)^2 = F(\beta_F(h; \beta_0)), \nonumber \\
\frac{\partial \beta_F(h; \beta_0)}{\partial \beta_0} & = \frac{\beta_F(h; \beta_0)^2}{\beta_0^2} = \frac{F(\beta_F(h; \beta_0))}{F(\beta_0)}.
\end{align}
\section{Concluding remarks}
\label{sect_concluding}
We have shown that the first and second postulates, Eqs. \ref{eq_first_postulate} and \ref{eq_second_postulate},
are necessary and sufficient conditions for the emergence of $q$-canonical probability distributions. These postulates
are in fact invariance requirements, on the partition between a subsystem and its environment, and under joint rescaling
of energy and temperature. Note that, unlike Tsallis statistics or Superstatistics, we have not assumed \emph{a priori} the
existence of a parameter $q$ in our postulates; it rather appears naturally as a parametrization of the family of joint solutions
of Eq. \ref{eq_first_postulate} and \ref{eq_second_postulate}.
It is interesting to note that the first postulate imposes that the same fundamental temperature function, even the same
$q$ index, has to be used for subsystems in contact, and for the whole. This is reminiscent of the issue raised by
Nauenberg~\cite{Nauenberg2003} about equilibrium between systems with different values of $q$.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
SD and GG gratefully acknowledge funding from FONDECYT grant 1171127. SD also acknowledges funding from Anillo ACT-172101 grant.
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $K$ be a non-discrete non-Archimedean local field and $\sch{G}$ be
a connected reductive group scheme over $K$ with an irreducible root
system. In this article we are interested in computing extensions of
supersingular characters of affine pro-$p$ Iwahori--Hecke algebra,
denoted by $\mathcal{H}^{\text{aff}}$ (see section $2$). In the
context of mod-$p$ local Langlands correspondence the Iwahori--Hecke
algebra, denoted by $\mathcal{H}$, plays a very important role. For
instance, when $\sch{G}={\rm GL}_n/K$ a numerical correspondence
between absolutely simple supersingular $\mathcal{H}$-modules of
dimension $n$ and $n$-dimensional absolutely irreducible mod-$p$
representations of the absolute Galois group of $\mathbb{Q}_p$ was
conjectured by Vigneras (see \cite{vigneras_split}) and is proved by
Ollivier for ${\rm GL}_n(\mathbb{Q}_p)$ (see \cite[Theorem
1.1]{ollivier_numerical}). This numerical correspondence is extended
as an exact functor by the work of Grosse-Kl\"onne (see \cite[Theorem
8.8]{grosse_klonne_hecke_galois_1}). This article is an attempt to
understand the blocks of the category of $\mathcal{H}$-modules.
We compute the dimension of degree one extensions of characters of the
affine pro-$p$ Iwahori--Hekce algebra for a connected reductive group
over a $p$-adic field. With the recent work of Abe on parabolic
induction and their adjoint functors (see \cite{abe_hecke_induct_1}
and \cite{abe_hecke_induct_2}) we know the dimension of
degree one extensions between simple modules of
$\mathcal{H}^{\text{aff}}$. In particular if the group is semi-simple
and simply connected the dimension of degree one extensions between
simple modules of pro-$p$ Iwahori--Hecke algebra, denoted by
$\mathcal{H}$, can be computed using the data of support of the
supersingular characters (see section $2$).
The structure of the algebra $\mathcal{H}$ is studied in detail by
Vigneras in the article \cite{vigneras_split} when $\sch{G}$ is split
and in the article \cite{vigneras_pro-p_hecke_alg} for any connected
reductive group $\sch{G}$. Among other things she showed presentations
of the algebra $\mathcal{H}$ similar to that of Iwahori--Matsumoto and
Bernstein as in the classical Iwahori--Hecke algebra. Ollivier defied
the notion of supersingularity for a $\mathcal{H}$ module in the split
case (see \cite{ollivier_satake_comp}) and later obtained a
classification of simple supersingular modules of $\mathcal{H}$. These
results were generalised to arbitrary groups by Vigneras (see
\cite{vigneras_modules}). All simple modules are constructed from
supersingular representations (see \cite{ollivier_induct} and
\cite{abe_hecke_induct_1}). The simple supersingular modules are
characterised completely by the results of Ollivier and Vigneras and we
use their explicit description in our calculations.
The dimensions of extensions spaces of simple modules over
$\mathcal{H}$ are computed for ${\rm GL}_2/K$ by Breuil and Paskunas
(see \cite{towards_mop_p_langlands}). The homological dimension of the
algebra $\mathcal{H}$ is investigated by Koziol in the article
\cite{koziol_hom_dim}. When $\sch{G}$ is split group Koziol showed
that the homological dimension is usually infinite. In
this regard the higher extensions always exist but the question of
blocks for the category of modules over $\mathcal{H}$ is to be
determined. The work of Abdellatif and the author gives dimensions of
extension spaces between simple modules of $\mathcal{H}$ for
${\rm SL}_2$. For rank one groups, it was observed that the notion of
$L$-packets and the blocks are closely related. To understand the
blocks of Iwahori--Hecke modules we first compute the dimension of
degree one extensions (see Theorem \ref{main_theorem}). For the case
of ${\rm SL}_n$ the defintion of $L$-packets was given by Koziol (see
\cite[Definition 6.4]{koziol_sl_packets}). We observed that the
notions of supersingular blocks and $L$-packets do not coincide if
$n>2$.
In this article we explicitly compute the blocks of simple
$\mathcal{H}$ modules for unramified unitary groups in $2$ and $3$
variables denoted by $U(1,1)$ and $U(2,1)$ respectively. The case of
$U(1,1)$ is similar to that of ${\rm SL}_2$ and blocks and $L$-packets
are the same. This paper is the authors attempt to understand the
relationship between blocks and $L$ packets for general reductive
groups. Even for the case of ${\rm SL}_n$ the complete relationship
between blocks and $L$-packets for $n>3$ is not complete.
\section{Preliminaries}
Let $K$ be a non-Archimedean non-discrete local field with ring of
integers $\integers{K}$, its maximal ideal $\mathfrak{P}_F{K}$ and residue
field $k$ of cardinality $q$ a power of prime $p$. In this article all
modules and representations are over a fixed algebraically closed
field $R$ of characteristic $p$. Let $\sch{G}$ be a connected
reductive group scheme over $K$. We denote by $\mathfrak{X}_K$ the
adjoint Bruhat--Tits building associated to $(\sch{G}, K)$ and
$j:\mathfrak{X}_K\hookrightarrow \mathfrak{X}_K'$ be the enlarged
Bruhat--Tits building. For any facet $F$ of $\mathfrak{X}_K$ we denote
by $\sch{G}_F$ the Bruhat--Tits group scheme over $\integers{K}$
associated to $F$ such that $\sch{G}_F(\integers{K})$ is isomorphic to
the pointwise $G$ stabiliser of the facet $j(F)$ and
$\sch{G}_F\times_{\integers{K}}K\simeq \sch{G}$. Let $\sch{G}_F^0$ be
the connected component of $\sch{G}_F$ and let $P_F$ be the group
$\sch{G}_F^0(\integers{K})$. The group $P_F$ is the parahoric subgroup
of $\sch{G}(K)$. Let $U_{F, k}$ be the unipotent radical of
$\sch{G}^0\times_{\integers{K}} k$. Let $I_F$ be the pro-$p$ group
$$\{\sch{G}^0_F(\integers{K})\ |\ g\in U_{F, k}(k)\ \text{mod}\
\mathfrak{P}_F{K}\}.$$
For any $K$-group scheme $\sch{H}$ we denote by $H$ the group
$\sch{H}(K)$.
In the rest of the section the main reference is
\cite[section 1.3]{vigneras_modules}. Let $\sch{T}$ be the maximal $K$-split
torus contained in $\sch{G}$. We denote by $\sch{N}$ and $\sch{Z}$
the normaliser and centraliser of the torus $\sch{T}$. Let $V$ be the
space spanned by the set of coroots
$\Phi(\sch{G}, \sch{T})^{\vee}\subset
X_\ast(\sch{T})\otimes\mathbb{R}$. Let $\mathcal{A}_{\sch{T}}$ be the
apartment in $\mathfrak{X}_K$ corresponding to $\sch{T}$ and
$\nu:Z\rightarrow V$ be the Bruhat--Tits homomorphism. The group $Z$
acts on $\mathcal{A}_{\sch{T}}$ by translations via the map
$\nu:Z\rightarrow V$ moreover this action extends to an action of $N$.
Let $Z_0$ be the unique parahoric subgroup of $Z$ and $Z_1$ be the
maximal pro-$p$ subgroup of $Z_0$. We denote by $Z_k$ the quotient
$Z_0/Z_1$. Let $W(1)$ be the group $N/Z_1$ and $W$ be the extended
affine Weyl group $N/Z_0$. With these notations $W(1)$ fits in the
following exact sequence.
$$0\rightarrow Z_k\rightarrow W(1)\rightarrow W\rightarrow 0.$$
Let $\Lambda$ be the group $Z/Z_0$, the group $W_0$ normalizes $Z/Z_0$
and we have an isomorphism $W\simeq \Lambda\rtimes W_0$. The
homomorphism $\nu:Z\rightarrow V$ factorizes through $Z_0$ and hence
$W$ acts on $V$.
We fix a chamber $C$ contained in $\mathcal{A}_{\sch{T}}$. The group
$P_C$ is the Iwahori subgroup and $I_C$ is the maximal pro-$p$
subgroup of $P_C$. The maps $n\mapsto P_CnP_C$ and $n\mapsto I_CnI_C$
induces bijections $W\simeq P_C\backslash G/P_C$ and
$W(1)\simeq I_C\backslash G/I_C$ respectively. Let $\mathcal{S}(C)$ be
the set of faces of $\bar{C}$ and for every $F\in \mathcal{S}(C)$ we
denote by $s_F$ the affine reflection fixing the face $F$. Let
$W^{\text{aff}}$ be the group generated by
$\{s_F\ |\ F\in \mathcal{S}(C)\}$, we denote this set of reflations by
$S^{\text{aff}}$. The group $W^{\text{aff}}$ is called the affine Weyl
group. The pair $(W^{\text{aff}}, S^{\text{aff}})$ is a Coxeter system
and the group $W^{\text{aff}}$ is contained in $\nu(N)$ the image of
$N$ in the group of affine automorphisms of
$\mathcal{A}_{\sch{T}}$. Let $l:W^{\text{aff}}\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}$
be the length function of the Coxeter system
$(W^{\text{aff}}, S^{\text{aff}})$.
For any $F\in \mathcal{S}(C)$ we denote by $G_{F,k}$ the group
$P_F/I_F$. The group $P_{F, k}$ is also the $k$-points of the
reductive quotient of $\sch{G}^0\times_{\integers{K}}k$, denoted by
$\sch{G}_{F, k}$. The group $\sch{G}_{F, k}$ is a connected reductive
group of rank one. The image of $I_F$ in $P_{F, k}$ is the group of
$k$-rational points of the unipotent radical $\sch{U}_{F, k}$ of a
Borel subgroup ${T}_{F, k}{U}_{F, k}$. We denote by
$\overline{\sch{U}}_{F, k}$ be the unipotent radical of the opposite
Borel subgroup of $\sch{G}_{F, k}$. We denote by $Z_{F, k}$ the group
$Z_k\cap<U_{F, k}, \overline{U}_{F,k}>$ where
$<U_{F, k}, \overline{U}_{F, k}>$ is the group generated by the two
opposite unipotent groups. Moreover for any $s\in S^{\text{aff}}$
there exits an $n_s\in N\cap P_s$ such that its image in $G_{k,s}$
belongs to the group $<U_{F, k}, \overline{U}_{F, k}>$. The image of
$n_s$ in $W(1)$ is called an admissible lift of $s$.
Let $\Omega$ be the $W$ stabiliser of $C$. The group $W$ can be
identified with $W^{\text{aff}}\rtimes \Omega$. The group $\Omega$
normalizes $W^{\text{aff}}$ and the length function $l$ extends to a
function on $W$. We denote by $l$ the inflation of $l$ to $W(1)$. If
$\sch{G}$ is semi-simple simply-connected group $\Omega$ is
trivial. The group $\Omega$ is trivial in some other interesting
cases. Consider an unramified quadratic extension $L$ of $K$ and
$(W, h)$ be a pair consisting of a vector space $W$ over $L$ and $h$
is a hermitian form. Assume that the dimension of the anisotropic part
of $W$ is less than one. The unitary group $\sch{U}(W)/K$ associated
to the pair $(W, h)$ is quasi-split and in this case
$W=W^{\text{aff}}$. We may take $L$ to be a separated ramified
quadratic extension of $K$, when the dimension of $W$ is odd and we
have $W=W^{\text{aff}}$ for $\sch{U}(W)/K$.
Let $\mathcal{H}$ be the algebra $\operatorname{End}_{G}(\operatorname{ind}_{I_C}^G\operatorname{id})$ and we
identify $\mathcal{H}$ with the space of functions $f:G\rightarrow R$
such that $f(i_1gi_2)=f(g)$ for all $i_1, i_2\in I_C$ and $g\in
G$. For any $w\in W(1)$ we denote by $T_w$ the characteristic function
on $I_CwI_C$. The elements $\{T_w\}_{w\in W(1)}$ form a basis for the
Hecke algebra and $\mathcal{H}$ admits the following presentation
given by two sets of relations
\begin{enumerate}
\item (braid relations) For any $w, w'\in W(1)$ such that
$l(w)+l(w')=l(ww')$ we have $T_{w}T_{w'}=T_{ww'}$
\item (quadratic relations) For any $s\in S^{\text{aff}}$ we have
$T_s^2=-c_sT_s$ where $c_s=1/|Z_{k,s}|\sum_{z\in Z_{k,s}}T_z$.
\end{enumerate}
We denote by $\mathcal{H}^{\text{aff}}$ the subalgebra of
$\mathcal{H}$ generated by $\{T_{w}\ | \ w\in W^{\text{aff}}\}$. The
algebra $\mathcal{H}$ is called the pro-$p$ Iwahori--Hecke algebra and
$\mathcal{H}^{\text{aff}}$ the affine pro-$p$ Iwahori--Hecke
algebra. The algebra $\mathcal{H}$ is isomorphic to a certain twisted
tensor product of $R[Z_k]$ and $\mathcal{H}^{\text{aff}}$. In this
article we restrict to the characters of $\mathcal{H}^{\text{aff}}$
and we will not need this description. Let $\iota$ be an involutive
$R$ automorphism of $\mathcal{H}$ such that
$\iota(T_{\tilde{s}})=T_{\tilde{s}}-c_{\tilde{s}}$.
We restrict ourselves to characters of $\mathcal{H}$ and
$\mathcal{H}^{\text{aff}}$ we do not recall the description of all
simple modules. We first describe the set of characters of
$\mathcal{H}^{\text{aff}}$ (see \cite[Theorem
1.6]{vigneras_modules}). Let $\lambda$ be any character of $Z_k$ and
we denote by $S_\lambda$ the set
$\{s\in S^{\text{aff}}\ |\ \lambda(c_s)\neq 0\}$. For any subset $I$
of $S^{\text{aff}}$ we denote by $W_I$ the subgroup of $W$ generated
by $s\in I$. The set of characters of the algebra $\mathcal{H}$ are
parametrised by pairs $(\lambda, I)$ consisting of a character
$\lambda$ of $Z_k$ and a subset $I$ of $S_\lambda$. We denote by
$\xi_{\lambda, I}$ the character corresponding to $(\lambda, I)$ and
is given by
\begin{equation}
\xi_{\lambda, I}(T_{wt})=0\ \text{for all}\ w\in W\backslash W_I\
\text{and} \ t\in Z_k.
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\xi_{\lambda, I}(T_{wt})=\lambda(t)(-1)^{l(w)}\ \text{for all}\ w\in W_I\
\text{and} \ t\in Z_k.
\end{equation}
For any character $\xi$ of $\mathcal{H}^{\text{aff}}$ we denote by
$S_{\xi}$ the set $\{s\in S^{\text{aff}}\ |\ \ c_{s}(T_{\tilde{s}})\}$
where $\tilde{s}$ is an admissible lift of $s$. This definition of
$S_{\xi}$ does not depend on admissible lifts. The character $\xi$ is
called sign character if $S_{\xi}=S^{\text{aff}}$. If $\xi$ is a sign
character then $\xi\circ\iota$ is called the trivial character. Any
character $\xi$ is supersingular if and only if $\xi$ is not a sign
character or trivial character (see \cite[Theorem
1.6]{vigneras_modules}).
\section{Calculations of degree one extensions.}
In this section we want to compute the dimension of the spaces
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}^{\text{aff}}}(\xi_{\lambda_1, I_1}, \xi_{\lambda_2, I_2})$. We
denote by $\mathcal{H}$ the affine pro-$p$ Iwahori--Hecke algebra by
abuse of notation. The algebra $\mathcal{H}$ is generated by $T_t$ for
$t\in Z_k$ and $T_{\tilde{s}}$ where $s\in S_{\text{aff}}$. For
convenience we drop the $\tilde{s}$ in the admissible lift of $s$. We
use the generators and relations to calculate the dimension of the
degree one extensions.
Let $E$ be an extension of $\mathfrak{m}:=\xi_{\lambda_2, I_2}$ by
$\mathfrak{n}:=\xi_{\lambda_1, I_1}$, i.e, we have
$$0\rightarrow \mathfrak{n}\xrightarrow{p}
E\xrightarrow{q}\mathfrak{m}\rightarrow 0.$$ We fix two non-zero
vectors $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1'$ and $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2'$ in $\mathfrak{n}$ and $\mathfrak{m}$
respectively. Fix a $Z_k$ equivariant section
$s:\mathfrak{m}\rightarrow E$ of the map $q$. Let $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$ and $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$
be the vectors $p(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1')$ and $s(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2')$. For any
$s\in S^{\text{aff}}$ let the action of $T_{s}$ on $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$ be
\begin{align*}
T_{s}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2&=a_{s}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2\ \forall \ s\in I_2,\\
T_{s}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2&=a_{s}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1, \ \forall \ s\not\in I_2.
\end{align*}
Moreover for any $t$ in $ Z_k$ we have,
\begin{align*}
\lambda_2(t^s)(a_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2) =T_sT_{t^s}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2
&=T_tT_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_s\lambda_1(t)\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\lambda_2(t)\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2 \ \forall \
s\in I_2, \\
a_s\lambda_2(t^s)\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=\lambda_2(t^s)T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=T_sT_{t^s}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2
&=T_tT_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=\lambda(t)a_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1, \ \forall \ s\not\in I_2.
\end{align*}
From the above relations we get that
$a_s((s\lambda_2)(t)-\lambda_1(t))=0$ for all $s\in S_{\text{aff}}$
and $t\in Z_k$. Let $I_E$ be the set
$\{s\in S_{\text{aff}}\ | \ a_s\neq 0\}$. If $E$ is non-split
extension then the set $I_E$ is non-empty and moreover we have
$\lambda_2^s=\lambda_1$ for all $s\in I_E$. If
$\lambda_1\neq \lambda_2$ the values $(a_s)_{s\in S^{\text{aff}}}$ are
determined by $E$ and does not depend on the choice of
$s:\mathfrak{m}\rightarrow E$. If $\lambda_1=\lambda_2$ the section
$s:\mathfrak{m}\rightarrow E$ is not unique we have to take this into
consideration to identify the space of extensions. But for the present
purpose let us fix a section $s:\mathfrak{m}\rightarrow E$.
\begin{lemma}\normalfont\label{quadratic_relations}
For a fixed basis $(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1, \operatorname{{\bf v}}_2)$ as above we get that $a_s=0$ for
any $s\in I_1\cap I_2$. If $s\in S_{\lambda_1}$, $s\not\in I_1$
and $s\not\in I_2$ then $a_s=0$. If $s\not\in S_{\lambda_1}$ and $s\in
I_2$ then $a_s=0$. With the above relations on $a_s$ the
quadratic relations are satisfied for all $s\in S_{\text{aff}}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
In this lemma we only use the quadratic relations on the elements
$T_s$ for $s\in S_{\text{aff}}$. To begin with consider any
$s\in I_1\cap I_2$. Consider the case where $s\in I_1\cap I_2$. In
this case we have $T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$ and
$T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$. Now the quadratic relation on $T_s$ gives us
$$c_s(-a_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1+\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2)=-c_sT_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=T_s^2\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=-2a_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2.$$
Now the reflection $s$ belongs to $I_1$ and $I_2$ and hence
$c_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=c_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=1$. This concludes that $a_s=0$. Now consider the
case where $s\not\in I_1$ and hence $s\not\in I_2$. In this case we
get that $T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=0$ and $T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$. The quadratic relations
gives us $-c_sT_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=0$. Hence we get that $-a_sc_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=0$. Now if
$s\in S_{\lambda_1}$ then $c_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$ which implies that $a_s=0$.
Consider the case where $s\in I_1$ and $s\not\in I_2$. We have
$T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$ and $T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$. Now
$T_s(T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2)=-a_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$. The element
$-c_sT_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=-a_sc_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$. Since $s\in I_1\subset S_{\lambda_1}$ we
get that $c_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$. This shows that $T_s$ satisfies the
required quadratic relation. Now consider the case $s\in I_2$ and
$s\not\in I_1$. In this case we have $T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$ and
$T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=0$. This shows that $T_s(T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2)=-T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$. But
$-c_sT_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$ is qual to $-a_sc_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1+c_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$. Now
$s\in I_2\subset S_{\lambda_2}$ we get that $c_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$. Hence we
get that $a_sc_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=a_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$. Now $s\in S_{\lambda_1}$ then the
quadratic relation is satisfied but otherwise $a_s=0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{bridge}\normalfont
Note that $a_s$ may be non-zero in either of the following cases. In
the first case, $s\in I_1$ and $s\not\in I_2$, in the second case
$s\in S_{\lambda_1}$, $s\not\in I_1$ and $s\in I_2$, the third case
when $s\not\in S_{\lambda_1}$, $s\not\in I_2$. Now the existence of
extensions and their isomorphism classes can be computed by
examining the braid relations.
\end{remark}
\begin{lemma}\label{first_braid}\normalfont
For any $s_1$ and $s_2$ in $I_1\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)$ the constants
$a_{s_1}$ equals to $a_{s_2}$. If $s_1$ and $s_2$ belong to
$I_2\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)$ then $a_{s_1}=a_{s_2}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
In the first case the action of $T_{s_1}$ and $T_{s_2}$ is given by
$T_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$, $T_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$ and
$T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$ and $T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$. Now
$(T_{s_i}T_{s_j})^m\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=-a_{s_j}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$ and
$T_{s_j}(T_{s_i}T_{s_j})^m\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_{s_j}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$. Now by braid relation
for $T_{s_1}$ and $T_{s_2}$ we get that $a_{s_i}=a_{s_j}$. In the
second case the action of $T_{s_1}$ and $T_{s_2}$ on $E$ are given
by $T_{s_i}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=0$ and $T_{s_i}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_{s_i}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$. Now
$(T_{s_i}T_{s_j})^m\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=-a_{s_i}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1+\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$ and
$T_{s_j}(T_{s_i}T_{s_j})^m\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_{s_j}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$. Using braid
relations we get that $a_{s_i}=a_{s_j}$.
\end{proof}
Note that in the third case when $s\not\in S_{\lambda_1}$ and
$s\in I_2$, $a_s=0$. Now if there is an $s$ in the third case we get
that for any $s\in I_2\backslash (I_1\cap I_1)$ the value $a_s=0$. The
next lemma concludes the verification of the remaining braid relations
on $T_{s}$ for $s\in S_{\text{aff}}$.
\begin{hypothesis}
We make the following hypothesis on the function
$a:S^{\text{aff}}\rightarrow \bar{k}$ sending $s\mapsto a_s$.
\begin{enumerate}\normalfont\label{conditions}
\item the conditions on $a_{s}$ satisfied by Lemmas
\ref{quadratic_relations} and \ref{first_braid},
\item If there exist $s_1\in I_1\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)$ and
$s_2\in I_2\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)$ such that the order of $s_1s_2$
is $2$ then we have $a_{s_i}+a_{s_j}=0$ for all
$s_i\in I_1\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)$ and
$s_j\in I_2\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)$,
\item Let $s\in S^{\text{aff}}\backslash (I_1\cup I_2)$ and there
exists an element $s'\in I_1\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)$ such that the
order of $ss'$ is $2$ then $a_s=0$,
\item Let $s\in S^{\text{aff}}\backslash (I_1\cup I_2)$ and there
exists an element $s'\in I_2\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)$ such that the
order of $ss'$ is $2$ then $a_s=0$,
\item Let $s\in S^{\text{aff}}\backslash (I_1\cup I_2)$ and there
exists an element $s'\in (I_1\cap I_2)$ such that the
order of $ss'$ is $3$ then $a_s=0$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{hypothesis}
\begin{lemma}\label{final_braid}\normalfont
Let $E$ be a $2$ dimensional vector space and for any basis
$(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1, \operatorname{{\bf v}}_2)$ of $E$ such that $T_t\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=\lambda_1(t)\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$ and
$T_t\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=\lambda_2(t)\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$ for all $t\in Z_k$. Suppose the
function $a:S^{\text{aff}}\rightarrow \bar{k}$ satisfy the following
Hypothesis \ref{conditions}. The
relations $T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$ for $s\in I_1$, $T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=0$ for
$s\not\in I_1$ and $T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$ for $s\in I_2$,
$T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$ for $s\not\in I_2$ makes $E$ a $\mathcal{H}$
module.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
From Lemma \ref{quadratic_relations} we have to verify braid
relations in $\mathcal{H}$. Note that Lemma \ref{first_braid} we get
the braid relations for pairs $(s_1, s_2)$ such that $s_1, s_2$ are
both in $I_1\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)$ and
$I_2\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)$. If $s_1$ and $s_2$ both belong to
$I_1\cap I_2$ then $a_s=0$ and hence braid relations follow as $E$
is a direct sum when restricted to the algebra generated by
$T_{s_1}$ and $T_{s_2}$. Let $s_1$ and $s_2$ belong to
$S_{\text{aff}}\backslash (I_1\cup I_2)$. In this case we have:
$T_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=0$, $T_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$, $T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=0$ and
$T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$. Now $(T_{s_i}T_{s_j})^m=0$ for
$m\geq 1$ from which the braid relations follow.
Fix any $s_1\in I_1\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)$ and consider the case
when $s_2\in I_1\cap I_2$ then we have $T_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$,
$T_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$, $T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$ and
$T_{s_{2}}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$. In this case we have
$(T_{s_i}T_{s_j})^m\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=-a_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$ and
$T_{s_j}(T_{s_i}T_{s_j})^m\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$. Hence the braid
relations are satisfied. Now consider the case where
$s_2\in I_2\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)$. In this case we have the
relations $T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=0$ and
$T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$. With these relations we get that
$T_{s_2}T_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=0$,
$T_{s_1}T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=-(a_{s_1}+a_{s_2})\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$ and
$T_{s_2}T_{s_1}T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=0$. By Hypothesis \ref{conditions}, (2)
we get the braid relations in this case. Now consider the case when
$s_1\in I_1\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)$ and
$s_2\in S_{\text{aff}}\backslash (I_1\cup I_2)$. In this case we
have $T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=0$ and $T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$. Moreover
$T_{s_2}T_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=0$, $T_{s_1}T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=-a_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$ and
$T_{s_2}T_{s_1}T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=0$. By Hypothesis \ref{conditions}, (3)
we get the braid relations in this case.
Now fix any $s_1\in (I_1\cap I_2)$. We have $T_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$
and $T_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$. Consider the case where
$s_2\in I_2\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)$. In this case we have
$T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=0$ and $T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$. In this case
we have $(T_{s_i}T_{s_j})^m=-a_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1+\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$ and
$T_{s_j}(T_{s_i}T_{s_j})^m=a_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$ and hence the braid
relations are satisfied. Consider the case when
$s_2\in S_{\text{aff}}\backslash (I_1\cup I_2)$. In this case we
have $T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=0$ and $T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$. Which gives
the relations
$T_{s_1}T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=T_{s_2}T_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=-a_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$,
$T_{s_2}T_{s_1}T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=0$ and
$T_{s_1}T_{s_2}T_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$. By Hypothesis
\ref{conditions}, (5) we get the braid relations in this case.
Finally we have to consider the case where
$s_1\in I_2\backslash (I_2\cap I_1)$ and
$s_2\in S_{\text{aff}}\backslash (I_1\cup I_2)$. In this case we have
$T_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=0$, $T_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$, $T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1=0$
and $T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=a_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$. This shows that
$T_{s_1}T_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=0$, $T_{s_2}T_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=-a_{s_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$ and
$T_{s_1}T_{s_2}T_{s_1}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2=0$. By Hypothesis \ref{conditions}, (4)
we get the braid relations in this case.
\end{proof}
We will investigate the structure constants with respect to Baer sum.
Let $\mathfrak{m}$ and $\mathfrak{n}$ be the $\mathcal{H}$ modules
$\xi_{\lambda_1, I_1}$ and $\xi_{\lambda_2, I_2}$. Assume that
$\lambda_1\neq \lambda_2$. Fix a basis vectors
$\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1^0\in \mathfrak{n}$ and $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^0\in \mathfrak{m}$. There is a
canonical basis of $E$ given by $p(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1^1)$ and $q(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^1)$ and we
denote them by $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$ and $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$. Consider any two extensions
$\mathfrak{n}\hookrightarrow E_1 \twoheadrightarrow \mathfrak{m}$ and
$ \mathfrak{n}\hookrightarrow E_2 \twoheadrightarrow \mathfrak{m}$ and
the Baer sum $E_1\dotplus E_2$ is given by the following commutative
diagram:
\begin{equation}\label{baer_sum}
\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=2.5cm,auto]
\node(A_1){$0$};
\node(B_1)[right of=A_1]{$\mathfrak{n}\oplus\mathfrak{n}$};
\node(C_1) [right of=B_1] {$E_1\oplus E_2$};
\node(D_1) [right of=C_1] {$\mathfrak{m}\oplus\mathfrak{m}$};
\node(E_1) [right of=D_1] {$0$};
\node(A_2)[below of =A_1]{$0$};
\node(B_2)[below of=B_1]{$\mathfrak{n}\oplus\mathfrak{n}$};
\node(C_2) [below of=C_1] {$E'$};
\node(D_2) [below of=D_1] {$\mathfrak{m}$};
\node(E_2) [right of=D_2] {$0$};
\node(A_3)[below of =A_2]{$0$};
\node(B_3)[below of=B_2]{$\mathfrak{n}$};
\node(C_3)[below of =C_2]{$E_1\dotplus E_2$};
\node(D_3)[below of =D_2]{$\mathfrak{m}$};
\node(E_3)[below of =E_2]{$0$};
\draw[->] (A_1) -- (B_1);
\draw[->] (B_1) to node[above]{$p_1\oplus p_2$}(C_1);
\draw[->](C_1) to node[above]{$q_1\oplus q_2$} (D_1);
\draw[->](D_1)--(E_1);
\draw[->](A_2) -- (B_2);
\draw[->](B_2) to node[above]{$p'$}(C_2);
\draw[->] (C_2) to node[above]{$q'$}(D_2);
\draw[->](D_2) --(E_2);
\draw[->](A_3) -- (B_3);
\draw[->](B_3) to node[above]{$p_3$}(C_3);
\draw[->] (C_3) to node[above]{$q_3$}(D_3);
\draw[->](D_3)--(E_3);
\draw[->](B_2) to node{$f_1=\operatorname{id}$}(B_1);
\draw[->](B_2) to node{$\Sigma$}(B_3);
\draw[->](C_2) to node{$f_2$}(C_1);
\draw[->](C_2) to node{$g_2$}(C_3);
\draw[->](D_2) to node{$\Delta$}(D_1);
\draw[->](D_2) to node{$g_3=\operatorname{id}$}(D_3);
\end{tikzpicture} \end{equation}
Here $\Delta$ and $\Sigma$ are diagonal and the sum maps
respectively. The two rows are pullback and push-out by $\Delta$ and
$\Sigma$ respectively.
We denote by $a_s$, $a_s'$ and $a_s''$ by the structure constants of
$E_1$, $E_2$ and $E_1\dotplus E_2$ respectively. Let $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2'$ be a
vector in $E'$ pulled back via $q'$. Since $\lambda_1\neq \lambda_2$
the vector $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2'$ is unique. Let $f_2(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2')=(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^1+\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^2)$ for
$\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1^1$ and $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^2$ in the first and second summand of
$E_1\oplus E_2$. Let $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1'$ and $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1''$ be two vectors in each
summand of $\mathfrak{n}\oplus \mathfrak{n}$. Now
$T_{s}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2'=b_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1'+d_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1''-\delta_{I_2}(s)\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$ and
$$f_2(T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2)=b_sf_2(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1')+c_sf_2(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1'')
-\delta_{I_2}(s)\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^1-\delta_{I_2}(s)\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^2.$$ Comparing the action
of $T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^1$ and $T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^2$ we get that $a_s=b_s$ and
$a_s'=c_s$. Finally considering
$g_2(T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2')=(b_s+c_s)\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\delta_{I_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$ we get that
$a_s''=a_s+a_s'$. This shows that the map sending $E$ to
$(a_s)_{s\in S^{\text{aff}}}$ is injective and surjective onto
functions $(a_s)_{s\in S^{\text{aff}}}$ satisfying the conditions of
Lemmas \ref{quadratic_relations} and \ref{first_braid}.
Now we consider the case where $\lambda_1=\lambda_2$. In this case
there is no canonical basis of $E$ stable under the action of $T_t$
for $t\in Z_k$. If we choose a non-canonical basis then the structure
constants are determined only upto translation by a certain
function. Fix two vectors $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$ and $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$ of $\mathfrak{n}$ and
$\mathfrak{m}$ respectively. Now choose a section
$s:\mathfrak{m}\rightarrow E$ of the map $q$. Let $\operatorname{{\bf v}}'$ be the vector
$s(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2)$. Now we note that
$T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}'=a_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\delta_{I_2}(s)\operatorname{{\bf v}}'$. Now if $s'$ is another section
of the map $q$ then image of $s-s'$ is contained in $\mathfrak{n}$
hence $s'(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2)=s(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2)+k\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$. Let $\operatorname{{\bf v}}''=s'(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2)$ and we have
$T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}''=(a_s-k\delta_{I_2}(s)+k\delta_{I_1}(s))\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\delta_{I_2}(s)\operatorname{{\bf v}}''$.
Hence the map sending $E$ to $s\mapsto a_s$ gives a map from
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\mathfrak{m}, \mathfrak{n})$ to functions on
$S_{\text{aff}}$, denoted by $\bar{k}^{S_{\text{aff}}}$, modulo the
function spanned by $\delta_{I_2}-\delta_{I_1}$. We denote by $\theta$
this map
\begin{equation}\label{strange_homology}
\theta:\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\lambda_1, I_1}, \xi_{\lambda_2, I_2})\rightarrow
\dfrac{\bar{k}^{S_{\text{aff}}}}{<\delta_{I_2}-\delta_{I_1}>}.
\end{equation}
The map $\theta$ is non-canonical and depends on the choice of $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1$
and $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$, but these vectors are determined upto a scalar.
\begin{lemma}
The map $\theta$ is a linear map and moreover is injective.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let us fix a section $s:\mathfrak{m}\rightarrow E'$ of the map $q$
in \eqref{baer_sum}. We also fix sections
$s_i:\mathfrak{m}\rightarrow E_i$ of $q_i$. This also gives a
section $s_1$ to the map $q_3$. Let $\operatorname{{\bf v}}'_2=s(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2)$ and we denote
by $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^1$ and $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^2$ vectors in each summand of
$E_1\oplus E_2$ such that $f_2(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2')=\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^1+\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^2$. Let
$\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1'$ and $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1''$ be two vectors in each summand of
$\mathfrak{n}\oplus \mathfrak{n}$. Now
$T_{s}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2'=b_sp'(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1')+d_sp'(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1'')-\delta_{I_2}(s)\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$ and
$$f_2(T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2)=b_sf_2(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1')+c_sf_2(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1'')
-\delta_{I_2}(s)\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^1-\delta_{I_2}(s)\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^2.$$ Now the vectors
$\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^1$ and $\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^2$ differ from $s_1(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2)$ and $s_2(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2)$ by
$k_1p_1(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1)$ and $k_2p_2(\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1)$. Comparing the action of
$T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^1$ and $T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2^2$ we get that
$a_s=b_s+k_1(\delta_{I_2}-\delta_{I_1})$ and
$a_s'=c_s+k_2(\delta_{I_2}-\delta_{I_1})$. This shows that
$g_2(T_s\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2')$ is equal to the difference of
$(b_s+c_s)\operatorname{{\bf v}}_1-\delta_{I_2}\operatorname{{\bf v}}_2$ by
$(k_1+k_2)(\delta_{I_2}-\delta_{I_1})$. Hence the map $\theta$ is
linear map. The injectivity is clear from the definition since the
vanishing of the function $s\mapsto a_{s}$ for all
$s\in S_{\text{aff}}$ implies $E$ splits.
\end{proof}
With this we are ready to state the main result of this article. We
introduce some notations for the main results. Let
$I(\lambda_1, \lambda_2)$ be the subset of $S_{\text{aff}}$ such that
$\lambda_1^{s}=\lambda_2$. Let $I(\lambda_1, I_2)$ be the intersection
of $I(\lambda_1, \lambda_2)$ and
$$ \{s\in S_{\text{aff}}\backslash
(S_{\lambda_1}\cup I_2)\ |\ s \ \text{does not satisfy the Hypothesis
}\ \ref{conditions}(3)\ (4)\ \text{and}\ (5)\}.$$ Note that for any
$s\not\in I(\lambda_1, \lambda_2)$ we know that $a_s=0$. Let
$\delta_1=1$ if $I_1\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)\neq \emptyset$ and
$I_1\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)\subset I(\lambda_1, \lambda_2)$ if
otherwise, we set $\delta_1=0$. We set $\delta_2=1$ if
$I_2\subset S_{\lambda_1}$, $I_2\not\subset I_1$ and
$I_2\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)\subset I(\lambda_1, \lambda_2)$ if
otherwise we set $\delta_2=0$.
\begin{theorem}\label{main_theorem}
Assume that $\lambda_1\neq \lambda_2$ and $I_1\neq I_2$ then the
dimension of the space
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\lambda_1, I_1}, \xi_{\lambda_2, I_2})$
is $|I(\lambda_1, I_2)|+\delta_1+\delta_2$ if $I_1$ and $I_2$ does
not satisfy the Hypothesis \ref{conditions} (2) and is
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\lambda_1, I_1}, \xi_{\lambda_2, I_2})$
is $|I(\lambda_1, I_2)|+\delta_1+\delta_2-1$ otherwise. If
$\lambda_1\neq \lambda_2$ and $I_1=I_2$ then the dimension of the
space
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\lambda_1, I_1}, \xi_{\lambda_2, I_2})$
is equal to $|I(\lambda_1, I_2)|$.
Assume that $\lambda_1=\lambda_2$ and $I_1\neq I_1$ the dimension of
the space
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\lambda_1, I_1}, \xi_{\lambda_2, I_2})$
is equal to $|I(\lambda_1, I_2)|+\delta_1+\delta_2-1$ if $I_1$ and
$I_2$ does not satisfy the Hypothesis \ref{conditions} (2) and
$|I(\lambda_1, I_2)|$ otherwise. Now if $\lambda_1=\lambda_2$ and
$I_1=I_2$ then the dimension of
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\lambda_1, I_1}, \xi_{\lambda_2, I_2})$
is $|I(\lambda_1, I_2)|$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
If $\lambda_1\neq \lambda_2$ then we have the map
$E\mapsto (a_{s})_{s\in S_{\text{aff}}}$ is injective linear map
onto the image determined by Lemmas \ref{quadratic_relations} and
\ref{first_braid}. If $\lambda_1=\lambda_2$ then we use the map
$\theta$ with the same conditions as in Lemmas
\ref{quadratic_relations} and \ref{first_braid} but now we have to
quotient the image with span of the function
$\delta_{I_2}-\delta_{I_1}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\normalfont
Let $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ be two trivial characters and $I_1$
and $I_2$ are disjoint and they do not satisfy the Hypothesis
\ref{conditions} (2) then the dimension of
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\operatorname{id}, I_1}, \xi_{\operatorname{id}, I_2})$ is $1$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{example}
\normalfont We verify this calculation for
${\rm SL}_2(\mathbb{Q}_p)$. These results are proved by other
methods in \cite{sl2_arxiv}. Let $\chi_r$ be the character of $Z_k$
sending $t\mapsto t^r$ for $0\leq r<p-1$. Let $S_{\text{aff}}$ be
the set $\{s_0, s_1\}$, the generators of the affine Weyl group
$W$. Here $s_0s_1$ has infinite order hence the only relavent
conditions in Hypothesis \ref{conditions} is the condition $(1)$. We
use the notation $\xi_{r, I}$ for the character $\xi_{\chi_r,
I}$. The characters of the affine Hecke algebra are given by
$\xi_{r, \emptyset}$ for $0<r<p-1$, $\xi_{0, s_0}$, $\xi_{0, s_1}$,
$\xi_{0, \emptyset}$ and $\xi_{0, S_{\text{aff}}}$. The set of
characters $\{\xi_{0, \emptyset}, \xi_{0, S_{\text{aff}}}\}$ are not
supersingular and rest of the characters are supersingular. We
first consider the regular case ($r\neq 0$). Consider the case when
$\mathfrak{m}=\xi_{r_1, \emptyset}$ and
$\mathfrak{n}=\xi_{r_2, \emptyset}$. The set
$I(\chi_{r_1}, \chi_{r_2})\neq \emptyset$ if and only if
$r_1+r_2=p-1$. In which case
$I(\chi_{r_1}, \chi_{r_2})=S_{\text{aff}}$. We may and do assume
that $0<r_i= (p-1)/2$ for $i \in \{1,2\}$. The sets
$S_{\lambda_1}=I_1=I_2=S_{\lambda_2}=\emptyset$. Hence
$I(S_{\lambda_1}, I_{\lambda_2})=S_{\text{aff}}$. This shows that
the space of extensions
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{r_1, \emptyset}, \xi_{p-1-r_2,
\emptyset})$ has dimension $2$. If $r_1=r_2=1$ we have $I_1=I_2$
and $\lambda_1=\lambda_2$ case of \ref{main_theorem} and hence the
dimension of the space
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{r_1, \emptyset}, \xi_{p-1-r_2,
\emptyset})$ has dimension $2$.
Consider the case when $r_1=0$ (the Iwahori--case) then the set
$I(\chi_{r_1}, \chi_{r_2})\neq \emptyset$ if and only if
$r_2\in \{p-1, 0\}$. We may assume that $r_2=0$. In this case the
set $I(\chi_{0}, \chi_{0})$ is $S_{\text{aff}}$. The set
$S_{\chi_0}=S_{\text{aff}}$. Now consider the case when
$\mathfrak{m}=\xi_{\chi_0, s_i}$ and
$\mathfrak{n}=\xi_{\chi_0, s_j}$. The set
$I(\chi_0, \{s_j\})=\emptyset$ and note that $\delta_1=1$ and
$\delta_2=1$ if $s_i\neq s_j$. If $s_i=s_j$ then $\delta_1=0$ and
$\delta_2=0$ since $I_2\not\subset I_1$ condition is not
satisfied. This shows that the dimension of the space
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{0, s_i}, \xi_{0, s_j})=1$ if $i\neq j$
and is zero otherwise.
\end{example}
\begin{remark}\label{counter_example}\normalfont
In the case of ${\rm SL}_n$ the $L$-packets are defined by Koziol as
conjugation by ${\rm PGL}_n(K)$ (see \cite[Definition
6.4]{koziol_sl_packets}). For $n=3$ the Hypothesis \ref{conditions}
(2) is not relavent. If $\xi_{\lambda_1, I_1}$ and
$\xi_{\lambda_2, I_2}$ are in the same $L$-packets then the sets
$|I_1|=|I_2|$. Now consider the simple example for ${\rm SL}_3$ the
set $S^{\text{aff}}=\{s_1,s_2,s_3\}$ and assume $I_1=\{s_1\}$ and
$I_2=\{s_2,s_3\}$. The above corollary shows that extensions exist
among distinct $L$-packets. The notion of blocks and $L$-packets in
the supersingular case of higher rank groups are different and the
relationship is not clear in the higher rank cases.
\end{remark}
\section{Blocks for unramified unitary groups in
\texorpdfstring{$2$}{} and \texorpdfstring{$3$}{} variables.}
As an application we deduce the extensions of simple supersingular
$\mathcal{H}$ modules of unramified groups $U(2,1)$ and $U(1,1)$. In
these cases we will try to precisely understand the relation between
extensions and $L$-packets. The Iwahori--Hecke module structure of
$U(2,1)$ and $U(1,1)$ are studied by Abdellatif, Koziol-Xu and Koziol
in the articles (see\cite{ramla_thesis}, \cite{koziol_unitary_three}
and \cite{koziol_unitary_two}).
Let $L$ be a unramified quadratic extension of $K$ and $(W, h)$ be a
pair consisting of a $3$-dimensional vector space $W$ over $L$ and $h$
be a non-degenerate hermitian form on $W$. We denote by $k_L$ the
residue field of $L$ which is a quadratic extension of $k$. Let
$\sch{G}$ be the isometry group scheme over $K$ associated to the pair
$(W, h)$. In this case the maximal $K$-split torus $\sch{T}$ is
isomorphic to $(\operatorname{\mathbb{G}_{\text{m}}}/K)$. The normaliser of $\sch{Z}$ of $\sch{T}$ is
isomorphic to ${\rm Res}_{L/K}\operatorname{\mathbb{G}_{\text{m}}}\times \sch{U}(1)(L/K)$. The group
$\sch{Z}_k$ is isomorphic to
${\rm Res}_{k_L/k}\operatorname{\mathbb{G}_{\text{m}}}\times \sch{U}(1)(k_L/k)$ such that the
determinant map is the second projection
$\sch{Z}_k\rightarrow \sch{U}(1)(k_L/k)$. Let us fix a chamber $C$ and
the set $S^{\text{aff}}=\{s_1,s_2\}$ where $s_1$ and $s_2$ are two
affine reflections in the walls of $C$. The order of $s_1s_2$ is
infinite and hence the relevant conditions in Hypothesis
\ref{conditions} is the condition $(1)$.
For quadratic relations we need to describe the groups $Z_{k, s_1}$
and $Z_{k, s_2}$. By abuse of notation we identify the faces fixed by
$s_i$ with $s_i$. With out loss of generality we assume that
$\sch{G}_{s_1, k}$ is isomorphic to $\sch{U}(2,1)(k_L/k)$ and
$\sch{G}_{s_2,k}$ is isomorphic to
$\sch{U}(1,1)(k_L/k)\times U(1)(k_L/k)$. This shows that the group
$<\sch{U}_{s_1, k}, \overline{\sch{U}}_{s_1,k}>\cap \sch{Z}_k$ is
isomorphic to ${\rm Res}_{k_L/k}\operatorname{\mathbb{G}_{\text{m}}}$ and
$<\sch{U}_{s_2, k}, \overline{\sch{U}}_{s_2,k}>\cap \sch{Z}_k$ is
isomorphic to $\operatorname{\mathbb{G}_{\text{m}}}/k$. The group $\sch{Z}_{k,s_2}$ embeds in
$\sch{Z}_k$ and is isomorphic to the first factor. Similarly the
group $\sch{Z}_{k,s_2}$ also embeds into the first factor of
$\sch{Z}_k$. The groups $Z_{s_0,k}\simeq k_L^{\times}$ and
$Z_{s_1,k}\simeq k^{\times}$. Since $\Lambda$ is commutative the group
$W(1)$ acts on $Z_k$ by the quotient
$W(1)\rightarrow W_0\simeq \{\operatorname{id}, s_1\}$.
Let $\zeta:k_E^\times\rightarrow \bar{k}$ and
$\eta:U(1)\rightarrow \bar{k}$ be any two characters then we denote by
$\chi$ the character $\zeta\otimes\eta$. Let $x\mapsto \bar{x}$ be the
nontrivial Galois automorphism on $k_L$. The character $\chi^{s_1}$ is
given by $\overline{\zeta}\otimes\eta$ where
$\overline{\zeta}(x)=\zeta(\bar{x}^{-1})$. Note that the character
$\chi=\zeta\otimes\eta$ is trivial on $Z_{k, s_1}$ if and only if
$\zeta$ is trivial and $\chi$ is trivial on $Z_{k, s_2}$ if and only
if $\zeta^{q+1}=\operatorname{id}$. These cases are called as trivial-Iwahori and
hybrid respectively by Koziol--Xu in these cases $\chi^{s_1}=\chi$. If
$\chi$ is non-trivial on $Z_{k,s_1}$ and $Z_{k, s_2}$ then the
character $\chi$ is called as regular and $\chi^{s_1}\neq \chi$. Now we
list the various characters of
$\mathcal{H}=\mathcal{H}^{\text{aff}}$. We use the description of
supersingular characters given by Vigneras but we point out that these
are also described by Koziol--Xu.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\chi=\zeta\otimes\eta$ is a trivial-Iwahori type then we
have $S_{\chi}=S^{\text{aff}}$. So we have two supersingular
characters $\xi_{\chi, s_1}$ and $\xi_{\chi, s_2}$. The characters
$\xi_{\chi, S^{\text{aff}}}$ and $\xi_{\chi, \emptyset}$ are not
supersingular.
\item If $\chi=\zeta\otimes\eta$ is hybrid then $S_{\chi}=\{s_2\}$ and
in this case we have two supersingular characters $\xi_{\chi, s_2}$
and $\xi_{\chi, \emptyset}$,
\item If $\chi=\zeta\otimes\eta$ is a regular character then we have
only one supersingular character $\xi_{\chi, \emptyset}$,
\end{enumerate}
Note that if $\chi$ is a trivial or hybrid type character then $I(\chi,
\chi')$ is not an empty set if and only if $\chi=\chi'$.
\begin{proposition}
Let $\chi$ be a trivial character then the dimension of
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\chi, s_i}, \xi_{\chi, s_j})$ is $1$
$i\neq j$ and is $0$ otherwise. If $\chi$ is a hybrid character then
the dimension of
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\chi, I_1}, \xi_{\chi, I_2})$ is $1$ for
all $I_1, I_2\subset \{s_2\}$. If $\chi$ is regular the dimension of
the space
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\chi, \emptyset}, \xi_{\chi',
\emptyset})$ is $2$ when $\chi^{s_0}=\chi'$ and zero otherwise.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\xi_{\lambda_1, I_1}$ and $\xi_{\lambda_2, I_2}$ be the
characters $\xi_{\chi, s_i}$ and $\xi_{\chi, s_j}$ respectively. We
observed that $I(\chi, \chi)=S^{\text{aff}}$ and we have
$I(\chi, \{s_i\})=\emptyset$. If $i\neq j$ then we have
$I_2\not\subset I_1$ and hence $\delta_2=1$ and
$I_1\backslash (I_1\cap I_2)$ is nonempty which gives
$\delta_1=1$. If $i=j$ we have $\delta_1=0$. The subsets $I_1=I_2$
hence $\delta_2=0$. Applying Theorem \ref{main_theorem} we get that
the dimension of the extension space
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\chi, s_i}, \xi_{\chi, s_j})$ is $1$ if
$i\neq j$ and the dimension of
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\chi, s_i}, \xi_{\chi, s_i})$ is $0$.
Assume that $\chi$ is hybrid character. Let $\xi_{\lambda_1, I_1}$
and $\xi_{\lambda_2, I_2}$ be the characters $\xi_{\chi, s_2}$ and
$\xi_{\chi, \emptyset}$ respectively. We note that
$I(\lambda_1, \lambda_2)=S^{\text{aff}}$, the set
$I(\lambda_1, I_2)=\{s_1\}$. Now if $I_1=\{s_2\}$ and $I_2=\{s_2\}$
we have $\delta_1=0$ and $\delta_2=0$. The dimension of the space
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\chi, s_2}, \xi_{\chi, s_2})$ is
$1$. Assume that $I_1=\{\emptyset\}$ and $I_2=\{s_2\}$ then
$\delta_1=0$ and $\delta_2=1$ and hence the dimension of
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\chi, s_2}, \xi_{\chi, \emptyset})$ is
$1$. If $I_1=\{s_2\}$ and $I_2=\{\emptyset\}$ then we have
$\delta_1=1$ and $\delta_2=0$ hence the dimension of the space
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\chi, s_2}, \xi_{\chi, \emptyset})$ is
$1$. Finally assume that $I_1=I_2=\emptyset$ in this case
$\delta_1=0$ and $\delta_2=\emptyset$ the dimension of
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\chi, \emptyset}, \xi_{\chi, \emptyset})$
is $1$.
Finally we consider the case when $\chi$ is regular. Assume that
$\xi_{\lambda_1, I_1}$ and $\xi_{\lambda_2, I_2}$ be the characters
$\xi_{\lambda_1, \emptyset}$ and $\xi_{\lambda_2, \emptyset}$ and
assume that $I(\lambda_1, \lambda_2)\neq \emptyset$. In this case we
have $S_{\lambda_1}=I_1=I_2=S_{\lambda_2}=\emptyset$ and
$|I(\lambda_1, I_2)|=2$. Moreover we have $\delta_1=0$ and
$\delta_2=0$ and the dimension of the space
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\lambda_1, \emptyset}, \xi_{\lambda_2,
\emptyset})$ is $2$.
\end{proof}
Now we will consider the case of unitary group $U(1,1)(L/K)$ where $L$
is unramified over $K$. Let $(W, h)$ be a pair consisting of a $2$
dimensional vector space over $L$ and $h$ be a non-degenerate
hermitian form on $W$. Let $\sch{U}(1,1)$ be the unitary group scheme
over $F$ attached to $(W, h)$. In this case the maximal $K$-split
torus $\sch{T}$ is isomorphic to $\operatorname{\mathbb{G}_{\text{m}}}/K$, its normalier is isomorphic
to ${\rm Res}_{L/K}\operatorname{\mathbb{G}_{\text{m}}}$. Hence the group $\sch{Z}_k$ is isomorphic to
${\rm Res}_{k_L/k}\operatorname{\mathbb{G}_{\text{m}}}$. Lets fix a chamber $C$ and the set
$S^{\text{aff}}$ is given by $\{s_1, s_2\}$. The group schemes
$\sch{G}_{k, s}\simeq \sch{U}(1,1)(k_L/k)$ for $s\in \{s_1,s_2\}$ as
$s_1$ and $s_2$ are conjugate in $GU(1,1)$. This shows that
$\sch{Z}_{k, s_0}$ and $\sch{Z}_{k, s_1}$ are both isomorphic to
$\operatorname{\mathbb{G}_{\text{m}}}/k$ as $<\sch{U}_{k,s}, \overline{\sch{U}}_{k,s}>={\rm SL}_2/k$.
Now consider any character $\chi$ on $k_E^{\times}$ and the character
$\chi$ is trivial on $Z_{k,s_i}$ if and only if
$\chi^{q+1}=\operatorname{id}$. Following the above case we use the terminology that
$\chi$ is trivial type if $\chi$ is trivial and hybrid type if
$\chi^{q+1}=1$ and $\chi\neq \operatorname{id}$. We also note that $\chi^{s_1}=\chi$
if and only if $\chi^{q+1}=\operatorname{id}$. Now the characters of the algebra
$\mathcal{H}=\mathcal{H}^{\text{aff}}$ are given by
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\chi$ is either trivial or hybrid character then
$S_{\chi}=S^{\text{aff}}$ and $\xi_{\chi, s_1}$ and
$\xi_{\chi, s_2}$ are supersingular characters. The characters
$\xi_{\chi, \emptyset}$ and $\xi_{\chi, S^{\text{aff}}}$ are not
supersingular characters.
\item If $\chi$ is a regular character then $S_{\chi}=\emptyset$ and
the only characters of $\mathcal{H}$ are $\xi_{\chi, \emptyset}$.
\end{enumerate}
To begin with the calculation of extensions, for a character
$\chi:k_L^{\times}\rightarrow R^\times$ such that $\chi^{q+1}=\operatorname{id}$,
the set $I(\chi, \chi')\neq \emptyset$ if and only if
$(\chi')^{q+1}=\operatorname{id}$.
\begin{proposition}
Let $\chi$ be a character such that $\chi^{q+1}=\operatorname{id}$ then the
dimension of the space
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\chi, s_i}, \xi_{\chi, s_j})$ is $1$ if
$i\neq j$ and is zero otherwise. If $\chi$ is a regular character
then the dimension of the space
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\chi, \emptyset}, \xi_{\chi',
\emptyset})$ is $2$ if $\chi'=\chi^{s_1}$ and is trivial
otherwise.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
This situation is similar to ${\rm SL}_2$. Assume that
$\chi^{q+1}=\operatorname{id}$ and $\xi_{\lambda_1, I_1}$ and
$\xi_{\lambda_2, I_2}$ be the characters $\xi_{\chi, s_i}$ and
$\xi_{\chi, s_j}$. In this case we have
$I(\lambda_1, I_2)=S^{\text{aff}}$ has cardinality two. If $i\neq j$
we have $\delta_1=1$ and $\delta_2=1$ and since $I_1\neq I_2$ we get
that the dimension of
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\chi, s_i}, \xi_{\chi, s_j})$ is $1$ if
$i\neq j$ and is zero otherwise. Assume that $\chi$ and
$\xi_{\lambda_1, I_1}$ and $xi_{\lambda_2, I_2}$ be the characters
$\xi_{\chi, \emptyset}$ and $\xi_{\chi^{s_1}, \emptyset}$. The set
$I(\lambda_1, \lambda_2)\neq \emptyset$ if and only if
$\lambda_1=\lambda_2^{s_1}$. If
$ I(\lambda_1, \lambda_2)\neq \emptyset$ then we have
$I(\lambda_1, \lambda_2)=S^{\text{aff}}$. The sets
$I(\lambda_1, \lambda_2)=\emptyset$,
$S_{\lambda_1}=I_1=I_2=S_{\lambda_2}=\emptyset$. This shows that
$\delta_1=0$ and $\delta_2=0$. The set $I(\lambda_1, I_2)$ has
cardinality $2$. This shows that
$\operatorname{Ext}^1_{\mathcal{H}}(\xi_{\chi, \emptyset}, \xi_{\chi^{s_0},
\emptyset})$ has dimension $2$.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
Survival analysis is used to model the length of time until a particular event occurs, for example, the time until death of a medical patient or failure of an equipment \cite{survivalanalysisbook}. One of the tasks in survival analysis is to cluster the individuals in a semi-supervised fashion by using not only their attributes but also their survival times. In other words, the goal of this task is to group the individuals with similar survival times into a single cluster. For example, the individuals could be divided into `high-risk' and `low-risk' groups, assuming there are only two clusters.
There are numerous applications for such a clustering procedure, one of which is the identification of cancer subtypes from gene expression data and is the most studied in the literature. Another example is that of grouping users based on their survival in a social network (i.e., the time until they leave the system permanently). Such an analysis can be extremely valuable as it can help in categorizing new users into groups that provide key information about their survival times.
There have been previous attempts at an unsupervised approach to clustering where the clusters were identified by considering only the attributes and not the survival outcome \cite{uncluster1, uncluster2, uncluster3}. This approach has a clear drawback that the clusters obtained may be completely unrelated to the survival of these grouped individuals. A second approach to clustering is to divide the individuals purely based on their survival times \cite{deathcluster1, deathcluster2}. But these approaches do not provide us with any meaningful information about the connection between the features and the survival outcome. There also have been several semi-supervised clustering approaches \cite{supcluster1, supcluster2, supcluster3, supcluster4} proposed that use some form of label information to obtain the clusters, but most of these methods do not work well when the data is censored, which is a common characteristic of survival data.
Only a few methods have been proposed that perform supervised clustering on censored data. Recently, Gaynor and Bair \cite{ssc} proposed a supervised version of the sparse clustering algorithm \cite{sparseclustering}. Sparse clustering provides a technique for feature selection in clustering by assigning weights to each feature. Supervised sparse clustering simply alters the initial weights of the features to reflect the features' relative importance in predicting survival.
We note that the major expectation from the resultant clusters is that they have considerably different survival distributions (Section \ref{sub:surv}). In this paper, we utilize this fact and propose a novel partially supervised clustering approach for survival data. We predominantly work with social network data and obtain clusters of users based on their survival in the system.
\section{Preliminaries} \label{sec:conceptsinsurvivalanalysis}
In what follows, we describe the important concepts relating to survival analysis that are used in this paper.
\subsection{Survival Distribution \& Hazard Function} \label{sub:surv}
Survival distribution is defined as the probability that an individual survives atleast until time $t$, and is given by
\begin{align}
S(t) = P(T > t) = 1 - F(t), \qquad 0 < t < \infty,
\end{align}
where T is a nonnegative random variable representing the time of death of an individual, and $F(t)$ is the cumulative distribution function.
In survival applications, it is typically convenient to define the hazard function, that represents the instantaneous rate of death of an individual given that she has survived till time $t$. The hazard function $\lambda(t)$, is given by
\begin{align}
\lambda(t) = \frac{f(t)}{S(t)},
\end{align}
where $f(t)$ is the probability density function.
\subsection{Right Censoring}\label{sub:censor}
When working with survival times of individuals, it is common to have censored observations. This happens when the event in consideration does not occur until end of the study. Consider, for example, the time until a user in a social network stops being active. In this scenario, we say the observation of a user is (right) censored if, at the time of data collection, the user is still active, i.e., the death event has not yet occurred. It is clear that ignoring the effect of censoring can lead to skewed estimates of survival probabilities. Right censoring can be classified into three types, namely, Type-I, Type-II and Random censoring \cite{survivalanalysisbook}. Random censoring is a common feature when the individuals enter the study at different times, which is notably the case in the social network scenario, where the users join the system at different times (Figure \ref{fig:chart3}). Here, we assume that the censoring times are independent of the death times, which is justified when the joining times are random \cite{survivalanalysisbook}. In the following subsection, we define Kaplan-Meier estimator (or product limit estimator) that provides a method for incorporating the censoring effect while obtaining the survival probabilities.
\subsection{Kaplan-Meier Estimator}\label{sub:kmest}
Kaplan-Meier estimator \cite{kaplanmeier} has been widely used in a variety of survival analysis tasks since its introduction. It provides a non-parametric maximum likelihood estimate of the empirical survival distribution, given by,
\begin{align}
\hat{F}(t) = \prod_{j|t_j \leq t} \frac{n_j - d_j}{n_j},
\end{align}
where $d_j$ is the number of individuals who `die' at time $t_j$ and $n_j$ is the number of individuals at risk of `death' at time just prior to $t_j$, i.e., the individuals that are not `dead' and not yet been censored.
\section{Related Work}
Majority of work in survival analysis has dealt with the task of predicting the survival outcome especially when the number of features is much higher than the number of subjects \cite{predictsurvival1, predictsurvival2, predictsurvival3, predictsurvival4}. A number of approaches have also been proposed to perform feature selection in survival data \cite{featureselection1, featureselection2}. In the social network scenario, Sun et al. \cite{whenwillithappen} tried to predict the relationship building time, that is, the time until a particular link is formed in the network. They use generalized linear models \cite{glm} with a modified likelihood function that incorporates censoring.
There have been relatively fewer works that perform clustering on survival data. Many unsupervised approaches have been proposed to identify cancer subtypes in gene expression data \cite{uncluster1, uncluster2, uncluster3}. However, we are interested in the task of supervised clustering for survival data. Traditional semi-supervised clustering methods \cite{supcluster1, supcluster2, supcluster3, supcluster4} do not perform well in this scenario since they do not provide a way to handle the issues with right censoring. Bair and Tibshirani \cite{bair} proposed a semi-supervised method for clustering survival data in which they assign Cox scores \cite{coxproportionalhazardsmodel} for each feature (or gene) in their dataset and considered only the features with scores above a predetermined threshold. Then, an unsupervised clustering algorithm, like k-means, is used to group the individuals using only the selected features. Such an approach can miss out on clusters when they are weakly associated with the survival outcome since such features are discarded immediately after the initial screening.
In order to overcome this issue, Gaynor and Bair \cite{ssc} proposed supervised sparse clustering as a modification to the sparse clustering algorithm of Witten and Tibshirani \cite{sparseclustering}. The sparse clustering algorithm uses an objective function similar to k-means but with the modification that each feature has a weight associated to it. Supervised sparse clustering \cite{ssc} initializes these feature weights depending on the feature's relation with the survival outcome and optimizes the same objective function. Once again, they use Cox scores \cite{coxproportionalhazardsmodel} to quantify the effect of each feature on the survival outcome. The authors show that this leads to a clustering that is relatively more linked to the survival outcome.
Both of these methods have been shown to perform well when the dataset size is small. Supervised sparse clustering in particular, is computationally expensive since in each iteration, it performs an unsupervised k-means clustering over the entire dataset. In this paper, we propose a decision tree based clustering algorithm that not only identifies better clusters than the existing methods but can also work efficiently with large amounts of data.
\section{Methodology}
Our primary goal for clustering is that the survival distributions be different across clusters. In this section, we present a decision tree based approach that is built to optimize for this goal.
The principal idea is to construct a decision tree such that the survival distributions of the two populations of users at each split differ significantly from each other. Concretely, we split the current set of users based on an attribute-value test and obtain the survival distributions of the two populations of users using Kaplan-Meier estimates (Section \ref{sub:kmest}). We use Kuiper statistic \cite{kuipertest} in order to quantify how significantly these survival distributions differ. This process is repeated for all attribute-value pairs and the one that results in the lowest p-value (denoting that the survival distributions after the split are most likely different from each other) is used as a node in the decision tree. The significance level, $\alpha$, is a parameter to our algorithm (set at 0.05 in our experiments). It is important to note that we are performing many statistical tests at each node which leads to a multiple hypothesis test problem \cite{multiplehypothesistesting1, multiplehypothesistesting2}. We use the Bonferroni correction \cite{multiplehypothesistesting1} to compensate for doing $m$ statistical tests which reduces the significance level by a factor of $m$. Thus, a node is split only if the resultant p-value is below the corrected significance level $\alpha/m$.
This procedure results in a tree where each leaf node has an associated population of users and thus, the leaf nodes themselves can be interpreted as clusters. But, the issue here is that the leaf nodes need not have significantly different distributions from each other. It is not hard to imagine that two leaf nodes descending from different parts of the tree may have very similar survival distributions. Hence, it is necessary to group these leaf nodes such that the ones with similar distributions are clustered together. Note that growing a tree deep and clustering the leaf nodes is different from growing a shallow tree and using the leaf nodes as clusters.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.8, right]{1.pdf}
\caption{Image depicting the complete procedure to obtain the clusters.}
\end{figure}
Let $\mathcal{L}$ be the set of leaf nodes. In order to cluster these leaf nodes, we build a complete graph $G = (V, E)$, where $V = \mathcal{L}$ and $E = \{(i, j) : i, j \in \mathcal{L}\}$. Define a weighted adjacency matrix $W \in \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}^{|V| \times |V|}$ such that $W_{ij} = K_p(i, j)$ where $K_p : \mathcal{L} \times \mathcal{L} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is a function that, given two leaf nodes, returns the p-value associated to the Kuiper's test between the survival distributions of the two leaf nodes. In other words, the weights on the edge represent the degree of similarity between the survival distribution of the two vertices. Now we could perform a graph clustering procedure on $G$ in order to cluster the leaf nodes. However, using p-values directly as edge weights is not a sound approach. This is because p-values can be high for two reasons -- the distributions in question are very similar, or there is not enough data to significantly claim that the distributions differ from each other. Thus, a leaf node with very few associated users will form heavy edges with all the other leaf nodes, resulting in a clustering with just one group. We normalize the weight matrix $W$ using Sinkhorn-Knopp algorithm \cite{sinkhornknopp} that converts it into a doubly stochastic matrix $W_{sk}$, thereby solving the aforementioned issue. We use Markov cluster algorithm \cite{mcl} on the graph $G$ and weight matrix $W_{sk}$ in order to obtain a clustering of leaf nodes and consequently, a clustering on the entire set of users.
\section{Dataset}
In this paper, we analyze a large-scale social network dataset collected from Friendster. Friendster was founded in 2002 and was one of the earliest social networking websites, reaching 3 million users within the first few months \cite{friendsterstats}. The website allowed users to share messages, photos and videos with other members. Each user also had a profile page consisting of general information like name, gender, age, location and interests.
After processing 30TB of data, originally collected by the Internet Archive in June 2011, the resulting network has around 15 million users with 335 million friendship links. Each user has profile information such as age, gender, and marital status. Additionally, there are user comments on each other's profile pages with timestamps that indicate activity in the site. See Table 6.1 for some additional statistics on the dataset.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|}
\hline
Number of Users & 15M\\
\hline
Number of friendship links & 335M\\
\hline
Number of comments & 75M\\
\hline
Number of users with atleast one comment & 9.5M\\
\hline
Number of users with atleast ten comments & 1.93M\\
\hline
Number of users with Age, Gender \& Location specified & 6.47M\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Statistics on the Friendster dataset}
\end{table}
Since, we do not have users' login information, we use the comments sent and received by the users as a proxy for activity. We choose ten months of inactivity to be the cut-off period after which the user will be assumed to have left the social network. The time from the user's joining to her last comment will be considered as her lifetime in the system.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{chart3.png}
\caption{Image depicting the lifespan of users in Friendster when comments are used as a proxy for activity. The vertical dotted line indicates the cut-off period of ten months. Users with no activity in this period are considered `dead'. In this figure, users A, B, C \& D have censored observations, user E is discarded and users F \& G have known survival lifetime.}
\label{fig:chart3}
\end{figure}
Ribeiro and Faloutsos \cite{brunowsdm} depicted the effect of the introduction of ``new Facebook wall'' in July 2008 to other competing social networking websites including Friendster. It is clear from their analysis that Friendster faced a continuous decline in the number of daily active users since then. Seeing that we wish to analyze the system on its own without any external influence, we only use the data upto March 2008 (six years from the introduction of Friendster) and disregard the rest. Figure \ref{fig:kmplots} shows the estimated survival distributions for the entire data and the reduced data. Note the sudden drop in survival probabilities when using the complete data, which is missing when we use only the data prior to the introduction of ``new Facebook wall''. In this work, we only consider a subset of 1.2 million users who had participated in atleast one comment, had specified their age and gender, and had joined the social network before March 2008. Our processed data will be made available to the public once we get the RIB approval for its distribution.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{kmplots_300.png}
\caption{Survival distributions of the complete data and the reduced data.}
\label{fig:kmplots}
\end{figure}
\section{Evaluation Metrics}
In this section, we describe a survival prediction task that we designed to evaluate the quality of the clusters obtained from our procedure.
We also describe briefly, two other standard evaluation techniques used in the literature, namely, hazard ratio and log rank test \cite{hazardratiousage, logranktest1}.
\subsection*{Classification task} \label{sub:classification}
In order to validate our claim that the clusters obtained differentiate the users based on their survival outcome, we devise a classification task as follows - \textit{given a user's profile and activity information for the initial five months, predict whether she will stay in the system five months hence}.
We obtain the clusters from running different clustering procedures on the features generated from the initial five months' data. We then use only these cluster labels as features in a logistic regression model \cite{glm} to predict whether the user will survive the next five months. A high prediction accuracy indicates that the clustering has extracted the information about the survival outcome from the entire set of features.
\subsection*{Hazard ratio}
Hazard ratio is defined as the ratio of the hazard rates (Section \ref{sub:surv}) of two groups of entities. The Cox proportional hazards model \cite{coxproportionalhazardsmodel} provides a method to estimate the hazard ratio given that the hazard ratio is constant over time. Spruance et al. \cite{hazardratiousage} give a description of the interpretation and the correct usage of the hazard ratios.
\subsection*{Log-rank test}
Log-rank test \cite{logranktest1, logranktest2} is a non-parametric hypothesis test that is widely used to compare two survival distributions. It tests the null hypothesis that the two (or more) groups in consideration have the same survival distributions. The predominant reason for the popularity of this test while comparing survival distributions is that it incorporates the effect of censoring the same way as the Kaplan-Meier estimates \cite{logranktestassumption}.
\section{Results}
We compare our model with two other clustering approaches -- semi-supervised clustering of Bair and Tibshirani \cite{bair}, and supervised sparse clustering by Gaynor and Bair \cite{ssc}.
We use user's profile features (like age, gender, relationship status, occupation, location) as well as construct features based on the user's initial five months' activity (like number of comments sent and received, number of individuals interacted with, etc.). Since our model is based on decision trees, it can handle both categorical and numerical features with ease. In order for other clustering approaches to work effectively, we encode the categorical features like location using $g$ binary variables, where $g$ is the number of values the feature can take. Out of a total of 500 features, we choose 25 ($\approx \sqrt{500}$) top features found using Cox scores \cite{coxproportionalhazardsmodel}. Semi-supervised clustering uses only these top features to find the clusters. Supervised sparse clustering assigns positive weights to these features and zero weights to the rest, and runs the standard sparse clustering algorithm with these initial weights.
Table \ref{tab:tests} shows the values for the log-rank test and the hazard ratio for the clusters obtained from different clustering algorithms. The number of clusters were kept fixed at two in this experiment. The $\chi^2$ values shown in the table are huge, indicating that all three clustering algorithms return clusters that have significantly different distributions. The hazard ratios of clusters from our model and that from supervised sparse clustering are comparable.
The performance of logistic regression model using only the cluster labels as features is presented in Table \ref{tab:classification} for the three clustering algorithms. We repeat the task for different values for $k$, the number of clusters . The clusters from our model have higher prediction accuracy than clusters from other models for $k = 2$ and $4$ whereas the accuracy is comparable for $k = 3$ and $5$. Our method also has higher f-measure scores compared to the competing models regardless of $k$.
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Clustering Method & Log Rank Test ($\chi^2$) & Hazard Ratio \\
\hline
Proposed Method & 172557 & 3.242\\
Semi-Supervised Clustering \cite{bair} & 141206 & 2.274\\
Supervised Sparse Clustering \cite{ssc} & 140660 & 3.331\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Log Rank test and Hazard ratio values for $k$ = 2}
\label{tab:tests}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& Precision & Recall & F-measure & Accuracy & FPR \\
\hline
Proposed Method ($k$ = 2) & 0.689 & 0.707 & 0.698& 0.673& 0.366 \\
Proposed Method ($k$ = 3) &0.711& 0.612& 0.658& 0.659& 0.286 \\
Proposed Method ($k$ = 4) & 0.688& 0.658&0.673& 0.657& 0.343\\
Proposed Method ($k$ = 5) & 0.689& 0.665& 0.677& 0.660& 0.345\\
\hline
Semi-Supervised Clustering ($k$ = 2) &0.763& 0.502& 0.605& 0.650& 0.178\\
Semi-Supervised Clustering ($k$ = 3) & 0.730& 0.584& 0.649& 0.662& 0.249\\
Semi-Supervised Clustering ($k$ = 4) & 0.511& 0.822& 0.630& 0.484& 0.906\\
Semi-Supervised Clustering ($k$ = 5) & 0.727& 0.591& 0.652& 0.662& 0.255\\
\hline
Supervised Sparse Clustering ($k$ = 2) & 0.764& 0.499& 0.604& 0.649& 0.176\\
Supervised Sparse Clustering ($k$ = 3) & 0.732& 0.579& 0.647& 0.661& 0.243\\
Supervised Sparse Clustering ($k$ = 4) & 0.772& 0.479& 0.591& 0.645& 0.162\\
Supervised Sparse Clustering ($k$ = 5) & 0.725& 0.509& 0.598& 0.633& 0.222\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Classification results with features from various clustering algorithms for number of clusters, $k = 2,3,4,5$. The clusters obtained from the proposed method achieve better accuracies and f-scores when $k = 2$ and $4$ whereas the accuracies are comparable for $k = 3$. Highest accuracy across all algorithms is achieved by the proposed method when $k = 2$, that is, when there are only two classes of Friendster users: short-lived and long-lived.}
\label{tab:classification}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we proposed a partially supervised approach for clustering users based on their survival outcome. We used decision trees to divide the users such that the survival distributions of the subgroups are significantly different at each step. We then performed graph clustering over these subgroups in order to make sure that the subgroups with similar survival distributions are clustered together. Explicitly working with survival distributions effectively leads to a clustering that is highly associated with the survival outcome. We used our model in a social network dataset to identify groups of users with different survival types. We evaluated our model using two standard metrics, log-rank test and hazard ratio, and a classification task that we devised to measure the clusters' ability to predict survival. We also observed in our dataset that the classification accuracy is highest when we use the proposed method to cluster the users into two groups -- \textit{short-lived} and \textit{long-lived}.
|
\subsection{Kinetic Theory}
Here, we develop a continuum theory for self-propelled Janus colloids, including phoretic interactions \cite{Liebchen2016sm}.
We begin with equations (1,2) of the main text in dimensionless form
\ea
\dot {\bf r}_i &=& {\rm Pe}\;{\bf p}_i \label{rdynSM}\\
\dot \theta_i &=& B{\bf p}_i \times \nabla c + \sqrt{2}\xi_i(t) \label{thdynSM}
\end{eqnarray}
which are coupled to a chemical field $c({\b
x},t)$ evolving according to (3) in the main text.
Using It\^{o}s Lemma and following \cite{Dean1996} we derive a continuum equation of motion for the combined $N$-particle probability density $f({\bf r},\theta,t)=\Sum{i=1}{N}\delta({\bf r}-{\bf r}_i(t))\delta(\theta-\theta_i(t))$:
\begin{equation}
\dot f = - {\rm Pe}{\bf p}\cdot \nabla f + \partial^2_\theta f - \4{b |\nabla c|}{2} \partial_\theta \left[f \sin(\theta + \delta)\right] - \partial_\theta \sqrt{2f} \eta \label{ffp}
\end{equation}
Here $\eta= \eta({\bf r},\theta,t)$ is a unit-variance Gaussian white noise field with zero mean and $\delta={\rm arg}(\partial_y-\I \partial_x)$ (i.e. $\cos(\delta)=-\partial_x c/|\nabla c|;\;\; \sin(\delta)=\partial_y c/|\nabla c|$).
We are mainly interested in mean-field phenomena here and therefore neglect the multiplicative noise term $-\partial_\theta \sqrt{2f}\eta$. Transforming (\ref{ffp}) to Fourier space, yields an equation of motion for the Fourier modes $f_k({\bf r},t)=\int f({\bf r},\theta,t){\rm e}^{\I k \theta} {\rm d} \theta$ of $f$:
\begin{equation}
\dot f_k({\bf r},t) =-\4{{\rm Pe}}{2} \left[\partial_x \left(f_{k+1}+f_{k-1}\right) - \I \partial_y \left(f_{k+1}-f_{k-1}\right)\right]- k^2 f_k +
\4{b |\nabla c| k}{2} \left(f_{k+1}{\rm e}^{\I \delta} - f_{k-1} {\rm e}^{-\I \delta} \right) \label{ffpk}
\end{equation}
Evaluating (\ref{ffpk}) for $k=0,1,\ldots$ leads to a hierarchy of equations for $\{f_k\}$ with $f_0({\bf x},t)=\rho({\bf x},t)=\int f({\bf x},\theta,t){\rm d} \theta$
being the orientation-independent probability density to find a particle at time $t$ at position ${\bf x}$
and ${\bf w}({\bf x},t)=({\rm Re}f_1,{\rm Im}f_1)=\int {\bf p}(\theta) f({\bf x},\theta,t) {\rm d}\theta$ is the polarization density. Here, the field $w:= |{\bf w}|$
measures the degree of alignment and ${\bf w}/w$ provides the average swimming direction.
To close the hierarchy (\ref{ffpk}) we follow the scheme used in \cite{Bertin2009} involving the assumption that
deviations from isotropy are not too strong. Specifically, we assume that $f_2$, representing nematic order, follows changes in $f_0,f_1$ adiabatically (i.e. $\dot f_2\approx 0$) and that
modes of order $f_{k_\geq 3} \approx 0$. After some lengthy algebra, this leads to a closed set of equations of motion for $\rho,{\bf w}$:
\ea
\dot \rho &=& - {\rm Pe} \nabla \cdot {\bf w}
\nonumber \\
\dot {\bf w} &=& -{\bf w} + \4{B\rho}{2}\nabla c - \4{{\rm Pe}}{2}\nabla \rho + \4{{\rm Pe}^2}{16}\nabla^2 {\bf w} - \4{B^2 |\nabla c|^2}{8} {\bf w} \nonumber \\
&+&
\4{{\rm Pe} B}{16} \left(3 (\nabla {\bf w})^{\rm T}\cdot \nabla c - (\nabla c \cdot \nabla){\bf w} - 3 (\nabla \cdot {\bf w})\nabla c \right) \label{kineqssm}
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Phoretic production}
\label{JP}
Consider an axisymmetrical, half-coated Janus colloid in a coordinate system where the colloids swimming direction is parallel to the $z$-axis (${\bf p}_i={\bf e}_z$) and its midpoint is at ${\bf r}_i$.
Let the colloid produce chemicals or temperature with an overall rate $k_0$, uniformly on the coated hemisphere, i.e. it features a `reaction'-rate-density
of $\sigma(\theta)=k_0/(2\pi R_0^2)$ for $\theta \in (0,\pi/2)$ ($\theta \in (\pi/2,\pi)$) and zero
elsewhere, for cap-ahead (cap-behind) swimmers (see Fig.~2 in the main text).
We rewrite the overall production by the considered colloid as given by (3) in the main text as
\begin{equation}
{P}_i({\bf r},t):= \int {\rm d}\theta \;{\rm d}\phi\; R_0^2 \sin \theta\; \delta\left({\bf r}-({\bf r}_i-\nu R_0 {\bf n})\right)\sigma(\theta) \label{surfint}
\end{equation}
where ${\bf n}=(\cos \phi \sin \theta, \sin \phi \sin \theta, \cos \theta)$ is the unit surface normal and $\nu=1$ ($\nu=-1$) for cap-behind (cap-ahead) swimmers.
Expanding the $\delta$-function around ${\bf r}_i$ yields:
\begin{equation}
\delta\left({\bf r}-({\bf r}_i-\nu R_0 {\bf n}_i)\right) = \delta({\bf r}-{\bf r}_i) +\nu R_0 {\bf n} \cdot \nabla \delta({\bf r}-{\bf r}_i) + \mathcal{O}\left(R_0 {\bf n}\cdot \nabla \delta({\bf r}-{\bf r}_i)\right)^2
\end{equation}
Truncating this expansion beyond the explicitly written terms, plugging the result back into (\ref{surfint}) and performing the surface integral yields
\begin{equation}
{P}_i({\bf r},t) \approx k_0 \delta({\bf r}-{\bf r}_i) +\nu k_a {\bf p}_i \cdot \nabla \delta({\bf r}-{\bf r}_i)
\end{equation}
where $k_a=k_0 R_0/2$.
For $N$ colloids we find an overall production of
\begin{equation}
{P}({\bf r},t):=\Sum{i=1}{N}{P}_i \approx k_0 \rho({\bf r},t) +\nu k_a \nabla \cdot {\bf w}({\bf r},t) \label{prodsm}
\end{equation}
which we can use to write the dynamics of the $c$-field (Eq.~(3) in the main text) as
\begin{equation}
\dot c = \mathcal{D} \nabla^2 c + K_0 \rho + \nu \4{K_0}{2}\nabla \cdot {\bf w} - K_d c \label{csm}
\end{equation}
Together with (\ref{kineqssm}) this equation provides a closed set of continuum equations, allowing us, below, to understand the onset of structure formation.
The used truncation in (\ref{prodsm}) should be a good approximation to the exact dynamics if the typical interparticle distance is large compared to the colloidal radius; i.e. it should be reliable in the
regime in which we are mainly interested: at low area fractions and close to the uniform phase.
Replacing the half-coating with a point source at one of the intersection points of the colloids surface and symmetry axis while keeping the overall production rate unchanged,
leads to the same result but with $k_a=k_0 R_0$. Following the instability criteria derived below and discussed in the main text, the Janus-instability criterion depends linearly on $k_a$.
Thus, a localized 'reaction' source supports this instability compared to a half-sphere coating, while the delay-induced instability and the Keller-Segel instability only depend on the
overall reaction rate $k_0$ and do therefore not depend on the coating area (for a given swimming speed).
For later convenience, we introduce the dimensionless number $K_a=k_a/(R_0 D_r)$.
\\For colloids without a net production, that produce uniformly on one hemisphere and consume with the same rate on the
other hemisphere (respectively with a rate of $k_0$), we find:
\begin{equation}
P({\bf r},t) \approx 2 \nu k_a \nabla \cdot {\bf w}({\bf r},t) \label{jpr}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Linear Stability Analysis}
Here, we perform a linear stability analysis of the uniform phase $(\rho,{\bf w},c)=(\rho_0,0,(K_0/K_d)\rho_0)$ which is a steady state solution of (\ref{kineqssm},\ref{csm}).
As it is not immediate to understand linear stability of the uniform phase in the most general case for our continuum equations, we proceed as follows:
(i) We first derive a generalized Keller-Segel model (GKS) applying to autophoretic colloids with either attractive or repulsive chemical or thermal interactions,
whereas the original Keller-Segel applies \cite{Keller1970,Keller1971} to chemoattraction. Our derivation
is based
on the assumption that colloids respond quasi-instantaneously to changes in the chemical field
and provides us with simple instability criteria, here expressed in terms of microscopic parameters,
both for the attractive (Keller-Segel instability) and repulsive (Janus instability \cite{Liebchen2015sm}) phoretic interactions.
(ii) To better understand the length scale of patterns emerging from the Janus instability, and to account for 'delay effects'
(non-instantaneous response of the orientation field to changes in the phoretic field) which can lead to an additional instability (delay-induced instability \cite{Liebchen2015sm})
we then generalize our analysis:, we will derive a linear stability criterion which is fully representative of the PBP model if the diffusivity of the phoretic field is large and in absence
decay effects of the phoretic field ($K_d=0$). We finally discuss the robustness of our instabilities against finite $K_d$-effects.
\subsubsection{Generalized Keller-Segel model}
Assuming that ${\bf w}$ follows changes in $c,\rho$ adiabatically ($\dot {\bf w}\rightarrow 0$), focusing on the regime of long and intermediate wavelength ($\nabla^2 {\bf w}\rightarrow 0$) and neglecting all terms
which do not contribute to the dynamics close to the uniform phase (purely nonlinear terms)
(\ref{kineqssm},\ref{csm}) reduce to a two variable model:
\ea
\dot \rho &=& -\4{{\rm Pe}}{2} \left(B\nabla \cdot \rho \nabla c - {\rm Pe} \nabla^2 \rho \right) \nonumber \\
\dot c &=& \mathcal{D} \nabla^2 c + K_0 \rho - K_d c + \4{K_a}{2}\left(B\nabla \cdot \rho \nabla c - {\rm Pe} \nabla^2 \rho \right) \label{gkssm}
\end{eqnarray}
Now linearising these equations around their uniform phase solution $(\rho,c)=\left(\rho_0,(K_0/K_d)c\right)$ (in one spatial dimension), writing the result as a linear matrix-vector-equation and calculating the
eigenvalues of the corresponding matrix, the real parts of which determine the linear stability of (\ref{gkssm}), yields the following result:
\\begin{equation}. Attractive phoretic interactions ($B>0$) destabilize the uniform phase if
\begin{equation}
\4{B \rho_0 K_0}{{\rm Pe} K_d}>1 \label{kssm}
\end{equation}
This 'Keller-Segel (KS) instability' criterion for chemoattractive Janus colloids, systematically derived here from a microscopic theory, closely resembles the one we derived earlier from a more phenomenological model \cite{Liebchen2015sm}.
Using our link between autophoresis and phoretic interactions ($B=6\pi s {\rm Pe}\mathcal{D}/K_0$, see main text), the KS-instability takes the following form:
\begin{equation} \4{6 s f \mathcal{D}}{K_d} > 1 \end{equation}
Thus, it occurs generically in Janus colloids if $\mathcal{D} \gg 1$. More specifically, in physical units the KS-instability for Janus colloids can
be expressed as $6 f D_c/(k_d R_0^2)>1$, i.e. it becomes effective if the
timescale a localized peak of the phoretic field would need to cover the mean free area per colloid is smaller than ($1/6$ of) the decay time of this field.
The associated instability band is
\begin{equation} 0< q^2 < \4{B \rho_0 K_0-{\rm Pe}K_d}{{\rm Pe}\mathcal{D}} \label{KSband} \end{equation}
showing that the KS-instability is a long wavelength instability, triggering the growth of long-wavelength fluctuations at the onset of instability and allowing for shorter ones
further away from onset. (For $\mathcal{D}\rightarrow \infty$ the short wavelength edge of the instability band (\ref{KSband}) scales as $q^2 \approx 6 f$, i.e. the associated length scale
reads in physical units $l=2\pi R_0/q \approx 2\pi R_0/\sqrt{6f}$.)
A complete linear stability analysis involving all three fields ($\rho,w,c$) shows that both the instability criterion (\ref{kssm}) and band (\ref{KSband}) hold true exactly for
attractive Janus colloids.
In our simulations the KS-instability leads to dense crystal-like clusters which coarsen and merge in the coarse of the dynamics, resulting at late times, in one large macrocluster (Fig.~1A,B in the main text).
\\\\
2. Considering repulsive phoretic interactions ($B<0$), we find the following instability criterion
\begin{equation}
\4{-B K_a \rho_0}{2\mathcal{D}+{\rm Pe}^2} \nu s >1
\end{equation}
The factor $K_a$ reveals that this instability is based on the asymmetry of the production of phoretic fields on the surface of our colloids; for this reason we called it the Janus-instability \cite{Liebchen2015sm}.
Using again $B=6\pi s {\rm Pe}\mathcal{D}/K_0$ and assuming $\mathcal{D}\rightarrow \infty$, this criterion reduces to the generic form
\begin{equation}
3 f {\rm Pe} s \4{K_a}{K_0} >1 \rightarrow -\4{3}{2}f {\rm Pe} \nu s >1
\end{equation}
where the right inequality applies to Janus colloids with $K_a = \nu K_0/2$
and is relevant for repulsive back producers and for attractive front producers (see Fig.~2 in the main text).
The GKS predicts an associated instability band of
\begin{equation} Q>\4{2 K_d}{-B \rho_0 K_a -{\rm Pe}^2/2 - 2 \mathcal{D}} \end{equation}
i.e. the Janus instability is a short-wavelength instability if $K_d >0$. Problematically, however, the instability band does not show a small wavelength
boundary leading to a divergence in the dispersion relation $\lambda(q \rightarrow \infty)\rightarrow \infty$.
We will lift this problem by performing a more general linear stability analysis involving all three fields $\rho,{\bf w},c$ in the next paragraph.
\subsubsection{Janus instability and length scale of patterns}
As we have just seen, the Janus instability hinges on the asymmetry of the production of phoretic fields on the colloids surfaces and is independent of the isotropic production (and the decay term).
To show that the Janus instability can lead to patterns with a well-defined length scale even for $K_d\rightarrow 0$, we now assume $K_d=K_0=0$ which corresponds to Janus colloids producing a
phoretic field on one hemisphere and degrading or consuming the same field on the other hemisphere. This leads to $k_a=\nu k_0 R_0$ (\ref{jpr}) or, in dimensionless units to $K_a=\nu K_0$
and allows us to perform
a general linear stability analysis of (\ref{kineqssm}) without requiring further approximations.
Following a similar procedure as above and using Routh-Hurwitz criteria \cite{Willems1970} to analyse the roots of the characteristic polynomial we find the following instability criterion (in 1D).
\begin{equation}
\4{-B \rho_0 K_a (16 \mathcal{D}+{\rm Pe}^2)}{32 \mathcal{D}^2 + 8 \sqrt{2}\mathcal{D}{\rm Pe}^2 + {\rm Pe}^4}>1 \label{janusfull}
\end{equation}
Conversely to what our instability analysis based on the GKS suggests, this instability is generally oscillatory.
Using $B=6\pi s {\rm Pe} \mathcal{D}/K_0$ (main text) and assuming $\mathcal{D}\rightarrow \infty$, this criterion reduces to
\begin{equation}
-3{\rm Pe} f \nu s >1 \label{janussm1}
\end{equation}
Note that for pure Janus producers ($K_a=\nu K_0/2$) (\ref{janusfull}) reduces to $-3{\rm Pe} f \nu s>2$
which is the same criterion as we obtained from the GKS.
The Janus instability applies to thermophoretic Janus particles and to diffusiophoretic Janus particles with $\mu_r<0$ if they swim cap-behind
(Fig.~2 in main text), but in addition also to diffusiophoretic swimmers with $\mu_r>0$ (chemoattraction) if they swim cap-ahead.
Remarkably, if and only if $B \rho_0 K_a < 2\mathcal{D}+ {\rm Pe}^2$ (i.e. close enough to the onset of instability) this instability is a short wavelength instability even for $K_d=0$ with an onset wavenumber (defining the length scale
where the instability first emerges) given by
\begin{equation}
q_0^2 = \4{16 (2\sqrt{2}-1)}{16\mathcal{D}+{\rm Pe}^2} \label{janusl}
\end{equation}
Eq.~(\ref{janusl}) predicts that the (onset) length scale $l=2\pi/q_0$ of patterns emerging from the Janus instability increase with the self-propulsion velocity of colloids; the increase is linear for ${\rm Pe}^2\gg \mathcal{D}$
and marginal for $\mathcal{D}\gg {\rm Pe}^2$.
\subsubsection{Delay-induced instability}
We now consider the limiting case where the only the isotropic component (monopole moment) of the production process is relevant ($K_0>0, K_a=0$) and assume again that the lifetime of the
phoretic field is long ($K_d=0$).
Performing an analogous analysis as above leads us to the following criterion for the oscillatory delay-induced instability
\begin{equation}
\4{-B \rho_0 K_0 {\rm Pe}}{2\mathcal{D}}>1 \rightarrow -3{\rm Pe}^2 f s >1
\end{equation}
Here, the delay-induced instability applies to diffusiophoretic Janus particles with $\mu_r<0$ and to thermophoretic Janus particles and yields a long-wavelength instability band, reading for large $\mathcal{D}$
\begin{equation} 0 < q^2 <
\4{-B}{2\mathcal{D}^2 {\rm Pe}K_0}
\end{equation}
Note that the width of this instability band shrinks with $1/\mathcal{D}$ for large $\mathcal{D}$.
Despite this shrinking, it turns out to be still an important instability: in our particle based simulations, we observe
structure formation even for isotropic production for large but finite values of $\mathcal{D}=10^3-10^5$.
We will see in the next paragraph that a finite $K_d$ suppresses instability at long wavelength and turns the delay-induced instability into a short wavelength instability which leads
to pattern formation.
With significant effort our analysis can be further generalized to derive a combined criterion for the Janus- and the delay-induced instability:
Proceeding as before, but assuming only $K_d=0$ ($K_a, K_0 \neq 0$), we find:
\begin{equation}
3{\rm Pe}f\left(\4{K_a}{K_0} +{\rm Pe}\right)>1 \rightarrow 3{\rm Pe}f\left(\4{\nu}{2} +{\rm Pe}\right)>1
\end{equation}
Here, the right hand side of the arrow holds true for Janus colloids with $K_a=K_0 \nu/2$ (or $k_a=k_0 R_0 \nu/2$ in physical units).
\subsubsection{Decay effects}
While the instability criterion for the KS instability which we derived above is fully general, for the chemorepulsive instability criteria we have so far assumed
$K_d \ll 1$, meaning that the lifetime of the phoretic fields is much longer than
$\sim 1/D_r \sim 10-100s$.
We are now exploring the robustness of our predictions in cases where this assumption is not true and decay processes (or screening effects)
such as bulk reactions for diffusiophoretic colloids degrade the phoretic field on comparatively short timescales.
\\We start our analysis by realizing that $K_d$ is the coefficient of a reaction term, whose main effect is to suppress instabilities at large wavelength. Therefore, we
analyse the roots of the characteristic polynomial similar as before (using Routh-Hurwitz criteria again) but truncate the resulting instability condition at order $q^4$, which makes our analysis
feasible.
Assuming once more that $\mathcal{D}$ is large compared to all other parameters but now allowing $K_d$ alongside with $B$ to be of the same order leads to the following modified criterion for the Janus instability
\begin{equation}
\4{4B\rho_0 s K_a}{K_d{\rm Pe}^2+8\mathcal{D}}>1 \Rightarrow \4{\4{3}{2}{\rm Pe}f s \nu}{1+\4{K_d {\rm Pe}}{8 \mathcal{D}}}>1 \label{januskd}
\end{equation}
For $K_d \rightarrow 0$ this reduces to our previous result (\ref{janussm1}). Remarkably, as long as $K_d {\rm Pe}^2\ll 8 \mathcal{D}$ the Janus instability is hardly affected by decay processes which
reflects the short-wavelength character of this instability.
Numerical calculations of the dispersion relation confirm this prediction and show that the Janus instability may apply even for $K_d\gg \mathcal{D}$ but
then require larger (negative) $\beta$-values than predicted by (\ref{januskd}).
Not surprisingly, the Delay-induced instability, which is typically ($\mathcal{D}\gg 1$) effective at finite but typically small wavenumbers
is comparatively sensitive to degradation processes.
\\To quantify this, we perform a similar approach but now assume $K_a=0$ For $\mathcal{D}\gg 1$ we find
\begin{equation}
\4{(-B/\mathcal{D})\rho_0 {\rm Pe} K_0}{2+4K_d + 4\sqrt{K_d(1+K_d)}}>1 \rightarrow \4{3f {\rm Pe}^2 s}{4K_d} >1 \label{kdcr}
\end{equation}
where we used again $B=6\pi s {\rm Pe} \mathcal{D}/K_0$, and assumed $K_d\gg 1$ to achieve the criterion on the right hand side of the arrow.
Thus, for Janus colloids with ${\rm Pe}=50$ at $f=0.1$ the delay-induced instability should survive at least up to $K_d \sim 20$; that is if the lifetime of the phoretic field amounts at least $1/20$th of the
rotational diffusion time of the colloids or about $1$ second.
If $K_d$ is not large enough to suppress the delay-induced instability, its main effect is a strong change of the length scale of the emerging patterns.
For $K_d \ll \mathcal{D}$, the long wavelength edge of the Delay-induced instability can be estimated as (in physical units and at leading order in $1/\mathcal{D}$):
\begin{equation}
l \sim 2\pi R_0 \sqrt{\4{-3 f {\rm Pe} s [{\rm Pe}+(K_a/K_0)(1+K_d)]}{K_d (1+K_d)}} \label{delle}
\end{equation}
That is, for ${\rm Pe}^2\gg K_d$ the characteristic size of waves emerging from the delay-induced instability increases linearly with ${\rm Pe}\propto v$
and decreases with $K_d$.
For $K_d\gg {\rm Pe}^2\gg 1$ it scales as $l \propto \sqrt{{\rm Pe}/K_d}$.
We finally note that in presence of short-range repulsions among colloids, as in our simulations, short wavelength instabilities cannot be effective if the characteristic length scale $l$ is below
the size of a colloid. Using (\ref{delle}) allows us to calculate that for colloids with ${\rm Pe}=50, f=0.1$
$l$ becomes comparable to $R_0$ for $K_d \sim 10^2-10^3$, which is well above the $K_d$-threshold which suppresses the delay-induced instability. This explains, why it is possible to
observe the delay-induced instability also in presence of short-range repulsions among colloids.
\subsubsection{Numerical scheme and parameters for movies}
We use standard Brownian particle dynamics with periodic boundary conditions to simulate the many colloid dynamics and couple it to a central-difference, forward Euler finite difference scheme propagating the phoretic field.
Interactions are described using the slightly soft Weeks-Chandler Anderson repulsion among colloids; we use a cell list to
accelerate simulations.
We simulate particles as point-producers (and point-consumers in case of the Janus pattern)
and choose the time steps and the grid spacing underlying the discretization of the chemical field
small enough that the emerging patterns does not change in any visible
qualitative sense (we used grid sizes of up to $1000 \times 1000$ for the chemial field to test convergence).
When simulating colloids with consumption on one side we do not allow for consumption of the chemical field towards negative values of course.
Following the parameter space collapse derived in the main text,
our phase diagram depends only on
$f$ and ${\rm Pe}$, but the specific appearance and length scales of the emerging patterns will of course still depend on other parameters.
Parameters used in simulations and for Fig.~1 of the main text:
We simulate cap-behind swimmers ($\nu=1$) and $B$ choose according to (7 in the main text).
Other parameters are as follows:
\\Movie 1 (Keller-Segel instability and collapse):
$N=10^4$; $f \approx 5\%$ ${\rm Pe}=50; \mathcal{D}=1666$; $K_0=0.26$; $K_d=0.96$; grid for phoretic field $L^p_x\times L^p_y=400\times 400$.
\\Movie 2 (Exploding Clusters):
$N=3\times 10^4; f=14.7\%; {\rm Pe}=100; \mathcal{D}=2667; K_0=0.83; K_d=0.17; L^p_x\times L^p_y=500\times 500$
\\Movie 3 (Continuously moving pattern):
$N=10^5; f=12\%; {\rm Pe}=100; \mathcal{D}=2667; K_0=0.83; K_d=0.17; L^p_x\times L^p_y=450\times 450$.
\\Movie 4 (Travelling bands):
$N=2.5\times 10^4; f=12.3\%; {\rm Pe}=50; \mathcal{D}=1333; K_0=0.42; K_d=0.21; L^p_x\times L^p_y=500\times 80$.
Here we choose a non-quadratic simulation box such that the pattern settles down into a regular stripe pattern on accessible timescales.
We observe analogous results for smaller systems in quadratic boxes.
\\Movie 5 (Janus instability):
$N=2800; f\approx 15\%; {\rm Pe}=100; \mathcal{D}=2000; K_d=0.5; L^p_x\times L^p_y=600\times 600$;
and $K_0=1.25$ for point source on producing hemisphere and $K_0=-1.25$ on the other one.
|
\section{Hyperelliptic curves
Let $C\longrightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$ be a hyperelliptic covering. Since $\text{char}(K)=0\neq{0}$, we can use Kummer Theory to see that the function field extension is given by an equation
\begin{equation*}
y^2=f(x),
\end{equation*}
where $f(x)$ is a polynomial of a certain degree over the field $K$. Over a finite extension of $K$, we can now write $f(x)$ as
\begin{equation*}
f(x)=\prod_{i=1}^{r}(x-\alpha_{i})
\end{equation*}
for certain elements $\alpha_{i}\in\overline{K}$. We assume that we have made the finite extension already and that $\alpha_{i}\in{{K}}$. For simplicity, we will now assume that $v(\alpha_{i})\geq{0}$ for every $i$. We will also assume that $f(x)$ is squarefree.
\begin{exa}\label{ExaHyp1}
We take the curve $C$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{EqnExaHyp1}
y^2=x(x-\pi)g(x),
\end{equation}
where $\pi$ is a uniformizer and $g(x)$ is a polynomial of odd degree $c=2k+1$ (the case of a polynomial with even degree is similar but with two points at infinity). We assume that the roots of $g$ reduce to distinct points not equal to $0$. We hav
\begin{equation*}
g(C)=k+1.
\end{equation*}
Since the points $(0)$ and $(\pi)$ are not disjoint in the special fiber, we will want to create a semistable model for $\mathbb{P}^{1}$ that makes them disjoint. We take:
\begin{equation*}
\text{Proj}R[X,T,W]/(XT-\pi{W}^2)
\end{equation*}
with affine model
\begin{equation*}
\text{Spec}R[x,t]/(xt-\pi).
\end{equation*}
We have that the point $(0)$ on the generic fiber is now transferred to the affine part
\begin{equation*}
\text{Spec}R[x',w]/(x'-\pi{w^2}),
\end{equation*}
where $x'=\dfrac{X}{T}$ and $w=\dfrac{W}{T}$. Indeed, the corresponding prime ideal is $(x',w)$. The point $(\pi)$ now corresponds to the prime ideal $(x-\pi,t-1)$ lying on the generic fiber. We see that the reductions of $(0)$ and $(\pi)$ now lie on the same component $(x)$, but they have distinct $t$-coordinates: one has $t=1$ and the other has "$t=\infty$".\\
We can thus use Theorem \ref{MaintheoremSemSta} and calculate the normalization of this scheme in the finite extension defined by Equation \ref{EqnExaHyp1}. We'll first take a different route however, using only our knowledge of the divisors involved. Consider the divisor
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}_{\eta}(f)=(0)+(\pi)+Z(g)-(2+c)\cdot{\infty}.
\end{equation*}
We calculate
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))=2\cdot(\Gamma_{1})-2\cdot({\Gamma_{2}}).
\end{equation*}
This means that the corresponding Laplacian function has slope $\pm{2}$ between $\Gamma_{1}$ and $\Gamma_{2}$. The Laplacian can also be found in Figure \ref{1eplaatjeExtra}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{{Graph1.png}}
\caption{\label{1eplaatjeExtra} {\it{The Laplacian of $f$ in Example \ref{ExaHyp1}.}}
\end{figure} For the edge corresponding to the intersection $\mathfrak{m}=(x,t,\pi)$, we thus obtain two edges in the pre-image.\\
We now calculate $f^{\Gamma_{1}}$. We obtain
\begin{equation*}
(f^{\Gamma_{1}})=(x',w,\pi)+(x,t-1,\pi)-2\cdot({\Gamma_{1}\cap{\Gamma_{2}}}).
\end{equation*}
If we thus consider the local equation
\begin{equation*}
y^2=f^{\Gamma_{1}},
\end{equation*}
it will ramify at 2 points. Thus the genus of the corresponding component above is $0$. For $\Gamma_{2}$ we have
\begin{equation*}
(f^{\Gamma_{2}})=Z(g)+2\cdot({\Gamma_{1}\cap\Gamma_{2}})-(c+2)(\infty).
\end{equation*}
Thus the equation $y^2=f^{\Gamma_{2}}$ ramifies in the points defined by $Z(g)$ and $\infty$. There are $c+1$ of these, thus we can use the Riemann-Hurwitz formula to obtain
\begin{equation*}
2g_{\Gamma'_{2}}-2=2(-2)+c+1
\end{equation*}
and thus
\begin{equation*}
g_{\Gamma'_{2}}=k.
\end{equation*}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{{Graph10.png}}
\caption{\label{10eplaatje} {\it{The covering in Example \ref{ExaHyp1}.}}
\end{figure}
Thus the reduction graph consists of two vertices with two edges meeting them. The first component has genus $0$ and the second component has genus $k$. The covering of graphs can be found in Figure \ref{10eplaatje}.
We could have also calculated the normalization directly:
\begin{eqnarray*}
z^2=(1-t)g(x),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $z=y/x$. Plugging in $t=0$ and $x=0$ then yields the same reduction graph.
\end{exa}
\begin{exa}\label{ExaHyp2}
Let us take a slightly more involved example. We take
\begin{equation*}
z^2=x(x-\pi)(x-\pi^2)g(x),
\end{equation*}
where $g(x)$ is a polynomial of even degree $c=2k$. Then $g(C)=k+1$. If we now consider the open affine defined by
\begin{equation*}
R[x,y]/(xy-\pi^2),
\end{equation*}
then $\pi$ does not reduce to a regular point. When we blow this point up, we obtain a new component where $\pi$ does reduce to a regular point.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{{Graph11_2.png}}
\caption{\label{11eplaatje} {\it{The Laplacian $\phi$ of $f$ in Example \ref{ExaHyp2}.}}
\end{figure} The blow-up is given by the local charts
\begin{eqnarray*}
U_{1}=\text{Spec}(R[x,t_{2}]),\\
U_{2}=\text{Spec}(R[y,t_{3}]),
\end{eqnarray*}
with relations
\begin{eqnarray}
xt_{2}&=&\pi,\\
yt_{3}&=&\pi,
\end{eqnarray}
and the "obvious" local isomorphisms. We label the components $Z(t_{2})=\Gamma_{1}$, $Z(x,y)=\Gamma_{2}$ and $Z(t_{3})=\Gamma_{3}$. Here $\Gamma_{i}$ intersects $\Gamma_{i+1}$.\\
We have
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}_{\eta}(f(x))=(0)+(\pi)+(\pi^2)+Z(g)-(c+3)(\infty),
\end{equation*}
where $(0)$ and $(\pi^2)$ reduce to $\Gamma_{3}$ (the component with "$v(x)\geq{2}$"), $(\pi)$ reduces to $\Gamma_{2}$ and $Z(g)$ and $\infty$ reduce to $\Gamma_{1}$. Furthermore
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))=2(\Gamma_{3})+(\Gamma_{2})-3(\Gamma_{1}),
\end{equation*}
whose Laplacian is depicted by a slope of $2$ between $\Gamma_{3}$ and $\Gamma_{2}$ and a slope of $3$ between $\Gamma_{2}$ and $\Gamma_{1}$, as in Figure \ref{11eplaatje}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{{Graph12.png}}
\caption{\label{12eplaatje} {\it{The covering of graphs in Example \ref{ExaHyp2}.}}
\end{figure}
Correspondingly, the edge $e_{2,3}$ has two pre-images in $\mathcal{C}$ and the edge $e_{1,2}$ has one pre-image in $\mathcal{C}$. One finds that $f^{\Gamma_{1}}$ has $c+1$ ramification points and thus $\Gamma'_{1}$ has genus $k$ (Check this with the Riemann-Hurwitz formula). Similarly, $f^{\Gamma_{2}}$ and $f^{\Gamma_{3}}$ have two ramification points and as such they have genus $0$. Thus the reduction graph consists of three vertices $v_{1},v_{2},v_{3}$ where $v_{1}$ and $v_{2}$ intersect once and $v_{2}$ and $v_{3}$ intersect twice. The covering of graphs can be found in Figure \ref{12eplaatje}.\\
We also give the normalizations for completeness. For the first chart $U_{1}$ they are given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
z_{1}^2&=&x(1-t_{2})(1-t_{2}\pi)g(x),\\
z_{2}^2&=&t_{2}(1-t_{2})(1-t_{2}\pi)g(x),\\
z_{1}\cdot{z_{2}}&=&\pi^{1/2}(1-t_{2})(1-t_{2}\pi)g(x).
\end{eqnarray*}
where $z_{1}=\dfrac{z}{x}$ and $z_{2}=\dfrac{t_{2}z}{\pi^{1/2}x}$.
For the second chart $U_{2}$ we have a single algebra given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
z_{3}^2=(t_{3}-1)(1-y)g(t_{3}\cdot{\pi}),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $z_{3}=\dfrac{z}{\pi^{1/2}t_{3}}$. Note that in both charts we clearly see the need for the ramified extension of degree $2$ given by $K\subseteq{K(\pi^{1/2})}$.
\end{exa}
\section{Cyclic abelian coverings of $\mathbb{P}^{1}$}
In the previous section, we saw that we can quite easily determine the reduction graph of a lot of hyperelliptic curves quite easily using divisors and their reductions. We will now state the process more generally for abelian covers of $\mathbb{P}^{1}$. The key step in this process will be the determination of the Laplacian of a certain defining function $f$. This Laplacian will determine most of the overlying reduction graph. We also refer the reader to \cite[Algorithm 4.2]{supertrop}, where the algorithm first appeared.
So suppose we are given an abelian cover $C\longrightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$ of degree $n$ over $K$. By Kummer Theory, we have that it is given by
\begin{equation*}
z^{n}=f(x),
\end{equation*}
where $f(x)$ possibly has multiple factors.
\begin{algo}\label{AbelianAlgorithm}
\begin{center}
{\bf{[Algorithm for semistable graphs of abelian coverings of $\mathbb{P}^{1}$]}}
\end{center}
\begin{flushleft}
Input: A polynomial $f\in{K[x]}$.
\end{flushleft}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Let $S=Z(f)\cup{\{\infty\}}$. Construct the tropical separating $T_{S}$ and its corresponding semistable model $\mathcal{D}_{S}$, as in Chapter \ref{Appendix2}.
\item Determine $\rho(P)$ for any $P\in\text{Supp}(f)$.
\item Determine the Laplacian function $\Delta(f)$.
\item Determine $|I_{e}|$ for every edge using Proposition \ref{PropositionCoveringData}. This determines the edge length for any edge $e'$ lying above $e$ by \ref{InertiagroupIntersectionPoint1}.
\item Determine the genera of the vertices $v'$ lying above every vertex $v\in{T_{S}}$ using the Riemann-Hurwitz formula (see Theorem \ref{RiemannHurwitz}).
\item Determine the covering graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ using the covering data obtained above.
\end{enumerate}
Output: The Berkovich skeleton of the curve $C$ defined by $z^{n}=f$.
\end{algo}
\begin{proof}
({\it{Correctness of the algorithm}})
The covering data obtained during the algorithm are correct by the cited propositions and theorems. There is only one covering graph up to the cyclic action of $\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}$ for the given covering data, since it corresponds to a $2$-cocycle on $T_{S}$, which must be trivial. We note that a more elementary argument explicitly determining the covering graphs is also possible here.
\end{proof}
\begin{exa}\label{ExaHyp3}
Let us do an example where our curve is given by a degree $3$ covering of $\mathbb{P}^{1}$. Let's take the curve $C$ given by the equation
\begin{equation*}
z^3=f(x):=x(x-\pi)g(x),
\end{equation*}
with $c:=\text{deg}(g(x))$ and $g(x)$ separable. We take $g(x)$ such that $\text{deg}(g)+2\neq{0}\mod{3}$. Then $C$ has exactly one point at infinity and $C$ ramifies above that point. We calculate
\begin{equation*}
2g-2=-6+2\cdot{}\text{Card}(\mathcal{R})
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*}
\text{Card}(\mathcal{R})=c+3,
\end{equation*}
so that
\begin{equation*}
g(C)=c+1.
\end{equation*}
We'll take the usual model with chart
\begin{equation*}
R[x,t]/(xt-\pi).
\end{equation*}
As before, we have
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}_{\eta}(f)=(0)+(\pi)+Z(g)-(2+c)\cdot({\infty})
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))=2(\Gamma_{1})-2(\Gamma_{2}).
\end{equation*}
We thus see that the edge $e=\Gamma_{1}\cap\Gamma_{2}$ is preserved in $\mathcal{C}_{s}$, meaning that $g_{e}=1$. We find that $f^{\Gamma_{1}}$ has 3 ramification points and $f^{\Gamma_{2}}$ has $c+2$. Using the formula
\begin{equation*}
g=-2+\#{\mathcal{R}},
\end{equation*}
we find that $\Gamma'_{1}$ has genus 1 and $\Gamma'_{2}$ genus $c$. Thus the reduction graph consists of two vertices intersecting once, with weights $1$ and $c$. The covering of graphs can be found in Figure \ref{14eplaatje}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{{Laatsteplaatje1copy.png}}
\caption{\label{14eplaatje} {\it{The covering of graphs in Example \ref{ExaHyp3}.}}
\end{figure}
\end{exa}
\begin{exa}\label{TripEllExa1}
Now take
\begin{equation*}
z^3=x(x-\pi)(x-2\pi)g(x),
\end{equation*}
where $c:=\text{deg}(g(x))$ is such that $c+3\neq{0}\mod{3}$. We then have that $g(C)=c+4-2=c+2$. We take the model
\begin{equation*}
R[x,t]/(xt-\pi).
\end{equation*}
with components $Z(x)=\Gamma_{1}$ and $Z(t)=\Gamma_{2}$. Note that $\Gamma_{1}$ corresponds to points with $v(x)\geq{1}$ and $\Gamma_{2}$ to points with $v(x)\leq{1}$. We thus find that $(0),(\pi),(2\pi)\longmapsto\Gamma_{1}$ and $Z(g),(\infty)\longmapsto{\Gamma_{2}}$. We have
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}_{\eta}(f)=(0)+(\pi)+(2\pi)+Z(g)-(c+3)(\infty)
\end{equation*}
with
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))=3(\Gamma_{1})-3(\Gamma_{2}
\end{equation*}
and thus $g_{e}=3$ for $e=\Gamma_{1}\cap\Gamma_{2}$. The Laplacian can also be found in Figure \ref{15eplaatje}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{{Graph15.png}}
\caption{\label{15eplaatje} {\it{The Laplacian $\phi$ of $f$ in Example \ref{TripEllExa1}.}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{{Graph14_oud.png}}
\caption{\label{14e2plaatje} {\it{The covering of graphs in Example \ref{TripEllExa1}.}}
\end{figure}
We see that
\begin{equation*}
(f^{\Gamma_{1}})=(\overline{0})+(x,t-1)+(x,t-2)-3(\Gamma_{1}\cap\Gamma_{2})
\end{equation*}
and thus that there are 3 ramification points. Thus $g(\Gamma'_{1})=1$. For $\Gamma_{2}$ we have
\begin{equation*}
(f^{\Gamma_{2}})=Z(g)-(3+c)(\infty)+3(\Gamma_{1}\cap\Gamma_{2})
\end{equation*}
and thus $g(\Gamma'_{2})=c-1$. All in all, we can see that our reduction graph consists of 2 vertices with 3 edges between them. The corresponding weights on the vertices are $c-1$ and $1$. The corresponding covering of graphs can be found in Figure \ref{14e2plaatje}.
\end{exa}
Now, let us suppose that we are only interested in the reduction graph {\it{without}} the weights of the genera of the components. We'll do an example where we only address this problem.
\begin{exa}\label{TripHypExp1}
Suppose we take something like
\begin{equation*}
z^3=x(x-\pi)(x-2\pi)(x-\pi^2)(x-2\pi^2)(x-\pi^3)g(x),
\end{equation*}
where $c:=\text{deg}(g)$ is such that $6+c\neq{0}\mod{3}$.
We are now only interested in the {\it{unweighted}} graph corresponding to this curve. We create a semistable model with $R[x,t]/(xt-\pi^3)$ blown up two times. We have $4$ components $\Gamma_{0}$, $\Gamma_{1}$, $\Gamma_{2}$, $\Gamma_{3}$ where $\Gamma_{0}$ corresponds to $v(x)\leq{0}$, $\Gamma_{1}$ to $v(x)=1$, $\Gamma_{2}$ to $v(x)=2$ and $\Gamma_{3}$ to $v(x)\geq{3}$. We see that
\begin{eqnarray*}
0,(\pi^3)&\longmapsto&\Gamma_{3},\\
(\pi^2),(2\pi^2)&\longmapsto&\Gamma_{2},\\
(\pi),(2\pi)&\longmapsto&\Gamma_{1},\\
Z(g),(\infty)&\longmapsto&\Gamma_{0}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Our Laplacian is then
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))=2(\Gamma_{3})+2(\Gamma_{2})+2(\Gamma_{1})-6(\Gamma_{0}).
\end{equation*}
The corresponding function has slope $6$ from $\Gamma_{0}$ to $\Gamma_{1}$, slope $-4$ from $\Gamma_{1}$ to $\Gamma_{2}$, slope $-2$ from $\Gamma_{2}$ to $\Gamma_{3}$, as in Figure \ref{16eplaatje}. We thus see that
\begin{eqnarray*}
g_{\Gamma_{0}\cap\Gamma_{1}}&=&3,\\
g_{\Gamma_{1}\cap\Gamma_{2}}&=&1,\\
g_{\Gamma_{2}\cap\Gamma_{3}}&=&1,\\
\end{eqnarray*}
which determines the graph. It is a graph with 4 neighbouring vertices, two of which have 3 edges between them. The covering of graphs can be found in Figure \ref{17eplaatje}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{{Graph16_2.png}}
\caption{\label{16eplaatje} {\it{The Laplacian $\phi$ of $f$ in Example \ref{TripHypExp1}.}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{{Graph17.png}}
\caption{\label{17eplaatje} {\it{The covering of graphs in Example \ref{TripHypExp1}.}}
\end{figure}
\end{exa}
\section{Tropical superelliptic coverings}
In this section, we give a short review of the results obtained in \cite{supertrop}. Here, a cyclic abelian covering $C\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$ with Galois group $G=\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}$ is called a \emph{superelliptic covering}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{realizabilitythm}
Let $p$ be a prime number. A covering $\phi_\Sigma:\Sigma \rightarrow T$ is a superelliptic covering of degree $p$ of weighted metric graphs if and only if there exists a superelliptic covering $\phi:C\rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ of degree $p$ tropicalizing to it.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We give a sketch of the proof and direct the reader to \cite[Theorem 5.4]{supertrop}. If $C\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$ is superelliptic, then any superelliptic disjointly branched morphism $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ gives a superelliptic covering of weighted metric graphs. The converse is somewhat harder. The idea is to explicitly write down the covering equations coming from Proposition \ref{PropositionCoveringData} for a general $f=\prod_{i=0}^{r}(x-\alpha_{i})$ in terms of the reductions of the $\alpha_{i}$. One then shows that these almost linear equations have at least one solution. Any such solution then gives the desired $f$, providing us with the curve $C$ defined by $z^p=f$ and the superelliptic covering $(x,z)\mapsto{x}$
\end{proof}
A similar result was proved for degree $d$ admissible coverings in \cite{admcov}: for every degree $d$ admissible covering of metric graphs $C_\Sigma \rightarrow T$, there exists an algebraic covering $C\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{1}$ tropicalizing to $C_\Sigma \rightarrow T$. We note however that the covering obtained by this theorem is not necessarily {\it{Galois}}, whereas the obtained covering in Theorem \ref{realizabilitythm} is manifestly superelliptic.
Unlike in \cite{admcov}, the approach given here is constructive; the proof of the realizability theorem presents a method for finding the defining equation of a curve $C$ with a superelliptic covering $C\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$.
\begin{rem}
As noted in \cite{supertrop}, to obtain a certain superelliptic covering of graphs algebraically, one needs to consider $f$ where the roots $\alpha_{i}$ coincide. That is, we need to allow polynomials with multiple factors. It would be interesting to see what kind of further restrictions these graphs give in terms of embeddings into $\mathbb{P}^{2}$.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}
In the proof of Theorem \ref{realizabilitythm} one is confronted with the following convenient fact: there are too many solutions to the covering equations. The following problem would now be interesting to study: how many configurations for the divisor of the reduction $\rho((f))$ give rise to a certain covering? What are the asymptotics? A good place to start here would be to optimize the proof of Theorem \ref{realizabilitythm} to give an explicit lower bound.
\end{rem}
\section{The Galois closure of an irreducible degree three extension
Let $K\subset{L}$ be a field extension of degree $3$. Let $z$ be any element in $L\backslash{K}$. After a translation, its minimal polynomial in $K[x]$ is given by $f(x):=x^3+p\cdot{}x+q$, leading to the equation
\begin{equation}\label{MainEq2}
z^3+p\cdot{z}+q=0,
\end{equation}
where $p,q\in{K}$. Its discriminant is then given by
\begin{equation}
\Delta_{f}:=-(4p^3+27q^2).
\end{equation}
We first have the following
\begin{lemma}
Let $\overline{L}$ be the Galois closure of $L/K$. Then $\text{Gal}(\overline{L}/K)=S_{3}$ if and only if the discriminant $\Delta_{f}$ is not a square in $K$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Proposition 22.4]{stewartgalois}.
\end{proof
We now assume that the Galois group of $\overline{L}/K$ is $S_{3}$. We have the following chain of subgroups
\begin{equation}
(1)\vartriangleleft{H}\vartriangleleft{S_{3}},
\end{equation}
where $H$ has order $3$ and index $2$. In other words, $S_{3}$ is solvable. Using this fact, the famous Cardano formulas then express the roots of $f(x)$ in terms of radicals.
Let us quickly summarize the procedure. One considers the following equation:
\begin{equation}\label{EquationW}
w^2-3wz-p=0.
\end{equation}
If it has a root in $L$, we take that root and call it $w$. Otherwise, we take a quadratic extension to obtain the desired $w$. It will later turn out that this is exactly the extension to the Galois closure. Note that $w\neq{0}$. Indeed, otherwise we would have $p=0$ and this would imply that $L/K$ is abelian, a contradiction. One can also assume that $w\neq{0}$ in the abelian case, because at least one of the roots of Equation \ref{EquationW} has to be nonzero.
At any rate, this $w$ then satisfies the (probably more familiar) equation
\begin{equation}
z=w-\dfrac{p}{3w}.
\end{equation}
This is also known as {\it{Vieta's substitution}}. Plugging this into Equation \ref{MainEq2} then quickly leads to to a sextic equation
\begin{equation}\label{EquationFull}
w^6+qw^3-\dfrac{p^3}{27}=0,
\end{equation}
which is quadratic in $w^3$. We can now consider the element
\begin{equation}
\tau(w):=\dfrac{p}{3w}.
\end{equation}
The reader can immediately check that if $w$ satisfies Equation \ref{EquationFull}, then $\tau(w)$ also satisfies the same equation.
We now have
\begin{lemma}
$\tau(w)\neq{w}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $\tau(w)=w$. Then $w^2=\dfrac{p}{3}$ and $w^6=\dfrac{p^3}{27}$. Substituting this into Equation \ref{EquationFull}, we find
\begin{equation}
\dfrac{p^3}{27}+qw^3-\dfrac{p^3}{27}=qw^3=0.
\end{equation}
In other words, either $q=0$ or $w=0$. If $q=0$, then Equation \ref{MainEq2} is reducible, a contradiction. We already saw that $w=0$ is impossible, so we arrive at the desired result.
\end{proof}
Completing the square in Equation \ref{EquationFull}, we now obtain:
\begin{equation}
(w^3+q/2)^2=\dfrac{p^3}{27}+\dfrac{q^2}{4}=\Delta':=\dfrac{\Delta}{4\cdot{27}},
\end{equation}
where $\Delta=4p^3+27q^2$. We thus see that the quadratic subfield $K(y):=K[y]/(y^2-\Delta')$ is contained in $K(w,z)=K(w)$ (where $w$ is a root of Equation \ref{EquationW}). Note that $K(y)$ is indeed a field, since $\Delta'=\dfrac{\Delta}{4\cdot{27}}$ is minus the discriminant, which is not a square in $K$ by assumption on the Galois group. Using the fact that field degrees are multiplicative, we then see that $K(w)\supset{K(y)}$ has degree three. This then implies that $K(w)$ has degree six over $K$, which also gives the irreducibility of Equation \ref{EquationFull}.
We now have
\begin{lemma}
The field extension $K(w)\supset{K(z)}\supset{K}$ is Galois of order six. As such, it is the Galois closure of $K(z)/K$. The two automorphisms given by
\begin{align*}
\sigma(w)&=\zeta_{3}\cdot{w},\\
\tau(w)&=\dfrac{p}{3w}
\end{align*}
generate the Galois group.
Here $\sigma$ has order three and $\tau$ has order two.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By basic field theory, $\tau$ defines an automorphism of order two on $K(w)$. One then also easily finds that $\sigma$ is an automorphism of order three. Note that they both fix the underlying field $K$. We now have two automorphisms that generate a group $<\sigma,\tau>=:H\subset{\text{Aut}(K(w))}$ with order equal to the degree of the field extension (namely six). This implies that $K(w)/K$ is Galois with Galois group $H$, as desired.
\end{proof}
Let us now perform some cosmetic changes that remove the fractions from the equations. We scale Equation \ref{EquationFull} slightly using the variable change
\begin{equation}
w'=\dfrac{w}{c\sqrt{3}},
\end{equation}
where $c^3=2$. Writing $w$ for $w'$,
this then leads to the equation
\begin{equation}
w^6+2\sqrt{27}qw^3-4p^3=0.
\end{equation}
Completing the square and taking the extension $K\subset{K[y]/(y^2-\Delta)}$ with $\Delta=4p^3+27q^2$, we find that
\begin{equation}
w^3=\pm{}y-\sqrt{27}q.
\end{equation}
Throughout this thesis, we in fact take the extension
\begin{equation}
w^3=y-\sqrt{27}q.
\end{equation}
The other extension (namely $w^3=-y-\sqrt{27}q$) is just the extension corresponding to $\tau(w)$, where $\tau$ is now given by $\tau(w)=\dfrac{cp}{w}$.
\begin{cor}\label{GalClos1}
The Galois closure of $L\supset{K}$ is given by the two extensions
\begin{equation}
K\subset{K(y)}\subset{K(w)},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
w^3=y-\sqrt{27}q
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
y^2=\Delta.
\end{equation}
\end{cor}
\section{Normalizations}\label{Normalizations}
Now let $R\subset{K}$ be as in the beginning of the Appendix. Let $L\supset{K}$ be a degree three field extension and $z\in{L}\backslash{K}$. After a translation, $z$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
z^3+p\cdot{z}+q=0,
\end{equation}
where $p$ and $q$ are in $K$. By scaling, we can even assume that $p,q\in{R}$.
Let $K'\subset{\overline{L}}$ be the quadratic subfield, $A$ the integral closure of $R$ in $K'$ and $B$ the integral closure of $R$ in $\overline{L}$. Let $\mathfrak{q}$ be any prime in $B$ lying above $\mathfrak{p}=(\pi)$. We will give explicit equations for the ring $B$ and use those to give formulas for $|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|$, the inertia group of $\mathfrak{q}$.
We consider three cases:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $3v(p)>2v(q)$,
\item $3v(p)<2v(q)$,
\item $3v(p)=2v(q)$.
\end{enumerate}
In every case, we start with a computation of the integral closure $A$ and then deduce $B$ from $A$. From Corollary \ref{GalClos1}, we see that the extension $K\subset{K'}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
y^2=\Delta=4p^3+27q^2.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Case I}
Suppose that $3v(p)>2v(q)$. We let $p=\pi^{k_{1}}u_{1}$ and $q=\pi^{k_{2}}u_{2}$ for units $u_{i}$. We then find the integral equation
\begin{equation}\label{EquationCase1}
(\dfrac{y}{\pi^{k_{2}}})^2=4\pi^{3k_{1}-2k_{2}}u_{1}^3+27u_{2}^2.
\end{equation}
Let $y'=\dfrac{y}{\pi^{k_{2}}}$.
Reducing Equation \ref{EquationCase1} modulo $\mathfrak{p}$ yields the equation
\begin{equation*}
\overline{(y')^2}=\overline{27u_{2}^2}.
\end{equation*}
Or in other words: $\overline{y'}=\pm{\sqrt{27}u_{2}}$. In other words: $A$ is completely split over $R$. The primes are then given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathfrak{q}_{1}&=&(\pi,\sqrt{27}u_{2})\\
\mathfrak{q}_{2}&=&(\pi,-\sqrt{27}u_{2}).
\end{eqnarray}
Note that this implies that $\pi$ is again a uniformizer of $A_{\mathfrak{q}_{i}}$ for both $i$.
We then have the following Lemma:
\begin{lemma}\label{caseone}
Let $3v(p)>{2v(q)}$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
v_{\mathfrak{q}_{1}}(y-\sqrt{27}q)&=&3v(p)-v(q)\\
v_{\mathfrak{q}_{1}}(y+\sqrt{27}q)&=&v(q).\\
v_{\mathfrak{q}_{2}}(y+\sqrt{27}q)&=&3v(p)-v(q)\\
v_{\mathfrak{q}_{2}}(y-\sqrt{27}q)&=&v(q).
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We write $y-\sqrt{27}q=\pi^{k_{2}}\cdot{(y'-\sqrt{27}u_{2})}$ and use the relatio
\begin{equation}
(y'-\sqrt{27}u_{2})(y'+\sqrt{27}u_{2})=4\pi^{3k_{1}-2k_{2}}u_{1}^3.
\end{equation}
Note that $y'-\sqrt{27}u_{2}$ and $y'+\sqrt{27}u_{2}$ are coprime, so that $y'+\sqrt{27}u_{2}$ is invertible at $\mathfrak{q}_{1}$. We then see that the desired valuation is given by
\begin{equation}
v_{\mathfrak{q}_{1}}(y-\sqrt{27}q)=v_{\mathfrak{q}_{1}}(\pi^{k_{2}})+v_{\mathfrak{q}_{1}}(4\pi^{3k_{1}-2k_{2}}u_{1}^3)=k_{2}+3{k_{1}}-2k_{2}=3{k_{1}}-k_{2}.
\end{equation}
Using again that $y'+\sqrt{27}u_{2}$ is invertible at $\mathfrak{q}_{1}$, we obtain that $v_{\mathfrak{q}_{1}}(y+\sqrt{27}q)=v(\pi^{k_{2}})=k_{2}$, as desired.
The other two cases for $\mathfrak{q}_{2}$ follow in a completely analogous way and are left to the reader.
\end{proof}
We can now give the order of the inertia groups for primes $\mathfrak{q}$ in $B$.
\begin{lemma}
Let $3v(p)>2v(q)$. Then
\begin{enumerate}
\item $|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|=3$ $\iff$ $3\nmid{v(q)}$.
\item $|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|=1$ $\iff$ $3| v(q)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This follows from Lemma \ref{caseone}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Case II}
Suppose that $3v(p)<2v(q)$ and let $p=\pi^{k_{1}}u_{1}$ and $q=\pi^{k_{2}}u_{2}$ for units $u_{i}$, as before. We subdivide this case into two subcases:
\begin{enumerate}
\item [{\bf{(A)}}] $v(p)$ is divisible by $2$,
\item [{\bf{(B)}}] $v(p)$ is not divisible by $2$.
\end{enumerate}
Suppose that $v(p)$ is divisible by $2$. We start with the equation $(y-\sqrt{27}q)(y+\sqrt{27}q)=4p^3$. Dividing by $\pi^{3k_{1}}$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
(\dfrac{y-\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{3k_{1}/2}})(\dfrac{y+\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{3k_{1}/2}})=4u_{1}^3.
\end{equation}
We thus see that $\dfrac{y-\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{3k_{1}/2}}$ and $\dfrac{y+\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{3k_{1}/2}}$ are invertible. Note that the reduced equation is
\begin{equation}
\overline{y'^2}=\overline{4u_{1}^3},
\end{equation}
which might be reducible or irreducible, depending on whether $u_{1}$ is a square in the residue field $k$. In either case, we have the following
\begin{lemma}\label{Case2A}
Let $3v(p)<2v(q)$ and suppose that $v(p)$ is divisible by $2$. Then $|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|=1$.
\end{lemma}
This concludes the determination of the inertia groups for the first case. We would now also like to give the valuation of $y-\sqrt{27}q$ at a prime in $\text{Spec}(A)$ lying above $\mathfrak{p}$. As noted above, there are two cases to consider: the case where $\mathfrak{p}$ is split in $A$ and the case where $\mathfrak{p}$ is not split in $A$. We saw that being split in $A$ is equivalent to $\overline{u}_{1}$ being a square in $k$.
Let us consider the case where $\mathfrak{p}$ is split in $A$. We can then write $\overline{u_{1}}=h^2$, where $\overline{h}\in{k}$. Let $h$ be a lift of $h$ to $A$. Then there are two primes lying above $\mathfrak{p}$:
\begin{align*}
\mathfrak{q}_{1}&=(y'-2h^3,\pi)\\
\mathfrak{q}_{2}&=(y'+2h^3,\pi).
\end{align*}
We can now give $v_{\mathfrak{q}_{i}}(y\pm\sqrt{27}q)$:
\begin{lemma}
Suppose that $\mathfrak{p}$ is split in $A$. Let $\mathfrak{q}_{i}$ be the primes in $\text{Spec}(A)$ lying above $\mathfrak{p}$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
v_{\mathfrak{q}_{i}}(y\pm\sqrt{27}q)&=&3v_{}(p)/2.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Using
\begin{equation}\label{EquationPDivisible}
(\dfrac{y-\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{3k_{1}/2}})(\dfrac{y+\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{3k_{1}/2}})=4u_{1}^3,
\end{equation}
we see that $\dfrac{y-\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{3k_{1}/2}})$ and $(\dfrac{y+\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{3k_{1}/2}})$ are invertible and thus $v_{\mathfrak{q}_{i}}(\dfrac{y\pm\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{3k_{1}/2}})=0$.
Since $R\rightarrow{A_{\mathfrak{q}_{i}}}$ is \'{e}tale for both $i$, we obtain that $\pi$ is again a uniformizer. This quickly gives the lemma.
\end{proof}
Suppose now that $\mathfrak{p}$ is not split in $A$. There is one prime lying above $\mathfrak{p}$, namely
\begin{equation}
\mathfrak{q}=(y'^2-4u_{1}^3,\pi).
\end{equation}
We then have
\begin{lemma}
Let $\mathfrak{q}$ be the only prime lying above $\mathfrak{p}$. Then
\begin{equation}
v_{\mathfrak{q}}(y\pm\sqrt{27}q)=3v(p)/2.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Using Equation \ref{EquationPDivisible} again, we see that $v_{\mathfrak{q}}(\dfrac{y\pm\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{3k_{1}/2}})=0$. Since $R\rightarrow{A_{\mathfrak{q}}}$ is \'{e}tale, we have that $\pi$ is again a uniformizer and the result follows.
\end{proof}
This concludes the case where $v(p)$ is divisible by $2$.
Now suppose that $v(p)$ is not divisible by $2$. We claim that $|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|=2$. We write $3v(p)=2k+1$ and find the equation
\begin{equation}\label{EquationRamifiedP}
(\dfrac{y-\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{k}})(\dfrac{y+\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{k}})=4\pi\cdot{}u_{1}^3.
\end{equation}
Writing $y'=\dfrac{y}{\pi^{k}}$ and $q'=\dfrac{q}{\pi^{k}}$, we see that there is only one prime lying above $\mathfrak{p}$ in this algebra, namely
\begin{equation}
\mathfrak{q}'=(y'-\sqrt{27}q', \pi)=(y'-\sqrt{27}q').
\end{equation}
Note that $\mathfrak{q}'$ is principal and thus $A$ is normal. The fiber over $\pi$ is of the form $\overline{y'^2}=\overline{0}$, showing that the extension is ramified.
Since the inertia group is cyclic inside $S_{3}$ and we already know that $|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|$ is greater than or equal to $2$, we find that $|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|=2$. We summarize this in a lemma:
\begin{lemma}\label{Case2B}
Let $3v(p)<2v(q)$ and suppose that $v(p)$ is not divisible by $2$. Then $|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|=2$.
\end{lemma}
Note now that there are only two options for $v(p)$: it is either divisible by two or it is not. Using this observation, we then also obtain the reverse statement of Lemmas \ref{Case2A} and \ref{Case2B}. We could also obtain this from the following lemma:
\begin{lemma}
Let $\mathfrak{q}'$ be the only prime lying above $\mathfrak{p}\in\text{Spec}(A)$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
v_{\mathfrak{q}'}(y\pm\sqrt{27}q)&=&3v_{}(p).
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This follows from Equation \ref{EquationRamifiedP}, noting that $v_{\mathfrak{q}'}(\pi)=2$ and $v_{\mathfrak{q}'}(y\pm\sqrt{27}q)=1$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Case III}
Suppose that $3v(p)=2v(q)$. Let $\Delta:=4p^3+27q^2$. We again consider two cases:
\begin{enumerate}
\item [{\bf{(A)}}] $v(\Delta)$ is divisible by $2$,
\item [{\bf{(B)}}] $v(\Delta)$ is not divisible by $2$.
\end{enumerate}
Suppose first that $v(\Delta)$ is divisible by $2$. We then see that the extension is unramified in the quadratic subfield.
\begin{lemma}
Suppose that $3v(p)=2v(q)$ and that $v(\Delta)$ is divisible by $2$. Then $|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|=1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We consider the equation
\begin{equation*}
(y'-\dfrac{\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{v(q)}})(y'+\dfrac{\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{v(q)}})=\dfrac{4p^3}{\pi^{2v(q)}}.
\end{equation*}
Note that the righthand side is invertible, implying that the elements on the lefthand side are also invertible.
From $v(\Delta)\equiv{0}\mod{2}$, we obtain that $\pi$ is again a uniformizer at the two points lying above it. We denote them by $\mathfrak{q}_{i}$.
This gives
\begin{lemma}
Let the $\mathfrak{q}_{i}$ be the two primes lying above $\mathfrak{p}$.
Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
v_{\mathfrak{q}_{i}}(y\pm\sqrt{27}q)&=&v(q).
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This follows as before, noting that $(y'-\dfrac{\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{v(q)}})$ and $(y'+\dfrac{\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{v(q)}})$ are invertible and that $v_{\mathfrak{q}_{i}}(\pi)=1$.
\end{proof}
This then also quickly gives the rest of the lemma: since $3|3v(p)$, we find that $3|2v(q)$, implying that $3|v(q)=v_{\mathfrak{q}_{i}}(y\pm\sqrt{27}q)$. As always, this implies that the abelian extension $K'\subset{\overline{L}}$ is unramified above the $\mathfrak{q}_{i}$.
\end{proof}
Now for the second case with $v(\Delta)\equiv{1}\mod{2}$. We find that there is only one point (denoted by $\mathfrak{q}$) that lies above $\mathfrak{p}$. The valuation of $\pi$ in $\mathfrak{q}$ is then $2$. This then gives
\begin{lemma}
Suppose that $3v(p)=2v(q)$, $v(\Delta)\equiv{1}\mod{2}$ and let $\mathfrak{q}$ be the only prime lying above $\mathfrak{p}$.
\begin{equation}
v_{\mathfrak{q}}(y\pm\sqrt{27}q)=2v(q)=3v(p).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This follows exactly as before: we have the equation
\begin{equation}
(y'-\dfrac{\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{v(q)}})(y'+\dfrac{\sqrt{27}q}{\pi^{v(q)}})=\dfrac{4p^3}{\pi^{2v(q)}},
\end{equation}
implying that the lefthand side is invertible. Since $v_{\mathfrak{q}}(\pi)=2$, we obtain the lemma by a simple calculation.
\end{proof}
\begin{comment}
\subsection{Oude versie}
Let $R$ be a discrete valuation ring with quotient field $K$, residue field $k$, uniformizer $\pi$ and valuation $v$. We will denote the maximal ideal $(\pi)$ by $\mathfrak{p}$. We will assume that $\text{char}(K)=0$, $\text{char}(k)>3$ . Furthermore, we will assume that $K$ contains a primitive third root
of unity $\zeta_{3}$. Note that this implies that $\sqrt{27}=3\sqrt{3}\in{K}$. Let $S\supset{R}$ be of the same type as $R$ with field of fractions $L$ and suppose that $K\subset{L}$ is of degree $3$. After a translation, this extension is given by an equation of the form
\begin{equation}\label{MainEq1}
z^3+p\cdot{z}+q=0,
\end{equation}
where $p,q\in{K}$. By scaling, we obtain a monic equation of the same form with $p,q\in{R}$. We now consider the algebra
\begin{equation*}
B:=R[w]/(w^6+2\sqrt{27}q\cdot{w^3}-4p^3).
\end{equation*}
Over $K$, this just gives the {\bf{Galois closure}} of the extension $K\subseteq{L}$. Note that it contains the finite $R$-subalgebra $A:=R[y]/(y^2-(\Delta))$, with $\Delta:=4p^3+27q^2$. Over $K$, this gives the quadratic subfield of the Galois closure. In terms of $y$, we then have $w^3=y\pm\sqrt{27}q$.\\
We consider three cases:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $3v(p)>2v(q)$,
\item $3v(p)<2v(q)$,
\item $3v(p)=2v(q)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{comment}
\section{Algorithm for the covering data}
We now give an algorithm for finding the covering data of a Galois covering $C\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$ with Galois group $G$ and function field extension $K(x)\rightarrow{K(C)}$. The idea is as follows. Let $A$ be a discrete valuation ring in $K(x)$ with maximal ideal $\mathfrak{p}$. We consider the normalization $A'$ of $A$ in $K(C)$. This is quite easy to calculate, see Appendix \ref{Appendix1} for the case of $S_{3}$ coverings. Let $\mathfrak{q}$ be any prime of $A'$ lying above $\mathfrak{p}$. We then calculate the order of the inertia group of $\mathfrak{q}$: $|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|$. If we know these for sufficiently many valuations, then we know the covering data by Theorems \ref{DecompVert} and \ref{InertProp2}.
\begin{algo}\label{AlgorithmCoveringDataDisjointlyBranched}
\begin{center}
{\bf{[Algorithm for the covering data of a disjointly branched morphism]}}
\end{center}
\begin{flushleft}
Input: The Galois covering $C\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$ as a function field extension $K(x)\subset{K(C)}$.
\end{flushleft}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Determine the branch locus $S$ of $C\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$.
\item Construct the corresponding separating semistable model $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ using Chapter \ref{Appendix2}.
\item For every irreducible component ${\Gamma}$ in the special fiber of $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ corresponding to a valuation $v_{\Gamma}$, determine the inertia group $I_{\Gamma}$.
\item Take a finite extension $K\subset{K'}$ of order $\text{lcm }(|I_{\Gamma}|)$.
\item Consider an edge $e\in\Sigma(\mathcal{D}_{S})$ and let $\Gamma_{1}$ be a component in a regular subdivision of $e$, with valuation $v_{\Gamma_{1}}$. Determine the order of an inertia group of $\Gamma_{1}$.
This gives $|I_{e}|$ by Theorem \ref{InertProp2}.
\item The order of the decomposition group of a vertex is then determined by Theorem \ref{DecompVert}.
\end{enumerate}
Output: The covering data $|D_{v}|$ and $|D_{e}|$ for every vertex and edge in $\Sigma(\mathcal{D}_{S})$.
\end{algo}
\begin{proof}
The orders of $D_{v}$ and $D_{e}$ are correct by Theorems \ref{DecompVert} and \ref{InertProp2}. The algorithm terminates because there are only finitely many normalizations that have to be calculated: one for every branch point, one for every vertex of $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ and one for a component in a regular subdivision of an edge $e$.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
The way we use this algorithm in practice is as follows. Instead of focusing on one covering, we will be slightly more ambitious and consider a \emph{family} of coverings that have the same Galois group and then specialize. For instance, in Chapter \ref{Abelian} we will consider abelian coverings of the projective line and in Chapter \ref{Solvable} we will consider $S_{3}$-coverings of the projective line. Calculating {\it{enough}} normalizations in these cases then gives us global statements on the covering data. The calculations for abelian coverings amount to normalizations in Kummer extensions, which we will give in the next section. The normalizations for $S_{3}$-coverings are a bit more work and are given in Appendix \ref{Appendix1}. The results of these calculations for $S_{3}$-coverings can be found in Proposition \ref{InertS3}.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}
Let us make a remark about the genus of any vertex $v'$ lying above a vertex $v$ in the tropical separating tree ${T_{S}}$. We automatically have a morphism $\Gamma_{v'}\rightarrow{\Gamma_{v}}$ and we know the ramification points of this morphism: they are the reductions of generic ramification points or the edges. Their decomposition groups were calculated in Algorithm \ref{AlgorithmCoveringDataDisjointlyBranched}. Using the {\emph{Riemann-Hurwitz formula}} given in Theorem \ref{RiemannHurwitz}, we then immediately know the genus of $\Gamma_{v'}$.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}
Once the decomposition groups of all the edges are known, the lengths of these edges are also known. They are given by Proposition \ref{InertiagroupIntersectionPoint1}.
\end{rem}
\section{Covering data for abelian coverings}
We will now consider the special case of abelian coverings. Let $\phi: C\rightarrow{D}$ be a cyclic abelian covering, with Galois group $\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}$ for some $n\in\mathbb{N}_{>0}$. This induces a morphism of function fields
\begin{equation}
K(D)\rightarrow{K(C)},
\end{equation}
which we can explicitly describe using Kummer theory. Indeed, Proposition \ref{AbelExt1} tells us that
\begin{equation}
K(C)\simeq{K(D)[z]/(z^{n}-f)}
\end{equation}
for some $f\in{K(D)}$. We will give the covering data in terms of $f$ and its Laplacian $\phi_{f}$. To that end, let $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched morphism for $\phi$ and consider an edge $e\in\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$. Let $\delta_{e}(\phi_{f})$ be the slope of $\phi_{f}$ along $e$.
\begin{pro}\label{PropositionCoveringData}
Let $e'$ be any edge lying above $e$. Then
\begin{equation}
|I_{e'}|=\dfrac{n}{\text{gcd}(n,\delta_{e}(\phi_{f}))}
\end{equation}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
We will give two proofs of this fact. The first one uses Proposition \ref{ramind2} and the second one uses Theorem \ref{InertS3}.
Let $f^{\Gamma}$ be the $\Gamma$-modified form of $f$. We then obtain an \'{e}tale algebra $k(\Gamma)[z]/(z^{n}-f^{\Gamma})$ that describes the function field extensions above $\Gamma$. We consider this function field extension above the intersection point $\tilde{x}_{e}$ corresponding to $e$. The valuation of $\overline{f^{\Gamma}}$ at this point is equal to the slope $\delta_{e}(\phi_{f})$ by the Poincar\'{e}-Lelong formula, see Theorem \ref{ValCor1}. If we consider the Newton polygon of $z^{n}-f^{\Gamma}$ at this point (that is, the valuation corresponding to $\tilde{x}_{e}$), then it consists of a single line segment with slope $-\delta_{e}(\phi_{f})/n$. Clearing the denominator and the numerator, we obtain $n/\text{gcd}(n,\delta_{e}(\phi_{f}))$ in the denominator. This denominator is the ramification index, which is then equal to the order $|I_{e'}|$ by Proposition \ref{ramind2}. This finishes the proof.
For the second proof, we consider a regular subdivision $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ of $e$. That is, the pre-image of $e$ consists of $l(e)-1$ projective lines. Consider the new component $\Gamma_{1}$ in $\mathcal{D}_{0,s}$ that intersects $\Gamma$. The valuation of $f^{\Gamma}$ at this component $\Gamma_{1}$ is then given by Theorem \ref{MainThmVert}: it is the slope $\delta_{e}(\phi_{f})$. The extension of discrete valuation rings $\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D}_{0},y_{1}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D}_{0},y_{1}}[z]/(z^{n}-f^{\Gamma})}$ is then ramified of order $n/\text{gcd}(\delta_{e}(\phi_{f}))$ by a Newton polygon computation as in the first proof. Here $y_{1}$ is the generic point of $\Gamma_{1}$ in $\mathcal{D}_{0}$. By Theorem \ref{InertProp2}, we find that this ramification index is equal to the order $|I_{e'}|$, as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
We note that the first proof of Proposition \ref{PropositionCoveringData} is almost the same as that of \cite[Proposition 4.1]{supertrop}. The main difference is that the coverings in \cite{supertrop} are all superelliptic, i.e. of the form $C\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$, whereas the coverings in this section are general cyclic abelian coverings $C\rightarrow{D}$. We will give plenty of examples of these general coverings soon.
\end{rem}
We now give the decomposition group of a vertex for a cyclic abelian cover $C\rightarrow{D}$ with disjointly branched morphism $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$. Let $v$ be a vertex in $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ and let $v'$ be any vertex in $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ lying above it. We will denote their corresponding components by $\Gamma_{v}$ and $\Gamma_{v'}$. There are two cases to consider: the case where $g(\Gamma_{v})=0$ and the case where $g(\Gamma_{v'})>0$. The first case is dealt with by Theorem \ref{DecompVert}, which we repeat for the reader's convenience.
\begin{reptheorem}{DecompVert}
Let $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched morphism with Galois group $G$ and let $v\in\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ be a vertex with $g(\Gamma_{v})=0$. Let $v'$ be any vertex lying above $v$. Then
\begin{equation}
D_{v'}=\prod_{P\in\Gamma_{v'}}{I_{P}}.
\end{equation}
\end{reptheorem}
For $g(\Gamma_{v})>0$, the situation is different since we can obtain nontrivial unramified abelian coverings of $\Gamma_{v}$. We will study these in Chapter \ref{Twistingdata}. For now, we state the following
\begin{pro}\label{DecompositionVertexProposition}
Let $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched morphism with Galois group $\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}$ and let $v\in\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ be a vertex with $g(\Gamma_{v})>0$. Let the extension of function fields be given by $z^{n}=f$. Then $|D_{v'}|=r$, where $r$ is the smallest divisor of $n$ such that $\overline{f^{\Gamma}}=h^{n/r}$ for some $h\in{k(\Gamma)}$.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
Let $y$ be the generic point of $\Gamma_{v}$. The extension $\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},y}\rightarrow{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},y}[z]/(z^{n}-f^{\Gamma})}$ is \'etale, so the splitting behaviour is determined by the factorization of $f^\Gamma$ in the residue field $k(\Gamma_{v})$. Let $r$ be the smallest divisor of $n$ such that $\overline{f^{\Gamma}}=h^{n/r}$. We can now write
\begin{equation}
z^{n}-\overline{f^{\Gamma}}=\prod_{i=0}^{n/r-1}(z^{r}-\zeta_{n/r}^{i}h),
\end{equation}
where $\zeta_{n/r}$ is a primitive $n/r$-th root of unity. This now gives us the $n/r$ solutions $z^{r}=\zeta_{n/r}^{i}h$. Note that these do not factorize further by assumption on $r$. The order of the decomposition group is then $\dfrac{|G|}{n/r}=\dfrac{n}{(n/r)}=r$, as desired
\end{proof}
\begin{exa}\label{Exa3Tors1}
Suppose that we are given an elliptic curve $E$ over $K$ with multiplicative reduction, with a $3$-torsion point $P$ reducing to the singular point. An explicit family of these curves can be found in \cite{Paul1}.
This point $P$ then gives a point of order three in the component group of the N\'{e}ron model of $E$. By definition, there exists a function $f$ such that
\begin{equation*}
(f)=3(P)-3(\infty).
\end{equation*}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{{Graph2.png}}
\caption{\label{333eplaatje} {\it{The Laplacian of $f$.}}}
\end{figure}
Subdividing the reduction graph $\Sigma(E)$ into three equidistant parts, we see that $P$ must reduce to one third of the length of $\Sigma(E)$, whose component we denote by $\Gamma_{1}$. We thus have the Laplacian
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))=3(\Gamma_{1})-3(\Gamma_{0}).
\end{equation*}
We take the solution $\phi$ with
\begin{eqnarray*}
\phi(0)=0,\\
\phi(1)=2,\\
\phi(2)=1,\\
\end{eqnarray*}
which has slope $2$ between $\Gamma_{0}$ and $\Gamma_{1}$ on the left side and slope $1$ between $\Gamma_{1}$ and $\Gamma_{0}$ on the right side, as in Figure \ref{333eplaatje}.
If we consider the extension
\begin{equation*}
z^3=f,
\end{equation*}
then this gives a morphism $E'\longrightarrow{E}$, which ramifies twice at every component (namely at the intersection points), since the slope is not divisible by $3$. The reduction graph is thus the same and $E'$ is an elliptic curve with multiplicative reduction. This was to be expected from an isogeny of two elliptic curves where one has bad reduction, see \cite[Chapter VII, Corollary 7.2]{Silv1}. The covering of graphs can be found in Figure \ref{23eplaatje}. We note that the lengths of the edges in $\Sigma(E')$ are multiplied by three, i.e. $3\cdot{}l(e')=l(e)$ by
Proposition \ref{InertiagroupIntersectionPoint1}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{{Graph23.png}}
\caption{\label{23eplaatje} {\it{The covering of graphs in Example \ref{Exa3Tors1}.}}}
\end{figure}
\end{exa}
\begin{exa}\label{Exa3torsgen2}
Suppose we take Example \ref{ExampleChapter1}.\ref{ExaS2} again, with the banana graph of genus 2, as in Figure \ref{52eplaatje}. The corresponding equation is
\begin{equation*}
y^2=x(x-\pi)(x+1)(x+1-\pi)(x+2)(x+2-\pi).
\end{equation*}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{{Graph5_2.png}}
\caption{\label{52eplaatje} {\it{The intersection graph of the genus 2 curve in Example \ref{Exa3torsgen2}.}}}
\end{figure}We label the components by $\Gamma$ and $\Gamma'$. There is a natural $3$-torsion point $D'$ on this graph, namely
\begin{equation*}
D'=(\Gamma)-(\Gamma').
\end{equation*}
Suppose we have a divisor $D$ of order $3$ in the Jacobian of $C$ such that $\rho(D)=D'$. For some function $f$, we have that
\begin{equation*}
3D=\text{div}_{\eta}(f).
\end{equation*}
Then $\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))=3D'$ and the corresponding Laplacian function up to scaling is just the indicator function of $\Gamma$, as in Figure \ref{4eplaatje}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{{Graph3.png}}
\caption{\label{4eplaatje} {\it{The Laplacian function $\phi$ of $f$, as in Example \ref{Exa3torsgen2}. The $e_{i}$ denote the three edges between the two vertices.}}}
\end{figure}
We thus see that the morphism on the components is ramified at every vertex, with the vertices $\Gamma_{0}$ and $\Gamma_{1}$ having three ramification points and the ones elsewhere having only $2$. Using the Riemann-Hurwitz formula, we see that the primes dividing $\Gamma_{0}$ and $\Gamma_{1}$ have genus 1.
The graph thus consists of two vertices with weights $1$ and three edges connecting them. This gives a genus 4 graph, as expected. The covering of graphs can be found in Figure \ref{25eplaatje}. Note that the lengths of the edges are again multiplied by three by Proposition \ref{InertiagroupIntersectionPoint1}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{{Graph25.png}}
\caption{\label{25eplaatje} {\it{The covering of graphs in Example \ref{Exa3torsgen2}.}}}
\end{figure}
\end{exa}
\begin{comment}
\begin{exa}\label{ExaHyp1}
We take the curve $C$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{EqnExaHyp1}
y^2=x(x-\pi)g(x),
\end{equation}
where $\pi$ is a uniformizer and $g(x)$ is a polynomial of odd degree $c=2k+1$ (the case of a polynomial with even degree is similar but with two points at infinity). We assume that the roots of $g$ reduce to distinct points not equal to $0$. We hav
\begin{equation*}
g(C)=k+1.
\end{equation*}
Since the points $(0)$ and $(\pi)$ are not disjoint in the special fiber, we will want to create a semistable model for $\mathbb{P}^{1}$ that makes them disjoint. \todo{Bekijken en aanpassen}We take:
\begin{equation*}
\text{Proj}R[X,T,W]/(XT-\pi{W}^2)
\end{equation*}
with affine model
\begin{equation*}
\text{Spec}R[x,t]/(xt-\pi).
\end{equation*}
We have that the point $(0)$ on the generic fiber is now transferred to the affine part
\begin{equation*}
\text{Spec}R[x',w]/(x'-\pi{w^2}),
\end{equation*}
where $x'=\dfrac{X}{T}$ and $w=\dfrac{W}{T}$. Indeed, the corresponding prime ideal is $(x',w)$. The point $(\pi)$ now corresponds to the prime ideal $(x-\pi,t-1)$ lying on the generic fiber. We see that the reductions of $(0)$ and $(\pi)$ now lie on the same component $(x)$, but they have distinct $t$-coordinates: one has $t=1$ and the other has "$t=\infty$".\\
We can thus use Theorem <<REFERENTIES>>
and calculate the normalization of this scheme in the finite extension defined by equation (\ref{EqnExaHyp1}). We'll first take a different route however, using only our knowledge of the divisors involved. Consider the divisor
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}_{\eta}(f)=(0)+(\pi)+Z(g)-(2+c)\cdot{\infty}.
\end{equation*}
We calculate
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))=2\cdot(\Gamma_{1})-2\cdot({\Gamma_{2}}).
\end{equation*}
This means that the corresponding Laplacian function has slope $\pm{2}$ between $\Gamma_{1}$ and $\Gamma_{2}$. The Laplacian can also be found in Figure \ref{1eplaatjeExtra}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{{Graph1.png}}
\caption{\label{1eplaatjeExtra} {\it{The Laplacian of $f$ in Example \ref{ExaHyp1}.}}
\end{figure} For the edge corresponding to the intersection $\mathfrak{m}=(x,t,\pi)$, we thus obtain two edges in the pre-image.\\
We now calculate $f^{\Gamma_{1}}$. We obtain
\begin{equation*}
(f^{\Gamma_{1}})=(x',w,\pi)+(x,t-1,\pi)-2\cdot({\Gamma_{1}\cap{\Gamma_{2}}}).
\end{equation*}
If we thus consider the local equation
\begin{equation*}
y^2=f^{\Gamma_{1}},
\end{equation*}
it will ramify at 2 points. Thus the genus of the corresponding component above is $0$. For $\Gamma_{2}$ we have
\begin{equation*}
(f^{\Gamma_{2}})=Z(g)+2\cdot({\Gamma_{1}\cap\Gamma_{2}})-(c+2)(\infty).
\end{equation*}
Thus the equation $y^2=f^{\Gamma_{2}}$ ramifies in the points defined by $Z(g)$ and $\infty$. There are $c+1$ of these, thus we can use the Riemann-Hurwitz formula to obtain
\begin{equation*}
2g_{\Gamma'_{2}}-2=2(-2)+c+1
\end{equation*}
and thus
\begin{equation*}
g_{\Gamma'_{2}}=k.
\end{equation*}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{{Graph10.png}}
\caption{\label{10eplaatje} {\it{The covering in Example \ref{ExaHyp1}.}}
\end{figure}
Thus the reduction graph consists of two vertices with two edges meeting them. The first component has genus $0$ and the second component has genus $k$. The covering of graphs can be found in Figure \ref{10eplaatje}.
We could have also calculated the normalization directly:
\begin{eqnarray*}
z^2=(1-t)g(x),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $z=y/x$. Plugging in $t=0$ and $x=0$ then yields the same reduction graph.
\end{exa}
\begin{exa}\label{ExaHyp2}
Let us take a slightly more involved example. We take
\begin{equation*}
z^2=x(x-\pi)(x-\pi^2)g(x),
\end{equation*}
where $g(x)$ is a polynomial of even degree $c=2k$. Then $g(C)=k+1$. If we now consider the open affine defined by
\begin{equation*}
R[x,y]/(xy-\pi^2),
\end{equation*}
then $\pi$ does not reduce to a regular point. When we blow this point up, we obtain a new component where $\pi$ does reduce to a regular point.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{{Graph11_2.png}}
\caption{\label{11eplaatje} {\it{The Laplacian $\phi$ of $f$ in Example \ref{ExaHyp2}.}}
\end{figure} The blow-up is given by the local charts
\begin{eqnarray*}
U_{1}=\text{Spec}(R[x,t_{2}]),\\
U_{2}=\text{Spec}(R[y,t_{3}]),
\end{eqnarray*}
with relations
\begin{eqnarray}
xt_{2}&=&\pi,\\
yt_{3}&=&\pi,
\end{eqnarray}
and the "obvious" local isomorphisms. We label the components $Z(t_{2})=\Gamma_{1}$, $Z(x,y)=\Gamma_{2}$ and $Z(t_{3})=\Gamma_{3}$. Here $\Gamma_{i}$ intersects $\Gamma_{i+1}$.\\
We have
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}_{\eta}(f(x))=(0)+(\pi)+(\pi^2)+Z(g)-(c+3)(\infty),
\end{equation*}
where $(0)$ and $(\pi^2)$ reduce to $\Gamma_{3}$ (the component with "$v(x)\geq{2}$"), $(\pi)$ reduces to $\Gamma_{2}$ and $Z(g)$ and $\infty$ reduce to $\Gamma_{1}$. Furthermore
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))=2(\Gamma_{3})+(\Gamma_{2})-3(\Gamma_{1}),
\end{equation*}
whose Laplacian is depicted by a slope of $2$ between $\Gamma_{3}$ and $\Gamma_{2}$ and a slope of $3$ between $\Gamma_{2}$ and $\Gamma_{1}$, as in Figure \ref{11eplaatje}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{{Graph12.png}}
\caption{\label{12eplaatje} {\it{The covering of graphs in Example \ref{ExaHyp2}.}}
\end{figure}
Correspondingly, the edge $e_{2,3}$ has two pre-images in $\mathcal{C}$ and the edge $e_{1,2}$ has one pre-image in $\mathcal{C}$. One finds that $f^{\Gamma_{1}}$ has $c+1$ ramification points and thus $\Gamma'_{1}$ has genus $k$ (Check this with the Riemann-Hurwitz formula). Similarly, $f^{\Gamma_{2}}$ and $f^{\Gamma_{3}}$ have two ramification points and as such they have genus $0$. Thus the reduction graph consists of three vertices $v_{1},v_{2},v_{3}$ where $v_{1}$ and $v_{2}$ intersect once and $v_{2}$ and $v_{3}$ intersect twice. The covering of graphs can be found in Figure \ref{12eplaatje}.\\
We also give the normalizations for completeness. For the first chart $U_{1}$ they are given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
z_{1}^2&=&x(1-t_{2})(1-t_{2}\pi)g(x),\\
z_{2}^2&=&t_{2}(1-t_{2})(1-t_{2}\pi)g(x),\\
z_{1}\cdot{z_{2}}&=&\pi^{1/2}(1-t_{2})(1-t_{2}\pi)g(x).
\end{eqnarray*}
where $z_{1}=\dfrac{z}{x}$ and $z_{2}=\dfrac{t_{2}z}{\pi^{1/2}x}$.
For the second chart $U_{2}$ we have a single algebra given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
z_{3}^2=(t_{3}-1)(1-y)g(t_{3}\cdot{\pi}),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $z_{3}=\dfrac{z}{\pi^{1/2}t_{3}}$. Note that in both charts we clearly see the need for the ramified extension of degree $2$ given $K\subseteq{K(\pi^{1/2})}$.
\end{exa}
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
\begin{pro}\label{AbelExt1} (Simplified Kummer Theory) Let $K\subseteq{L}$ be a finite Galois extension of degree $q$ with $q$ coprime to the characteristic $p$ of $K$. Suppose that $K$ contains a primitive $q$-th root of unity. We then have
\begin{equation*}
L=K[X]/(X^{q}-f)
\end{equation*}
for some $f\in{K}$.
\end{pro}
We now return to the Dedekind case, where we have a finite extension of Dedekind domains
\begin{equation*}
A\longrightarrow{A'}
\end{equation*}
with quotient fields $K\subset{L}$ as before. We can consider the subalgebras
\begin{equation*}
A\subseteq{A[X]/(X^{q}-f)}\subseteq{A'},
\end{equation*}
where $f$ is as in Proposition \ref{AbelExt1}. We do not always have equality, as the extension given by a certain $f$ might be {\it{nonnormal}}.
We will now look at the local case. So we assume that $A$ is local and Dedekind, meaning that it is a discrete valuation ring. We take $\mathfrak{p}$ to be the maximal ideal and $t$ to be the uniformizer of $A$. Consider any $f$ from Proposition \ref{AbelExt1}. We can then write $f=t^{n}u$ where $u$ is a unit and $n\geq{0}$.
\begin{pro}\label{UnrAbelExt1}
Let $A\subseteq{A[X]/(X^{q}-f)}\subseteq{A'}$ be as above with $f=t^{n}u$. We then have that the extension is unramified if and only if $n=0\mod{q}$.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
One can consider the Newton polygon of $X^{q}-t^{n}u$, which is given by a single line segment of slope $-\dfrac{n}{q}$. We then have that the extension is unramified $\iff$ The slope is integral $\iff$ $n\equiv{0 }\mod{q}$. This gives the proposition.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{AbelExt2}
For any abelian extension $A\subseteq{A'}$ of Dedekind domains with corresponding extension of fraction fields $K\subseteq{L}=K[x]/(X^{q}-f)$, we have that the extension is unramified above $\mathfrak{p}$ if and only if $\text{v}_{\mathfrak{p}}(f)\equiv{0}\mod{q}$.
\end{cor}
\end{comment}
\section{Divisors on graphs and Laplacians}\label{DivisorsLaplacians}
So let $G$ be a graph, which we will assume to be finite, connected and without loop edges. Let $V(G)$ be its vertices and $E(G)$ its edges. We define $\text{Div}(G)$ to be the free abelian group on the vertices $V(G)$ of $G$.
Writing $D\in{\text{Div}(G)}$ as $D=\sum_{v\in{V(G)}}c_{v}(v)$, we define the degree map as $\text{deg}(D)=\sum_{v\in{V(G)}}c_{v}$. We let $\text{Div}^{0}(G)$ be the group of divisors of degree zero on $G$.\\ Now let $\mathcal{M}(G)$ be the group of $\mathbb{Z}$-valued functions on $V(G)$. Define the {\bf{Laplacian operator}} $\Delta:\mathcal{M}(G)\longrightarrow\text{Div}^{0}(G)$ by
\begin{equation*}
\Delta(\phi)=\sum_{v\in{V(G)}}\sum_{e=vw\in{E(G)}}(\phi(v)-\phi(w))(v).
\end{equation*}
We then define the group of principal divisors to be the image of the Laplacian operator:
\begin{equation*}
\text{Prin}(G):=\Delta(\mathcal{M}(G)).
\end{equation*}
\begin{mydef}[{\bf{Tropical Jacobians}}]
We define the {\it{tropical Jacobian}} of $G$ to be the group
\begin{equation}
J(G):=\text{Div}^{0}(G)/\text{Prin}(G).
\end{equation}
\end{mydef}
\begin{exa}\label{FirstExa}
Suppose we take $\text{Proj }R[X,Y,W]/(XY-\pi{W}^2)$ with its usual grading. As before, we have two components intersecting each other in one point. It is now quite easy to see that every divisor of degree zero is in fact principal. Take any $D$ of degree zero. Then $D(\Gamma_{1})=-D(\Gamma_{2})$. Let us define
\begin{eqnarray*}
\phi(\Gamma_{1})&=&0,\\
\phi(\Gamma_{2})&=&D(\Gamma_{2}).
\end{eqnarray*}
Then $\phi$ has the right divisor and as such every divisor is principal.
\end{exa}
\begin{exa}\label{SecExa2}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.44]{{Graph26.png}}
\caption{\label{16eplaatjeExtra} {\it{The graph of the function $\phi$ considered in Example \ref{SecExa2}.}}}
\end{figure}
Throughout this thesis, we will connect the values of $\phi$ by the unique line between them.
An example of a Laplacian can be found in Figure \ref{16eplaatjeExtra}. The graph in question is given in Figure \ref{27eplaatje}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{{Graph27.png}}
\caption{\label{27eplaatje} {\it{The graph considered in Example \ref{SecExa2}.}}
\end{figure}
The divisor of the Laplacian in this figure is
\begin{equation*}
\Delta(\phi)=-8(\Gamma_{0})+10(\Gamma_{1})-2(\Gamma_{2})
\end{equation*}
\end{exa}
We would like to quickly mention a connection between this tropical Jacobian and a well-known theorem on spanning trees in a graph: {\bf{Kirchhoff's Theorem}}.
\begin{theorem}
Let $G$ be a finite connected graph. Then the order of the tropical Jacobian of $G$ is equal to the number of maximal spanning trees in $G$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{exa}
Let us take the graph from Example (\ref{ExampleChapter1}.\ref{ExaS2}).
Then there are three maximal spanning trees, and so the order of tropical Jacobian is three. This of course also means that $\text{Jac}(G)\simeq{\mathbb{Z}/3\mathbb{Z}}$.
\end{exa}
\begin{rem}
We will later see that the tropical Jacobian is canonically isomorphic to the component group of the N\'{e}ron model of the Jacobian of $C$, see Section \ref{JacNer} or \cite[Page 24]{baker}. Using Kirchhoff's theorem we can say that the order of this component group is then equal to the number of maximal spanning trees.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}
As in the case of algebraic curves, one has multiple ways of constructing a "{\it{Tropical Jacobian}}". In \cite[Page 203]{MZ1},
a tropical Jacobian is constructed using differential forms: one takes the dual $\Omega(C)^{*}=\text{Hom}(\Omega(C),\mathbb{R})$ of the space of holomorphic differentials $\Omega(C)$, where $C$ is a tropical curve. By integration, one obtains a lattice $H_{1}(\Gamma,\mathbb{Z})$ in this vector space and one then sets
\begin{equation*}
J(C):=\Omega(C)^{*}/H_{1}(\Gamma,\mathbb{Z}).
\end{equation*}
After chosing a basis of $\Omega(C)^{*}$, one then obtains a noncanonical isomorphism $J(C)\simeq{}(\mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z})^{g}$.
This Jacobian can then be described entirely in terms of the associated intersection graph, as in \cite[Page 35, Section 5]{BBC1}.
This is already much closer to our approach. \\One obvious difference between this approach and our approach is that our tropical Jacobian is {\it{finite}}. As noted in \cite[Remark A.11]{baker}, we can get somewhat closer by considering the limit over finite extensions $K'\supset{K}$ to obtain a $\mathbb{Q}$-rational tropical Jacobian $J_{\mathbb{Q}}(\Gamma)$ which is noncanonically isomorphic to $(\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z})^{g}$.\\
Let us describe these phenomena in a particular case: an elliptic curve $E$ with multiplicative reduction. Over a discretely valued field $K$ with $v(\pi)=1$, one then obtains an isomorphism with the Tate curve $E(K)\simeq{}K^{*}/<q>$ for some $q$ with positive valuation equal to $-v(j)$. One can then define a "naive" tropicalization map
\begin{eqnarray*}
\text{trop}:(K)^{*}/<q>&\longrightarrow&{\mathbb{Z}/v(q)\mathbb{Z}},\\
\lbrack{x}\rbrack{}&\longmapsto&\lbrack{v(x)}\rbrack{}
\end{eqnarray*}
This is easily seen to be well-defined. To study the passage to finite extensions of $K$, let us consider the easy example of a ramified extensions of degree $n$ given by $K\subset{}K':=K(\pi^{1/n})$. We extend the valuation on $K$ by $v(\pi^{1/n})=1/n$. As before, one has an isomorphism $E(K')={(K')}^{*}/<q>$. See [\cite{Silv2}, Chapter V] for this. If we take a similar naive tropicalization as before, one obtains $\text{trop}(E(K'))=(\dfrac{1}{n}\mathbb{Z})/(v(q)\mathbb{Z})\simeq{\mathbb{Z}/(n\cdot{}v(q)\mathbb{Z})}$. Taking this argument further to an algebraic closure of $K$, we then easily obtain $\text{trop}(E(\bar{K}))=\mathbb{Q}/\mathbb{Z}$.
\end{rem}
\section{Intersection theory on $\mathcal{C}$}\label{IntersectionTheory}
Here we will start transporting divisors. Let us suppose now that we have a strongly semistable {\it{regular}} model $\mathcal{C}$. As before we will consider its intersection graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ and the irreducible components $\{\Gamma_{1},...,\Gamma_{n}\}$. Let $\text{Div}(C)$ (resp. $\text{Div}(\mathcal{C})$) be the group of Cartier divisors on $C$ (resp. $\mathcal{C}$). Since both $C$ and $\mathcal{C}$ are {\it{regular and integral}}, we have by \cite[Page 271]{liu2} that these Cartier divisors correspond to Weil divisors. Similarly, we will let $\text{Prin}(C)$ (resp. $\text{Prin}(\mathcal{C})$) be the group of principal Cartier divisors on $C$ (resp. $\mathcal{C}$). Note also that we have that $\mathcal{C}$ is {\it{normal}} (because $\mathcal{C}$ is regular or because $\mathcal{C}_{s}$ is reduced and $\mathcal{C}_{\eta}$ is normal), so we can talk about valuations at codimension one primes.
The intersection theory that we now need is described in \cite[Page 381]{liu2} and \cite[Page 7]{baker}. We will give a quick summary and refer the reader to the aforementioned sources for the details. Let $\text{Div}_{s}(\mathcal{C})$ be the set of Cartier divisors on $\mathcal{C}$ with support in $\mathcal{C}_{s}$. These are known as the {\bf{vertical divisors}}. This group has the $\Gamma_{i}$ as a $\mathbb{Z}$-basis. (We will later also define the {\it{horizontal divisors}}). At any rate, there exists a bilinear map (the intersection map)
\begin{equation*}
\text{Div}(\mathcal{C})\times{\text{Div}_{s}(\mathcal{C})}\longrightarrow{\mathbb{Z}},
\end{equation*}
which we will write as $\mathcal{D}\cdot{E}$ for Cartier divisors $\mathcal{D}$ and $E$, where $E\subseteq\mathcal{C}_{s}$. This can then be computed as
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{D}\cdot{E}=\text{deg }\mathcal{O}_{X}(\mathcal{D})|_{E}.
\end{equation*}
One special case that needs attention is the {\it{self-intersection}} of elements of $\text{Div}_{s}(\mathcal{C})$. Suppose we have $E\subseteq{\mathcal{C}_{s}}$. The number $E\cdot{E}$ is called the {\it{self-intersection}} of $E$ and is denoted by $E^2$. We then have the following proposition that gives us the self-intersection numbers:
\begin{pro}
Let $\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{S}$ be as above. The following properties are then true.
\begin{enumerate}
\item For any $E\in\text{Div}_{s}(\mathcal{C})$, we have $\mathcal{C}_{s}\cdot{E}=0$.
\item Let $\Gamma_{i}$ be the irreducible components of $\mathcal{C}_{s}$. Then for any $i\leq{r}$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\Gamma_{i}^{2}=-\sum_{j\neq{i}}\Gamma_{i}\cdot{\Gamma_{j}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
This is Chapter 9, Proposition 1.21 in \cite{liu2}. Note that the multiplicities in our case are all 1, so the formula simplifies.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
In the semistable case, all intersections will be {\it{transversal}}, meaning that
\begin{equation*}
\Gamma_{i}\cdot\Gamma_{j}=\#\{\text{intersection points of } \Gamma_{i}\text{ and }\Gamma_{j}\}.
\end{equation*}
This means that the self-intersection number of any $\Gamma_{i}$ is just the total number of intersections with other components.
\end{rem}
\begin{exa}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Let us take $\mathcal{C}=\text{Proj}R[X,Y,W]/(XY-\pi{}W^2)$ with affine chart
\begin{equation*}
A=R[x,y]/(xy-\pi),
\end{equation*} where $x=\dfrac{X}{W}$ and $y=\dfrac{Y}{W}$. Then $\Gamma_{1}=\overline{(x)}$ and $\Gamma_{2}=\overline{(y)}$. Then $\Gamma_{1}\cdot\Gamma_{2}=1$ and $\Gamma_{i}^2=-1$.
\item Let us consider Example \ref{ExampleChapter1}.\ref{ExaS2}
again. We have two components $\Gamma_{1}$ and $\Gamma_{2}$. Then $\Gamma_{1}\cdot\Gamma_{2}=3$ and as such we have $\Gamma_{i}^2=-3$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{exa}
\subsection{From $\text{Div}(\mathcal{C})$ to $\text{Div}(\Sigma(\mathcal{C}))$}
Using the intersection theory above, we can now transport our divisors from $\mathcal{C}$ to $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$. We define a homomorphism $\rho: \text{Div}(\mathcal{C})\longrightarrow{\text{Div}(\Sigma(\mathcal{C}))}$ with
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\mathcal{D})=\sum_{v_{i}\in{\Sigma(\mathcal{C})}}({\mathcal{D}}\cdot\Gamma_{i})(v_{i}).
\end{equation*}
We call this map the {\it{specialization map}}.
\begin{exa}
Suppose we take $\mathcal{C}=\text{Proj}R[X,Y,W]/(XY-\pi{}W^2)$ again. Then
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\Gamma_{1})=\Gamma_{1}^2(v_{1})+(\Gamma_{1}\cdot\Gamma_{2})(v_{2})=-1\cdot{(v_{1})}+1\cdot(v_{2}).
\end{equation*}
\end{exa}
\begin{exa}
Let us consider Example \ref{ExampleChapter1}.\ref{ExaS2} again.
We then see that
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\Gamma_{1})=-3\cdot(v_{1})+3\cdot(v_{2}).
\end{equation*}
Note that this divisor is actually trivial in the tropical Jacobian. We have that the negative of the characteristic function of the vertex $v_1$ has divisor equal to $-3(v_{1})+3(v_{2})$, so $\rho(\Gamma_{1})$ is in the image of $\Delta$ (the Laplacian). This happens in general: a multiple of the negative of the characteristic function at a vertex $v_{i}$ is equal to $\rho(\Gamma_{i})$, see Lemma \ref{VertInd1}.
Thus the image of any vertical divisor in the tropical Jacobian is {\it{zero}}. If we want nontrivial examples of elements of $J(\Sigma(\mathcal{C}))$, we have to look elsewhere. This is given by the {\it{horizontal divisors}}, which we will discuss in Section \ref{Horizontaldivisors}
\end{exa}
\subsection{The intersection matrix}
We will now associate a matrix $A$ to the restriction of the intersection pairing $i_{s}(\cdot{},\cdot{})$ to the special fiber, known as the {\it{intersection matrix}}. A good reference for the material below is \cite[Chapter 9, page 272]{Bosch1990}. The finitely generated, torsion-free $\mathbb{Z}$-module $\text{Div}_{s}(\mathcal{C})$ has the irreducible components $\Gamma_{i}$ as a basis. We then construct the intersection matrix by
\begin{equation}
a_{i,j}:=(\Gamma_{i}\cdot{\Gamma_{j}}).
\end{equation}
We can view it as a linear map $\mathbb{Z}^{n}\rightarrow{\mathbb{Z}^{n}}$, where $n$ is the number of irreducible components $\Gamma_{i}$ in $\mathcal{C}_{s}$. We let $e_{i}$ be the standard basis of $\mathbb{Z}^{n}$, so that $e_{i}$ corresponds to $\Gamma_{i}$. Note that the intersection pairing $i_{s}(\cdot{},\cdot{})$ is now given by the bilinear form $<v,w>=v^{T}\cdot{(Aw)}$ induced by $A$.
We would now like to know the rank of $A$. It is given by
\begin{pro}\label{RankIntersect}
The rank of $A$ is $n-1$. Its kernel is generated by the element $c:=(1,1,...,1)$, corresponding to $\sum_{i}\Gamma_{i}=\mathcal{C}_{s}$.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $v\in\text{Ker}(A)$. In particular, we then have $v^{T}Av=0$. By \cite[Chapter 9, Theorem 1.23]{liu2}, we then find that $v\in{c\cdot{\mathbb{R}}}$. This then easily implies that $v=n\cdot{c}$ for some $n\in\mathbb{Z}$.
Conversely, consider the vector $Ac$. For every basis vector $e_{i}$, we calculate
\begin{equation}
{e_{i}}^{T}\cdot{Ac}=i_{s}(\Gamma_{i},\mathcal{C}_{s})=0,
\end{equation}
where the last equality can be found in \cite[Chapter 9, Proposition 1.21]{liu2}. This then implies that $Ac=0$, as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{KernelRho}
Consider the restriction $\rho_{\mathcal{C}_{s}}$ of $\rho$ to the divisors with support in the special fiber $\mathcal{C}_{s}$. Then
\begin{equation}
\text{Ker}(\rho_{\mathcal{C}_{s}})=<\mathcal{C}_{s}>.
\end{equation}
\end{cor}
\section{Transporting divisors from $C$ to $\mathcal{C}$}\label{Horizontaldivisors}
Now we would like to transport divisors from $\text{Div}(C)$ to $\text{Div}(\mathcal{C})$. Suppose we have any divisor $D\in\text{Div}(C)$. We can now take the closure $\mathcal{D}$ of $D$ inside $\mathcal{C}$. This naturally gives a Cartier divisor of $\mathcal{C}$. These are known as the {\bf{horizontal divisors}}. We will associate a function to the above transportation. Define $\psi:\text{Div}(C)\longrightarrow{\text{Div}(\mathcal{C})}$ by
\begin{equation*}
\psi(D)=\overline{D},
\end{equation*} where the closure is in $\mathcal{C}$.
We will make ths process a bit more explicit using the \emph{reduction map}.
\begin{mydef}\label{ReductionMap11}
Let $S$ be the spectrum of a Henselian discrete valuation ring $R$. Let $\mathcal{X}\rightarrow{}S$ be surjective and proper, with generic fiber $X$. Let $X^{0}$ denote the set of closed points of $X$. We define the map $r_{\mathcal{X}}:X^{0}\rightarrow{\mathcal{X}_{s}}$ by
\begin{equation}
r_{\mathcal{X}}(x)=\overline{\{x\}}\cap{\mathcal{X}_{s}}.
\end{equation}
We call $r_{\mathcal{X}}$ the reduction map associated to $\mathcal{X}$. We then say that $x$ reduces to $r_{\mathcal{X}}(x)$.
\end{mydef}
\begin{rem}
We note first that $r_{\mathcal{X}}$ is surjective by \cite[Proposition 1.36, Page 468]{liu2}. Note also that in the definition of the reduction map, one needs the ring $R$ to be Henselian
because otherwise there could be multiple reduction points. One can consider the example
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{X}=\text{Spec}(\mathbb{Z}_{(5)}[x]/(x^2+1))\longrightarrow{\text{Spec}(\mathbb{Z}_{(5)}[x]/(x^2+1))},
\end{equation*}
where $\mathbb{Z}_{(5)}$ is the localization of $\mathbb{Z}$ at $(5)$. Consider the closed point $(0)$ of the generic fiber.
There are then two possible reductions: $(x-1,5)$ and $(x-2,5)$. Note that if we instead take the $5$-adic ring in the above example, then $\mathcal{X}$ has two connected components.
\end{rem}
\begin{mydef}
Let $\mathcal{X}\longrightarrow{\text{Spec}(R)}$ be irreducible, surjective and proper. Let $\tilde{x}$ be a closed point of $\mathcal{X}_{s}$. Define
\begin{equation*}
X_{+}(\tilde{x}):=r_{\mathcal{X}}^{-1}(\tilde{x}).
\end{equation*}
This is known as the {\it{formal fiber}} of $\tilde{x}$.
\end{mydef}
\begin{rem}
For semistable models, these formal fibers are naturally isomorphic to open annuli and spheres, where one takes an absolute value corresponding to the valuation on $R$. These notions play an important role in analytic theories of semistability, to name a few: Rigid geometry, Formal $R$-schemes and Berkovich spaces. In the Berkovich theory one also has formal fibers for points that are not necessarily closed in $\mathcal{X}_{s}$: for instance a generic point of a component. These are known as the type $2$ points for curves.
\end{rem}
\begin{exa}
Let $\mathcal{C}=\text{Proj}R[X,T,W]/(XT-\pi^{n}{W^2})$ with open affine $U=\text{Spec}(R[x,t]/(xt-\pi^{n})$ where $x=\dfrac{X}{W}$ and $t=\dfrac{T}{W}$. Let $C$ be its generic fiber. Let $\tilde{x}=(x,t,\pi)$. Note that $\tilde{x}$ is not a regular point. We then have that
\begin{equation*}
C_{+}(\tilde{x})(K)=\{a\in{K}:\,|\pi|^{n}<|a|<1\}.
\end{equation*}
That is, it is an open annulus.
See \cite[Page 471]{liu2} for the details.
\end{exa}
Let us return to our transportation morphism $\psi:\text{Div}(C)\rightarrow{\text{Div}(\mathcal{C})}$. Consider the divisor $D=P$, where $P$ is some point in $C(K)$. Then $P$ specializes to a well-defined point $r_{\mathcal{C}}(P)$ that lies in the smooth locus of $\mathcal{C}_{s}$, see \cite[Corollary 9.1.32]{liu2}. Note that we use the regularity of $\mathcal{C}$ here, see Example \ref{regnec} below for a simple counterexample. At any rate, the point $P$ reduces to a smooth point and as such it reduces to a unique irreducible component of $\mathcal{C}_{s}$. We will denote this component by $c(P)$. We then have $\overline{\{P\}}=\{P,r_{\mathcal{C}}(P)\}$ and $\rho(\mathcal{D})=c(P)$.
\begin{exa} Consider the affine scheme defined by $R[x,y]/(xy-\pi)$. It has generic fiber $K[x,y]/(xy-\pi)$ and special fiber $k[x,y]/(xy)$. Consider the point defined by the prime ideal $\mathfrak{p}=(x-\pi,y-1)$. This corresponds to the point on the generic fiber $"(\pi,1)"$. There is exactly one maximal ideal lying above $\mathfrak{p}$, namely $\mathfrak{m}=(x-\pi,y-1,\pi)$ (which corresponds to $"(0,1)"$ on the special fiber). The closure of the prime ideal $\mathfrak{p}$ is then $\{\mathfrak{p},\mathfrak{m}\}$. The point $P$ reduces to a {\it{unique}} component, namely the one defined by the prime ideal $(x)$.
\end{exa}
\begin{exa} ({\it{Regularity}})\label{regnec}
Suppose we now have the affine scheme defined by
\begin{equation*}
A:=R[x,y]/(xy-\pi^2).
\end{equation*} It has generic fiber $K[x,y]/(xy-\pi^2)$ and special fiber $k[x,y]/(xy)$. This scheme is however not regular: the tangent space at $\mathfrak{m}=(x,y,\pi)$ is 3-dimensional, which is strictly higher than the dimension of the ring $A$ (which is 2). \\
Consider the prime ideal defined by $\mathfrak{p}=(x-\pi,y-\pi)$. This corresponds to the point $"(\pi,\pi)"$ on the generic fiber. There is exactly one maximal ideal above it (this holds for any proper morphism of schemes $\mathcal{X}\longrightarrow{S}$ where $S$ is the spectrum of a complete d.v.r.), but there is no {\it{unique}} component that it reduces to. Here $\mathfrak{p}\subseteq{\mathfrak{m}}=(x,y,\pi)$, which corresponds to the origin of the coordinate axes. We have that both $\Gamma_{1}:=\overline{(x)}$ and $\Gamma_{2}:=\overline{(y)}$ contain this point.
\end{exa}
\begin{rem}
To actually define a reduction for the point in the last example, one can blow-up the point $\mathfrak{m}$ to obtain a regular model. This works in general, see for instance \cite[Page 404]{liu2}. We will see many examples of this phenomenon later on.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}
[{\bf{Conventions on divisors}}]
As noted earlier, since both $C$ and $\mathcal{C}$ are {\it{regular and integral}}, we have by \cite[Page 271]{liu2} that the Cartier divisors correspond to Weil divisors. We will therefore write every Cartier divisor as a {\it{Weil divisor}}, i.e. as finite sums of irreducible closed subsets of codimension 1.\\
Let us give one more notational device regarding principal divisors. Let $K(\mathcal{C})$ be the function field of $\mathcal{C}$. It is equal to the function field of $C$. If we have an element $f\in{K(\mathcal{C})}$, we can consider its divisor in both $C$ and in $\mathcal{C}$. To avoid any ambiguity, we will write $\text{div}(f)$ or $(f)$ for the divisor in $\mathcal{C}$ and $\text{div}_{\eta}(f)$ or $(f)_{\eta}$ for the divisor in $C$.
\end{rem}
We will now consider the {\bf{principal divisors}} of $C$ and we will see what happens to them under this map $\psi$. Unfortunately, if we take a principal divisor $(f)$ and consider its closure in $\mathcal{C}$, then the resulting divisor in $\text{Div}(\mathcal{C})$ can be nonprincipal. Let us see why this happens.
\begin{exa}
Suppose we take $\mathcal{C}=\text{Proj}R[X,Y,W]/(XY-\pi{}W^2)$ again with affine patch
\begin{equation*}
A_{1}=R[x,y]/(xy-\pi).
\end{equation*} It has generic fiber $K[x,y]/(xy-\pi)$. Let us take $x$ in the function field of $C$. Then
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}_{\eta}(x)=(0)-(\infty).
\end{equation*}
Note that these points actually don't lie in the affine patch $A_{1}$; they lie in the other patches determined by $D^{+}(X)$ and $D^{+}(Y)$ (where the current patch $A_{1}$ corresponds to $D^{+}(W)$).\\
The function $x$ can also be considered as an element of the function field of $\mathcal{C}$ (they are the same after all). To determine this divisor in $\mathcal{C}$, we have to know at which codimension 1 primes $x$ has nonzero valuation. Consider $\mathfrak{p}_{1}=(x,\pi)=(x)$. The local ring $A_{1,\mathfrak{p}_{1}}$ is a discrete valuation ring with generator $x$. Thus $x$ has valuation 1 here. For $\Gamma_{2}$ we have the local ring $A_{1,\mathfrak{p}_{2}}$ where $\mathfrak{p}_{2}=(y,\pi)$. The element $x$ is invertible in this ring, so it has zero valuation. We then in fact have that
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}(x)=\overline{\{P\}}-\overline{\{\infty\}}+(\Gamma_{1}).
\end{equation*}
Note that the closure of $\text{div}_{\eta}(x)$ in $\mathcal{C}$ only contains the first two. In general, for any nonzero element $f$ of the function field of $\mathcal{C}$ we can write
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}(f)=\overline{\text{div}_{\eta}(f)}+V,
\end{equation*}
where $V$ is a vertical divisor (that is defined by the valuations of $f$ at the vertical divisors).\\
In fact, if we now have any divisor $D\in\text{Div}(C)$ of the form $D=\sum_{P\in{C(K)}}n_{P}(P)$, then we can take the closure $\mathcal{D}$ of $D$ in $\mathcal{C}$ and obtain a divisor there. We have
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{D}=\sum_{P\in{C(K)}}n_{P}\overline{(P)}+\sum_{i}c_{i}(\Gamma_{i}),
\end{equation*}
where $c_{i}$ is the valuation of $\mathcal{D}$ at $\Gamma_{i}$.
\end{exa}
Luckily we have the following proposition, which tells us that principal divisors on $C$ map down to principal divisors on $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$.
\begin{pro}\label{Principaldivisors}
The specialization map $\rho$ induces a map
\begin{equation}
\text{Prin}({C})\rightarrow{\text{Prin}(\Sigma(\mathcal{C}))}.
\end{equation}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Lemma 2.1]{baker}.
\end{proof}
We will use Proposition \ref{Principaldivisors} in Section \ref{JacNer} to construct a map from the Jacobian of $C$ to the tropical Jacobian of $\mathcal{C}$.
\section{Jacobians and N\'{e}ron models}\label{JacNer}
In this section we take the two transporting maps from $\text{Div}(C)$ to $\text{Div}(\mathcal{C})$ and from $\text{Div}(\mathcal{C})$ to $\text{Div}(\Sigma(\mathcal{C}))$ and consider the maps on the Jacobians. There is a description of this map in terms of the N\'{e}ron model of the Jacobian of $C$, which we will present here.\\
Let $\text{Div}(C)$ and $\text{Div}(\mathcal{C})$ be as before. Let $\text{Div}^{0}(C)$ be the subgroup of Cartier divisors of degree zero on $C$. We further define $\text{Div}^{(0)}(\mathcal{C})$ to be the subgroup of $\text{Div}(\mathcal{C})$ consisting of the Cartier divisors such that the restriction of the associated line bundle $\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}}(\mathcal{D})$ to each irreducible component of $\mathcal{C}_{s}$ has degree zero. This last condition can be translated to
\begin{equation*}
\text{deg}(\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}}(\mathcal{D})|_{\Gamma_{i}})=0
\end{equation*}
for every $\Gamma_{i}$. Using our specialization map $\rho$ from before, we can write
\begin{equation*}
\text{Div}^{(0)}(\mathcal{C})=\text{Ker}(\rho).
\end{equation*}
We now let
\begin{equation*}
\text{Div}^{(0)}(C)=\{D\in\text{Div}^{0}(C):\psi(D)\in\text{Ker}(\rho)\}.
\end{equation*}
As such, it is the inverse image of $\text{Ker}(\rho)$ under $\psi$.\\
Let us consider the associated Jacobians. Let $J(C)$ be the Jacobian of $C$ over $K$, that is: $\text{Div}^{0}(C)/\text{Prin}(C)$. Now let $\mathcal{J}$ be its N\'{e}ron model over $\text{Spec}(R)$. We direct the reader unfamiliar with N\'{e}ron models to \cite{liu2}, \cite{Silv2} and \cite{Bosch1990}
for introductions to the subject. We let $\mathcal{J}^{0}$ be the connected component of the identity in $\mathcal{J}$. We denote by $\Psi=\mathcal{J}_{s}/{\mathcal{J}_{s}}^{0}$ the group of connected components of the special fiber $\mathcal{J}_{s}$ of $\mathcal{J}$. This is in fact a finite group that is isomorphic to the tropical Jacobian we defined earlier. See \cite[Page 24]{baker} for the details.
\begin{exa}
Let us take an elliptic curve $E$ with split multiplicative reduction. Its reduction type is thus $I_{n}$ and we have that the intersection graph is just a cycle with $n$ vertices, where $n=-v(j)$, where $j$ is the j-invariant of $E$. We have that $E$ is canonically isomorphic to its own Jacobian. The N\'{e}ron model of $E$ in this case is obtained as follows: one takes the minimal regular model $\mathcal{C}$.
One then considers the closed subscheme $S$ consisting of all the intersection points of $\mathcal{C}_{s}$. We give it the reduced induced subscheme structure. The open subscheme $\mathcal{E}:=\mathcal{C}\backslash{S}$ is then the N\'{e}ron model of $E$.
It is a $\text{Spec}(R)$-scheme that is {\it{not proper}}, but it is a group scheme over $\text{Spec}(R)$. Its component group is then equal to $\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}$. The details can be found in \cite[Page 492]{liu2}.
The corresponding analytic version might be useful to have in mind as well. We will follow \cite[Chapter V]{Silv2}.
Since $E$ has split multiplicative reduction, we have an analytic isomorphism
\begin{equation*}
E(K)\simeq{K^{*}/(q)}
\end{equation*}
for some $q\in{K^{*}}$ with $\text{val}(q)=n$.
We have a natural map
\begin{equation*}
i:R^{*}\longrightarrow{K^{*}/(q)},
\end{equation*}
where the image of $R^{*}$ in $E(K)$ is equal to the $R$-points of the connected component of the identity $\mathcal{E}^{0}$:
\begin{equation*}
i(R^{*})=\mathcal{E}^{0}(R).
\end{equation*}
We then quite easily see that
\begin{equation*}
\Psi=(K^{*}/(q))/(i(R^{*}))\simeq{\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{exa}
Let us now return to the more general case of Jacobians and their N\'{e}ron models. We can ask for a concrete description of the $R$-points of the connected component of the identity and this is given by the following isomorphism
\begin{equation}\label{RaynaudIsom}
J^{0}(K):=\mathcal{J}^{0}(R)\simeq{\text{Div}^{(0)}(C)/\text{Prin}^{(0)}(C)},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation*}
\text{Prin}^{(0)}(C):=\text{Div}^{(0)}(C)\cap{\text{Prin(C)}}.
\end{equation*}
In other words, if we let $j$ be the injection $\text{Prin}(C)\longrightarrow{\text{Div}(C)}$, then
\begin{equation*}
\text{Prin}^{(0)}(C)=(\psi\circ{j})^{-1}(\text{Ker}(\rho)).
\end{equation*}
The isomorphism in Equation \ref{RaynaudIsom} comes from a theorem by Raynaud, which states that $\mathcal{J}^{0}=\text{Pic}_{\mathcal{C}/R}^{0}\label{Pick}$ represents the functor of "isomorphism classes of line bundles whose restriction to each element of $\mathcal{C}$ has degree zero". A quick sidenote to clarify this functorial approach: the entities above are considered to be functors from $(\text{Sch})\longrightarrow(\text{Sets})$. This identity of functors then means for instance that if we plug in the spectrum of the residue field $k$ as a scheme, we obtain the identity
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{J}^{0}(k)=\text{Pic}^{0}(\mathcal{C}_{s})(k).
\end{equation}
We will study the entity on the right hand side in the next section.
We note that we now have a natural map from the Jacobian of a curve $J(C)$ to the tropical Jacobian $J(\Sigma(\mathcal{C}))$. Let $P\in{J(C)(K)}$ and let $D\in\text{Div}^{0}(C)$ be any representative of $P$. We then define $\tilde{\psi}(D)=\rho(\psi(D))$. By Proposition \ref{Principaldivisors}, we then see that this is well-defined and from
\cite[Diagram A.6, Page 25]{baker} we see that the kernel of this map is in fact $J^{0}(K)$.
Let us now review some facts about the {\bf{torsion}} in the Jacobian of a curve.
\begin{theorem}
Let $C$ be a smooth, connected, projective curve of genus $g$ over an algebraically closed field $K$ . Let $n\in\mathbb{N}$ be non-zero.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $(n,\text{char}(K))=1$, then $J(C)[n]\simeq{(\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z})^{2g}}$.
\item If $\text{char}(K)=p$, then there exists an $0\leq{h}\leq{g}$ such that for any $n=p^{m}$ we have $J(C)[n]\simeq{(\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z})^{h}}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
This can be found in \cite[Theorem 4.38, Page 299]{liu2}
or \cite[Corollary 2.3.2]{KatzMazur} and \cite[Chapter 3, Corollary 6.4]{Silv1} for elliptic curves.
\end{proof}
In the rest of the thesis, we will mainly be dealing with the first case of the theorem.
\section{Decomposition of $\mathcal{J}^{0}(k)$}
In this section we will further study the $\mathcal{J}^{0}(k)$ introduced in the previous section. In fact, we will only study the group $\text{Pic}^{0}(X_{k})$ for a curve (not necessarily irreducible) over $k$ (reminder: this is the residue field of $R$, which we assume is algebraically closed). We have a natural identification
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{J}^{0}(k)=\text{Pic}^{0}(\mathcal{C}_{s})(k).
\end{equation*}
from Section \ref{Pick} and as such we have a description of $\mathcal{J}^{0}(k)$.\\
So consider a connected projective curve $X$ over $k$ with {\it{smooth}} irreducible components $X_{1},...,X_{r}$. We will follow \cite[Chapter 7, Section 5]{liu2} with some extra assumptions for the scenario we're interested in. Let us suppose that $X$ is reduced and that it only has ordinary double points as its singularities (which is the case we're most interested in, the {\it{semistable}} case). Let $X':=\coprod_{1\leq{i}\leq{r}}X_{i}$ be the {\it{normalization}} of $X$. We have a surjective integral morphism $\pi:X'\longrightarrow{X}$.
\begin{mydef}
$\text{Pic}^{0}(X)$ is the set of isomorphism classes of invertible sheaves $\mathcal{L}$ such that $\text{deg}(\mathcal{L}|_{X_{i}})=0$ for every $1\leq{i}\leq{r}$.
\end{mydef}
Let $G$ be the intersection graph of $X$, as in \cite[Chapter 10, Definition 1.48]{liu2}.
The structure of $\text{Pic}^{0}(X)$ is given by the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{ToricPic}
Let $X$ be as above (i.e., semistable). Let $t=\beta(G)$ be the Betti number of $G$. The following properties are then true.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[a)] The morphism $\pi$ induces a canonical surjective homomorphism
\begin{equation}\label{CohPic1}
\pi_{\text{Pic}^{0}}:\text{Pic}^{0}(X)\longrightarrow{\prod_{1\leq{i}\leq{r}}\text{Pic}^{0}(X_{i})}.
\end{equation}
\item[b)] Let $L=\text{Ker}(\pi_{\text{Pic}}^{0})$. Then $L\simeq{(k^{*})^{t}}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
(See \cite[Page 313]{liu2}, the following is a sketch) Consider the exact sequence of sheaves of abelian groups
\begin{equation}\label{CohPic2}
0\longrightarrow{\mathcal{O}^{*}_{X}}\longrightarrow{\pi_{*}\mathcal{O}^{*}_{X'}}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{G}}\longrightarrow{0},
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{G}$ is a skyscraper sheaf concentrated at the intersection points of the components of $X$. Let $S:=\{\text{the intersection points of components of $X$}\}$. For any intersection point $x\in{S}$ we have the identity on stalks
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{G}_{x}=(\pi_{*}\mathcal{O}^{*}_{X'})_{x}/\mathcal{O}^{*}_{X,x}\simeq{k^{*}}
\end{equation*}
(\cite[Lemma 5.12, Page 309]{liu2}). We can take Cech cohomology of sequence (\ref{CohPic2}) to obtain the exact sequence
\begin{equation}\label{CohPic3}
0\longrightarrow{k^{*}}\longrightarrow{(k^{*})^{r}}\longrightarrow{\prod_{x\in{S}}k^{*}}\longrightarrow{\text{Pic}(X)}\longrightarrow{\text{Pic}(X')},
\end{equation}
where we used the identification $H^{1}(X,\mathcal{O}^{*}_{X})=\text{Pic}(X)$ (which is in \cite[Exercise 5.1.2.7]{liu2}). The last homomorphism in (\ref{CohPic3}) coincides with the usual homomorphism $\pi_{\text{Pic}}:\text{Pic}(X)\longrightarrow{\text{Pic}(X')}$, which takes $[\mathcal{L}]$ to $[\pi_{*}\mathcal{L}]$. The theorem now follows from the following observations:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\pi_{\text{Pic}}$ is surjective,
\item $[\mathcal{L}]\in\text{Pic}^{0}(X)$ if and only if $[\pi_{*}\mathcal{L}]\in\text{Pic}^{0}(X')$ (this with the previous statement gives (a)),
\item Exactness of the cohomology sequence (\ref{CohPic3}) (which gives (b)).
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
We will refer to the kernel of $\pi_{\text{Pic}^{0}}$ as the {\bf{toric part}} of $\mathcal{J}^{0}$. It will be denoted by
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{J}^{0}_{T}:=\text{ker}(\pi_{\text{Pic}^{0}}).
\end{equation*}
The elements of $\mathcal{J}^{0}$ reducing to nontrivial elements under the map $\pi_{\text{Pic}^{0}}$ will be said to belong to the {\bf{abelian part}} of $\mathcal{J}^{0}$.
\end{rem}
\section{Graph cohomology and the toric part of $\mathcal{J}^{0}(k)$}
\label{TorExtJac1}
From Theorem \ref{ToricPic}, we see that the degree zero line bundles consist of an abelian part and a toric part. We will now give a very explicit way to think about these line bundles that come from the toric part in terms of graphs. The reader that is interested in more of this is directed to \cite{Ulm}.
We will mostly follow her presentation of the material, albeit in an algebraic way.
So let $G(V,E)$ be a finite connected graph with vertex set $V$ and edge set $E$. We will review \v{C}ech cohomology for this graph with values in an abelian group $A$ (which for us will be $k^{*}$).
\begin{mydef}
A graph $G(V',E')$ with $V'\subset{V}$ and $E'\subset{E}$, where every edge of $E'$ has source or target in $V'$ is called a subgraph of $G(V,E)$. A subgraph is called complete, if $E'$ contains all edges of $E$ with source and target in $V'$.
\end{mydef}
We can now define a topology on $G$ as follows: the open sets are the complete subgraphs of $G$. With this topology we can now define \v{C}ech cohomology for graphs. Let $e$ be any edge of $G$ and let $G_{e}$ be the (complete) subgraph of $G$ consisting of the edge and the two vertices it joins. We then have the open covering of $G$
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{B}=\{G_{e}:e\in{E(G)}\}.
\end{equation*}
As with normal \v{C}ech cohomology, we now define
\begin{equation*}
\check{C}^{q}(\mathfrak{B},A)=\prod_{(e_{0},...,e_{q})\in{E(G)^{q+1}}}A(G_{e_{0}}\cap{\cdot\cdot\cdot}\cap{G_{e_{q}}})
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*}
d_{q}:\check{C}^{q}\longrightarrow{\check{C}^{q+1}};\,\, \alpha\mapsto{(\prod_{k=0}^{p+1}(-1)^{k}\alpha_{i_{0},...,i_{k-1},i_{k+1},...,i_{q+1}})_{i_{0},...,i_{p+1}}}
\end{equation*}
We then have cohomology groups
\begin{equation*}
\check{H}^{q}(G,A)=\text{ker }d_{q}/\text{im }d_{q-1},
\end{equation*}
which are trivial for $q\geq{2}$ (since we're working with graphs). Let us describe $\check{H}^{1}(G,A)$. The elements of $\text{ker }d_{1}$ are the elements of $C^{1}$ that satisfy the cocycle relations
\begin{equation*}
\alpha_{e_{i},e_{j}}=\alpha_{e_{i},e_{k}}\cdot{\alpha_{e_{k},e_{j}}}
\end{equation*} for three edges sharing a vertex $v$. The coboundaries of $\text{im }d_{0}$ can then be described by
\begin{equation*}
\alpha_{e_{i},e_{j}}=\beta_{e_{j}}\beta^{-1}_{e_{i}}
\end{equation*}
for a 0-cocycle $(\beta_{e})_{e\in{E}}$.
For all the proofs involved, the reader is directed to \cite{Ulm}.
We will now say that an edge {\it{ends in a vertex}}, if said vertex is either target or source of the edge.
\begin{mydef}
Let $e$ be an arbitrary edge with target vertex $v$ and an element $a\in{A}$, we define the weighted cocycle $\alpha(e,a)=(\alpha_{e_{i},e_{j}})_{e_{i},e_{j}\in{E^{2}}}$ by setting
\begin{equation*}
\alpha_{e_{i},e_{j}}=\begin{cases}
a & \text{if }e_{i}=e,e_{j}\neq{e}\text{ and }e_{j}\text{ ends in }v,\\
a^{-1} & \text{if }e_{j}=e,e_{i}\neq{e}\text{ and }e_{i}\text{ ends in }v,\\
1 & \text{otherwise}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
\end{mydef}
That concludes our short review of graph \v{C}ech cohomology on graphs. Let us now return to the scenario of Theorem \ref{ToricPic}. So consider the surjective homomorphism
\begin{equation*}
\pi_{\text{Pic}^{0}}:\text{Pic}^{0}(X)\longrightarrow{\text{Pic}^{0}(X')}=\prod_{1\leq{i}\leq{r}}\text{Pic}^{0}(X_{i})
\end{equation*}
where the $X_{i}$ are the irreducible components of $X$. This homomorphism can be made quite explicit: one takes a divisor class $[D]$ on $X$ and restricts it to all its components:
\begin{equation*}
[D]\longmapsto ([D|_{X_{i}}])_{i}
\end{equation*}
If we now have a divisor class in the kernel of this map, then this means that for every component $X_{i}$, we can write
\begin{equation*}
D|_{X_{i}}=(f_{i})
\end{equation*}
where $f_{i}\in{k(X_{i})}$, the function field of $X_{i}$. Suppose now that we have two intersection points $x_{j}$ and $x_{k}$ on the same component $X_{i}$ of $X$. Let the corresponding edges in the intersection graph be given by $e_{j}$ and $e_{k}$. We define
\begin{equation*}
\alpha_{e_{j}}=f_{i}(x_{j})
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*}
\alpha_{e_{j},e_{k}}=\alpha_{e_{j}}/\alpha_{e_{k}}
\end{equation*}
Evaluating this for all edges (or: intersection points) gives a {\it{weighted cocycle}} on the intersection graph that corresponds to the element of $\check{H}^{1}(G,k^{*})=H^{1}(X,\mathcal{O}^{*}_{X})=\text{Pic}^{0}(X)$ (the first equality follows from
\cite[Proposition 4.2.5]{Ulm}).
\begin{rem}
In Section \ref{Twistingdata}, we will see a modified version of this $2$-cocycle. It will be used for coverings that are unramified on a subgraph of $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$.
\end{rem}
\section{The inertia group of an intersection point}
Let $\phi_{\mathcal{C}}:\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched morphism and let $x\in\mathcal{C}$ be an intersection point.
The completed ring $\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathcal{C},x}$ is then isomorphic to $R[[x,y]]/(xy-\pi^{n})$ for some $n\in\mathbb{N}$ and the length of the corresponding point is then by definition $n$. By Corollary \ref{CorSmooth2}, we then find that $y:=\phi_{\mathcal{C}}(x)$ is also an ordinary double point. Let us denote their lengths by $l(x)$ and $l(y)$. We then have:
\begin{pro}\label{InertiagroupIntersectionPoint1}
\begin{equation}
|I_{x}|=l(y)/l(x).
\end{equation}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
We use \cite[Chapter 10, Proposition 3.48]{liu2}, which says that the length of $x$ is multiplied by the order of the image of the inertia group in $\text{Aut}_{R}(\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C},x})$. But by Lemma \ref{InjectiveGaloisAction}, we find that $G\hookrightarrow{\text{Aut}_{R}(\mathcal{C})}$, so this order is just the order of the inertia group $I_{x}$. This finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Specialization of decomposition groups and inertia groups}
Let $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched morphism. Let $y$ be the generic point of an irreducible component $\Gamma'\subset{\mathcal{C}_{s}}$ and let $x$ be an intersection point lying on $\Gamma'$.
We can, in general, not find an injective morphism
\begin{equation*}
D_{{x}}\longrightarrow{D_{{y}}}
\end{equation*}
for general coverings of semistable models.
Indeed, we saw this in Remark \ref{NonQuotGraph1}. We will now show that we do obtain such an injection for disjointly branched morphisms.
\begin{pro}\label{InjectionDecomposition}
Let $\phi$ be a disjointly branched morphism with $y$ a generic point of an irreducible component $\Gamma\subset{\mathcal{C}_{s}}$ and $x$ an intersection point lying on $\Gamma$.
There is then a canonical injective morphism $D_{x}\longrightarrow{D_{y}}$.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
Let us write down the condition that $x$ is an intersection point on affines. Let $A$ be an affine neighborhood of $x$. Then $A$ also contains $y$. Let $\mathfrak{m}$ be the maximal ideal corresponding to $x$ and $\mathfrak{p}$ the prime ideal corresponding to $y$. We then have $\mathfrak{m}\supset{\mathfrak{p}}$. We will show the following: if $\sigma$ fixes $\mathfrak{m}$, then it also fixes $\mathfrak{p}$. Suppose for a contradiction that it doesn't fix $\mathfrak{p}$. Then $\sigma(\mathfrak{p})$ corresponds to a different component. We have $\sigma(\mathfrak{m})=\mathfrak{m}$, so we find
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{m}\supset{\sigma(\mathfrak{p})}.
\end{equation*}
This just means (together with $\mathfrak{m}\supset{\mathfrak{p}}$) that $\mathfrak{m}$ is an intersection point of the components $\Gamma$ and $\sigma(\Gamma)$, which correspond to $\mathfrak{p}$ and $\sigma(\mathfrak{p})$.
We will now find a contradiction using
\begin{lemma}\label{QuotientNons1}
Let $G$ be a finite group acting on a semistable model $\mathcal{C}$. Let $x$ be an ordinary double point of $\mathcal{C}$, connecting two components $\Gamma$ and $\Gamma'$. Let $I$ be the inertia subgroup of $x$ and let
\begin{equation*}
\pi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{C}/I}
\end{equation*}
be the corresponding quotient map. Then $\pi(x)$ is smooth in $\mathcal{C}/I$ if and only if there exists an element $\sigma\in{I}$ such that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sigma(\Gamma)&=&\Gamma'.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let
\begin{equation*}
I_{0}=\{\sigma\in{I}:\sigma(\Gamma)=\Gamma\}.
\end{equation*}
By tracing through the proof of \cite[Page 527, Proposition 3.48]{liu2}, one finds that the case with $I_{0}\subsetneq{I}$ corresponds to $\pi(x)$ being smooth and the case $I_{0}=I$ to $\pi(x)$ being an ordinary double point. The Lemma then quickly follows.
\end{proof}
The inclusion $\mathfrak{m}\supset{\sigma(\mathfrak{p})}$ will now give us the desired contradiction, which will conclude the proof of Proposition \ref{InjectionDecomposition}. Indeed, we see that $\sigma(\Gamma)=\Gamma'$ and $\sigma$ is an element of the inertia subgroup of $x$ (here we use that our residue field $k$ is algebraically closed). But then $\pi(x)$ is smooth by Lemma \ref{QuotientNons1}. This contradicts Corollary \ref{CorSmooth1}, as desired.
\end{proof}
We note that for smooth points $x\in\mathcal{C}$ we also have an injection
\begin{equation*}
D_{x}\longrightarrow{D_{y}}.
\end{equation*}
This is much easier to prove however, since there is only one component that contains $x$.
\section{Reduction of inertia groups}
In this section, we will give a quick review of several results presented in \cite{supertrop}. Let $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched morphism and fix a component $\Gamma'\subset{\mathcal{C}_{s}}$ with image $\Gamma\subset{\mathcal{D}_{s}}$. The decomposition group $D_{\Gamma'}$ is then the Galois group of the covering $\Gamma'\rightarrow{\Gamma}$.
Now let $x$ be an intersection point of $\Gamma'$ or a ramification point of the morphism $C\rightarrow{D}$ reducing to $\Gamma'$ under the natural reduction map $r_{\mathcal{C}}$ introduced in Definition \ref{ReductionMap11}.
We let $r_{\mathcal{C}}(x)$ be the corresponding point in $\Gamma$. We now have two inertia groups: inertia groups for the covering $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ and inertia groups for the covering $\Gamma'\rightarrow{\Gamma}$. We would like to relate these two kinds of inertia groups. This is done by the following
\begin{pro}\label{ramind2}
Let $x\in\mathcal{C}$ be a generic ramification point or an intersection point of a disjointly branched morphism $\phi_{\mathcal{C}}:\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$. Let $\Gamma$ be any component in the special fiber $\mathcal{C}_{s}$ containing $r_{\mathcal{C}}(x)$.
Then
$$
I_{x,\mathcal{C}}=I_{r_{\mathcal{C}}(x),\Gamma'
$$
where the second inertia group is an inertia group of the Galois covering $\Gamma'\rightarrow{\Gamma}$ on the special fiber.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
We give a sketch of the proof and refer the reader to \cite[Proposition 3.9]{supertrop} for the details. For any closed point $x\in\mathcal{C}_{s}$, we have a natural injection $D_{x}\rightarrow{D_{y}}$, where $y$ is the generic point of an irreducible component $\Gamma'$. See Proposition \ref{InjectionDecomposition}. Under this morphism, we easily obtain the identification $I_{x,\mathcal{C}}=I_{r_{\mathcal{C}(x)},\Gamma'}$. We are thus left with the case where $x$ is a generic ramification point. One then considers the image $y$ of $x$ under $\phi$. Since $\phi_{\mathcal{C}}$ is disjointly branched, we have that $y$ is in the regular locus. We consider the morphism $\mathcal{C}/I_{x}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ and let $z$ be the image of $r_{\mathcal{C}}(x)$ in $\mathcal{C}/I_{x}$. Supposing that $\mathcal{C}/I_{x}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ is ramified at $z$, one then obtains a contradiction as follows. Let $z'$ be the image of $z$ in $\mathcal{D}$. It is in the branch locus and it is not an ordinary double point. By Lemma \ref{LemmaSmooth2}, we find that it is smooth. By purity of the branch locus, there exists a codimension one point above which $\mathcal{C}/I_{x}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ is ramified. By our assumption on disjointly branched morphisms, this point must be $y$. But this contradicts the fact that $\mathcal{C}/I_{x}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ is unramified above $y$ (see Lemma \ref{RamificationInertiaLemma}), a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\begin{comment}
\todo{Bewijs aanpassen naar "Sketch"}
We first let $x\in\mathcal{C}_{s}$ be any closed point in the special fiber and $y$ the generic point of $\Gamma$. We then have a natural injection $D_{x,\mathcal{C}}\rightarrow{D_{y,\mathcal{C}}}$. For $x$ smooth this follows directly from the fact that $y$ is the unique generic point under $x$. For $x$ an intersection point, this follows from
By Lemma \ref{exactseq}, $D_{y,\mathcal{C}}$ can be identified with the Galois group of the function field extension $k(\Gamma)\supset{k(\Gamma')}$. The image of $D_{x,\mathcal{C}}$ in this Galois group is then in fact equal to $D_{r_{\mathcal{C}}(x),\Gamma}$. We thus see $D_{x,\mathcal{C}}=D_{r_{\mathcal{C}}(x),\Gamma}$ for any closed point $x$ in the special fiber. By our assumption on the residue field, these decomposition groups are equal to their respective inertia groups and we have
$I_{x,\mathcal{C}}=I_{r_{\mathcal{C}}(x),\Gamma}$.
Using this identification, the case where $x$ is an intersection point immediately follows. We are thus left with the case of a generic ramification point $x$ of the morphism $\phi:C\rightarrow{D}$.
Let $z:=r_{\mathcal{C}}(x)$.
For any subgroup $H$ of $G$, we let $z_{H}$ be the image of $z$ under the natural map $C\rightarrow{C/H}$. We show $I_{x,\mathcal{C}}=I_{z,\mathcal{C}}$. By our earlier considerations, we then see $I_{x,\mathcal{C}}=I_{z,\Gamma}$.
If $\sigma\in{I_{x,\mathcal{C}}}$, then $\sigma\in{D_{x,\mathcal{C}}}$. Then $\sigma$ must fix $z$ as well, because otherwise there would be at least two points in the closure of $x$ lying above the special fiber. So $\sigma\in{D_{z,\mathcal{C}}}$. But by our earlier assumption on the residue field $k$, we have
$D_{z,\mathcal{C}}=I_{z,\mathcal{C}}$. This yields ${I_{x,\mathcal{C}}}\subseteq{I_{z,\mathcal{C}}}$.
For the other inclusion, we use the following criterion.
Let $H$ be a subgroup of $G$. Let $x_{H}$ be the image of $x$ in $\mathcal{C}/H$. The induced map $\mathcal{C}/H\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ is \'{e}tale at $x_{H}$ if and only if $H\supseteq{I_{x}}$.
This is a consequence of the second part of Proposition \ref{ramprop} in Section \ref{disbransect}.
We now only need to show $\mathcal{C}/I_{x}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ is unramified at $z_{I_{x}}$. Suppose it is ramified at $z_{I_{x}}$. Then $z_{G}$ is a branch point of the covering $\mathcal{C}/I_{x}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$. Since $\phi_{C}$ is disjointly branched, $z_{G}$ is in the smooth part of the special fiber. This implies $\mathcal{D}$ is regular at $z_{G}$, so we can use \emph{purity of the branch locus} (See \cite[Tag 0BMB]{stacks-project}) on some open subset $U$ of $\mathcal{D}$ containing $z_{G}$ to conclude there must be a generic branch point $P$ such that $z_{G}$ is in the closure of $P$. Indeed, purity of the branch locus tells us a point of codimension 1 has to be in the branch locus and this cannot be a vertical divisor by our second assumption for disjointly branched morphisms.
We must have $P=x_{G}$ because the branch locus is disjoint. This contradicts the fact that the morphism $\mathcal{C}/I_{x}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ is unramified above $x_{G}$ (it is the largest extension with this property), so we conclude $\mathcal{C}/I_{x}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ is unramified at $z_{I_{x}}$. In other words, we have $I_{z,\mathcal{C}}=I_{x,\mathcal{C}}$, as desired.
\end{proof}
\end{comment}
\section{The decomposition group of a vertex}
Let $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched Galois morphism, with Galois group $G$.
Let $\Gamma'$ be any irreducible component in the special fiber of $\mathcal{C}$ and let $\Gamma$ be its image in $\mathcal{D}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{DecompVert}
Suppose that the genus of $\Gamma$ is zero. Then
\begin{equation}
D_{\Gamma'}=\prod_{P\in{\Gamma'(k)}}I_{P}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $y'$ be the generic point of $\Gamma'$. We factorize the morphism $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ into $\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{C}/D_{\Gamma'}}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$. Note that last morphism is {\it{"Nisnevich"}} at the image of $y$. That is, it is \'{e}tale and the induced map of residue fields is an isomorphism. In fact, $K(\mathcal{C}/D_{\Gamma'})$ is the largest among all such fields. Since the map on the residue fields is an isomorphism, we don't have any ramification and as such we find that $D_{\Gamma'}\supset{\prod_{P\in{\Gamma'(k)}}I_{P}}$. Note that this didn't use the condition on the genus of $\Gamma$.
The induced morphism $\mathcal{C}/\prod_{P\in{\Gamma'(k)}}I_{P}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{C}/D_{\Gamma'}}$ is unramified above every point in the image of $\Gamma'$ in $\mathcal{C}/D_{\Gamma'}$. But this component has the same function field as $\Gamma$, which has genus zero. Since genus zero curves have no unramified coverings (by the Riemann-Hurwitz formula for instance), we find that $D_{\Gamma'}=\prod_{P\in{\Gamma'(k)}}I_{P}$, as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
Note that the condition on the genus of $\Gamma$ is indeed necessary. Take an elliptic curve $E$ with good reduction over $K$ and a corresponding model $\mathcal{E}$ with good reduction over $R$. Now take any unramified Galois covering of $E$ (which is in fact abelian, but we won't be needing this) with Galois group $G$ . Then the corresponding curve $E'$ again has genus $1$ by the Riemann-Hurwitz formula and the corresponding intersection graph consists of only one vertex with weight $1$. We therefore see that $D_{\Gamma'}=G$, even though $I_{P}=(1)$ for every $P$.
\end{rem}
\section{Subdivisions and inertia groups for edges}
In this section, we prove a continuity result for inertia groups of a disjointly branched morphism, as defined in Section \ref{DisjointBran11}.
More precisely, for a regular subdivision $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ of $\mathcal{D}$, we will give a formula for the inertia groups of the new components in $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ in terms of the inertia group of the corresponding edge in $\mathcal{D}$. This will allow us to determine the inertia group of an edge in terms of codimension one phenomena, namely the inertia groups of the generic points of these new components.
We will also give a formula for the decomposition group of a vertex $v'\in\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ lying above a vertex $v\in\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$, where the corresponding component $\Gamma_{v}$ has genus zero.
Consider a disjointly branched Galois morphism $\phi:\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ with $x\in\mathcal{C}$ an intersection point with length $n_{x}$ and $y$ its image in $\mathcal{D}$ with length $n_{y}$. We will denote the Galois group by $G$. From Proposition \ref{InertiagroupIntersectionPoint1},
we then have the formula
\begin{equation}\label{InertiaFormula}
n_{y}=|I_{x/y}|\cdot{n_{x}}.
\end{equation}
Let $y$ be an intersection point in $\mathcal{D}$, with corresponding components $\Gamma_{0}$ and $\Gamma_{n}$. Here $n$ is the length of $y$.
We now take a regular subdivision $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ of $\mathcal{D}$ in $y$. That is, we have a model $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ with a morphism $\psi: \mathcal{D}_{0}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ that is an isomorphism outside $y$ and the pre-image $\psi^{-1}\{y\}$ of $y$ consists of $n-1$ projective lines $\Gamma_{i}$. Here, the projective lines are labeled such that $\Gamma_{i}$ intersects $\Gamma_{i+1}$ in one point: $y_{i,i+1}$. Furthermore, we have that $\Gamma_{1}$ intersects an isomorphic copy of the original component $\Gamma_{0}$ in $y_{0,1}$ and likewise $\Gamma_{n-1}$ intersects an isomorphic copy of the original component $\Gamma_{n}$ in $y_{n-1,n}$, see \cite[Chapter 8, Example 3.53. and Chapter 9, Lemma 3.21]{liu2}
for the details.
We now take the normalization $\mathcal{C}_{0}$ of $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ in $K(\mathcal{C})$. By virtue of the universal property for normalizations, we have a natural morphism
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{C}_{0}\rightarrow{\mathcal{C}}
\end{equation}
that is an isomorphism outside $\phi^{-1}(y)$.
Taking the tamely ramified extension $K\subset{K'}$ of order $\text{lcm }(|I_{\Gamma_{i}}|)$, we obtain a new model $\mathcal{D}'_{0}=\mathcal{D}_{0}\times_{\text{Spec}(R)}{\text{Spec}(R')}$ over $R'$, which is the normalization of $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ in $K'(\mathcal{D})$.
Taking the normalization $\mathcal{C}'_{0}$ of this model inside $K'(\mathcal{C})$, we then naturally obtain morphisms
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{C}'_{0}\rightarrow{\mathcal{C}_{0}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{C}}.
\end{equation}
Here the first morphism is finite and the second one is birational. Note that by \cite[Chapter 10, Proposition 4.30]{liu2}, we have that $\mathcal{C}'_{0}$ is again semistable and that $G$ naturally acts on $\mathcal{C}_{0}$ and $\mathcal{C}'_{0}$ such that $\mathcal{C}_{0}/G=\mathcal{D}_{0}$ and $\mathcal{C}'_{0}/G=\mathcal{D}'_{0}$ (which follows from the fact that $G$ acts naturally on any normalization, see Proposition \ref{GalExtNormInt}).
We now wish to study the inertia groups of the various points in $\mathcal{C}'_{0}$, $\mathcal{C}_{0}$ and $\mathcal{C}$. To do that, we will introduce the notion of a "\emph{chain}".
\begin{comment}
\end{comment}
\begin{mydef}
Let $y_{i,i+1}$ and $y'_{i,i+1}$ be the intersection points in $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ and $\mathcal{D}'_{0}$ respectively that map to $y\in\mathcal{D}$ under the natural morphism. Similarly, let $y_{i}$ and $y'_{i}$ be the generic points of the components in $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ and $\mathcal{D}'_{0}$ that map to $y$. Here the generic points are labeled such that $y_{i,i+1}$ is a specialization of both $y_{i}$ and $y_{i+1}$.
A {\bf{chain}} lying above these points is a collection of generic points $x_{i}$ in the special fiber of $\mathcal{C}_{0}$ or $\mathcal{C}'$ and closed points $x_{i,i+1}$ in $\mathcal{C}_{0}$ or $\mathcal{C}'_{0}$ such that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $x_{i,i+1}$ is a specialization of both $x_{i}$ and $x_{i+1}$,
\item The $x_{i,i+1}$ map to $y_{i,i+1}$,
\item The $x_{i}$ map to $y_{i}$.
\end{enumerate}
For the remainder of this section, we will refer to these simply as a "{\it{chain}}".
\end{mydef}
\begin{lemma}\label{LiftChains}
Let $\{x_{i,i+1}\}\cup{\{x_{i}\}}$ be a chain in $\mathcal{C}_{0}$. Then there exists a chain $\{x'_{i,i+1}\}\cup{\{x'_{i}\}}$ in $\mathcal{C}'_{0}$ mapping to $\{x_{i,i+1}\}\cup{\{x_{i}\}}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The idea of the proof is to apply the going-up and going-down theorems for integral extensions several times as follows. Since $\mathcal{C}'_{0}\rightarrow{\mathcal{C}_{0}}$ is finite, the base change to the special fiber of $\mathcal{C}_{0}$ is also finite. This ensures that any lifts we obtain will be either closed points or generic points of components. We start with $x_{0}$ and $x_{0,1}$ and pick lifts $x'_{0}$ and $x'_{0,1}$ (which exist by the going-up theorem).
Using the going-down theorem for $x_{0,1}$, $x_{1}$ and $x'_{0,1}$, we obtain a point $x'_{1}$ lying above $x_{1}$.
Continuing in this fashion yields the lemma.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{ChainLemma}
For every intersection point $x\in\mathcal{C}$, there is only one chain in $\mathcal{C}_{0}$ and in $\mathcal{C}'_{0}$ lying above it.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let us prove this for $\mathcal{C}'_{0}$ first. Since $\mathcal{C}'_{0}$ is semistable, we know that the morphism $\mathcal{C}'_{0}\rightarrow{\mathcal{C}}$ is just a blow-up over $R'$ in the sense that the edge $x$ is subdivided into a chain of projective lines. This gives a one-to-one correspondence between chains in $\mathcal{C}'_{0}$ and edges $x\in\mathcal{C}$ lying above $y$. This then also gives the result for $\mathcal{C}_{0}$ as follows. Since every chain in $\mathcal{C}_{0}$ is liftable to a chain in $\mathcal{C}$ (by Lemma \ref{LiftChains}), it has to be unique. Indeed, if there exist two different chains in $\mathcal{C}_{0}$ mapping to $x$, then there would be two different chains in $\mathcal{C}'_{0}$ mapping to $x$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\begin{comment}
\begin{center}
{\bf{Het lemma hierna is volgens mij niet meer nodig. Even controleren.
}}
\end{center}
\begin{lemma}
Let $\phi:\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched Galois morphism. Then
\begin{equation}
l(e')\cdot{|I_{e'/e}|}=l(e).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{cor}
A disjointly branched morphism $\phi$ is ramified at an edge $e'$ if and only if the length of the image $l(e)$ is greater than the length of the original $l(e')$.
\end{cor}
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
\begin{center}
{\bf{Het volgende is verwerkt:}}
\end{center}
{\it{Criterium: een zijde vertakt bij een (Galois) morfisme van semistabiele modellen dan en slechts dan de lengte van de zijde groter wordt.}}
\end{comment}
\begin{lemma}
Let $x\in\mathcal{C}$ be an intersection point lying over $y$
and let $x'_{i,i+1}$ and $x_{i,i+1}$ be closed points in $\mathcal{C}'_{0}$ and $\mathcal{C}_{0}$ respectively that map to $x$.
Then
\begin{equation} I_{x}=I_{x'_{i,i+1}}=I_{x_{i,i+1}}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We will prove that $D_{e'}=D_{x'_{i,i+1}}=D_{x_{i,i+1}}$. Since the residue field $k$ is algebraically closed by assumption, we have that they are equal to their inertia groups. For any chain $\{x_{i,i+1}\}\cup{\{x_{i}\}}$ (or $\{x'_{i,i+1}\}\cup{\{x'_{i}\}}$ for $\mathcal{C}'_{0}$) mapping to $x$ and $\sigma\in{G}$, we have the induced chain $\{\sigma(x_{i,i+1})\}\cup{\{\sigma(x_{i})\}}$, which maps down to $\sigma(x)$. Using this and Lemma \ref{ChainLemma}, we immediately obtain the desired result.
\end{proof}
\begin{comment}
\begin{center}
{\bf{Het volgende is verwerkt:}}
\end{center}
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
{\it{Een lijst van enkele makkelijke identiteiten:}}
\begin{enumerate}
\item $I_{e}=I_{e_{i}}=I_{e'_{i}}$.
\item Vertakkingscriterium voor inertiegroepen uit \cite{supertrop}.
\item Voor een willekeurige $H\subset{G}$, geldt voor $L^{H}$ dat $I'=I\cap{H}$ (en $D'=D\cap{H}$).
\end{enumerate}
\end{comment}
\begin{pro}
Let $x_{i}\in\mathcal{C}_{0}$ be as above. Then
\begin{equation}
I_{e}=I_{x_{i,i+1}}\subset{\prod_{i=0}^{n}I_{x_{i}}}.
\end{equation}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
Consider the morphism $\mathcal{C}_{0}/{\prod_{i=0}^{n}I_{x_{i}}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}_{0}}$ and suppose that it is ramified at the image of some $x_{i,i+1}$. Then it has to ramify in codimension one by purity of the branch locus. But the only possible candidates for this are the images of the $x_{i}$, a contradiction. This gives the desired result.
\end{proof}
Let us quickly try the same argument to prove the other inclusion. Consider the morphism $\mathcal{C}_{0}/I_{e}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}_{0}}$ and suppose that it is ramified at a vertical component $y_{i}$. From this point on, it is not directly evident how to predict the behavior of the corresponding connected edges. We will illustrate this in an example.
\begin{exa}
Let $A:=R[x,y]/(xy-\pi)$ and consider the covering given by the function field extension
\begin{equation}
K(x)\subset{K(x)[z]}/(z^2-\pi(x+1))=:L.
\end{equation}
The normalization of $A$ in $L$ is then vertically ramified at both components $\Gamma_{1}=Z(x)$ and $\Gamma_{2}=Z(y)$. Taking the tamely ramified extension $K\subset{K(\pi^{1/2})}$, we see that the normalization of $R'[x,y]/(xy-\pi)$ inside $L$ is now \'{e}tale above $(x,y,\pi^{1/2})$. We thus see that the inertia group can be unrelated to the inertia group of the edge after the extension.
\end{exa}
We will now prove that $I_{e}\supset{\prod_{i=0}^{n}I_{x_{i}}}$. To do this, we will use {\it{Abhyankar's Lemma}}.
\begin{lemma}\label{ramstruct2}{\bf{[Abhyankar's Lemma]}}
Let $X$ be a strictly Henselian local regular scheme of residue characteristic $p$, $D=\sum_{i=1}^{r}\text{div}(f_{i})$ a divisor with normal crossings on $X$ and $U=X-D$. Then every connected finite \'{e}tale covering of $U$ which is tamely ramified along $D$ is a quotient of a (tamely ramified) covering of the form
\begin{equation}
U'=U[T_{1},...,T_{r}]/(T_{1}^{n_{1}}-f_{1},...,T_{r}^{n_{r}}-f_{r}),
\end{equation}
where the $n_{i}$ are natural numbers prime to $p$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Theorem 1.2]{tamearithmetic} for the current formulation and \cite[Exp. XIII, 5.3., Page 316]{SGA1} for the proof.
\end{proof}
Let us consider this lemma for $y_{i,i+1}$ an intersection point in $\mathcal{D}_{0}$. Note that we have a natural morphism
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D}_{0},y_{i,i+1}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}_{0},x_{i,i+1}}},
\end{equation}
giving rise to a morphism of completed rings
\begin{equation}
A:=\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathcal{D}_{0},y_{i,i+1}}\rightarrow{\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathcal{C}_{0},x_{i,i+1}}}.
\end{equation}
The ring $A$ is strictly Henselian, so we can apply Lemma \ref{ramstruct2}. We have
\begin{equation}
A\simeq{R[[u,v]]/(uv-\pi)}
\end{equation}
by assumption, and we thus obtain that $\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathcal{D}_{0},y_{i,i+1}}\rightarrow{\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathcal{C}_{0},x_{i,i+1}}}$ is a quotient of a Kummer covering of the form
\begin{equation}\label{Kummercov1}
A\rightarrow{}A[T_{1},T_{2}]/(T_{1}^{n_{1}}-u,T_{2}^{n_{2}}-v)
\end{equation}
for $n_{i}$ coprime to $p$.
\begin{pro}\label{Inertiagroup1}
\begin{equation}
I_{e}={\prod_{i=0}^{n}I_{x_{i}}}.
\end{equation}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
We already proved that $I_{e}\subset{\prod_{i=0}^{n}I_{x_{i}}}$, so we will now prove the other inclusion.
Let us first show that $I_{e}=I_{x_{1}}$. We first note that the natural morphism
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{C}_{0}/I_{x_{1}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}_{0}}
\end{equation}
is \'{e}tale at the image of $x_{0,1}$. Indeed, if it were ramified, then it would be ramified in codimension one by purity of the branch locus. But it is already unramified at the image of both $x_{0}$ and $x_{1}$ (the first by the assumption on disjointly branched morphisms and the second by Proposition \ref{RamificationInertiaLemma}, part 4).
We conclude that this is impossible.
We would now like to show that $\mathcal{C}_{0}/I_{x_{0,1}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}_{0}}$ is unramified at the image of $x_{1}$. Suppose that it is ramified. Since $x_{0}$ is unramified, we see that the associated morphism of completions from Equation \ref{Kummercov1} is of the form
\begin{equation}
A[T]/(T^{n}-v),
\end{equation}
where $v$ is a uniformizer for the local ring at $y_{1}$. But then a simple calculation shows that the length of the corresponding ring in $\mathcal{C}'_{0}/I_{x_{0,1}}$ would be strictly smaller. This contradicts the fact that $\mathcal{C}'_{0}/I_{x_{0,1}}=\mathcal{C}'_{0}/I_{x'_{0,1}}$ is \'{e}tale at the image of $x'_{0,1}$. We thus conclude that $I_{e}=I_{x_{1}}$.
We will now prove by rising induction that $I_{e}={\prod_{i=1}^{j}I_{x_{i}}}$ for every $j\leq{n}$. The case with $j=1$ was just treated. So assume that $I_{e}={\prod_{i=1}^{j-1}I_{x_{i}}}$. Consider the morphism
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{C}_{0}/{\prod_{i=1}^{j-1}I_{x_{i}}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{C}_{0}/{\prod_{i=1}^{j}I_{x_{i}}}}.
\end{equation}
Using the same reasoning as before, we see that $\mathcal{C}_{0}/{\prod_{i=1}^{j-1}I_{x_{i}}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}_{0}}$ is \'{e}tale at the image of $x_{j-1,j}$. The corresponding completed local ring
in $\mathcal{C}_{0}/{\prod_{i=1}^{j-1}I_{x_{i}}}$ is thus regular. Using Equation \ref{Kummercov1}, we see that the corresponding covering again must be of the form
\begin{equation}
A[T]/(T^{n}-v).
\end{equation}
Indeed, $\mathcal{C}_{0}/{\prod_{i=1}^{j-1}I_{x_{i}}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{C}_{0}/{\prod_{i=1}^{j}I_{x_{i}}}}$ is unramified at the image of $x_{j-1}$, so there is no other option. But then the corresponding length again decreases and we obtain another contradiction as in the $j=1$ case. By induction, we then conclude that $I_{e}={\prod_{i=0}^{n}I_{x_{i}}}$.
\end{proof}
We now set out to prove a formula for the inertia group $I_{x}$ in terms of the $I_{x_{i}}$. In the proof of Proposition \ref{Inertiagroup1}, we already saw that $I_{x}=I_{x_{1}}$. In general, the other inertia groups will be smaller. We first have the following
\begin{lemma}
Let $x$ be an intersection point in $\mathcal{C}$, $y$ its image in $\mathcal{D}$ and let $I_{x}$ be the corresponding inertia group. Then $I_{x}$ is cyclic.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This follows from $I_{x}=I_{x_{1}}$ and the fact that $I_{x_{1}}$ is cyclic (which is a result on tame Galois coverings of discrete valuation rings). For another proof, we note that
\begin{equation}
I_{x}=I_{\tilde{x}},
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{x}$ is the intersection point, considered as an element of a component $\Gamma'\subset{\mathcal{C}_{s}}$ and the inertia group is an inertia group for the induced Galois covering $\Gamma'\rightarrow{\Gamma}$. This equality follows from Proposition \ref{ramind2}.
Since the local ring for $\tilde{x}$ in $\Gamma'$ is a discrete valuation ring, we again obtain that the inertia group is cyclic.
\end{proof}
We now consider the cyclic abelian extension
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{C}_{0}\rightarrow{\mathcal{C}_{0}/I_{e}}.
\end{equation}
We note that $\mathcal{C}_{0}/I_{e}$ is again regular at the image of the chain induced by $e$. We now have
\begin{theorem}\label{InertProp2}
Let $I_{x_{i}}$ be as above. Then
\begin{equation}
|I_{x_{i}}|=\dfrac{|I_{e}|}{\gcd(i,|I_{e}|)}.
\end{equation}
In particular, for $i$ such that $\gcd(i,|I_{e}|)=1$, we have that
\begin{equation}
I_{x_{i}}=I_{e}.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The corresponding extension of function fields for $\mathcal{C}_{0}\rightarrow{\mathcal{C}_{0}/I_{e}}$ is cyclic abelian, so we find by Kummer theory that it is given by an extension of the form
\begin{equation}
z^n=f
\end{equation}
for some $f\in{}K(\mathcal{C}_{0}/I_{e})$. Since $\mathcal{C}_{0}\rightarrow{\mathcal{C}_{0}/I_{e}}$ is unramified at $x_{0}$, we can assume that $v_{\tilde{x}_{0}}(f)=0$. Here $\tilde{x}_{0}$ is the image of $x_{0}$ in $\mathcal{C}_{0}/I_{e}$. Let $\tilde{x}$ be the image of $x$ in $\mathcal{C}/I_{e}$. By Proposition \ref{ValCor1},
we now find that
\begin{equation}
v_{x_{i}}(f)=\delta_{\tilde{x}}(\psi))\cdot{i},
\end{equation}
where $\psi$ is the Laplacian of $f$ and $\delta_{\tilde{x}}(\psi)$ is the slope of $\psi$ along $\tilde{x}$ in $\mathcal{C}/I_{e}$. Since $\tilde{x}$ is completely ramified in this extension, we find that $\text{gcd}( \delta_{\tilde{x}}(\psi),n)=1$. Using Proposition \ref{UnrAbelExt1}, we see that the order of the inertia group is as stated in the theorem.
\end{proof}
\begin{comment}
\begin{enumerate}
\item {Introduceren Abhyankar's Lemma}. DONE
\item Bewijzen dat $I_{v_{1}}=I_{e}$. Het is een quotient van een Kummeroverdekking, deze kan niet vertakken boven de ene priem. Zodoende moet hij wel vertakken van graad $|I_{v_{1}}|$. Dit geeft het gevraagde.
\item Bewijzen dat $I_{v_{1}}\cdot{I_{v_{2}}}=I_{v_{1}}=I_{e}$. Dit volgt door te kijken naar
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{C}_{0}/I_{v_{1}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{C}_{0}/I_{v_{1}}\cdot{I_{v_{2}}}}.
\end{equation}
Inderdaad, beschouw de vertakking bij $v_{2}$. Volgens Abhyankar moet de totale vertakking gelijk zijn aan $|I_{v_{1}}|$. Dit kan alleen als $I_{v_{1}}=I_{v_{1}}\cdot{I_{v_{2}}}$.
\item Met inductie: bewijs dat $I_{v_{1}}=I_{e}= {\prod_{i=0}^{n}I_{v_{i}}}$.
\end{enumerate}
Daarna kan dezelfde formule als eerst bewezen worden voor de inertiegroepen. Dit gaat door eerst te kijken naar de {\it{abelse}} uitbreiding
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{C}_{0}\rightarrow{\mathcal{C}_{0}/I_{e}},
\end{equation}
en door dan de Laplaciaan te gebruiken voor het reguliere (in de buurt van $e$) model $\mathcal{C}_{0}/I_{e}$. Deze geeft dan dat de inertiagroep verandert naargelang de grootste gemene deler van $|I_{e}|$ en $i$, waarbij $i$ de index van $\Gamma_{i}$ aangeeft.
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
\subsection{Subdivisions and inertia groups for edges}
In this section, we will prove a continuity result for inertia groups of components belonging to a subdivision. The set-up is as follows. We start with a disjointly branched morphism $\phi:\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ giving rise to a Galois morphism of graphs $\phi_{\Sigma}:\Sigma(\mathcal{C})\longrightarrow{\Sigma(\mathcal{D})}$. Consider any edge $e'\in\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ with image $e=\phi_{\Sigma}(e')$. Let $v'$ and $w'$ be the corresponding neighboring vertices in $\mathcal{C}$, $v$ and $w$ their images in $\mathcal{D}$ and $\Gamma_{v}$ and $\Gamma_{w}$ their respective components. Desingularizing $\mathcal{D}$ at $e$, we obtain a morphism $\psi:\mathcal{D}_{0}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ such that the inverse image of $e$ in $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ consists of a chain of projective lines. Here $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ is regular at all intersection points lying above $e$.\\
Now represent the chain of projective lines in the pre-image of $e$ as an ordered set $S=\{\Gamma_{i}\}$ such that $\Gamma_{i}$ intersects $\Gamma_{i-1}$ and $\Gamma_{i+1}$, $\Gamma_{1}$ intersects the component corresponding to $v$ and $\Gamma_{n}$ intersects the component corresponding to $w$. Here, $n=l(e)-1$.
We now consider the normalization $\mathcal{C}_{0}$ of $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ in the function field $K(\mathcal{C})$. One of the problems one immediately encounters is that the special fiber of $\mathcal{C}_{0}$ can contain nilpotents due to vertical ramification. Over a tamely ramified extension $K'$ of $K$, this ramification disappears and the normalization of $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ in $K'(\mathcal{C})$ yields a semistable model $\mathcal{C}'_{0}$.
We now have natural morphisms of normal fibered surfaces
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{C}'_{0}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{C}_{0}}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{C}},
\end{equation}
where the first morphism is finite and the second one is birational. We now take a "lift" of $e'\in\mathcal{C}$ to $\mathcal{C}_{0}$. That is, we take the series of points $y_{i}$ and $x_{i,i+1}$ in $\mathcal{C}_{0}$ such that the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The $x_{i,i+1}$ are closed points of $\mathcal{C}_{0}$.
\item The $y_{i}$ are generic points of components $\Gamma'_{i}\subset{\mathcal{C}_{0,s}}$.
\item $x_{i,i+1}$ is a specialization of both $y_{i}$ and $y_{i+1}$.
\item $y_{1}$ is the generic point of a component $\Gamma'_{1}$ intersecting $\Gamma_{v'}$.
\item $y_{n}$ is the generic point of a component $\Gamma'_{n}$ intersecting $\Gamma_{w'}$.
\item The $x_{i,i+1}$ and $y_{i}$ map to $e'$ under the natural morphism $\mathcal{C}_{0}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{C}}$.
\end{enumerate}
We will write $e'_{0}=\{x_{i,i+1}\}_{i=1}^{n-1}\cup\{y_{i}\}_{i=1}^{n}$ and refer to it as the lift of $e'$ to $\mathcal{C}_{0}$.
We will now use the following version of "\emph{Abhyankar's Lemma}".
\begin{lemma}\label{ramstruct1}{\bf{[Abhyankar's Lemma]}}
Let $X$ be a strictly henselian local regular scheme of residue characteristic $p$, $D=\sum_{i=1}^{r}\text{div}(f_{i})$ a divisor with normal crossings on $X$ and $U=X-D$. Then every connected finite \'{e}tale covering of $U$ which is tamely ramified along $D$ is a quotient of a (tamely ramified) covering of the form
\begin{equation}
U'=U[T_{1},...,T_{r}]/(T_{1}^{n_{1}}-f_{1},...,T_{r}^{n_{r}}-f_{r}),
\end{equation}
where the $n_{i}$ are natural numbers prime to $p$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Theorem 1.2.]{tamearithmetic} for the current formulation and \cite[Exp. XIII, 5.3., Page 316]{SGA1} for the proof.
\end{proof}
Now consider the local ring $\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}_{0},x_{i,i+1}}$, with the ring homomorphism
\begin{equation}
\psi: \mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D}_{0},\phi(x_{i,i+1})}\longrightarrow{}\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}_{0},x_{i,i+1}}.
\end{equation}
We then automatically obtain an induced morphism of completed rings that satisfies Lemma \ref{ramstruct1}. Note that we have
\begin{equation}
\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathcal{D}_{0},\phi(x_{i,i+1})}\simeq{R[[x,y]]/(xy-\pi)}.
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{ramstruct1}, we see that $\hat{\psi}$ is a quotient of the Kummer covering
\begin{equation}
A\rightarrow{}A[T_{1},T_{2}]/(T_{1}^{e_{1}}-x,T_{2}^{e_{2}}-y),
\end{equation}
where $A=\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathcal{D}_{0},\phi(x_{i,i+1})}$ and the $e_{i}$ are coprime to $p$.
A simple exercise in normalizations then shows that after taking the tamely ramified extension of degree $c:=\text{lcm}(e_{i},e_{i+1})$ for $K$, one obtains a semistable local ring with length $1/c$. {\bf{(Include explanation?)}}
Let us now consider the morphism $\phi_{1}:\mathcal{C}_{0}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{C}_{0}/I_{e'}}$ and the image $\phi_{1}(e'_{0})$.
We will write $\phi_{2}$ for the natural morphism $\mathcal{C}_{0}/I_{e'}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}_{0}}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{etalesubdivision1}
For every point $z\in\phi_{1}(e'_{0})$, we have that $\phi_{2}$ is \'{e}tale at $z$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $\phi_{2}$ is not \'{e}tale at some point $z\in\phi_{1}(e'_{0})$. By Lemma \ref{ramstruct1}, we find that the length of $\phi_{1}(e'_{0})$ in $\mathcal{C}'_{0}/I_{e'}$ is strictly smaller than its image in $\mathcal{D}'_{0}:=\mathcal{D}_{0}\times{\text{Spec}(R')}$. This contradicts the fact that $\mathcal{C}/I_{e'}$ is \'{e}tale at the image of $e'$ (see \cite[Proposition 3.9.]{supertrop}). <<{\bf{Iets meer uitleg}}>> The Lemma follows.
\end{proof}
We can now prove the following proposition, which tells us how the inertia groups of the $y_{i}$ are related to the inertia group of $e'$.
\begin{prop}\label{InertProp}
Let $I_{\Gamma'_{i}}$ be the inertia group of the generic point $y_{i}$ corresponding to $\Gamma'_{i}$. Then the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $I_{\Gamma'_{i}}\subseteq{I_{e'}}$.
\item $|I_{\Gamma'_{i}}|=\dfrac{|I_{e}|}{\gcd(i,|I_{e}|)}$.
\end{enumerate}
In particular, for $i$ such that $\gcd(i,|I_{e}|)=1$, we have that
\begin{equation}
I_{\Gamma_{i}}=I_{e}.
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The first part follows from Lemma \ref{etalesubdivision1}. For the second part we will use the Laplacian and the Poincar\'{e}-Lelong formula.
<<{\bf{Details invullen}}>>
\end{proof}
\end{comment}
\section{Introductie, tweede poging}
In this thesis, we will be studying the Berkovich skeleton of an algebraic curve $C$ over a discretely valued field $K$ with uniformizer $\pi$. Informally speaking, we view $C/K$ as a family of curves (where the uniformizer is the parameter) and assign a
combinatorial limit object $\Sigma(C)$ (a weighted metric graph) that retains information about the original family $C/K$. The goal of this thesis is to explicitly find $\Sigma(C)$ for a given $C/K$. The idea is to start with a morphism $C\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$ and then to consider the Galois closure $\overline{\phi}:\overline{C}\rightarrow{}\mathbb{P}^{1}$ of this morphism. We will particularly interested in the case where the Galois group of this morphism is \emph{solvable}. In this case, we can factorize the morphism $\overline{\phi}$ into a sequence of abelian coverings, which can be studied using Kummer extensions.
In \cite{berkovich2012}, the skeleton of a curve was introduced by V. Berkovich in the context of what we now know as Berkovich spaces. Forms of these skeleta certainly were known before this time, for instance for elliptic curves in the N\'{e}ron/Kodaira-classification of the singular fibers of an elliptic fibration\footnote{See \cite{Kodaira1964}, \cite{Kodaira1966}, \cite{Nron1964} and \cite{Tate1975} for the original material (including Tate's algorithm) and \cite[Appendix C.15]{Silv1}] for an overview.}. In these classifications, one finds that the intersection graph of a semistable model for the elliptic curve in question contains a cycle of length $-v(j(E))$ (where $j(E)$ is the $j$-invariant of $E$) if and only if the valuation of the $j$-invariant is negative.\todo{beetje aanpassen}
\section{Introductie, eerste poging}
In this thesis, we will be studying the Berkovich skeleton of an algebraic curve $C$ over a discretely valued field $K$ with uniformizer $\pi$.
Informally speaking, we view $C/K$ as a family of curves (where the uniformizer is the parameter) and assign a
combinatorial limit object $\Sigma(C)$ (a weighted metric graph) that retains information about the original family $C/K$. The goal of this thesis is to explicitly find $\Sigma(C)$ for a given $C/K$. We will do this by reconstructing it from a finite sequence of abelian coverings $C_{i}\rightarrow{C_{i+1}}$, where $C_{1}=C$ and $C_{n}=\mathbb{P}^{1}$. \todo{Nadenken over deze formulering}
The Berkovich skeleton of a curve arises in many contexts, including arithmetic geometry, nonarchimedean geometry and tropical geometry. In arithmetic geometry, these skeletons are used in the context of Arakelov geometry and N\'{e}ron models of Jacobians of curves. For instance, one can give the component group of the N\'{e}ron model of the Jacobian of a curve in terms of the corresponding intersection graph of a semistable model (assuming that the curve has semistable reduction over $K$),
see \cite[Chapter 9]{Bosch1990}.
\todo{Herschrijven}In tropical geometry, one finds that the Berkovich skeleton is the object that tropicalizations "should" contain. To be more precise, if we take the inverse limit over all tropicalizations, it is equal to the {\it{analytification}} $C_{an}$ of $C$ by \cite{Payne2009}. This analytification contains the Berkovich skeleton by definitio
The tropicalizations that actually contain an isometric copy of this skeleton are then called {\it{"faithful tropicalizations"}}, see \cite{BPRa1}.
The main goal of this thesis is to relate the Berkovich skeleta of two curves $C$ and $D$ that are coupled by a finite morphism $\phi:C\rightarrow{D}$. Our experience from Galois and number theory then tells us that it is actually better to consider the "symmetric" case, i.e. the case where $\phi$ is Galois. This is not a restriction, as we can always extend a finite morphism $\phi$ to a finite Galois morphism $\overline{\phi}:\overline{C}\rightarrow{D}$.
This morphism $\overline{\phi}$ then has an associated Galois group $G$, which is sometimes also known in the literature as the \emph{monodromy group} of the covering $\phi$. In this thesis, we study the easiest case where $G$ is \emph{abelian}. By iterating our results for these coverings, we then directly obtain results for \emph{solvable} Galois coverings, i.e. coverings such that the Galois group $G$ is solvable. As a direct application, we can then relate the Berkovich skeleta of $C$ and $D$ for all covering of degree up to four, using the classical result that all (transitive) subgroups of $S_{2},S_{3}$ and $S_{4}$ are solvable.
We will relate these skeleta by what we call {\it{covering data}} and {\it{twisting data}}. The covering data
In this chapter, we will quickly define the basic objects that we will be studying in this thesis. They can be found in most books on algebraic and nonarchimedean geometry, see \cite{liu2}, \cite{Hart1}, \cite{Bosch2014} and \cite{BPRa1} for instance.
\end{comment}
\section{Notation}
We will use the following standard notation throughout this thesis:
\begin{itemize}
\item $K$ is a discretely valued complete field of characteristic zero with valuation $v:K^{*}\rightarrow{\mathbb{Z}}$,
\item $R=\{x\in{K}:v(x)\geq{0}\}$ is the valuation ring of $K$,
\item $R^{*}=\{x\in{K}:v(x)=0\}$ is the unit group,
\item $\mathfrak{m}=\{x\in{K}:v(x)>0\}$ is the unique maximal ideal in $R$,
\item $\pi$ is a uniformizer for $v$, i.e. $\pi{R}=\mathfrak{m}$,
\item $k:=R/\mathfrak{m}$ is the residue field of $R$.
\end{itemize}
We will assume that $v$ is normalized so that $v(\pi)=1$. For simplicity, we will also assume that the residue field $k$ is algebraically closed. In practice, it will be sufficient to assume that the residue field is large enough to contain the coordinates of all the branch and ramification points.
For any finite extension $K'$ of $K$, we let $R'$ be a discrete valuation ring in $K'$ dominating $R$.
For a scheme $X$, we let $\mathcal{O}_{X}$ be its structure sheaf. For any point $x\in{X}$ we let $\mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ be the stalk of $\mathcal{O}_{X}$ at $x$. It is a local ring with maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}_{x}$. A \emph{generic point} of an irreducible component $\Gamma$ is a point $y\in{X}$ such that $\overline{\{y\}}=\Gamma$. A point $x$ is a \emph{specialization} of a point $y$ if $x\in\overline{\{y\}}$.
For any Noetherian local ring $A$ with maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}_{A}$, we let $\hat{A}$ be its $\mathfrak{m}_{A}$-adic completion, as in \cite[Section 1.3]{liu2}.
For graphs, we use the definition found in \cite[Section 2.1]{Serre1980}. A graph $\Sigma$ consists of a set $E$ and a set $V$, together with two maps
\begin{align*}
E&\rightarrow{V\times{V}} & e &\mapsto{}(o(e),t(e)) & {}&{}\\
E&\rightarrow{E} & e&\mapsto{\overline{e}} & {}&{},
\end{align*}
which satisfy the following condition: for every $e$ in $E$, we have $\overline{\overline{e}}=e$, $\overline{e}\neq{e}$ and $o(e)=t(\overline{e})$. The set $E$ is known as the edge set, the set $V$ as the vertex set, $o(e)$ as the outgoing vertex of $e$ and $t(e)$ as the target vertex of $e$. An orientation of the graph is a subset $Y_{+}$ of $Y$ such that $Y$ is the disjoint union of $Y_{+}$ and $\overline{Y}_{+}$. When we're not interested in the orientation, we will refer to the set $\{e,\overline{e}\}$ as one edge.
\section{Curves and fibered surfaces
An algebraic variety over $K$ is a scheme of finite type over $\text{Spec }{K}$ and a curve over $K$ is an algebraic variety whose irreducible components are of dimension 1. For integral algebraic varieties $X$ over $K$, we denote their function fields by $K(X)$. We then say that $X$ is geometrically irreducible if the base change of $X$ to the algebraic closure of $K$ is irreducible.
\begin{exa}
Let $X$ be given by $\text{Spec}(\mathbb{Q}_{2}[x,y]/(x^2-2y^2))$, where $\mathbb{Q}_{2}$ is the field of $2$-adic numbers. Then $X$ is irreducible, but not geometrically irreducible, since the base change to $\mathbb{Q}_{2}(\sqrt{2})$ gives two irreducible components with generic points $(x\pm\sqrt{2}y)$.
\end{exa}
\begin{lemma}\label{GeometricallyIrreducible}
An integral algebraic variety over $K$ with function field $K(X)$ is geometrically irreducible if and only if $K(X)\cap{K^{s}}=K$, where $K^{s}$ is the separable closure of $K$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Chapter 3, Corollary 2.14]{liu2}.
\end{proof}
We say that an algebraic variety over $K$ is smooth at a point $x\in{X}$ if the points of $X_{\overline{K}}$ lying above $x$ are regular points of $X_{\overline{K}}$. We then say that $X$ is smooth over $K$ if it is smooth at all of its points.
We now define the arithmetic genus of a projective curve. We start with the definition of the Euler-Poincar\'{e} characteristic of a coherent sheaf of a projective variety over a field. So let $X$ be a projective variety over a field $K$ and let $\mathcal{F}$ be a coherent sheaf. We then define
\begin{equation}
\chi_{K}(\mathcal{F})=\sum_{i\geq{0}}(-1)^{i}\text{dim}_{K}H^{i}(X,\mathcal{F}),
\end{equation}
where the $H^{i}(X,\mathcal{F})$ are the \v{C}ech cohomology groups of $X$.
We have that $H^{i}(X,\mathcal{F})=0$ for $i>\text{dim}(X)$, so the above sum is finite. We now define the \emph{arithmetic genus} of a curve $X$ over a field to be
\begin{equation}
p_{a}(X):=1-\chi_{K}(\mathcal{O}_{X}).
\end{equation}
We will also refer to this integer as the genus of the curve $X$, where we sometimes write $g(X):=p_{a}(X)$.
We now move from algebraic varieties over a field $K$ to schemes over the discrete valuation ring $R$. We will mostly follow Chapters 8,9 and 10 in \cite{liu2}.
A {\bf{fibered surface}} over $S:=\text{Spec }R$ (in short: over $R$) is an integral, projective, flat $R$-scheme $\tau:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{S}$ of dimension 2. The generic fiber of $\mathcal{C}$ will be denoted by $\mathcal{C}_{\eta}$ and the special fiber by $\mathcal{C}_{s}$. An {\bf{arithmetic surface}} is a fibered surface over $S$ that is regular. A {\bf{model}} of a curve $C$ over $K$ is a normal fibered surface $\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{S}$ together with an isomorphism $f:\mathcal{C}_{\eta}\simeq{C}$.
Let $z$ be a closed point in $\mathcal{C}$. We say that $z$ is an {\bf{ordinary double point}} if
\begin{equation}
\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathcal{C},z}\simeq{R[[x,y]]/(xy-\pi^{n})}
\end{equation}
for some $n\in\mathbb{N}$. We call the integer $n$ the \emph{thickness} or \emph{length} of $z$.
A model $\mathcal{C}$ is said to be {\bf{semistable}} if the special fiber $\mathcal{C}_{s}$ is reduced and has only ordinary double points as its singularities. We will adopt the terminology of \cite{baker} and say that the model $\mathcal{C}$ is {\bf{strongly semistable}} if in addition to semistability the irreducible components of $\mathcal{C}_{s}$ are all smooth.
\begin{exa}\label{ExampleChapter1}
We illustrate some of the local properties in the above definitions.
Let $A:=R[x,y]/I$, with $I$ specified below.
We assume that $\text{char}(k)\neq{2}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item ({\it{Flatness}}) Let $I=(\pi(y^2-x^3-1))$. Then the generic fiber is an elliptic curve and the special fiber is $k[x,y]$.
The ring $A$ is not flat over $R$, since it contains torsion.
\item ({\it{Ordinary double point with a non-smooth component}})
Take $I=(y^2-x^3-x^2-\pi)$. The special fiber is then given by $y^2=x^3+x^2$, which is not smooth, since the point $\mathfrak{p}=(x,y)$ is not regular.
\item \label{ExaS2} ({\it{Ordinary double point with two smooth components}}) Take $I=(y^2-f)$, where
\begin{equation*}
f=x(x-\pi)(x+1)(x+1-\pi)(x+2)(x+2-\pi).
\end{equation*}
The special fiber then consists of two irreducible components, given by $y=\pm{x(x+1)(x+2)}$. These intersect each other transversally in the three points $(0),(-1),(-2)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{exa}
Let us first define some properties of morphisms of curves over $\text{Spec}(K)$.
Let $\phi:C\rightarrow{D}$ be a finite morphism of smooth, projective, geometrically irreducible curves over $K$. We say that $\phi$ is Galois with Galois group $G$ if the corresponding injection of function fields $K(D)\rightarrow{K(C)}$ is Galois with Galois group $G$. We say that $\phi$ is separable if the corresponding injection of function fields is separable. The degree of $\phi$ is defined to be the degree of the field extension $K(D)\subseteq{K(C)}$.
For a morphism of curves as defined above, we then have the following version of the {\it{Riemann-Hurwitz}} formula.
\begin{theorem}{\bf{[Riemann-Hurwitz formula]}}\label{RiemannHurwitz}
Let $\phi:C\rightarrow{D}$ be a finite, separable morphism of smooth projective curves over $K$. Then
\begin{equation}
2p_{a}(C)-2=\text{deg}(\phi)(2p_{a}(D)-2)+\sum_{P\in{C}}(e_{P}-1).
\end{equation}
Here $e_{P}$ is the ramification index of $\phi$ at $P$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Chapter 7, Theorem 4.16]{liu2}.
\end{proof}
Now let $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$ be models for $C$ and $D$ respectively. A \emph{finite morphism of models for} $\phi$ is a finite morphism $\phi_{\mathcal{C}}:\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ over $\text{Spec}(R)$ such that the base change to $\text{Spec}(K)$ gives $\phi:C\rightarrow{D}$.
\section{Intersection graphs and Berkovich skeleta}\label{IntersectionGraphIntro}
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a strongly semistable model. In this section, we define the intersection graph of $\mathcal{C}$. We furthermore relate these graphs to the main object in this thesis: the Berkovich skeleton.
\begin{mydef}({\bf{Dual Intersection Graph}})
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a strongly semistable model for a curve $C$ over $K$. Let $\{\Gamma_{1},...,\Gamma_{r}\}$ be the set of irreducible components. We define the dual intersection graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ of $\mathcal{C}_{}$ to be the finite graph whose vertices $v_{i}$ correspond to the irreducible components $\Gamma_{i}$ of $\mathcal{C}_{s}$ and whose edges correspond to intersections between components. The latter means that we have one edge for every point of intersection.
We write $V(\Sigma(\mathcal{C}))$ for the vertex set and $E(\Sigma(\mathcal{C}))$ for the edge set of $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$.
\end{mydef}
\begin{exa}
In Example \ref{ExampleChapter1}.\ref{ExaS2}, the intersection graph consists of two vertices with three edges between them. One can find the graph in Figure \ref{Eersteechteplaatje}. The morphism $C\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$ collapses the three edges to smooth points on the only component of the semistable model $\mathbb{P}_{R}^{1}$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{{Graph5_2.png}}
\caption{\label{Eersteechteplaatje} The intersection graph in Example \ref{ExampleChapter1}.\ref{ExaS2}.}
\end{figure}
\end{exa}
We will also want to keep track of the genera of the components. We will do this by assigning to every vertex in the dual intersection graph its associated genus. We define
\begin{equation*}
w(v_{i}):=g(\Gamma_{i}).
\end{equation*}
Whenever we draw the graph of a certain curve, we will write the genera next to the components in question. Whenever the component has genus 0, we will omit the zero. This function
\begin{equation}
w:V(\Sigma)\rightarrow{\mathbb{N}}
\end{equation}
now turns the intersection graph into a \emph{weighted graph}.
We have the following
\begin{theorem}\label{TheoremGenus}
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a strongly semistable model for a smooth curve $C$ over $K$ with intersection graph $G$. Let $\beta(G)$ be the Betti number of $G$ and let $p_{a}(\mathcal{C}_{s})$ be the arithmetic genus of $\mathcal{C}_{s}$. We then have
\begin{equation*}
p_{a}(\mathcal{C}_{s})=\beta(G)+\sum_{1\leq{i}\leq{r}}w(v_{i}).
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Page 511]{liu2}.
\end{proof}
Let us now define the notion of a {\it{weighted metric graph}}.
\begin{mydef}
A {\bf{weighted metric graph}} is a triple $(\Sigma,w(\cdot{}),l(\cdot{}))$, where
\begin{itemize}
\item $\Sigma$ is a finite graph,
\item $w(\cdot{})$ a function $w:V(\Sigma)\rightarrow{\mathbb{N}}$,
\item $l(\cdot{})$ a function $l: E(\Sigma)\rightarrow{\mathbb{N}}$.
\end{itemize}
We refer to $w(\cdot{})$ as the {\it{weight}} function and $l(\cdot{})$ as the {\it{length}} function associated to $\Sigma$.
\end{mydef}
We now turn our weighted intersection graph $(\Sigma(\mathcal{C}),w)$ into a {\it{weighted metric graph}}.
To do this, we need to assign a notion of length to our edges. Let $e$ be an edge in $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$, corresponding to an intersection point $z\in\mathcal{C}$. Recall that we have the following isomorphism for the completed local ring of $z$:
\begin{equation}
\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathcal{C},z}\simeq{R[[x,y]]/(xy-\pi^{n})}.
\end{equation}
We then define the {\bf{length function}} $l:E(\Sigma(\mathcal{C}))\rightarrow{\mathbb{N}}$ by
\begin{equation}
l(e)=n.
\end{equation}
Different semistable models can give rise to subdivisions of our graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$, so we need to define the notion of refinements. To obtain the \emph{minimal} Berkovich skeleton, we also need to do some pruning and delete the leaves.
\begin{comment}
We now define a \emph{path} between two vertices in $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$.
\begin{mydef}
A \emph{path} between two vertices $v$ and $w$ is defined to be a finite sequence $(e_{i})_{i=1}^{n}$ of edges in $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ such that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $v$ is one of the vertices of $e_{1}$,
\item $w$ is one of the vertices of $e_{n}$,
\item the edges $e_{i-1}$ and $e_{i}$ have a common vertex for every $i$.
\end{enumerate}
For every path $\gamma$, we then define the length of the path by
\begin{equation}
l(\gamma)=\sum_{i=1}^{n}l(e_{i}).
\end{equation}
\end{mydef}
To turn $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ into a metric space, we now mimic the approach in Riemannian geometry and define the distance between two vertices $v$ and $w$ by
\begin{equation}
d(v,w)=\text{min}_{\gamma}(l(\gamma))\in\mathbb{N},
\end{equation}
where the minimum is over all paths between $v$ and $w$.
\end{comment}
\begin{mydef}\label{Refinement}
A {\bf{refinement}} of $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ is a graph obtained from $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ by subdividing the edges of $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ in a length-preserving fashion. Here we only allow subdivisions where the edges have integer lengths and the new vertices have weight zero.
We say that two weighted metric graphs $\Sigma$ and $\Sigma'$ are \emph{equivalent} if they admit a common refinement $\tilde{\Sigma}$. We write $\Sigma\sim\Sigma'$.
\end{mydef}
\begin{rem}
Every weighted metric graph as defined above now has a "maximal refinement", in the sense that we can subdivide any edge of length $n$ with vertices $v_{1}$ and $v_{n+1}$ into a graph with $n+1$ vertices $\{v_{1},v_{2},...,v_{n+1}\}$ and edges $e_{i,i+1}$ of length $1$.
\end{rem}
\begin{mydef}
Let $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ be as above.
A {\bf{leaf}} of $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ is a subgraph $L$ of $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ with vertex set $\{v\}$ and edge set $\{e\}$, where $v\in\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ has valency one, genus zero and $e$ is the edge connected to $v$. A weighted metric graph without leaves is called leafless.
\end{mydef}
\begin{mydef}
Let $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ be as above. Consider the subgraph $\Sigma(C)$ obtained from $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ by deleting all the leaves. The equivalence class of this graph $\Sigma(C)$ under refinements
of leafless weighted metric graphs is the {\bf{Berkovich skeleton}} of $C$.
\end{mydef}
\begin{rem}
This graph can also be obtained algebraically: we take the semistable model $\mathcal{C}$ and contract all the \emph{exceptional} divisors $E$ which have self-intersection $-1$, see Chapter \ref{IntersectionTheory} and \cite[Chapter 9.3.1]{liu2}.
The desingularization of this model is then the minimal regular model for curves of genus $\geq{1}$. The intersection graph of this minimal regular model is then exactly the leafless maximal refinement.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}
This definition makes no reference to Berkovich spaces, but it gives the same skeleton as defined in that context, see \cite{berkovich2012}. In terms of semistable vertex sets (see \cite{BPRa1}), this skeleton is known as the \emph{minimal} Berkovich skeleton.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}
In Section \ref{Metrizedcomplex}, we will enhance the weighted metric graph $\Sigma$ with additional data in the form of an explicit curve $C_{v}/k$ for every vertex $v\in\Sigma$. This will turn $\Sigma$ into a metrized complex of $k$-curves.
\end{rem}
\begin{comment}
\subsection{Semistable models and the Berkovich skeleton: Oud}
Let $C$ be a smooth projective curve over $K$. We can now consider its associated Berkovich space, which is denoted by $C^{an}$. It is a quasipolyhedron, in the sense of \cite[Definition 4.1.1]{berkovich2012}.
\begin{mydef}
The {\bf{skeleton}} $\Delta(C^{an})$ of $C$ is defined to be the set of points in $C^{an}$ that have no open neighborhoods which are simply connected quasipolyhedra with a single endpoint. We denote it by $\Delta(C)$ or $\Delta$.
\end{mydef}
There is a natural retraction map $\tau: C^{an}\twoheadrightarrow{\Delta}$ such that $\tau_{|\Delta}=\text{id}$, see \cite[Proposition 4.1.6]{berkovich2012}.
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
\subsection{Reduction map}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Definitie kromme, functielichamen, meetkundig irreducibel
\item Modellen/Fibered surfaces over $\text{Spec}(R)$. Desingularisatie definitie?
\item Divisoren
\item
\end{enumerate}
\end{comment}
\section{Main problems}
We now give a summary of the main problems we wish to address in this thesis. They are as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item There exist criteria for the Berkovich skeleta of elliptic curves and genus two curves in terms of coordinates on their coarse moduli spaces, see \cite[Chapter VII]{Silv1} and \cite{Igusa}. Can they be generalized to curves of higher genus?
\item Is there a fast algorithm for finding the Berkovich skeleton of a genus three curve?
\item Are there fast algorithms for finding the Berkovich skeleton of other types of curves?
\end{enumerate}
We will answer these questions in Chapter \ref{Conclusion}.
To answer these questions, we used the analogy between coverings of curves and finite extensions of number fields as our motivation.
It is in this theory of number fields that one quite quickly sees that it is better to consider the fully symmetric version, the Galois closure, of a finite extension of number fields to study the decomposition of primes. This then also yields the decomposition for the subfields by taking an appropriate quotient. The idea in this thesis is to view the vertices and edges of a Berkovich skeleton as the primes in a number field and then to find the decomposition groups of these primes.
This then locally gives the Berkovich skeleton of the curve lying above it and in order to give the full skeleton some additional data has to be added. We call this the twisting data of the covering. Something similar happens for number fields: knowing the decomposition of primes for a covering $L\supset{K}$ doesn't directly give any \emph{global} information like the class number $h_{L}$ of the number field $L$. We will view the Berkovich skeleton of a curve $C$ as an analogue of the class group/class number in number theory.
\begin{comment}
\section{Notation and terminology: Oud}
Let $R$ be a complete discrete valuation ring with quotient field $K$ and residue field $k$. Throughout the paper $\pi$ will be a uniformizer. We will assume that the residue field is algebraically closed. A {\bf{curve}} over $K$ will be an algebraic variety whose irreducible components are of dimension 1. A {\bf{fibered surface}} over $S:=\text{Spec }R$ (in short: over $R$) is an integral, projective, flat $R$-scheme $\tau:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{S}$ of dimension 2. The generic fiber of $\mathcal{C}$ will be denoted by $\mathcal{C}_{\eta}$ and the special fiber by $\mathcal{C}_{s}$. An {\bf{arithmetic surface}} is a fibered surface over $S$ that is regular. A {\bf{model}} of a curve $C$ over $K$ is a normal fibered surface $\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{S}$ together with an isomorphism $f:\mathcal{C}_{\eta}\simeq{C}$. We will assume throughout the paper that {\it{curves $C$ over $K$ are smooth and geometrically connected}}.
A model $\mathcal{C}$ is said to be {\bf{semistable}} if the special fiber $\mathcal{C}_{s}$ is reduced and has only ordinary double points as its singularities. We will adopt the terminology of \cite{baker} and say that the model $\mathcal{C}$ is {\bf{strongly semistable}} if in addition to semistability the irreducible components of $\mathcal{C}_{s}$ are all smooth.
\begin{exa}\label{Exa1}
Let $A:=R[x,y]/I$ where $I$ will be specified. $A$ will be considered to be an open affine subscheme of a projective model of some curve. We will assume that $\text{char}(k)\neq{2}$ below.
\begin{enumerate}
\item (Example that is not flat) Let $I=(\pi(y^2-x^3-1))$. Then the generic fiber is an elliptic curve and the special fiber is $k[x,y]$. This is obviously not what we want.
\item (Example that is not strongly semistable) Take $I=(y^2-x^3-x^2-\pi)$. The corresponding model is semistable. The special fiber is singular, with one component $y^2=x^3+x^2$, so this is an example of a semistable model that is not strongly semistable.
\item \label{ExaS2} (Example that is strongly semistable) Take $I=(y^2-f)$ where
\begin{equation*}
f=x(x-\pi)(x+1)(x+1-\pi)(x+2)(x+2-\pi).
\end{equation*} The corresponding projective model is then strongly semistable. Its generic fiber is a genus 2 curve. The special fiber has two components intersecting each other in three points.
\end{enumerate}
\end{exa}
\begin{mydef}({\bf{Dual Intersection Graph}})
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a strongly semistable model for a curve $C$ over $K$. Let $\{\Gamma_{1},...,\Gamma_{r}\}$ be the set of irreducible components. We define the dual intersection graph $\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{C})$ of $\mathcal{C}_{}$ to be the finite graph whose vertices $v_{i}$ correspond to the irreducible components $\Gamma_{i}$ of $\mathcal{C}_{s}$ and whose edges correspond to intersections between components. The latter means that we have one edge for every point of intersection.
\end{mydef}
\begin{exa}
The third example above has as its intersection graph two vertices with three edges between them. One can find the graph in Figure \ref{Eersteplaatje}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{{Graph5.png}}
\caption{\label{Eersteplaatje} Covering of graphs in Example \ref{ExampleChapter1}.\ref{ExaS2}.}
\end{figure}
\end{exa}
We will also want to keep track of the genera of the components. We will do this by assigning to every vertex in the dual intersection graph its associated genus. For later purposes, we define
\begin{equation*}
w(v_{i}):=g(\Gamma_{i}).
\end{equation*}
Whenever we draw the graph of a certain curve, we will write the genera next to the components in question. Whenever the component has genus 0, we will omit the zero.
We have the following
\begin{theorem}\label{TheoremGenus}
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a strongly semistable model for a smooth curve $C$ over $K$ with intersection graph $G$. Let $\beta(G)$ be the Betti number of $G$ and let $p_{a}(\mathcal{C}_{s})$ be the arithmetic genus of $\mathcal{C}_{s}$. We then have
\begin{equation*}
p_{a}(\mathcal{C}_{s})=\beta(G)+\sum_{1\leq{i}\leq{r}}w(v_{i}).
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Page 511]{liu2}.
\end{proof}
\begin{exa}
In Example \ref{Exa1}.\ref{ExaS2} considered earlier, we have that the Betti number is $3-2+1=2$. The curve $C$ has genus 2 (which can be seen by applying Riemann-Hurwitz to the map corresponding to $(x,y)\longrightarrow{x}$), so the two coincide.
\end{exa}
In the upcoming sections we will quite often consider graphs of semistable models that are obtained by subdividing the graph. To do this, we will introduce a notion of {\it{length}} on our graphs, making them {\bf{metric graphs}}, as in \cite{baker}.
\begin{lemma}
Let $\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{S}$ be a strongly semistable model with $S$ as above. Let $x\in\mathcal{C}_{s}$ be a singular point. We then have
\begin{equation*}
\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathcal{C},x}\simeq{R[[u,v]]/(uv-c)}
\end{equation*}
for some $c\in\mathfrak{m}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Page 514]{liu2} for the proof. Note that our ring $R$ is complete, so we don't need to make an \'{e}tale extension
\end{proof}
\begin{mydef}
We define the {\bf{thickness}} or length of a singular point on $\mathcal{C}_{s}$ to be $v(c)$.
\end{mydef}
We define the length of any edge in our dual intersection graph now to be the length of the corresponding singular point on $\mathcal{C}_{s}$. This makes our graph a metric graph.\\
We can now also {\it{subdivide}} our intersection graph by putting vertices on edges at certain rational distances away from the other vertices. These subdivisions then correspond to semistable models (by a combination of \cite[Page 515]{liu2} and blowing down components). For the Berkovich version, the reader is directed to \cite[Chapters 3 and 4]{BPRa1}.
Let us recall that for a surjective proper $\mathcal{X}\longrightarrow{\text{Spec}(R)}$ with $R$ Henselian, we have a reduction map on the closed points of the generic fiber. Let $X=\mathcal{X}_{\eta}$ and let $X^{0}$ be the closed points of $X$.
\begin{mydef}
We define the {\bf{reduction map}} $r_{\mathcal{X}}: X^{0}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{X}_{s}}$ by
\begin{equation*}
r_{\mathcal{X}}:x\longmapsto{\overline{\{x\}}\cap\mathcal{X}_{s}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{mydef}
\begin{rem}
We note first that $r_{\mathcal{X}}$ is surjective by \cite[Proposition 1.36, page 468]{liu2}. Note also that in the definition of the reduction map, one needs the ring $R$ to be Henselian
because otherwise there could be multiple reduction points. One can consider the example
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{X}=\text{Spec}(\mathbb{Z}_{(5)}[x]/(x^2+1))\longrightarrow{\text{Spec}(\mathbb{Z}_{(5)}[x]/(x^2+1))},
\end{equation*}
where $\mathbb{Z}_{(5)}$ is the localization of $\mathbb{Z}$ at $(5)$. One then takes the closed point of the generic fiber to be the generic point. There are then two possible reductions: $(x-1,5)$ and $(x-2,5)$. Note that if we instead take the $5$-adic ring in the above example, then $\mathcal{X}$ has two connected components.
\end{rem}
\begin{mydef}
Let $\mathcal{X}\longrightarrow{\text{Spec}(R)}$ be irreducible, surjective and proper. Let $\tilde{x}$ be a closed point of $\mathcal{X}_{s}$. Define
\begin{equation*}
X_{+}(\tilde{x}):=r_{\mathcal{X}}^{-1}(\tilde{x}).
\end{equation*}
This is known as the {\it{formal fiber}} of $\tilde{x}$.
\end{mydef}
\begin{rem}
For semistable models, these formal fibers are naturally isomorphic to open annuli and spheres, where one takes an absolute value corresponding to the valuation on $R$. These notions play an important role in analytic theories of semistability, to name a few: Rigid geometry, Formal $R$-schemes and Berkovich spaces. In the Berkovich theory one also has formal fibers for points that are not necessarily closed in $\mathcal{X}_{s}$: for instance a generic point of a component. These are known as the type $2$ points for curves.
\end{rem}
\begin{exa}
Let $\mathcal{C}=\text{Proj}R[X,T,W]/(XT-\pi^{n}{W^2})$ with open affine $U=\text{Spec}(R[x,t]/(xt-\pi^{n})$ where $x=\dfrac{X}{W}$ and $t=\dfrac{T}{W}$. Let $C$ be its generic fiber. Let $\tilde{x}=(x,t,\pi)$. Note that $\tilde{x}$ is not a regular point. We then have that
\begin{equation*}
C_{+}(\tilde{x})(K)=\{a\in{K}:\,|\pi|^{n}<|a|<1\}.
\end{equation*}
That is, it is an open annulus.
See \cite[Page 471]{liu2} for the details.
\end{exa}
\end{comment}
\chapter*{Referees}
\begin{enumerate}
\item First referee: Professor Eva Maria Feichtner, University of Bremen
\item Second referee: Associate Professor Joseph Rabinoff, Georgia Institute of Technology.
\end{enumerate}
\chapter*{Abstract}
\input{Abstract2.tex}
\chapter*{Acknowledgements}
\input{Acknowledgements2.tex}
\begingroup
\color{black}
\tableofcontents
\endgroup
\chapter{Introduction}\label{Introduction}
\input{Introduction.tex}
\chapter{Divisors on curves and graphs}\label{Divisors}
\input{Divisors.tex}
\chapter{The Poincar\'{e}-Lelong formula}\label{Poincare}
\input{Poincare.tex}
\chapter{Semistable models and Galois actions}\label{Quotients}
\input{Quotients.tex}
\chapter{Decomposition and inertia groups for disjointly branched morphisms}\label{Inertiagroups}
\input{Inertiagroups.tex}
\chapter{Tropical separating trees}\label{Appendix2}
\input{Separatingtrees.tex}
\chapter{Covering data}\label{Coveringdata}
\input{Coveringdata.tex}
\chapter{Unramified abelian coverings and twisting data}\label{Twistingdata}
\input{Twistingdata.tex}
\chapter{Cyclic abelian coverings of the projective line}\label{Abelian}
\input{Abelian.tex}
\chapter{$S_{3}$-coverings of the projective line}\label{Solvable}
\input{Solvable.tex}
\chapter{Conclusion}\label{Conclusion}
\input{Conclusion.tex}
\section{Reducing Cartier divisors
Let $X$ be a locally Noetherian scheme and $D$ be a Cartier divisor on $X$. We first give some background for studying the reduction of a Cartier divisor.
\begin{mydef}
The {\it{support}} of $D$, denoted by $\text{Supp }D$, is the set of points $x\in{X}$ such that $D_{x}\neq{1}$. The set $\text{Supp }D$ is then a closed subset of $X$.
\end{mydef}
\begin{rem}
Recall that the group of Cartier divisors is defined to be $H^{0}(X,\mathcal{K}^{*}_{X}/\mathcal{O}^{*}_{X})$, so $D_{x}$ is the image of $D$ in the stalk of the quotient sheaf $\mathcal{K}^{*}_{X}/\mathcal{O}^{*}_{X}$ in the point $x$.
\end{rem}
\begin{exa}\label{ExamplePoincare1}
Let $\mathcal{C}=\text{Proj}R[X,Y,W]/(XY-\pi{}W^2)$ with $\Gamma_{1}=\overline{\{(x)\}}$ and $\Gamma_{2}=\overline{\{(y)\}}$ as before. Consider the Cartier divisor defined by the element $x$. As before, we have that
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}(x)=\overline{\{P\}}-\overline{\{\infty\}}+(\Gamma_{1}).
\end{equation*}
We then have
\begin{equation*}
\text{Supp}(\text{div}(x))=\overline{\{P\}}\cup\overline{\{\infty\}}\cup\Gamma_{1}.
\end{equation*}
\end{exa}
Recall that for a locally Noetherian scheme $X$, we have a notion of {\it{associated primes}}. These are defined by
\begin{equation*}
\text{Ass}(\mathcal{O}_{X}):=\{x\in{X}:\mathfrak{m}_{x}\in\text{Ass}_{\mathcal{O}_{X,x}}(\mathcal{O}_{X,x})\}.
\end{equation*}
\begin{theorem}\label{RedCar}
Let $X$ be a closed subscheme of a locally Noetherian scheme $Y$. Let $i:X\longrightarrow{Y}$ be the canonical injection.
\begin{enumerate}
\item The set $G_{X/Y}$ of Cartier divisors $E$ on $Y$ such that
\begin{equation*}
(\text{Supp}(E))\cap{\text{Ass}(\mathcal{O}_{X})}=\emptyset
\end{equation*}
is a subgroup of $\text{Div}(Y)$.
\item There exists a natural homomorphism $G_{X/Y}\longrightarrow{\text{Div}(X)}$, denoted by $E\longmapsto{E|_{X}}$, compatible with the homomorphism $\mathcal{O}_{Y}\longrightarrow{i_{*}\mathcal{O}_{X}}$. Moreover, we have a canonical isomorphism
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{O}_{Y}(E)|_{X}\simeq{\mathcal{O}_{X}(E|_{X})}
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*}
\text{Supp}(E|_{X})=\text{Supp}(E)\cap{X}.
\end{equation*}
If $E>0$, then $E|_{X}\geq{0}$. The image of a principal divisor is a principal divisor.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The details can be found in \cite[Page 261]{liu2}. We will outline the construction of the divisor $E|_{X}$. Let $E$ be represented by $\{U_{i},f_{i}\}$, where the $U_{i}$ are open in $Y$, and $f_{i}\in\mathcal{K}^{*}_{Y}(U_{i})$. Let
\begin{equation*}
\overline{U}_{i}=X\cap{U_{i}}.
\end{equation*}
From the surjective morphism
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{O}_{Y}\longrightarrow{\pi_{*}(\mathcal{O}_{X})},
\end{equation*}
we obtain a surjective morphism
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{O}_{Y}(U_{i})\longrightarrow{\mathcal{O}_{X}(\overline{U_{}}_{i})},
\end{equation*}
which we denote on the element $f_{i}$ as $\overline{f}_{i}$. One can now show that $\overline{f}_{i}$ is actually an element of $\mathcal{K}^{*}_{X}(\overline{U}_{i})$, see \cite[Page 261]{liu2} for the details. This then gives a Cartier divisor represented by $\{(\overline{U}_{i},\overline{f}_{i})\}_{i\in{I}}$.
\end{proof}
\section{Reducing Cartier divisors on regular semistable models}
We now specialize to the case of arithmetic surfaces. Recall that an arithmetic surface is by definition a regular fibered surface. A regular surface is automatically normal (by \cite[Chapter 4, Theorem 2.16]{liu2}), so we have two notions ready: valuations at codimension 1 primes
and intersection theory (see Section \ref{IntersectionTheory}).
We would now like to reduce principal divisors to components of the special fiber. Let $f\in{K(\mathcal{D})}$ be an element of the function field of $\mathcal{D}$.
As we saw in Example \ref{ExamplePoincare1}, we cannot always restrict the divisor of this element to an irreducible component of the special fiber, since the restricted element might be completely contained in the vanishing set of that component (or in other words, there is a nonempty intersection of the divisor of $f$ with the associated primes of $\mathcal{D}_{s}$).\\
We will therefore modify our $f$ for various irreducible components $\Gamma\subset{\mathcal{D}_{s}}$. Let $y$ be a generic point for $\Gamma$.
The local ring $\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},y}$ is then a discrete valuation ring. Indeed, it is normal and it has dimension one
by the fact that $\mathcal{D}_{s}$ is equidimensional of dimension $1$, see \cite[Chapter 4, Proposition 4.16]{liu2}. Here, equidimensional means that all irreducible components have the same dimension. We denote the corresponding valuation by $v(\cdot{})$ in this section. The uniformizer $\pi$ of $R$ in fact has valuation $v(\pi)=1$, since $\mathcal{D}_{s}$ is assumed to be reduced and $\Gamma$ is contained in the special fiber. Suppose that $v(f)=k$.
\begin{mydef}
The $\Gamma$-modified form of $f$ is defined to be
\begin{equation*}
f^{\Gamma}:=\dfrac{f}{\pi^{k}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{mydef}
By definition, we then have $v(f^{\Gamma})=0$. If we then consider the natural map
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},y}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},y}/\mathfrak{m}_{y}\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},y}},
\end{equation*}
we see that $f^{\Gamma}$ naturally gives a nonzero element in the residue field, which we denote by $\overline{f^{\Gamma}}$. Note that the residue field at $y$ is the {\it{function field}} of the component $\Gamma$.
\begin{lemma}\label{RedDiv1}
Let $f$ and $f^{\Gamma}$ be as above. We have
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}_{\Gamma}(\overline{f^{\Gamma}})=(\text{div}_{\mathcal{Y}}(f^{\Gamma}))|_{\Gamma}.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We have that the divisor is represented by $\{\mathcal{D},f^{\Gamma}\}$, which is then reduced to
\begin{equation*}
\{\mathcal{D}\cap{\Gamma},\overline{f^{\Gamma}}\}=\{\Gamma,\overline{f^{\Gamma}}\}.
\end{equation*} This is exactly the Cartier divisor
$\text{div}_{\Gamma}(\overline{f^{\Gamma}})$, as desired.
\end{proof
Let $V_{f}$ and $V_{f^{\Gamma}}$ be the vertical divisors of $f$ and $f^{\Gamma}$ respectively. We have that $V_{f^{\Gamma}}=V_{f}-k\cdot{\mathcal{D}_{s}}$. Let $D^{0}$ be the closed points of the generic fiber. Recall that we have a natural reduction map
\begin{equation*}
r_{\mathcal{D}}:D^{0}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}_{s}},
\end{equation*}
which associates to every closed point $x$ in $D$ the point $\overline{\{x\}}\cap{\mathcal{D}_{s}}$, see Definition \ref{ReductionMap11}. We now have
\begin{pro}\label{RedDiv2}
Consider the divisor $\text{div}_{\eta}(f)=\sum_{P}n_{P}(P)$ with corresponding $\Gamma$-modified surface divisor
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}(f^{\Gamma})=\sum_{P}n_{P}\overline{\{P\}}+V_{f^{\Gamma}}.
\end{equation*}
For $\tilde{x}$ in the nonsingular locus of $\mathcal{D}_{s}$, consider the formal fiber $D_{+}(\tilde{x})$. Then
\begin{equation*}
v_{\tilde{x}}(\overline{f^{\Gamma}})=\sum_{P\in{D_{+}(\tilde{x})}}n_{P}.
\end{equation*}
For $\tilde{x}$ an intersection point of $\Gamma$ and $\Gamma'$, we have
\begin{equation*}
v_{\tilde{x}}(\overline{f^{\Gamma}})=v_{\Gamma'}(f^{\Gamma}).
\end{equation*}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
The idea of the proof is to write out the equality in Lemma \ref{RedDiv1} in terms of valuations.
For $\tilde{x}$ where $\overline{f^{\Gamma}}$ has positive valuation, the valuation can be found by
\begin{equation*}
v_{\tilde{x}}(\overline{f^{\Gamma}})=\text{length}(\mathcal{O}_{\Gamma,\tilde{x}}/(\overline{f_{\tilde{x}}^{\Gamma}}))
\end{equation*}
(the case with negative valuation is similar). Let $t$ be a local uniformizer of $\Gamma$, so that
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{O}_{\Gamma,\tilde{x}}=\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},\tilde{x}}/t\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},\tilde{x}}.
\end{equation*}
We have the equality
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{O}_{\Gamma,\tilde{x}}/(\overline{f_{\tilde{x}}^{\Gamma}})=\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},\tilde{x}}/(t\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},\tilde{x}}+f^{\Gamma}_{\tilde{x}}\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},\tilde{x}}).
\end{equation*}
But the length of this last ring is exactly the local intersection number, so that
\begin{equation*}
v_{\tilde{x}}(\overline{f^{\Gamma}})=(\Gamma\cdot{\text{div}(f^{\Gamma})})_{\tilde{x}}.
\end{equation*}
Writing this condition in terms of the horizontal and the vertical divisors gives us both statements of the proposition.
\end{proof}
Proposition \ref{RedDiv2} allows us to calculate the reduced divisor of $f$ directly in terms of the horizontal and the vertical divisor of $f$.
\section{Vertical divisors, Laplacians and the Poincar\'{e}-Lelong formula}
In the last section we saw that to know the reduced divisors for a given element $f\in{K(\mathcal{D})}$, we have to know the horizontal divisor and the vertical divisor of $f$. In this section we will give a way of determining the vertical divisor using the divisors on the intersection graph. To do this, we'll explain in more detail the connection between principal divisors on the intersection graph and vertical divisors.
Suppose we are given an element $f$ of the function field $K(\mathcal{D})$. We have two options: we can consider its divisor in $D$ and in $\mathcal{D}$. The divisor $\text{div}_{\eta}(f)$ is well-defined up to a scaling factor of $K^{*}$ and the divisor $\text{div}(f)$ is well-defined up to a scaling factor of $R^{*}$. Namely, for every element of $K^{*}$ with nonzero valuation we get a shift in the vertical divisor and for every element of $R^{*}$ we obtain the same divisor.
Thus in general it is impossible to reconstruct $\text{div}(f)$ from just the generic divisor $\text{div}_{\eta}(f)$. If we however take the {\it{$\Gamma$-modified}} form $f^{\Gamma}$, we already know that $v_{\Gamma}(f^{\Gamma})=0$. There is then a {\it{unique}} solution $V_{f}=\sum_{i}c_{i}\Gamma_{i}$ such that $V_{f}$ is the vertical divisor corresponding to $\text{div}_{\eta}(f)$ with $c(\Gamma)=0$, by Corollary \ref{KernelRho} for instance. The good news is that we can explicitly give this vertical divisor in terms of the Laplacian operator.
\begin{theorem}\label{MainThmVert}
Let $\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))$ be the induced principal divisor of $f$ on the intersection graph $G$ of $\mathcal{D}$.
Write
\begin{equation*}
\Delta(\phi)=\rho(\text{div}(f))
\end{equation*}
for some $\phi:\mathbb{Z}^{V}\longrightarrow{\mathbb{Z}}$, where $\Delta$ is the Laplacian operator. Choose $\phi$ such that $\phi(\Gamma)=0$. Then the unique vertical divisor corresponding to $\text{div}_{\eta}(f)$ with $V_{f^{\Gamma}}(\Gamma)=0$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{ExplVert2}
V_{f^{\Gamma}}=\sum_{i}\phi(\Gamma_{i})\cdot{\Gamma_{i}}.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
Before we start the proof of this theorem, let us point out why Theorem \ref{MainThmVert} implies the Poincar\'{e}-Lelong formula.
\begin{theorem}\label{ValCor1}{\bf[Poincar\'{e}-Lelong formula]}
Let $f$ and $f^{\Gamma}$ be as before. Let $\tilde{x}$ be an intersection point of $\Gamma$ with another component $\Gamma'$. Then
\begin{equation}
v_{\tilde{x}}(\overline{f^{\Gamma}})=\phi(v')-\phi(v).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Proposition \ref{RedDiv2}, we find that the valuation of $\overline{f^{\Gamma}}$ at $\tilde{x}$ is equal to the valuation of $f^{\Gamma}$ at $\Gamma'$. By Theorem \ref{MainThmVert} we see that this is the slope of $\phi$ in the direction of $\Gamma$, as desired.
\end{proof}
Let us start by considering the divisors of the simplest functions.
\begin{lemma}\label{VertInd1}
For any component $\Gamma_{i}$ with corresponding vertex $v_{i}$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\Delta(1_{v_{i}})=-\rho(\Gamma_{i}).
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We calculate both sides. Define
\begin{equation*}
B:=\{j:\Gamma_{i}\cap\Gamma_{j}\neq\emptyset\}\backslash{\{i\}}.
\end{equation*}
Let $b=\#{B}$. We have
\begin{equation*}
\Delta(1_{v_{i}})=(\sum_{j\in{B}}-1\cdot(v_{j}))+b\cdot{v_{i}}.
\end{equation*}
We also have
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\Gamma_{i})=(\sum_{j\in{B}}(\Gamma_{j}\cdot{\Gamma_{i}})(v_{j}))-b\cdot{v_{i}}=(\sum_{j\neq{i}:\Gamma_{i}\cap\Gamma_{j}}(1)(v_{j}))-b\cdot{v_{i}}.
\end{equation*}
We thus see that
\begin{equation*}
\Delta(1_{v_{i}})=-\rho(\Gamma_{i}),
\end{equation*}
as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}
(of Theorem \ref{MainThmVert}) Let $\phi$ be such that
\begin{equation*}
\Delta(\phi)=\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))
\end{equation*}
and $\phi(\Gamma)=0$. We write
\begin{equation*}
\phi=\sum_{i}\phi(\Gamma_{i})\cdot{}1_{v_{i}}.
\end{equation*}
Taking the Laplacian operator of $\phi$ and using Lemma \ref{VertInd1}, we see that
\begin{equation*}
\Delta(\phi)=-\rho(\sum_{i}\phi(\Gamma_{i})\cdot({\Gamma_{i}})).
\end{equation*}
Writing
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}(f^{\Gamma})=\text{div}_{\eta}(f^{\Gamma})+\sum_{i}c_{i}(\Gamma_{i})
\end{equation*}
and using that $\rho(\text{div}(f^{\Gamma}))=0$, we see that
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\sum_{i}c_{i}(\Gamma_{i}))=\rho(\sum_{i}\phi(\Gamma_{i})(\Gamma_{i})).
\end{equation*}
Since $c(\Gamma)=0$ and $\phi(\Gamma)=0$, we must have that these vertical divisors are equal by Corollary \ref{KernelRho}. This gives the theorem.
\end{proof}
\begin{exa}
Let us consider the projective line $\mathbb{P}^{1}$ with the function $f=x(x-\pi)$. We take the semistable model
\begin{equation*}
\text{Proj}R[X,T,W]/(XT-\pi{W}^2)
\end{equation*}
with open affine
\begin{equation*}
\text{Spec}R[x,t]/(xt-\pi).
\end{equation*}
We label the components as $\Gamma=Z(x)$ and $\Gamma'=Z(t)$. We see that
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}_{\eta}(f)=(0)+(\pi)-2(\infty)
\end{equation*}
and that
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))=2(\Gamma)-2(\Gamma').
\end{equation*}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{{Graph1.png}}
\caption{\label{Tweedeplaatje} {\it{The Laplacian of the function $f=x(x-\pi)$.}}}
\end{figure}
The Laplacian thus has slope $-2$ from $\Gamma$ to $\Gamma'$, as in Figure \ref{Tweedeplaatje}. This means that if we take the $\Gamma$-modified form of $f$, it will have a pole of order 2 at the intersection point. Furthermore, we see that $f^{\Gamma}$ has a zero of order one at $(0)$ and $(\pi)$. This determines $f^{\Gamma}$ up to a constant in $k$.\\
We can also just calculate the modified form. By writing $f=x^2(1-t)$, we easily see that $v_{\Gamma}(f)=2$. Then the $\Gamma$-modified form of $f$ is equal to
\begin{equation*}
f^{\Gamma}=\dfrac{1-t}{t^2}.
\end{equation*}
As expected, this has a pole of order 2 at $t=0$ and a zero of order $1$ at $(\pi)$. Furthermore, it has a zero of order one at $t=\infty$, which corresponds to the point $(0)$, as expected.\\
Let us now determine the $\Gamma'$-modified form of $f$. We have that the Laplacian has slope 2 and thus that $f^{\Gamma'}$ has a zero of order two at the intersection point. Furthermore, we see that $f^{\Gamma'}$ has a pole of order two at $(\infty)$. We calculate the $\Gamma'$-form. Since $v_{\Gamma'}(f)=0$, we can just substitute $t=0$. We then obtain
\begin{equation*}
f^{\Gamma'}=\overline{x}^{2}
\end{equation*}
which has a zero of order 2 at $x=0$ (which corresponds to the intersection point) and a pole of order two at $\infty$.
\end{exa}
\section{Introductie oud}
In this chapter, we will study semistable coverings $\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ corresponding to finite morphisms of curves $C\rightarrow{D}$. We will call the obtained morphisms \emph{disjointly branched morphisms}. We will be particularly interested in the case where these morphisms are Galois. The morphism of semistable models $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ obtained in this section then gives rise to a quotient of schemes $\mathcal{C}/G=\mathcal{D}$.
We will study these quotients in Section \ref{GaloisQuotientsSchemes}. After that, we define the decomposition and inertia groups in Section \ref{DefinitionInertia}. Additional properties of these groups will be studied in Chapter \ref{Inertiagroups}. We then study the induced Galois action on the special fiber in Section {}, where we see in the tame case that we again obtain a quotient. The last two sections are devoted to showing that we obtain a quotient of metrized complexes of curves, which is an enhancement of our weighted metric graphs.
\end{comment}
\section{Disjointly branched morphisms}\label{DisjointBran11}
Throughout this thesis, we'll be making great use of a classical theorem on coverings of semistable curves. This theorem also gives a practical way of explicitly calculating a lot of semistable reduction graphs. The theorem states that the normalization of a semistable model $\mathcal{D}$ of a curve $D$ that separates the branch points (in the special fiber of $\mathcal{D}$) of a finite cover $C\longrightarrow{D}$, will yield a semistable model $\mathcal{C}$ of $C$ after some finite extensions. This already gives some intuition why tropical geometry comes into play here:
points that reduce to the same point on the special fiber will have a relative distance with strictly positive valuation, which is a tropical condition.
\begin{comment}
\section{Disjointly branched morphisms}\label{DisjointlyBranchedM}
To obtain such a semistable covering, we start with a semistable model $\mathcal{D}$ and modify it so that the closure of the branch locus consists of disjoint smooth sections in $\mathcal{D}_{0}$. Taking the normalization of this model in $K(C)$ then yields a morphism $\mathcal{C}_{0}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}_{0}}$, which might have vertical ramification. By removing this vertical ramification by a finite extension of the base field $K$ and then normalizing again, we find a finite morphism of semistable models $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$.
\end{comment}
The theorem is as follows.
\begin{theorem}\label{MaintheoremSemSta}
\begin{flushleft}
{\bf[{Obtaining semistable models from coverings}]}
\end{flushleft}
Let $f:C\longrightarrow{D}$ be a finite morphism of smooth, projective geometrically connected curves over $K$. Suppose that $f$ is Galois with group $G$ of order prime to $\text{char}(k)$ and that $D$ admits a semistable model $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ over $R$.
Then the potential stable reduction of $C$ can be obtained by following the steps below:
\begin{enumerate}
\item {\bf{(Including branch points)}} Let $B\subset{D}$ be the branch locus of $f$. Take a finite separable extension $M/K$ to make the points of $B$ rational over $M$. Replace $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ by $\mathcal{D}_{0}\times_{\text{Spec}(R)}{\text{Spec}(R')}$, where $R'$ is a discrete valuation ring that dominates $R'$ and has field of fractions $M$.
\item {\bf{(Separation)}} Let $\mathcal{B}_{0}$ be the closure of $B$ in $\mathcal{D}_{0}$. Perform blow-ups at the closed points of $\mathcal{B}_{0}$ to obtain a birational morphism $\phi:\mathcal{D}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}_{0}}$ with $\mathcal{D}$ semistable such that the closure $\mathcal{B}$ of $B$ in $\mathcal{D}$ is a disjoint union of sections contained in the smooth locus of $\mathcal{D}$.
\item {\bf{(Normalization)}} Let $\mathcal{C}_{0}\longrightarrow{D}$ be the normalization of $\mathcal{D}$ in $K(C_{M})$. Let
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{F}=\{\Delta\,:\,\Delta\subseteq{\mathcal{D}_{s}}\text{ such that either }p_{a}(\Delta)\geq{1},\text{ or }\Delta\text{ contains at least three points of }\mathcal{B}\cup{(\mathcal{D}_{s})_\text{sing}}\}.
\end{equation*}
Let $e_{\Delta}$ denote the ramification index $e_{\Gamma/\Delta}$ for an irreducible component $\Gamma$ of $(\mathcal{C}_{0})_{s}$ lying above $\Delta$. Set $e=\text{lcm}\{e_{\Delta}\,|\,\Delta\in\mathcal{F}\}$ and $e=1$ if $\mathcal{F}=\emptyset$.
\end{enumerate}
Then for any extension of discrete valuation rings $R''\supseteq{R'}$ with $L:=\text{Quot}(R'')$ of ramification index divisible by $e$, the normalization $\mathcal{C}$ of $\mathcal{D}_{R''}$ in $K(C_{L})$ is a semistable model of $C_{L}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Chapter 10, Proposition 4.30]{liu2} for the theorem as stated above. A proof can be found in \cite[Theorem 2.3]{liu1}, for instance.
\end{proof}
In other words, if we find a semistable model $\mathcal{D}$ such that the closure of the branch locus consists of disjoint smooth sections over $\text{Spec}(R)$, then the normalization $\mathcal{C}$ of $\mathcal{D}$ in $K(C)$ (see \cite[Section 4.1.2]{liu2} for more background on normalizations) gives a morphism $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ that might be vertically ramified. Removing this vertical ramification by taking a finite extension $K\subset{K'}$ then gives a morphism of semistable models $\mathcal{C}'\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}'}$. We'll call these morphisms "disjointly branched".
\begin{mydef}\label{disbran}
Let $\phi:C\rightarrow{D}$ be a finite, Galois morphism of curves over $K$ with Galois group $G$.
Let $\phi_{\mathcal{C}}:\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a finite morphism of models for $\phi$. We say $\phi_{\mathcal{C}}$ is {\bf{disjointly branched}} if the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The closure of the branch locus in $\mathcal{D}$ consists of disjoint, smooth sections over $\text{Spec}(R)$.
\item Let $y$ be a generic point of an irreducible component in the special fiber of $\mathcal{C}$. Then the induced morphism $\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},\phi(y)}\rightarrow{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C},y}}$ is \'{e}tale.
\item $\mathcal{D}$ is strongly semistable, meaning that $\mathcal{D}$ is semistable and that the irreducible components in the special fiber are all smooth.
\end{enumerate}
\end{mydef}
\begin{cor}
Let $\phi_{\mathcal{C}}:\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched morphism for $\phi:C\rightarrow{D}$. Then $\mathcal{C}$ is semistable.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
The morphism $\phi_{\mathcal{C}}$ satisfies all the properties of Theorem \ref{MaintheoremSemSta}, so we directly find that $\mathcal{C}$ is semistable.
\end{proof}
Since we want to use this theorem for intersection graphs, we would like to prove that we can find a morphism of {\it{strongly}} semistable models.
\begin{pro}\label{PropStrongSemSta1}
Let $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be as in Theorem \ref{MaintheoremSemSta}. If $\mathcal{D}$ is {\it{strongly semistable}}, then $\mathcal{C}$ is also strongly semistable.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
The proof is mostly based on the following Lemma:
\begin{lemma}\label{LemmaSmooth2}
Let $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched morphism. Then the pre-image of a smooth point consists of smooth points.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This is the last statement of \cite[Theorem 2.3, page 69]{liu1}.
\end{proof}
Lemma \ref{LemmaSmooth2} then implies that
\begin{cor}\label{CorSmooth2}
For every ordinary double point $x$ of $\mathcal{C}$,
the image $\phi(x)$ is an ordinary double point of $\mathcal{D}$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Indeed, if $\pi(x)$ is smooth, then there exists a non-smooth point in the pre-image of $\pi(x)$ (namely $x$). This contradicts Lemma \ref{LemmaSmooth2}. Thus $\pi(x)$ is non-smooth. Since $\mathcal{D}$ is semistable, it must be an ordinary double point, as desired.
\end{proof}
Now for the rest of the proof. Suppose that $x'$ is an ordinary double point in $\mathcal{C}$. Let $\mathfrak{m'}$ be the corresponding maximal ideal on some open affine $A'$, which is the integral closure of $A$ corresponding to an open affine of $\mathcal{D}$. Then $\phi(x)$ is also an ordinary double point by Corollary \ref{CorSmooth2}. Let $\mathfrak{m}$ be the corresponding maximal ideal. Since $\mathcal{D}$ is assumed to be strongly semistable, we can find two distinct prime ideals $\mathfrak{p}_{1}$ and $\mathfrak{p}_{2}$ (corresponding to two components intersecting each other in $\phi(x)$) in the special fiber such that
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{p}_{i}\subset\mathfrak{m}
\end{equation*}
for both $i$. By the going-up theorem (which is applicable because $A\subseteq{A}'$ is integral), we can find $\mathfrak{q}_{i}\subset{\mathfrak{m}'}$ such that $\mathfrak{q}_{i}\cap{A}=\mathfrak{p}_{i}$ (note that they are in the special fiber by this condition). But then $\mathfrak{m'}$ is an intersection point of $\mathfrak{q}_{1}$ and $\mathfrak{q}_{2}$. This proves that $\mathcal{C}$ is strongly semistable, as desired
\end{proof}
Let us now make some remarks about Theorem \ref{MaintheoremSemSta} and Proposition \ref{PropStrongSemSta1} that should be kept in mind throughout the thesis.
\begin{rem}[{\it{About the branch points}}]
Since we assumed the residue field $k$ to be algebraically closed, we only have to take {\it{ramified extensions}} of $K$ here.
For the extensions in the third step, we find that the extensions are in fact {\it{tame}}. Indeed, the ramification index of any component has to divide the order of the Galois group, which is coprime to the characteristic of $k$.
This then also means that the extensions in the third step are obtained by $K\subseteq{K(\pi^{1/n})}$ for some $n$ with $(n,\text{char}(k))=1$.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}[{\it{About the closure of $B$}}]
The closure of $B$ in $\mathcal{D}$ can be computed using the {\it{reduction}} map. See Definition \ref{ReductionMap11}. For any closed point $x$ of the generic fiber, we have that
\begin{equation*}
\overline{\{x\}}=\{x,r_{\mathcal{D}}(x)\}.
\end{equation*}
That is, we take the point $x$ together with its reduction. The condition here is that the reductions of the branch points are {\it{disjoint}} and that they reduce to nonsingular points.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}[{\it{Caveat about the characteristic}}]
The condition on the characteristic of the residue field is to avoid issues of separability in the special fiber.
There is a way to address these cases as well using Artin-Schreier equations, see \cite{KArz1}. We will also encounter these problems in Section \ref{QuotientSpecial}, where we study quotients on the special fiber.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}[{\it{A separating semistable model}}]
For Galois coverings $C\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$, there is an explicit semistable model of $\mathbb{P}^{1}$ that separates the branch locus. We will explicitly give this model in Chapter \ref{Appendix2}. The corresponding intersection graph is known as the {\bf{tropical separating tree}}, see \cite{supertrop} and \cite{tropicalbook} for more on the tropical point of view of this graph.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}[{\it{Galois action}}]
In Theorem \ref{MaintheoremSemSta}, we take the normalization of a certain normal integral scheme in a Galois extension. The resulting scheme $\mathcal{C}$ then actually has a natural Galois action such that $\mathcal{C}/G=\mathcal{D}$. These Galois actions will be reviewed in Section \ref{GaloisQuotientsSchemes}.
\end{rem}
\section{Galois quotients for schemes}\label{GaloisQuotientsSchemes}
In Section \ref{DisjointBran11} we defined disjointly branched morphisms. The corresponding semistable models
have a
natural Galois action on them. In this section, we will review some facts about quotient schemes for finite Galois groups that act on a scheme $X$. We will quickly specialize to the strongly semistable case, where we consider the problem of Galois actions on graphs.
We will follow \cite{SGA1} and \cite[Exercises 2.14, 2.3.21 and 3.3.23]{liu2}. Let $X$ be a scheme with a finite group $G$ acting on $X$. This means that we have a group homomorphism
\begin{equation*}
G\longrightarrow{\text{Aut}(X)}.
\end{equation*}
The {\it{quotient scheme}} is then defined by a universal property that we will repeat here. The quotient scheme of $X$ under $G$ is a scheme $Y$ with the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}
\item There is a morphism $p:X\longrightarrow{Y}$.
\item We have $p=p\circ{\sigma}$ for every $\sigma\in{G}$.
\item Any morphism of schemes $f:X\longrightarrow{Z}$ satisfying $f=f\circ{\sigma}$ for every $\sigma$ factors in a unique way through $p$. This means that there exists a unique morphism $\tilde{f}:Y\longrightarrow{Z}$ such that $f=\tilde{f}\circ{p}$.
\end{enumerate}
In other words, $Y$ represents the functor $Z\mapsto{\text{Hom}(X,Z)^{G}}$, see \cite[Page 87]{SGA1} for this point of view.
Let us consider the affine case first. The following can be found in \cite[Proposition 1.1 and Corollary 1.2]{SGA1}.
\begin{pro}\label{QuotientLemma10}{\bf{[Affine quotients]}}
Let $A$ be a ring with a finite group action $G\longrightarrow{\text{Aut}(A)}$. Let $B=A^{G}$ be the invariants, $X=\text{Spec}(A)$, $Y=\text{Spec}(B)$ and $p:X\longrightarrow{Y}$ the canonical morphism. Then
\begin{enumerate}
\item $A$ is integral over $B$ (and the morphism $p$ is thus integral).
\item The morphism $p$ is surjective, its fibers are the orbits under $G$, the topology of $Y$ is the quotient of the topology on $X$.
\item Let $x\in{X}$, $y=p(x)$, $G_{x}$ the stabilizer of $x$. Then $k(x)$ (the residue field of $x$) is a normal algebraic extension of $k(y)$ and the homomorphism $G_{x}\longrightarrow{\text{Gal}(k(x)/k(y))}$ is surjective.
\item $(Y,p)$ is the quotient scheme of $X$ by $G$.
\item The natural morphism
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{O}_{Y}\longrightarrow{p_{*}(\mathcal{O}_{X})^{G}}
\end{equation*}
of sheaves is an isomorphism.
\end{enumerate}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
This is almost a word-by-word translation of \cite[Expos\'{e} V, Proposition 1.1 and Corollary 1.2]{SGA1}.
\end{proof}
Let us now generalize a little bit. We will consider what Grothendieck calls "admissible actions".
\begin{mydef}
Let $G$ be a finite group acting on a scheme $X$, $p:X\longrightarrow{Y}$ an {\it{affine}} invariant morphism such that
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{O}_{Y}\longrightarrow{p_{*}(\mathcal{O}_{X})^{G}}
\end{equation*}
is an isomorphism.
This action is then called an {\bf{admissible action}}.
\end{mydef}
\begin{pro}\label{PropositionQuotient1}
Let $G$ give an admissible action on $X$. Then the conclusions from Proposition \ref{QuotientLemma10} are still valid. In particular, we have $Y=X/G$.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
This is \cite[Expos\'{e} V, Proposition 1.3]{SGA1}
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{CorOpenQuotient}
Let $G$ give an admissible action on $X$. Then for any open set $U\subset{Y}$, we have that $U$ is the quotient of $p^{-1}(U)$ under $G$
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Expos\'{e} V, Corollary 1.4]{SGA1}.
\end{proof}
\begin{pro}
Let $G$ be a finite group acting on a scheme $X$. Then $G$ gives an admissible action if and only if there is an open affine cover $\{U_{i}\}$ of $X$ such that each $U_{i}$ is invariant under $G$.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Expos\'{e} V, Proposition 1.8]{SGA1}.
\end{proof}
Let us now focus on
{\it{normal integral}} schemes
\begin{pro} \label{GalExtNormInt}
Let $Y$ and $X$ be normal integral schemes. Suppose that we have a finite surjective integral morphism $f:X\longrightarrow{Y}$ such that $K(X)/K(Y)$ is a finite Galois extension with Galois group $G$. Then $X$ is the normalization of $Y$ in $K(X)$. We have an action of $G$ on $X$ with $X/G=Y$. Furthermore, this action on $X$ is transitive.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
The fact that $X$ is the normalization follows from \cite[Page 120, Proposition 1.22]{liu2}. The normalization naturally comes with a group action, stemming from the fact that on affines we have that if $a'\in{A'}$ is integral over $A$, then $\sigma(a')$ is also integral over $A$ for any $\sigma\in{G}$. Now consider the chain
\begin{equation*}
A'\supseteq{(A')^{G}}\supseteq{A}.
\end{equation*}
We have that $(A')^{G}=A$. Indeed, if $a'\in{(A')^{G}}$, then $a'\in{K(Y)}$ and $a'$ is integral over $A$. Since $A$ is integrally closed in $K(Y)$, we have that $a'\in{A}$, as desired. This then yields $\mathcal{O}_{Y}=p_{*}(\mathcal{O}_{X})$ and thus $Y=X/G$ by Proposition \ref{PropositionQuotient1}. For transitivity, see \cite[Page 546, Lemma 4.34]{liu2}.
\end{proof}
\section{Decomposition and inertia groups}\label{DefinitionInertia}
Let $Y$ be a normal integral locally Noetherian scheme with function field $K(Y)$ and let $L\supset{K(Y)}$ be a Galois extension with Galois group $G$. We let $X$ be the normalization of $Y$ in $L$. We then have $X/G=Y$. Indeed, the morphism $\phi:X\rightarrow{Y}$ is finite surjective and integral, so we can apply Proposition \ref{GalExtNormInt}. We will now define decomposition and inertia groups for these coverings.
For any point $x$ of $X$, we define the {\bf{decomposition group}} to be $D_{x,X}:=\{\sigma \in G:\sigma(x)=x\}$, the stabilizer of $x$.
Every element $\sigma\in{D_{x,X}}$ naturally acts on $\mathcal{O}_{X,x}$ and the residue field $k(x)$, see also Proposition \ref{QuotientLemma10}.
We then define the {\bf{inertia group}} $I_{x,X}$ of $x$ to be the elements of $D_{x}$ that reduce to the identity on $k(x)$. In other words, $\sigma \in I_{x,X}$ if and only if for every $z \in {\mathcal{O}_{X,x}}$, we have $\sigma z \equiv z \mod m_x$, where $m_{x}$ is the unique maximal ideal of $\mathcal{O}_{X,x}$.
We will quite often omit the scheme $X$ in $I_{x,X}$ and $D_{x,X}$ and just write $I_{x}$ and $D_{x}$.
We again consider the affine case. Suppose we have a normal integral domain $A$ with field of fractions $K(A)$ and a Galois extension $L\supset{K(A)}$. Let $B$ be the normalization of $A$ in $L$. For every subgroup $H$ of $\text{Gal}(K(B)/K(A))$, we can then consider the chain
\begin{equation}
B\supset{B^{H}}\supset{A}.
\end{equation}
Note that $B^{H}$ is again integrally closed in $L^{H}$, so we find that it is the integral closure of $A$ in $L^{H}$. We will now take $H=I_{\mathfrak{q}}$ for some $\mathfrak{q}\in\text{Spec}(B)$ with image $\mathfrak{p}=\mathfrak{q}\cap{A}$. In the sense of the following Lemma, the subextension $L^{I_{\mathfrak{q}}}$ is the largest extension such that $B^{I_{\mathfrak{q}}}\supseteq{A}$ is \'{e}tale at $\mathfrak{q}\cap{B^{I_{\mathfrak{q}}}}$. It is therefore also known as the {\it{"maximal unramified extension"}} of $\mathfrak{p}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{RamificationInertiaLemma}
Let $B\supset{B^{I_{\mathfrak{q}}}}\supset{A}$ be as before. Then the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The prime $\mathfrak{q}$ is the only prime in $\text{Spec}(B)$ lying above $\mathfrak{q}\cap{B^{I_{\mathfrak{q}}}}$.
\item Let $k(\mathfrak{q})^{\text{sep}}$ be the separable closure of $k(\mathfrak{q}\cap{A})$ in $k(\mathfrak{q})$.
Then $(k(\mathfrak{q}))^{\text{sep}}=k(\mathfrak{q}\cap{B^{I_{\mathfrak{q}}}})$.
\item Suppose that $\text{char}(k(\mathfrak{q}))\nmid{|G|}$. Then $k(\mathfrak{q})=k(\mathfrak{q}\cap{B^{I_{\mathfrak{q}}}})$.
\item $B^{H}\supset{A}$ is \'{e}tale at $\mathfrak{q}\cap{B^{H}}$ if and only if $H\supseteq{I_{\mathfrak{q}}}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
These are given in \cite{supertrop} as: Lemma 3.4, Lemma 3.5, Corollary 3.6 and Proposition 3.7 respectively. We refer the reader to that paper.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{Orbitstabilizer}
Let $D_{\mathfrak{q}}$ be the decomposition group of $\mathfrak{q}\in\text{Spec}(B)$. Let $$G(\mathfrak{q})=\{\mathfrak{q}'\in\text{Spec}(B):\mathfrak{q}'=\sigma(\mathfrak{q})\text{ for some }\sigma\in{G}\}.$$ Then
\begin{equation}
|G(\mathfrak{q})|=\dfrac{|G|}{|D_{\mathfrak{q}}|}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We apply the orbit-stabilizer theorem from group theory and directly obtain the lemma.
\end{proof}
By Proposition \ref{QuotientLemma10}, the action of $G$ is transitive, so for any $\mathfrak{p}\in\text{Spec}(A)$ and $\mathfrak{q}\in\text{Spec}(B)$, we find that the number of primes lying above $\mathfrak{p}$ is equal to $\dfrac{|G|}{|D_{\mathfrak{q}}|}$. In other words, if we know the decomposition group of any prime $\mathfrak{q}$ lying above $\mathfrak{p}$, then we know how many primes there are in the pre-image of $\mathfrak{p}$ for the morphism $\text{Spec}(B)\rightarrow{\text{Spec}(A)}$.
\subsection{Finite extensions of Dedekind domains}
In this section, we give a summary of the theory of finite extensions of Dedekind domains. There will necessarily be some overlap with the previous sections and we invite the reader to compare definitions and results.
We first describe how to pass from the ring extension $B\supset{A}$ of Noetherian normal integral domains of the previous section to an extension of Dedekind domains. Let $\mathfrak{p}\in\text{Spec}(A)$ be any prime.
Recall that $B\supset{A}$ is finite by \cite[Chapter 4, Proposition 1.25]{liu2}.
We can take the base extension
\begin{equation*}
A_{\mathfrak{p}}\longrightarrow{A_{\mathfrak{p}}\otimes{B}}=B_{\mathfrak{p}}
\end{equation*}
of the map $A\longrightarrow{A_{\mathfrak{p}}}$. Since finiteness is preserved under base extensions, we have that this ring extension is again finite. Taking another base extension, this time corresponding to $A_{\mathfrak{p}}\longrightarrow{A_{\mathfrak{p}}/\mathfrak{p}}$, we obtain that the ring extension
\begin{equation*}
A_{\mathfrak{p}}/\mathfrak{p}\longrightarrow{B_{\mathfrak{p}}/\mathfrak{p}
\end{equation*}
is again finite. This just means that $B_{\mathfrak{p}}/\mathfrak{p}$
is a finite vector space over the field $A_{\mathfrak{p}}/\mathfrak{p}$. We thus have that it's an Artinian ring, meaning that there are only finitely many prime ideals. We are just expressing the fact that a finite morphism of schemes is quasi-finite of course. These prime ideals of $B_{\mathfrak{p}}/\mathfrak{p}$ now correspond exactly to the prime ideals of $B$ above the prime ideal $\mathfrak{p}$. A small reminder: localization commutes with normalization, so we can write
\begin{equation*}
B_{\mathfrak{p}}=(A_{\mathfrak{p}})'.
\end{equation*}
Let us now restrict ourselves to the $\mathfrak{p}$ such that $\text{dim }A_{\mathfrak{p}}=1$. These are known as the primes of codimension one. In this case, we have that $A_{\mathfrak{p}}$ is a normal Noetherian integral domain of dimension 1. Or in other words, we have that $A_{\mathfrak{p}}$ is a {\it{Dedekind domain}}. Since $B_{\mathfrak{p}}$ is finite over $A_{\mathfrak{p}}$, we have that $1=\text{dim }(A_{\mathfrak{p}})=\text{dim }(B_{\mathfrak{p}})$. Since $B$ is normal, any localization of $B$ is also normal. Thus $B_{\mathfrak{p}}$ is also a Dedekind domain. This puts us back into the usual framework of algebraic number theory: finite ring extensions of Dedekind domains. One major difference of course with the number field theory is that the residue fields involved can be nonperfect. Note also that we are dealing with finite extensions of \emph{local} Dedekind domains which have a trivial Picard group, so some of the global aspects of the usual theory are lost.
We recall some definitions and theorems from algebraic number theory. For the rest of the section, $A$ and $B$ are Dedekind. We say that $\mathfrak{q}\in\text{Spec}(B)$ {\it{divides}} $\mathfrak{p}\in\text{Spec}(A)$ if $\mathfrak{q}\cap{A}=\mathfrak{p}$. We define the ramification index of $\mathfrak{q}$ over $\mathfrak{p}$ by
\begin{equation*}
e_{\mathfrak{q}/\mathfrak{p}}=\text{dim}_{A/\mathfrak{p}}(B_{\mathfrak{q}}/\mathfrak{p}B_{\mathfrak{q}}).
\end{equation*}
We will also write this as $e_{\mathfrak{q}}$. We then have a decomposition of prime ideals
\begin{equation}
\mathfrak{p}=\prod_{i=1}^{r}\mathfrak{q_{i}}^{e_{{\mathfrak{q}_{i}}}}.
\end{equation}
For each $\mathfrak{q}$ dividing $\mathfrak{p}$ we have a finite extension of residue fields
\begin{equation*}
A_{\mathfrak{p}}/\mathfrak{p}\longrightarrow{B_{\mathfrak{q}}/\mathfrak{q}}
\end{equation*}
with finite degree
\begin{equation*}
f_{\mathfrak{q}/\mathfrak{p}}=[B_{\mathfrak{q}}/\mathfrak{q}:A_{\mathfrak{p}}/\mathfrak{p}].
\end{equation*}
We will also let $g_{\mathfrak{p}}$ be the number of primes in $\text{Spec}(B)$ dividing a given $\mathfrak{p}$. For a {\it{Galois}} extension, we then have the following
\begin{pro}\label{SerLocFields}
Suppose that the extension $A\subseteq{B}$ with fraction fields $K(A)\subset{K(B)}$ is Galois with Galois group $G$. Let $n$ be its order. Then the integers $e_{\mathfrak{q}}$ and $f_{\mathfrak{q}}$ depend only on $\mathfrak{p}$. If we denote them by $e_{\mathfrak{p}}$ and $f_{\mathfrak{p}}$, then
\begin{equation}\label{FundGalEq1}
n=e_{\mathfrak{p}}f_{\mathfrak{p}}g_{\mathfrak{p}}.
\end{equation}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Page 20]{Ser1}.
\end{proof}
Let $D=D_{\mathfrak{q}}$ be the decomposition group of $\mathfrak{q}$ and $I=I_{\mathfrak{q}}$, as defined earlier. By the orbit-stabilizer theorem, we have that the index of $D$ in $G$ is equal to the number $g_{\mathfrak{p}}$. Let us write
\begin{eqnarray*}
\overline{L}&=&B_{\mathfrak{q}}/\mathfrak{q},\\
\overline{K}&=&A_{\mathfrak{p}}/\mathfrak{p}.
\end{eqnarray*}
For any $\sigma\in{D}$, we a natural $\overline{K}$-automorphism $\overline{\sigma}$ of $\overline{L}$ by passing to the quotient. This gives a homomorphism
\begin{equation*}
\rho:D\longrightarrow{G(\overline{L}/\overline{K})}
\end{equation*}
whose kernel is by definition the {{inertia group}} of $\mathfrak{q}$. As we saw in Section \ref{DefinitionInertia}, this extension $\overline{L}\supset{\overline{K}}$ is not always Galois.
\begin{pro}\label{SerExtGal1}The following properties are true
\begin{enumerate}
\item The residue extension $\overline{L}/\overline{K}$ is normal and the homomorphism
\begin{equation*}
\rho:D\longrightarrow{\text{G}(\overline{L}/\overline{K})}
\end{equation*}
defines an isomorphism $D/I\simeq{\text{G}(\overline{L}/\overline{K})}$.
\item If $\overline{L}/\overline{K}$ is separable, then it is a Galois extension with Galois group $D/I$. We then have $[L:L^{I}] =e$, $[L^{I}:L^{D}]=f$ and $[L^{D}:K]=g$. Here $L^{H}$ for any subgroup $H$ of $G$ means the invariant field under $H$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Page 23]{Ser1}.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
The residue extension $\overline{L}/\overline{K}$ is separable in the following cases:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\overline{K}$ is perfect (which will generally not be the case for us, unless the residue field $k$ has characteristic zero).
\item The order of the inertia group $I$ is prime to the characteristic $p$ of the residue field $\overline{K}$.
\end{enumerate}
In the case of a disjointly branched Galois morphism we naturally have case $(2)$. This implies that $\overline{L}/\overline{K}$ is separable and thus we can use Proposition \ref{SerExtGal1}.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem
Let $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched morphism. By definition, we then have $e_{x/y}=1$ for $x$ and $y$ the generic points of components $\Gamma_{x}$ and $\Gamma_{y}$ in $\mathcal{C}_{s}$ and $\mathcal{D}_{s}$ respectively.
This is because $\pi$ is a uniformizer in both. We therefore have
\begin{equation*}
|G|=f_{\mathfrak{q}/\mathfrak{p}}\cdot{g_{\mathfrak{q}/\mathfrak{p}}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}
We would like to point out to the reader that we now have two notations that are very similar.
On the one hand for an edge $e$ with corresponding prime $\mathfrak{p}$ of $\mathcal{D}$, we have the "splitting" indices
\begin{equation*}
g_{\mathfrak{q}/\mathfrak{p}}.
\end{equation*}
On the other hand, in a very natural way we have that our primes are curves. We thus also have the genus
\begin{equation*}
g(\mathfrak{p})
\end{equation*}
to our disposal. We will sometimes write $a(\mathfrak{p})$ (as in: abelian rank) or $g(\Gamma)$ for the arithmetic genus. Whenever we mean the splitting indices, we will write them as a subscript.
\end{rem}
\section{Kummer extensions}\label{Kummerextensions}
We quickly recall some Kummer Theory.
Suppose we have a finite cyclic abelian extension $K\subseteq{L}$ of degree $n$ coprime to the characteristic $p$ of $K$. We will also suppose that $K$ contains a primitive $n$-th root of unity $\zeta_{n}$. If $n$ is not coprime to the characteristic, one has to consider so-called Artin-Schreier type extensions. We will not pursue this path here. For our case, the abelian extension takes a very simple form.
\begin{pro}\label{AbelExt1} (Kummer Theory) Let $K\subseteq{L}$ be a finite cyclic Galois extension of degree $n$ with $n$ coprime to the characteristic $p$ of $K$. Suppose that $K$ contains a primitive $n$-th root of unity. We then have
\begin{equation*}
L=K[X]/(X^{n}-f)
\end{equation*}
for some $f\in{K}$.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Proposition 3.2]{neu}.
\end{proof}
Suppose now that we have a finite extension of Dedekind domains $A\rightarrow{A'}$ such that the morphism of quotient fields $K\rightarrow{L}$ is cyclic abelian. Let $f$ be as in Proposition \ref{AbelExt1}. Write $f=\dfrac{a}{b}$ for $a,b\in{A}$ and let $\alpha\in{L}$ be any root of $X^{n}-f$. We then see that
$b\cdot{\alpha}$ satisfies the \emph{integral} equation $X^{n}-b^{n-1}a$. In other words, we can now assume that $f\in{A}$.
We consider the chain of algebras
\begin{equation*}
A\subseteq{A[X]/(X^{n}-f)}\subseteq{A'}.
\end{equation*}
We do not always have equality, as the extension given by a certain $f$ might be {\it{nonnormal}}.
We will now look at the local case. So assume that $A$ is local and Dedekind, in other words a discrete valuation ring. Let $\mathfrak{p}$ be the maximal ideal of $A$ and $\pi$ the uniformizer.
We can then write $f=\pi^{m}u$ where $u$ is a unit and $m\geq{0}$.
\begin{pro}\label{UnrAbelExt1}
Let $A\subseteq{A[X]/(X^{n}-f)}\subseteq{A'}$ be as above with $f=\pi^{m}u$. Let $\mathfrak{q}$ be any prime of $A'$ lying above $\mathfrak{p}$. We then have that
\begin{equation}
|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|=e_{\mathfrak{q}/\mathfrak{p}}=\dfrac{n}{\text{gcd}(m,n)}.
\end{equation}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
We consider the Newton polygon of $X^{n}-\pi^{m}u$, which is given by a single line segment of slope $-\dfrac{m}{n}$. Clearing the denominator and the numerator, we obtain $n/\text{gcd}(n,m)$
in the denominator. This slope is exactly the ramification index of the extension, so we obtain the Proposition.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{AbelExt2}
For any cyclic abelian extension $A\subseteq{A'}$ of Dedekind domains with corresponding extension of fraction fields $K\subseteq{L}=K[x]/(X^{n}-f)$, we have that the extension is unramified above $\mathfrak{p}$ if and only if $v_{\mathfrak{p}}(f)\equiv{0}\mod{n}$.
\end{cor}
\begin{rem}
We will sometimes abbreviate "cyclic abelian coverings" to "abelian coverings" in this thesis.
\end{rem}
\section{Quotients on the special fiber}\label{QuotientSpecial}
In Proposition \ref{GalExtNormInt},
we obtained a quotient $\mathcal{C}/G=\mathcal{D}$ for any finite Galois morphism of normal integral schemes $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$. Suppose now that $\mathcal{D}$ is a scheme over a discrete valuation ring $R$. The composition $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}\rightarrow{\text{Spec}(R)}$ then also endows $\mathcal{C}$ with the structure of an $R$-scheme. The morphism $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ is then a morphism of $R$-schemes. We then have
\begin{lemma}\label{InjectiveGaloisAction}
\begin{equation}
G\hookrightarrow{\text{Aut}_{R}(\mathcal{C})}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The fact that every $\sigma\in{G}$ gives an $R$-automorphism of $\mathcal{C}$ follows from our definition of the structural morphism $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\text{Spec}(R)}$.
Since $\text{Aut}_{R}(\mathcal{C})\hookrightarrow{\text{Aut}_{K}(\mathcal{C}_{\eta})}$ and $G\hookrightarrow{\text{Aut}_{K}(\mathcal{C}_{\eta})}$, we obtain the statement of the lemma.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
If we start the other way around, say with an $R$-scheme structure on $\mathcal{C}$, then this does not descend to an $R$-scheme structure on the quotient $\mathcal{D}$ in general. For instance, let
Let $K=\mathbb{Q}_{3}(\sqrt{3})$, $R'=\mathbb{Z}_{3}[\sqrt{3}]$, $\pi=\sqrt{3}$ and $R=\mathbb{Z}_{3}$, where $\mathbb{Z}_{3}$ and $\mathbb{Q}_{3}$ are the ring and field of $3$-adic numbers respectively. Let $X:=\text{Spec}(A)$, where $A=R'[x,y]/(xy-\pi)$ and let $\sigma$ be the automorphism of $A$ given by
\begin{align*}
\sigma(x)&=x,\\
\sigma(y)&=-y,\\
\sigma(\pi)&=-\pi.
\end{align*}
This is an automorphism of order two. The invariant ring $A^{G}$ is then given by $R[x,z]/(x^2\cdot{z}-3)$, which embeds into $A$ by $z\mapsto{y^2}$. We see that the $R'$-scheme structure on $\text{Spec}(A)$ does not descend to an $R'$-scheme structure on $A^{G}$. We do have an $R$-scheme structure on both schemes and by Lemma \ref{InjectiveGaloisAction} we obtain an
injective homomorphism $G\hookrightarrow{\text{Aut}_{R}(\text{Spec}(A))}$
The morphism on the special fiber is then given by
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{F}_{3}[x,z]/(x^2\cdot{z})\rightarrow{(\mathbb{F}_{3}[x,y]/(xy))[w]/(w^2)},
\end{equation}
where the nilpotent $w$ comes from the totally ramified extension $\mathbb{Z}_{3}\rightarrow{\mathbb{Z}_{3}[w]/(w^2-3)}\simeq{\mathbb{Z}_{3}[\sqrt{3}]}$.
\end{rem}
Let us now study the special fiber of $\mathcal{C}$. We have the exact sequence of sheaves
\begin{equation}\label{Firstexactsequence}
0\rightarrow\mathcal{I}\rightarrow{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}_{s}}}\rightarrow{0},
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{I}$ is the ideal sheaf of $\mathcal{C}_{s}$. That is, $\mathcal{I}=\pi{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}}}$. These sheaves have a natural action by $G$ on them. Taking the invariants under this action then yields the exact sequence
\begin{equation}\label{ExactQuotientSpecial}
0\longrightarrow{\pi{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D}}}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D}}}\rightarrow{(\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}_{s}})^{G}
\end{equation}
of sheaves on $\mathcal{D}$.
Note however that the righthand map is not necessarily surjective.
\begin{exa}
Consider the Galois covering given generically by $K(x)\rightarrow{K(x)[z](z^{p}-x)}$, where $K=\mathbb{Q}_{p}(\zeta_{p})$ with uniformizer $\pi=1-\zeta_{p}$. We then have the exact sequence
\begin{equation}
0\rightarrow{}(\pi)\rightarrow{R[z]}\rightarrow{\mathbb{F}_{p}[z]}\rightarrow{0}.
\end{equation}
Note that the Galois action is given by $z\rightarrow{\zeta_{p}\cdot{}z}$ on the generic fiber. The reduction of $\zeta_{p}$ is equal to $1$ however, so the induced action on $\mathbb{F}_{p}[z]$ is trivial. Taking the invariants then yields
\begin{equation}
0\rightarrow{}(\pi)\rightarrow{R[z^{p}]}\rightarrow{\mathbb{F}_{p}[z]}.
\end{equation}
The last map $R[z^{p}]\rightarrow{\mathbb{F}_{p}[z]}$ is not surjective, since there is no element of $R[z^{p}]$ that maps to $z$.
\end{exa}
When the order of the Galois group is coprime to the characteristic of the residue field, we can prove that the last morphism in Equation \ref{ExactQuotientSpecial} \emph{is} surjective.
\begin{pro}
Suppose that $\text{char}(k)\nmid{|G|}$. Then
\begin{equation}
0\longrightarrow{\pi{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D}}}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D}}}\rightarrow{(\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}_{s}})^{G}}\rightarrow{0}
\end{equation}
is exact.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
It suffices to show that the sequence is exact on the stalks. Let $y\in{D}$ and let $x\in\mathcal{C}$ be any point such that $\phi_{\mathcal{C}}(x)=y$. From Equation \ref{Firstexactsequence}, we obtain the exact sequence of abelian groups
\begin{equation}
0\rightarrow\mathcal{I}_{x}\rightarrow{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C},x}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}_{s,x}}}\rightarrow{0}.
\end{equation}
Taking the long exact sequence of group cohomology (see \cite[Appendix B, Proposition 2.3]{Silv1} or \cite{Ser1}), we then obtain
\begin{equation}
0\longrightarrow{(\pi{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D}}})_{y}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},y}}\rightarrow{(\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}_{s,y}})^{G}}\rightarrow{H^{1}((\pi{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D}}})_{y},G)}.
\end{equation}
Using \cite[Chapter VIII, Section 2, Corollary 1]{Ser1}, we then see that this last cohomology group is zero (here we use the condition on the order of the Galois group). This finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{QuotientSpecialFiber}
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{C}_{s}/G=\mathcal{D}_{s}.
\end{equation}
\end{cor}
We note that the above argument can also partially be found in \cite[Remark 1.7]{liu1}.
\begin{comment}
\section{Quotients on the special fiber: Oud}
From Proposition \ref{GalExtNormInt} we see that in the case of a disjointly branched Galois morphism $\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$, we also have that $\mathcal{C}/G=\mathcal{D}$. Let us try to specialize this equality to the special fiber. Let $\mathcal{I}$ be the ideal sheaf of the special fiber $\mathcal{C}_{s}$. That is, $\mathcal{I}=\pi{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}}}$. We then have an exact sequence
\begin{equation*}
0\longrightarrow\mathcal{I}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}}}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}_{s}}}\longrightarrow{0}
\end{equation*}
of sheaves of abelian groups, where $\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}}$ and $\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}_{s}}$ are the structure sheaves. These sheaves have a natural $G$-action on them. We consider the cohomology group $H^{1}(G,\mathcal{I})$ coming from group cohomology. Since $|G|$ is invertible in $\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}}$ (this is the condition on the characteristic being prime to the Galois group) we have that
\begin{equation*}
H^{1}(G,\mathcal{I})=(1).
\end{equation*}
Indeed, $|G|$ is invertible in $\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}}$ and thus also in $H^{1}(G,\mathcal{I})$. We then have that $|G|$ annihilates $H^{1}(G,\mathcal{I})$ by <<REFERENTIES>>
and thus $H^{1}(G,\mathcal{I})=(1)$.\\
We now use the long exact sequence of group cohomology, which yields
\begin{equation*}
(\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}_{s}})^{G}=(\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{C}}/\mathcal{I})^{G}=\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D}}/(\mathcal{I})^{G}=\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D}_{s}},
\end{equation*}
implying that
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{C}_{s}/G=\mathcal{D}_{s}.
\end{equation*}
(\footnote{This argument can also be found in {[\cite{liu2}, Remark 1.7]}.})
We thus also have a quotient on the special fiber.
\begin{center}
{\bf{[Toevoegen]}}
\end{center}
\begin{enumerate}
\item En dus ook $\Gamma'/D_{\Gamma'}=\Gamma$.
\item Voorbeeld karakteristiek $p$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{comment}
\section{Galois actions on intersection graphs}\label{MetrizedQuotient}
In this section, we will show that a disjointly branched morphism $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ with Galois group $G$ gives rise to a Galois action on the intersection graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$. In fact, we will see that $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})/G=\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$. We will also define the notions of decomposition and inertia groups for these graphs.
So let us consider a disjointly branched morphism $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ with Galois group $G$, as defined in Section \ref{DisjointBran11}.
\begin{lemma}\label{LemmaGaloisAction}
For any $\sigma\in{G}$ and $x\in\mathcal{C}_{s}$ an intersection point of $\Gamma_{1}$ and $\Gamma_{2}$, we have that $\sigma(x)$ is an intersection point of $\sigma(\Gamma_{1})$ and $\sigma(\Gamma_{2})$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathfrak{m}$ be the maximal ideal corresponding to $x$ on some open affine $U$. Correspondingly, let $\mathfrak{p}_{i}$ be the primes corresponding to $\Gamma_{i}$.
The fact that $x$ is an intersection point of $\Gamma_{1}$ and $\Gamma_{2}$ can be paraphrased by
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{m}\supseteq{\mathfrak{p}_{i}}
\end{equation*}
for both $i$. Letting $\sigma$ act on the above, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\sigma(\mathfrak{m})\supseteq{\sigma(\mathfrak{p}_{i})}
\end{equation*}
for both $i$, meaning that $\sigma(x)$ is an intersection point of $\sigma(\Gamma_{1})$ and $\sigma(\Gamma_{2})$.
\end{proof}
We thus see that $\sigma$ acts as an automorphism of graphs: if $v$ and $v'$ are joined by an edge $e$, then $\sigma(v)$ and $\sigma(v')$ are joined by the edge $\sigma(e)$ by the above lemma. We therefore see that we have a homomorphism
\begin{equation*}
G\longrightarrow{\text{Aut}(\Sigma(\mathcal{C}))}.
\end{equation*}
We can now define {\it{decomposition groups}} and {\it{inertia groups}} for elements of our graph.
\begin{mydef}
[{\bf{Decomposition and inertia groups for graphs}}]
Let $v$ and $e$ be a vertex and edge respectively of the intersection graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$. Let the corresponding points in $\mathcal{C}$ be given by $x_{v}$ and $x_{e}$. We define the {\it{decomposition group of }}$v$ and $e$ to be $D_{x_{v}}$ and $D_{x_{e}}$ respectively. Similarly, we define the {\it{inertia groups}} of $v$ and $e$ to be $I_{x_{v}}$ and $I_{x_{e}}$.
\end{mydef}
Recall now that we have a homomorphism $G\longrightarrow{\text{Aut}(\Sigma(\mathcal{C}))}$. We can therefore consider the quotient of graphs
\begin{equation*}
\Sigma(\mathcal{C})\longrightarrow{\Sigma(\mathcal{C})/G}.
\end{equation*}
\begin{rem}\label{NonQuotGraph1}
Unfortunately, we can have that $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})/G\neq\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ for semistable models $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$. Indeed, consider the semistable model given by the equation
\begin{equation*}
y^2=x(x-\pi)(x+1)(x+1-\pi)(x+2)(x+2-\pi),
\end{equation*}
which gives an intersection graph with two vertices and three edges between them. We have a natural Galois action on this model, given by
\begin{equation*}
y\longmapsto{-y}
\end{equation*}
on the coordinate rings.
Note that the edges of the intersection graph are invariant under the action, giving
\begin{equation*}
I_{e_{i}}=\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}.
\end{equation*}
For the components however, we have that
\begin{equation*}
D_{v_{i}}=(1).
\end{equation*}
We thus see that the quotient graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})/G$ consists of one vertex with three loops. The intersection graph of the quotient $\mathcal{C}/G$ consists of just one vertex however.
\end{rem}
We would now like to prove the following theorem:
\begin{theorem}\label{MainQuotientTheorem1}
Let $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched Galois morphism with Galois group $G$. Then
\begin{equation*}
\Sigma(\mathcal{C})/G=\Sigma(\mathcal{D}).
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The proof relies mostly on Lemma \ref{LemmaSmooth2}, which we will restate here.
\begin{lemma}\label{LemmaSmooth1}
Let $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched Galois morphism. Then the pre-image of a smooth point consists of smooth points
\end{lemma}
Let us also restate Corollary \ref{CorSmooth2}:
\begin{cor}\label{CorSmooth1}
For every ordinary double point $x$ of $\mathcal{C}$, we have that the image $\phi(x)$ is an ordinary double point of $\mathcal{D}$.
\end{cor}
To finish the proof of Theorem \ref{MainQuotientTheorem1}, first note that we already hav
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{C}/G=\mathcal{D},
\end{equation*}
a quotient of schemes. We thus only have to show that vertices are mapped to vertices and edges to edges. The first follows from the fact that $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$
maps a codimension one prime in the special fiber $\mathcal{C}_{s}$ to another codimension one prime in $\mathcal{D}_{s}$ (this follows from \cite[Chapter 4.3, Proposition 3.12]{liu2} for instance).
The second follows from Corollary \ref{CorSmooth1}. This gives the theorem.
\end{proof}
Let us now consider the following problem. Suppose that we again have a disjointly branched morphism
\begin{equation*}
\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}
\end{equation*}
with Galois group $G$. Let $H$ be any subgroup of $G$. We can consider the subquotient
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{C}/H}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}},
\end{equation*}
where we define $\psi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{C}/H}$ to be the quotient morphism. Note that this quotient is again semistable, by \cite[Proposition 3.48, Page 526]{liu2}.
\begin{lemma}
The image $\psi(x)$ of an ordinary double point $x\in\mathcal{C}_{s}$ is an ordinary double point of $\mathcal{C}/H$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $\psi(x)$ is smooth. Then the image of $\psi(x)$ in $\mathcal{D}$ is also smooth, by \cite[Proposition 1.6., page 16]{liu1}. This contradicts Corollary \ref{CorSmooth1}, concluding the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{MainQuotientLemma1}
Let $\mathcal{C}$, $\mathcal{D}$ and $H$ be as above. Then
\begin{equation*}
\Sigma(\mathcal{C})/H=\Sigma(\mathcal{C}/H).
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
As in Theorem \ref{MainQuotientTheorem1}, we have a Galois quotient
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{C}/H}
\end{equation*}
with Galois group $H$. As in that theorem, we see that vertices are mapped to vertices and edges to edges, so the lemma follows.
\end{proof}
The above lemma allows us to find the intersection graph of quotients by just taking the quotient of the intersection graphs. We will use this quite often in the examples to come.
\begin{mydef}
Let $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched morphism. We define $\phi_{\Sigma}:\Sigma(\mathcal{C})\longrightarrow{\Sigma(\mathcal{D})}$ to be the induced morphism on intersection graphs. Note that this is well-defined by Theorem \ref{MainQuotientTheorem1}.
\end{mydef}
\section{Metrized complexes of curves}\label{Metrizedcomplex}
In Section \ref{MetrizedQuotient}, we saw that a disjointly branched morphism $\phi_{\mathcal{C}}:\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ gives rise to a morphism $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})\rightarrow{\Sigma(\mathcal{D})}$. In this section, we will see that $\phi_{\mathcal{}}$ also gives rise to a quotient of {\it{metrized complexes of curves}}. Briefly speaking, these metrized complexes consist of a weighted metric graph with the additional data of an algebraic curve $C_{v}$ for every vertex $v$, where the edges adjacent to $v$ are identified with closed points in $C_{v}$.
We will follow the presentation in \cite{ABBR1} for metrized complexes of $k$-curves.
\begin{mydef}
A metrized complex of $k$-curves consists of the following data:
\begin{enumerate}
\item A weighted metric graph $(\Sigma, w(\cdot{}), l(\cdot{}))$,
\item A smooth, irreducible projective curve $C_{v}/k$ for every vertex $v\in{V(\Sigma)}$ such that $w(v)=g(C_{v})$.
\item An injective function $\text{red}_{v}:T_{v}\rightarrow{C_{v}(k)}$, where $T_{v}$ is the set of edges connected to $v$.
\end{enumerate}
The metrized complex $k$-curves corresponding to this data will be denoted by $(\Sigma,w(\cdot{}),l(\cdot{}),\text{red}_{v}(\cdot{}))$, or just $\Sigma$ if no confusion can arise.
\end{mydef}
\begin{exa}\label{MetrizedExample}
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a strongly semistable model over $R$. The weighted metric graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ can be turned into a metrized complex of $k$-curves as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item A vertex $v$ in $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ naturally corresponds to an irreducible component $\Gamma/k$. We assign the curve $\Gamma$ to $v$ and see that the weight assigned to $v$ is the genus of this curve.
\item Every edge $e$ corresponds to an intersection point $\tilde{x}$ of $\Gamma$ with another component $\Gamma'$. We assign the point $\tilde{x}$ to the edge $e$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{exa}
We would now like to define the notion of a morphism of metrized complexes. To do that, we first define what a morphism of weighted metric graphs is. After that, we define a {harmonic morphism} of weighted metric graphs and then proceed to the definition of a harmonic morphism of metrized complexes. The underlying idea in defining these notions is that they should be some sort of discrete variant of the usual notion of a morphism of algebraic curves. In particular, we should have some kind of notion of a \emph{ramification index} and \emph{degree}.
Let $\Sigma'$ and $\Sigma$ be two weighted metric graphs as defined in Section \ref{IntersectionGraphIntro}. A morphism $\psi:\Sigma'\rightarrow{\Sigma}$ is just a morphism of graphs $\psi:\Sigma'\rightarrow{\Sigma}$. For any edge $e'\in{E(\Sigma')}$, we define the \emph{dilatation factor}
\begin{equation}
d_{e'}(\psi)=\dfrac{l(\phi(e'))}{l(e')}.
\end{equation}
This is the analogue of the ramification index for edges.
For any edge $e\in\Sigma$, we now define the \emph{total degree} of $\psi$ above $e$ to be
\begin{equation}
\text{deg}_{e}(\psi)=\sum_{e'\in\psi^{-1}(e)}d_{e'}(\psi).
\end{equation}
\begin{rem}
We will see in Proposition \ref{InertiagroupIntersectionPoint1} that for a disjointly branched Galois morphism $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ and corresponding morphism of weighted metric graphs $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})\rightarrow{\Sigma(\mathcal{D})}$, this dilatation factor is equal to the order of the inertia group $I_{e}$. The total degree for every edge will then just be the order of the Galois group, by Lemma \ref{Orbitstabilizer} and the fact that the residue field is algebraically closed.
\end{rem}
\begin{mydef}\label{HarmonicWeighted}{\bf{[Harmonic morphisms weighted metric graphs]}}
A \emph{harmonic} morphism of weighted metric graphs is a morphism of weighted metric graphs $\psi:\Sigma'\rightarrow{\Sigma}$ such that the total degree $\text{deg}_{e}(\psi)$ is the same for every edge $e\in\Sigma$.
\end{mydef}
\begin{comment}
\begin{mydef}\label{HarmonicWeighted}{\bf{[Harmonic morphism weighted metric graphs]}}
Let $\Sigma$ and $\Sigma'$ be two weighted metric graphs as in Section \ref{IntersectionGraphIntro}. A morphism $\psi:\Sigma'\rightarrow{\Sigma}$ is given by the following data:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
\item
\item
\end{enumerate}
\end{mydef}
\end{comment}
We are now ready to define {\it{harmonic morphisms of metrized complexes}}.
\begin{mydef}
Let $\Sigma$ and $\Sigma'$ be two metrized complexes of $k$-curves. A harmonic morphism from $\Sigma'$ to $\Sigma$ is then given by the following data:
\begin{itemize}
\item A harmonic morphism $\Sigma'\rightarrow{\Sigma}$ of weighted metric graphs
\item A finite separable morphism of algebraic curves $\phi_{v'}:C_{v'}\rightarrow{C_{\phi_{v'}}}$ for every $v'\in{\Sigma'}$.
\end{itemize}
They are required to satisfy the following compatibility data:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Let $v'$ be any vertex in $\Sigma'$. For every $e'\in{T_{v}}$, we have $\text{red}_{v}(\phi(e'))=\phi_{v}(\text{red}_{\phi(v)}(e'))$.
\item Let $v'$ be any vertex in $\Sigma'$ and $e'\in{T_{v'}}$. Then the ramification index of $\text{red}(e')$ for $\phi_{v}$ is equal to $l(e')/l(e)$.
\item Let $v$ be any vertex in $\Sigma'$ and $e\in{T_{\phi(v)}}$. Then for every $x'\in\phi^{-1}_{v}(\text{red}_{\phi(v)}(e))$, there exists an $e'$ in $T_{v}$ such that $\text{red}_{v}(e')=x'$.
\item For every $v'\in\Sigma'$, we have that $\text{deg}(\phi_{v})$ is equal to the degree on every edge.
\end{enumerate}
\end{mydef}
As noted in \cite{ABBR1}, the last property actually follows from the other properties, since the sum of the ramification indices is equal to the degree of $\phi_{v}$ (see Proposition \ref{SerLocFields} or Lemma \ref{Orbitstabilizer}).
\begin{pro}
A disjointly branched morphism $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ with Galois group $G$ gives rise to a morphism of metrized complexes $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})\rightarrow{\Sigma(\mathcal{D})}$.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
By Proposition \ref{MainQuotientTheorem1}, we already have a morphism of graphs $\phi_{\mathcal{C}}:\Sigma(\mathcal{C})\rightarrow{\Sigma(\mathcal{D})}$. We have to check that this is a harmonic morphism. This follows from the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $I_{e'}=d_{e'}(\phi_{\mathcal{C}})$, see Proposition \ref{InertiagroupIntersectionPoint1}.
\item $\sum_{e'\in\phi^{-1}_{\mathcal{C}}(e)}d_{e'}(\phi_{\mathcal{C}})=\sum_{e'}|I_{e'}|=|G|$, see Lemma \ref{Orbitstabilizer}.
\end{enumerate}
The morphisms $C_{v'}\rightarrow{C_{v}}$ are now given by considering the image of $\Gamma_{v'}$ in $\mathcal{D}$ for the composite $\Gamma_{v'}\rightarrow\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$.
The only nontrivial part in the compatibility data that we have to check is the persistence of the ramification indices, which is criterium number two. We will defer this to Chapter \ref{Inertiagroups}, where it will be proved in Proposition \ref{ramind2}.
\end{proof}
Let us now define what a Galois quotient is for a metrized complex of $k$-curves.
\begin{mydef}
A {\bf{Galois action}} of a finite group $G$ on a metrized complex of $k$-curves $\Sigma$ consists of the following data.
\begin{itemize}
\item A homomorphism $G\rightarrow{\text{Aut}(\Sigma)}$.
\item A homomorphism $D_{v}\rightarrow{\text{Aut}(K(C_{v})/K(C_{\phi(v)}))}$ for every $v$.
\end{itemize}
We then say that a morphism $\phi$ of metrized complexes $\Sigma'\rightarrow{\Sigma}$ is a {\bf{Galois quotient}} if
\begin{itemize}
\item $\Sigma'/G=\Sigma$.
\item $C_{v}/D_{v}=C_{\phi(v)}$.
\end{itemize}
In this case, we write $\Sigma'/G=\Sigma$.
\end{mydef}
Note that for a disjointly branched morphism $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$, we have a homomorphism $G\rightarrow{\text{Aut}(\Sigma(\mathcal{C}))}$ by Lemma \ref{LemmaGaloisAction}. The homomorphism of the decomposition groups is then given by Proposition \ref{QuotientLemma10} (part 3) or Proposition \ref{SerExtGal1} (note that the components define codimension one points in $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$). We thus see that we have a Galois action of metrized complexes on $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$.
\begin{pro}
Let $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched morphism. Then $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})/G=\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ as a quotient of metrized complexes.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
This follows from Proposition \ref{MainQuotientTheorem1} and Corollary \ref{QuotientSpecialFiber}.
\end{proof}
\begin{comment}
\section{Galois action on intersection graphs and metrized complexes}\label{MetrizedQuotient}
In the last section we studied decomposition groups for codimension 1 primes and later on for more general points. Here we will continue to study them for disjointly branched morphisms. We will find that there exists a natural Galois action on the intersection graph. In fact, this action will induce a quotient of intersection graphs $\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{C})/G=\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{D})$. We will then see that we can specialize decomposition groups for specializations $\mathfrak{p}_{1}\supseteq{\mathfrak{p}_{2}}$ in the form of an injection $D_{\mathfrak{p}_{1}}\longrightarrow{D_{\mathfrak{p}_{2}}}$.\\
So let us consider a disjointly branched morphism $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ with Galois group $G$.
\begin{lemma}
For any $\sigma\in{G}$ and $x\in\mathcal{C}_{s}$ an intersection point of $\Gamma_{1}$ and $\Gamma_{2}$, we have that $\sigma(x)$ is an intersection point of $\sigma(\Gamma_{1})$ and $\sigma(\Gamma_{2})$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathfrak{m}$ be the maximal ideal corresponding to $x$ on some open affine $U$. Correspondingly, let $\mathfrak{p}_{i}$ be the primes corresponding to $\Gamma_{i}$.
The fact that $x$ is an intersection point of $\Gamma_{1}$ and $\Gamma_{2}$ can be paraphrased by
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{m}\supseteq{\mathfrak{p}_{i}}
\end{equation*}
for both $i$. Letting $\sigma$ act on the above, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\sigma(\mathfrak{m})\supseteq{\sigma(\mathfrak{p}_{i})}
\end{equation*}
for both $i$, meaning that $\sigma(x)$ is an intersection point of $\sigma(\Gamma_{1})$ and $\sigma(\Gamma_{2})$.
\end{proof}
We thus see that $\sigma$ acts as an automorphism of graphs: if $v$ and $v'$ are joined by an edge $e$, then $\sigma(v)$ and $\sigma(v')$ are joined by the edge $\sigma(e)$ by the above lemma. We therefore see that we have a homomorphism
\begin{equation*}
G\longrightarrow{\text{Aut}(\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{C}))}.
\end{equation*}
We can now define {\it{decomposition groups}} and {\it{inertia groups}} for elements of our graph.
\begin{mydef}
[{\bf{Decomposition and inertia groups for graphs}}]
Let $v$ and $e$ be a vertex and edge respectively of the intersection graph $\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{C})$. Let the corresponding points in $\mathcal{C}$ be given by $x_{v}$ and $x_{e}$. We define the {\it{decomposition group of }}$v$ and $e$ to be $D_{x_{v}}$ and $D_{x_{e}}$ respectively. Similarly, we define the {\it{inertia groups}} of $v$ and $e$ to be $I_{x_{v}}$ and $I_{x_{e}}$.
\end{mydef}
Recall now that we have a homomorphism $G\longrightarrow{\text{Aut}(\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{C}))}$. We can therefore consider the quotient of graphs
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{C})\longrightarrow{\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{C})/G}.
\end{equation*}
\begin{rem}\label{NonQuotGraph1}
Unfortunately, we can have that $\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{C})/G\neq\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{D})$ for semistable models $\mathcal{C}$ and $\mathcal{D}$. Indeed, consider the semistable model given by the equation
\begin{equation*}
y^2=x(x-\pi)(x+1)(x+1-\pi)(x+2)(x+2-\pi),
\end{equation*}
which gives an intersection graph with two vertices and three edges between them. We have a natural Galois action on this model, given by
\begin{equation*}
y\longmapsto{-y}
\end{equation*}
on the coordinate rings.
Note that the edges of the intersection graph are invariant under the action, giving
\begin{equation*}
I_{e_{i}}=\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}.
\end{equation*}
For the components however, we have that
\begin{equation*}
D_{v_{i}}=(1).
\end{equation*}
We thus see that the quotient graph $\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{C})/G$ consists of one vertex with three loops. The intersection graph of the quotient $\mathcal{C}/G$ consists of just one vertex however.\\
Note that we always have a morphism of graphs
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{C})/G\longrightarrow{\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{D})}
\end{equation*}
by the universal property of the quotient and the fact that every element of $\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{D})$ is invariant under $G$. From the above example we see that this morphism can be noninjective.
\end{rem}
We would now like to prove the following theorem:
\begin{theorem}\label{MainQuotientTheorem1}
Let $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched Galois morphism with Galois group $G$. Then
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{C})/G=\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{D}).
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The proof relies mostly on Lemma \ref{LemmaSmooth2}, that we will restate here.
\begin{lemma}\label{LemmaSmooth1}
Let $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched Galois morphism. Then the pre-image of a smooth point consists of smooth points.
\end{lemma}
Let us also restate Corollary \ref{CorSmooth2}:
\begin{cor}\label{CorSmooth1}
For every ordinary double point $x$ of $\mathcal{C}$, we have that the image $\phi(x)$ is an ordinary double point of $\mathcal{D}$.
\end{cor}
To finish the proof of Theorem \ref{MainQuotientTheorem1}, first note that we already hav
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{C}/G=\mathcal{D},
\end{equation*}
a quotient of schemes. We thus only have to show that vertices are mapped to vertices and edges to edges. The first follows from the fact that $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$
maps a codimension 1 prime in the special fibre $\mathcal{C}_{s}$ to another codimension 1 prime in $\mathcal{D}_{s}$.
The second follows from Corollary \ref{CorSmooth1}. This gives the theorem.
\end{proof}
Let us now consider the following problem. Suppose that we again have a disjointly branched morphism
\begin{equation*}
\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}
\end{equation*}
with Galois group $G$. Let $H$ be any subgroup of $G$. We can consider the subquotient
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{C}/H}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}},
\end{equation*}
where we define $\psi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{C}/H}$ to be the quotient morphism. Note that this quotient is again semistable, by [\cite{Liu1}, Proposition 3.48., page 526].
\begin{lemma}
The image $\psi(x)$ of an ordinary double point $x\in\mathcal{C}_{s}$ is an ordinary double point of $\mathcal{C}/H$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $\psi(x)$ is smooth. Then the image of $\psi(x)$ in $\mathcal{D}$ is also smooth, by \cite[Proposition 1.6., page 16]{liu1}. This contradicts Corollary \ref{CorSmooth1}, concluding the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{MainQuotientLemma1}
Let $\mathcal{C}$, $\mathcal{D}$ and $H$ be as above. Then
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{C})/H=\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{C}/H).
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
As in Theorem \ref{MainQuotientTheorem1}, we have a Galois quotient
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{C}/H}
\end{equation*}
with Galois group $H$. As in that theorem, we see that vertices are mapped to vertices and edges to edges, so the lemma follows.
\end{proof}
The above lemma allows us to find the intersection graph of quotients by just taking the quotient of the intersection graphs. We will use this quite often in the examples to come.
\begin{mydef}
Let $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched morphism. We define $\phi_{\mathcal{G}}:\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{C})\longrightarrow{\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{D})}$ to be the induced morphism on intersection graphs. Note that this is well-defined by Theorem \ref{MainQuotientTheorem1}.
\end{mydef}
\begin{rem}
Let us quickly say something about the weights that our vertices in $\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{D})$ might have had. Recall that these weights correspond to the genera of the corresponding components. For any morphism
\begin{equation*}
\Gamma_{C}\longrightarrow{\Gamma_{D}}
\end{equation*} of components in the special fibre, we assign the genus of $\Gamma_{C}$ to the vertex corresponding to it. Throughout the paper, we will assume implicitly that we have done this for every vertex of $\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{C})$.
\end{rem}
\end{comment}
\section{Construction in terms of blow-ups}\label{ConstructionBlowup}
Let
\begin{equation*}
S:=\{\alpha_{1},...,\alpha_{r}\}\subset{\mathbb{P}^{1}(K)}.
\end{equation*}
We will assume that no $\alpha_{i}$ is equal to another $\alpha_{j}$.
Consider the standard model $\mathbb{P}^{1}_{R}$ given by glueing the rings $R[x]$ and $R[1/x]$. Let $\tilde{x}$ be any closed point of the special fiber $\mathbb{P}^{1}_{k}$.
Let
\begin{equation*}
S_{\tilde{x}}:=\{\alpha\in{S}:r(\alpha)=\tilde{x}\},
\end{equation*}
where $r(\cdot)$ is the reduction map associated to $\mathbb{P}^{1}_{R}$.
This partitions the original set $S$ (because points have a unique reduction point by the fact that our ring $R$ is Henselian).\\
We label the points in $\mathbb{P}^{1}_{k}$ that the set $S$ reduces to by
\begin{equation*}
x_{1},x_{2},...,x_{l}.
\end{equation*}
We will then write $S_{i}$ for $S_{x_{i}}$. Let us consider the blow-up of $\mathbb{P}^{1}_{R}$ at all the $x_{i}$. We will later give an interpretation using $\pi$-adic expansions. We denote the blow-up by $P_{1}$. Let $z$ be any closed point in the exceptional divisor of $P_{1}$. Consider the set
\begin{equation*}
r_{P_{1}}^{-1}(z)=\{\alpha\in{S_{i}}:r_{P_{1}}(\alpha)=z\}.
\end{equation*}
By varying $z$ over the closed points of the exceptional divisor of $P_{1}$, we obtain a partition of $S_{i}$. We label the points in the exceptional divisor that the set $S_{i}$ reduces to by
\begin{equation*}
x_{i,1},x_{i,2},...,x_{i,l_{i}}.
\end{equation*}
As before, we then define $S_{i_{1},i_{2}}=r_{P_{1}}^{-1}(x_{i_{1},i_{2}})$. Continuing this process, we then obtain sequences of sets
\begin{equation*}
S_{i_{1},i_{2},...,i_{t}}.
\end{equation*}
and models $P_{i}$ of $\mathbb{P}^{1}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{LemmaLargeT}
For $t$ large, we have $|S_{i_{1},i_{2},...,i_{t}}|=1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The easiest way to see this is using $\pi$-adic expansions. We defer this to the next section. The basic idea is that the semistable model corresponding to $S_{i_{1},i_{2},...,i_{t}}$ separates certain $\pi$-adic expansions up to a certain height
\end{proof}
We can now define the {\bf{tropical separating tree}} of $S$.
\begin{mydef}\label{TropSep}
Consider the set of all $S_{i_{1},i_{2},...,i_{t}}$ as constructed above. We consider the following inclusions:
\begin{equation*}
S_{i_{1},i_{2},..,i_{t-1},i_{t}}\subset{S_{i_{1},i_{2},...,i_{t-1}}}.
\end{equation*}
Consider the graph $\Sigma_{S}$ consisting of all $S_{i_{1},i_{2},...,i_{t}}$ as vertices. The edge set consists of all pairs of vertices such that
\begin{equation*}
S_{i_{1},i_{2},..,i_{t-1},i_{t}}\subset{S_{i_{1},i_{2},...,i_{t-1}}}.
\end{equation*}
Furthermore, we create one vertex $S_{\emptyset}$ that is connected to all $S_{i}$.
The {\bf{tropical separating tree}} for $S$ is the finite complete subgraph consisting of the following vertex set:
\begin{itemize}
\item All vertices $S_{i_{1},i_{2},...,i_{t}}$ such that $|S_{i_{1},i_{2},..,i_{t}}|>1$.
\item The vertex $S_{\emptyset}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{mydef}
\begin{rem}
From Lemma \ref{LemmaLargeT}, we see that the tropical separating tree is indeed finite.
\end{rem}
\begin{mydef}
The semistable model $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ for $\mathbb{P}^{1}$ constructed before Definition \ref{TropSep} will be referred to as the {\it{separating semistable model}} for $S$. Its intersection graph is the same as $\Sigma_{S}$.
\end{mydef}
We will give some explicit equations for parts of this semistable model $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ in Section \ref{Appendix3}.
\begin{exa}\label{Exa111}
Let us consider the 4 elements
\begin{equation*}
S=\{0,\pi,\pi+\pi^2, \pi+2\pi^2\}.
\end{equation*}
We see that they all reduce to the point $0$. We therefore consider the blow-up, given by
\begin{equation*}
t'\pi=x.
\end{equation*}
The corresponding $t'$-coordinates for the last three points are
\begin{equation*}
S'=\{1,{1+\pi},{1+2\pi}\}.
\end{equation*}
These reduce to the same point given by $(x,t'-1,\pi)$. We consider one patch of the blow-up in this point, given by
\begin{equation*}
R[x,t'][t'']/(t'\pi-x,t''\pi-(t'-1)).
\end{equation*}
The last two points of $S'$ now have $t''$-coordinates given by
\begin{equation*}
S''=\{1,2\}.
\end{equation*}
We see that these points reduce to different points, meaning we have reached our endpoint.\\
The corresponding tropical separating tree is now given as follows: we have a tree consisting of three vertices. The first set is
\begin{equation*}
S_{0}=\{0,\pi,\pi+\pi^{2},\pi+2\pi^{2}\}.
\end{equation*}
On the blow-up, these reduce to two different points $x_{0,0}$ and $x_{0,1}$. We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
S_{0,0}&=&\{0\}, \\
S_{0,1}&=&\{\pi,\pi+\pi^{2},\pi+2\pi^{2}\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
The graph now has vertex set
\begin{equation*}
V_{\Sigma}=\{S_{\emptyset},S_{0},S_{0,1}\},
\end{equation*}
with edges between $S_{\emptyset}$ and $S_{0}$, and $S_{0}$ and $S_{0,1}$.
\end{exa}
\section{Construction using $\pi$-adic expansions}
Let $N\subset{R}$ be a set of representatives of $R/\mathfrak{m}$, where we assume that $0\in{N}$.
Then every element $x$ of $R$ can be written {\it{uniquely}} as
\begin{equation*}
x=\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}a_{k}\pi^{k},
\end{equation*}
where $a_{k}\in{N}$. Suppose that we are given a finite set $S$ of elements in $R$. Write every element $\alpha_{i}$ as
\begin{equation*}
\alpha_{i}=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}a_{i,k}\pi^{k}
\end{equation*}
as above.
As an example, we now consider the points $\alpha_{i}$ that reduce to the point $\tilde{0}$, that is: $a_{i,0}=0$. We then have
\begin{equation*}
\alpha_{i}=\pi\cdot{f_{i,1}},
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}
f_{i,1}={\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}a_{i,k+1}\pi^{k}.}
\end{equation*
As indicated in the previous section, we create the separating tree for $S$ by considering blow-ups in the points where $S$ is not separated. The critical point for these $\alpha_{i}$ with $a_{i,0}=0$ is of course $P=(x,\pi)$. Let us consider a specific affine patch of the blow-up of $\text{Spec}{(R[x])}$ in $P$:
\begin{equation*}
R_{1}:=R[x,t']/(t'\pi-x).
\end{equation*}
We then easily see that the $t'$ coordinates of the elements of $S$ are given by
\begin{equation*}
t'(\alpha_{i})=f_{i,1}.
\end{equation*}
Considering the prime ideal $(x-\alpha_{i},t'-f_{i,1},\pi)$, we see that it gives a reduced coordinate $\overline{t'}=\overline{f_{i,1}}=\overline{a_{i,1}}$. \\
We state this observation separately:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\it{The extra coordinate $t'$ on the blow-up keeps track of the coefficient $a_{i,1}$ in the $\pi$-adic expansion}}.
\end{itemize}
That is, we have separated these coordinates up to their first ($k=1$) $\pi$-adic coefficient.
Now if, for instance, $a_{1,1}$ and $a_{2,1}$ are the same, we cannot distinguish between them on the special fiber of this blow-up. We therefore blow-up $\text{Spec}(R_{1})$ in the point $Q:=(x-\alpha_{i},t'-a_{1,1},\pi)$. This gives a new algebra $R_{2}:=R_{1}[t'']/(t''\pi-(t'-a_{1,1}))$. We can then write
\begin{eqnarray*}
f_{1,1}-a_{1,1}&=&\pi{f_{1,2}},\\
f_{2,1}-a_{1,1}&=&\pi{f_{2,2}},
\end{eqnarray*}
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
f_{1,2}&=&\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}a_{1,k+2}\pi^{k},\\
f_{2,2}&=&\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}a_{2,k+2}\pi^{k}.
\end{eqnarray*}
This means that the $t''$-coordinates of $\alpha_{1}$ and $\alpha_{2}$ are given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
t''(\alpha_{1})&=&f_{1,2},\\
t''(\alpha_{2})&=&f_{2,2}.
\end{eqnarray*}
As before, we have that their reduced coordinates are now respectively $\overline{t''}=\overline{f_{1,2}}=\overline{a_{1,2}}$ and $\overline{t''}=\overline{f_{2,2}}=\overline{a_{2,2}}$. These new coordinates can be the same of course and we can then continue the blow-up process. At some point however we must have that their $\pi$-adic coefficients are different (at least, if $\alpha_{1}\neq{\alpha_{2}}$). This happens exactly at the $k$-th $\pi$-adic coefficient, where $k=v(\alpha_{1}-\alpha_{2})$. Note that this also proves Lemma \ref{LemmaLargeT}, since in any finite set of distinct elements in $\mathbb{P}^{1}(K)$, elements agree only up to a certain finite height in their $\pi$-adic expansions.
\begin{rem}
An important observation now is the following: every component $\Gamma$ in the semistable model $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ corresponds to a finite $\pi$-adic expansion
\begin{equation}
z_{\Gamma}=a_{0}+a_{1}\pi^{1}+...+a_{k}\pi^{k}.
\end{equation}
Points $z$ in $\mathbb{P}^{1}(K)$ that have this expansion up to height $k$ will reduce to this component $\Gamma$ if there are no further components $\Gamma'$ (with their own $\pi$-adic expansions) that agree with $z$ up to a higher power of $\pi$.
\end{rem}
\subsection{An algorithm for separation}\label{AlgSep1}
Let us give this $\pi$-adic separation process in an algorithmic fashion. We suppose that we are given $n$ points $S:=\{\alpha_{i}\}$ that all reduce to finite points in $\mathbb{P}^{1}_{k}$. That is, $v(\alpha_{i})\geq{0}$. The infinite case is similar.
\begin{mydef}
We say that $S$ is {\bf{separated up to height }}$k$ if the images of the $\alpha_{i}$ in the ring $R/(\pi)^{k}$ are all different.
\end{mydef}
For any finite set $S$, there exists a finite integer $k$ such that $S$ is separated up to height $k$. For instance, the roots of a single polynomial $f$ are separated up to $v(\Delta(f))$ (which is of course not always the smallest integer that has this property). At any rate, we are now ready to give the separating tree in terms of $\pi$-adic expansions. We will assume that the set $S$ is separated up to height $k$ for the next algorithm.
\begin{algo}
{\center{
{\bf{[Algorithm for separating trees]}}
\begin{flushleft}
Input: A finite subset $S\subset{\mathbb{P}^{1}(K)}$.
\end{flushleft}
\begin{itemize}
\item Determine the separating height $k$ for the subset $S$.
\item Calculate for every $i$ the $\pi$-adic expansion $\alpha_{i}=u_{0,i}+u_{1,i}\pi+u_{2,i}\pi^2+...+u_{k,i}\pi^{k}+r_{i}$, where $r_{i}$ has valuation strictly greater than $k$.
\item First partition: partition $S$ into subsets $S_{j}$ that have the same zeroth order approximation $u_{0,i}$.
\item Second partition: partition every $S_{j_{1}}$ into subsets $S_{j_{1},j_{2}}$ that have the same first order approximation $u_{1,i}$.
\item Third partition: partition every $S_{j_{1},j_{2}}$ into subsets $S_{j_{1},j_{2},j_{3}}$ that have the same second order approximation $u_{2,i}$.
\item (Iterate the partition process up to $k$).
\item Construct the finite tropical separating tree $\Sigma_{S}$ according to Definition \ref{TropSep}.
\end{itemize}}}
\begin{flushleft}
Output: The tropical separating tree $\Sigma_{S}$.
\end{flushleft}
\end{algo}
\section
Hyperelliptic coverings of the projective line}\label{Appendix3}
To illustrate how these separating semistable models are used, we consider the example of hyperelliptic coverings of the projective line.
Let $\phi: D\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$ be a hyperelliptic covering, given generically by an equation of the form
\begin{equation}
y^2=f(x),
\end{equation}
where we assume that $f(x)$ is a squarefree polynomial.
Let $S$ be a set in $\mathbb{P}^{1}(K)$ containing the branch locus of $\phi$. The previous section demonstrated a canonical semistable model $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ of $\mathbb{P}^{1}$ that separates $S$ in the special fiber. After a finite extension of $K$, we find that the normalization $\mathcal{D}$ of $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ in $K(D)$ gives a semistable model of $D$ over $R'$. In this section, we give an explicit representation of the residue field extension
\begin{equation}
k(\Gamma)\rightarrow{k(\Gamma')},
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma\subset{\mathcal{D}_{S,s}}$ is an irreducible component in the special fiber. This representation is needed in the algorithm for the twisting data.
We apply the construction of Section \ref{ConstructionBlowup} to $S$ and find the separating tree $\Sigma(\mathcal{D}_{S})$.
A component $\Gamma$ in this tropical separating tree now corresponds to a finite $\pi$-adic expansion
\begin{equation*}
z_{\Gamma}=a_{0}+a_{1}\pi^{1}+...+a_{k}\pi^{k}.
\end{equation*}
We now wish to obtain an expression of $x$ in terms of a local uniformizer (which is $\pi$) and a generator of the residue field of $\Gamma$. This is in fact not too hard: we consider the following chain of blow-ups
\begin{eqnarray*}
R_{0}&=&R[x], \\
R_{1}&=&R_{0}[t_{1}]/(t_{1}\pi-(x-a_{0})), \\
R_{2}&=&R_{1}[t_{2}]/(t_{2}\pi-(t_{1}-a_{1})), \\
\vdots&{}&\vdots\\
R_{k}&=&R_{k-1}[t_{k}]/(t_{k}\pi-(t_{k-1}-a_{k-1})).
\end{eqnarray*}
This then expresses $x$ in terms of $t_{k}$: $x=g(t_{k})$. We then find $f(x)=f(g(t_{k}))$. To obtain the normalization, we take the highest power of $\pi$ out:
\begin{equation*}
f(x)=f(g(t_{k}))=\pi^{r}h(t_{k}).
\end{equation*}
Note that this $h(t_{k})$ is indeed a polynomial in $t_{k}$, as can easily be seen from the above equations. The normalization is then given by
\begin{equation}\label{NormEq1}
y'^2=h(t_{k}),
\end{equation}
where $y'=\dfrac{y}{\pi^{r/2}}$.
Reducing the equation $\text{mod }{\pi}$ might result in some multiple factors in $\overline{h(t_{k})}$, or even worse: the equation might be reducible.
\begin{itemize}
\item If Equation \ref{NormEq1} is reducible, then the residue field extension is an isomorphism and we have $\overline{y}'=\tilde{h}$ for some ${\tilde{h}}$.
\item If Equation \ref{NormEq1} is irreducible and has multiple factors, we normalize to obtain a new equation. The residue field extension then has degree $2$.
\end{itemize}
\begin{rem}
The unique components of $R_{i}$ and $R_{i-1}$ have a single intersection point $P$ on the semistable model $\mathcal{D}_{S}$. Note that this intersection point is not visible in these equations: it is given on the special fiber as "$t_{i}=\infty$". To illustrate this, consider the algebra $R[x,t_{1}]/(t_{1}\pi-(x-a_{0}))$. The natural missing algebra is then given by $R[x,t'_{1}]/((x-a_{0})t'_{1}-\pi)$.
On the overlap of these affine charts, we find that $t_{1}$ and $t'_{1}$ satisfy $t_{1}\cdot{t'_{1}}=1$.
It is clear from this equation why the intersection point with $t_{1}=0$ is not visible in the other chart.
\end{rem}
\begin{comment}
\begin{exa}\label{ExaHyp1}
We take the curve $C$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{EqnExaHyp1}
y^2=x(x-\pi)g(x),
\end{equation}
where $\pi$ is a uniformizer and $g(x)$ is a polynomial of odd degree $c=2k+1$ (the case of a polynomial with even degree is similar but with two points at infinity). We assume that the roots of $g$ reduce to distinct points not equal to $0$. We hav
\begin{equation*}
g(C)=k+1.
\end{equation*}
Since the points $(0)$ and $(\pi)$ are not disjoint in the special fiber, we will want to create a semistable model for $\mathbb{P}^{1}$ that makes them disjoint. We take:
\begin{equation*}
\text{Proj}R[X,T,W]/(XT-\pi{W}^2)
\end{equation*}
with affine model
\begin{equation*}
\text{Spec}R[x,t]/(xt-\pi).
\end{equation*}
We have that the point $(0)$ on the generic fiber is now transferred to the affine part
\begin{equation*}
\text{Spec}R[x',w]/(x'-\pi{w^2}),
\end{equation*}
where $x'=\dfrac{X}{T}$ and $w=\dfrac{W}{T}$. Indeed, the corresponding prime ideal is $(x',w)$. The point $(\pi)$ now corresponds to the prime ideal $(x-\pi,t-1)$ lying on the generic fiber. We see that the reductions of $(0)$ and $(\pi)$ now lie on the same component $(x)$, but they have distinct $t$-coordinates: one has $t=1$ and the other has "$t=\infty$".\\
We can thus use Theorem \ref{MainThmSemSta} and calculate the normalization of this scheme in the finite extension defined by equation (\ref{EqnExaHyp1}). We'll first take a different route however, using only our knowledge of the divisors involved. Consider the divisor
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}_{\eta}(f)=(0)+(\pi)+Z(g)-(2+c)\cdot{\infty}.
\end{equation*}
We calculate
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))=2\cdot(\Gamma_{1})-2\cdot({\Gamma_{2}}).
\end{equation*}
This means that the corresponding Laplacian function has slope $\pm{2}$ between $\Gamma_{1}$ and $\Gamma_{2}$. The Laplacian can also be found in Figure \ref{1eplaatjeExtra}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{{Graph1.png}}
\caption{\label{1eplaatjeExtra} {\it{The Laplacian of $f$ in Example \ref{ExaHyp1}.}}
\end{figure} For the edge corresponding to the intersection $\mathfrak{m}=(x,t,\pi)$, we thus obtain two edges in the pre-image.\\
We now calculate $f^{\Gamma_{1}}$. We obtain
\begin{equation*}
(f^{\Gamma_{1}})=(x',w,\pi)+(x,t-1,\pi)-2\cdot({\Gamma_{1}\cap{\Gamma_{2}}}).
\end{equation*}
If we thus consider the local equation
\begin{equation*}
y^2=f^{\Gamma_{1}},
\end{equation*}
it will ramify at 2 points. Thus the genus of the corresponding component above is $0$. For $\Gamma_{2}$ we have
\begin{equation*}
(f^{\Gamma_{2}})=Z(g)+2\cdot({\Gamma_{1}\cap\Gamma_{2}})-(c+2)(\infty).
\end{equation*}
Thus the equation $y^2=f^{\Gamma_{2}}$ ramifies in the points defined by $Z(g)$ and $\infty$. There are $c+1$ of these, thus we can use the Riemann-Hurwitz formula to obtain
\begin{equation*}
2g_{\Gamma'_{2}}-2=2(-2)+c+1
\end{equation*}
and thus
\begin{equation*}
g_{\Gamma'_{2}}=k.
\end{equation*}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{{Graph10.png}}
\caption{\label{10eplaatje} {\it{The covering in Example \ref{ExaHyp1}.}}
\end{figure}
Thus the reduction graph consists of two vertices with two edges meeting them. The first component has genus $0$ and the second component has genus $k$. The covering of graphs can be found in Figure \ref{10eplaatje}.
We could have also calculated the normalization directly:
\begin{eqnarray*}
z^2=(1-t)g(x),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $z=y/x$. Plugging in $t=0$ and $x=0$ then yields the same reduction graph.
\end{exa}
\begin{exa}\label{ExaHyp2}
Let us take a slightly more involved example. We take
\begin{equation*}
z^2=x(x-\pi)(x-\pi^2)g(x),
\end{equation*}
where $g(x)$ is a polynomial of even degree $c=2k$. Then $g(C)=k+1$. If we now consider the open affine defined by
\begin{equation*}
R[x,y]/(xy-\pi^2),
\end{equation*}
then $\pi$ does not reduce to a regular point. When we blow this point up, we obtain a new component where $\pi$ does reduce to a regular point.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{{Graph11_2.png}}
\caption{\label{11eplaatje} {\it{The Laplacian $\phi$ of $f$ in Example \ref{ExaHyp2}.}}
\end{figure} The blow-up is given by the local charts
\begin{eqnarray*}
U_{1}=\text{Spec}(R[x,t_{2}]),\\
U_{2}=\text{Spec}(R[y,t_{3}]),
\end{eqnarray*}
with relations
\begin{eqnarray}
xt_{2}&=&\pi,\\
yt_{3}&=&\pi,
\end{eqnarray}
and the "obvious" local isomorphisms. We label the components $Z(t_{2})=\Gamma_{1}$, $Z(x,y)=\Gamma_{2}$ and $Z(t_{3})=\Gamma_{3}$. Here $\Gamma_{i}$ intersects $\Gamma_{i+1}$.\\
We have
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}_{\eta}(f(x))=(0)+(\pi)+(\pi^2)+Z(g)-(c+3)(\infty),
\end{equation*}
where $(0)$ and $(\pi^2)$ reduce to $\Gamma_{3}$ (the component with "$v(x)\geq{2}$"), $(\pi)$ reduces to $\Gamma_{2}$ and $Z(g)$ and $\infty$ reduce to $\Gamma_{1}$. Furthermore
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))=2(\Gamma_{3})+(\Gamma_{2})-3(\Gamma_{1}),
\end{equation*}
whose Laplacian is depicted by a slope of $2$ between $\Gamma_{3}$ and $\Gamma_{2}$ and a slope of $3$ between $\Gamma_{2}$ and $\Gamma_{1}$, as in Figure \ref{11eplaatje}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{{Graph12.png}}
\caption{\label{12eplaatje} {\it{The covering of graphs in Example \ref{ExaHyp2}.}}
\end{figure}
Correspondingly, the edge $e_{2,3}$ has two pre-images in $\mathcal{C}$ and the edge $e_{1,2}$ has one pre-image in $\mathcal{C}$. One finds that $f^{\Gamma_{1}}$ has $c+1$ ramification points and thus $\Gamma'_{1}$ has genus $k$ (Check this with the Riemann-Hurwitz formula). Similarly, $f^{\Gamma_{2}}$ and $f^{\Gamma_{3}}$ have two ramification points and as such they have genus $0$. Thus the reduction graph consists of three vertices $v_{1},v_{2},v_{3}$ where $v_{1}$ and $v_{2}$ intersect once and $v_{2}$ and $v_{3}$ intersect twice. The covering of graphs can be found in Figure \ref{12eplaatje}.\\
We also give the normalizations for completeness. For the first chart $U_{1}$ they are given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
z_{1}^2&=&x(1-t_{2})(1-t_{2}\pi)g(x),\\
z_{2}^2&=&t_{2}(1-t_{2})(1-t_{2}\pi)g(x),\\
z_{1}\cdot{z_{2}}&=&\pi^{1/2}(1-t_{2})(1-t_{2}\pi)g(x).
\end{eqnarray*}
where $z_{1}=\dfrac{z}{x}$ and $z_{2}=\dfrac{t_{2}z}{\pi^{1/2}x}$.
For the second chart $U_{2}$ we have a single algebra given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
z_{3}^2=(t_{3}-1)(1-y)g(t_{3}\cdot{\pi}),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $z_{3}=\dfrac{z}{\pi^{1/2}t_{3}}$. Note that in both charts we clearly see the need for the ramified extension of degree $2$ given $K\subseteq{K(\pi^{1/2})}$.
\end{exa}
\end{comment}
\section{Preliminaries}
We will assume in this chapter that the characteristic of the residue field is coprime to six.
Let $C$ be a smooth, projective, geometrically irreducible curve over $K$ with a degree three covering $\phi:C\longrightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$. This means that the injection of function fields
\begin{equation}
K(\mathbb{P}^{1})\longrightarrow{K(C)}
\end{equation}
has degree three. We will write $K(\mathbb{P}^{1})=K(x)$ and $K(C)=L$ from now on. We can then find an element $z\in{L\backslash{K(x)}}$
that satisfies
\begin{equation}
z^3+pz+q=0
\end{equation}
for $p,q\in{K(x)}$. We now assume that the corresponding {\it{Galois closure}} $\overline{L}$ has Galois group $S_{3}$ over $K(x)$.
Let $\overline{C}$ be the normalization of $C$ in $\overline{L}$. We then have
\begin{lemma}\label{GeomIrr}
$\overline{C}$ is geometrically irreducible if and only $\Delta=4p^3+27q^2\notin{K}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Note that being geometrically irreducible is equivalent to $\overline{L}\cap{\overline{K}}=K$ by \cite[Chapter 3, Corollary 2.14]{liu2}, where $\overline{K}$ is the algebraic closure of $K$. Note that $\overline{L}$ naturally contains the {\it{field}} (by assumption on the Galois group) $K(x)[y]/(y^2-\Delta)$. Suppose that $\overline{C}$ is geometrically reducible. Then there exists a $z_{0}\in\overline{L}$ such that $K(z_{0})\supset{K}$ is finite of degree $\neq{1}$. If $K(z_{0})/K$ is of degree $2$, we reason as follows. For some $a,b\in{K}$, we have $a+bz_{0}=y$ (since there is only one subfield of degree two) and thus $y^2\in\overline{K}$. We then find $y^2\in{K(x)\cap{\overline{K}}}=K$, a contradiction. Now suppose that $K(z_{0})/K$ is of degree $3$. Then some conjugate $\sigma(z_{0})$ of $z_{0}$ belongs to $L$. But then $\sigma(z_{0})\in{L\cap{\overline{K}}}=K$, a contradiction.
For the other direction, suppose that $\Delta\in{K}$. Then $y$ is an element of $(\overline{L}\cap{\overline{K}})\backslash{K}$.
This contradicts our assumption on $\overline{L}$, finishing the proof.
\end{proof}
For the remainder of the thesis, we assume that $\overline{C}$ is geometrically irreducible, which is quite an easy condition to check by Lemma \ref{GeomIrr}.
The Galois closure $\overline{L}$ can now be described by the two equations
\begin{equation}
w^3=y-\sqrt{27}q
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
y^2=\Delta.
\end{equation}
See Appendix \ref{Appendix1} for the details. These equations first arose in the famous Cardano formulas, where they are used to express $z$ in terms of the above radicals. We will not use these formulas in this paper, since the above equations are enough to derive all the information we need.
\section{Tame $S_{3}$-coverings of discrete valuation rings}
Let $R$ be a discrete valuation ring with quotient field $K$, residue field $k$, uniformizer $\pi$ and valuation $v$. Note that the residue field $k$ is \emph{not} assumed to be algebraically closed for this section, since we'll be using the results here for valuations corresponding to components in the special fiber of a semistable model. We will denote the maximal ideal $(\pi)$ in $R$ by $\mathfrak{p}$. We will assume that $\text{char}(K)=0$, $\text{char}(k)>3$ . Furthermore, we will assume that $K$ contains a primitive third root
of unity $\zeta_{3}$ and a primitive fourth root of unity $\zeta_{4}$. The fourth root of unity is used to remove a minus sign in the formula for the discriminant (see Appendix \ref{Appendix1}), which is strictly speaking not necessary, but it makes the formulas somewhat nicer.
The third root of unity will allow us to use Kummer theory for abelian coverings of degree $3$.
Let $L$ be a degree $3$ extension of $K$ such that $\overline{L}/K$ has Galois group $S_{3}$. This is equivalent to the discriminant of $L/K$ not being a square in $K$.
After a translation, $L$ is given by an equation of the form
\begin{equation}\label{MainEq1}
z^3+p\cdot{z}+q=0,
\end{equation}
where $p,q\in{K}$.
Let $B$ be the normalization of $R$ in $\overline{L}$ and let $\mathfrak{q}$ be any prime lying above $\mathfrak{p}$.
We would now like to know the \emph{inertia group} of $\mathfrak{q}$.
We will content ourselves with knowing $|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|$.
Let us state the relevant results here and defer the actual proofs and computations to Appendix \ref{Normalizations}.
\begin{pro}\label{InertS3}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Suppose that $3v(p)>2v(q)$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|=3 &\iff & 3\nmid{v(q)},\\
|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|=1 & \iff & 3\mid{v(q)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\item Suppose that $3v(p)<2v(q)$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|=2 &\iff & 2\nmid{v(p)},\\
|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|=1 & \iff & 2\mid{v(p)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\item Suppose that $3v(p)=2v(q)$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|=2 &\iff & 2\nmid{v(\Delta)},\\
|I_{\mathfrak{q}}|=1 & \iff & 2\mid{v(\Delta)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{Normalizations}.
\end{proof}
\section{Covering data using continuity of inertia groups}\label{InertTechnique}
In this section, we give the covering data for the morphism of intersection graphs $\Sigma(\overline{\mathcal{C}})\rightarrow\Sigma({\mathcal{D}_{S}})$ associated to a disjointly branched morphism $\overline{\mathcal{C}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}_{S}}$ for the $S_{3}$-covering $\phi: \overline{C}\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$. Here $S$ is a subset of $\mathbb{P}^{1}(K)$ that contains the branch locus of $\overline{\phi}$, as in Chapter \ref{Appendix2}. Before we give the covering data, we will first give an \emph{explicit} $S\subset{\mathbb{P}^{1}(K)}$ that contains the branch locus, giving rise to a separating model $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ as explained in Appendix \ref{Appendix2}. After that, we will use Proposition \ref{InertS3} and Theorem \ref{InertProp2} to give the {\it{covering data}}. That is, we will give $|D_{x}|$, where $x$ corresponds to an edge or vertex in $\Sigma(\overline{\mathcal{C}})$.
For any $z\in\mathbb{P}^{1}$, let $v_{z}$ be the corresponding valuation of the function field $K(x)$. Consider the set $S:=\text{Supp}(p,q,\Delta)\subset{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$. In terms of valuations, we then find that $z\in{S}$ if and only $v_{z}$ is nontrivial on $p,q$ or $\Delta$.
From now on, we assume that
$S\subset{\mathbb{P}^{1}(K)}$ (otherwise, we take a finite extension $K'$ of $K$ and set $K:=K'$). Let $B_{\overline{\phi}}$ be the branch locus of the morphism $\overline{\phi}:\overline{C}\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$. We then have
\begin{lemma}\label{BranchLocus1}
\begin{equation}
B_{\overline{\phi}}\subseteq{S}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This follows from Proposition \ref{InertS3} and the characterization of $S$ in terms of valuations given before the lemma.
\end{proof}
For $S=\text{Supp}(p,q,\Delta)$, we now take a model $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ of $\mathbb{P}^{1}$ such that the closure of $S$ in $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ consists of disjoint smooth sections over $R$. See Chapter \ref{Appendix2} for the construction of $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ and its corresponding intersection graph (which is also known as the {\it{tropical separating tree}}). Note that the morphism $\overline{\mathcal{C}}_{0}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}_{S}}$ obtained by normalizing might not be disjointly branched, as the generic points of components in the special fiber of $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ can ramify. By Proposition \ref{InertS3}, we see that as soon as we know the valuations $v_{\Gamma}(p), v_{\Gamma}(q),v_{\Gamma}(\Delta)$ for a component $\Gamma$, we know what tamely ramified extension we have to take to make this morphism disjointly branched.
We then obtain a disjointly branched morphism $\overline{\mathcal{C}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}'_{S}}$, where $\mathcal{D}'_{S}=\mathcal{D}_{S}\times{\text{Spec}(R')}$ for $R'$ a discrete valuation ring in $K'$ dominating $R$.
We now take a regular subdivision $\mathcal{D}''_{S}$ of $\mathcal{D}'_{S}$ in any edge $e$ and obtain a subdivision of the intersection graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{D}'_{S})$. As before, we note that the corresponding normalization of this model $\mathcal{D}''_{S}$ in $K(\overline{C})$ can then be vertically ramified over $\mathcal{D}''_{S}$.
The good news here is that the inertia groups of the new components are directly related to the inertia group of the original edge $e$ by Theorem \ref{InertProp2}.
We thus see by Proposition \ref{InertS3} that if we know the set $v_{\Gamma}(p), v_{\Gamma}(q),v_{\Gamma}(\Delta)$ for \emph{any} component in \emph{any} subdivision of our original intersection graph, then we know the inertia group of the original edge.
We can find these valuations $v_{\Gamma}(p), v_{\Gamma}(q),v_{\Gamma}(\Delta)$ directly using the Laplacian operator and Theorem \ref{MainThmVert}.
\begin{rem}\label{Remark1}
The valuation of $f$ at a component $\Gamma$ is exactly the coefficient in the vertical divisor corresponding to $\text{div}(f)$. We thus see that the above theorem gives the valuation, as soon as we know the valuation of $f$ at a single component. For $K(\mathcal{D})=K(x)$, this is quite easy: we take the valuation $v_{\Gamma_{0}}$ corresponding to the prime ideal $\mathfrak{p}=(\pi)\subset{R[x]}$. To be explicit, we write $f=\pi^{k}g$ (with $g\notin\mathfrak{p}$) and find $v_{\Gamma_{0}}(f)=k$. In other words, this valuation just measures the power of $\pi$ in $f$.
\end{rem}
\begin{rem}
If we take any base change of the form $K\subset{K(\pi^{1/n})}$, then the corresponding Laplacians for $p,q$ and $\Delta$ are scaled by a factor $n$ (at least, if we normalize our valuation such that $v(\pi^{1/n})=1$).
\end{rem}
\begin{comment}
Taking a finite extension $K'$ of $K$ as in Section ..., we obtain a disjointly branched morphism
\begin{equation}
\phi_{\overline{\mathcal{C}}}:\overline{\mathcal{C}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}'_{S}},
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{D}'_{S}=\mathcal{D}_{S}\times\text{Spec}(R')$, for $R'$ a discrete valuation ring in $K'$ dominating $K$.
We now fix this disjointly branched morphism $\phi_{\overline{\mathcal{C}}}$ and consider the corresponding morphism of intersection graphs $\Sigma(\overline{\mathcal{C}})\rightarrow\Sigma({\mathcal{D}_{S}})$ (where we write $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ for $\mathcal{D}'_{S}$). We will now give the \emph{covering data} for this morphism of graphs. That is, for every intersection point or generic point $x\in\overline{\mathcal{C}}$ we give $|D_{x}|$. This then tells us how many edges or vertices there are in the pre-image of any vertex or edge in $\Sigma(\mathcal{D}_{S})$.
Let us consider the problem of finding the inertia group of an edge $e'$ lying above an edge $e\in\Sigma(\mathcal{D}_{S})$. Note that for these points, we have that $D_{x}=I_{x}$ by our assumption on the residue field. We take a local desingularization of $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ at $e$ and consider the inertia groups of the discrete valuation rings corresponding to the new components. If we know the valuations
\begin{equation}
v_{\Gamma}(p), v_{\Gamma}(q),v_{\Gamma}(\Delta),
\end{equation} for these new components, then by Theorem \ref{InertProp2} and Proposition \ref{InertS3}, we know the order of the inertia group $I_{e'}$. The good news is that we can find these valuations using the Laplacian operator.
\begin{theorem}
Let $f\in\mathcal{K(D)}$, where $\mathcal{D}$ is assumed to be regular. Let $\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))$ be the induced principal divisor of $f$ on the intersection graph $G$ of $\mathcal{D}$.
Write
\begin{equation*}
\Delta(\phi)=\rho(\text{div}(f))
\end{equation*}
for some $\phi:\mathbb{Z}^{V}\longrightarrow{\mathbb{Z}}$, where $\Delta$ is the Laplacian operator. Choose $\phi$ such that $\phi(\Gamma)=0$. Then the unique vertical divisor corresponding to $\text{div}_{\eta}(f)$ with $V_{f^{\Gamma}}(\Gamma)=0$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{ExplVert2}
V_{f^{\Gamma}}=\sum_{i}\phi(\Gamma_{i})\cdot{\Gamma_{i}}.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
See <<VERWIJZEN NAAR ANDER HOOFDSTUK>>
\end{proof}
The valuation of $f$ at a component $\Gamma$ is exactly the coefficient in the vertical divisor corresponding to $\text{div}(f)$. We thus see that the above Theorem gives the valuation, as soon as we know the valuation of $f$ at a single component. For $K(\mathcal{D})=K(x)$, this is quite easy: we take the valuation $v_{\Gamma}$ corresponding to the prime ideal $(\pi)\subset{R[x]}$, write $f=\pi^{k}g$ (with $g\notin\mathfrak{p}$) and find $v_{\Gamma}(f)=k$. In other words, this valuation just measures the power of $\pi$ in $f$.
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
Another possibility that circumvents this is as follows. Let $\pi$ be the uniformizer for the discrete valuation $v$. Consider the coordinate change
\begin{equation}
z\longmapsto{\pi^{k}z}
\end{equation}
for some $k\in\mathbb{Z}$. Multiplying the equation $z^3+pz+q=0$ by $\pi^{3k}$, we then see that
\begin{equation}
(\pi^{k}z)^3+\pi^{2k}p(\pi^{k}z)+\pi^{3k}q=0.
\end{equation}
In other words, we have an action on $(p,q)$ given by
\begin{equation}
(p,q)\longmapsto{(\pi^{2k}p,\pi^{3k}q)}.
\end{equation}
This tropicalizes to
\begin{equation}
(x,y)\longmapsto{(x,y)+k(2,3)}.
\end{equation}
We then have
\begin{lemma}
Let $(x,y)\in\mathbb{N}^{2}$. {\bf{CONTROLEREN}}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Suppose that $2y>3x$. There exists a unique pair $(x_{0},y_{0})\in\mathbb{N}^{2}$ with $x_{0}\in\{0,1\}$ such that $(x,y)-(x_{0},y_{0})=k(2,3)$ for some $k$.
\item Suppose that $2y\leq{}3x$. There exists a unique pair $(x_{0},y_{0})\in\mathbb{N}^{2}$ with $y_{0}\in\{0,1,2\}$ such that $(x,y)-(x_{0},y_{0})=k(2,3)$ for some $k$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\end{comment}
We now summarize the above method for finding the covering data for a disjointly branched $S_{3}$-covering $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}_{S}}$ corresponding to the $S_{3}$-covering $\overline{C}\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$.
\begin{algo}
\begin{center}
{\bf{[Algorithm for the covering data using continuity of inertia groups]}}
\end{center}
\begin{flushleft}
Input: The polynomials $p,q,\Delta\in{K[x]}$.
\end{flushleft}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Construct the tropical separating tree for the set $S=\text{Supp}(p,q,\Delta)\subset{\mathbb{P}^{1}(K)}$.
\item For every root (and pole) $\alpha$ of $p$, $q$ and $\Delta$, determine $v_{\alpha}(p)$, $v_{\alpha}(q)$ and $v_{\alpha}(\Delta)$.
\item Find $v_{\Gamma_{0}}(p)$, $v_{\Gamma_{0}}(q)$ and $v_{\Gamma_{0}}(\Delta)$, as explained in Remark \ref{Remark1}.
\item Determine the corresponding Laplacians of $p$, $q$ and $\Delta$.
\item Use Theorems \ref{InertProp2}, \ref{DecompVert} and Proposition \ref{InertS3} to determine the covering data.
\end{enumerate}
Output: The covering data for the covering $\overline{C}\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$.
\end{algo}
\begin{exa}\label{Examplecurve}
Let $C$ be the curve given by the equation
\begin{equation}
f(z)=z^3+p\cdot{z}+q=0
\end{equation}
for $p=x^3$ and $q=x^3+\pi^3$.
That is, we consider the field extension
\begin{equation}
K(x)\subset{K(x)[z]/(f(z))}
\end{equation}
and let $C\longrightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$ be the corresponding morphism of smooth curves.
Let us find the divisors of $p$, $q$ and $\Delta=4p^3+27q^2=4x^9+27(x^3+\pi^3)^2$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{{Graph4-copy.png}}
\caption{\label{1eplaatje} {\it{The tropical separating tree in Example \ref{Examplecurve}.}}
\end{figure}
Let
\begin{align*}
P_{0}&=(0),\\
P_{i}&=(-\zeta^{i}_{3}\cdot{\pi}),
\end{align*}
for $i\in\{1,2,3\}$ and $\zeta_{3}$ a primitive third root of unity. Then $(p)=3P_{0}-3(\infty)$ and $(q)=P_{1}+P_{2}+P_{3}-3(\infty)$.
We now take the tropical separating tree with five vertices, marked as in Figure \ref{1eplaatje}.
We then have the following \emph{tropical} divisors:
\begin{align}
\rho((p))&=3\Gamma_{0}-3\Gamma'_{0},\\
\rho((q))&=\Gamma_{1}+\Gamma_{2}+\Gamma_{3}-3\Gamma'_{0}.
\end{align}
We quickly see that $p$ and $q$ contain no factors of $\pi$, so $v_{\Gamma'_{0}}(p)=v_{\Gamma'_{0}}(q)=0$. The Laplacians are then given by Figure \ref{Laplacianen1}. Note that the Laplacian $\phi_{p}$ is the same on every segment $e_{i}:=\Gamma_{i}\Gamma_{0}$ and likewise for $\phi_{q}$. We see that $\phi_{p}$ has slope zero on the $e_{i}$ and slope $3$ on $\Gamma_{0}\Gamma'_{0}$. Furthermore, we see that $\phi_{q}$ has slope $1$ on every $e_{i}$ and slope $3$ on $\Gamma_{0}\Gamma'_{0}$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.5\linewidth, height=5cm]{Graph2-2copy.png}
\caption{The Laplacian $\phi_{p}$ of $p$.
\label{2eplaatje}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}[b]{.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.7\linewidth, height=5cm]{Graph3-2.png}
\caption{The Laplacian $\phi_{q}$ of $q$.}
\label{3eplaatje}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{The Laplacians for Example \ref{Examplecurve}.}
\label{Laplacianen1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{{Graph5-copy.png}}
\caption{\label{5eplaatje} The intersection graph of the Galois closure in Example \ref{Examplecurve}.}
\end{figure}
For every vertex, we then have $3v_{\Gamma}(p)>2v_{\Gamma}(q)$, so we are in Case (I) of Theorem \ref{InertS3}. We then see that $\Gamma_{0}$ and $\Gamma'_{0}$ are unramified and every $\Gamma_{i}$ is ramified of order $3$. So we first take the tamely ramified extension of order three: $K\subset{K(\pi^{1/3})}$. If we now take a regular model after the base change, the Laplacians of both $p$ and $q$ will be scaled by a factor three (if we assume that our new valuation is normalized such that $v(\pi^{1/3})=1$). Furthermore, for this regular model we see that every edge gives rise to two new components.
By Theorem \ref{InertProp2}, we have that the inertia groups of the new components on the subdivisions in fact give the inertia groups of the original edges.
Let us illustrate this in more detail. For instance, if we take the edge $e_{i}$, then after taking the base change we obtain four components: $\Gamma_{i}, v_{i,1},v_{i,2}$ and $\Gamma_{0}$, where $v_{i,1}$ and $v_{i,2}$ are new. We then find that the new Laplacian $\tilde{\phi}_{q}$ has
\begin{align*}
\tilde{\phi}_{q}(\Gamma_{0})&=9, \\
\tilde{\phi}_{q}(v_{i,2})&=10, \\
\tilde{\phi}_{q}(v_{i,1})&=11,\\
\tilde{\phi}_{q}(\Gamma_{i})&=12.
\end{align*}
Again, using Theorem \ref{InertS3}, we find that $|I_{v_{i,2}}|=3$. By Theorem \ref{InertProp2}, we see that $|I_{e_{i}}|=3$. In other words, there are two edges lying above every $e_{i}$.
For $e_{0}=\Gamma_{0}\Gamma'_{0}$, using the same procedure as before, we see that there are six edges lying above $e_{0}$. Using Theorem \ref{DecompVert}, we see that there are two vertices lying above $\Gamma_{0}$. One then quickly finds that there is only one covering graph $\Sigma(\overline{\mathcal{C}})$ satisfying these conditions. It is given by Figure \ref{5eplaatje}.
We note that the genera of $\Gamma_{0,1}$, $\Gamma_{0,2}$ and $\Gamma'_{0,1}$ are one, whereas the genera of the other components are zero. This can be found using the Riemann-Hurwitz formula.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{{Graph6-copy.png}}
\caption{\label{6eplaatje} The intersection graph of the quotient under the subgroup of order two in Example \ref{Examplecurve}.}
\end{figure}
Taking the quotient under the subgroup of order two corresponding to the curve $C$, we then obtain the intersection graph of $\mathcal{C}$. It is given in Figure \ref{6eplaatje}. Note that the component labeled by $\tilde{\Gamma}_{0}$ has genus $1$, whereas $\tilde{\Gamma}'_{0}$ has genus $0$. The other three components don't contribute to the Berkovich skeleton. The entire Galois lattice, including all the intermediate intersection graphs but excluding the leaves, can now be found in Figure \ref{21eplaatje}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{{Graph21_2.png}}
\caption{\label{21eplaatje} The full Galois lattice of intersection graphs in Example \ref{Examplecurve}. The leaves are omitted. }
\end{figure}
\end{exa}
In Example \ref{Gen3NonAb1}, we will do the same example with a different technique. This technique will be presented in the next section.
\section{Covering data using the quadratic subfield}\label{QuadraticSubfieldTechnique}
The degree three covering $\phi:C\longrightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$ can be represented on the level of function fields as
\begin{equation}
z^3+p\cdot{}z+q=0,
\end{equation}
where $p$ and $q$ are polynomials over $K$. By our initial assumption on $\phi$, we find that the Galois closure
contains a quadratic subfield $K(D)$, corresponding to a smooth curve $D$. On the level of function fields, this is given as
\begin{equation}
K(x)\subset{}K(x)[y]/(y^2-\Delta),
\end{equation}
where $\Delta=4p^3+27q^2$.
The corresponding degree three morphism $\overline{C}\rightarrow{D}$ can then be represented by
\begin{equation}
K(D)\subset{K(D)[w]/(w^3-(y-\sqrt{27}q))}.
\end{equation}
We thus see that the field extension $K(\overline{C})\supset{K(\mathbb{P}^{1})}$ has been subdivided into two abelian parts: $K(\overline{C})\supset{K(D)}$ of degree $3$ and $K(D)\supset{K(\mathbb{P}^{1})}$ of degree $2$. See Appendix \ref{Appendix1} for some background material regarding these equations.
Consider a model $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ of $\mathbb{P}^{1}$ such that the closure of $S:=\text{Supp}(p,q,\Delta)$
is separated in $\mathcal{D}_{S}$.
We find by Lemma \ref{BranchLocus1} that the branch locus of $\overline{\phi}$ is contained in $S$. Over some finite extension $K'\supset{K}$, we thus obtain disjointly branched morphisms $\overline{\mathcal{C}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}_{S}}$ such that the base change to the generic fiber is $\overline{C}\rightarrow{D}\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$.
We won't worry about this finite extension in this section and just take $K:=K'$.
We first calculate the intersection graph of the intermediate model $\mathcal{D}$.
The covering $D\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$ is hyperelliptic, so we can apply Algorithm \ref{AbelianAlgorithm}.
We note that this step does not require any twisting data, since we are dealing with an abelian covering of a tree.
We now consider the divisor of the function $y-\sqrt{27}q\in{K(D)}$. This can be given explicitly in terms of the zero divisors of $p,q$ and $\Delta$. Since calculating divisors is a matter of normalizing, the reader will probably not be surprised that there are again three cases. The result is as follows, where we again defer the proof to Appendix \ref{Normalizations}.
\begin{pro}\label{DivisorDegree3}
Let $y-\sqrt{27}q\in{K(D)}$ be as above. Let $z\in\mathbb{P}^{1}(K)$ and denote by $v_{z}$ the corresponding valuation of $K(x)$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Suppose that $3v_{z}(p)>2v_{z}(q)$. There are then two points $Q_{1}$ and $Q_{2}$ lying above $P$ in $D$. We then have
\begin{align*}
v_{Q_{1}}(y-\sqrt{27}q)&=3v_{z}(p)-v_{z}(q),\\
v_{Q_{2}}(y-\sqrt{27}q)&=v_{z}(q).
\end{align*}
\item Suppose that $3v_{z}(p)<2v_{z}(q)$. If $2|v_{z}(p)$, then there are two points $Q_{1}$ and $Q_{2}$ lying above $P$ in $D$. We have
\begin{equation}
v_{Q_{i}}(y-\sqrt{27}q)=3v_{z}(p)/2.
\end{equation}
If $2\nmid{v_{z}(p)}$, then there is only one point $Q$ in $D$ lying above $P$. We then have
\begin{equation}
v_{Q}(y-\sqrt{27}q)=3v_{z}(p).
\end{equation}
\item Suppose that $3v_{z}(p)=2v_{z}(q)$. If $2|v_{P}(\Delta)$, then there are two points $Q_{1}$ and $Q_{2}$ lying above $P$. We have
\begin{equation}
v_{Q_{i}}(y-\sqrt{27}q)=v_{z}(q).
\end{equation}
If $2\nmid{v_{z}(\Delta)}$, then there is only one point $Q$ lying above $P$. We have
\begin{equation}
v_{Q}(y-\sqrt{27}q)=2v_{z}(q).
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
See Appendix \ref{Normalizations}.
\end{proof}
By calculating the reduction of every $Q_{i}$ in $\mathcal{D}$, one then obtains the tropical divisor $\rho(\text{div}(y-\sqrt{27}q))$. This is a principal divisor in $\text{Div}^{0}(\Sigma(\mathcal{D}))$, so we can write
\begin{equation}
\Delta(\phi)=\rho(\text{div}(y-\sqrt{27}q))
\end{equation}
for some $\phi$ in $\mathcal{M}(\Sigma(\mathcal{D}))$. The covering data for an edge $e\in\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ is then obtained as follows:
\begin{pro}\label{QuadraticSubfield}
Let $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ be the intersection graph of $\mathcal{D}$ and let $\phi$ be such that
\begin{equation}
\Delta(\phi)=\rho(\text{div}(y-\sqrt{27}q)).
\end{equation}
Let $e$ be an edge in $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ and let $\delta_{e}(\phi)$ be the absolute value of the slope of $\phi$ along $e$.
Then the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item There are three edges above $e$ if and only if $3|\delta_{e}(\phi)$.
\item There is one edge above $e$ if and only if $3\nmid{\delta_{e}(\phi)}$.
\end{enumerate}
Furthermore, there are three vertices above a vertex $v$ with corresponding component $\Gamma$ if and only if the reduction of
$(y-\sqrt{27}q)^{\Gamma}$ is a cube.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
The first part is Proposition \ref{PropositionCoveringData}. The second part about the vertices is recorded in Proposition \ref{DecompositionVertexProposition}.
\end{proof}
We now summarize the above method for finding the covering data for a tame $S_{3}$-covering $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}}$ using the quadratic subfield $K(D)$.
\begin{algo}
\begin{center}
{\bf{[Algorithm for the covering data using the quadratic subfield]}}
\end{center}
\begin{flushleft}
Input: The polynomials $p,q,\Delta\in{K[x]}$.
\end{flushleft}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Construct the tropical separating tree corresponding to $S=\text{Supp}(p,q,\Delta)$.
\item Calculate the intersection graph $\Sigma(D)$ using the disjointly branched morphism $\mathcal{D}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}_{\mathbb{P}^{1},S}}$.
\item Calculate the Laplacian of $y-\sqrt{27}q$ on $\Sigma(D)$ using Proposition \ref{DivisorDegree3}.
\item Calculate the covering data for the edges using Proposition \ref{QuadraticSubfield}.
\item If $\text{div}(\overline{f^{\Gamma}})\equiv{0}\mod{3}$, determine if it is a cube in $k(\Gamma)$. (This requires additional computations on the residue fields of the components of $\mathcal{D}_{s}$, these are given in Section \ref{Appendix3}).
\item If $\overline{f^{\Gamma}}$ is a cube, there are three components lying above $\Gamma$. Otherwise, there is only one component lying above $\Gamma$.
\end{enumerate}
Output: The covering data for the covering $\overline{C}\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$.
\end{algo}
\section{Tropicalizing degree three morphisms to the projective line: an algorithm
In this section, we assemble the pieces from the previous sections into an algorithm for calculating the Berkovich skeleton of a curve with a degree three covering to the projective line. There are actually two algorithms for the covering data, so the reader can choose whichever method he prefers. The author is under the impression that the method presented in Section \ref{InertTechnique} (using inertia groups) is faster than the one in Section \ref{QuadraticSubfieldTechnique} (using the quadratic subfield), since it doesn't require any Laplacian computations on nontrivial graphs.
\begin{comment}
Let $C$ be given by
\begin{equation}
z^3+pz+q=0
\end{equation}
for polynomials $p$ and $q$ in $K[x]$.
\end{comment}
\begin{algo}\label{Algorithm}
{}
\begin{center}
{\bf{[The Berkovich skeleton of a curve with a degree three covering to the projective line]}}
\end{center}
\begin{flushleft}
Input: $p,q\in{K[x]}$.
\end{flushleft}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Let $C$ be given by the equation $z^3+pz+q=0$. If the equation is reducible, then the covering does not have degree three.
\item If $\Delta=4p^3+27q^2\in{K}$, then $C\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$ is superelliptic over a quadratic extension (namely $K(\sqrt{\Delta})$) of $K$.
Use Algorithm \ref{AbelianAlgorithm} to determine the Berkovich skeleton.
Otherwise, the Galois closure $\overline{C}$ is geometrically irreducible. It is described by the equation $w^6+2\sqrt{27}qw^3-4p^3=0$.
\item Construct the tropical separating tree $\Sigma(\mathcal{D}_{S})$ for the semistable model $\mathcal{D}_{S}$ as described in Chapter \ref{Appendix2}. Here $S=\text{Supp}(p,q,\Delta)$.
\item Determine the covering data for $\overline{C}\rightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$ using Section \ref{InertTechnique} or \ref{QuadraticSubfieldTechnique}.
\item Determine the twisting data using Algorithm \ref{Linkingcomponents} and use this to determine the intersection graph of $\overline{\mathcal{C}}$.
\item Calculate the genera of the vertices in $\Sigma(\overline{\mathcal{C}})$ using the Riemann-Hurwitz formula, see Proposition \ref{RiemannHurwitz}.
\item Take the quotient of $\Sigma(\overline{\mathcal{C}})$ under the subgroup of order two corresponding to $C$ by Galois theory. The resulting graph $\Sigma(C)$ is the intersection graph of $\mathcal{C}$ by Lemma \ref{MainQuotientLemma1}.
\item Calculate the genera of the vertices in $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ using the Riemann-Hurwitz formula \ref{RiemannHurwitz}.
\item Calculate the lengths of the edges in $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ using Proposition \ref{InertiagroupIntersectionPoint1}.
\item Contract any "leaves" to obtain the graph $\Sigma'(\mathcal{C})$.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{flushleft}
Output: The Berkovich skeleton $\Sigma'(\mathcal{C})$.
\end{flushleft}
\end{algo}
\begin{proof}
({\it{Correctness of the algorithm}})
For the covering data and the twisting data, we refer the reader to Sections \ref{Coveringdata} and \ref{Linkingcomponents}. The fact that the quotient graph is equal to the intersection graph of the quotient is Lemma \ref{MainQuotientLemma1}.
Contracting any leaves then automatically yields the Berkovich skeleton.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{{Graphs8-4.png}}
\caption{\label{83eplaatje} {\it{Two different $S_{3}$-coverings with the same covering data.}}}
\end{figure}
\begin{rem}
We would like to point out a difference here between abelian coverings of the projective line and nonabelian coverings of the projective line. First of all, the twisting data is not needed for abelian covers of the projective line. It is only necessary for coverings $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ where $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ has nonzero Betti number and the covering is completely decomposable, as in Section \ref{CompletelyDecomposable}. We note however that the covering data for an $S_{3}$-covering $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})\rightarrow{T}$ of a tree $T$ does \emph{not} fix $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$. See Figure \ref{83eplaatje} for an example. Luckily, the nontrivial twisting can be detected on the quadratic subcover.
\end{rem}
\section{Semistability of elliptic curves using a degree three covering}
As an application of the methods presented in the previous sections, we reprove the criterion:
\begin{equation}
"v(j)>0 \text{ if and only if }E\text{ has potential good reduction}".
\end{equation}
Here $j$ is the $j$-invariant of $E$. For the definitions of (potential) good reduction and (split) multiplicative reduction, we refer the reader to \cite[Chapter 10, Definition 2.27]{liu2}.
Let us take an elliptic curve $E/K$. Over an extension $K'$ of $K$, one can then find an equation of the form
\begin{equation}\label{EquationElliptic}
x^3+Ax+B+y^2=0
\end{equation}
for some $A$ and $B$ in $K'$. Just as in \cite[Chapter VII, Section 1]{Silv1}, we can assume that $v(A),v(B)\geq{0}$. In fact, we can assume that the equation has been scaled such that either $v(A)=0$ or $v(B)=0$, which again often requires a finite extension. We will assume that all these extensions have been made and the resulting field will be denoted by $K$.
To prove semistability of the curve, one usually considers the $2:1$ covering given by
\begin{equation*}
\phi(x,y)=x
\end{equation*}
and then uses the branch points to explicitly create the semistable model. We will make life hard for us now and consider a different covering:
\begin{equation*}
\phi(x,y)=y.
\end{equation*}
This gives a degree three morphism $E\longrightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$ with corresponding extension of function fields $K(y)\subset{K(E)}$. We will use the quadratic subfield of the Galois closure and Algorithm \ref{AbelianAlgorithm} for the degree three abelian extension $\overline{E}\rightarrow{E'}$.
The twisting data studied in Section \ref{TwistingDataFinal}
will not be needed, as we will see that the covering data obtained here determines the covering graph uniquely.
We note that the curve in Equation \ref{EquationElliptic} is in our normal form with $p=A$ and $q=B+y^2$. For psychological reasons, the author chose to revert the minus sign coming from the usual Weierstrass equation (given by $x^3+Ax+B-y^2=0$) to a plus sign.
Consider the $K(A,B)[y]$-algebra $K(A,B)[y][x]/(x^3+Ax+B+y^2)$. We first calculate the discriminant of this algebra. It is given by
\begin{equation*}
\Delta=4A^3+27(B+y^2)^2.
\end{equation*}
We would like to determine whether this is a square or not. To that end, we calculate the discriminant of
\begin{equation*}
\Delta'(y_{1})=4A^3+27(B+y_{1})^2
\end{equation*}
and see that
\begin{equation*}
\Delta(\Delta'(y_{1}))=(2\cdot{27}\cdot{B})^2-4\cdot{(27)}\cdot{(27B^2+4A^3)}=-(4\cdot{27})^2\cdot{A}^3.
\end{equation*}
Here $y_{1}=y^2$.
We therefore see that the discriminant $\Delta$ is a square if and only if either $A=0$ or $y=0$ is a zero of $\Delta$. In the latter case we see directly that we must have $4A^3+27B^2=0$, which contradicts the assumption that $E$ is nonsingular. The case $A=0$ is a separate case, where one can easily see that $E$ has potential good reduction.
So let us assume that $A\neq{0}$. Then the discriminant is not a square and we obtain a bonafide extension of degree two given by
\begin{equation*}
z^2=4A^3+27(B+y^2)^2.
\end{equation*}
This is again a curve of genus $1$, which we denote by $E'$. We would like to know the reduction type of this curve. We will do this in terms of the discriminant $\Delta(E)=4A^3+27B^2$. Note that the $E$'s equation has been scaled such that either $v(A)=0$ or $v(B)=0$.
We now consider the following possible scenarios for $A,B$ and $\Delta(E)$:
\begin{enumerate}\label{ScenariosEllipticCurve1}
\item $v(A)=v(B)=0$ and $v(\Delta(E))>0$.
\item $v(A)=0$, $v(B)\geq{0}$ and $v(\Delta(E))=0$.
\item $v(A)>0$, $v(B)=0$ and $v(\Delta(E))=0$.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{lemma}\label{Onecase1}
Every elliptic curve $E/K$ belongs to exactly one of the three cases described above.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $E$ be given as in Equation \ref{EquationElliptic}. If $v(A)>0$, then by assumption we must have $v(B)=0$ and thus $v(\Delta)=0$. This means that we are in Case 3. Suppose that $v(A)=0$. If $v(B)>0$, then $v(\Delta)=0$ and we are in Case 2. If $v(B)=0$, then there are two possibilities: either $v(\Delta)>0$ or $v(\Delta)=0$. These are cases 1 and 2 respectively. It is now clear from the nature of these cases that they are mutually exclusive. This finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{ScenariosEllipticCurve2}
Let $\overline{E}$ be the Galois closure of the morphism $\phi$.
For every type of $\{v(A),v(B),v(\Delta)\}$ as described above, there exists a disjointly branched morphism $\overline{\mathcal{E}}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}}$ giving the following intersection graphs:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Suppose that $v(A)=v(B)=0$ and $v(\Delta(E))>0$. Then $E'$ has multiplicative reduction with intersection graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{E}')$ consisting of two components intersecting in two points. $\Sigma(\overline{\mathcal{E}})$ consists of 3 copies of $\Sigma(\mathcal{E}')$ meeting in one vertex
The corresponding intersection graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{E})$ consists of three vertices, connected as in Figure \ref{101eplaatje}. The curve $E$ has multiplicative reduction.
\item Suppose that $v(A)=0$, $v(B)\geq{0}$ and $v(\Delta(E))=0$. Then all curves involved are nonsingular and the corresponding models have the trivial intersection graph.
\item Suppose that $v(A)>0$, $v(B)=0$ and $v(\Delta(E))=0$. Then $E'$ has multiplicative reduction with intersection graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{E}')$ consisting of two components intersecting in two points. $\Sigma(\overline{\mathcal{E}})$ consists of two elliptic curves meeting twice. $E$ has good reduction, with intersection graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{E})$ as described in Figure \ref{92eplaatje}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We subdivide the proof into three parts, according to the cases given in the statement of the proposition.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
We write
\begin{equation*}
z^2=4A^3+27B^2+2\cdot{27}By^2+27y^4=\Delta(E)+2\cdot{27}By^2+27y^4=\Delta.
\end{equation*}
We label the roots of $\Delta$ by $\alpha_{i}$ for $i\in\{1,2,3,4\}$.
Since $v(A)=v(B)=0$ and $v(\Delta(E))>0$, we find that two of the roots of $\Delta$ coincide. Let them be $\alpha_{1}$ and $\alpha_{2}$. A Newton polygon computation then shows that $v(\alpha_{1})=v(\alpha_{2})=v(\Delta)/2$. We therefore construct a tropical separating tree $\Sigma(\mathcal{D}_{S})$ with two vertices and one edge, which has length $v(\Delta)/2$. The reduction graph of $E'$ is then as shown in Figure \ref{101eplaatje} (which contains some spoilers regarding the final product). Indeed, the Laplacian of $\Delta(E)+2\cdot{27}By^2+27y^4$ has slope $\pm{2}$ on $e$, so we obtain two edges. Furthermore, there is only one vertex lying above each vertex of $\Sigma(\mathcal{D}_{S})$, since the roots of $\Delta$ are branch points on these components. We label these components by $\Gamma_{1}$ and $\Gamma_{2}$.
We now consider the degree three covering $\overline{E}\rightarrow{E'}$. We'll use the formulas in Proposition \ref{DivisorDegree3}. Let $f=z-\sqrt{27}q$. We then easily see that
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}_{\eta}(f)=2\cdot({\infty_{1}})-2\cdot({\infty_{2}}),
\end{equation*}
where the $\infty_{i}$ are the two points at infinity. These points both reduce to smooth points on $\Gamma_{1}$. The corresponding Laplacian is thus trivial on $\Sigma(E')$. Using Proposition \ref{PropositionCoveringData},
we see that there are three edges lying above each of the two in $\Sigma(E')$.
We now turn to the vertices. The reduced divisor of $f$ on $\Gamma_{2}$ is trivial, so there are three vertices lying above it. For $\Gamma_{1}$, the covering is ramified and thus there is only vertex lying above it. By the Riemann-Hurwitz formula, the covering vertex has genus zero. We thus directly see that the intersection graph must be as in Figure \ref{101eplaatje}. The corresponding quotient and the rest of the lattice is depicted there as well. We see that the Betti number of the quotient is one, implying that $E$ has multiplicative reduction.
Note that the length of the cycle in $\Sigma(\mathcal{E})$ is the same as the length of the cycle in $\Sigma(\mathcal{E}')$ by inspecting the corresponding inertia groups. From the construction of the tropical separating tree, we then find that the cycle in $\Sigma(\mathcal{E}')$ has length $v(\Delta)/2+v(\Delta)/2=v(\Delta)=-v(j)$ and thus the cycle in $\Sigma(\mathcal{E})$ has the same length. This is another well-known feature of elliptic curves with split multiplicative reduction.
\begin{comment}
We will not explicitly give them. Instead, we write
\begin{equation*}
\Delta(E)=\pi^{2n}u,
\end{equation*}
for some $u\in{R}^{*}$ (note that this usually requires a ramified extension of $K$). We then take the semistable model obtained from the following
\begin{equation*}
yt=\pi^{n}.
\end{equation*}
This then gives the equation
\begin{equation*}
({z}/{y})^{2}=t^2{u}+2\cdot{27}B+27y^2,
\end{equation*}
which gives two vertices (corresponding to $y=0$ and $t=0$) and two edges (corresponding to $\dfrac{z}{y}=:z'=\pm{\sqrt{2\cdot{27}B}}$). We thus find that $E'$ has multiplicative reduction. We label the components by $\Gamma_{1}=Z(y)$ and $\Gamma_{2}=Z(t)$.
Now for $\overline{E}$. We'll use the formulas in Proposition \ref{DivisorDegree3}. Let $f=z-\sqrt{27}q$. We then easily see that
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}_{\eta}(f)=2\cdot({\infty_{1}})-2\cdot({\infty_{2}}),
\end{equation*}
where the $\infty_{i}$ are the two points at infinity. These points both reduce to smooth points on $\Gamma_{2}$. The corresponding Laplacian is thus trivial on $\Sigma(E')$. Using Proposition \ref{QuadraticSubfield}, we see that there are three edges lying above each of the two in $\Sigma(E')$.
We now turn to the vertices. The reduced divisor of $f$ on $\Gamma_{1}$ is trivial, so there are three vertices lying above it. For $\Gamma_{2}$, the covering is ramified and thus there is only vertex lying above it. By the Riemann-Hurwitz formula, the covering vertex has genus zero. We thus directly see that the intersection graph must be as in Figure \ref{101eplaatje}. The corresponding quotient and the rest of the lattice is depicted there as well. We see that the Betti number of the quotient is one, implying that $E$ has multiplicative reduction.
\end{comment}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{{Graphs10-1.png}}
\caption{\label{101eplaatje} The Galois closure of graphs in Case I.
\end{figure}
\item A quick calculation shows that all curves in sight are nonsingular. We thus obtain trivial graphs with weights $1,3,1$. Hence $E$ has good reduction.
\begin{comment}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{{Graph20.png}}
\caption{\label{20eplaatje} The Galois closure of graphs in Case II.
\end{figure}
\end{comment}
\item Suppose that $v(A)>0$, $v(B)=0$ and $v(\Delta(E))=0$. ({\footnote{The author has to confess that this feels like we're using too much machinery, because we already know that $E$ has good reduction from the fact that the reduced discriminant is nonzero. Nonetheless, calculating the entire Galois closure shows some interesting features.}})
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{{Graphs9-1.png}}
\caption{\label{91eplaatje} The hyperelliptic covering in Case III.
\end{figure}
We label the roots of $\Delta$ by $\alpha_{i}$ for $i\in\{1,2,3,4\}$. We quickly find that the roots reduce to roots of the equation $y^2+B=0$. We have two roots (say $\alpha_{1}$ and $\alpha_{2}$) reducing to $y=\sqrt{-B}$ and two other roots ($\alpha_{3}$ and $\alpha_{4}$) reducing to $y=-\sqrt{-B}$. A Newton polygon calculation then shows that $v(\alpha_{1}-\alpha_{2})=3v(A)/2$ and $v(\alpha_{3}-\alpha_{4})=3v(A)/2$. We therefore construct a tropical separating tree with three vertices $\Gamma_{0}$, $\Gamma_{1}$ and $\Gamma_{2}$ as in Figure \ref{91eplaatje}. This figure also contains the corresponding degree two covering of intersection graphs. Note that the edges $\Gamma_{1}\Gamma_{0}$ and $\Gamma_{0}\Gamma_{2}$ both have length $3v(A)/2$. Since the morphism of intersection graphs is \'{e}tale above these edges, we find that the edges lying above them also have length $3v(A)/2$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{{Graphs9-2.png}}
\caption{\label{92eplaatje} The Galois closure and its quotient in Case III.
\end{figure}
Since $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ has Betti number one, we see that $E'$ has multiplicative reduction. Note that there are two points at infinity $\infty_{i}$ and that they reduce to different components: $\infty_{1}\mapsto{\Gamma_{0,+}}$ and $\infty_{2}\mapsto{\Gamma_{0,-}}$. Let $f=y-\sqrt{27}q$. We now find that $\text{div}_{\eta}(f)=2(\infty_{1})-2(\infty_{2})$. The reduction of the divisor of $f$ is then given by
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))=2(\Gamma_{1})-2(\Gamma_{2}).
\end{equation*}
We then find that the Laplacian corresponding to $f$ has slope $\pm{1}$ on every edge. It is not divisible by three, so there is only edge lying above every edge, again by Proposition \ref{PropositionCoveringData}.
The Galois closure can now be found in Figure \ref{92eplaatje}. The components $\Gamma''_{0,i}$ both have genus one. Indeed, the morphisms $\Gamma''_{0,i}\rightarrow{\Gamma'_{0,i}}$ are ramified above the edges and $\infty_{i}$, giving a total of three ramification points per component. The Riemann-Hurwitz formula then gives the desired genus. We now see that the quotient consists of three vertices, where the middle vertex has genus $1$. In other words, $E$ has good reduction.
\begin{comment}
There is no need for a special semistable model of $\mathbb{P}^{1}$: we directly have two components $\Gamma_{1}$ and $\Gamma_{2}$ that correspond to the equations:
\begin{eqnarray*}
z=\sqrt{27}(B+y^2),\\
z=-\sqrt{27}(B+y^2).
\end{eqnarray*}
These two components intersect in the two points defined by
\begin{equation*}
y^2=-B,\,z=0.
\end{equation*}
Thus the intersection graph of $E'$ consists of two vertices and two edges. We now have to know the reduction of $\text{div}_{\eta}(y-\sqrt{27}(q))=2(\infty_{1})-2(\infty_{2})$. We quite easily check that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\infty_{i}\longmapsto{\Gamma_{i}}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus the reduction of the divisor of $f$ is given by
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))=2(\Gamma_{1})-2(\Gamma_{2}).
\end{equation*}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{{Graph19_2.png}}
\caption{\label{19eplaatje} The Galois closure of graphs in Case III.
\end{figure}
\end{comment}
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
An elliptic curve $E$ has potential good reduction if and only if $v(j)>0$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Every elliptic curve can be put in exactly one of the three scenarios considered in Proposition \ref{ScenariosEllipticCurve2} by Lemma \ref{Onecase1}.
Case 1 corresponds exactly to $v(j)<0$ by the calculation $v(j)=v(1728\cdot\dfrac{4A^3}{\Delta})=-v(\Delta)<0$. Cases 2 and 3 then naturally correspond to $v(j)\geq{0}$, giving the Corollary.
\end{proof}
\section{Genus three curves}
We now turn to genus 3 curves. For genus 3 curves, we have that the moduli space of isomorphism classes has dimension $6$ (in general, $\mathcal{M}_{g}$ is irreducible of genus $3g-3$). If we look at the subspace of all hyperelliptic curves of genus $3$, one quickly finds that this space has dimension $5$. The idea is that for $\text{char}{K}\neq{2}$, one can locally write such a curve as
\begin{equation*}
y^2=x(x-1)(x-\alpha_{1})(x-\alpha_{2})(x-\alpha_{3})(x-\alpha_{4})(x-\alpha_{5})
\end{equation*}
by putting three of the ramification points of the hyperelliptic involution at $\{0,1,\infty\}$. Since the dimension of $\mathcal{M}_{3}$ is strictly bigger than the dimension of the hyperelliptic locus, we find that not all curves of genus 3 have a hyperelliptic involution. So a different strategy is needed here. We will soon find out that one can in fact find a morphism of degree $3$ to $\mathbb{P}^{1}$ for curves that are not hyperelliptic. Such a morphism need not be Galois however, so we take the Galois closure of this morphism.
We will see quite quickly that the Galois subextension of degree $3$ is often {\it{unramified}}. This means that it comes from a $3$-torsion point in the Jacobian.
\subsection{From quartics to degree three morphisms}
Suppose we take a nonhyperelliptic curve of genus $3$. By \cite[Chapter IV, Proposition 5.2]{Hart1},
we find that the canonical divisor on $C$ defines a closed embedding
\begin{equation*}
C\longrightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{2}},
\end{equation*}
which has degree $4$, meaning that it is a nonsingular quartic. Conversely, every nonsingular quartic defines a nonhyperelliptic curve of genus $3$. We now take a point $P$ on $C$ (which might need a finite extension of $K$). Consider the space of all lines intersecting $P$. This is isomorphic to $\mathbb{P}^{1}$. If we now take any other point $Q\in{C}(\overline{K})$, we have that there is a line intersecting $Q$ and $P$. We define
\begin{equation*}
\phi(Q)=L_{P,Q},
\end{equation*}
where $L_{P,Q}$ is the line connecting the two points. This defines a morphism $\phi:C\longrightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}$ of degree $3$, since any hyperplane section intersects $C$ in four points and we already have $P$ as an intersection point.
\begin{exa}
As an example, take the plane curve defined by
\begin{equation*}
x^4+y^4-1=0.
\end{equation*}
It has the rational point $P=(1,0)$. Consider all lines of the form
\begin{equation*}
y=t(x-1).
\end{equation*}
By plugging this in, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
x^4-1+t^4(x-1)^4=0
\end{equation*}
and thus
\begin{equation*}
(x-1)(x^3+x^2+x+1+t^4(x-1)^3)=0.
\end{equation*}
We cancel out $x-1$ (the obvious intersection point), to obtain
\begin{equation*}
x^3+x^2+x+1+t^4(x-1)^3=0.
\end{equation*}
This curve has an obvious degree $3$ morphism to $\mathbb{P}^{1}$, given locally by
\begin{equation*}
(x,t)\longmapsto{t}.\\
\end{equation*}
\end{exa}
Let us now return to the general case. We have a morphism of degree $3$
\begin{equation*}
\phi:C\longrightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}.
\end{equation*}
We now wish to arrive at some kind of "normal form". We take any quartic
\begin{equation*}
f(x,y)=\sum_{i,j}c_{i,j}x^{i}y^{j}
\end{equation*}
and assume by translating that $P=(0,0)$ lies on $C$. Thus $c_{0,0}=0$. Write
\begin{equation*}
y=tx.
\end{equation*}
We then obtain
\begin{equation*}
f(x,tx)=\sum_{i,j}c_{i,j}x^{i}(tx)^{j}.
\end{equation*}
Canceling $x$, we thus obtain an equation of the form
\begin{equation*}
f'(x,t)=\sum_{j=0}^{j=3}a_{j}(t)x^{j}=0,
\end{equation*}
where $\text{deg}(a_{j}(t))\leq{j+1}$.
We find that
\begin{equation*}
f'(x-\dfrac{a_{2}(t)}{3a_{3}(t)},t)=a_{3}x^3+((-3a_{2}^2 + 9a_{1}a_{3})/(9a_{3}))x + (2/3\cdot{}a_{2}^3 - 3a_{1}a_{2}a_{3} + 9a_{0}a_{3}^2)/(9a_{3}^2)
\end{equation*}
Multiplying by $a_{3}^2$ and taking $x'=a_{3}\cdot{x}$, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
f''(x',t)=x^3+((-3a_{2}^2 + 9a_{1}a_{3})/(9))x + (2/3\cdot{}a_{2}^3 - 3a_{1}a_{2}a_{3} + 9a_{0}a_{3}^2)/(9)
\end{equation*}
We define
\begin{eqnarray*}
p(t)&=&((-3a_{2}^2 + 9a_{1}a_{3})/(9)),\\%9a_{1}a_{3}-3a_{2}^2\\
q(t)&=&(2/3\cdot{}a_{2}^3 - 3a_{1}a_{2}a_{3} + 9a_{0}a_{3}^2)/(9)
\end{eqnarray*}
and see that
\begin{equation*}
\Delta:=(4p^3+27q^2)/(a_{3})^2=-a_{1}^2a_{2}^2 + 4a_{2}^3a_{0} + 4a_{1}^3a_{3}^1 - 18a_{1}a_{2}a_{0}a_{3}^1 + 27a_{0}^2a_{3}^2.
\end{equation*}
\begin{lemma}\label{DegDiscrim1}
For each monomial $m$ in $\Delta$, we have that $\text{deg}(m)\leq{10}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This follows quite easily from $\text{deg}(a_{j})\leq{j+1}$ and some easy calculations on $\Delta$.
\end{proof}
We can now explicitly describe the curves in the Galois closure. For the quadratic subfield, we have that it is given by
\begin{equation*}
y^2=\Delta.
\end{equation*}
The cubic extension of this field is then given by
\begin{equation*}
w^3=y-\sqrt{27}q.
\end{equation*}
See Appendix \ref{Appendix1} for the details.
From now on, we {assume} that $p$ and $q$ have {\it{no common factors}}.
Otherwise, the formulas have to be adjusted.
\begin{lemma}
Suppose that $\text{gcd}(p,q)=1$. We then have that
\begin{eqnarray*}
g(\overline{C})\leq{12},\\
g(D)\leq{4}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
From Lemma \ref{DegDiscrim1} we see that the degree of $\Delta$ is at most 10, and as such we see that the genus of the corresponding curve $y^2=\Delta$ can be at most 4.
For $\overline{C}$, we use Riemann-Hurwitz on the covering $\phi_{3}:\overline{C}\longrightarrow{D}$. Let us first describe the ramification of the degree $3$ morphism $\phi_{3}$. Recall that it is given by
\begin{equation*}
w^3=y-\sqrt{27}q.
\end{equation*} Let $f:=y-\sqrt{27}q$. Using Proposition \ref{InertS3} and our assumption $\text{gcd}(p,q)=1$, we then see that $\overline{C}\rightarrow{D}$ is unramified above any point of $D$ lying above a point of $K[t]$.
The only points of ramification are thus the point(s) at infinity. How many there are of these, depends on the degree of the squarefree part of $\Delta$.
Indeed, if the squarefree part of $\Delta$ has {\it{even}} degree, then $D$ has two points at infinity and if it has {\it{odd}} degree, then it has exactly one point at infinity.
Rewriting the Riemann-Hurwitz formula for the covering $\phi_{3}$, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
g_{\overline{C}}-1=3(g_{D}-1)+\#(R).
\end{equation*}
The maximal occurring $g_{D}$ and $\#(R)$ are respectively $4$ and $2$, so we obtain that
\begin{equation*}
g_{\overline{C}}\leq{9}+2+1=12,
\end{equation*}
as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
Suppose that $\text{gcd}(p,q)=1$. There are then 8 options for $(g(D),\#{R}, g(\overline{C}), \#(R_{\overline{C}/C}))$. They are given by
\center
\begin{tabular}{ |c| c | c|c| }
\hline
$g(D)$ & $\#(R)$ & $g(\overline{C})$& $\#(R_{\overline{C}/C})$\\%$ g(D)$& $\#(R)$& $g(\overline{C})
\hline
2 & 1 & 5 & 0\\
2 & 2 & 6 & 2\\
3 & 0 & 7 & 4\\
3 & 1 & 8 & 6\\
3 & 2 & 9 & 8 \\
4 & 0 & 10 & 10\\
4 & 1 & 11 & 12 \\
4 & 2 & 12 & 14\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
One uses the Riemann Hurwitz on both the covering $\overline{C}\longrightarrow{D}$ and $\overline{C}\longrightarrow{C}$. This leads to
\begin{eqnarray*}
g_{\overline{C}}-1&=&3(g_{D}-1)+\#(R),\\
2g_{\overline{C}}-2&=&2(2g_{C}-2)+\#(R_{{\overline{C}/C}}),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $g_{C}=3$. Plugging in the possible values for $D$ and $\#(R)$ yields the above values.
\end{proof}
Let us now find the intersection graph of a genus 3 curve by a nonabelian morphism $C\longrightarrow\mathbb{P}^{1}$ to illustrate the above. We note that this example was also done in Example \ref{Examplecurve}, using a different technique.
\begin{exa}\label{Gen3NonAb1}
Let us consider the genus 3 curve defined by
\begin{equation*}
z^3+x^3{z}+(x^3+\pi^3)=0.
\end{equation*}
We can find the reduction type in two ways: via an abelian cover and a nonabelian cover. The abelian cover is given by
\begin{equation*}
(x,z)\longmapsto{z}
\end{equation*}
and the nonabelian one by
\begin{equation*}
(x,z)\longmapsto{x}.
\end{equation*}
We will only consider the nonabelian cover. Note that we have $p=x^3$ and $q=x^3+\pi^3$, so that
\begin{equation*}
\Delta=4p^3+27q^2=4x^9+27\cdot{(x^3+\pi^3)^2}.
\end{equation*}
The corresponding quadratic extension is then given by
\begin{equation*}
y^2=\Delta,
\end{equation*}
which gives a hyperelliptic genus 4 curve $D$.\\
Taking the model with
\begin{equation*}
xt=\pi,
\end{equation*}
we see that by normalizing we get a local model for $D$ given by
\begin{equation*}
(y/x^3)^2=4x^3+27(1+t^3)^2,
\end{equation*}
which has three components in the special fiber. Above $x=0$, we find two components $\Gamma_{-1}$ and $\Gamma_{1}$ given by the equations
\begin{equation*}
y'=\pm{\sqrt{27}(1+t^3)}.
\end{equation*}
Above $t=0$ we find an elliptic curve (labeled by $\Gamma'$) with corresponding equation
\begin{equation*}
y'^2=4x^3+27.
\end{equation*}
We have three edges between $\Gamma_{-1}$ and $\Gamma_{1}$ (given by $t^3+1=0$), one between $\Gamma_{-1}$ and $\Gamma'$ and another one between $\Gamma_{1}$ and $\Gamma'$. This gives the reduction graph of $D$. It can be found in Figure \ref{24eplaatje}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{{Graph24.png}}
\caption{\label{24eplaatje} {\it{The intersection graph of the intermediate genus 4 curve in Example \ref{Gen3NonAb1}.}}}
\end{figure}
We now examine the divisor $f=y-\sqrt{27}q$. Since $D$ has only one point at infinity, there is only 1 possible ramification point. We quite quickly see that the valuation of $f$ at infinity is divisible by $3$, so the covering $\overline{C}\longrightarrow{C}$ is unramified everywhere. It therefore comes from a 3-torsion point.\\
The support of $f$ is given by the points $P_{1}=(x,y-\sqrt{27}\pi^3)$ and $P_{2}=\infty$. We see that
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}_{\eta}(f)=9(P_{1})-9(P_{2}).
\end{equation*}
We therefore actually have a 9-torsion point. The divisor we are interested in is $D=3P_{1}-3P_{2}$ (which gives the extension). We find
\begin{eqnarray*}
\rho(P_{1})=\Gamma_{1},\\
\rho(P_{2})=\Gamma'.
\end{eqnarray*}
We first want to clarify one thing: when writing down the reduction graph, one needs to keep in mind the lengths of the corresponding edges. For every edge between $\Gamma_{-1}$ and $\Gamma_{1}$ for instance we have that the edge has length $3$, which can be seen by the relation
\begin{equation*}
(y'-\sqrt{27}(1+t^3))(y'+\sqrt{27}(1+t^3))=4\pi^3/(t^3)
\end{equation*}
(and the fact that $t$ is invertible at these intersection points). The other two edges have length 1. We can now find a solution for the Laplacian. One of them is given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
\phi(\Gamma')=0,\\
\phi(\Gamma_{-})=3,\\
\phi(\Gamma_{+})=6.
\end{eqnarray*}
The corresponding graph of the Laplacian can be found in Figure \ref{22eplaatje}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{{Graph22.png}}
\caption{\label{22eplaatje} {\it{The Laplacian function $\phi$ corresponding to $f$ in Example \ref{Gen3NonAb1}. There are three edges between $\Gamma_{-}$ and $\Gamma_{+}$, but the Laplacian on each is the same. }}
\end{figure}
Note that the increase of slope for every edge between $\Gamma_{-}$ and $\Gamma_{+}$ is taken to be $1$, so that the total increase from $\Gamma_{-}$ to $\Gamma_{+}$ is 3. \\%Because of this, we see that when we take our extension
Let us now consider the extension
\begin{equation*}
w^3=f.
\end{equation*}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{{Graph21.png}}
\caption{\label{21eplaatje} {\it{The Galois closure of graphs in Example \ref{Gen3NonAb1}.}}
\end{figure}
The corresponding curve $\overline{C}$ has genus 10. For $f^{\Gamma_{+}}$ and $f^{\Gamma_{-}}$, we see that there are 3 ramification points, because the slope between them on the three edges is not divisible by $3$. The slope of $\phi$ between $\Gamma_{+}$ and $\Gamma'$ for instance is $-6$, so $f^{\Gamma_{+}}$ does not ramify at that intersection point. We therefore have that there are two components $\Gamma_{+,0}$ and $\Gamma_{-,0}$ above $\Gamma_{+}$ and $\Gamma_{-}$ respectively. The corresponding morphism on the special fiber is ramified at exactly 3 points and so these components are genus 1 curves. On the other 2 edges, we have that the slope of $\phi$ is divisible by 3, so there are 3 edges lying above them. On $\Gamma'$, it just defines an unramified extension of an elliptic curve, so we have one component which we call $\Gamma'_{0}$ with genus 1 again.\\
We obtain the following reduction graph. We have three vertices. Each of these vertices intersects the other vertex in exactly three edges. Furthermore, these vertices all have weights $1$. The intersection graph can be found in Figure \ref{21eplaatje}.\\
Let us now consider the Galois action of $\tau$ on this graph. Note that for the intersection graph of $D$, we have that $\tau$ is trivial on all the edges. In the quotient, we have that these edges become smooth points. This happens because the morphism we created from $D$ to $\mathbb{P}^{1}$ is not disjointly branched.
We have that $\tau$ fixes $\Gamma'_{0}$ and switches the other two vertices $\Gamma_{+,0}$ and $\Gamma_{-,0}$. One can see this using the fundamental equality
\begin{equation*}
n=e_{\mathfrak{p}}f_{\mathfrak{p}}g_{\mathfrak{p}}
\end{equation*}
from Equation \ref{FundGalEq1} in Section \ref{SerLocFields}.
This then gives that the decomposition group of $\Gamma'_{0}$ is $S_{3}$ and the decomposition group of $\Gamma_{+,0}$ and $\Gamma_{-,0}$ are both the normal subgroup $\mathbb{Z}/3\mathbb{Z}$. The reduction graph in the quotient is then a graph on two vertices, intersecting each other in 3 edges. One of these vertices has weight $1$ and is obtained as the quotient of $\Gamma_{+,0}$ and $\Gamma_{-,0}$. The corresponding Galois diagram can be found in Figure \ref{21eplaatje}.
\end{exa}
\begin{exa}\label{LaatsteVoorbeeld1}
Consider the curve $C$ defined by
\begin{equation*}
z^3+p(x)z+q(x)=0
\end{equation*}
with
\begin{eqnarray*}
p(x)&=&x^3,\\
q(x)&=&x^4+\pi^{4}.
\end{eqnarray*}
This is again a genus 3 curve with a nonabelian morphism
\begin{equation*}
\phi:(x,z)\longmapsto{x}
\end{equation*}
of degree 3. The intermediate curve $D$ defined by
\begin{equation*}
y^2=4p^3+27q^2=4x^9+27(x^{4}+\pi^{4})
\end{equation*}
then has genus 4 as before. Taking the semistable model corresponding to $xt=\pi$, we obtain the equation
\begin{equation*}
(y')^2=4x+27(1+t^4)^{2}
\end{equation*}
with $y'=y/x^4$. This has the following reduction graph: we have two vertices above $x=0$, corresponding to
\begin{equation*}
(y')=\pm{\sqrt{27}(1+t^4)}.
\end{equation*}
These components $\Gamma_{+}$ and $\Gamma_{-}$ intersect each other 4 times, corresponding to the roots of $1+t^{4}$. Above $t=0$ we have one component $\Gamma_{0}$ of genus 0.\\
We now check the divisor of $f=y-\sqrt{27}q$ as before. We again find
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}_{\eta}(f)=9(P_{1})-9(\infty),
\end{equation*}
where $P_{1}=(x,y-\sqrt{27}\pi^{4})$. Note that $P_{1}$ reduces to $\Gamma_{+}$. We then again have the divisor on graphs
\begin{equation*}
\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))=9\Gamma_{+}-9\Gamma_{0}.
\end{equation*}
Note that the length of every edge in $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ is $1$ by the identity
\begin{equation*}
(y'-\sqrt{27}(1+t^{4}))(y'+\sqrt{27}(1+t^{4}))=4\pi/t
\end{equation*}
and the fact that $\phi_{\Sigma}$ is \'{e}tale above the edge corresponding to $x=t=0$. We then find the following Laplacian as a solution:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\phi(\Gamma_{0})&=&0,\\
\phi(\Gamma_{0})&=&4,\\
\phi(\Gamma_{0})&=&5.
\end{eqnarray*}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{{Graph28.png}}
\caption{\label{28eplaatje} {\it{The Laplacian in Example \ref{LaatsteVoorbeeld1}.}}
\end{figure}
See also Figure \ref{28eplaatje}.
Note that the slope between every pair of vertices is {\it{not}} divisible by 3. We therefore find that the reduction graph of the Galois closure has the same reduction graph as $\mathcal{D}$, but with different weights.\\
For $\Gamma_{-}$ and $\Gamma_{+}$, we find that they both have 5 branch points (corresponding to the intersection points), so that their genera are $3$. For $\Gamma_{0}$, we find that $g(\Gamma_{0})=0$. This determines the reduction graph.\\
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{{Graph29.png}}
\caption{\label{29eplaatje} {\it{The Galois closure of graphs in Example \ref{LaatsteVoorbeeld1}.}}
\end{figure}
If we now take the invariants under the automorphism of order $\tau$ corresponding to $C$, we then obtain the graph consisting of two vertices, with one vertex having genus $3$ and the other having genus $0$. We thus see that $C$ has potential good reduction. For the Galois diagram of graphs, see Figure \ref{29eplaatje}.
\end{exa}
\section{Higher genus}
Let us now quickly say something about curves of higher genus. We will adopt the notation from \cite{Hart1}. We say that a curve has a $g^{1}_{d}$ if there exists a linear system of degree $d$ and dimension $1$ on $C$. This then automatically gives a morphism
\begin{equation*}
\phi:C\longrightarrow\mathbb{P}^{1}
\end{equation*}
of degree $d$. We will state the result in \cite[Page 345, Remark 5.5.1]{Hart1} again.
\begin{pro}
For any $d\geq{\dfrac{1}{2}g+1}$, any curve of genus $g$ has a $g^{1}_{d}$. For $d<\dfrac{1}{2}g+1$, there exist curves of genus $g$ having no $g^{1}_{d}$.
\end{pro}
Let us now set $d=4$. We will explain why in a moment. At any rate, we then find that any curve of genus $4,5,6$ admits a $g^{1}_{4}$. Furthermore, for higher genus there exist curves having no $g^{1}_{4}$.\\
For any curve of genus $4,5$ or $6$, we thus have a morphism of degree $4$
\begin{equation*}
\phi:C\longrightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}.
\end{equation*}
The Galois group of this morphism is then a subgroup of $S_{4}$. Since $S_{4}$ is solvable, we can again use our techniques to find the reduction type of any curve of genus $4,5$ or $6$.\\
Problems arise for our method for Galois morphisms
\begin{equation*}
C\longrightarrow{\mathbb{P}^{1}}
\end{equation*}
that have $A_{5}$ as its Galois group. The techniques developed in this thesis are then no longer applicable, since $A_{5}$ is not solvable. If one can find a different morphism that has a solvable Galois group, then one can still find the reduction type of $C$.
\section{Unramified abelian coverings and Jacobians}\label{Unramified}
In this section, we will recall some of the algebraic notions of unramified coverings of a curve. We will take a Galois theory point of view, which can be found in \cite[Chapter 6]{Lenstra} or in \cite[Page 113]{Milne1}. We will give the correspondence between finite abelian unramified coverings of a curve $D$ and torsion subgroups in the Jacobian $J(D)$. This correspondence is quite explicit and we will use it in various examples in this chapter.
Let $D$ be a smooth, geometrically irreducible projective curve over $K$. Taking the base change to $\overline{K}$, we obtain the curve $D_{\overline{K}}$ with function field $\overline{K}(D)$. We will set $K=\overline{K}$ for this section. The finite, smooth coverings $C\rightarrow{D}$ are then classified by the Galois group of the algebraic closure $({K}(D))^{ac}\supset{{K}(D)}$.
That is, there is a bijection between subgroups of finite index in $\text{Gal}(({K}(D))^{ac}/{K}(D))$ and finite smooth coverings $C\rightarrow{D}$. We now consider the field extensions ${K}(D)\rightarrow{{K}(C)}$ where $C\rightarrow{D}$ is {\it{unramified}} and we take the composite of these fields: $({K}(D))^{un}$. This field is then easily seen to be Galois over ${K}(D)$
and we can thus define the following:
\begin{mydef}
The {\it{geometric fundamental group}} $\pi_{1}(D)$ of $D$ is the Galois group of the field extension $({K}(D))^{un}\supset{{K}(D)}$.
\end{mydef}
\begin{rem}
For a curve $D$ over $\mathbb{C}$, The group $\pi_{1}(D_{\mathbb{C}})$ is not the usual fundamental group defined in the analytic category, but rather the profinite completion of the analytic fundamental group, see \cite[Theorem 6.3.1]{serre2008topics}.
\end{rem}
We are now particularly interested in the abelian unramified coverings. That is, we consider the subfield $({K}(D))^{un,ab}$ of ${K}(D)^{un}$, which is the composite of all field extensions $K(C)\supset{{K}(D)}$ such that $C\rightarrow{D}$ is finite, Galois with abelian Galois group. This subfield is again Galois, since the composite of two abelian field extensions is abelian. The Galois group of this field extension is then the {\it{abelianization}} $\pi_{1,ab}(D)$ of $\pi_{1}(D)$.\footnote{Recall that the abelianization of a group $G$ is the quotient $G/[G,G]$, where $[G,G]$ is the group generated by all elements of the form $[g,h]:=g^{-1}h^{-1}gh$.}
We have the following theorem regarding the unramified abelian coverings of the curve $D$.
\begin{theorem}\label{UnramifiedAbelianCoverings}
Let $D$ be a smooth irreducible curve over an algebraically closed field $K$ as above. Then
\begin{equation}
\text{Hom}_{\text{cont}}(\pi_{1}(D),\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z})=\text{Hom}_{cont}(\pi_{1,ab}(D),\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z})\simeq{J(D)[n]}.
\end{equation}
Here the homomorphisms are continuous with respect to the profinite (Krull) topology on $\pi_{1}(D)$ and the discrete topology on $\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We give a sketch of the proof.
For every torsion point $D$ of order $n$ on the Jacobian, we obtain by definition the relation
\begin{equation}
nD=\text{div}(f)
\end{equation}
for some $f\in{K}(D)$. We then take the normalization $C$ of $D$ in ${K}(D)[z]/(z^n-f)$. The induced morphism $C\rightarrow{D}$ is then a finite unramified abelian covering (since the valuation of $f$ at every point is divisible by $n$, see Corollary \ref{AbelExt2}). Conversely, given an unramified abelian cover $C\rightarrow{D}$, we obtain from Kummer theory (see Proposition \ref{AbelExt1}) an isomorphism ${K}(C)=K(D)[z]/(z^n-f)$ for some $f$ in $K(D)$. The divisor of $f$ is then divisible by $n$ for every point in its support, giving an $n$-torsion divisor.
\end{proof}
\section{\'{E}tale abelian coverings of graphs}
In this section, we will define the corresponding notions of {\it{unramified coverings}} for metrized complexes of $k$-curves, as defined in Section \ref{Metrizedcomplex}. We note that an unramified covering might be ramified on the intersection graphs, see Example \ref{Exa3Tors1}.
Suppose we have a disjointly branched covering $\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ with Galois group $\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}$. Suppose that for every edge $e'$ of $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ dividing an edge $e$ in $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$, we have that $D_{e'}=(1)$.
In other words, we know for every edge on the intersection graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ that there are exactly $n$ edges lying above them. If in addition the morphisms on components
\begin{equation*}
\Gamma_{v}\longrightarrow{\Gamma_{w}}
\end{equation*}
are all unramified, we will say that the induced morphism of graphs
\begin{equation*}
\Sigma({\mathcal{C}})\longrightarrow{\Sigma({\mathcal{D}})}
\end{equation*}
is "\'{e}tale". \begin{mydef}
Suppose we have a disjointly branched, abelian Galois morphism $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ of degree $n$ such that for every edge $x$ in $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ there exist exactly $n$ edges dividing $x$. Suppose in addition that the morphisms
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_{v}\longrightarrow{\Gamma_{w}}
\end{equation}
on components are all unramified. Then this morphism $\phi$ with the corresponding morphism $\phi_{\Sigma}$
is then referred to as an {\bf{\'{e}tale morphism of graphs}}.
\end{mydef}
Let us now see why
this terminology of "\'{e}tale" abelian morphisms of graphs is appropriate.
\begin{lemma}
Let $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be disjointly branched of degree $n$. Then $\phi_{\Sigma}$ is an \'{e}tale morphism of graphs if and only if $\phi$ is \'{e}tale on the points corresponding to elements of the intersection graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ and the morphisms $\Gamma_{v}\longrightarrow{\Gamma_{w}}$ are \'{e}tale.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First note that $\phi$ is always \'{e}tale at primes corresponding to components. Furthermore, we see that $\phi$ is \'{e}tale at an intersection point if and only if there are $n$ pre-images. These two conditions quickly give the lemma.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
Let $\phi:\mathcal{C}\longrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ be a disjointly branched morphism of degree $n$. Suppose that $\phi_{\Sigma}$ is \'{e}tale.
Then $\phi_{\eta}$ is unramified
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $\phi_{\eta}$ is ramified. Then there exists a branch point $Q\in{D}$. Let $P\in{C}$ be any point lying above $Q$. By Proposition \ref{ramind2}, we see that the morphism of components corresponding to $Q$ and $P$ is ramified, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
Note that the converse is definitely not true, since we can have an unramified morphism $\phi:{C}\longrightarrow{{D}}$ with edges having $D_{e}=\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}$. This happens for instance if we take an elliptic curve $E$ with multiplicative reduction with a $n$-torsion point that reduces to the singular point. The corresponding extension is unramified and yields the same reduction type as $E$. See Example \ref{Exa3Tors1}
for instance.
\end{rem}
Let us now found out what unramified abelian extensions correspond to \'{e}tale morphisms of graphs.
\begin{pro}\label{UnrGraph1}
Let $P\in{J(D)[q]}$ be a $n$-torsion point giving rise to an unramfied abelian morphism of degree $n$:
\begin{equation*}
\phi: C\longrightarrow{D}.
\end{equation*}
Then the induced morphism
\begin{equation*}
\phi_{\Sigma}:\Sigma(\mathcal{C})\longrightarrow{\Sigma(\mathcal{D})}
\end{equation*}
is an \'{e}tale morphism of graphs if and only if $P\in\mathcal{J}^{0}(R)[n]$.
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
If $P\in\mathcal{J}^{0}(R)[n]$, then we see that the Laplacian corresponding to $nP$ is zero everywhere. For every edge in $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$, we then have $n$ primes lying above it by Proposition \ref{PropositionCoveringData}, so we have an unramified morphism of graphs.
Conversely, suppose that we have an unramified morphism of graphs. Then for every edge we have that the Laplacian has slope divisible by $n$. We can then quite easily find a new function $\phi'$ such that $n\Delta(\phi{'})=\Delta(\phi)$. But then $\rho(P)=\Delta(\phi{'})$ and so the class of $P$ is in the identity component of $\mathcal{J}(D)$, as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{exa}\label{RedGraphGen2Ab1}
Suppose we take a genus 2 curve $D$ with reduction graph consisting of two vertices and two edges. We label the 2 corresponding components by $\Gamma_{0}$ and $\Gamma_{1}$. One of them must have genus one, so let that component be $\Gamma_{0}$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{{Graph4_2.png}}
\caption{\label{555eplaatje} {\it{The covering in Example \ref{RedGraphGen2Ab1}.}}
\end{figure}
We now take a 3-torsion point in the Jacobian of $D$ that reduces entirely to $\Gamma_{0}$. That is, we take a 3-torsion point of the corresponding genus 1 curve. If we consider the extension defined by that 3-torsion point, we obtain the intersection graph consisting of 4 vertices, 3 lying above $\Gamma_{1}$ and $1$ above $\Gamma_{0}$ with 2 edges between each component $\Gamma_{1}'$ and $\Gamma_{0}'$ (so 6 in total). The resulting covering of intersection graphs is in Figure \ref{555eplaatje}. Note that the component $\Gamma_{0}'$ again has genus 1, since it is given as an unramified covering of a genus 1 curve. The Betti number of the graph is 3 and the total genus is $3+1=4$, as expected.\\
Note that the covering of graphs in this case is {\it{unramified}}: for every edge there are exactly three pre-images. The Galois action then permutes these edges accordingly.
\end{exa}
\section{Completely decomposable coverings}\label{CompletelyDecomposable}
We will now continue our study of {\it{\'{e}tale morphisms of graphs}}. As we saw in the last section in Proposition \ref{UnrGraph1}, they arise from $n$-torsion points in the identity component $\mathcal{J}^{0}$ of the Jacobian $J(D)$. For these morphisms we know the decomposition groups of the edges: $D_{e}=(1)$ for every edge $e$ in $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$. This does not fix the order of the decomposition groups of the vertices however.
In this section we will study the completely reducible case, where $D_{v}=(1)$ for every vertex.
\begin{mydef}
Suppose that we are given an unramified Galois cover of metrized complexes
$\phi_{\Sigma}:\Sigma_{1}\longrightarrow{\Sigma_{2}}$ with Galois group $\mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}$. Suppose that $D_{v}=(1)$ for every vertex. Then $\phi_{\Sigma}$ is referred to as a {\bf{completely decomposable morphism of metrized complexes}}.
\end{mydef}
\begin{exa}\label{Trampoline1}
Suppose we take an elliptic curve $E$ with multiplicative reduction and
reduction graph consisting of two vertices with two edges between them. We now take a 2-torsion point $P$ reducing to a {\it{nonsingular}} point, in terms of reductions defined in \cite[Chapter VII]{Silv1}.
The corresponding degree two morphism $E'\rightarrow{E}$ is completely reducible everywhere (we will in fact write down the equations explicitly soon, where it will be clear why this is true). We thus obtain four vertices with four edges between them. The graph has to be connected, so there is only option. Note that for any component $\Gamma$ of $\mathcal{E}$, the two primes lying above $\Gamma$ do not intersect.
Since $\Sigma(\mathcal{E}')$ has Betti number 1, we find that $E'$ has multiplicative reduction. The covering of graphs can be found in Figure \ref{66eplaatje}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{{Graph6_2.png}}
\caption{\label{66eplaatje} {\it{The covering in Example \ref{Trampoline1}.}}
\end{figure}
\end{exa}
\begin{pro}\label{CritEtalCover1}
Let $P\in{J(D)[n]}$ be an $n$-torsion point giving rise to an unramified abelian morphism of degree $n$:
\begin{equation*}
\phi: C\longrightarrow{D}.
\end{equation*}
Then $\phi_{\Sigma}:\Sigma(\mathcal{C})\longrightarrow\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ is a completely decomposable morphism of graphs if and only if
\begin{equation*}
P\in{\mathcal{J}^{0}_{T}[n]}.
\end{equation*}
\end{pro}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that
\begin{equation*}
\Sigma(\mathcal{C})\longrightarrow{\Sigma(\mathcal{D})}
\end{equation*}
is completely decomposable. Then for every vertex $v$ in $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$, we have that $g_{v}=n$.
Using Proposition \ref{DecompositionVertexProposition}, we then see that the reduced divisor $(f)|_{v}$ is trivial in every
\begin{equation*}
\text{Pic}^{0}(\Gamma_{i}),
\end{equation*} so that $P$ is in fact a toric divisor by Theorem \ref{ToricPic}.
Now suppose that $P$ is a toric divisor. We then see that the pulled back divisors are trivial for every component. Using Proposition \ref{DecompositionVertexProposition}
again, we see that the corresponding extensions have $g_{v}=n$, as desired.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Explicit computations for completely decomposable morphisms}\label{IdentCompTors1}
We saw in the previous section that one can distinguish between torsion points in
$\mathcal{J}$, $\mathcal{J}^{0}$ and $\mathcal{J}^{0}_{T}$ by considering their corresponding coverings of graphs. We would now like to distinguish between the different toric divisors and their corresponding extensions. To do this, we will take a strong hint from graph cohomology, as introduced in Section \ref{TorExtJac1} and apply it to our setting. This will use a result by Bosch and L\"{u}tkebohmert on the reduction of the divisors corresponding to these torsion points.
So suppose we have a {\bf{toric}} $n$-torsion point $[P]$ in $\mathcal{J}^{0}(K)={\text{Div}^{(0)}(D)/\text{Prin}^{(0)}(D)}$ with representative $P\in{\text{Div}^{(0)}(D)}$. If we restrict $P$ to a component $\Gamma$, then we can write
\begin{equation*}
P|_{\Gamma}=\text{div}(\overline{h_{\Gamma}})
\end{equation*}
for some $\overline{h_{\Gamma}}$ in the function field $k(\Gamma)$ of the component $(\Gamma)$, because $P$ is trivial. A local lift of $\overline{h_{\Gamma}}$ to $\mathcal{D}$ will be denoted by $h_{\Gamma}$.
Since $P$ is an $n$-torsion point, we have that
\begin{equation*}
n\cdot{P}=\text{div}_{\eta}(f)
\end{equation*}
for some $f\in\text{Prin}^{(0)}(D)$. If we restrict this equality, then locally we have that
\begin{equation*}
(\overline{f})_{\Gamma}=(\overline{h}^{n}_{\Gamma}),
\end{equation*}
meaning that $f$ is locally a $q$-th power. We {\it{assume}} here that we have scaled $h_{\Gamma}$ such tha
\begin{equation*}
\overline{f}(x)=(\overline{h}_{\Gamma}(x))^{n}.
\end{equation*}
There are exactly $n$ functions that satisfy $\overline{f}_{\Gamma}=\overline{h}^{n}_{\Gamma}$, so we will introduce notation for them. Let $\zeta:=\zeta_{n}$, a primitive $n$-th root of unity. We define
\begin{equation*}
h_{\Gamma,i}:=\zeta^{i}\cdot{h_{\Gamma}}.
\end{equation*}
for every component $\Gamma$ in $\mathcal{D}_{s}$. As we will see, these functions correspond to the components that lie above $\Gamma$.
Now let $x$ be an intersection point of two components $\Gamma$ and $\Gamma'$ in $\mathcal{D}_{s}$. We then have:
\begin{lemma}\label{BoschLemma}
\begin{equation}
\overline{f(x)}\in{k^{*}}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Page 274]{Bosch1984}.
\end{proof}
We now define for any $x$ an intersection point the following set:
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{S}_{x}=\{\alpha\in{k^{*}}:\alpha^{n}=\overline{f(x)}\}.
\end{equation*}
We will see that these elements correspond exactly to the $n$ intersection points lying above $x$.
Now let us review the situation we are in. Let us consider $f$ as an element of the function field of $K(\mathcal{D})$. For every $x\in\mathcal{D}$ we have a natural injection
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},x}\longrightarrow{K(\mathcal{D})}.
\end{equation*} We can then consider the following set:
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{D}_{f}=\{x\in{\mathcal{D}}:f_{x}\in\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},x}\},
\end{equation*}
where $\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},x}$ is identified with its image in ${K(\mathcal{D})}$.
\begin{lemma}
$\mathcal{D}_{f}$ is open.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Locally for every point $x\in\mathcal{D}_{f}$, we can write
\begin{equation*}
f|_{U}=g/h
\end{equation*}
for some open affine $U$. Here $h$ is not contained in the prime corresponding to $x$, by assumption on $f$. Let us consider the open subset $D(h)$ in $U$. Then for every $y\in{D(h)}$, we see that $f$ is contained in $\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},y}$, as desired.
\end{proof}
By Lemma \ref{BoschLemma}, we see that any intersection point in the special fiber of $\mathcal{D}$ lies in $\mathcal{D}_{f}$ ($f$ is in fact invertible in $\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},x}$ for an intersection point $x$). We then also see that any generic point $y$ lying under $x$ must also be an element of $\mathcal{D}_{f}$.\\
Since $\mathcal{D}_{f}$ is open, for every $x\in\mathcal{D}_{f}$ we can find an open affine $U=\text{Spec}(A)$ such that for every $\mathfrak{p}\in\text{Spec}(A)$ we have that $f\in{A}_{\mathfrak{p}}$. This then also means that $f\in{A}$.
The ring
\begin{equation*}
B=A[z]/(z^n-f)
\end{equation*}
is thus integral over $A$ and is thus contained in $A'$.
\begin{lemma}
The algebra $C=A[z][1/z]/(z^n-f)$ is standard \'{e}tale over $A$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We only have to check that the derivative of $z^n-f$ with respect to $z$, $nz^{n-1}$, is invertible in $C$.
Since $n$ is invertible by assumption on our rings and $z$ is invertible by the localization we applied, we see that $B$ is standard \'{e}tale.
\end{proof}
Let us recall that for a morphism of schemes $f:X\longrightarrow{Y}$ of finite type with $Y$ locally Noetherian, we have the following equivalent statements:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $f$ is \'{e}tale at $x\in{X}$.
\item $\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{X,x}$ is a free $\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{Y,y}$-module and $\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{X,x}/\mathfrak{m}_{y}\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{X,x}$ is a finite separable field extension of $k(y)$. Here $y=f(x)$
\end{enumerate}
We furthermore have that if the induced map $k(y)\longrightarrow{k(x)}$ is an isomorphism, then we have an isomorphism $\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{X,x}=\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{Y,y}$. All of this is contained in \cite[Proposition 17.6.3]{EGA4}.
Applying this to our situation, we have the following
\begin{lemma}\label{ClosedPointEtale1}
Let $\mathfrak{m}$ be a maximal ideal of $A$ in $D(f)$. Then the induced morphism
\begin{equation*}
\hat{A}_{\mathfrak{m}}\longrightarrow{\hat{B}_{\mathfrak{m}'}}
\end{equation*}
is an isomorphism. Here $\mathfrak{m}'$ is a maximal ideal of the algebra $B=A[z]/(z^n-f)$ lying above $\mathfrak{m}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We note that since $f\notin{\mathfrak{m}'}$ for any $\mathfrak{m}'$ lying above it, we have that $z\notin{\mathfrak{m}'}$ and that we thus have that the corresponding morphism of rings factors through the above standard \'{e}tale algebra $A[z][1/z]/(z^n-f)$. We thus see that $f$ is \'{e}tale at $\mathfrak{m}'$. Furthermore, the residue fields of all these points are assumed to be algebraically closed, so we obtain an isomorphism of completions by the above considerations.
\end{proof}
We will mainly use this lemma for the intersection points in the intersection graph. Let us now explicitly compute some prime ideals. Let $\mathfrak{p}\in\text{Spec}(A)$ correspond to a component in the special fiber and let $\mathfrak{m}\in\text{Spec}(A)$ be a closed point in that component (i.e. $\mathfrak{m}\supset{\mathfrak{p}}$).
\begin{lemma}\label{Easylemma2}
The primes above $\mathfrak{p}$ are given by
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{p}_{i}=\mathfrak{p}+<z-h_{\Gamma,i}>.
\end{equation*}
The maximal ideals above $\mathfrak{m}$ are given by
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{m}'=\mathfrak{m}+<z-\alpha>,
\end{equation*}
where $\alpha\in\mathcal{S}_{x}=\{\alpha\in{k^{*}}:\alpha^{n}=\overline{f(x)}\}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The primes above $\mathfrak{p}$ correspond to primes of the ring
\begin{equation*}
k(\mathfrak{p})[z]/(z^n-f),
\end{equation*}
where $k(\mathfrak{p})$ is the residue field of $\mathfrak{p}$.
Writing out this correspondence for
$\mathfrak{p}$ yields the desired form as stated in the lemma. One similarly proceeds for $\mathfrak{m}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{LemmaDoublePoint2}
Let $\mathfrak{m}$ be an intersection point in $\mathcal{D}$ such that $\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathcal{D},x}\simeq{R[[x,y]]/(xy-\pi^{m})}$.
The completion of ${{(A[z]/(z^{n}-f))_{\mathfrak{m}'}}}$ with respect to $\mathfrak{m}'$ is then also isomorphic to $R[[x,y]]/(xy-\pi^{m})$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This follows from Lemma \ref{ClosedPointEtale1}.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
${{(A[z]/(z^{n}-f))_{\mathfrak{m}'}}}$ is normal
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
First of all, $A_{\mathfrak{m}}$ is an {\it{excellent}} ring. Furthermore, any finitely generated algebra over an excellent ring is again excellent and any localization of an excellent algebra is also excellent. We thus see that ${{(A[z]/(z^{n}-f))_{\mathfrak{m}'}}}$ is excellent. We then use the following:
\begin{lemma}
[{\it{Normality of excellent rings}}] Let $A$ be an excellent Noetherian local ring. Let $\hat{A}$ be its formal completion. Then $A$ is normal if and only if $\hat{A}$ is normal.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Page 344, Proposition 2.41]{liu2}.
\end{proof}
We thus see that ${{(A[z]/(z^{n}-f))_{\mathfrak{m}'}}}$ is normal if and only if its completion is normal. Its completion is isomorphic to $R[[x,y]]/(xy-\pi^{m})$ for some $m$ by Lemma \ref{LemmaDoublePoint2}, which is a normal ring. This gives the Corollary.
\end{proof}
We have thus identified the local rings of intersection points lying above an edge with maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}$. We now link these maximal ideals to the components.
\begin{lemma}\label{UniqComponentIntersect2}
Let $\mathfrak{m}'$ be an intersection point lying above $\mathfrak{m}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\mathfrak{m}'$ uniquely corresponds to a solution $\alpha\in{k}^{*}$ of the equation $\alpha^{n}=\overline{f}(x)$.
\item There exists a unique component $\Gamma_{i}$ lying above $\Gamma$ such that $\mathfrak{m}'$ belongs to $\Gamma_{i}$.
\item For this component $\Gamma_{i}$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\overline{h_{\Gamma,i}}(x)=\alpha.
\end{equation*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Part 1 is just Lemma \ref{Easylemma2}.
We have that
\begin{equation*}
\overline{h_{\Gamma}}(x)^n=\overline{f}(x)=\alpha^{n},
\end{equation*}
so there exists a unique $i$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\overline{h_{\Gamma,i}}(x)=\alpha.
\end{equation*}
We then easily see that $\mathfrak{m}'$ belongs to $\Gamma_{i}$ and we automatically obtain part (3) of the Lemma.
\end{proof}
For every intersection point $\mathfrak{m}'$ lying above $\mathfrak{m}$, we can now find a unique $i$ and a unique $j$ such that $\mathfrak{m}'$ lies in both $\Gamma_{i}$ and $\Gamma'_{j}$. We will therefore denote the maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m}'$ lying above $\mathfrak{m}$ by
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{m}_{i,j}:=\mathfrak{m}'.
\end{equation*}
\begin{cor}
$\Gamma_{i}$ and $\Gamma'_{j}$ intersect each other in $\mathfrak{m}_{i,j}$ with $\Gamma_{i}\cdot{\Gamma_{j}}=1$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
This follows from Lemmas \ref{LemmaDoublePoint2} and \ref{UniqComponentIntersect2}.
\end{proof}
Let us now fix a single $i$ and $j$ with components $\Gamma_{i}$ and $\Gamma'_{j}$. We would now like to give a criterion for their intersection points.
\begin{lemma}\label{Easylemma3}
$\Gamma_{i}$ and $\Gamma'_{j}$ intersect each other if and only if there exists an intersection point $x$ of $\Gamma$ and $\Gamma'$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\overline{h_{\Gamma,i}}(x)=\overline{h_{\Gamma',j}}(x).
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The only intersections between $\Gamma_{i}$ and $\Gamma_{j}$ are those that are in the pre-image of an edge of $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$. We thus see that all intersections must arise from maximal ideals of the algebras
\begin{equation*}
A_{\mathfrak{m}}[x]/(z^n-f),
\end{equation*}
where $\mathfrak{m}$ corresponds to an intersection point $x$ of $\mathcal{D}_{s}$. By Lemma \ref{UniqComponentIntersect2}, we now see that these maximal ideals are exactly given by equations of the form
\begin{equation*}
\overline{h_{\Gamma,i}}(x)=\alpha=\overline{h_{\Gamma',j}}(x).
\end{equation*}
This then yields the Lemma.
\end{proof}
We thus see that we have a complete description of the intersection points lying above the intersection points of $\Gamma$ and $\Gamma'$. In a concrete example, one has to do the following:
\begin{algo}
\begin{center}
{\bf{[Algorithm for completely decomposable
morphisms of graphs]}}
\end{center}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Determine local functions $h_{\Gamma}$ and $h_{\Gamma'}$ such that
\begin{eqnarray*}
(\overline{h_{\Gamma}})^{n}&=&\overline{f},\\
(\overline{h_{\Gamma'}})^{n}&=&\overline{f}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\item Determine the values
\begin{equation*}
\overline{h_{\Gamma}}(x)
\end{equation*}
for all intersection points $x$ of $\Gamma$ and $\Gamma'$. One then pairs these values as in Lemma \ref{Easylemma3}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{algo}
\begin{exa}\label{EllCurveTramp1}
Suppose we take the elliptic curve $E$ defined by the equation
\begin{equation*}
y^2=x(x-\pi)(x+1).
\end{equation*}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{{Graph6_2.png}}
\caption{\label{6eplaatje2} {\it{The trampoline covering in Example \ref{EllCurveTramp1}.}}
\end{figure}
This has a 2-torsion point $P=(-1,0)$. Indeed, one can easily check that
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}_{\eta}(x+1)=2(P)-2(\infty).
\end{equation*}
The elliptic curve has the semistable model obtained by
\begin{equation*}
xt=\pi
\end{equation*}
and normalizing. The resulting equation is
\begin{equation*}
(\dfrac{y}{x})^2=(1-t)(x+1).
\end{equation*}
which is easily seen to have two vertices and two edges. We take $\Gamma=Z(x)$ and $\Gamma'=Z(t)$. We now take the normalization of this local model in the extension defined by
\begin{equation*}
z^2=x+1.
\end{equation*}
One easily finds that the divisor $x+1$ is locally a square in $E$. Indeed, for $t=0$ we find that
\begin{equation*}
\overline{y}^2=\overline{x}+1
\end{equation*}
and for $x=0$ we find that $\overline{x}+1=1$. In our adopted notation we now have
\begin{eqnarray*}
h_{\Gamma,0}&=&1,\\
h_{\Gamma,1}&=&-1,\\
h_{\Gamma',0}&=&\overline{y},\\
h_{\Gamma',1}&=&-\overline{y}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Let us consider the intersection point $\tilde{x}$ defined by $x=0=t$ and $\overline{y}=1$. We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
h_{\Gamma,0}(\tilde{x})&=&1,\\
h_{\Gamma,1}(\tilde{x})&=&-1,\\
h_{\Gamma',0}(\tilde{x})&=&1,\\
h_{\Gamma',1}(\tilde{x})&=&-1\\
\end{eqnarray*}
We thus see that we have two intersection points lying above $\tilde{x}$: for the value $1$ $\Gamma_{0}$ and $\Gamma'_{0}$ intersect, for the value $-1$ the components $\Gamma_{1}$ and $\Gamma'_{1}$ intersect. A similar computation gives the intersections lying above the other intersection point. We see that we obtain a {\it{trampoline}}-figure with 4 vertices, as obtained earlier. The covering can also be found in Figure \ref{6eplaatje2}. Since the obtained curve is again an elliptic curve, the reduction can also be obtained directly by calculating the reduction type.
\end{exa}
\begin{exa}\label{TripleTrampoline1}
Suppose we take the same elliptic curve $E$ with multiplicative reduction defined by
\begin{equation*}
y^2=x(x-\pi)(x+1)
\end{equation*}
and suppose that we take a three torsion point $P$ that does not reduce to $(0,0)$ (the singular point).
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{{Graph7.png}}
\caption{\label{771eplaatje} {\it{The covering in Example \ref{TripleTrampoline1}.}}
\end{figure}
We first find a function $f$ such that
\begin{equation*}
(f)=3(P)-3(\infty).
\end{equation*}
If we label the components of $E$ as $\Gamma$ and $\Gamma'$ as before, we see that
$f|_{\Gamma}$ is a constant and that $f|_{\Gamma'}$ is the cube of a nonconstant function $\overline{h_{\Gamma'}}$, which has a zero at $\tilde{P}$ and a pole at $\infty$.
We have the numbers
\begin{equation*}
\alpha_{h_{\Gamma',j}}(x)=\overline{h}_{\Gamma',j}(x)
\end{equation*}
for any intersection point. Note that for any $j$ and $x$ and $y$ distinct intersection points, we have that $\alpha_{h_{\Gamma',j}}(x)\neq{\alpha_{h_{\Gamma',j}}(y)}$ by the fact that $P$ is a nontrivial torsion point in the identity component.\\
We see that if we take the extension
\begin{equation*}
z^3=f,
\end{equation*}
we obtain a reduction graph with 3 vertices above $\Gamma$ and 3 above $\Gamma'$. By earlier considerations, we see that if we take any component $\Gamma_{0}$ lying above $\Gamma$, it intersects {\it{two distinct}} other components lying above $\Gamma'$. The Galois group $\mathbb{Z}/3\mathbb{Z}$ then cycles these intersections naturally to give 6 edges. By the calculation
\begin{equation*}
e(E')-v(E')+1=6-6+1=1,
\end{equation*}
we find that this graph has Betti number one, as expected. The covering of graphs can be found in Figure \ref{771eplaatje}. We will an explicit covering in Example \ref{3Tors}.
\end{exa}
\begin{exa}\label{MixedTrampoline1}
Let us take the genus 2 curve $C$ defined by
\begin{equation*}
y^2=x(x-\pi)(x+1)(x+1-\pi)(x+2)(x+2-\pi),
\end{equation*}
which has the usual reduction graph consisting of two vertices with three edges between them. \\
We will however not take this model. As before, let
\begin{equation*}
xt=\pi.
\end{equation*}
Then the normalization of this model in $C$ is given by
\begin{equation*}
(y/x)^2=(1-t)(x+1)(x+1-\pi)(x+2)(x+2-\pi).
\end{equation*}
For $x=0$ (with corresponding component $\Gamma$), we obtain a single component, which we will call $\Gamma_{0}$. For $t=0$ (corresponding to $\Gamma'$), we obtain two components $\Gamma'_{0}$ and $\Gamma'_{1}$ intersecting each other in two points. We also have that $\Gamma_{0}$ intersects both $\Gamma'_{0}$ and $\Gamma'_{1}$ exactly once. We see that this yields a {\it{subdivision}} of the original intersection graph given by just taking the special fiber. This can also be seen in Figure \ref{8eplaatje}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{{Graph8.png}}
\caption{\label{8eplaatje} {\it{The subdivision of the original graph in Example \ref{MixedTrampoline1}.}}
\end{figure}
We now take the following divisor: $D=(\pi,0)-(0,0)$. This divisor cannot be principal because otherwise the curve would have genus 0. We have that
\begin{equation*}
2D=\text{div}_{\eta}(f),
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}
f=\dfrac{x-\pi}{x}=1-t.
\end{equation*}
It thus gives an element of $J(C)$ that is 2-torsion.\\
For $t=0$, we have that $f$ is constant, whereas for $x=0$, we have that $f$ is the square of a nonconstant function. Namely, we have that
\begin{equation*}
f|_{\Gamma_{0}}=(\overline{y/x})^2.
\end{equation*}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{{Graph9.png}}
\caption{\label{9eplaatje} {\it{The covering in Example \ref{MixedTrampoline1}.}}
\end{figure}
We are thus in a similar situation as in the previous 2-torsion example. If we consider the extension
\begin{equation*}
z^2=f,
\end{equation*}
we see that we obtain 2 vertices lying above $\Gamma_{0}$: $\Gamma_{0,0}$ and $\Gamma_{0,1}$. Similarly, we have 2 vertices lying above $\Gamma'_{0}$ ($\Gamma'_{0,0}$ and $\Gamma'_{0,1}$) and $\Gamma'_{1}$ ($\Gamma'_{1,0}$ and $\Gamma'_{1,1}$).\\
The intersection graph can now be found just as in the previous 2-torsion example. The only possible option up to relabeling components is: $\Gamma_{0,0}$ intersects $\Gamma'_{0,0}$ and $\Gamma'_{1,1}$, $\Gamma_{0,1}$ intersects $\Gamma'_{0,1}$ and $\Gamma'_{1,0}$. Furthermore, $\Gamma'_{0,0}$ intersects $\Gamma'_{0,1}$ twice and $\Gamma'_{1,0}$ intersects $\Gamma'_{1,1}$ twice. This covering of graphs can be found in Figure \ref{9eplaatje}. This gives a graph with Betti number
\begin{equation*}
e(\mathcal{C})-v(\mathcal{C})+1=6-4+1=3,
\end{equation*}
as was to be expected from an unramified degree 2 covering of a genus 2 curve.
\end{exa}
\begin{exa}\label{3Tors}
{\bf{[3-torsion on an elliptic curve]}}
Let us take $p=\alpha\cdot{}x$ and $q=\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{27}}(ax+b)$, where
\begin{eqnarray*}
a&=&\dfrac{\pi-3}{2},\\
b&=&\dfrac{\pi-1}{2},\\
\alpha^3&=&1/4.
\end{eqnarray*}
Consider the curve $C$ defined by
\begin{equation*}
z^3+pz+q=0,
\end{equation*}
with discriminant $\Delta=4p^3+27q^2=x^3+(ax+b)^2.$
We now take the Galois closure of the morphism $K(x)\rightarrow{K(C)}$. By Corollary \ref{GalClos1}, it is given by the chain
\begin{equation}
K\subset{K(y)}\subset{K(w)},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
w^3=y-\sqrt{27}q
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
y^2=\Delta
\end{equation}
We will study these $S_{3}$-coverings more closely in Chapter \ref{Solvable}.
The intermediate curve given by
\begin{equation*}
D:y^2=\Delta
\end{equation*}
has genus 1, with a $3$-torsion point $P=(0,b)$ in its Jacobian.\footnote{The way we created this example is as follows. We took the family with $p(x)=x$ and $q(x)=ax+b$ linear and we imposed two conditions: that $x=-1$ be a zero of $\Delta$ and that $\Delta'(-1)=0$ (the derivative with respect to $x$). This then implies that the singular point is different from the $3$-torsion point. This can also be used to create examples of higher genus.}
That is, we have
\begin{equation*}
\text{div}(y-(ax+b))=3P-3(\infty).
\end{equation*}
We then easily see that $D$ has split multiplicative reduction and that $P$ doesn't reduce to the singular point. In other words, $P$ defines a $3$-torsion point in the \emph{toric} part of the Jacobian of $D$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.27]{{Graph7-copy.png}}
\caption{\label{7eplaatje} The intersection graph of the Galois closure in Example \ref{3Tors}.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.18]{{Graph8-copy.png}}
\caption{\label{8eplaatje} The intersection graph of the quotient of the Galois closure under a subgroup of order two in Example \ref{3Tors}.}
\end{figure}
At any rate, after a transformation $x\longmapsto{x+1}$ we obtain the equation
\begin{equation*}
y^2=(x-1)^3+(a(x-1)+b)^2=x^3+x^2(a^2-3)+\pi{x}.
\end{equation*}
Let $y'=\dfrac{y}{x}$.
Taking the model defined by
\begin{equation*}
xt=\pi,
\end{equation*}
we obtain the equation
\begin{equation}\label{EquationExample5}
y'^2=x+a^2-3+t.
\end{equation}
We thus see that we have an intersection graph with two vertices and two edges, giving the multiplicative reduction.
For $t=0$, we know that there exists a function $g$ such that $\overline{g^3}=\overline{y-\sqrt{27}q}$. We will find this function now.\\
Plugging in $t=0$ in Equation \ref{EquationExample5}, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
y'^2=x-3/4.
\end{equation*}
We thus see that $y'$ parametrizes the corresponding projective line. We write (without the reduction bar for $t=0$):
\begin{equation*}
y-\sqrt{27}q=xy'+3x/2-1=(y'^2+3/4)y'+3/2(y'^2+3/4)-1=(y'+1/2)^3.
\end{equation*}
Thus $g=y'+1/2$ solves the corresponding problem. We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
g(x_{0})&=&-\zeta,\\
g(x_{1})&=&-\zeta^2,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\zeta$ is a primitive third root of unity and $x_{0}$ and $x_{1}$ are the intersection points. The covering graph is now given by Figure \ref{7eplaatje} and the quotient graph under a subgroup of order two by Figure \ref{8eplaatje}. Note that all components in these figures have genus zero.
\end{exa}
\begin{comment}
\begin{exa}\label{Genus2Example}
Although the following example doesn't give a $3:1$ covering, we included it in the text because the covering phenomena are the same.
So consider the curve defined by
\begin{equation*}
y^2=x(x-\pi)(x+1)(x+1-\pi)(x+2)(x+2-\pi).
\end{equation*}
This is semistable with intersection graph consisting of two vertices and three edges. Here the edges have length $2$.
In this example, we will consider the divisor of the function
\begin{equation*}
f=\dfrac{(x-\pi)(x+1-\pi)}{x(x+1)}
\end{equation*}
and the corresponding covering defined by $z^2=f$. The support reduces to intersection points (note that the model is not regular, with the intersection points having length $2$), so we need another semistable model. Consider the local blow-ups given by $\pi{t'}=x$ and $\pi{r'}=x+1$. For the first, we obtain the local model
\begin{equation*}
(\dfrac{y}{\pi})^2=t'(t'-1)(t'\pi+1)(t'\pi+1-\pi)(t'\pi+2)(t'\pi+2-\pi).
\end{equation*}
Reducing mod $\pi$, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
y'^2={t'(t'-1)},
\end{equation*}
where $y'=\dfrac{y}{\pi}$. Taking the parametrization defined by $t'z=y'$, we obtain the expressions
\begin{eqnarray*}
t'=\dfrac{-1}{z^2+1}\\
y'=\dfrac{z}{z^2+1}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Note that the intersection points are actually given by $t'=\infty$. Thus if we write $t=\dfrac{1}{t'}$, we obtain the two intersection points
\begin{equation*}
z=\pm{1}.
\end{equation*}
We have that
\begin{equation*}
\overline{f}=\dfrac{t'-1}{t'}=z^2.
\end{equation*}
Thus we take $h=z$ and see that this function takes the values $1$ and $-1$ at the intersection points.\\
Now for the blow-up given by $\pi{r'}=x+1$. We obtain the local model
\begin{equation*}
(\dfrac{y}{\pi})^2=(\pi{r'}-1)(\pi{r'}-1-\pi)r'(r'-1)(\pi{r'}+1)(\pi{r'}+1-\pi),
\end{equation*}
which reduces to
\begin{equation*}
(\dfrac{y}{\pi})^2=r'(r'-1).
\end{equation*}
As before, we then obtain $\overline{f}=z'^2$, where $z'=\dfrac{y'}{r'}$ and $y'=\dfrac{y}{\pi}$. This again takes the values $1$ and $-1$ at the intersection points given by $z'=\pm{1}$. \\
We can now glue these parts together to obtain the graph as in Figure \ref{9Graph}.
Note that there is nontrivial twisting above the two edges defined by $z=-1$ and $z'=-1$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{{Graph9copy.png}}
\caption{\label{9Graph} The covering of intersection graphs in Example \ref{Genus2Example}.
\end{figure}
\end{exa}
\end{comment}
\section{Twisting data for abelian coverings}\label{TwistingDataFinal}
In the last three sections, we saw that knowing the covering data for a disjointly branched morphism with morphism $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})\rightarrow\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ is not enough, but we can recover $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$ for unramified abelian coverings by adding the additional data of a $2$-cocycle on $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$. In this section, we will continue this train of thought and define a $2$-cocycle for general abelian coverings $C\rightarrow{D}$. This will be a $2$-cocycle on the "unramified part" of $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$. For simplicity, we will assume throughout this section that the covering is of prime degree $q$ with Galois group $\mathbb{Z}/q\mathbb{Z}$. The covering is then given by $z^{q}=f$ for some $f\in{K(D)}$.
\subsection{Reconstructing $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})$}\label{ReconstructingTwisting}
Let $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$
be disjointly branched morphisms associated to the morphism $C\rightarrow{D}$.
Consider a vertex $v$ in $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ with corresponding component $\Gamma\subset{\mathcal{D}_{s}}$. Let $v'$ be any vertex in $\overline{\mathcal{C}}$ lying above $v$ and let $\Gamma'$ be its corresponding component. If $D_{v'/v}=\mathbb{Z}/q\mathbb{Z}$, then there are no options for the edges lying above $v$: they are connected to $v'$.
We now remove these "ramified parts" of $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ and then consider the local \'{e}tale equations.
\begin{mydef}\label{UnramifiedPartGraph}
Let $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})\rightarrow{\Sigma(\mathcal{D})}$ be the degree $q$ abelian morphism of intersection graphs coming from a disjointly branched morphism $\phi_{\mathcal{C}}$. Let $U(\Sigma(\mathcal{D}))\subset{\Sigma(\mathcal{D})}$ be the (possibly disconnected and incomplete) subgraph of $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$, consisting of all edges and vertices that have trivial decomposition groups. We call this graph the \emph{unramified} part of $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$.
\end{mydef}
Let $v$ be a vertex in $U(\Sigma(\mathcal{D}))$ with corresponding component $\Gamma=\Gamma_{1}$.
The abelian covering is given on the level of function fields as
\begin{equation}
K(D)\rightarrow{K(D)[z]/(z^q-f)}.
\end{equation}
We now consider the $\Gamma$-modified form of $f$. That is, we set $k=v_{\Gamma}(f)$ and consider
\begin{equation}
f^{\Gamma}=\dfrac{f}{\pi^{k}},
\end{equation}
so that $v_{\Gamma}(f^{\Gamma})=0$. This means that we can now safely consider the image of $f^{\Gamma}$ in the function field $k(\Gamma)$. We then have
\begin{lemma}\label{FactorizationVertexSplit}
\begin{equation}
\overline{f^{\Gamma}}=h_{v}^{q}
\end{equation}
for some $h_{v}\in{k(\Gamma)}$. In particular, the components lying above $\Gamma$ are given by the prime ideals
\begin{equation}
\mathfrak{q}_{i}=\mathfrak{p}+(w-\zeta^{i}h_{v}),
\end{equation}
where $\zeta$ is a primitive $q$-th root of unity and $i\in\{0,1,2...,q-1\}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since there are $q$ vertices lying above $v$, we know that
\begin{equation}
\text{div}(\overline{f^{\Gamma}})=qD
\end{equation}
for some divisor $D$. Indeed, otherwise the extension $z^q=\overline{f^{\Gamma}}$ would be ramified at some point and thus there would only be one component lying above it. Suppose now that $D$ is not a principal divisor. Then $D$ is a $q$-torsion point in $\text{Pic}^{0}(\Gamma)$. The corresponding extension would then give a {\it{connected}} unramified covering of $\Gamma$, which contradicts the fact that there are $q$ vertices lying above $v$. This finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
We now \emph{desingularize} $\mathcal{D}$ to obtain a morphism $\mathcal{D}_{0}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ that is regular in the pre-image of every $e\in{U(\Sigma(\mathcal{D}))}$. We then have
\begin{lemma}
The normalization $N(\mathcal{D}_{0},K(\mathcal{C}))$ of $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ in $K(\mathcal{C})$ is semistable.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We will show that there exists no further vertical ramification above the new components created in $\mathcal{D}_{0}$. This then implies that $N(\mathcal{D}_{0},K(\mathcal{C}))$ is semistable by Theorem \ref{MaintheoremSemSta}.
Let $\Gamma$ be any component in $\mathcal{D}$ and consider its image in $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ (which we will still denote by $\Gamma$). For every edge $e\in{U(\Sigma(\mathcal{D}))}$ with length $l(e)>1$, there are new components in $\mathcal{D}_{0}$. The valuation of $f^{\Gamma}$ at these new components is divisible by $q$ by Theorem \ref{ValCor1}. In other words, the normalization is \'etale above these components. We thus see that there is no further vertical ramification and the Lemma follows.
\end{proof}
We will now continue with this model $\mathcal{D}_{0}$ and its normalization $\mathcal{C}_{0}$ in $K(C)$. We will write $\mathcal{D}=\mathcal{D}_{0}$ from now on.
To construct the twisting data, we first gather some standard facts about ordinary double points of length one that are probably familiar to the reader. Let $P\in\mathcal{D}$ be an intersection point and let $A:=\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},P}$. We write $\mathfrak{p}_{1}$ and $\mathfrak{p}_{2}$ for the generic points of the components passing through $P$. Since $P$ is an ordinary double point with length one, we find that
\begin{equation}
\hat{A}=\hat{\mathcal{O}}_{\mathcal{D},P}\simeq{R[[x,y]]/(xy-\pi)}.
\end{equation}
We have the following
\begin{lemma}\label{LabelOrdDouble}
Let $A$ be as above. Then
\begin{enumerate}
\item $A$ is a unique factorization domain.
\item There exist $x_{1}$ and $y_{1}$ in $A$ such that $v_{\mathfrak{p}_{1}}(x_{1})=0$, $v_{\mathfrak{p}_{2}}(x_{1})=1$, $v_{\mathfrak{p}_{1}}(y_{1})=1$ and $v_{\mathfrak{p}_{2}}(y_{1})=0$ and $x_{1}y_{1}=\pi$.
\item Every element $f\in{K(\mathcal{D})}$ can be written uniquely as
\begin{equation}
f=x^{i}_{1}\cdot{y^{j}_{1}}\cdot{u},
\end{equation}
where $(i,j)\in\mathbb{Z}^{2}$ and $u\in{A}^{*}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We have that $\hat{A}$ is a unique factorization domain, so by \cite[Lemma 1.2]{samdomains} we find that $A$ is a unique factorization domain\footnote{One could also reason as follows. The ring $\hat{A}$ is regular, so $A$ is regular. A famous result by Auslander and Buchbaum then says that any regular local ring is a unique factorization domain. The lemma cited above is far easier to prove however, only needing Nakayama's Lemma and the Mittag-Leffler condition.}.
By the approximation theorem for valuations (\cite[Chapter 9, Lemma 1.9]{liu2}), we can find an element $x_{1}\in{K(\mathcal{D})}$ such that $v_{\mathfrak{p}_{1}}(x_{1})=0$ and $v_{\mathfrak{p}_{2}}(x_{1})=1$. Since a normal domain is the intersection of its localizations, we find that $x_{1}\in{A}$. The special fiber of $\mathcal{D}$ is reduced, so we find that $v_{\mathfrak{p}_{i}}(\pi)=1$ for both $i$. Now consider the element $y_{1}:=\dfrac{\pi}{x_{1}}$. We find that $v_{\mathfrak{p}_{1}}(y_{1})=1$ and $v_{\mathfrak{p}_{2}}(y_{1})=0$ and thus $y_{1}\in{A}$. The unique factorization as stated in the Lemma now directly follows.
\end{proof}
We now return to the normalized form $f^{\Gamma}$, where we we take $\Gamma=\overline{\{\mathfrak{p}_{1}\}}$. As before, we focus on an intersection point $P$ that corresponds to an edge $e\in{}U(\Sigma(\mathcal{D}))$. We have that $v_{\mathfrak{p}_{1}}(f^{\Gamma})=0$, so that we can write
$f^{\Gamma}=x_{1}^{i}{f'}$ for some $f'$. In fact, by the Poincar\'{e}-Lelong formula, Theorem \ref{ValCor1},
we must have $i=qn$. We now consider the element $f'$. We then have $f'\in{A}$. In fact, we see that $v_{\mathfrak{p}_{i}}(f')=0$ for both $i$, so by Lemma \ref{LabelOrdDouble}, we find that $f'\in{A^{*}}$.
We now consider the equation $z^{q}=f$, which gives the extension $K(D)\rightarrow{K(C)}$ on the generic fiber. Since $\mathcal{C}\rightarrow{\mathcal{D}}$ is disjointly branched, we have that the extension is unramified above $\Gamma$. In other words, $v_{\mathfrak{p}_{1}}(f)$ is divisible by $q$. We can then normalize this equation to obtain
\begin{equation}
z'^q=f^{\Gamma}.
\end{equation}
We now consider the element $z''=\dfrac{z'}{x^{n}_{1}}$ in the function field of $K(\mathcal{C})$.
\begin{cor}
The algebra $A[z'']$ is finite \'{e}tale over $A=\mathcal{O}_{\mathcal{D},P}$
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
We have $z''^q=f'$,
so it is finite. It is standard \'{e}tale by $f'\in{A^{*}}$, and thus also \'{e}tale.
\end{proof}
By Lemma \ref{FactorizationVertexSplit}, we can now factorize $f^{\Gamma}$ and even $f'$ as a $q$-th power in $k(\Gamma_{1})$ and $k(\Gamma_{2})$. To avoid confusion, we will write $\text{red}(f',\mathfrak{p}_{i})$ for the image of $f'$ in $\text{Frac}(A/\mathfrak{p}_{i})=k(\mathfrak{p}_{i})$. We then have
\begin{align*}
\text{red}(f',\mathfrak{p}_{1})&=\overline{g_{1}}^q,\\
\text{red}(f',\mathfrak{p}_{2})&=\overline{g_{2}}^q.
\end{align*}
Note that we can evaluate both $g_{1}$ and $g_{2}$ at the point $P$.
The components lying above $\Gamma_{1}$ and $\Gamma_{2}$ are now given by the prime ideals
\begin{align*}
\mathfrak{q}_{1,i}&=\mathfrak{p}_{1}+(z''-\zeta^{i}g_{1}),\\
\mathfrak{q}_{2,i}&=\mathfrak{p}_{2}+(z''-\zeta^{i}g_{2}).
\end{align*}
We denote the corresponding components by $\Gamma_{1,i}$ and $\Gamma_{2,i}$ for $i\in\{0,1,2,...,q-1\}$.
Now consider the component $\Gamma_{1,0}$ labeled by $z''=\overline{g_{1}}$. Evaluating $f'$ at $P$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
g_{1}(P)^q=g_{2}(P)^q.
\end{equation}
In other words, there exists a $j\in\{0,1,2,...,q-1\}$ such that $g_{1}(P)=\zeta^{j}g_{2}(P)$. This implies that $\Gamma_{1,0}$ is connected to $\Gamma_{2,i}$ and by the cyclic $\mathbb{Z}/q\mathbb{Z}$-action, this also determines the rest of the edges. We now give a summary of the procedure:
\begin{algo}\label{Linkingcomponents}
\begin{center}
{\bf{[Algorithm for linking components]}}
\end{center}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Find $g_{1}(P)$ and $g_{2}(P)$ using an explicit representation of the function field of $\Gamma_{1}$.
\item There exists an $j$ such that
\begin{equation}
g_{1}(P)=\zeta^{j}\cdot{}g_{2}(P).
\end{equation}
\item Connect the vertex labeled by $z''=g_{{1}}$ to the vertex labeled by $z''=\zeta^{j}g_{2}$.
\item The other vertices and connecting edges lying above $\Gamma_{1}$ are now completely determined by the cyclic $\mathbb{Z}/q\mathbb{Z}$-action.
\end{enumerate}
\end{algo}
By considering these functions $g_{1,P}$ for various intersection points $P$, we now obtain a $2$-cocycle on the intersection graph as follows: we define
\begin{equation}
\alpha(e_{1},e_{2})=\dfrac{g_{1,P_{1}}(P_{1})}{g_{1,P_{2}}(P_{2})},
\end{equation}
where $P_{i}$ is the intersection point corresponding to the edge $e_{i}$. This can be seen as a generalization of the usual $2$-cocycle one obtains when studying the Picard group of a reduced (possibly reducible) curve with ordinary singularities over a field $k$, see Section \ref{TorExtJac1}.
\section{An algorithm for abelian coverings}\label{Algorithmabeliancoverings}
In this section, we use the twisting data obtained in the previous sections to obtain an algorithm that reconstructs the Berkovich skeleton of a curve $C$ that admits a cyclic abelian covering $C\rightarrow{D}$, where the Berkovich skeleton of $D$ is known.
\begin{algo}\label{AlgorithmAbelian}
\begin{center}
{\bf{[Reconstructing Berkovich skeleta using abelian coverings]}}
\end{center}
\begin{flushleft}
Input: A cyclic abelian covering $C\rightarrow{D}$, a semistable model $\mathcal{D}$ with intersection graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$.
\end{flushleft}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Determine the covering data of $\Sigma(\mathcal{C})\rightarrow{\Sigma(\mathcal{D})}$ using Propositions \ref{PropositionCoveringData}, \ref{DecompositionVertexProposition} and Theorem \ref{DecompVert}.
\item Determine the unramified part $U(\Sigma(\mathcal{D}))$ of $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$, as in Definition \ref{UnramifiedPartGraph}.
\item For every $v\in{U(\Sigma(\mathcal{D}))}$ and every adjacent edge $e$, determine $g_{1}(e)$ and $g_{2}(e)$, as in Section \ref{ReconstructingTwisting}.
\item Use the procedure in Algorithm \ref{Linkingcomponents} to link together the components.
\end{enumerate}
Output: The Berkovich skeleton of $C$.
\end{algo}
\begin{proof}
({\it{Correctness of the algorithm}})
The covering data and the twisting data are correct by Chapter \ref{Coveringdata} and Section \ref{ReconstructingTwisting}. The algorithm terminates because there are only finitely many vertices in $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$ and finitely many options for linking together the covering vertices and edges.
\end{proof}
\subsection{An algorithm for solvable Galois coverings
In this section we iterate the algorithm obtained in Section \ref{Algorithmabeliancoverings} for solvable Galois coverings.
We first describe several generalities regarding solvable groups and then give an algorithm that gives the Berkovich skeleton of $C$, where $C\rightarrow{D}$ is a solvable Galois covering to a curve $D$ with a known Berkovich skeleton.
Let $G$ be a finite group. Then $G$ is said to be {\it{solvable}} if there exists a finite chain of subgroups of $G$:
\begin{equation*}
G_{0}=(1)\subseteq{G_{1}}\subseteq{...}\subseteq{G_{n}=G},
\end{equation*}
where $G_{i}$ is normal in $G_{i+1}$ and $G_{i+1}/G_{i}$ is abelian. An equivalent definition is that $G$ admits a {\it{composition series}} such that every factor is cyclic of prime order. Recall that a composition series is a series
\begin{equation*}
(1)=H_{0}\vartriangleleft{H_{1}}\vartriangleleft{...}\vartriangleleft{H_{r}=G}
\end{equation*}
such that each $H_{i}$ is normal in $H_{i+1}$ and $H_{i+1}/H_{i}$ is simple. \\
We will now return to our usual setting of coverings. Suppose that $C\longrightarrow{D}$ is Galois with solvable Galois group. Then there exists a composition series
\begin{equation*}
(1)=H_{0}\vartriangleleft{H_{1}}\vartriangleleft{...}\vartriangleleft{H_{r}=G}
\end{equation*}
with corresponding inclusions of function fields
\begin{equation*}
K(C)\longleftarrow{(K(C))^{H_{1}}}\longleftarrow{...}\longleftarrow{(K(C))^{H_{r}}=K(D)}.
\end{equation*}
We define $K(C_{i}):=(K(C))^{H_{i}}$. Then for every inclusion $H_{i}\vartriangleleft{H_{i+1}}$ we have a Galois extension
\begin{equation*}
K(C_{i+1})\longrightarrow{K(C_{i})}
\end{equation*}
that is cyclic of degree $n_{i}:=[H_{i+1}:H_{i}]$. If our field $K$ contains $\zeta_{n}$ for every $n$ dividing $|G|$ (so it contains $\zeta_{n_{i}}$ in particular),
then this field extension can be described by an extension of the form
\begin{equation*}
K(C_{i+1})\longrightarrow{K(C_{i+1})[z]/(z^{q}-f_{i}})=K(C_{i})
\end{equation*}
by Kummer theory.
We can now state the algorithm for solvable coverings $C\rightarrow{D}$.
\begin{algo}\label{AlgorithmSolvable}
\begin{center}
{\bf{[Reconstructing Berkovich skeleta using solvable coverings]}}
\end{center}
\begin{flushleft}
Input: A solvable Galois covering $C\rightarrow{D}$ with Galois group $G$, a semistable model $\mathcal{D}$ with intersection graph $\Sigma(\mathcal{D})$.
\end{flushleft}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Find the subextensions $K(C_{i})$ of $K(C)$ corresponding to a composition series of $G$.
\item Use Algorithm \ref{AlgorithmAbelian} on the morphisms $C_{i}\longrightarrow{C_{i+1}}$ to calculate the intersection graph of $C_{i}$, starting with $C_{r}=D$.
\end{enumerate}
Output: The Berkovich skeleton of $C$.
\end{algo}
\begin{proof}
({\it{Correctness of the algorithm}}) The morphisms $C_{i}\rightarrow{C_{i+1}}$ are cyclic abelian by assumption, so Algorithm \ref{AlgorithmAbelian} is applicable. The group $G$ is finite, so there are only finitely many morphisms $C_{i}\rightarrow{C_{i+1}}$ for which Algorithm \ref{AlgorithmAbelian} has to be run. Since that algorithm terminates in finite time for each morphism $C_{i}\rightarrow{C_{i+1}}$, we find that this algorithm also terminates.
\end{proof}
\begin{comment}
\subsection{The algorithm for solvable coverings
In this section, we will state some systematic procedures to determine intersection graphs for curves. We will start with abelian covers and then consider the problem of taking quotients.\\
So let us start by giving an algorithm for calculating the semistable intersection graph of a curve $C$ with abelian cover $\phi:C\longrightarrow{D}$. We assume that we already have the intersection graph of $D$.
\begin{center}
[{\bf{Algorithm for determining the intersection graph for abelian coverings $C\longrightarrow{D}$}}]
\end{center}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Determine the degree of the extension $K(C)\supseteq{K(D)}$.
\item Find an $f$ such that the above field extension is given by
\begin{equation*}
z^q=f.
\end{equation*}
\item Determine the divisor of $f$.
\item For every $P\in\text{Supp}(f)$, find $\rho(P)\in\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{D})$.
\item Find a solution $\phi$ of $\Delta(\phi)=\rho(\text{div}_{\eta}(f))$.
\item Determine the divisors of the functions $f^{\Gamma}$ using Propositions <<REFERENTIES>>
\item Determine the $g_{\mathfrak{q}/\mathfrak{p}}$ using Propositions <<REFERENTIES>>
and the $a(\mathfrak{q})$ (the genus of the component corresponding to $\mathfrak{q}$) using Propositions REFERENTIES.
\item Determine if $f$ gives rise to an \'{e}tale morphism of graphs using Theorem <<REFERENTIES>
If it does, then one has to determine local functions $h_{\Gamma}$ such that
\begin{eqnarray*}
(\overline{h_{\Gamma}})^{q}&=&\overline{f}
\end{eqnarray*}
and one has to calculate for all intersection points in $\mathcal{G}(\mathcal{D})$ the values
\begin{equation*}
\overline{h_{\Gamma}}(x).
\end{equation*}
These then have to be paired as in Lemma <<REFERENTIES>>.
\end{enumerate}
\end{comment}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.